1918-1929: USA, Maryhill Stonehenge. WW1 Memorial?

The Maryhill Stonehenge is a replica of England's Stonehenge located in Maryhill, Washington. It was commissioned in the early 20th century by the wealthy entrepreneur Sam Hill, and dedicated on 4 July 1918 as a memorial to the people who had died in World War I.
usa_stonehenge.jpg

Image Source


KD: What a strange monument to honor the people who died in World War I. Why would they build a Stonehenge to honor the dead?
  • 11-12 years of construction... are there any construction photographs?
 
  • A Avatar
    Info

  • Joined
    Oct 29, 2020
    Messages
    1,103
    Reaction score
    3,249
    That's a cool video. I'm pretty sure if the OP structure was built between 1918 and 1921, they used heavy machinery.

    In reference to the video. The guy is working on a concrete slab. If we are talking about the construction of the actual Stonehenge using this method, I doubt they would have had the luxury of the flat stone surface like that.

    v3.jpg

    Additionally, I'm not sure how the below method would work with much larger stones over an uneven terrain.

    v1.jpg

    For the actual Stonehenge we get the following:
    • The sarsen stones are a type of silcrete rock, which is found scattered naturally across southern England.
    • For many years most archaeologists believed that these stones were brought from the Marlborough Downs, 20 miles (32km) away, but their exact origin remained a mystery.
    distance.jpg

    How did he get the stone behind him delivered to the site where he used physics to lift it up? Did he use the above rolling method? (from the video it appears that he made it of concrete). I would like to see a group of people rolling the below stone for 20 miles across the mapped terrain using the method shown in the video.

    v2.jpg

    Or one of these.

    stonehenge-stones.jpg
     

    jd755

    Active member
    Joined
    Jan 8, 2021
    Messages
    162
    Reaction score
    364
    I'm pretty sure if the OP structure was built between 1918 and 1921, they used heavy machinery.
    So am I hence the question mark.
    I did a site search for "Stonehenge" before posting.

    How did he move the barn 300 yards by hand?
    I'll lay odds it wasn't over concrete.
    I seem to recall one of the Indiana Jones movies depicted giant heavy cut stones being slotted into place by removal of sand.
    His efforts with the barn and blocks show how skillful and resourceful we were before 'tech' & machines came along and probably still are and will be again when machines no longer function.
     
    Last edited:
    Joined
    Oct 29, 2020
    Messages
    1,103
    Reaction score
    3,249
    I agree, people are resourceful. This technique (or any other similar approach) is not something tremendously secretive to not be mentioned in any of the older texts or drawings. Stuff like this should be nothing but a common knowledge present in every text book. For whatever reason this is not the case, and we have to guess how they did it back then. We even admire videos like the one you posted, because some dude figured out something we should see all over the place in the past. Instead, we get stuff like this for 1832.
    Alexander_column_C_2.jpg

    Alexander_column_C_5.jpg

    With what we know from the available recorded history, the below structure is what we are not surprised with from those times. That's just my opinion, of course.

    chalet-2.jpg

    All I'm saying is this. If they used techniques like the one the gentleman in the video used, how come these techniques are not mentioned in the books? Instead we get versions where thousands of slaves used brute force to move stuff around.

    egypt1.jpg

    The reason I'm not buying stuff like this is either a clearly available unknown technology used back in the day, or some totally different physical abilities of human creatures (read giants) possessed by them constructing individuals.

    Do you honestly think that the video dude can use his method to roll this rock into its current position?

    stone 1.jpg

    Or to remove, and transport the unfinished obelisk if it was ever cut out?

    The-Unfinshed-Obelisk-Egypt-Egypt-Portal.jpg
     

    jd755

    Active member
    Joined
    Jan 8, 2021
    Messages
    162
    Reaction score
    364
    It is frankly beyond obvious "the books" and "the experts" are useless. I feel both exist so to hide truth in plain sight that truth being "the authorities or controllers" are as much in the dark as everyone else is in regards "our past" but their illusion of power and control endures simply because they present us with plausibility they incessantly manufacture and tweak.
    What the video above and the one you found on the simple manufacture of limestone blocks for the pyramids, assuming they can stand the pressure of compression, show me is how things were probably done prior to the current "tech" age is not completely lost to us. How we can escape, if you will, the "tech story" we have been sold for all of our lives and remember (for want of a better word) how things such as moving heavy objects effectively and efficiently `are best achieved is the crux of the matter.

    As for the inclined stone pictured above what if ti was in fact cast in place as per the pyramid video technique shows and was inclined for a purpose everyone alive today is clueless about?
    To often we fall into the narratives trap of working from "what someone opined and someone else interpreted and a third wrote about" instead of using our innate "gift of the god" our curious imagination to consider what we are not seeing rather than what we are told to see.
     
    Joined
    Oct 29, 2020
    Messages
    1,103
    Reaction score
    3,249
    Anything is possible @jd755, we know that. It’s just too many things do not make sense. One of them is their obsession with humongous stones. May be they did cast that trilithon stone in place. But what for and why? Why didn’t they use smaller rocks? How did they plan on moving the trilithon if it was supposed to be somewhere else. If it was supposed to stay in place, why is it in such a peculiar position?

    That video I posted... yeah, it’s all good when they say that no grinding was necessary. I’m pretty sure there is some of that rocky substance laying around in small chunks. But where do you find enough pre-grinded limestone to build 3 Giza pyramids? What the hell did they plan on doing with the cracked obelisk of Luxor were they able to produce it as intended? Raise it and move it?

    While I do think that the previous spin of our civilization was way more mechanically inclined than we are, for myself, given our present state of understanding (6 foot tall people, and no heavy machinery), I struggle to justify behemoth objects we witness.

    BC9508DA-8A46-40D9-8B79-572064F6CDD1.jpeg

    I do understand that hypothetically it’s possible to dig out the Grand Canyon using nothing but picks and shovels. The probability of such an excavation is probably slim to none, but it can be done with enough people and time. The extracted dirt and rocks can be loaded on mule buggies and transported by canoes to get dropped off in the middle of the ocean. It’s possible, but I will only believe it when I see it. Same goes for all these enormous structures.

    If they used some cinder block sized construction materials, we would have never had the majority of questions we ask.

    5B4D2849-0C39-4CA8-9B40-80D8357F0B08.jpeg

    But no...
    • Known as the “Stone of the Pregnant Woman,” it weighs an estimated 1,200 tons - equivalent to three Boeing 747s.
    • This massive weight apparently proved too much for anyone to move ( no sh*t), and the stone was left in the place where it was cut, an enormous rectangle sticking up at an angle from the ground.
    • Source
     
  • A Avatar
    Info

  • Similar articles
    Article starter Title Section Replies Date
    KorbenDallas 1921-1923: Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Stadiums 0

    Similar articles

    Top