Hi Heather, which 'most of the other comments' are you referring to? If you are talking about the geoglyphs only the top comment speculates they could have been remains trappings for animals. The article itself talks about a neolithic settlement nearby which is not part of the geoglyph. What makes you think they were huts and dwelling units there? If that were the case one would presume there would be remains of that. In the article there is link to how the geoglyphs were made intentionally - so they didn't seem to have been be villages or structures http://e-history.kz/en/contents/view/1562