You write, "it would really require examination on the ground before any deduction could be made regarding your assessment."
I agree with that. Since you are much closer to this than I on the other side of the pond, perhaps you can take a look and report back? The World would be forever grateful!
But there are other tail tell signs on the ground at Rhosyfelin. Including the once "wider embankments" of the River Brynberian as can be seen in an aerial photo of the place. And even the rock face itself suggests torrents of water smoothing out the crag and quarrying off naturally rocks and megaliths.
Brian John's finding of the "Rhosyfelin mill" ruin just a short distance upslope makes more plausible Crag Rhosyfelin was engulfed in water in the not too distant past. If true, this would make MPP's Rhosyfelin "quarry" impossible. And that being so, it is therefore imperative this possibility is thoroughly and independently investigated. Before more mass media hysteria and commitment to a false narrative is made. Especially by truth seeking scientists whose research MPP used to support his narrative.
[log in to unmask]
From: John Wood <[log in to unmask]>
To: kostadinos <[log in to unmask]>
Cc: BRITARCH <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Mon, Oct 12, 2015 06:24 PM
Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] Was the Rhosyfelin Neolithic bluestone "quarry" engulfed in water?
<div id="AOLMsgPart_1_807dfa5c-cd55-4c70-abd6-16981d6a24de" style="margin: 0px;font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, Sans-Serif;font-size: 12px;color: #000;background-color: #fff;">
<pre style="font-size: 9pt;"><tt>On 10/12/15, Constantinos
<<a href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>> wrote:
> If the
location of this mill is "few hundred yards up the valley" from Crag
Rhosyfelin and built "into the slope above a stream", this would be strong
evidence the stream (flowing some 50 yards from the Rhosyfelin rock face)
at the time of the mill operation much wider and deeper. And this wider
would likely engulf Crag Rhosyfelin in water. Raising serious
> questions if
the Rhosyfelin rock face could possibly have been a "bluestone
> quarry", as
Prof. Mike Parker Pearson has been claiming.
> This, of course, is not a
proof of anything. But it is a call to question
> the current claims. And a
call for further independent research into the
> "quarry" idea of
Sorry, Kostas, this isn't evidence that the stream would be wider
deeper. If the building was a mill it might not have been a very big
and the power to drive the mill comes from the headwater in the
mill stream that flows down beyond the mill wheel is
often quite small. I used
to own part of such a stream from a fairly
large mill and the cross-section was
about 1.5 metres wide and 0.6m
deep. The natural stream that was the overflow
of the mill dam wasn't
particularly wide or deep either.
Either way, it
would really require examination on the ground before
any deduction could be
made regarding your assessment.
</div> <!-- end of AOLMsgPart_1_807dfa5c-cd55-4c70-abd6-16981d6a24de -->