The geopolymer theory is not provocative to me in the sense that it supports the theory that the ancients were supposed to have used some sort of concrete or cement. There is no manufacturing evidence to support this theory that I am aware of, and the chemistry on this is only as good as the interpretation. The physical properties of these stones suggest a manipulation of fundamental forces which may have altered their original composition in some way, however, it is only a trail, and not the answer itself. To cherry pick this single data point and then to extrapolate that into a much desired easy answer on the part of those studying it are performing a disservice, and is the opposite of competent process.
I say this often, but it is true: It is useless to speculate without the proper amount of data. This leads one to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. We cannot make bricks without clay, data data data....and, there is absolutely not enough data with which to justify ANY theory on the subject. And, a guess based on such a limited amount of data does not register as an "According to Hoyle," scientific theory. It is based on no sound, or reproducible principals, as far as I know. Has anyone tried to reproduce this geopolymer? Im guessing not. I think this yet another of what we will discover is a mistaken notion in an inadvertently created false trail of evidence, which goes absolutely no further.
My observation, and reasons for my theory regarding this issue is much simpler. I noticed obvious impressions left by the coral, then found the items that made the impressions, and they match. There is physical displacement, and an unmistakable compression of the coral material left behind by the physical insertion of the soft steel wedges which Ed used to make them. This phenomena is achievable through only one principal which is known. When we see compression caused by the insertion of one material into another, it is the result of the impressed materials malleability in relation to the material being inserted. In other words, coral rock is too hard and brittle to allow compression and displacement by soft steel. Therefore, it stands to absolute reason that, as weird as it may sound, that the coral, at the time when these impressions were made, was of such a density and consistency that it allowed what is normally impossible, namely the insertion of steel wedges into the coral by way of displacement through compression by a means yet unknown, but highly evident in its presentation.