riley58•3d agoMost Upvoted

TIL a big stone circle in the UK isn't as old as everyone says

I was looking at this site near Avebury last summer when a guide told me the main circle was actually from about 2500 BC, not 3000 BC like most books claim. I had always assumed the older date was right because it's what every documentary says. But she showed me the excavation reports from the 60s with carbon dating that backs it up. Has anyone else run into a popular site where the accepted age is just wrong?

2 comments

2 Comments

faithrodriguez3d ago

That bit about carbon dating from the 60s is wild, it really makes you wonder how many other "facts" we just take for granted. It's like how everyone thinks the pyramids were built by slaves, but most historians now say it was actually paid workers with good benefits. This stuff happens all the time in everyday life too, like when a friend swears a restaurant has been around for decades and you look it up and it opened five years ago. People just pass along what they heard without checking, and then it becomes the truth. Makes you wonder what other popular beliefs might be totally off base, right?

keith_henderson2d ago

C'mon, is it really that deep though? Sure, some facts get twisted over time, but most of the stuff we take for granted is pretty solid. Like, nobody's confusing the pyramids with a Denny's that's been around since 1998. The carbon dating thing from the 60s had issues, sure, but they fixed it. Scientists don't just stop there. The bigger problem is people cherry-picking one outdated study to act like everything's a lie. I mean, the earth is round, gravity works, and vaccines stop diseases. Some "facts" are just facts.