'Brazilian Stonehenge' discovered

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4767717.stm

or society.

Just like today's Bush supporters constantly mimic his war on terra as the reason for all his moves.

of course there have been ancient civilizations, and of course we are just beginning to realize that most of them are far older than 6,004 years old.

If I had a time machine, I would head back to Brazil, to Alexandria's library and to the hanging gardens.
Heavily armed, I might even head back to various really destructive times in humanity's history - mainly during the horrible reign of the church during the Dark Ages.

Of course if I survived, I might travel to the future, too. To see if we survive the Era of Bush.

...To see if we survive the Era of Bush.

On one hand, had the advent of christianity not intervened, we would likely have a post-petroleum society, now. The discoveries and inventions that led to modern society, IMO, were basically put on the back burner for a thousand years.
On that unavoidable other hand, could it be that the interfering religiosity, with both its agony and its rewards have allowed that extra thousand years which, in the final analysis, may have kept us from totally annihilating ourselves five hundred years ago?
Fascinating.

Rome was in decline long before Christianity because common in the Roman Empire. I may be an Atheist, but I know enough about history not to bash the importance of Christianity in preserving the lagacy of Graeco-Roman civilization and giving the West it's base for growth. Christianity was the result of Rome's decline, not it's cause; it allowed the masses of people aleinated by thier dying civilization to vent thier frustration and to have a sense of purpose not given by the dry, acendemic philosphies of Stoicism and Neo-Platonism. The young Roman Catholic Church copied the institutions of the roman state for it's own purposes, saving those institutions for use by future generations (most law in non-english speaking Western countries are derived from Roman legal structures). The teachings of St. Agustine about the City of God verses the CIty of Man was the root of the division of political and religious athourity that led to the concept of the Seperation of Church and State; this, for various reasons tied to Medieval power politics between the Holy Roman Emperor and the Pope, gave Western Civilization a much longer then average period of growth (over 900 years, from 600AD to 1519AD) then is typical since the Pope could excomunicate any monarch that disturbed the Medieval balance of power and threatended the Vatican's athourity; that wasn't true in Graco-Roman civilization where there was no threat of Damnation from on high for Athenians who bossed around other Greek city states, leading to the Peloponnesian War and the breakdown of Graeco-Roman society that resulted from the war. Western Christian monasticism caused a change in the view of work that allowed modern capitalism, Graeco-Roman culture actually retarded technological progress and the scientific method (Aristotle was the only Ancient Greek philospher that emphasized observation and experiment, and even then only for Biology and Sociology, instead of thinking on could get truth just by thinking), they invented the steam engine then never used it for Christ's sake. in Graeco-Roman society work was looked down upon, a respectable Greek or Roman aristocrat was expected to be able to live off the wealth generated by the slaves and peasents working his estate (this mindset would survive as the basis of the Manorial economy of the Middle Ages), it was considered improper to work hard if one did not had to. This changed with monastic orders who saw hard work as a form of worship, and this ultimately evolved into the "Protestant Work Ethic" and the "entrepuenurial spirit."

Your analysis is very much appreciated. You might want to do us over fifty old farts a favor and break up your dissertation into more readable clumps-old eyes do get confused.

As an anti-theist, myself, I tend to view with suspicion any assumption that religious imperialism produces a net benefit for the society in which it is embedded or the overall sweep of history, although individual actions may well be of immediate benefit to specific members of that society.

Thanks again.

I join with EST in appreciating your post.

I've come to believe Rome was in decline the moment the Republic fell. The history of the Republic has long fascinated me but most Americans seem familiar only with the Empire.

Mention Rome and most people think only of the Caesars. Titus Quinctius Flamininus, the Gracchi and even Scipio Africanus are unknowns. What terrifies me about our ignorance of the Roman Republic is our accompanying ignorance of how fragile a Republican form of government is.

The American Republic may be more robust than Rome's or it may have already fallen. I really don't know ... which is why I so appreciate your post.

... that they instantly label such findings as 'places of worship' or 'temples' or 'sacrifice sites' ... when they could just as easily be an ancient version of today's strip mall or megaplex.

What are they going to say in 10,000 years when they dig up the ruins of 21st Century Las Vegas ? It was a holy site ?

Why must discoveries always immediately be aligned with some sort of religion ??


:shrug:

It's like a megachurch for the true American religion -- $$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

The Celts, South American tribes, and the people of India believed there was a hare in the moon. That's right, they all saw a great big bunny.

Raven, the trickster, is basically Loki.

And then there were the Red Paint People who boated the polar circle from Europe to the Americas.

Not to mention that 8,000 year old skeleton who was the image of Patrick Stewart.

Brazil is most likely from the Sumerian barzil....for the valuable metal mined there in antiquity.

Columbus wasn't the first. Lief Ericson wasn't the first.

And I haven't even mentioned the Chinese on the West Coast taking the grand tour of the Americas on the Kamchatka current (based on the Chinese Classic of Mountains and Seas).

it's wonderful to see the evidense of first nations people and how they lived and what they thought.

always more complex than what anyone was taught.

imagine that?

(that's the title) explores some of the research claiming that Amazonians had organized societies, and tries to account for a lot of the later lack of organization. It admits the research is controversial, but points to some evidence that the standard view has to be wrong, and that people have known the evidence for a while.

The Amazon was supposed to have have fairly complex societies but they were distroyed by European diseases. :(

Isn't it amazing how many ancient cultures, from the Mayans, to the Egyptians, to the Native Americans, had sophisticated knowledge of astronomy? It is as if such knowledge is not hard to come by and, in fact, may be the most easily learned information about the universe humans naturally acquire. It appears to me that ALL ancient cultures eventually develop these types of technologies early on.

We also tend to forget that every era and every culture has its share of Einstein's and Hawking's -- genius minds who expanded the knowledge of their people.

When you spend most of your time outside, and the concepts of light pollution, American Idol, and the combustion engine are millenia in the future, having a sophisticated knowledge of star movements isn't that hard a stretch. In fact, it was probably common knowledge even at band-level human societies. If the majority of your time is spent paying attention to the environment, including study of the night sky and the seasons, and you share what you observe with your relatives and children, it's not hard to imagine the types of knowledge possessed by people most 21st century Americans would dismiss as undeveloped.

they watched the REAL stars...

http://www.stonehengeusa.com/

What is it?
Built by a Native American Culture or a migrant European population? No one knows for sure. A maze of man-made chambers, walls and ceremonial meeting places, America's Stonehenge is most likely the oldest man-made construction in the United States (over 4000 years old).

Ancient Observatory
Like Stonehenge in England, America's Stonehenge was built by ancient people well versed in astronomy and stone construction. It has been determined that the site is an accurate astronomical calendar. It was, and still can be, used to determine specific solar and lunar events of the year.


My son and I went there several years ago, very cool.

OK assignment for the day - how many other "stonehenge's" are there and what are their locations (and dates of construction)? Can we Google Earth them all?


TYPO

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12739940/



I've been to Stonehenge II myself, in Kerrville, TX

it "serves astronomical purposes" and is purported to be about 4000 yo.

It's too bad the folks who own Mystery Hill are more interested in profit than the truth. Here's something I wrote about Mystery Hill a while back:

"Please note that the structures at Mystery Hill, as noted by archaeologist Kenneth Feder can be closely related to similar structures in Ireland that were being built into the late 19th Century. Also note that no artifacts found at Mystery Hill are diagnostic of Neolithic European cultures. The only prehistoric cultures present in the area at the time of the radio carbon dates (which archaeologists will admit to being easily contaminated) were Native American, which we know by the style of artifacts. Astronomical coincidences aside, thelikeliest expanation for Mystery Hill is that it is of 18th century construction, according to the artifacts found there, and the style of building. Please also note that Barry Fell has been widely discredited by archaeological evidence, and the markings he thought could have been Ogham may likely been scratch marks from plows or natural. Two books you may want to consult not in your references (which are pretty one-sided towards the argument of antiquity), are Fantastic Archaeology and Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries, both of which discuss Mystery Hill from the archaeological perspective, i believe."

Remember folks: Barry Fell is America's own Von Daniken, in terms of credibility.

This one is in New Hampshire and is about 4000 yrs old.

sorry you were taken in, but it's been pretty well debunked (hence the name change).

There's a big warning sign on that website that indicates it's a bunch of hokum, and that's the claim there's a link between their site and the Da Vinci Code (well, there is, they are both works of fiction that some people apparently take at face value).

It's a neat example of what it really is, colonial period root cellars and the example of transferral of European landscape concepts to the colonies, but remnants of a megalithic culture it ain't. Too bad the property owners are more intent on milking a fable then representing the truth (hmmm... that sounds familiar... I wonder if they're republicans too? just a thought).

Try this article, it's a pretty good explanation.
http://www.bu.edu/bridge/archive/2002/02-01/archaeology.htm

I hope this post isn't too harsh, but this IS the science forum, and when scientific evidence can be used to debunk an extraordinary claim, it needs to be done.

The one I linked to is in NH...... how can they be the same?

You can google "Mystery Hill New Hampshire" and find multiple references to it.

And it doesn't change the fact that it's not some sort of mysterious megalithic site.