There is one mystery that ancient astronaut theorists point out for many years. How did the ancients move stone giants that weigh several hundred tons. While in the 1970s and 1980s archaeologists didn't have an answer to this question, it seems that in the last 20 years the conservative archaeologist fraction seems to have more and more influence. They proclaim most of the mysteries are solved or no mystery at all. But if we look more closely, some of the archaeologists' theories are so far fetched, the PaleoSeti Theory seems as rational as 1+1=2. 

Every year another theory comes up how stones were transported by the ancients. Usually it’s a group of students between the ages of 15-25 that is carrying out the experiment. In those experiments, block of (usually) concrete are dragged with the method the theory says, a few meters from point A to point B. And usually the experiment is a ‘success’ and it is declared in some newspaper or TV show: “the mystery is solved!” But there are many problems with this ‘experimental archaeology’ and I will illustrate with the example of Stonehenge, a popular subject for experimental archaeology (In fact the mystery of Stonehenge has been solved so many times in the past, that I’m wondering why they are still looking): 

1. We know the outcome. A solution to a problem is much easier, if you know how the end result has to look like. We can plan ahead as we have plenty of references over thousands of years of construction and know what works and what doesn’t.

2. Our modern experiments require extensive planning. The project leads are using pen and paper, do calculations with computers, talk to engineers, carpenters, stone masons. But our ancestors didn’t have pen and paper or computers. Or do we all over sudden assume the ancient people had higher mathematics and script for planning? Isn’t exactly that what modern archaeology says, the ancients didn’t have?

3. Like I said before, the theories are usually tested with a group of healthy, young and enthusiastic students. After a day of hard studying they go home to mom and dad and a nice cooked meal - that mom bought in the supermarket – is on the table. Or a nice Microwave dish. Healthcare is provided – of course – and for every boo-boo they go to the hospital, like we all do. During the experiment you usually see an Ambulance parked in the background, just in case. The experiment is conducted on a nice Saturday afternoon and if it’s raining that day, it’s going to be postponed. But the Ancients didn’t have all those luxuries. Healthy members of the society (back then there was a life expectancy of 40-50) where needed to provide food for their families. If an accident happened during construction, no ambulance was there to help. If somebody got crushed or badly injured by a stone, how did that reflect on the worker’s enthusiasm? How is the motivation after a rainy day or a week of rain? Clothes are soaked and the wind is blowing with 8 degrees Celsius. Do that for weeks, months and years. Because that is what it takes to transport the Bluestones of Stonehenge from their quarry in Wales to where the stones are now. How does the food available in the Stone Age affect a worker’s daily ability to work? How many thousands of people are needed to provide the infrastructure needed to accommodate, cloth and feed the workers? Or do we assume that all several hundred men of the community just said to their families “Guys we are going to a place far away to fetch some huge stones. We will be back in a few years…”? 

All of the above questions are not addressed during those experiments. They are not even asked. That’s what makes those experiments pure speculation at best.

Don't get me wrong I admire the ingenuity of experimental archaeology and it has great value in other projects, like daily life, dying colors, weaving textiles and similar tasks. But transporting megastones? I have not seen any convincing explanation, yet..