The article says "CSIRO astrophysicist Professor Ray Norris said the precise alignment of the stones proved beyond a doubt it was constructed to map the movements of the sun," . . .

. . . is a reasonable inference, but "proved beyond a doubt" is a bit of a stretch. And that, combined with the rest of the quote,

". . . in order to track the seasons",

. . . raises additional questions. How does he know why those ancients did what they did, if they did?   I think the more reasonable paraphrase of what Prof. Norris said would be, "the precise alignment of the stones almost surely shows that it was constructed to map the movements of the sun, and we can reasonably speculate that that was to track the seasons."

Dave Oesterreich