| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Zap
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 10:04 pm Post subject: Any druids in Wales |
 |
|
| Any druids in Wales? |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Garry Denke
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 25, 2004 11:54 am Post subject: Re: Any druids in Wales |
|
|
| Quote: | Zapwrote:
Any druids in Wales? |
Hello Zap,
We were there gathered and hoping to show you all of the Carboniferous
rocks, circling/over the artifacts. No worries though, all of the
Welsh born Stonehenge rocks are to be moved back to Wales:
Linking to external sites is not allowed
Instead we visited the good Doctor Robyn Lewis who staked the official
claim on behalf of all fellow druids, all bards and all the Welsh
compatriots. Archdruid of Wales made no claim to our artifacts:
[b:882e509c14]Linking to external sites is not allowed[/b:882e509c14]
Discoveries sparked it. Glacial transport disproven. So much for the
Judd, Kellaway, Hawkins, Williams-Thorpe, et al, glacial transport.
Thomas, Atkinson, Greene, Scourse, et al, would be proud.
[b:882e509c14]Linking to external sites is not allowed[/b:882e509c14]
Here is the good Doctor's requested list of Welsh rocks that need to
go back to Wales. They are in the way of the excavation of our gold,
silver, brass, iron, wood, and stone artifacts anyway. Archdruid of
Wales, the good Doctor Robyn Lewis, has offered to pay for their
removal, as agreed, making this a low cost excavation:
[b:882e509c14]Linking to external sites is not allowed[/b:882e509c14]
[b:882e509c14]1) Stonehenge Whitestones -[/b:882e509c14] The oldest
limestone sedimentary rocks at Stonehenge are the Early Carboniferous
(Mississippian) Period, Arundian Age, calcium carbonates. The Early
Carboniferous (Mississippian) Period limestone sedimentary rocks
comprise the first (1st) Welsh construction material used by the
Stonehenge builders from Wales. This material is approximately 340
million years old. These stones are called High Tor (Birnbeck)
Limestone Formation rocks. They are Welsh and need to
go back to Wales.
[b:882e509c14]2) Stonehenge Bluestones -[/b:882e509c14] The volcanic
rocks (oldest geologically) at Stonehenge are the Ordovician Period
intrusive igneous diabases (dolerites), and extrusive igneous
felsites (rhyolites) and tuffs (basic). The Ordovician Period igneous
rocks comprise the second (2nd) Welsh construction material used by
the Stonehenge builders from Wales. This material is approximately
470 million years old. These stones are called Ordovician Volcanic
rocks. [i:882e509c14]They are Welsh and need to go back to
Wales.[/i:882e509c14]
[b:882e509c14]3) Stonehenge Coshestons -[/b:882e509c14] The oldest
sandstone sedimentary rocks at Stonehenge are the Silurian-Devonian
Period micaceous sandstones. The Silurian-Devonian Period sandstone
sedimentary rocks comprise the third (3rd) Welsh construction
material used by the Stonehenge builders from Wales. This material is
approximately 417 million years old. These stones are called Old Red
Sandstone Formation rocks. [i:882e509c14]They are Welsh and need to
go back to Wales.[/i:882e509c14]
[b:882e509c14]4) Stonehenge Gritstones -[/b:882e509c14] The sandstone
grit, conglomerate, limestone, shale, and coal sedimentary rocks at
Stonehenge are the Late Carboniferous (Pennsylvanian), Namurian Age,
silicates, calcium carbonates, and carbons. The Late Carboniferous
(Pennsylvanian) Period sandstone grit, conglomerate, limestone,
shale, and coal sedimentary rocks comprise the fourth (4th) Welsh
construction material used by the Stonehenge builders from Wales.
This material is approximately 320 million years old. These stones
are called Millstone Grit Formation rocks. [i:882e509c14]They are
Welsh and need to go back to Wales.[/i:882e509c14]
[b:882e509c14]5) Stonehenge Coalstones -[/b:882e509c14] The bituminous
coal sedimentary rocks at Stonehenge are the Late Carboniferous
(Pennsylvanian) Period, Westphalian Age, carbons. The Late
Carboniferous (Pennsylvanian) Period bituminous coal sedimentary
rocks comprise the fifth (5th) Welsh construction material used by
the Stonehenge builders from Wales. This material is approximately
310 million years old. These stones are called Crosskeys Coal
Measures rocks. [i:882e509c14]They are Welsh and need to go back to
Wales.[/i:882e509c14]
[b:882e509c14]Here Here to the good Doctor, the Archdruid of
Wales![/b:882e509c14]
Garry Denke
ps. See that Zap, this redig is financed.
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
David Dalton
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 25, 2004 9:56 pm Post subject: Re: Any druids in Wales |
|
|
why would the stones have to go back to Wales when the Welsh can
use them from Wales to influence the areas they are in, perhaps? :-)
Also was there glacial transport of big rocks in the UK
the same way there was here in Newfoundland?
Are Plethyn still playing? I heard them in 1990.
David |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kevin Jones
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2004 2:45 am Post subject: Re: Any druids in Wales |
|
|
"Garry Denke" <garrydenke@hotmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid> wrote in message
news:40dbcc12$1_2@127.0.0.1...
| Quote: | Zapwrote:
Any druids in Wales?
Hello Zap,
We were there gathered and hoping to show you all of the Carboniferous
rocks, circling/over the artifacts. No worries though, all of the
Welsh born Stonehenge rocks are to be moved back to Wales:
Linking to external sites is not allowed
|
They won't be moved back to Wales - Stonehenge is an ancient monument, and
is therefore protected by the Ancient Monuments Act. It would actually be an
offence to remove the stones - that said, no one will seriously consider a
request to do so.
Next, teeth can't tell you if someone was Welsh. I'd rather like a link to
the research paper, but I would have a good guess that the researchers
remarked that the DNA showed markers which these days are more commonly (but
not exclusively) found in Wales. There's been a lot of changes since the
Late Neolithic and Bronze Age - the markers may well have been more
widespread then and the builders could just as easily have been local. In
any case, there was no such thing as 'Welsh' back when Stonehenge was being
constructed.
| Quote: | Here is the good Doctor's requested list of Welsh rocks that need to
go back to Wales. They are in the way of the excavation of our gold,
silver, brass, iron, wood, and stone artifacts anyway. Archdruid of
Wales, the good Doctor Robyn Lewis, has offered to pay for their
removal, as agreed, making this a low cost excavation:
|
Any dig at any Ancient Monument will have to be approved, which means that
it needs to demonstrate research questions. You'd need approval before you
even do geophys. Even if a dig is permitted, it will be limited.
Furthermore, it's not just a matter of funding the dig - you also need show
that you've funded the post-excavation work, and made provision for
publication and the archive. No provision for these things, then definitely
no permission to dig.
However, as I said, it's not going to happen. Any Secretary of State who was
sufficiently off his rocker enough to approve such an action would be
legally overruled immediately, because it is absolutely verboten - by law.
If someone actually tried to do it, you'd have such civil unrest as to make
the Battle of the Beanfield look like a vicarage tea party. A sizable chunk
of the population would be up in arms, and Robyn Lewis would probably be
lynched. In short, no one, at all, ever, is going to dig up Stonehenge from
where it's been for the last 4,500 years and remove the stones to Wales,
much less allow a dig for a load of non-existent gold. You'll grow old and
die waiting for it to happen, and then some. The stones will no doubt be
there in another millennia.
BTW, another little wrinkle - if any one digs up gold and silver artefacts
in the UK, then by law they belong to the Crown. Look up the Treasure Trove
act.
Kevin |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Garry Denke
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2004 7:11 pm Post subject: Re: Any druids in Wales |
|
|
These rocks get to stay Kevin Jones, so what is the big deal?
1) Stonehenge White Chalk - The outcrop sedimentary rocks at
Stonehenge are the Late Cretaceous Period, Santonian Age, calcium
carbonates. The Late Cretaceous Period outcrop sedimentary rocks
comprise the first (1st) English construction material used by the
Stonehenge builders of England. This material is approximately 85
million years old. These stones are called Seaford Chalk Formation
rocks. They are English and belong in England.
2) Stonehenge Sarsens - The youngest sandstone sedimentary rocks at
Stonehenge are the Oligocene-Miocene (Tertiary) Period silicates. The
Oligocene-Miocene Period sandstone sedimentary rocks comprise the
second (2nd) English construction material used by the Stonehenge
builders of England. This material is approximately 24 million years
old. These stones are called Reading Formation rocks. They are English
and belong in England.
Unless of course Marlborough wants the Sarsens back,
Save and Except; the Heelstone of Hampshire County:
In 22 separate excavations, for which the detailed records are
published, a total of "over 11,500 stone fragments were recorded" at
Stonehenge (PROCEEDINGS AT THE BRITISH ACADEMY . 92, SCIENCE AND
STONEHENGE, Cunliffe & Renfrew, 1997, pages 258-9), representing all
of its different lithologies. Approximately 4,000 sarsen chips,
including "a total of 3,760 sarsen fragments", and "sarsen sand from
the area", excavated by Lieutenant-Colonel William Hawley (REPORT ON
THE EXCAVATIONS AT STONEHENGE DURING THE SEASON OF 1923, W. Hawley,
1925, pages 21-50), from a single location within ten (10) meters of
the Heelstone, in the Avenue between the Heelstone and the Slaughter
Stone, "do strongly suggest that a stone was either dressed or broken
up in the vicinity" (STONEHENGE, Cleal, Walker, Montague, 1995, page
290), in front of the Heelstone carvings. In 1975, Arizona State
University (ASU) GLG 324 Petrology-Petrography class analised the
Cainozoic Reading Formation sarsen samples provided by Professor
Richard Atkinson from the London Basin, the Hampshire Basin, and from
each of the sarsens at Stonehenge. 1975 GLG 324 Petrology-Petrography
class determined through optical mineralogy and geochemical analysis
that the source area of the Palaeogene-Oligocene age heavy mineralogy
Heelstone was from the Hampshire Basin located to the south of
Stonehenge, and all of the rest of the Neogene-Miocene age lighter
mineralogy sarsens at Stonehenge were from the London Basin to the
north of Stonehenge. It was from this first detailed analysis by ASU
in 1975, and the subsequent works of H. Howard 1982; A petrological
study of the rock specimens from excavations at Stonehenge, 1979-1980,
in M.W. Pitts, 1982, 104-24, where the Heelstone carvings fragment
chips from its sculpture were determined. In short, the piles of
sarsen chips and sarsen sand at the sarsen Heelstone, "do strongly
suggest that a stone was either dressed or broken up in the vicinity"
(STONEHENGE, Cleal, Walker, Montague, 1995, page 290), in front of the
Heelstone Lion head, Calf head, Man face (clockwise), and Eagle wings
(centering) carvings:
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=sc.groups.msn.com/tn/57/91/arkarchaeology/2/8.jpg&imgrefurl=http://groups.msn.com/arkarchaeology/pictures&h=96&w=72&sz=2&tbnid=xt14052P69gJ:&tbnh=76&tbnw=57&start=55&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dheelstone%26start%3D40%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DN
Bibliography:
REPORT ON THE EXCAVATIONS AT STONEHENGE DURING THE SEASON OF 1923
William Hawley
Antiq. J., 5
1925
21-50
Hele Stone, sarsen chips,
and sarsen sand
STONEHENGE
R.J.C. Atkinson
PENGUIN BOOKS
in association with Hamish Hamilton
1956
ISBN 0140136460
INDEX 221
Carvings, prehistoric,
43-7, 91-3, 139-40, 178-9, 208-9
Heel Stone,
29-30,68-9, 70, 76, 105, 173, 203
STONEHENGE in its landscape; Twentieth-century excavations
Rosamund M J Cleal, K E Walker, and R Montague with major
contributions by Michael J Allen, Alex Bayliss, C Bronk Ramsey, Linda
Coleman, Julie Gardiner, P A Harding, Rupert Housley, Andrew J Lawson,
Gerry McCormac, Jacqueline I McKinley, Andrew Payne, Robert G Scaife,
Dale Serjeantson, and Geoff Wainwright
ENGLISH HERITAGE
1995
ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORT 10
ISBN 1850746052
INDEX 603, 608
carvings, prehistoric
30-3, Plate 7.2
Heelstone (Stone 96),
25, 26, 166, 269, 270, 271, 272
PROCEEDINGS OF THE BRITISH ACADEMY . 92
Science and Stonehenge
Edited by
BARRY CUNLIFFE & COLIN RENFREW
Published for THE BRITISH ACADEMY
by OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
1997
ISBN 0197261744
INDEX 351, 355
carvings, prehistoric
5, 29, 35, 150, 338
Heelstone (Stone 96)
15, 16, 28, 155
HENGEWORLD
Mike Pitts
C
CENTURY . LONDON
2000
ISBN 0712679545
INDEX 402, 403
Stonehenge
carvings
8, 26, 265-6, 296-7, 27, 266
Heelstone
8, 96, 135, 139, 145-50, 154, 229, 266, 275, 7, 138, 146, 230
"Kevin Jones" <laighleas@nospam.yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:<cbnf59$r0v$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com>...
| Quote: | "Garry Denke" <garrydenke@hotmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid> wrote in message
news:40dbcc12$1_2@127.0.0.1...
Zapwrote:
Any druids in Wales?
|
Hello Zap,
We were there gathered and hoping to show you all of the Carboniferous
rocks, circling/over the artifacts. No worries though, all of the
Welsh born Stonehenge rocks are to be moved back to Wales:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/3830547.stm
Instead we visited the good Doctor Robyn Lewis who staked the official
claim on behalf of all fellow druids, all bards and all the Welsh
compatriots. Archdruid of Wales made no claim to our artifacts:
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20040614/stonehenge.html
Discoveries sparked it. Glacial transport disproven. So much for the
Judd, Kellaway, Hawkins, Williams-Thorpe, et al, glacial transport.
Thomas, Atkinson, Greene, Scourse, et al, would be proud.
http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/?view=usa&sf=toc&ci=0197261744
Here is the good Doctor's requested list of Welsh rocks that need to
go back to Wales. They are in the way of the excavation of our gold,
silver, brass, iron, wood, and stone artifacts anyway. Archdruid of
Wales, the good Doctor Robyn Lewis, has offered to pay for their
removal, as agreed, making this a low cost excavation:
http://groups.msn.com/ArkArchaeology/shoebox.msnw
1) Stonehenge Whitestones - The oldest limestone sedimentary rocks at
Stonehenge are the Early Carboniferous (Mississippian) Period,
Arundian Age, calcium carbonates. The Early Carboniferous
(Mississippian) Period limestone sedimentary rocks comprise the first
(1st) Welsh construction material used by the Stonehenge builders from
Wales. This material is approximately 340 million years old. These
stones are called High Tor (Birnbeck) Limestone Formation rocks. They
are Welsh and need to go back to Wales.
2) Stonehenge Bluestones - The volcanic rocks (oldest geologically) at
Stonehenge are the Ordovician Period intrusive igneous diabases
(dolerites), and extrusive igneous felsites (rhyolites) and tuffs
(basic). The Ordovician Period igneous rocks comprise the second (2nd)
Welsh construction material used by the Stonehenge builders from
Wales. This material is approximately 470 million years old. These
stones are called Ordovician Volcanic rocks. They are Welsh and need
to go back to Wales.
3) Stonehenge Coshestons - The oldest sandstone sedimentary rocks at
Stonehenge are the Silurian-Devonian Period micaceous sandstones. The
Silurian-Devonian Period sandstone sedimentary rocks comprise the
third (3rd) Welsh construction material used by the Stonehenge
builders from Wales. This material is approximately 417 million years
old. These stones are called Old Red Sandstone Formation rocks. They
are Welsh and need to go back to Wales.
4) Stonehenge Gritstones - The sandstone grit, conglomerate,
limestone, shale, and coal sedimentary rocks at Stonehenge are the
Late Carboniferous (Pennsylvanian), Namurian Age, silicates, calcium
carbonates, and carbons. The Late Carboniferous (Pennsylvanian) Period
sandstone grit, conglomerate, limestone, shale, and coal sedimentary
rocks comprise the fourth (4th) Welsh construction material used by
the Stonehenge builders from Wales. This material is approximately 320
million years old. These stones are called Millstone Grit Formation
rocks. They are Welsh and need to go back to Wales.
5) Stonehenge Coalstones - The bituminous coal sedimentary rocks at
Stonehenge are the Late Carboniferous (Pennsylvanian) Period,
Westphalian Age, carbons. The Late Carboniferous (Pennsylvanian)
Period bituminous coal sedimentary rocks comprise the fifth (5th)
Welsh construction material used by the Stonehenge builders from
Wales. This material is approximately 310 million years old. These
stones are called Crosskeys Coal Measures rocks. They are Welsh and
need to go back to Wales.
Here Here to the good Doctor, the Archdruid of Wales!
Garry Denke
ps. See that Zap, this redig is financed.
| Quote: | They won't be moved back to Wales - Stonehenge is an ancient monument, and
is therefore protected by the Ancient Monuments Act. It would actually be an
offence to remove the stones - that said, no one will seriously consider a
request to do so.
Next, teeth can't tell you if someone was Welsh. I'd rather like a link to
the research paper, but I would have a good guess that the researchers
remarked that the DNA showed markers which these days are more commonly (but
not exclusively) found in Wales. There's been a lot of changes since the
Late Neolithic and Bronze Age - the markers may well have been more
widespread then and the builders could just as easily have been local. In
any case, there was no such thing as 'Welsh' back when Stonehenge was being
constructed.
Any dig at any Ancient Monument will have to be approved, which means that
it needs to demonstrate research questions. You'd need approval before you
even do geophys. Even if a dig is permitted, it will be limited.
Furthermore, it's not just a matter of funding the dig - you also need show
that you've funded the post-excavation work, and made provision for
publication and the archive. No provision for these things, then definitely
no permission to dig.
However, as I said, it's not going to happen. Any Secretary of State who was
sufficiently off his rocker enough to approve such an action would be
legally overruled immediately, because it is absolutely verboten - by law.
If someone actually tried to do it, you'd have such civil unrest as to make
the Battle of the Beanfield look like a vicarage tea party. A sizable chunk
of the population would be up in arms, and Robyn Lewis would probably be
lynched. In short, no one, at all, ever, is going to dig up Stonehenge from
where it's been for the last 4,500 years and remove the stones to Wales,
much less allow a dig for a load of non-existent gold. You'll grow old and
die waiting for it to happen, and then some. The stones will no doubt be
there in another millennia.
BTW, another little wrinkle - if any one digs up gold and silver artefacts
in the UK, then by law they belong to the Crown. Look up the Treasure Trove
act.
Kevin
|
The specific gold, silver, brass, iron, wood, and stone artefacts at
Stonehenge Heelstone, Stonehenge Barrow, and Westbury White Horse Eye:
http://groups.msn.com/ArkArchaeology/theheelstonestonehengeuk.msnw?albumlist=2
http://www.coconino.edu/apetersen/megaliths/images/stonehenge_barrow.jpg
http://wiltshirewhitehorses.org.uk/images/weseye.jpg
have been declared the exclusive personal property of Coin Oil by law
David Jones, the same not belonging to The Crown, per the official
claim filed and recorded at the Wiltshire County Coroner's Office in
1997, on 27th February, in accordance with the Treasure Act of 1996,
on 4th July, by her Majesty. So again Kevin Jones, your error.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=sc.groups.msn.com/tn/57/91/arkarchaeology/2/8.jpg&imgrefurl=http://groups.msn.com/arkarchaeology/pictures&h=96&w=72&sz=2&tbnid=xt14052P69gJ:&tbnh=76&tbnw=57&start=55&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dheelstone%26start%3D40%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DN
Garry |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
1X2Willows
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:38 pm Post subject: Re: Any druids in Wales |
|
|
"Kevin Jones" wrote
| Quote: | They won't be moved back to Wales - [....]
|
Bored, Kev?
Dan |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kevin Jones
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2004 6:21 am Post subject: Re: Any druids in Wales |
|
|
"1X2Willows" <spambucket@euro-celts.dot.com> wrote in message
news:n09Ec.17401$w07.1926@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
| Quote: | "Kevin Jones" wrote
They won't be moved back to Wales - [....]
Bored, Kev?
|
Very!
Kevin |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kevin Jones
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2004 5:46 am Post subject: Re: Any druids in Wales |
|
|
"Garry Denke" <garrydenke@usa.com> wrote in message
news:96f81cbe.0406280611.ed4980f@posting.google.com...
| Quote: | These rocks get to stay Kevin Jones, so what is the big deal?
|
You miss the point - all of the rocks get to stay, because it is a
*criminal* offence to remove *any* of them or otherwise damage the site. It
is also a criminal offence to dig, excavate, use metal detectors or even do
geophys unless the work is licenced and approved by the Secretary of State
for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. In order for such permission to
be granted for even preliminary work, you would have to give English
Heritage a very well planned programme, including research questions to be
answered, an indication of funding for postexcavation work and analysis,
plus funding for the archive, writing up the dig etc etc. Permission will
not be granted *ever* if the attitude of the team is "the stones are in the
way." The guiding principle of the law is that the monument will not be
disturbed or damaged, and that no stone will be disturbed. Hell, unless
you've got a valid reason, you won't even be allowed to touch the stones
with your hand - the public isn't generally allowed into the circle these
days.
That's not an opinion - that is the law. Now if you don't like it, you
could, if you were a British citizen (I'll assume that you're not) talk to
your MP in an attempt to persuade him to raise a Private Members Bill to
change the law. Of course, you then run into the other problem that it is
also a World Heritage Site, and that no MP would wish to be associated with
anything that damaged a World Heritage Site. It wouldn't just result in
national outrage - there would be international hell to pay. From the POV of
any British government, it is a no-brainer.
In short, you'd have a better chance of making snowballs in Hell than you
have of ever seeing stones removed from Stonehenge and transported back to
Wales or of being allowed to do a major excavation that damages the site.
Still, good luck with trying to argue MPs, English Heritage and the S of S
for EFRA round to your POV.
Don't believe me? Well, go along to Stonehenge and start doing some work
there. See how quickly the police arrest you. It could potentially result in
some heavy time and very large fines. You'd probably get several years if
you only spraypainted the stones. Don't think you'd find any friends in the
pagan community either - you'd be shopped in doublequick time. There's been
a few cases of stone circles being vandalised of late, and people have got
rather ticked off about it.
I'm just telling you how it is. It is no skin off my nose if you wish to
make an arse of yourself and not believe me. It might however indicate your
connection to reality is a little shaky though.
| Quote: | 1) Stonehenge White Chalk - The outcrop sedimentary rocks at
Stonehenge are the Late Cretaceous Period, Santonian Age, calcium
carbonates. The Late Cretaceous Period outcrop sedimentary rocks
comprise the first (1st) English construction material used by the
Stonehenge builders of England. This material is approximately 85
million years old. These stones are called Seaford Chalk Formation
rocks. They are English and belong in England.
|
Rocks aren't English or Welsh - those are human labels. Rocks were there
before there was an England or a Wales and will be there after the labels
have been forgotten; it is a bit like a mayfly trying to say "I own this
pond!" In addition, it is fairly irrelevant where a lump of rock
originated - it's far more important what people do with it afterwards. A
goodly number of roofs in England are made of Welsh slate - are you
suggesting that all Welsh slate roofs be repatriated to Wales?
Stonehenge isn't a Welsh monument that was somehow stolen from deepest
Wales - it is an artefact of past successive generations who lived in what
is now called Wiltshire. Its context is the landscape of Salisbury Plain,
which is heavily populated with sacred sites - divorced from that context,
it is meaningless.
You know, you really do need to learn some archaeology. You're making some
very elementary boo-boos.
| Quote: | In 22 separate excavations, for which the detailed records are
published, a total of "over 11,500 stone fragments were recorded" at
Stonehenge (PROCEEDINGS AT THE BRITISH ACADEMY . 92, SCIENCE AND
STONEHENGE, Cunliffe & Renfrew, 1997, pages 258-9),
|
I rather suspect that Barry would laugh his socks off at you trying to use
his work in support of your theories.
| Quote: | representing all
of its different lithologies. Approximately 4,000 sarsen chips,
including "a total of 3,760 sarsen fragments", and "sarsen sand from
the area", excavated by Lieutenant-Colonel William Hawley (REPORT ON
THE EXCAVATIONS AT STONEHENGE DURING THE SEASON OF 1923, W. Hawley,
1925, pages 21-50), from a single location within ten (10) meters of
the Heelstone, in the Avenue between the Heelstone and the Slaughter
Stone, "do strongly suggest that a stone was either dressed or broken
up in the vicinity" (STONEHENGE, Cleal, Walker, Montague, 1995, page
290), in front of the Heelstone carvings. In 1975, Arizona State
University (ASU) GLG 324 Petrology-Petrography class analised the
Cainozoic Reading Formation sarsen samples provided by Professor
Richard Atkinson from the London Basin, the Hampshire Basin, and from
each of the sarsens at Stonehenge. 1975 GLG 324 Petrology-Petrography
class determined through optical mineralogy and geochemical analysis
that the source area of the Palaeogene-Oligocene age heavy mineralogy
Heelstone was from the Hampshire Basin located to the south of
Stonehenge, and all of the rest of the Neogene-Miocene age lighter
mineralogy sarsens at Stonehenge were from the London Basin to the
north of Stonehenge. It was from this first detailed analysis by ASU
in 1975, and the subsequent works of H. Howard 1982; A petrological
study of the rock specimens from excavations at Stonehenge, 1979-1980,
in M.W. Pitts, 1982, 104-24, where the Heelstone carvings fragment
chips from its sculpture were determined. In short, the piles of
sarsen chips and sarsen sand at the sarsen Heelstone, "do strongly
suggest that a stone was either dressed or broken up in the vicinity"
|
Err, big deal. We know the sarsens were shaped on the spot. What has that
got to do with the price of cheese?
| Quote: | The specific gold, silver, brass, iron, wood, and stone artefacts at
Stonehenge Heelstone, Stonehenge Barrow, and Westbury White Horse >Eye:
|
http://groups.msn.com/ArkArchaeology/theheelstonestonehengeuk.msnw?albumlist=2
http://www.coconino.edu/apetersen/megaliths/images/stonehenge_barrow.jpg
http://wiltshirewhitehorses.org.uk/images/weseye.jpg
| Quote: | have been declared the exclusive personal property of Coin Oil by law
David Jones, the same not belonging to The Crown, per the official
claim filed and recorded at the Wiltshire County Coroner's Office in
1997, on 27th February, in accordance with the Treasure Act of 1996,
on 4th July, by her Majesty. So again Kevin Jones, your error.
|
He didn't declare any such thing nor, under English law, does he have the
power to do so. Your letter to the Coroner laid claim to the gold ark of the
covenant and other artefacts. The Coroner, probably rather nonplussed at
such a claim, duly made inquiries. He subsequently recieved a report from
English Heritage confirming that no articles answering your description had
been found at Stonehenge or indeed any other EH site.The coroner therefore
did not consider that he had to pursue the matters raised in your letter. I
quote from the copy of the letter on your own site:
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=sc.groups.msn.com/tn/57/91/arkarchaeology/2/8.jpg&imgrefurl=http://groups.msn.com/arkarchaeology/pictures&h=96&w=72&sz=2&tbnid=xt14052P69gJ:&tbnh=76&tbnw=57&start=55&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dheelstone%26start%3D40%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DN
Now if by some miracle the ark of the covenant should turn up anywhere in
England and Wales, it would be regarded as treasure within the meaning of
the Act, to wit, it is presumably over 300 years old, it is composed of
precious metals, and it is of cultural significance. Consequently, as the
current code of practice has it:
"Section 4 of the Act provides that treasure (as defined in section 1 of the
Act) *vests in the Crown or in the appropriate franchisee of the Crown
(Duchy of Lancaster, the Duchy of Cornwall and the Corporation of London)*,
if there is one (see below), but the rights of original owners or their
heirs, where known, are fully protected. The Act confirms that the Crown or
the franchisee will enjoy the same rights over treasure as they currently do
in respect of treasure trove. Objects that qualify as treasure under section
1 of the Act will be treasure irrespective of the circumstances in which
they came to be in the place where they were found and, in particular,
irrespective of whether they were lost, buried in a grave or abandoned."
http://www.britarch.ac.uk/cba/potant10.html#D
The exclusions from this are unworked natural objects and ores, or else
covered by Part IX of the Merchant Shipping Act 1995, or else are less than
300 years old and not hidden with the intention of later recovery. Single
coins are not covered either, nor are precious objects associated with human
burials in consecrated ground. The ark of the covenant would not meet any of
these exclusions, and would therefore be considered treasure. Whilst you
have laid claim to the ark, you can't, in law, be considered the original
owner, and you'd have to demonstrate in a court of law that you were an heir
of the original owner - that might be fun! Even if accepted - and that would
be an enormously problematic claim - the law only protects the rights of the
heirs of the original owner. Ownership of the treasure itself remains vested
in the Crown. So regardless of the claim that you made to the Coroner, the
Crown would own it - you'd recieve a finder's fee if you dug it up (it's
market value). If you didn't dig it up, then the finder's fee would go to
the person who did. Either way, it would wind up in the British Museum,
being studied, before going on exhibition.
Kevin |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Garry Denke
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2004 11:17 pm Post subject: Garry Denke's Ark of the Covenant below Stonehenge Heelstone |
|
|
Garry Denke's Ark of the Covenant under Stonehenge Heelstone Wings
Hello Kevin,
As a matter of law, Garry Denke's ark of the covenant below Stonehenge
Heelstone wings, and Garry Denke's brasen altar inside Stonehenge
Barrow located 100 meters east-southeast of Garry Denke's ark of the
covenant, said Stonehenge Barrow containing Garry Denke's golden table
and Garry Denke's golden altar, including, but not limited to, all of
Garry Denke's personal property inside said Garry Denke's ark, altars,
and table; they are, as you have confirmed below; the exclusive
personal property of the original owner: Garry Denke. Said personal
property of Garry Denke, described and identified above, were by law
remembered Kevin - in legal terms, neither 'found' nor 'discovered' -
only verified by Garry Denke's 1984 geophysical (already conducted)
confirmation of that remembered. In short, Garry Denke's personal
property was not 'found' or 'discovered' by Garry Denke's 1984
surveys, but remembered by Garry Denke. Thus, as a matter of law, the
original owner, Garry Denke, has exclusive sole ownership of Garry
Denke's ark, altars, and table personal property, including, but not
limited to, all of Garry Denke's personal property inside Garry
Denke's ark, altars, and table - and Garry Denke's gold plates and
brass plates inside Westbury White Horse Eye
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=wiltshirewhitehorses.org.uk/images/weseye.jpg&imgrefurl=http://wiltshirewhitehorses.org.uk/weseye.html&h=420&w=593&sz=35&tbnid=hoVlUegXxLAJ:&tbnh=94&tbnw=132&start=2&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dwestbury%2Bwhite%2Bhorse%2Beye%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DG
will be returned to Garry Denke's Coin Oil Company, as a matter of
law, Abstract of Title, which you have referenced below. Note that all
rights, titles, and interests in and to the same are currently
protected by that certain Assignment of Working Interest duly filed
and recorded of 1) Texas Hebrew Post, 11333 North Central Expressway,
Dallas, Texas, 75243, (214) 692-7283, 2) Playboy Magazine, Des Moines,
Iowa, 50307, (515) 243-1200, 3) Texas Catholic, 3725 Blackburn Street,
Dallas, Texas 75219, (214) 528-8792, 4) American Atheists, 225
Christiani, Cranford, New Jersey, 07016, (908) 276-7300, 5) The Dallas
Morning News, 508 Young Street, Dallas, Texas, 75202, (214) 977-8222,
6) Dallas Observer, 2120 Commerce Street, Dallas, Texas, 75201, (214)
757-9000, and 7) The Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 8801 South
Yale Avenue, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 74137, (918) 493-2074, The Leading Edge.
Also note said Working Interest ownership expires upon excavation and
exhumation of Garry Denke's ark of the covenant from below Stonehenge
Heelstone wings. Thank you for confirming Garry Denke's sole ownership
rights, titles, and interests. Your research and legal work is most
appreciated by all at Denoco Inc. of Texas, Coin Oil Company, Wildcat
Station, P.O. Box 866488, Plano, Texas, USA
"Section 4 of the Act provides that treasure (as defined in section 1
of the Act) *vests in the Crown or in the appropriate franchisee of
the Crown (Duchy of Lancaster, Duchy of Cornwall and the Corporation
of London)*, if there is one (see below), but the rights of original
owners or their heirs, where known, are fully protected." Yes. fully
protected. Watch the universal magnetic reversal (polar flip), on
excavation day, at exhumation hour, of Garry Denke's ark of the
covenant, from under Stonehenge Heelstone wings. Here are the three
(3) primary physics equations Garry Denke will be using to effect the
universal magnetic reversal (a polar flip)
superforce = c^4 / G
superforce = (299792458 m/s)^4 / 6.67236419 e-11 m^3/kg-s^2
superforce = 8.07760871 e33 m^4/s^4 / 6.67236419 e-11 m^3/kg-s^2
superforce = 1.21060669 e44 kg-m/s^2 [rsu 3.9 e-8]
[OUTDATED 1998 CODATA-NIST VALUES]
c = superpower / superforce
c = 3.62930757 e52 kg-m^2/s^3 / 1.21060669 e44 kg-m/s^2
c = 299792458 m/s [exact]
[OUTDATED 1998 CODATA-NIST VALUES]
superpower = c^5 / G
superpower = (299792458 m/s)^5 / 6.67236419 e-11 m^3/kg-s^2
superpower = 2.42160617 e42 m^5/s^5 / 6.67236419 e-11 m^3/kg-s^2
superpower = 3.62930757 e52 kg-m^2/s^3 [rsu 3.9 e-8]
[OUTDATED 1998 CODATA-NIST VALUES]
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=garry+denke&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&scoring=d&selm=96f81cbe.0406292143.4050ac62%40posting.google.com&rnum=6
Best wishes,
Denoco Inc. of Texas
Coil Oil Company
Garry, et al
"Kevin Jones" <laighleas@nospam.yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:<cbvmrj$r6m$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com>...
| Quote: |
You miss the point - all of the rocks get to stay, because it is a
*criminal* offence to remove *any* of them or otherwise damage the site. It
is also a criminal offence to dig, excavate, use metal detectors or even do
geophys unless the work is licenced and approved by the Secretary of State
for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. In order for such permission to
be granted for even preliminary work, you would have to give English
Heritage a very well planned programme, including research questions to be
answered, an indication of funding for postexcavation work and analysis,
plus funding for the archive, writing up the dig etc etc. Permission will
not be granted *ever* if the attitude of the team is "the stones are in the
way." The guiding principle of the law is that the monument will not be
disturbed or damaged, and that no stone will be disturbed. Hell, unless
you've got a valid reason, you won't even be allowed to touch the stones
with your hand - the public isn't generally allowed into the circle these
days.
That's not an opinion - that is the law. Now if you don't like it, you
could, if you were a British citizen (I'll assume that you're not) talk to
your MP in an attempt to persuade him to raise a Private Members Bill to
change the law. Of course, you then run into the other problem that it is
also a World Heritage Site, and that no MP would wish to be associated with
anything that damaged a World Heritage Site. It wouldn't just result in
national outrage - there would be international hell to pay. From the POV of
any British government, it is a no-brainer.
In short, you'd have a better chance of making snowballs in Hell than you
have of ever seeing stones removed from Stonehenge and transported back to
Wales or of being allowed to do a major excavation that damages the site.
Still, good luck with trying to argue MPs, English Heritage and the S of S
for EFRA round to your POV.
Don't believe me? Well, go along to Stonehenge and start doing some work
there. See how quickly the police arrest you. It could potentially result in
some heavy time and very large fines. You'd probably get several years if
you only spraypainted the stones. Don't think you'd find any friends in the
pagan community either - you'd be shopped in doublequick time. There's been
a few cases of stone circles being vandalised of late, and people have got
rather ticked off about it.
I'm just telling you how it is. It is no skin off my nose if you wish to
make an arse of yourself and not believe me. It might however indicate your
connection to reality is a little shaky though.
Rocks aren't English or Welsh - those are human labels. Rocks were there
before there was an England or a Wales and will be there after the labels
have been forgotten; it is a bit like a mayfly trying to say "I own this
pond!" In addition, it is fairly irrelevant where a lump of rock
originated - it's far more important what people do with it afterwards. A
goodly number of roofs in England are made of Welsh slate - are you
suggesting that all Welsh slate roofs be repatriated to Wales?
Stonehenge isn't a Welsh monument that was somehow stolen from deepest
Wales - it is an artefact of past successive generations who lived in what
is now called Wiltshire. Its context is the landscape of Salisbury Plain,
which is heavily populated with sacred sites - divorced from that context,
it is meaningless.
You know, you really do need to learn some archaeology. You're making some
very elementary boo-boos.
I rather suspect that Barry would laugh his socks off at you trying to use
his work in support of your theories.
Err, big deal. We know the sarsens were shaped on the spot. What has that
got to do with the price of cheese?
http://groups.msn.com/ArkArchaeology/theheelstonestonehengeuk.msnw?albumlist=2
http://www.coconino.edu/apetersen/megaliths/images/stonehenge_barrow.jpg
http://wiltshirewhitehorses.org.uk/images/weseye.jpg
He didn't declare any such thing nor, under English law, does he have the
power to do so. Your letter to the Coroner laid claim to the gold ark of the
covenant and other artefacts. The Coroner, probably rather nonplussed at
such a claim, duly made inquiries. He subsequently recieved a report from
English Heritage confirming that no articles answering your description had
been found at Stonehenge or indeed any other EH site.The coroner therefore
did not consider that he had to pursue the matters raised in your letter. I
quote from the copy of the letter on your own site:
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=sc.groups.msn.com/tn/57/91/arkarchaeology/2/8.jpg&imgrefurl=http://groups.msn.com/arkarchaeology/pictures&h=96&w=72&sz=2&tbnid=xt14052P69gJ:&tbnh=76&tbnw=57&start=55&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dheelstone%26start%3D40%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DN
Now if by some miracle the ark of the covenant should turn up anywhere in
England and Wales, it would be regarded as treasure within the meaning of
the Act, to wit, it is presumably over 300 years old, it is composed of
precious metals, and it is of cultural significance. Consequently, as the
current code of practice has it:
"Section 4 of the Act provides that treasure (as defined in section 1 of the
Act) *vests in the Crown or in the appropriate franchisee of the Crown
(Duchy of Lancaster, the Duchy of Cornwall and the Corporation of London)*,
if there is one (see below), but the rights of original owners or their
heirs, where known, are fully protected. The Act confirms that the Crown or
the franchisee will enjoy the same rights over treasure as they currently do
in respect of treasure trove. Objects that qualify as treasure under section
1 of the Act will be treasure irrespective of the circumstances in which
they came to be in the place where they were found and, in particular,
irrespective of whether they were lost, buried in a grave or abandoned."
http://www.britarch.ac.uk/cba/potant10.html#D
The exclusions from this are unworked natural objects and ores, or else
covered by Part IX of the Merchant Shipping Act 1995, or else are less than
300 years old and not hidden with the intention of later recovery. Single
coins are not covered either, nor are precious objects associated with human
burials in consecrated ground. The ark of the covenant would not meet any of
these exclusions, and would therefore be considered treasure. Whilst you
have laid claim to the ark, you can't, in law, be considered the original
owner, and you'd have to demonstrate in a court of law that you were an heir
of the original owner - that might be fun! Even if accepted - and that would
be an enormously problematic claim - the law only protects the rights of the
heirs of the original owner. Ownership of the treasure itself remains vested
in the Crown. So regardless of the claim that you made to the Coroner, the
Crown would own it - you'd recieve a finder's fee if you dug it up (it's
market value). If you didn't dig it up, then the finder's fee would go to
the person who did. Either way, it would wind up in the British Museum,
being studied, before going on exhibition.
Kevin |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kevin Jones
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2004 2:58 am Post subject: Re: Garry Denke's Ark of the Covenant below Stonehenge Heels |
|
|
"Garry Denke" <garrydenke@usa.com> wrote in message
news:96f81cbe.0407011017.794e6194@posting.google.com...
| Quote: | Garry Denke's Ark of the Covenant under Stonehenge Heelstone Wings
Hello Kevin,
As a matter of law, Garry Denke's ark of the covenant below Stonehenge
Heelstone wings, and Garry Denke's brasen altar inside Stonehenge
Barrow located 100 meters east-southeast of Garry Denke's ark of the
covenant, said Stonehenge Barrow containing Garry Denke's golden table
and Garry Denke's golden altar, including, but not limited to, all of
Garry Denke's personal property inside said Garry Denke's ark, altars,
and table; they are, as you have confirmed below; the exclusive
personal property of the original owner: Garry Denke.
|
Err - not quite under English law, unless you wish to argue that you,
personally are the original owner of the Ark of the Covenant - I presume you
mean the Hebrew Ark - which would probably mean that you would have to be
the first high priest to use it, the guy who built it, or God.
Now here you would have a problem in law. Exodus predates the building of
the Ark. Now at the earliest Exodus would be about 1400-1500 BC, whilst the
latest date suggested is somewhere round 1290 BC; actually the evidence for
either date is meagre, though the upper date looks more convincing. That
means that you either have to argue that you are something like 3,500 years
old, or else it is a case of reincarnation. Now I rather doubt that the
courts would accept the argument that a belief in reincarnation establishes
your claim to any Arks found in England or Wales.
In any case since treasure is, in part, defined as being precious metal
artefacts over 300 years old, British law make the not unreasonable
presumption that the original owner is dead, and that the matter therefore
concerns his or her heirs, if heirs exist - the concept of property passing
from a deceased person to his or her reincarnation does not exist in British
law. If it did, the Treasury would find some way of applying Capital Gains
Tax.
British law does *not* establish the heirs of the original owner as having
exclusive ownership of artefacts defined as 'treasure' - on the contrary, it
establishes the Crown as having exclusive ownership, though it remarks that
the rights of the heirs are fully protected. Exactly what 'fully protected'
means would have to be fought out in a court of law, but it does not mean
that they own the treasure. The Crown may waive ownership - but that can
only be done by the Secretary of State.
The next problem is that no Ark has been found. The law does not have any
capacity to award ownership of artefacts that have not been found to anyone,
let alone someone whose only claim to the non-existent artefacts is that he
remembers that they are there because he is the original owner of an
artefact that's 3000 years old. Such a claim would immediately be filed
under 'Funnies', along with letters written in green ink with lots of
underlining, and only pulled out for the amusement of new recruits. Mind
you, some poor sod might well be detailed off to write a courteous reply,
the gist of which would be "thank you for your interesting letter . . . we
do not feel that we can take this matter any further" Every official body
that deals with the general public has its file of Funnies.
Said personal
| Quote: | property of Garry Denke, described and identified above, were by law
remembered Kevin - in legal terms, neither 'found' nor 'discovered' -
only verified by Garry Denke's 1984 geophysical (already conducted)
confirmation of that remembered. In short, Garry Denke's personal
property was not 'found' or 'discovered' by Garry Denke's 1984
surveys, but remembered by Garry Denke.
|
That has no status in British law. A coroner can only deal with facts
deriving from a something solid, namely a dead body on a slab, or a piece of
treasure that he can pick up and examine. He can't deal with things that
haven't been found or discovered, and he has no authority to do so. I could
say that I remembered being the original owner of the Crown jewels, but
nobody is going to let me have them on the basis of that. Courts only
recognise claims that can be supported by evidence.
Now you do have a problem in arguing that the Ark of the Covenant is buried
under the Heel Stone. Stonehenge was built in three major phases. The stones
belong to Phase 3 (2600-1600 BC). In the earliest phase (2600 BC), a
crescent of bluestones was errected. This was followed about 500 years later
by the sarsen stone circle, with tenoned joints, and the Heel Stone. The
henge reached its final shape in 1600 BC.
As mentioned above Exodus would be, at the earliest, about 1400-1500 BC,
whilst the latest date suggested is somewhere round 1290 BC. The Ark is
therefore no older that 1500 BC; it disappeared following the fall of
Jerusalem in 587 BC.
The Heel Stone was put in place somewhere around 2000-1800 BC, some 400-700
years before the earliest hypothetical date of Exodus and thus,
approximately 400-700 years before the Ark was built. The Heel Stone was
also in place some 1200-1400 years before the ark went missing. Consequently
the one place that the Ark won't be is under the Heel Stone. Indeed,
anything under the Heel Stone will be earlier than the beginning of the
second millennium BC. At that date it may even predate the emergence of the
Hebrews as an identifiably separate people.
As to where the Ark went to - assuming anyone really cares - the best guess
is that it was taken by the victorious army that ransacked Jerusalem, as
stated in the Apocalypse of Esdras (IV Esd., x, 22). This is certainly most
possible; in IV Kings, xxv it is stated that the Babylonian troops carried
away from the temple whatever brass, silver, and gold they could lay their
hands upon.
Still Arks seem to be multiplying like mice these days. People are finding
them all over the place:
http://www.dccsa.com/greatjoy/ark.html
http://anchorstone.com/arkofcovenant.html
It is also variously supposed to be definitely under the Hill of Tara, in
Ethiopia, in Rosslyn Chapel (Scotland), under the Temple Mount, or else has
been hidden near Rennes-le-Chateau by the Templars and the Masons, who are
its current guardian.
Actually, they're all wrong - it's been in my garden shed for the last ten
years. My mother found it, back in the 50s, in some antique shop - she'd
only gone out for a pound of tea. She was never much interested in
demolishing cities and conquering neighbouring kings, so she just asked it
for the best time to plant the beans. Since it has come to me, I've found
it's quite useful as a toolbox. Since I'm doing a spot of conservation, I
don't mind the odd rain of frogs. I'll see if it can do newts next. They're
currently declining, so a rain of newts could be useful.
Kevin |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Garry Denke
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2004 9:39 am Post subject: Garry Denke's Brasen Altar @ Stonehenge Barrow |
|
|
Garry Denke's Brasen Altar inside Stonehenge Barrow
Hello Kevin,
Thanks for your Funnies.
Be good,
YHWH
"Kevin Jones" <laighleas@nospam.yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:<cc21dq$g66$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com>...
| Quote: | "Garry Denke" <garrydenke@usa.com> wrote in message
news:96f81cbe.0407011017.794e6194@posting.google.com...
Garry Denke's Ark of the Covenant under Stonehenge Heelstone Wings
Hello Kevin,
As a matter of law, Garry Denke's ark of the covenant below Stonehenge
Heelstone wings, and Garry Denke's brasen altar inside Stonehenge
Barrow located 100 meters east-southeast of Garry Denke's ark of the
covenant, said Stonehenge Barrow containing Garry Denke's golden table
and Garry Denke's golden altar, including, but not limited to, all of
Garry Denke's personal property inside said Garry Denke's ark, altars,
and table; they are, as you have confirmed below; the exclusive
personal property of the original owner: Garry Denke.
Err - not quite under English law, unless you wish to argue that you,
personally are the original owner of the Ark of the Covenant - I presume you
mean the Hebrew Ark - which would probably mean that you would have to be
the first high priest to use it, the guy who built it, or God.
Now here you would have a problem in law. Exodus predates the building of
the Ark. Now at the earliest Exodus would be about 1400-1500 BC, whilst the
latest date suggested is somewhere round 1290 BC; actually the evidence for
either date is meagre, though the upper date looks more convincing. That
means that you either have to argue that you are something like 3,500 years
old, or else it is a case of reincarnation. Now I rather doubt that the
courts would accept the argument that a belief in reincarnation establishes
your claim to any Arks found in England or Wales.
In any case since treasure is, in part, defined as being precious metal
artefacts over 300 years old, British law makes the not unreasonable
presumption that the original owner is dead, and that the matter therefore
concerns his or her heirs, if heirs exist - the concept of property passing
from a deceased person to his or her reincarnation does not exist in British
law. If it did, the Treasury would find some way of applying Capital Gains
Tax.
British law does *not* establish the heirs of the original owner as having
exclusive ownership of artefacts defined as 'treasure' - on the contrary, it
establishes the Crown as having exclusive ownership, though it remarks that
the rights of the heirs are fully protected. Exactly what 'fully protected'
means would have to be fought out in a court of law, but it does not mean
that they own the treasure. The Crown may waive ownership - but that can
only be done by the Secretary of State.
The next problem is that no Ark has been found. The law does not have any
capacity to award ownership of artefacts that have not been found to anyone,
let alone someone whose only claim to the non-existent artefacts is that he
remembers that they are there because he is the original owner of an
artefact that's 3000 years old. Such a claim would immediately be filed
under 'Funnies', along with letters written in green ink with lots of
underlining, and only pulled out for the amusement of new recruits. Mind
you, some poor sod might well be detailed off to write a courteous reply,
the gist of which would be "thank you for your interesting letter . . . we
do not feel that we can take this matter any further" Every official body
that deals with the general public has its file of Funnies.
Said personal property of Garry Denke, described and identified above, were
by law remembered Kevin - in legal terms, neither 'found' nor 'discovered'
- only verified by Garry Denke's 1984 geophysical (already conducted)
confirmation of that remembered. In short, Garry Denke's personal property
was not 'found' or 'discovered' by Garry Denke's 1984 surveys, but
remembered by Garry Denke.
That has no status in British law. A coroner can only deal with facts
deriving from a something solid, namely a dead body on a slab, or a piece of
treasure that he can pick up and examine. He can't deal with things that
haven't been found or discovered, and he has no authority to do so. I could
say that I remembered being the original owner of the Crown jewels, but
nobody is going to let me have them on the basis of that. Courts only
recognise claims that can be supported by evidence.
Now you do have a problem in arguing that the Ark of the Covenant is buried
under the Heel Stone. Stonehenge was built in three major phases. The stones
belong to Phase 3 (2600-1600 BC). In the earliest phase (2600 BC), a crescent
of bluestones was errected. This was followed about 500 years later by the
sarsen stone circle, with tenoned joints, and the Heel Stone. The henge
reached its final shape in 1600 BC. As mentioned above Exodus would be, at
the earliest, about 1400-1500 BC, whilst the latest date suggested is
somewhere round 1290 BC. The Ark is therefore no older that 1500 BC; it
disappeared following the fall of Jerusalem in 587 BC.
The Heel Stone was put in place somewhere around 2000-1800 BC, some 400-700
years before the earliest hypothetical date of Exodus and thus, approximately
400-700 years before the Ark was built. The Heel Stone was also in place some
1200-1400 years before the ark went missing. Consequently the one place that
the Ark won't be is under the Heel Stone. Indeed, anything under the Heel
Stone will be earlier than the beginning of the second millennium BC. At that
date it may even predate the emergence of the Hebrews as an identifiably
separate people.
As to where the Ark went to - assuming anyone really cares - the best guess
is that it was taken by the victorious army that ransacked Jerusalem, as
stated in the Apocalypse of Esdras (IV Esd., x, 22). This is certainly most
possible; in II Kings, xxv, 15 it is stated that the Babylonian troops carried
away from the temple whatever brass, silver, and gold they could lay their
hands upon.
Still Arks seem to be multiplying like mice these days. People are finding
them all over the place:
http://www.dccsa.com/greatjoy/ark.html
http://anchorstone.com/arkofcovenant.html
It is also variously supposed to be definitely under the Hill of Tara, in
Ethiopia, in Rosslyn Chapel (Scotland), under the Temple Mount, or else has
been hidden near Rennes-le-Chateau by the Templars and the Masons, who are
its current guardian.
Actually, they're all wrong - it's been in my garden shed for the last ten
years. My mother found it, back in the 50s, in some antique shop - she'd
only gone out for a pound of tea. She was never much interested in
demolishing cities and conquering neighbouring kings, so she just asked it
for the best time to plant the beans. Since it has come to me, I've found
it's quite useful as a toolbox. Since I'm doing a spot of conservation, I
don't mind the odd rain of frogs. I'll see if it can do newts next. They're
currently declining, so a rain of newts could be useful.
Kevin
|
Garry Denke's Ark of the Covenant under Stonehenge Heelstone Wings
Hello Kevin,
As a matter of law, Garry Denke's ark of the covenant below Stonehenge
Heelstone wings, and Garry Denke's brasen altar inside Stonehenge
Barrow located 100 meters east-southeast of Garry Denke's ark of the
covenant, said Stonehenge Barrow containing Garry Denke's golden table
and Garry Denke's golden altar, including, but not limited to, all of
Garry Denke's personal property inside said Garry Denke's ark, altars,
and table; they are, as you have confirmed below; the exclusive
personal property of the original owner: Garry Denke. Said personal
property of Garry Denke, described and identified above, were by law
remembered Kevin - in legal terms, neither 'found' nor 'discovered' -
only verified by Garry Denke's 1984 geophysical (already conducted)
confirmation of that remembered. In short, Garry Denke's personal
property was not 'found' or 'discovered' by Garry Denke's 1984
surveys, but remembered by Garry Denke. Thus, as a matter of law, the
original owner, Garry Denke, has exclusive sole ownership of Garry
Denke's ark, altars, and table personal property, including, but not
limited to, all of Garry Denke's personal property inside Garry
Denke's ark, altars, and table - and Garry Denke's gold plates and
brass plates inside Westbury White Horse Eye
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=wiltshirewhitehorses.org.uk/images/weseye.jpg&imgrefurl=http://wiltshirewhitehorses.org.uk/weseye.html&h=420&w=593&sz=35&tbnid=hoVlUegXxLAJ:&tbnh=94&tbnw=132&start=2&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dwestbury%2Bwhite%2Bhorse%2Beye%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DG
will be returned to Garry Denke's Coin Oil Company, as a matter of
law, Abstract of Title, which you have referenced below. Note that all
rights, titles, and interests in and to the same are currently
protected by that certain Assignment of Working Interest duly filed
and recorded of 1) Texas Hebrew Post, 11333 North Central Expressway,
Dallas, Texas, 75243, (214) 692-7283, 2) Playboy Magazine, Des Moines,
Iowa, 50307, (515) 243-1200, 3) Texas Catholic, 3725 Blackburn Street,
Dallas, Texas 75219, (214) 528-8792, 4) American Atheists, 225
Christiani, Cranford, New Jersey, 07016, (908) 276-7300, 5) The Dallas
Morning News, 508 Young Street, Dallas, Texas, 75202, (214) 977-8222,
6) Dallas Observer, 2120 Commerce Street, Dallas, Texas, 75201, (214)
757-9000, and 7) The Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 8801 South
Yale Avenue, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 74137, (918) 493-2074, The Leading Edge.
Also note their Working Interest ownership expires upon excavation and
exhumation of Garry Denke's ark of the covenant from below Stonehenge
Heelstone wings. Thank you for confirming Garry Denke's sole ownership
rights, titles, and interests. Your research and legal work is most
appreciated by all at Denoco Inc. of Texas, Coin Oil Company, Wildcat
Station, P.O. Box 866488, Plano, Texas, USA
"Section 4 of the Act provides that treasure (as defined in section 1
of the Act) *vests in the Crown or in the appropriate franchisee of
the Crown (Duchy of Lancaster, Duchy of Cornwall and the Corporation
of London)*, if there is one (see below), but the rights of original
owners or their heirs, where known, are fully protected." Yes. fully
protected. Watch the universal magnetic reversal (polar flip), on
excavation day, at exhumation hour, of Garry Denke's ark of the
covenant, from under Stonehenge Heelstone wings. Here are the three 3)
primary physics equations Garry Denke will be using to effect the
universal magnetic reversal (a polar flip)
superforce = c^4 / G
superforce = (299792458 m/s)^4 / 6.67236419 e-11 m^3/kg-s^2
superforce = 8.07760871 e33 m^4/s^4 / 6.67236419 e-11 m^3/kg-s^2
superforce = 1.21060669 e44 kg-m/s^2 [rsu 3.9 e-8]
[OUTDATED 1998 CODATA-NIST VALUES]
c = superpower / superforce
c = 3.62930757 e52 kg-m^2/s^3 / 1.21060669 e44 kg-m/s^2
c = 299792458 m/s [exact]
[OUTDATED 1998 CODATA-NIST VALUES]
superpower = c^5 / G
superpower = (299792458 m/s)^5 / 6.67236419 e-11 m^3/kg-s^2
superpower = 2.42160617 e42 m^5/s^5 / 6.67236419 e-11 m^3/kg-s^2
superpower = 3.62930757 e52 kg-m^2/s^3 [rsu 3.9 e-8]
[OUTDATED 1998 CODATA-NIST VALUES]
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=garry+denke&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&scoring=d&selm=96f81cbe.0406292143.4050ac62%40posting.google.com&rnum=6
Best wishes,
Denoco Inc. of Texas
Coil Oil Company
Garry, et al
"Kevin Jones" <laighleas@nospam.yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:<cbvmrj$r6m$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com>...
| Quote: |
You miss the point - all of the rocks get to stay, because it is a
*criminal* offence to remove *any* of them or otherwise damage the site. It
is also a criminal offence to dig, excavate, use metal detectors or even do
geophys unless the work is licenced and approved by the Secretary of State
for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. In order for such permission to
be granted for even preliminary work, you would have to give English Heritage
a very well planned programme, including research questions to be answered,
an indication of funding for postexcavation work and analysis, plus funding
for the archive, writing up the dig etc etc. Permission will not be granted
*ever* if the attitude of the team is "the stones are in the way." The
guiding principle of the law is that the monument will not be disturbed or
damaged, and that no stone will be disturbed. Hell, unless you've got a valid
reason, you won't even be allowed to touch the stones with your hand - the
public isn't generally allowed into the circle these days. That's not an
opinion - that is the law. Now if you don't like it, you could, if you were a
British citizen (I'll assume that you're not) talk to your MP in an attempt
to persuade him to raise a Private Members Bill to change the law. Of course,
you then run into the other problem that it is also a World Heritage Site,
and that no MP would wish to be associated with anything that damaged a World
Heritage Site. It wouldn't just result in national outrage - there would be
international hell to pay. From the POV of any British government, it is a no
- brainer. In short, you'd have a better chance of making snowballs in Hell
than you have of ever seeing stones removed from Stonehenge and transported
back to Wales or of being allowed to do a major excavation that damages the
site. Still, good luck with trying to argue MPs, English Heritage and the S
of S for EFRA round to your POV. Don't believe me? Well, go along to
Stonehenge and start doing some work there. See how quickly the police arrest
you. It could potentially result in some heavy time and very large fines.
You'd probably get several years if you only spraypainted the stones. Don't
think you'd find any friends in the pagan community either - you'd be shopped
in doublequick time. There's been a few cases of stone circles being
vandalised of late, and people have got rather ticked off about it. I'm just
telling you how it is. It is no skin off my nose if you wish to make an arse
of yourself and not believe me. It might however indicate you connection to
reality is a little shaky though. Rocks aren't English or Welsh - those are
human labels. Rocks were there before there was an England or a Wales and
will be there after the labels have been forgotten; it is a bit like a mayfly
trying to say "I own this pond!" In addition, it is fairly irrelevant where a
lump of rock originated - it's far more important what people do with it
afterwards. A goodly number of roofs in England are made of Welsh slate - are
you suggesting that all Welsh slate roofs be repatriated to Wales? Stonehenge
isn't a Welsh monument that was somehow stolen from deepest Wales - it is an
artefact of past successive generations who lived in what is now called
Wiltshire. Its context is the landscape of Salisbury Plain, which is heavily
populated with sacred sites - divorced from that context, it is meaningless.
You know, you really do need to learn some archaeology. You're making some
very elementary boo-boos. I rather suspect that Barry would laugh his socks
off at you trying to use his work in support of your theories. Err, big deal.
We know the sarsens were shaped on the spot. What has that got to do with the
price of cheese?
|
http://groups.msn.com/ArkArchaeology/theheelstonestonehengeuk.msnw?albumlist=2
http://www.coconino.edu/apetersen/megaliths/images/stonehenge_barrow.jpg
http://wiltshirewhitehorses.org.uk/images/weseye.jpg
| Quote: | He didn't declare any such thing nor, under English law, does he have the
power to do so. Your letter to the Coroner laid claim to the gold ark of the
covenant and other artefacts. The Coroner, probably rather nonplussed at
such a claim, duly made inquiries. He subsequently received a report from
English Heritage confirming that no articles answering your description had
been found at Stonehenge or indeed any other EH site.The coroner therefore
did not consider that he had to pursue the matters raised in your letter. I
quote from the copy of the letter on your own site:
|
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=sc.groups.msn.com/tn/57/91/arkarchaeology/2/8.jpg&imgrefurl=http://groups.msn.com/arkarchaeology/pictures&h=96&w=72&sz=2&tbnid=xt14052P69gJ:&tbnh=76&tbnw=57&start=55&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dheelstone%26start%3D40%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DN
| Quote: | Now if by some miracle the ark of the covenant should turn up anywhere in
England and Wales, it would be regarded as treasure within the meaning of the
Act, to wit, it is presumably over 300 years old, it is composed of precious
metals, and it is of cultural significance. Consequently, as the current code
of practice has it: "Section 4 of the Act provides that treasure (as defined
in section 1 of the Act) *vests in the Crown or in the appropriate franchisee
of the Crown (Duchy of Lancaster, the Duchy of Cornwall and the Corporation
of London)*, if there is one (see below), but the rights of original owners
or their heirs, where known, are fully protected. The Act confirms that the
Crown or the franchisee will enjoy the same rights over treasure as they
currently do in respect of treasure trove. Objects that qualify as treasure
under section 1 of the Act will be treasure irrespective of the circumstances
in which they came to be in the place where they were found and, in
particular, irrespective of whether they were lost, buried in a grave or
abandoned."
|
http://www.britarch.ac.uk/cba/potant10.html#D
| Quote: | The exclusions from this are unworked natural objects and ores, or else
covered by Part IX of the Merchant Shipping Act 1995, or else are less than
300 years old and not hidden with the intention of later recovery. Single
coins are not covered either, nor are precious objects associated with human
burials in consecrated ground. The ark of the covenant would not meet any of
these exclusions, and would therefore be considered treasure. Whilst you
have laid claim to the ark, you can't, in law, be considered the original
owner, and you'd have to demonstrate in a court of law that you were an heir
of the original owner - that might be fun! Even if accepted - and that would
be an enormously problematic claim - the law only protects the rights of the
heirs of the original owner. Ownership of the treasure itself remains vested
in the Crown. So regardless of the claim that you made to the Coroner, the
Crown would own it - you'd recieve a finder's fee if you dug it up (it's
market value). If you didn't dig it up, then the finder's fee would go to
the person who did. Either way, it would wind up in the British Museum,
being studied, before going on exhibition.
Kevin |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kevin Jones
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 03, 2004 6:33 am Post subject: Re: Garry Denke's Brasen Altar @ Stonehenge Barrow |
|
|
"Garry Denke" <garrydenke@usa.com> wrote in message
news:96f81cbe.0407012039.26d52327@posting.google.com...
| Quote: | Garry Denke's Brasen Altar inside Stonehenge Barrow
Hello Kevin,
Thanks for your Funnies.
Be good,
YHWH
|
I always am - and if I can't be, I'm careful. :-)
A friend of mine spotted that post, and suddenly the design of my garden
became clear. Burnt offerings are made in the outer sanctuary - the
neighbours mistake these for barbecues. From there, you pass through a
narrow gap guarded by Sage, to follow a narrow winding path that leads
through the middle sanctuary, past the sacred waters. You have to pass a
veil of Deadly Nightshade and Rose of Sharon to enter the inner sanctuary,
which is perfumed by Rose, Honeysuckle and Jasmine, and screened on all
sides from profane eyes. Doves regularly alight there. In the centre of the
inner sanctuary is the sancta sanctorum, The Shed, its doors always closed,
it's contents veiled from the outside world. Open the doors, and you are met
with a screen which has to be ritually removed - this takes the best end of
a day. It requires much mental and spiritual preparation to remove the Final
Veil.
The wife usually stays in the outer sanctuary - she's never penetrated to
the mysteries of the inner sanctuary, much less The Shed. What happens in
the inner sanctuary is, as far as she's concerned, Mysteries Beyond Her
Comprehension. The perils of the Narrow Path in the middle sanctuary also
terrify her.
The other giveaway, my friend observed, is the state of the garden. It is
far more fertile than the surrounding gardens - notably so. It is also
knee-deep in wildlife, unlike the surrounding area. This they interpreted as
the Ark working with what its got and trying to turn it into the Land of
Milk and Honey. They are, BTW, cross that I didn't tell them I had the Ark
of the Covenant in The Shed. However, I never regarded it as terribly
important. Incidentally, there's some things resembling stone flags at the
bottom of the Ark, but mum always thought they should be left there, so I've
gone along with her notions.
So far I have been content with a plague of butterflies, a plague of
Canterbury Bells, a plague of crickets, and a plague of frogs - and verily
life is good! Makes a change from flies, boils, and locusts - though the cat
wasn't too keen on frogs splashing down everywhere. You've never seen a cat
move so fast!  She still looks suspiciously at the sky whenever she goes
out. However, my friend is now sending me a newt umbrella.
:-)
Kevin |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Garry Denke
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2004 8:19 am Post subject: Garry Denke's Gold & Brass Plates @ Westbury White Horse Eye |
|
|
Hello Kevin,
Here moving stone principles.
Take care,
God
superforce constant = c^4/G
c = superpower / superforce
superpower constant = c^5/G
9^9 (387,420,489) equations (the Laws of Physics) ...
FUNDAMENTAL PHYSICAL CONSTANTS
Latest (2002) values of the constants
Seven primary universal base unit values
1) luminous intensity - (hG/c^5)^1/2/sr = 1.9720204(06) x 10^-45 cd
2) graviton time - (hG/c^5)^1/2 = 1.3511889(33) x 10^-43 s
3) graviton length - (hG/c^3)^1/2 = 4.0507625(15) x 10^-35 m
4) graviton substance - M/(hc/G)^1/2 = 1.6605388(62) x 10^-27 kmol
5) graviton mass - (hc/G)^1/2 = 5.4563031(1 x 10^-8 kg
6) graviton current - e/(hG/c^5)^1/2 = 1.1857531(4 x 10^24 A
7) graviton temperature - (hc^5/G)^1/2/k = 3.5518626(92) x 10^32 K
and two primary universal base unit arc angles
1) relative permeability - 1/dielectric = 6.8517999(55) x 10^1 sr
2) i. fine-structure - 1/fine-structure = 1.3703599(91) x 10^2 rad
yield 9^9 (387,420,489) universal physical constants
001) irradiance constant i. = 4.5211586(75) x 10-122 s^3/kg
002) radiance constant i.= 3.0978074(81) x 10-120 s^3-sr/kg
003) radiant volume = 1.3554092(73) x 10^-113 m-s^2/kg
004) measurement volume = 6.6467653(52) x 10^-104 m^3
005) graviton volume = 1.2181811(03) x 10^-96 m^3/kg
006) luminous efficacy = 3.7229933(79) x 10^-96 cd-sr-s^3/kg-m^2
007) electric current volume = 1.3838189(66) x 10^-93 m^2/A
008) luminous energy = 1.8257115(33) x 10^-86 cd-sr-s
009) electric charg | |
