I don't know which is dumber. The Children's book or Stonehenge
(www.telegraph.co.uk)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (36)
sorted by:
This wiki?
The Arabs who conquered Asia Minor and in whose wake the Turks settled there. What on earth does that have with pyramids. There are no pyramids in Asia minor.
Before the Arabs invaded, there were no Turkic people in Anatolia.
Are you drunk?
There aren't images of anything except a ruin. I have said it numerously. You're drunk I keep repeating myself. Then you look it up on Google reading what you want.
The first mention is like when 1400-1500s a book reference suggesting a stone henge, it might as well be in reference to Camelot. It's not Salisbury plain. These were mostly left by Romans, stone ruins. Literally Bath, and many more. It was known as Roman by Kings of England and the Lordships who were the county's governance. All the way up until the late 1700s when the druid society partied on it. Later early 1800s a very good landscape painter painted it, John Constable. It looks nothing like it does today. Nothing at all. Look at his painting laugh. Why is there the lightning on it. It suggest what kind of motivation. Fake. Not real. Artistic impression. The other is a Knight on a horse, it suggests what period? It's riding out into a ruin of?
Instead of dumb artwork. Go look at the actual photos of how it was arranged. Now read the dumb Wiki telling you they've kept adding stones to it.
At what point was it anything else you blowhard? Literal autism. So they added stones, with cranes, diggers, surveyors, and trains, but it was made by the neolithic neanderthals from Africa?
At what point can't they forge its insertions. Believe me Britain has been doing for a while. I can think of lots. We won't go there.
Simple problem is they added a bunch of stuff today, but it was built by a lost reference? No it wasn't. Any picture wasn't a stone circle missing half its stones. It definitely didn't align into anything. It was just ruins.
I can link pictures of demolished castles and ruins crumbling, and all that is left is? Ruins, often standing stones, and a lintel. We are talking stone.
But regardless you're claiming who built it? Druidic Celts. Where are their burial mounds in England. Look next door Ireland. At what point did Rome not demolish the most famous piece of druidic feces if it was that site? Honk. Honk. Wrong try again.
Celts of Greekish origin. Northern Italy threatening Rome itself, across all of Europe.
This is what you wrote about Stonehenge:
Your cannot even be consistent in your own ramblings.
So when was it build? 150 years ago or by the Romans? Can you make up your mind?
What are you arguing. They built stonehenge then. You retarded dumbass.
It wasn't anything except a ruins. A ruins known as Roman for almost 1000 years. Until all of a 150 years ago. What is stonehenge today. A freaking stop watch. A lunar calander marking the solstice by supposed ancients worshipping the stars. It glitters.
No it wasn't. Its alignment, all those added stones and arrangement came 150 years ago until today, it keeps adding stones. All it took was funding. What was so freaking hard to read?
Arabs weren't called Arabs then, they're a modern name. A population of hugely different demographics. Are they Africans. No they're not, despite some inhabitanting North Africa. They aren't blacks as a generalisation at all. Many are white, or much lighter. Like Turks. Etc etc.
Arabs have been called Arab for literally thousands of years.
Please stop making shit up. It's embarrassing.