• Note - Archeological Evidence Pointing More To Ice-Age Super-Civs

    From c186282@21:1/5 to All on Fri Apr 11 01:55:15 2025
    XPost: alt.history, alt.archeology, alt.science
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    Sophisticated mega constructions ... oft all that survive
    all those centuries ... keep getting re-dated earlier and
    earlier. Some, Sardinia esp, look to date into the middle
    of the ice age ... >12,000 years. Some pre-Incan structures
    seem to fit the same bill.

    Some TV idiots like to claim 'aliens' or 'god-like beings'
    were responsible. Kinda doubt it. The old structures are
    damned good, but not 'alien civ' sophisticated. Hey, humans
    are CLEVER - don't necessarily NEED 'aliens'.

    HOW some of these things were built, STILL a big mystery
    however ... it'd be super-difficult even with modern
    methods/machines.

    Maybe the oldest thing anyone wants to ADMIT to are
    the Gobekli Tepe 'temples' ... WAY better than
    Stonehenge. 10-12000 years old. Was NOT so long ago
    that humans were assumed to be near-animal idiots,
    incapable of such engineering/cooperation that long
    ago. For some reason we always want to de-rate The
    Ancients ... likely so WE can feel all superior now.

    Clearly some really funky stuff was happening during
    the last ice age. Alas a lot of it was probably
    coastal civs - now 300+ feet underwater. "High Tech"
    civs ... um ... no, not likely. High-tech leaves
    LOTS of signs, a huge garbage footprint, and so far
    we haven't seen those.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Siri Cruz@21:1/5 to All on Thu Apr 10 23:25:56 2025
    XPost: alt.history, alt.archeology, alt.science
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    On 10/4/25 22:55, c186282 wrote:
    Some TV idiots like to claim 'aliens' or 'god-like beings'
    were responsible. Kinda doubt it. The old structures are
    damned good, but not 'alien civ' sophisticated. Hey, humans
    are CLEVER - don't necessarily NEED 'aliens'.

    HOW some of these things were built, STILL a big mystery
    however ... it'd be super-difficult even with modern
    methods/machines.

    Maybe the oldest thing anyone wants to ADMIT to are
    the Gobekli Tepe 'temples' ... WAY better than
    Stonehenge. 10-12000 years old. Was NOT so long ago

    Humans require 2000 to 3000 calories a day. Before agriculture
    that food to be gatherred/hunted (no significant food storage)
    each day. Because everything had to be carried from camp to camp,
    the technology was inefficient.

    This meant after a big kill the family could loll around a few
    days telling stories and crafting more artistic arrowheads. Then
    on to the next camp getting hungrier and hungrier until the next
    big kill.

    Our ancestors had long distance trade, fine arts, rocking hot
    music nobody can hear today, but they had trouble getting enough
    calories in one place for a sustained time to survive as well
    spend calories carving and moving big chunks of rock. We were
    thinking deep thoughts about how the universe worked. Sometimes
    the effort was deemed worthwhile.

    The surprising thing about Gobekli Tepe is not the intellect,
    artistry, and skill. Humans be smart. The surprise is the degree
    of social engineering that fed it.

    There is an argument about the age of the Sphinx. The argument of archaeologists against the geologists is at the time of proposed
    construction there is no evidence of an economy that could
    sustain the work. Then Gobekli showed up. It is too far from the
    Nile to prove anything, but it did show hunter gatherrers could
    organise and feed large communal projects.

    --
    Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-999. Disavowed. Denied. @
    'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
    The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 4.0 / \
    of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Borax Man@21:1/5 to Siri Cruz on Fri Apr 11 06:53:43 2025
    XPost: alt.history, alt.archeology, alt.science
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    ["Followup-To:" header set to talk.politics.misc.]
    On 2025-04-11, Siri Cruz <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 10/4/25 22:55, c186282 wrote:
    Some TV idiots like to claim 'aliens' or 'god-like beings'
    were responsible. Kinda doubt it. The old structures are
    damned good, but not 'alien civ' sophisticated. Hey, humans
    are CLEVER - don't necessarily NEED 'aliens'.

    HOW some of these things were built, STILL a big mystery
    however ... it'd be super-difficult even with modern
    methods/machines.

    Maybe the oldest thing anyone wants to ADMIT to are
    the Gobekli Tepe 'temples' ... WAY better than
    Stonehenge. 10-12000 years old. Was NOT so long ago

    Humans require 2000 to 3000 calories a day. Before agriculture
    that food to be gatherred/hunted (no significant food storage)
    each day. Because everything had to be carried from camp to camp,
    the technology was inefficient.

    This meant after a big kill the family could loll around a few
    days telling stories and crafting more artistic arrowheads. Then
    on to the next camp getting hungrier and hungrier until the next
    big kill.

    Our ancestors had long distance trade, fine arts, rocking hot
    music nobody can hear today, but they had trouble getting enough
    calories in one place for a sustained time to survive as well
    spend calories carving and moving big chunks of rock. We were
    thinking deep thoughts about how the universe worked. Sometimes
    the effort was deemed worthwhile.

    The surprising thing about Gobekli Tepe is not the intellect,
    artistry, and skill. Humans be smart. The surprise is the degree
    of social engineering that fed it.

    There is an argument about the age of the Sphinx. The argument of archaeologists against the geologists is at the time of proposed
    construction there is no evidence of an economy that could
    sustain the work. Then Gobekli showed up. It is too far from the
    Nile to prove anything, but it did show hunter gatherrers could
    organise and feed large communal projects.


    I think part of our modern day assumption, that humans back then were
    not as sophisticated as they actually were, was due to us looking for
    evidence for civilisation where we thought we would find it. Like
    looking for your keys under the street lamp, not because that is where
    they last where, because that is where the light was best. Sea levels
    have changed, but it was always easier to excavate on land, where we
    found previous artefacts and evidence.

    Not much survives of the past, and our understanding is based on what we
    have been able to uncover, which I think is a fraction of what existed.
    Take for example the antikythera mechanism. There must have been more
    than one, or at least, there must have been precursors, a technological
    arc that leads to that. We just haven't found it.

    But then, look today. You'll see iPhones and sleek Apple laptops. Its
    very, very difficult to stumble across older computers now. How many Millennial's have seen a 1980s microcomputer? Probably only in a
    museum. These were ubiquitous, and now you can go years without seeing
    one. If they disappear within a couple of decades, surely decades of civilisation, and centuries after that would have erased so, so much.
    Only stone remains. We see stone and assume that's all there was.
    Books is another. Public libraries in the suburbs have few old books.

    Methods of social organisation, if not written down AND uncovered, would
    also be lost.

    I think our view of history is therefore way off, because we've
    constructed our view based on what survived, which perhaps, isn't enough
    to go on after all.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Siri Cruz@21:1/5 to Borax Man on Fri Apr 11 00:41:01 2025
    On 10/4/25 23:53, Borax Man wrote:
    I think part of our modern day assumption, that humans back then were
    not as sophisticated as they actually were, was due to us looking for evidence for civilisation where we thought we would find it. Like
    looking for your keys under the street lamp, not because that is where
    they last where, because that is where the light was best. Sea levels
    have changed, but it was always easier to excavate on land, where we
    found previous artefacts and evidence.

    Not much survives of the past, and our understanding is based on what we
    have been able to uncover, which I think is a fraction of what existed.
    Take for example the antikythera mechanism. There must have been more
    than one, or at least, there must have been precursors, a technological
    arc that leads to that. We just haven't found it.

    But then, look today. You'll see iPhones and sleek Apple laptops. Its
    very, very difficult to stumble across older computers now. How many Millennial's have seen a 1980s microcomputer? Probably only in a
    museum. These were ubiquitous, and now you can go years without seeing
    one. If they disappear within a couple of decades, surely decades of civilisation, and centuries after that would have erased so, so much.
    Only stone remains. We see stone and assume that's all there was.
    Books is another. Public libraries in the suburbs have few old books.

    Methods of social organisation, if not written down AND uncovered, would
    also be lost.

    I think our view of history is therefore way off, because we've
    constructed our view based on what survived, which perhaps, isn't enough
    to go on after all.

    I am waiting for fossil teeth with root canals.

    --
    Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-999. Disavowed. Denied. @
    'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
    The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 4.0 / \
    of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From c186282@21:1/5 to Borax Man on Fri Apr 11 12:14:38 2025
    XPost: alt.history, alt.archeology

    On 4/11/25 2:53 AM, Borax Man wrote:
    ["Followup-To:" header set to talk.politics.misc.]
    On 2025-04-11, Siri Cruz <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 10/4/25 22:55, c186282 wrote:
    Some TV idiots like to claim 'aliens' or 'god-like beings'
    were responsible. Kinda doubt it. The old structures are
    damned good, but not 'alien civ' sophisticated. Hey, humans
    are CLEVER - don't necessarily NEED 'aliens'.

    HOW some of these things were built, STILL a big mystery
    however ... it'd be super-difficult even with modern
    methods/machines.

    Maybe the oldest thing anyone wants to ADMIT to are
    the Gobekli Tepe 'temples' ... WAY better than
    Stonehenge. 10-12000 years old. Was NOT so long ago

    Humans require 2000 to 3000 calories a day. Before agriculture
    that food to be gatherred/hunted (no significant food storage)
    each day. Because everything had to be carried from camp to camp,
    the technology was inefficient.

    This meant after a big kill the family could loll around a few
    days telling stories and crafting more artistic arrowheads. Then
    on to the next camp getting hungrier and hungrier until the next
    big kill.

    Our ancestors had long distance trade, fine arts, rocking hot
    music nobody can hear today, but they had trouble getting enough
    calories in one place for a sustained time to survive as well
    spend calories carving and moving big chunks of rock. We were
    thinking deep thoughts about how the universe worked. Sometimes
    the effort was deemed worthwhile.

    The surprising thing about Gobekli Tepe is not the intellect,
    artistry, and skill. Humans be smart. The surprise is the degree
    of social engineering that fed it.

    There is an argument about the age of the Sphinx. The argument of
    archaeologists against the geologists is at the time of proposed
    construction there is no evidence of an economy that could
    sustain the work. Then Gobekli showed up. It is too far from the
    Nile to prove anything, but it did show hunter gatherrers could
    organise and feed large communal projects.


    I think part of our modern day assumption, that humans back then were
    not as sophisticated as they actually were, was due to us looking for evidence for civilisation where we thought we would find it. Like
    looking for your keys under the street lamp, not because that is where
    they last where, because that is where the light was best. Sea levels
    have changed, but it was always easier to excavate on land, where we
    found previous artefacts and evidence.

    Seashore civs are most logical and of old civs we know
    the great bulk were at or near the sea. Combine and AND
    sea resources and you've got a good equation.

    But, as said, sea levels changed drastically about 11,000
    years ago. Physical evidence of older civs is surely now
    under three or four hundred feet of water and sediment.
    Finding that is going to be close to random chance at
    this point. Newer tech is sure to help, but even then
    it is going to be a HUGE area to search even with some
    best-guessing applied.

    Not much survives of the past, and our understanding is based on what we
    have been able to uncover, which I think is a fraction of what existed.
    Take for example the antikythera mechanism. There must have been more
    than one, or at least, there must have been precursors, a technological
    arc that leads to that. We just haven't found it.

    That thing IS a mystery - and what you mentioned, the lack
    of any previous OR contemporary post mechanisms/methods,
    makes it even more mysterious. Tech usually leaves a long
    shadow but there's none here.

    But then, look today. You'll see iPhones and sleek Apple laptops. Its
    very, very difficult to stumble across older computers now. How many Millennial's have seen a 1980s microcomputer? Probably only in a
    museum. These were ubiquitous, and now you can go years without seeing
    one. If they disappear within a couple of decades, surely decades of civilisation, and centuries after that would have erased so, so much.
    Only stone remains. We see stone and assume that's all there was.
    Books is another. Public libraries in the suburbs have few old books.

    I have an Apple-II ... and a VIC-20 somewhere under the
    heap. However when I'm gone whomever comes next will throw
    them in the bin and their circuit boards will be melted
    down for the gold.

    The Euros are better at conserving old books and such,
    longer sense of history. The Americas, no - the only good
    stuff is the NEW stuff and the rest goes in the fire.
    I suppose there are advantages to each approach.

    Methods of social organisation, if not written down AND uncovered, would
    also be lost.

    I think our view of history is therefore way off, because we've
    constructed our view based on what survived, which perhaps, isn't enough
    to go on after all.

    A useful perspective.

    Every so often we come across bits of the "softer"
    history, accidentally preserved. They expand the
    picture but sans detailed writings they won't tell
    us everything. The tales of Gilgamesh are about the
    oldest things that 'bring the times to life', and
    those barely reach back into the 3000s. Alas while
    writing goes back twice as far, it was almost
    entirely the province of the elites and bureaucrats -
    meaning propaganda and bean-counting.

    We can INFER some things from the odd bog body or
    'ice man' - but we see those through contemporary
    lenses and perhaps get it wrong as much as right.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From c186282@21:1/5 to Siri Cruz on Fri Apr 11 13:32:58 2025
    XPost: alt.history, alt.archeology

    On 4/11/25 3:41 AM, Siri Cruz wrote:
    On 10/4/25 23:53, Borax Man wrote:
    I think part of our modern day assumption, that humans back then were
    not as sophisticated as they actually were, was due to us looking for
    evidence for civilisation where we thought we would find it.  Like
    looking for your keys under the street lamp, not because that is where
    they last where, because that is where the light was best.  Sea levels
    have changed, but it was always easier to excavate on land, where we
    found previous artefacts and evidence.

    Not much survives of the past, and our understanding is based on what we
    have been able to uncover, which I think is a fraction of what existed.
    Take for example the antikythera mechanism.  There must have been more
    than one, or at least, there must have been precursors, a technological
    arc that leads to that.  We just haven't found it.

    But then, look today.  You'll see iPhones and sleek Apple laptops.  Its
    very, very difficult to stumble across older computers now.  How many
    Millennial's have seen a 1980s microcomputer?  Probably only in a
    museum.  These were ubiquitous, and now you can go years without seeing
    one.  If they disappear within a couple of decades, surely decades of
    civilisation, and centuries after that would have erased so, so much.
    Only stone remains.  We see stone and assume that's all there was.
    Books is another.  Public libraries in the suburbs have few old books.

    Methods of social organisation, if not written down AND uncovered, would
    also be lost.

    I think our view of history is therefore way off, because we've
    constructed our view based on what survived, which perhaps, isn't enough
    to go on after all.

    I am waiting for fossil teeth with root canals.


    Teeth last the longest (and can be dated and DNA'ed).

    But, so far, no signs of 200,000 year old root canals.

    Indeed even the mummified elites of old Egypt often
    show signs of very nasty dental problems.

    On the flip, not all kinds of sci/tech advance equally.
    Poor communications and a strong trend towards keeping
    secrets inside guilds amplified this problem until
    very recently. Medicine could only advance so far
    until the advent of good antibacterials/antibiotics.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)