Morrisjonathan
@jonathanmorris.bsky.social
Chartered Engineer and a chronicler of Stonehenge theories.
for contact etc see: https://linktr.ee/envisager
for contact etc see: https://linktr.ee/envisager
Up in them hills is great for sunset strolls (not this time of year though).
December 2, 2025 at 7:42 PM
Up in them hills is great for sunset strolls (not this time of year though).
Its. Damn. Again
December 2, 2025 at 7:40 PM
Its. Damn. Again
So overall, and in my opinion, the Government almost certainly made the right call. 3/3
December 2, 2025 at 7:14 PM
So overall, and in my opinion, the Government almost certainly made the right call. 3/3
This regardless of whether CVA was appropriate at all for the bulk of benefit (hard to argue for: very "innovative"). On top of that, that's a preliminary response. Further: costs always escalate and there are far less expensive ways to achieve the CVA benefits (but again outside scope). 2/3
December 2, 2025 at 7:14 PM
This regardless of whether CVA was appropriate at all for the bulk of benefit (hard to argue for: very "innovative"). On top of that, that's a preliminary response. Further: costs always escalate and there are far less expensive ways to achieve the CVA benefits (but again outside scope). 2/3
That came in as "TR010025-003635-A303.4.1.SoS letter 20 June 2022.Response to questions.Redetermination-4.1.20220711". The issues with this were the removal of sunk costs and that the Contingent Valuation itself was flawed (but that out of scope of the inquiry). 1/3
December 2, 2025 at 7:14 PM
That came in as "TR010025-003635-A303.4.1.SoS letter 20 June 2022.Response to questions.Redetermination-4.1.20220711". The issues with this were the removal of sunk costs and that the Contingent Valuation itself was flawed (but that out of scope of the inquiry). 1/3
"I've got a problem with my house, can you come round and have a quick look.. I'll pay you for it"
December 2, 2025 at 4:59 PM
"I've got a problem with my house, can you come round and have a quick look.. I'll pay you for it"
What's happened? (haven't been keeping up)
December 2, 2025 at 12:36 PM
What's happened? (haven't been keeping up)
I was one of the Interested Parties and submitted to all stages of the Inquiry; particularly focussed on this topic. Where are you getting this information from?
December 2, 2025 at 11:35 AM
I was one of the Interested Parties and submitted to all stages of the Inquiry; particularly focussed on this topic. Where are you getting this information from?
As a general rule, it's hard to get major construction projects off the ground if the (costed) benefit is lower than the construction cost. Unfortunately, this one was very bad value and there's many other projects that aren't.
December 2, 2025 at 10:32 AM
As a general rule, it's hard to get major construction projects off the ground if the (costed) benefit is lower than the construction cost. Unfortunately, this one was very bad value and there's many other projects that aren't.
M4. Sorry. Can't be the M3: would break the Welsh connection
December 1, 2025 at 9:00 PM
M4. Sorry. Can't be the M3: would break the Welsh connection
Or just move the lot to Swindon to make easy access from the M3; Theme Park: more tourism; everybody wins!
December 1, 2025 at 8:58 PM
Or just move the lot to Swindon to make easy access from the M3; Theme Park: more tourism; everybody wins!
On the other hand, they'd need a lot of broken up stone/fill to make the gradient up from Stonehenge Bottom?
December 1, 2025 at 8:26 PM
On the other hand, they'd need a lot of broken up stone/fill to make the gradient up from Stonehenge Bottom?
Can't speak for Torsten, but the first one had very low benefit relative to cost.
December 1, 2025 at 8:04 PM
Can't speak for Torsten, but the first one had very low benefit relative to cost.
Probably if commercial. If there's no meaningful 'output' that corresponds to what archaeology is defined in the public mind as meaning (ie advances in the understanding of what did people do and/or why did they do it at [this place]), then it does start to look a bit tick-boxish.
December 1, 2025 at 6:04 PM
Probably if commercial. If there's no meaningful 'output' that corresponds to what archaeology is defined in the public mind as meaning (ie advances in the understanding of what did people do and/or why did they do it at [this place]), then it does start to look a bit tick-boxish.
Read it. Thought it was good. There's what people engage with archaeology for (the definition you find in dictionaries) and there's what people in archaeology see archaeology as. But report flags up lack of interpretation and that'd probably close the gap.
December 1, 2025 at 5:18 PM
Read it. Thought it was good. There's what people engage with archaeology for (the definition you find in dictionaries) and there's what people in archaeology see archaeology as. But report flags up lack of interpretation and that'd probably close the gap.
Might have got a civic. But might not. And then a few months later they decided to close the UK factory in Swindon. So the chance of a new Honda out of the window.
November 30, 2025 at 8:02 PM
Might have got a civic. But might not. And then a few months later they decided to close the UK factory in Swindon. So the chance of a new Honda out of the window.
The Ylvis video was sponsored by Honda (go to about 3 min 5 seconds". In it, he says he would give his car to know about "the Stonehenge". Anyways, I offered them a theory that is far more likely than any other (with evidence, which I knew they could assess). They were interested.
November 30, 2025 at 8:02 PM
The Ylvis video was sponsored by Honda (go to about 3 min 5 seconds". In it, he says he would give his car to know about "the Stonehenge". Anyways, I offered them a theory that is far more likely than any other (with evidence, which I knew they could assess). They were interested.
Probably true. Not sure it's related to autism though: unless interested prior, I've not found any interest expressed after seeing it (limited sample though).
November 30, 2025 at 12:29 PM
Probably true. Not sure it's related to autism though: unless interested prior, I've not found any interest expressed after seeing it (limited sample though).
It grabs some people and not others. My opinion, on first wandering about the stones, was "why are we here?", swiftly followed by, "when are we going?". My sister, on the other hand, found a large hole in one of the rocks and hid there.
November 30, 2025 at 11:59 AM
It grabs some people and not others. My opinion, on first wandering about the stones, was "why are we here?", swiftly followed by, "when are we going?". My sister, on the other hand, found a large hole in one of the rocks and hid there.
I think they need to know for certain if adding a firetruck over two vertical trucks would make then qualify?
I think it should make them qualify!
I think it should make them qualify!
November 30, 2025 at 11:54 AM
I think they need to know for certain if adding a firetruck over two vertical trucks would make then qualify?
I think it should make them qualify!
I think it should make them qualify!