13 things that don’t make sense about Waun Mawn (Stonehenge’s The Lost Circle Revealed)
Introduction
According to the BBC documentary, the discovery of the bluestone quarry in Wales was presented as a major breakthrough in understanding Stonehenge. At face value, that seems fair enough. Identifying a potential source for the stones is important.
But this is where the problem begins.
Because from that point onward, the investigation appears to shift away from asking what the evidence actually shows… and toward trying to make the evidence fit an already established timeline.
Instead of examining the quarry independently and comparing it objectively with Stonehenge, the focus becomes finding dates that support a pre-existing conclusion. That is not how science works. When you start with the answer and work backwards, you are no longer testing a hypothesis — you are trying to confirm one.
Craig Rhos-y-Felin is a good example of this.
The site contains clear evidence of Mesolithic activity, particularly in the form of man-made hearths. That should be the starting point for interpretation. Yet the emphasis is instead placed on a small number of later samples that fall closer to the desired Neolithic timeframe.
When those dates still don’t quite align, the solution is not to question the model — it is to introduce another one. A “prototype” stone circle in Wales was later moved to Stonehenge. A theory designed not from evidence, but from necessity.
And so begins a decade-long search for that missing link.
Sites are proposed… then quietly dropped when the dates don’t match. New locations are suggested… then abandoned for the same reason. The pattern repeats. The goal is no longer discovery — it is validation.
Eventually, everything converges on Waun Mawn.
This is presented as the long-awaited solution. But when you strip it back, the physical evidence is extremely limited. A handful of stones. A small number of possible stone holes. Nowhere near enough to replicate what exists at Stonehenge.
So the gaps are filled in.
Estimates are extended beyond what is actually present. Missing stones are assumed. Layouts are reconstructed from partial data. And suddenly, a fragment becomes a full circle.
Then we come to the dating.
Among a broad range of results spanning several millennia, one sample is highlighted as aligning with the proposed timeline. The rest — which do not support the theory — receive far less attention.
This is the core issue. You cannot treat a single favourable result as definitive while ignoring the wider dataset. That is not strengthening an argument — it is narrowing it.
The same pattern appears in other parts of the interpretation.
Large stones at the quarry are presented as the source of Stonehenge’s bluestones, despite clear differences in size and shape. No explanation is provided for how they were reduced or reworked.
Transport by water is dismissed, despite experimental demonstrations showing it is entirely possible. Instead, overland transport through heavily forested and waterlogged terrain is presented as the more feasible option — a claim that raises more questions than it answers.
Even the more technical aspects, such as photogrammetry, are used in ways that assume ideal conditions. A stone is said to match a socket, without addressing the simple fact that removing a stone alters the shape of that socket. Basic mechanical realities are overlooked.
And then, towards the end, the programme drifts into broader speculation — cultural movements, symbolic alignments, and generalised astronomical claims. These are presented confidently, but without the level of supporting evidence required to justify them.
Meanwhile, key inconsistencies remain unresolved.
Stonehenge contains 56 bluestone positions. Waun Mawn does not. The construction methods differ. The depth of the stone holes differs. The overall structure is not the same.
These are not small details. There are fundamental differences.
So what are we left with?
Not a clear, evidence-led conclusion — but a narrative built around selective interpretation. Certain data points are emphasised. Others are downplayed. Gaps are filled with theory rather than evidence.
The result is compelling television.
But it is not robust science.
Because real scientific analysis does not depend on finding the right answer.
It depends on being willing to accept when the evidence points somewhere else entirely.
The Documentary
Therefore, the last hope for MPP’s reputation and his ’10-year search’ fell upon Waun Mawn, culminating in the BBC documentary “Stonehenge: The Lost Circle Revealed”, shown on the 12th February 2021. In it, he claimed many so-called ‘facts’ which I shall now highlight as ‘not making sense’, with the reasons why.
1. At (13:20) MPP shows signs of human-made quarrying and splitting of Bluestones at Carn Goedog in Wales – unfortunately, there are no extensive excavation reports on this site, just a published review showing that of the 31 carbon dates, only three random samples support his theory and none of the man-made hearths which are Mesolithic (like Craig Rhos-Y-Felin) or late Neolithic.
2. The program showed the suggested quarried stones at Carn Goedog, which are over 12 feet long and 5 feet wide, weighing therefore around 20+ tonnes. The Stonehenge bluestones are, on average, less than six feet high and about 18–24 inches wide, weighing 1-3 tonnes. The review on the site offered no evidence that the stones were cut down and reshaped for the journey to Stonehenge or elsewhere. (Stonehenge’s The Lost Circle Revealed)
3. MPP claims that the boat transport method (14.50) was infeasible as they did not have sturdy enough boats to carry the stones on such a journey – Sadly, you do not need a ‘boat’ to transport stones in a river as shown by Atkinson in the 1960’s who employed just four school kids to punt a raft with a 3 tonne stone attached down the Avon. Moreover, he has failed to recognise that the oldest boatyard in the world, located in the Solent (at the end of the Avon), was found with planked wood (and associated wheat grain from Turkey), indicating that substantial seafaring boats were available by the 7th Millennium BCE.
4. Mike Parker-Pearson also suggested that an ‘ox-cart’ route that followed the current A40 was the most feasible way of transporting these stones to Stonehenge. He believed that they dragged these stones over 200 km on wooden sledges – unfortunately, the example shown on the program shows schoolboys dragging a small stone over flat grassland, which would not be available for another 4000+ years and after Stonehenge’s initial construction. At the time of Phase I construction, the environment (as indicated by pollen analysis) shows that 70% of the terrain was woodland and forest, and the remaining 30% was mostly rivers and swampland, making such an endeavour impossible.
5. The Discovery (21:15) of ‘random’ hazel nuts at Craig Rhos-Y-Felin provides MPP’s required date for Stonehenge of 3300 BCE (which is still 500 years before MPP’s supposed construction date) – This clear ‘cherry picking’ of the archaeological evidence is ‘Bad Science’. To take just two carbon dates from over 40 at the Craig-Rhos-Y-Felin site and ignoring the more solid man-made hearth dates, which are Mesolithic and moreover, compatible with 26 carbon dates found at Stonehenge, is plainly a falsehood.
6. When they eventually found their target site (36:15), Waun Mawn (after many claims that other sites were “the one we have been looking for” to eventually find that the carbon dating on these sites did not match the required date), they found just four bluestones, and so went on a stone hunt and found 10 further stone HOLES! – This is clearly a sad attempt to fit a square peg into a round hole. The excavation was flawed as it only identified 14 possible stone locations and the remainder of the estimated 15 – 25 stones was a ‘guesstimation’ based on the known 14 holes – two of which had non-bluestone stones in situ.
7. The BBC reconstruction shows just 28 stones (38:05) of the 56 Bluestones required for the Aubrey holes to be filled at Stonehenge, and MPP goes on to suggest, that the stone circle is of equal size and dimensions as Stonehenge, quote “the chances of the two sites having the EXACT dimensions are very slim”- This sadly, is another falsehood, the Moat/Ditch at Stonehenge is approximately 110 metres in diameter, NOT the Aubrey holes which are 90 metres in diameter. Moreover, Stonehenge has a ditch/moat surrounding the stones (for a good reason) Waun Mawn does not!!
8. MPPs then used a new, unused tool in archaeology to prove their hypothesis, ‘photogrammetry’, and suggested that Stone 62 at Stonehenge fitted the stone hole 91 at Waun Mawn. The reason this method is not used is somewhat obvious to even non-academics. You would need a crane to lift the stone vertically out of the hole to get an exact imprint. If you are taking out a stone by hand and/or with levers, you will rock it from side to side, destroying the stone hole impression, as we have seen with post holes in numerous excavations.
9. The program fails to report that the 40 carbon dates from wood found on the site did not come up with MPP’s magic date, and so he employed another form of Dating OSL (40:17) to find this single piece of evidence he desperately required. – Sadly, watching Dr Kim Kinnaird’s efforts to get a light, uncontaminated sample from over a fallen Stone summed up the state of archaeology as a science for me. Armed with a black weed blocker and a bicycle light on his head, he set forth to get a sample to prove MPP’s hypothesis. Anyone who considers this an effective way of obtaining an OSL sample is beyond scientific redemption, as logic would suggest; doing it at night would perhaps be more suitable. This was finally compounded when we saw him transporting the sample in his hand into the detector in daylight, which was pure icing on that flawed cake.
10. Roberts indicated (quite rightly) that ALL the dates were “way out” and all hopes were put on this one sample, MPP then claimed (42:20) “we had dated the thing, and it just before Stonehenge’s construction” (3300 BCE) – Sadly, and not report in the program, but within the Waun Mawn excavation report, there was not one OSL samples taken but 18, which gave results in the range of 6980+/- 2120 BCE to AD 1900 +/- 20. So the 17 dating sample did not verify MPP’s hypothesis, only a single one, which was dated 3530 +/- 330 (with that date range, the probability it’s 3300 BCE is slim!!).In fact, the OSL data in the review document suggested “removal of the stones” in 2120 +/- 520 BCE, long after the Stonehenge phase I.
11. The program then went onto a flight of fantasy for 15 minutes (25% OF AIR TIME) with unscientific mythology and astroarchaeology (which proved MORE that astroarchaeology doesn’t have any significance as the ‘expert’ suggested that the stones were ‘in the general direction’ of an alignment – which by the very nature of a stone circle of 360 degrees – every stone circle in the world is in the general direction of all astrological alignments!! Even more ludicrous came an idea that the Welsh culturally invaded England in 3300 BCE and took the stones of Waun Mawn with them –Sadly, at no point did the experts attempt to justify why Stonehenge had 56 Bluestones and the site at Waun Mawn had less than 30 at the most. Even if this idea were remotely true, why would you leave four stones behind when you are already going to be 30 stones short and need to go back and get some more from the quarry site?
12. The program never went into any detail of the OTHER carbon dates found at Waun Mawn, which would have allowed a balanced scientific program, allowing the viewer to decide whether MPP’s hypothesis was actually feasible. It presented speculation as fact, with a number of site workers and the presenter agreeing on MPP’s ideas without question or qualification – this is commonly known as ‘propaganda’ rather than scientific methodology. Moreover, the REAL evidence can be found in the report and shows that of the carbon dating evidence at Waun Mawn (the OSL data was excluded from the report accept a small paragraph without all data!) shows that of the 42 samples taken:
- 1 – sample were of 9th Millennium BCE
- 3 – samples were of the 8th Millennium BCE
- 8 – samples were of the 7th Millennium BCE
- 4 – samples were of the 6th Millennium BCE
- 10 – samples were of the 5th Millennium BCE
- 6 – samples were of the 4th Millennium BCE
- 11- samples from the 4th Millennium BCE to 17 AD.
13. The report on Waun Mawn contains other questionable evidence, which was excluded from the program. This includes the fact that the Aubrey holes at Stonehenge are ALL two to three times deeper than at Waun Mawn. This indicates that the Stonehenge Bluestones were made from larger bluestones than those at Waun Mawn (Stonehenge Bluestone hole 69 is over 1.5m deep, as it is long and thin). It looks as if the original stone circle at Waun Mawn was made up of stones similar in shape to the existing recumbent stone 13, which is 6– 7 feet tall and surrounded by a moat. The shape of recumbent 13 indicates that rather than the long thin bluestones as at Stonehenge, Waun Mawn had ‘fat bottomed’ domed ends and hence the need for only shallow ditches.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it seems that the BBC has produced a nice piece of archaeological propaganda that supports the current false ‘archaeological narrative’ of mythology and speculation, rather than tested and qualified scientific fact. This lack of ‘critical analysis’ is a clear indication of why the ‘science’ of archaeology has not progressed much over the last 50 years, even with modern technology, which it has incorporated to very limited success.
Memoir
I first met MPP on his excavation dig on the Avon in 2009, where he was preparing to announce his bluestone site, ‘Bluestonehenge’. At the time, we had a discussion about the date of the site, as he was convinced that (at that time) he believed it predated Stonehenge Phase I (we now know this was the first of many claims of a predated Stonehenge bluestone circle). I did point out that at the meeting that I thought this date would be incorrect as according to my research (of the surrounding 50 sites around Stonehenge) which was included in my published book and post-glacial flooded environment hypothesis ‘The Stonehenge Enigma’ in 2013 – that this site would have been below water as the River Avon would remain flooded throughout the Neolithic period. At this point, he ended the meeting and disappeared at such a rapid speed – it looked as if he thought I was clearly mad.
Later carbon dating proved my point and supported my hypothesis, as it is now accepted that Bluehenge was constructed between 2840 and 2230 BCE, in the Early Bronze Age.
PODCAST
Author’s Biography
Robert John Langdon, a polymathic luminary, emerges as a writer, historian, and eminent specialist in LiDAR Landscape Archaeology.
His intellectual voyage has been interwoven with stints as an astute scrutineer in government and grand corporate bastions, a tapestry spanning British Telecommunications, Cable and Wireless, British Gas, and the esteemed University of London.
A decade hence, Robert’s transition into retirement unfurled a chapter of insatiable curiosity. This phase saw him immerse himself in Politics, Archaeology, Philosophy, and the enigmatic realm of Quantum Mechanics. His academic odyssey traversed the venerable corridors of knowledge hubs such as the Museum of London, University College London, Birkbeck College, The City Literature Institute, and Chichester University.
In the symphony of his life, Robert is a custodian of three progeny and a pair of cherished grandchildren. His sanctuary lies ensconced in the embrace of West Wales, where he inhabits an isolated cottage, its windows framing a vista of the boundless sea – a retreat from the scrutinising gaze of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, an amiable clandestinity in the lap of nature.
Exploring Prehistoric Britain: A Journey Through Time
My blog delves into the fascinating mysteries of prehistoric Britain, challenging conventional narratives and offering fresh perspectives grounded in cutting-edge research, particularly LiDAR technology. I invite you to explore some key areas of my research. For example, the Wansdyke, often cited as a defensive structure, is re-examined in light of new evidence. I’ve presented my findings in my blog post Wansdyke: A British Frontier Wall – ‘Debunked’, and a Wansdyke LiDAR Flyover video further visualises my conclusions.
My work also often challenges established archaeological dogma. I argue that many sites, such as Hambledon Hill, commonly identified as Iron Age hillforts, are not what they seem. My posts Lidar Investigation Hambledon Hill – NOT an ‘Iron Age Fort’ and Unmasking the “Iron Age Hillfort” Myth explore these ideas in detail and offer an alternative view. Similarly, sites like Cissbury Ring and White Sheet Camp receive re-evaluations based on LiDAR analysis in my posts “Lidar Investigation Cissbury Ring through time” and “Lidar Investigation White Sheet Camp,“ revealing fascinating insights into their true purpose. I have also examined South Cadbury Castle, often linked to the mythical Camelot56.
My research also extends to ancient water management, including the role of canals and other linear earthworks. I have discussed the true origins of Car Dyke in multiple posts, including Car Dyke – ABC News Podcast and Lidar Investigation Car Dyke – North Section, which suggest a Mesolithic origin 2357. I also explore the misidentification of Roman aqueducts, as seen in my posts on the Great Chesters (Roman) Aqueduct. My research has also been greatly informed by my post-glacial flooding hypothesis, which has helped explain landscape transformations over time. I have discussed this hypothesis in several posts, including AI now supports my Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis and Exploring Britain’s Flooded Past: A Personal Journey
Finally, my blog also investigates prehistoric burial practices, as seen in Prehistoric Burial Practices of Britain and explores the mystery of Pillow Mounds, often mistaken for medieval rabbit warrens, but with a potential link to Bronze Age cremation in my posts: Pillow Mounds: A Bronze Age Legacy of Cremation? and The Mystery of Pillow Mounds: Are They Really Medieval Rabbit Warrens?. My research also includes astronomical insights into ancient sites, for example, in Rediscovering the Winter Solstice: The Original Winter Festival. I also review new information about the construction of Stonehenge in The Stonehenge Enigma.
Further Reading
For those interested in British Prehistory, visit www.prehistoric-britain.co.uk, a comprehensive resource featuring an extensive collection of archaeology articles, modern LiDAR investigations, and groundbreaking research. The site also includes insights and excerpts from the acclaimed Robert John Langdon Trilogy, a series of books that explore Britain during the Prehistoric period. Titles in the trilogy include The Stonehenge Enigma, Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and The Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis, which offer compelling evidence of ancient landscapes shaped by post-glacial flooding.
To further explore these topics, Robert John Langdon has developed a dedicated YouTube channel featuring over 100 video documentaries and investigations that complement the trilogy. Notable discoveries and studies showcased on the channel include 13 Things that Don’t Make Sense in History and the revelation of Silbury Avenue – The Lost Stone Avenue, a rediscovered prehistoric feature at Avebury, Wiltshire.
In addition to his main works, Langdon has released a series of shorter, accessible publications, ideal for readers delving into specific topics. These include:
- The Ancient Mariners
- Stonehenge Built 8300 BCE
- Old Sarum
- Prehistoric Rivers
- Dykes, Ditches, and Earthworks
- Echoes of Atlantis
- Homo Superior
- 13 Things that Don’t Make Sense in History
- Silbury Avenue – The Lost Stone Avenue
- Offa’s Dyke
- The Stonehenge Enigma
- The Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis
- The Stonehenge Hoax
- Dawn of the Lost Civilisation
- Darwin’s Children
- Great Chester’s Roman Aqueduct
- Wansdyke
For active discussions and updates on the trilogy’s findings and recent LiDAR investigations, join our vibrant community on Facebook. Engage with like-minded enthusiasts by leaving a message or contributing to debates in our Facebook Group.
Whether through the books, the website, or interactive videos, we aim to provide a deeper understanding of Britain’s fascinating prehistoric past. We encourage you to explore these resources and uncover the mysteries of ancient landscapes through the lens of modern archaeology.
For more information, including chapter extracts and related publications, visit the Robert John Langdon Author Page. Dive into works such as The Stonehenge Enigma or Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and explore cutting-edge theories that challenge traditional historical narratives.
Other Blogs
1
a
- AI now Supports – Homo Superior
- AI now supports my Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis
- Alexander the Great sailed into India – where no rivers exist today
- Ancient Secrets of Althorp – debunked
- Antler Picks built Ancient Monuments – yet there is no real evidence
- Antonine Wall – Prehistoric Canals (Dykes)
- Archaeological ‘pulp fiction’ – has archaeology turned from science?
- Archaeological Pseudoscience
- Archaeology in the Post-Truth Era
- Archaeology: A Bad Science?
- Archaeology: A Harbour for Fantasists?
- Archaeology: Fact or Fiction?
- Archaeology: The Flaws of Peer Review
- Archaeology’s Bayesian Mistake: Stop Averaging the Past
- Are Raised Beaches Archaeological Pseudoscience?
- Atlantis Found: The Mathematical Proof That Plato’s Lost City Was Doggerland
- ATLANTIS: Discovery with Dan Snow Debunked
- Avebury Ditch – Avebury Phase 2
- Avebury through time
- Avebury’s great mystery revealed
- Avebury’s Lost Stone Avenue – FREE Flipbook
b
- Battlesbury Hill – Wiltshire
- Beyond Stone and Bone: Rethinking the Megalithic Architects of Northern Europe
- BGS Prehistoric River Map
- Blackhenge: Debunking the Media misinterpretation of the Stonehenge Builders
- Brain capacity (Cro-Magnon Man)
- Britain’s First Road – Stonehenge Avenue
- Britain’s Giant Prehistoric Waterways
- British Roman Ports miles away from the coast
c
- Caerfai Promontory Fort – Archaeological Nonsense
- Car Dyke – ABC News PodCast
- Car Dyke – North Section
- Car Dyke Atlas – Prehistoric Canals – FREE Flipbook
- CASE STUDY – An Inconvenient TRUTH (Craig Rhos Y Felin)
- Case Study – River Avon
- Case Study – Woodhenge Reconstruction
- Chapter 2 – Craig Rhos-Y-Felin Debunked
- Chapter 2 – Stonehenge Phase I
- Chapter 2 – Variation of the Species
- Chapter 3 – Post Glacial Sea Levels
- Chapter 3 – Stonehenge Phase II
- Chapter 7 – Britain’s Post-Glacial Flooding
- Cissbury Ring through time
- Clement Reid, Doggerland, and the Archaeological Establishment
- Cro-Magnon Brain Capacity
- Cro-Magnon Megalithic Builders: Measurement, Biology, and the DNA
- Cro-Magnons – An Explainer
d
- Darwin’s Children – Flipbook
- Darwin’s Children – The Cro-Magnons
- Dawn of the Lost Civilisation – FREE Flipbook
- Dawn of the Lost Civilisation – Introduction
- Digging for Britain – Cerne Abbas
- Digging for Britain Debunked – Cerne Abbas 2
- Digging Up Britain’s Past – Debunked
- DLC Chapter 1 – The Ascent of Man
- Durrington Walls – Woodhenge through time
- Durrington Walls Revisited: Platforms, Fish Traps, and a Managed Mesolithic Landscape
- Dyke Construction – Hydrology 101
- Dykes Ditches and Earthworks
- DYKES of Britain
e
f
g
h
- Hadrian’s Wall – Military Way Hoax
- Hadrian’s Wall – the Stanegate Hoax
- Hadrian’s Wall LiDAR investigation
- Hambledon Hill – NOT an ‘Iron Age Fort’
- Hayling Island Lidar Maps
- Hidden Sources of Ancient Dykes: Tracing Underground Groundwater Fractals
- Historic River Avon
- Hollingsbury Camp Brighton – A Hillfort… or a Forgotten Harbour?
- Hollows, Sunken Lanes and Palaeochannels
- Homo Superior – Flipbook
- Homo Superior – History’s Giants
- How Lidar will change Archaeology
- Hydrology 101 Simplified: Why Britain’s Dykes Worked Without Rivers
i
l
m
- Maiden Castle through time
- Mathematics Meets Archaeology: Discovering the Mesolithic Origins of Car Dyke
- Mesolithic River Avon
- Mesolithic Stonehenge
- Minerals found in Prehistoric and Roman Quarries
- Mining in the Prehistoric to Roman Period
- Mount Caburn through time
- Mysteries of the Oldest Boatyard Uncovered
- Mythological Dragons – a non-existent animal that is shared by the World.
o
- Offa’s Dyke – FREE Flipbook
- Old Sarum Lidar Map
- Old Sarum Through Time…………….
- On Sunken Lands of the North Sea – Lived the World’s Greatest Civilisation.
- OSL Chronicles: Questioning Time in the Geological Tale of the Avon Valley
- Oswestry LiDAR Survey
- Oswestry through time
- Oysters in Archaeology: Nature’s Ancient Water Filters?
p
- Pillow Mounds: A Bronze Age Legacy of Cremation?
- Pinkery Canal
- Plato Was Right: The Archaeological Evidence the Academics Never Expected
- Post Glacial Flooding – Flipbook
- Prehistoric Burial Practices of Britain
- Prehistoric Canals – Wansdyke
- Prehistoric Canals – Wansdyke
- Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Great Chesters Aqueduct (The Vallum Pt. 4)
- Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Hadrian’s Wall Vallum (pt 1)
- Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Offa’s Dyke (Chepstow)
- Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Offa’s Dyke (LiDAR Survey)
- Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Offa’s Dyke Survey (End of Section A)
- Prehistoric Canals (Dykes) – Wansdyke (4)
- Prehistoric Canals Wansdyke 2
- Professor Bonkers and the mad, mad World of Archaeology
r
- Real-World Confirmation of Post-Glacial Flooding
- Rebirth in Stone: Decrypting the Winter Solstice Legacy of Stonehenge
- Rediscovering the Winter Solstice: The Original Winter Festival
- Rethinking Ancient Boundaries: The Vallum and Offa’s Dyke”
- Rethinking Ogham: Could Ireland’s Oldest Script Have Begun as a Tally System?
- Rethinking The Past: Mathematical Proof of Langdon’s Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis
- Rising Evidence, Falling Rivers: The Real Story of Europe’s First Farmers
- Rivers of the Past Were Higher: A Fresh Perspective on Prehistoric Hydrology
s
- Sea Level Changes
- Section A – NY26SW
- Section B – NY25NE & NY26SE
- Section C – NY35NW
- Section D – NY35NE
- Section E – NY46SW & NY45NW
- Section F – NY46SE & NY45NE
- Section G – NY56SW
- Section H – NY56NE & NY56SE
- Section I – NY66NW
- Section J – NY66NE
- Section K – NY76NW
- Section L – NY76NE
- Section M – NY87SW & NY86NW
- Section N – NY87SE
- Section O – NY97SW & NY96NW
- Section P – NY96NE
- Section Q – NZ06NW
- Section R – NZ06NE
- Section S – NZ16NW
- Section T – NZ16NE
- Section U – NZ26NW & NZ26SW
- Section V – NZ26NE & NZ26SE
- Silbury Avenue – Avebury’s First Stone Avenue
- Silbury Hill
- Silbury Hill / Sanctuary – Avebury Phase 3
- Sky Maps of Prehistoric Britain
- Somerset Plain – Signs of Post-Glacial Flooding
- South Cadbury Castle – Camelot
- Statonbury Camp near Bath – an example of West Wansdyke
- Stone me – the druids are looking the wrong way on Solstice day
- Stone Transportation and Dumb Censorship
- Stonehenge – Monument to the Dead
- Stonehenge Hoax – Dating the Monument
- Stonehenge Hoax – Round Monument?
- Stonehenge Hoax – Summer Solstice
- Stonehenge LiDAR tour
- Stonehenge Phase 1 – 8300 BCE Documentary
- Stonehenge Phase 1 — Britain’s First Monument
- Stonehenge Phase I (The Stonehenge Landscape)
- Stonehenge Solved – Pythagorean maths put to use 4,000 years before he was born
- Stonehenge Through Time
- Stonehenge, Doggerland and Atlantis connection
- Stonehenge: Borehole Evidence of Post-Glacial Flooding
- Stonehenge: Discovery with Dan Snow Debunked
- Stonehenge: The World’s First Computer – FREE Flipbook
- Stonehenge: The Worlds First Computer
- Stonehenge’s The Lost Circle Revealed – DEBUNKED
t
- Ten Reasons Why Car Dyke Blows Britain’s Earthwork Myths Out of the Water
- Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Britain’s Prehistoric Flooded Past
- Ten thousand year old boats found on Northern Europe’s Hillsides
- Ten thousand-year-old boats found on Northern Europe’s Hillsides
- Testing Plato’s Atlantis Against Reality
- The “Hunter-Gatherer” Myth: Why It’s Time to Bury This Outdated Term
- The Ancient Mariners – Flipbook
- The Ancient Mariners – Prehistoric seafarers of the Mesolithic
- The Ascent of Man — From Survival to Systems
- The Beringian Migration Myth: Why the Peopling of the Americas by Foot is Mathematically and Logistically Impossible
- The Bluestone Enigma
- The Bulford Hoax: The “Simpler, Older Stonehenge” That Wasn’t
- The Cheddar Man Hoax
- The Cro-Magnon Cover-Up: How DNA and PR Labels Erased Our Real Ancestry
- The Dolmen and Long Barrow Connection
- The Durrington Mega-Monument Hoax: What Lies Beneath? – Debunked
- The Durrington Walls Hoax – it’s not a henge?
- The Dyke Myth Collapses: Excavation and Dating Prove Britain’s Great Dykes Are Prehistoric Canals
- The First European Smelted Bronzes
- The Fury of the Past: Natural Disasters in Historical and Prehistoric Britain
- The Giant’s Graves of Cumbria
- The Giants of Prehistory: Cro-Magnon and the Ancient Monuments
- The Great Ancient DNA Illusion: How Statistical Models Became Archaeological “Facts”
- The Great Antler Pick Hoax
- The Great Bell Beaker Migration Myth
- The Great Chichester Hoax – A Bridge too far?
- The Great Dorchester Aqueduct Hoax
- The Great Farming Hoax – (Einkorn Wheat)
- The Great Farming Migration Hoax
- The Great Hadrian’s Wall Hoax
- The Great Iron Age Hill Fort Hoax
- The Great Offa’s Dyke Hoax
- The Great Prehistoric Migration Hoax
- The Great Stone Transportation Hoax
- The Great Stonehenge Hoax
- The Great Wansdyke Hoax
- The Henge and River Relationship
- The Logistical Impossibility of Defending Maiden Castle
- The Long Barrow and Dolmen Enigma
- The Long Barrow Mystery
- The Long Barrow Mystery: Unravelling Ancient Connections
- The Lost Island of Avalon – revealed
- The Maiden Way Hoax – A Closer Look at an Ancient Road’s Hidden History
- The Maths – LGM total ice volume
- The Mystery of Pillow Mounds: Are They Really Medieval Rabbit Warrens?
- THE ODYSSEY PROBLEM: WHY DID A WEEK-LONG VOYAGE BECOME A TEN-YEAR EPIC?
- The Old Sarum Hoax
- The Oldest Boat Yard in the World found in Wales
- The Perils of Paradigm Shifts: Why Unconventional Hypotheses Get Branded as Pseudoscience
- The Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis – 1/11
- The Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis – FREE Flipbook
- The Post-Glacial Flooding Theory
- The Problem with Hadrian’s Vallum
- The Rise of the Cro-Magnon (Homo Superior)
- The Roman Military Way Hoax
- The Silbury Hill Lighthouse?
- The Stone Money – Credit System
- The Stonehenge Avenue
- The Stonehenge Avenue
- The Stonehenge Code: Unveiling its 10,000-Year-Old Secret
- The Stonehenge Crescent: A Monument to a Lost World
- The Stonehenge Enigma – FREE Flipbook
- The Stonehenge Enigma: Part 1/6
- The Stonehenge Hoax – Bluestone Quarry Site
- The Stonehenge Hoax – FREE Flipbook
- The Stonehenge Hoax – FREE Flipbook
- The Stonehenge Hoax – Moving the Bluestones
- The Stonehenge Hoax – Periglacial Stripes
- The Stonehenge Hoax – Station Stones
- The Stonehenge Hoax – Stonehenge’s Location
- The Stonehenge Hoax – The Ditch
- The Stonehenge Hoax – The Slaughter Stone
- The Stonehenge Hoax – The Stonehenge Layer
- The Stonehenge Hoax – Totem Poles
- The Stonehenge Hoax – Woodhenge
- The Stonehenge Hospital
- The Stonehenge Transportation Mystery
- The Subtropical Britain Hoax
- The Troy, Hyperborea and Atlantis Connection
- The Vallum @ Hadrian’s Wall – it’s Prehistoric!
- The Vallum at Hadrian’s Wall Atlas – FREE Flipbook
- The Woodhenge Hoax
- Three Dykes – Kidland Forest
- Thurnam’s 137 Skulls: The Forgotten People Behind Britain’s Megaliths.
- Top Ten Misidentified Fire Beacons in British History
- Troy Debunked – Troy did not exist in Asia Minor, but in fact, the North Sea island of Doggerland
- TSE – DVD Barrows
- TSE DVD – An Inconvenient Truth
- TSE DVD – Antler Picks
- TSE DVD – Avebury
- TSE DVD – Durrington Walls & Woodhenge
- TSE DVD – Dykes
- TSE DVD – Epilogue
- TSE DVD – Stonehenge Phase I
- TSE DVD – Stonehenge Phase II
- TSE DVD – The Post-Glacial Hypothesis
- TSE DVD Introduction
- TSE DVD Old Sarum
- Twigs, Charcoal, and the Death of the Saxon Dyke Myth
w
- Wansdyke – Short Film
- Wansdyke Atlas – FREE Flipbook
- Wansdyke East – Prehistoric Canals
- Wansdyke LiDAR Flyover
- Wansdyke: A British Frontier Wall – ‘Debunked’
- Was Columbus the first European to reach America?
- What Archaeology Missed Beneath Stonehenge
- White Sheet Camp
- Why a Simple Fence Beats a Massive Dyke (and What That Means for History)
- Windmill Hill – Avebury Phase 1
- Winter Solstice – Science, Propaganda and Indoctrination
- Woodhenge – the World’s First Lighthouse?
