Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Laurentian Menhir - #931

Expand Messages
  • Reinoud
    Dear Sir, Thank you for your quick reply. The most important information is the latitude of the site. I can find it via Google maps, and other (paper) maps.
    Message 1 of 7 , Jun 8, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Sir,
      Thank you for your quick reply. The most important information is the latitude of the site. I can find it via Google maps, and other (paper) maps. However, what is the State where the menhir is located, and what is the nearest town, and what is the nearest village?
      Sincerely yours,
      Reinoud de Jonge

      --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, charles bruns <charbruns@...> wrote:
      >
      > dear sir.  I will be there next Sunday.  Please guide me on aspects to check out.  Compasses are useless in this area due to high iron contend.  Little Bear dolmen (which is close-by) produces 180' deviation (when you circle rock arrow remains pointed at the dolmen)  The rock is same high grade iron ore (I believe called hematite) as adjacent stone in area (magnet will stick to magrock).
      >
      > Out of deep respect for your work I wish to inundate you with some original jpgs of this area and await your reply.  Wish I had the Lat/Lon at my fingertips for you, but try Minnesota Gunflint Lodge/Lake on Canadian border, at ten o'clock several mile from there, west above Magnetic Lake on top of Laurentian divide.  Sincerely yours,  Char Bruns
      >
      > From: Reinoud <drsrmdejonge@...>
      > To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Wednesday, June 8, 2011 9:55 AM
      > Subject: [ancient_waterways_society] Re: Laurentian Menhir - #931
      >
      >
      >  
      > Dear Char Bruns,
      > I would like to know the exact location of the menhir. If you have other knowledge about it, please share it with us. Did you measure the dimensions of the menhir? Do you have some information about the immediate surroundings. Please inform us about it. Kind of stone? Orientation of the front side?
      > Regards,
      > Reinoud de Jonge
      > The Netherlands
      >
      > --- In ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com, charles bruns <charbruns@> wrote:
      > >
      > > congratulations!  I think you have a superb ancient megalith site, worthy of investigation.  Magnetic rock is also located at the exact point the waters go south or north.  chb
      > >
      > >
      > > From: Larry Hancock <hancocklarry40@>
      > > To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
      > > Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 2:00 PM
      > > Subject: Re: [ancient_waterways_society] Laurentian Menhir - #931
      > >
      > >  
      > > Same rock? No, just same area. These stand at a junction in the river of two branches of the White River defining a triangular area of land, each leg of the triangle 5 mi. long. At the apex is a megalithic chamber and the third angle sits in the middle of a hug cairn field with over 200 cairns. The large earthen mound delineates a complete solar calendar.
      > >
      > > --- On Mon, 5/30/11, charles bruns <charbruns@> wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > > >From: charles bruns <charbruns@>
      > > >Subject: Re: [ancient_waterways_society] Laurentian Menhir - #931
      > > >To: "ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com" <ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com>
      > > >Date: Monday, May 30, 2011, 2:46 PM
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > 
      > > >i assume these are all pictures of the same rock?  perched stone is problematic.  what do you think?
      > > >
      > > >From: Larry Hancock <hancocklarry40@>
      > > >To: ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com
      > > >Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2011 1:33 PM
      > > >Subject: Re: [ancient_waterways_society] Laurentian Menhir - #931 [1 Attachment]
      > > >
      > > > 
      > > >This is just a little of what is near the river. Do these qualify as comparisons to your stones.
      > > >
      > > >--- On Sun, 5/29/11, charles bruns <charbruns@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >>From: charles bruns <charbruns@>
      > > >>Subject: [ancient_waterways_society] Laurentian Menhir - #931 [2 Attachments]
      > > >>To: "oas@" <oas@>
      > > >>Cc: "Monette Bebow-Reinhard" <moberein@>, "susan colbert" <suky_n_fl@>, "sue english" <ancient_waterways_society@yahoogroups.com>, "vince barrows" <v_barrows@>, "scott ferris" <scott@>, "steve hilgren" <hilgren@>, "Judy" <judyspapergoods@>, "judy tepley" <judy.tepley@>, "Bernadette Albright" <begood5683@>, "karen bauernschmidt" <specialklyb@>, "Bruce Campbell" <bcampbell1961@>
      > > >>Date: Sunday, May 29, 2011, 1:41 PM
      > > >>
      > > >>
      > > >> 
      > > >>Commented on this jpeg to the crew at Buckingham Palace.  I am serious, so is anything more needing to be said? 
      > > >>     I would associate this marker as for a channel through the Laurentian Divide, connecting the waters of Hudson Bay with the central drainage (Mississippi flowage and Great Lakes) of prehistoric America. 
      > > >>     With the authentication of the Kennsington Rune Stone as pre-Columbian, an interest in prehistoric contact has grown in this country as of late, focused mostly in the last two thousand years of history.  I have chosen to focus on the two millenium before this; the Old Copper Culture, North Altantic Maritime culture, the Beaker People, Red Ocher People, etc.  In other words, the Archaic.  I want to diminish the epistemological confusion, looking in the field for artifacts, and enjoying my retirement returning to the interests of my youth.  
      > > >>     It sure would be nice if you could return suitable jpegs (photos) of your standing stones with the angled tops.  the draw to our part of the continent, beside for great skiing and ice fishing, is the 99%+ pure copper found in northern Michigan and upon Isle Royal in Lake Superior.
      > > >>     I hope you folks feel I am worthy of a play date or something.  there are more arrows in my quiver, and I graduated with a BS in Anthro/Archeo from the University of Wisconsin.  
      > > >>     Minnesota archaeologists say this is a glacial anomally, being 1. too large for primitive man to have moved, and 2. is located at the top of the hill (overlooking large lakes to the north and a stream that still flows south through the ridge) so impossible for man to have placed there.  The menhir is made of the same highgrade hematite (iron ore a magnet will stick to) as the hills around it.  This spring I hope to go there (quite secluded) and tell my kids to go find where it was quarried - can't be too far as it IS a big sucker and IS way up atop Minnesota's mountain range.  I sure am interested in what you say, to me it looks akin to the grand stones of your islands.       char bruns        
      > >
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.