325 replies to this topic

[Harsh86_Patel]

The Puzzler, on 11 August 2012 - 02:56 PM, said:

Yes, I just read it too.

However, their stone technology did not develop out of thin air and the vector of development should be traceable - and, indeed, properly interpreted - is in fact traceable in the archaeological evidence.

But you do not have thousands of years of gap in the appearance of the same technology.

The Gobekli Tepe and Nabta Playa stone technology dates out of the period 4000-3000 BC, just as the Malta Temples, so in my opinion.
http://lexiline.blog...laya-dates.html

Or may be we are not dating a few of the other Stone megaliths to the right time period...........

The author seems like a proponent of a different sort of Fringe..............

Edited by Harsh86_Patel, 11 August 2012 - 04:22 PM.

[Harsh86_Patel]

docyabut2, on 11 August 2012 - 11:37 AM, said:

I`d have to agree with this author, they are not dating the site right.


http://lexiline.blog...laya-dates.html

The author surprisingly raises the same questions that i raised about Gobekli Tepe and its mysteries but sadly has decided to cope with those questions by saying they are not that old...............very easy to deny something you can't digest.............but the best part his he seems to condemn both the qualified and the fringe proponents at the same time.............he his definitely a new breed of nuetrals........................he raised good points about why the site couldn't be 10000BC but the bull **** he offered about why he dates it to 3800 is laudable............he is claiming that Gobekli Tepe was made after it was back filled............what he conveniently ignores is that it is much more easier to date the back filling of the complex more definitively then dating the entire complex.................as time progresses different strata of soil develop over the other and what the author is suggesting is that the back filling of the complex (which according to him was no older then 3800 BC) was done with materials from a strata of soil 6000 to 7000 years old items from which show up the time at 10000BC..........but if that was the case then the organic materials sticking to the pillars on the top region would be the oldest when compared to the organic matter sticking to the pillars at lower regions...........

[Abramelin]

Any resemblance between the Göbekli Tepe and Easter Island statues/carvings is only based on the material worked on.

You only have so much possibilties to carve out something resembling a human being from a large standing stone, so either the arms and hands are carved out sideways, or in front.

[Harsh86_Patel]

Abramelin, on 11 August 2012 - 07:52 PM, said:

Any resemblance between the Göbekli Tepe and Easter Island statues/carvings is only based on the material worked on.

You only have so much possibilties to carve out something resembling a human being from a large staTnding stone, so either the arms and hands are carved out sideways, or in front.

The way the hands are placed above the loin cloth seems uncannily similar

[Abramelin]

Harsh86_Patel, on 11 August 2012 - 08:38 PM, said:

The way the hands are placed above the loin cloth seems uncannily similar

They are not; look at what Puzzler posted:

http://www.unexplain...15#entry4409776

The hands on the Göbekli statues are sideways, the hands on the Easter Island statues or in front.

.

Edited by Abramelin, 11 August 2012 - 08:55 PM.

[jules99]

Abramelin, on 11 August 2012 - 08:53 PM, said:

They are not; look at what Puzzler posted:

http://www.unexplain...15#entry4409776

The hands on the Göbekli statues are sideways, the hands on the Easter Island statues or in front.

.

The hand(s) on the Tepe statues are to the front also, if you look up and down the statue you will see both hands positioned similar to Easter Island Moais.

[Abramelin]

jules99, on 11 August 2012 - 09:04 PM, said:

The hand(s) on the Tepe statues are to the front also, if you look up and down the statue you will see both hands positioned similar to Easter Island Moais.

http://www.unexplain...15#entry4409776

The hands/arms are SIDEWAYS.

+++++

Oh fk, I see it now.

I thought the things on the side of the stone were hands.

Well, let that be a lesson: don't drink (Belgium beer, 11%) and poste at the same time.

It's a groin lap or something, some thing that made Ghandi famous and made Churchil chuckle..

OK, I agree.

But how would YOU depict hands and arms on a standing stone? There are not many other ways to do it, right??

.

Edited by Abramelin, 11 August 2012 - 09:37 PM.

[lightly]

There is a large range of angles (180º)  that forearms and hands could be positioned ?    Not counting behind the back ...  they could be  at any angle between straight down and, from the elbows, straight up.   If you stand with your arms relaxed.. they hang straight down and slightly to the front.  That is the natural position for arms and hands?   Any other position is purposely Held in place.             ... why?

[lightly]

Why depict the hands at all?   .. let alone so distinctly.  Where are the feet?..  or the head?
If there is a reason for depicting the hands.. (which there obviously must be)  there is most likely a reason for their positions?

  Many assume the constructions to be ritualistic ...  but , could they be for more reasons than one?
..like meeting places for area clans or something?   Maybe some of the animal carvings are clan symbols ?

Sort of like a church and a meeting hall .. with gazelle dinners every full moon!  .. and a three piece band   lol

Who knows  .. it's fun to wonder.

[docyabut2]

I can`nt see that Gobekli Tepe stones was dated 10,000 years ago that perfect, when there were other cultures like this still in the rough that are dated only a few thousand years ago. I believe in the evolution  of desigh.

http://www.flickr.co...ras/5527852084/

Edited by docyabut2, 12 August 2012 - 04:52 AM.

[The Puzzler]

These bag shapes at the top here, they intrigue me.




I'm sure I've seen these before, on some palette or such from Egypt..? I know there is a purse carrying Assyrian God but the way these 3 'bags' are, does anyone recognise them from something else?

Also, on this website here: http://www.earthfile...ategory=Science  you can see a picture of the complete 'man', with the duck 'altar' at the base.

[docyabut2]

Sumerian basket of 4,000 years ago?

Edited by docyabut2, 12 August 2012 - 12:37 PM.

[docyabut2]

Its even got the little animal on top;)

[The Puzzler]

docyabut2, on 12 August 2012 - 12:39 PM, said:

Its even got the little animal on top;)

Nice. Here's Nisroch, an Assyrian bag carrying God...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nisroch

But I know Ive seen those 3 bag shapes like that on something else.

[kmt_sesh]

Harsh86_Patel, on 11 August 2012 - 08:38 PM, said:

The way the hands are placed above the loin cloth seems uncannily similar

The extant Göbekli Tepe monuments date to around the tenth millennium BCE. The oldest statues on Easter Island date to no earlier than the twelfth century CE. This time span alone handily disproves any possible connection between the two. More to the point, although we know very little about the people who erected Göbekli Tepe, we can be certain they were a completely separate culture group from Polynesian peoples who inhabited Easter Island and carved the statues. There can be no real connection. A similarity in cultural style—such as a feature or two on a monument or statue—is really only relevant to peoples occupying the same general region. This is clearly not the case between Göbekli Tepe and Easter Island.