Does "LAP"* possibly prove ancient cultures?

[President Wearer of Hats 34,779]

You see, the biggest "proof against" ancient civilizations/cultures was the fact they've left absolutely nothing behind. No physical evidence whatsoever (ignoring OOPArts for a moment, they're inherently difficult to classify after all).

However, Life After People illustrates what'd happen if we suddenly disappeared.

And it took about a hundred years for roads to disappear. A Thousand years all 99% of traces from the largest cities either vanished or very close to vanished.

I'm not saying that because it's possible, it obviously happened, but rather it does counter one of the arguments people make to counter the ancient civilisation believers.

[Sthenno 15]

Isn't that largely because our cities are comparably lightweight though? A stone city would not erode away in the same way.

[President Wearer of Hats 34,779]

Isn't that largely because our cities are comparably lightweight though? A stone city would not erode away in the same way.

Not according to LAP, they say that even the pyramids would have been dust if it wasn't for the dunes that enveloped them.

[Sthenno 15]

I haven't seen it, but I find it difficult to believe that there wouldn't be remains of a stone city visible after 1,000 years.

Also, if it takes that long to disappear, when exactly would these civilisations fit in human history?

[Professor Buzzkill 2,586]

and if there was a species of super smart dinosaurs that had cars and spaceships what evidence would there be now 65 million years later? I have often wondered that. But because they were too smart to get trapped in silt and rivers there is no fossil evidence.

Far fetched but plausable...

[jules99 858]

I haven't seen it, but I find it difficult to believe that there wouldn't be remains of a stone city visible after 1,000 years.

Also, if it takes that long to disappear, when exactly would these civilisations fit in human history?

Yes but we use a lot of reinforced concrete and not so much "stone" to build with. With the RC the reo rusts, swells and cracks n crumbles the concrete. Concretes only has a 70? year lifespan anway.

[Sthenno 15]

Yes but we use a lot of reinforced concrete and not so much "stone" to build with. With the RC the reo rusts, swells and cracks n crumbles the concrete. Concretes only has a 70? year lifespan anway.

Ah yes, I can see quite easily how our civilisation would crumble fairly quickly, I just think an ancient, stone-built civilisation would have more longevity.

[jules99 858]

Ah yes, I can see quite easily how our civilisation would crumble fairly quickly, I just think an ancient, stone-built civilisation would have more longevity.

Yeah I agree;

However the environmental conditions (location) might be a factor though along with the type of stone used.

[Mr Supertypo 220]

LAP it'a a crock. Sorry to say people, but something will always remain. Dont jump on stupid media pseudoscientific creation, they are always incomplete or plain wrong...

Look at fossiliced 200.000.000my old wood....WOOD, look at dino tracks in the dirth, look at coprolites (fossiliced feces) ect ect, all what I mentioned arent supposed to exist according to LAP. Seehow easy is to debunk it?

[jules99 858]

LAP it'a a crock. Sorry to say people, but something will always remain. Dont jump on stupid media pseudoscientific creation, they are always incomplete or plain wrong...

Look at fossiliced 200.000.000my old wood....WOOD, look at dino tracks in the dirth, look at coprolites (fossiliced feces) ect ect, all what I mentioned arent supposed to exist according to LAP. Seehow easy is to debunk it?

Ok, youve mentioned all organics that are known to fossilise anyway, not man made materials. Further I didnt think anyone has said nothing manmade would survive the ages, I mean poisons and radiation will be around for millenia.

[Mr Supertypo 220]

Ok, youve mentioned all organics that are known to fossilise anyway, not man made materials. Further I didnt think anyone has said nothing manmade would survive the ages, I mean poisons and radiation will be around for millenia.

it's irrilevant, because all man made artifact's are made by raw material you find in nature. And if they survive so will the remains.

Look did you ever pick up a poo made by a dog on a road? if not try it(no I never try it), and then tell me how does that feel's? is that hard? soft? wet? do you belive me if I tell you modern paleontologist dig's fossiliced poo from ancient animals? included dinosaurs?

Talking about road's just to change to a more pleaseant subject, the chemical composition on that place (if we are talking about modern roads) will always be different than the surrounding geology. And so it will be for geological ages.

Talking about buildings, the nature around (including the dirth) will be shaped clearly different than the untouched surroundings (look how many archeological discorveries are been made thanks to google earth). You will clearly see if something has been there even if the building are gone for millennia ago. And you will still find remains.

There is simply no way a ancient civilitation would wanish without leaving traces, no matter how old it is, it will just be less apparent. But the remains will still be there.

Dinosaur bones, fossiliced wood, coprolites, even print's of ancient jellyfish, foot prints ect ect survive, so will the what is left of a unknow ancient advanced civ.

[Murrangurk 8]

it's irrilevant, because all man made artifact's are made by raw material you find in nature. And if they survive so will the remains.

Look did you ever pick up a poo made by a dog on a road? if not try it(no I never try it), and then tell me how does that feel's? is that hard? soft? wet? do you belive me if I tell you modern paleontologist dig's fossiliced poo from ancient animals? included dinosaurs?

Interesting point. Civilization creates waste. Where is theirs?

Or if it is lying about somewhere, could we recognise it? Would it be what we expect?

Or, is it an Atlantis situation, and it's under the sea, or even under a lava flow?

The fossil records of cro-magnon go back plenty of years for civilization to develop. Supposing that there was no advanced civilization, but for 100,000years or whatever there was an advanced and rich culture. The idea of settlement would be considered unpalatable. Would we recognise the trade routes, ceremony grounds, fish traps, and so on?

Hmmm I dunno. I wouldn't be surprised of the was a civilisation, ante-diluvian, so to speak.

[Sthenno 15]

Interesting point. Civilization creates waste. Where is theirs?

Or if it is lying about somewhere, could we recognise it? Would it be what we expect?

Or, is it an Atlantis situation, and it's under the sea, or even under a lava flow?

The fossil records of cro-magnon go back plenty of years for civilization to develop. Supposing that there was no advanced civilization, but for 100,000years or whatever there was an advanced and rich culture. The idea of settlement would be considered unpalatable. Would we recognise the trade routes, ceremony grounds, fish traps, and so on?

Hmmm I dunno. I wouldn't be surprised of the was a civilisation, ante-diluvian, so to speak.

We have recognised these... from tools and artifacts we have built up a picture of Cro-Magnon as he evolved from hunter gatherer to farmer and trader.

[aquatus1 7,093]

The thing about LAP is that it doesn't really talk about how long till traces of civilization are destroyed, rather how long till they are unrecognizable. The remains are still there, particularly things that get rapidly buried, such as roads and landfills, to say nothing of foundations. And, of course, the smaller an object, the longer it will survive. The humble porcelain toilet and sparkplug will be recognizable long after mankind's greatest buildings have crumbled to dust. They might be harder to find, but they'll still be there.

[Sthenno 15]

That's what I thought. Considering that we have found flint tools thought to be over 2 million years old, surely any great civilisation would leave behind some trace?

[jules99 858]

it's irrilevant, because all man made artifact's are made by raw material you find in nature. And if they survive so will the remains.

Look did you ever pick up a poo made by a dog on a road? if not try it(no I never try it), and then tell me how does that feel's? is that hard? soft? wet? do you belive me if I tell you modern paleontologist dig's fossiliced poo from ancient animals? included dinosaurs?

Talking about road's just to change to a more pleaseant subject, the chemical composition on that place (if we are talking about modern roads) will always be different than the surrounding geology. And so it will be for geological ages.

Talking about buildings, the nature around (including the dirth) will be shaped clearly different than the untouched surroundings (look how many archeological discorveries are been made thanks to google earth). You will clearly see if something has been there even if the building are gone for millennia ago. And you will still find remains.

There is simply no way a ancient civilitation would wanish without leaving traces, no matter how old it is, it will just be less apparent. But the remains will still be there.

Dinosaur bones, fossiliced wood, coprolites, even print's of ancient jellyfish, foot prints ect ect survive, so will the what is left of a unknow ancient advanced civ.

Hi~C.S.M~;

Firstly LAP is more of an environmentalists lament rather than a scientific examination of the lifespans of various products of our civilisation. While estimates are given by qualified personnel regarding how well various structures would stand the test of time were we to cease mantainence, by using LAP as a qualified study of these matters and labelling it pseudoscience I suspect you are missing the whole point.

Many items we use to build things are inorganic and may not leave any fossil trace. To call something natural is not the same as being organic.

The survival of roads would depend on their environmental conditions and location, in deserts they may last though in areas of higher rainfall will be exposed to both erosion and subsequent plowing/farming and habitation, so may not last at all. Most of our population lives on the coast or in areas of higher rainfall, desert towns are rare by comparison.

Anyway I agree totally that some traces of our civilisation will remain. That they will be obscured is given. The extent to which these traces show our technology and state of advancement is another thing.

[lightly 8,593]

Yes but we use a lot of reinforced concrete and not so much "stone" to build with. With the RC the reo rusts, swells and cracks n crumbles the concrete. Concretes only has a 70? year lifespan anway.

hi jules.. the Concrete ! dome of the Roman Pantheon has held up nicely for nearly 2000 years! They were masters of concrete though.

(click) !*!*!*! >

Edited April 22, 2010 by lightly

[Myles 14,621]

A culture most certainly could be almost undetectable thousands of years later. It just depends on how and where they developed. Wooden structures?

I visited the in-laws in Florida a few months ago. There is an area where they were going to put a whole housing addition in. They had paved the roads and had it all cleared out. Then the housing market went to crap. In the 3 years it has sit, it is almost unrecognizable. In fact, I thought I was on a path when I was informed that under all the vegitation was a road. Then I could make out the driveways and such. Granted Florida has nearly year long growth, but tropical locations engulf man made structure very quickly.

[digitalartist 5]

I don't remember the great pyramid being buried in the sand. It was built over 4500 years ago. How many years before it becomes unrecognizable?

[Myles 14,621]

I don't remember the great pyramid being buried in the sand. It was built over 4500 years ago. How many years before it becomes unrecognizable?

Obviously it will take a long time. However, you cannot assume anything like that was built by every culture.

[jules99 858]

hi jules.. the Concrete ! dome of the Roman Pantheon has held up nicely for nearly 2000 years! They were masters of concrete though.

(click) !*!*!*! >

Hi Lightly,

Yes they were masters of concrete and they also didnt use any steel reo in construction, which might be why the Pantheons lasted so well. I think a bit of luck may have helped it survive 2 world wars and earthquakes.

Its had renovation/restoration done in its past and continued maintenance since early times would have helped it survive the ages. Pantheon; I love the sentiment to honour all gods.

[lightly 8,593]

Hi Lightly,

Yes they were masters of concrete and they also didnt use any steel reo in construction, which might be why the Pantheons lasted so well. I think a bit of luck may have helped it survive 2 world wars and earthquakes.

Its had renovation/restoration done in its past and continued maintenance since early times would have helped it survive the ages. Pantheon; I love the sentiment to honour all gods.

oh, thanks jules, i didn't know about the upkeep. .. Amazing bit of engineering.

As for the topic... not everything has been found yet... some stuff never will be because its buried too deep by flood or sea sedimentation, or ancient dunes, or lava? ... Although, new kinds of imaging will find a lot of stuff.

[KennyB 4]

1000 years isn't a great amount of time, speaking of the age of the Earth. There's lots of human built things still here older than that. Stonehenge, the Coliseum, etc. My money will be on Mt. Rushmore and the Denver Airport to outlast any of the modern cities. If a volcano doesn't get Rome, the Coliseum may still be around 5000 years from now. KennyB

[Myles 14,621]

1000 years isn't a great amount of time, speaking of the age of the Earth. There's lots of human built things still here older than that. Stonehenge, the Coliseum, etc. My money will be on Mt. Rushmore and the Denver Airport to outlast any of the modern cities. If a volcano doesn't get Rome, the Coliseum may still be around 5000 years from now. KennyB

I guess it also depends on whether people still use the structures. Ever see how fast an empty house deteriorates as opposed to one with people living there.

[aquatus1 7,093]

1000 years isn't a great amount of time, speaking of the age of the Earth. There's lots of human built things still here older than that. Stonehenge, the Coliseum, etc. My money will be on Mt. Rushmore and the Denver Airport to outlast any of the modern cities. If a volcano doesn't get Rome, the Coliseum may still be around 5000 years from now. KennyB

Well, most of it. The interesting thing about the Coliseum is the many different technologies that went into building it. You can actually walk around it and see the knowledge of masonry growing through the diffrent areas and levels, incorporating the latest that the Romans had discovered. Some parts didn't work out so well, and are in an advanced state of decay. Others are still holding strong.

I guess it also depends on whether people still use the structures. Ever see how fast an empty house deteriorates as opposed to one with people living there.

Absolutely. The loss of air conditioning is brutal, as a building is now suddenly subjected to thermal expansion and contraction.