New Russian Megolithic Site

[+OverSword]

From the article:

Alternate history buffs are about to be whipped into a frenzy! OK, maybe not, but they will find this interesting.

An ancient “super-megalithic” site has been found in the Siberian Mountains. Found recently in Gornaya Shoria (Mount Shoria) in southern Siberia, this site consists of huge blocks of stone, which appear to be granite, with flat surfaces, right angles, and sharp corners. The blocks appear to be stacked, almost in the manner of cyclopean masonry, and well…they’re enormous!

Read the rest and see pictures here

[beelzebufo]

They look natural to me. These could have easily been formed by frost wedging. Water gets into small cracks in stone, then freezes, and expands, eventually splitting the rock.

Here are some examples of frost wedging:

(Pictures aren't mine)

[Leonardo]

They look natural to me. These could have easily been formed by frost wedging. Water gets into small cracks in stone, then freezes, and expands, eventually splitting the rock.

I agree the formations shown are almost certainly natural, but I would suggest the initial cracks in the granite were caused by plane shearing as the rocks shifted - possibly due to isostatic rebound or another uplift/geological process. Frost wedging, along with other weathering processes, would have, over time, favourably enhanced the cracks to give the formation the appearance of being made of distinct blocks of stone.

Edited March 11, 2014 by Leonardo

[+OverSword]

That doesn't explain the three stacked blocks with the (for lack of a better term) room formed by them. Otherwise I agree, it's possibly natural.

[Imaginarynumber1]

I agree with the above posters that the "wall" looks like a natural formation. I've seen several aroundnhere that look similar.

As for stacked rocks, they are probably also natural, simply a bit weirder. There are other examples of strange formations that are completely natural. I just can't think of their names right now and am too lazy to look them up. Plus it's annoying to post pictures and links on a tablet.

[jules99]

More pics would be nice though my 1st impression is that the formation looks natural....nature can do some strange things; Tessellated pavement..

Edited March 11, 2014 by jules99

[Taun]

My first thought was it was like the infamous "Bimini Road", and definitely natural (IMO)...

[+and-then]

My first thought was it was like the infamous "Bimini Road", and definitely natural (IMO)...

Yep... and though I cannot remember the name there is a similar formation underwater off Japan that is natural but looks very much man made.

Or I could have taken a moment to use my friend...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yonaguni_Monument

Edited March 12, 2014 by and then

[onesixoneeight]

I got some catching up to do. Even Arkhaim is a new one on me :/

[Rafterman]

Well if he thinks he's on to something, there are numerous well-respected archaeology and geology journals to which he could submit his findings.

Peer review that **** bro.

[+OverSword]

It seems that if this is not natural then there will certainly be other artifacts in the surrounding area.

[Leonardo]

It seems that if this is not natural then there will certainly be other artifacts in the surrounding area.

What lies behind the alleged 'wall'?

Consider the nature of a wall. A wall is either designed to retain, rebuff or uphold. If this feature is a retaining wall, then what is it retaining? If it is a rebuffing (defensive) wall, then the space beyond it should indicate what it was designed to protect. If it was designed to uphold, then whatever it was designed to uphold (i.e. ruins of roof, etc) should indicate that function.

If it is not retaining anything, protecting anything, or upholding anything or then I would suggest it is not a wall at all.

[+OverSword]

What lies behind the alleged 'wall'?

Consider the nature of a wall. A wall is either designed to retain, rebuff or uphold. If this feature is a retaining wall, then what is it retaining? If it is a rebuffing (defensive) wall, then the space beyond it should indicate what it was designed to protect. If it was designed to uphold, then whatever it was designed to uphold (i.e. ruins of roof, etc) should indicate that function.

If it is not retaining anything, protecting anything, or upholding anything or then I would suggest it is not a wall at all.

Or maybe it's imprisoning. Look on the map and maybe it will say 'here there be nephilim'

[SHaYap]

SOmehing about the state of these monoliths does not gives an impression of 'weathering' or 'erosion' to me ...

~

[Thorvir]

Natural formations. It's easy to see, but I do agree they are an unusual set of features. And cool! Wish I had land like that around here.

@third_eye: explain how you think the weathering and erosion don't look natural. Because to me, there's nothing unnatural looking to any of it. Thanks.

[beelzebufo]

SOmehing about the state of these monoliths does not gives an impression of 'weathering' or 'erosion' to me ...

~

What is it about these that look unnatural to you? I didn't see anything in any of those photos that could not have easily been formed by natural processes.

[SHaYap]

Natural formations. It's easy to see, but I do agree they are an unusual set of features. And cool! Wish I had land like that around here.

@third_eye: explain how you think the weathering and erosion don't look natural. Because to me, there's nothing unnatural looking to any of it. Thanks.

What is it about these that look unnatural to you? I didn't see anything in any of those photos that could not have easily been formed by natural processes.

THe lateral 'crack' across the entire face cross multiple blocks and vertical lines ... especially on the left of the image ... nature seldom if ever 'cracks' or erode in such a 'constructed' manner ... it is too consistent along touching edges of multiple blocks.

Erosion usually on an 'incline' and cracks usually on vertical rather than horizontal ... and seldom if ever cuts right across different blocks in same patterns consistent with 'stacking'

~ edit : double post bypass

Edited March 12, 2014 by third_eye

[beelzebufo]

THe lateral 'crack' across the entire face cross multiple blocks and vertical lines ... especially on the left of the image ... nature seldom if ever 'cracks' or erode in such a 'constructed' manner ... it is too consistent along touching edges of multiple blocks.

Erosion usually on an 'incline' and cracks usually on vertical rather than horizontal ... and seldom if ever cuts right across different blocks in same patterns consistent with 'stacking'

~ edit : double post bypass

I've actually had a formal education in geology, and have gone on assignments mapping rock beds in the rocky mountains. I have had to study a lot of exposed cliff faces, and I can tell you that horizontal cracks in the rock are not uncommon.

The simple explanation of the horizontal crack that crosses several vertical cracks, is that it happened first. The vertical cracks formed afterwards, hence why they stop at the horizontal crack. These are not blocks that have been stacked on top of each other, it is just a cliff face that is breaking apart.

Also, erosion does not need an incline to occur, but I'm not sure what you're talking about, as there are a lot of inclines in the rock.

Edited March 13, 2014 by beelzebufo

[SHaYap]

I've actually had a formal education in geology, and have gone on assignments mapping rock beds in the rocky mountains. I have had to study a lot of exposed cliff faces, and I can tell you that horizontal cracks in the rock are not uncommon.

The simple explanation of the horizontal crack that crosses several vertical cracks, is that it happened first. The vertical cracks formed afterwards, hence why they stop at the horizontal crack. These are not blocks that have been stacked on top of each other, it is just a cliff face that is breaking apart.

I know what you are saying ~ it seems to me the activity is quite concentrated on just a small cross section of these rocks ... anyway ... I'll need much more information of the area to come to any conclusions based on geological phenomena.

THat's a lot of rocking and rolling on a few rocks ~

[jules99]

There is a clip on the area posted in the articles comments section, that shows some good footage of the area...looks like quite a mystical place, very beautiful, Would love to spend some time there with a camera.

[MiskatonicGrad]

After watching the video it just makes me think these people need to get out more. I see nothing that makes me think it was manmade. I do a lot of hiking and have seen similar formations.

[Anthony North]

Interesting. It seems to me to be natural with the possibility of human shaping going on (early attempt at temple forming?) - another for the catalogue of those structures that could be natural, could be man-made. Obvious answer: could be both.

[seeder]

No vitrification? WHAT?

[+OverSword]

What is it about these that look unnatural to you? I didn't see anything in any of those photos that could not have easily been formed by natural processes.

Except the three stacked blocks in the photo posted after the "wall" picture on the site. That is very obviously not on a large granite wall cracked and looking like stacked blocks. It is stacked blocks.

Someone commented that these could also be a natural formation. I think that comment was made by someone with no expertise who just doesn't want to admit they may not know everything. A fairly common flaw amongst people. IMO there is no easy way to explain this through erosion. If it is then it is a completely different type of erosion than is seen on the big "wall" which would make no sense since they are in the same area and presumably from the same type of stone.

It is obvious that a symetrical and uniform type of erosion is not at all uncommon in nature, I've seen quite a few unextreme examples in my life but to offhandedly dismiss this as natural (above photo) is not making alot of sense to me.

Edited March 13, 2014 by OverSword

[lightly]

Look's natural to me. Cracking, shifting around and weathering over a very very long period of time. The Ice and water in the pic above is telling.