I found that the alleged calendar could only be dated "between 75000 and 300000 years old"
to be rather" loosely goosey." If it is calendar and confident correlations could be made between
its sightlines and celestial phenomena, they should be able to be more precise than somewhere
in a 225,000 year interval. Given that time range, chance alignments of some type are quite likely.

It would be interesting to take a randomly distributed group of glacial erratics or other boulders
and see what spurious celestial correlations can be found by randon chance and whether there
some way of falsifying proposed celestial correlations.

Yours,

Paul H.

"The past is never dead. It's not even past."
William Faulkner, Act 1, Scene III, Requiem for a Nun (1951)