Neolithic Interventionism

[Kantzveldt 0]

Hi, i'd like to share what i consider the best evidence for Genetic manipulation, in terms of interventionism, at the sites of the early Neolithic in Anatolia and Syria.

The site that first prompted this study was that of Djade al-Mughara in Syria, there in 2007 was discovered a painted wall that was generally described as like modern art, it was geometric and abstract. At 11,000 years old it was also painted upon the oldest known adobe brick walll.

Djade al-Mughara

So this is the wall and below is my reconstruction of the pattern utilised, which whilst not perfectly executed, considering the difficulties involved regarding materials and surface was a remarkable effort.

The pattern, i will go on to establish, provides the most abstract basis for what went on to become the common Near Eastern iconography of what was known as 'The tree of life', in itself it bears comparison with the structure of DNA and the basic numbering of each formative square of the grid is such that there are 36 2x1 rectangles in each, this number relating to a pattern of DNA which when seen in vertical section after 36 bonds appears thus;

As i said, this then was my starting premise, considering what information this pattern could have been intended to convey as it was remarkable for this period.

Edited March 26, 2011 by Kantzveldt

[Druidus-Logos 18]

I'm sorry, but this doesn't present as evidence, to me. I mean, seriously, it's also an aesthetically pleasing design, it could easily have been simple chance and preference produced the design and your own supposition (or another's) provided the "similarity to helical structured DNA" argument.

By the way, not ALL DNA is arranged in a double-helix. Many organisms on Earth do it differently.

[Kantzveldt 0]

I'm sorry, but this doesn't present as evidence, to me. I mean, seriously, it's also an aesthetically pleasing design, it could easily have been simple chance and preference produced the design and your own supposition (or another's) provided the "similarity to helical structured DNA" argument.

By the way, not ALL DNA is arranged in a double-helix. Many organisms on Earth do it differently.

It's evidence, but i'd agree hardly conclusive in itself, i'll be establishing the greater context. Many organisms on Earth may indeed be differant but all this evidence relates to selective human breeding/genetic manipulation.

[Kantzveldt 0]

To continue, whilst the abstract design can only provide suggestive structural/pattern/numeric information, a greater context can be developed from related settlements, notably Catal Hoyuk.

The first image shows a pattern of women, the theme here is birth, the ovaries are shown emphasised. What is remarkable is that four differant ethnic groups/races are shown, between each pair of women is a curious birth Goddess type figure

Another example of this theme, this time with differant coloured goats, what seems to be implied here is that the breeding of differant coloured humans is similar in principle to goat breeding.

The connection to the abstract pattern is that these stylized groupings of women share the same structural pattern, and thus the pattern is thematically linked to procreation/selective breeding.

Also one of the main shrines at Catal Hoyuk utilised the design upon the pillars at the leopard/Goddess shrine.

Anthropological studies from Catal Hoyuk support the consideration that women arrived at the settlement from diverse regions, and that the society had an unusual structre;

There appears to be evidence for the division of the site along two main descent groups, or moieties.

These groups appear to be phenotypically distinct based on dental metrics and morphology, and they were physically separate from each other living at opposite ends of the site, north and south.

These groups likely exchanged mates with each other, although it is more likely that females were brought in from other sites.

Differences between males and females within Çatalhöyük and between Çatalhöyük, Aşıklı Höyük, and Musular indicate that Çatalhöyük likely participated in a patrilocal post-marital residence practice.

It appears that females were migrants from other sites in the region and that males were the less mobile sex within Çatalhöyük and without. In other words, males did not appear to emigrate from or migrate to Çatalhöyük at the scale that females appear to have done both.

The authors of this study suggest that there was a genetic bottleneck in Central Anatolia as populations moved into Europeand their data supports an exogenous origin of European Neolithic farmers.

It could, therefore, be possible that the Neolithic sites of Çatalhöyük and Aşıklı Höyük are in fact ancestral populations to this late sample, and other later populations.

It is interesting that in many of the statistical treatments the late sample is the group that the other Neolithic samples are most like. These results are in fact what one would expect to find if the late sample was descended from Central Anatolian Neolithic populations.

This study found that house interment was only minimally related to biological affinity and that ties to the home were not solely based on biology.

It is likely that burial location choice, and by inference, the social structure of Çatalhöyük was much more complex and incorporated a different meaning of kin than one based solely on familial relations

Catal Hoyuk

The earlist Neolithic sites predate ceramics, crop manipulation/animal domestication and it has been difficult to establish a reason for their origins, from an interventionist viewpoint they could only have been created to draw people to them for purposes of selective breeding, everything following on from increased human capacity to develop technologies himself.

Edited March 26, 2011 by Kantzveldt

[Aus Der Box Skeptisch 714]

What point is trying to be made here? All I see is straw. And unintentional misrepresentation through anachronistic suppositions.

Breeding programs and knowledge of double helix? Sure I could look at stonehenge and see a giant womb and when people left the circle it represented birth into the new society, and while you can see planets from the circle it must mean the a planet was considered a goddess of fertility tying everything together in a neat package.

I do like the pictures, and I am not disappointed that this was an initial conclusion for discussion.

I do want to ask, especially the OP. Are there any other possibilities surrounding you original post. Coming from what we know about their culture. Using only what is in the same timeline. I would like to hear an unbiased view from you as to possible scenarios. Do you have any specific concerns or is there any details that don't quite fit that was maybe left out for discussion reasons?

Face value to me creates illusions, and critical thinking is very pertinent when making discovery. Is this something you would be willing to explore further today?

[Kantzveldt 0]

What point is trying to be made here? All I see is straw. And unintentional misrepresentation through anachronistic suppositions.

Breeding programs and knowledge of double helix? Sure I could look at stonehenge and see a giant womb and when people left the circle it represented birth into the new society, and while you can see planets from the circle it must mean the a planet was considered a goddess of fertility tying everything together in a neat package.

The adobe bricks would contain straw, sufficient quantity providing a basis for structural integrity...

I'm not looking to misrepresent anything, the concern of the supporting illustations are undoubtably related to birthing and differant ethnic groups and have the underlying structural pattern that suggests the double helix.

I do like the pictures, and I am not disappointed that this was an initial conclusion for discussion.

I do want to ask, especially the OP. Are there any other possibilities surrounding you original post. Coming from what we know about their culture. Using only what is in the same timeline. I would like to hear an unbiased view from you as to possible scenarios. Do you have any specific concerns or is there any details that don't quite fit that was maybe left out for discussion reasons?

Face value to me creates illusions, and critical thinking is very pertinent when making discovery. Is this something you would be willing to explore further today?

There is no precedent for comparison, thats the worlds oldest mural on the worlds oldest adobe brick wall involving the worlds oldest complex geometric pattern.

Of course i consider counter arguments, as bricks are being created which are 2x1 rectangles you begin to percieve and create structured patterns derived from this, but the greater context shows that there was meaning attatched to this pattern, and that the concern was with the 'building blocks' of life.

[Aus Der Box Skeptisch 714]

I am having trouble finding context without first understanding the people. I will look into this further and get back to the conversation. I feel we may be adding depth to something meant to be pretty. I'll look further...

[Kantzveldt 0]

Continuing, the most implicit iconographic evidence for what has been suggested is from Catal Hoyuk again and appears thus;

Again the overall theme is related to women and mysteries of the womb, as it were, there are four inter-connected women seen either side of the design, eight in total as on the earlier illustrations, based upon four ethnic kind.

The pattern literally connects to the wombs, at top and bottom there are 23 segments, which finds correspondance in the 46 human chromosomes. There are 36 of the bulls head motif, correlating to what i suggested for the 36 numerics of the original pattern, that this relates to idealised structure of B DNA.

A comparison with modern DNA illustrations can easily be made such as these for example;

The pattern went on to form the basis for the 'tree of Life' in Near Eastern tradition, as can be seen in this traditional rug design;

Edited March 26, 2011 by Kantzveldt

[Aus Der Box Skeptisch 714]

What you are suggesting goes beyond the capability of the people to know. If they had the technology to know how many chromosomes and to know about dna. Then why is the artwork so primitive?

So you are seriously explaining to me your view that because number patterns appear and coincidentally match b dna and chromosome strands, that "something" intervened and said "hey primitive people we came a long way to tell you to cross breed with other races. It's because of these numbers. They will be sacred from now on for you. Well now time to go. We will not help you with anything else. We just want you to breed."

I'm not with you yet on that.

A connection to a womb. This one I believe is correct. It would be simple to associate ...woman-bulge in mid area- later a birth...

That could be considered sacred.

Is there ANY documentation in regards to these numbers you keep finding. Did these number patterns appear on anything else? IF these were sacred numbers what was their belief of what they were? I(I'm not sure this one can be answered)

I'm not trying to be critical of you. Not in the least. But I HAVE to be critical of the patterns. You see we are inherently focused on patterns. It's in our nature. We will find a pattern in absolutely nothing. Heck turn your tv to a station that is all static and you will begin to matrix pictures that are not there. It's unavoidable.

[Kantzveldt 0]

What you are suggesting goes beyond the capability of the people to know. If they had the technology to know how many chromosomes and to know about dna. Then why is the artwork so primitive?

So you are seriously explaining to me your view that because number patterns appear and coincidentally match b dna and chromosome strands, that "something" intervened and said "hey primitive people we came a long way to tell you to cross breed with other races. It's because of these numbers. They will be sacred from now on for you. Well now time to go. We will not help you with anything else. We just want you to breed."

I'm not with you yet on that.

That's basically it, the scenario i would outline is benign aliens helping to furthur intelligent life on this planet, creating the first settlements of the Neolithic through incentive, introducing the concept that through selective breeding the appearance and behaviour of humans/plants/animals can be modified and enhanced, the genetic mutations of blue eyes and blonde hair are dated to this period.

This scenario would suggest sufficient knowledge was imparted to create the basic patterns and numerics of what was involved at the DNA level, those patterns being reproduced for 11,000 years to present...the artwork is primitive because it was produced by early Neolithic people.

Is there ANY documentation in regards to these numbers you keep finding. Did these number patterns appear on anything else? IF these were sacred numbers what was their belief of what they were? I(I'm not sure this one can be answered)

I'm not trying to be critical of you. Not in the least. But I HAVE to be critical of the patterns. You see we are inherently focused on patterns. It's in our nature. We will find a pattern in absolutely nothing. Heck turn your tv to a station that is all static and you will begin to matrix pictures that are not there. It's unavoidable.

I;m not sure what you mean by documentation for this period, the patterns of the Neolithic period are very limited, you can identify and trace various groups through the patterns on ceramics, the patterns illustrated here are markers of the core Neolithic region.

[Aus Der Box Skeptisch 714]

The theory you are proposing begets a master plan. They are breeding us for a reason. Maybe for our benefit, like dogs. Purebreeds have a host of health issues, while "mutts" are relatively devoid of breed specific health problems. Along with mutts typically having a longer lifespan.

Or they are prepping for a harvest. Either way it still seems odd.

What is the mythology of the specific groups you are referring to?

Just to clarify I do not believe in any intervention from an intelligent race outside of our own atmosphere.

That said though, I am trying to go step by step with you.

My questions of the mythology if any is known is necessary again for learning about the people and to learn how they viewed their past.

Also at what point did contact happen? Is there any extant evidence to the effect of a cultural shift among these peoples. Not a gradual one. But an immediate shift which would indicate the entrance of new knowledge.

[Kantzveldt 0]

The theory you are proposing begets a master plan. They are breeding us for a reason. Maybe for our benefit, like dogs. Purebreeds have a host of health issues, while "mutts" are relatively devoid of breed specific health problems. Along with mutts typically having a longer lifespan.

Or they are prepping for a harvest. Either way it still seems odd.

What is the mythology of the specific groups you are referring to?

Just to clarify I do not believe in any intervention from an intelligent race outside of our own atmosphere.

That said though, I am trying to go step by step with you.

My questions of the mythology if any is known is necessary again for learning about the people and to learn how they viewed their past.

Also at what point did contact happen? Is there any extant evidence to the effect of a cultural shift among these peoples. Not a gradual one. But an immediate shift which would indicate the entrance of new knowledge.

In terms of 'masterplan' one only has later mythological/religious takes on the nature and purpose of those who intervened, whether the Sumerian accounts of what took place in the region and the Gods creation of humanity, which were around 5,000 years after the event, or the Hebrew accounts of fallen angels descending and manipulating nature and teaching mankind, again thousands of years later.

The sudden cultural shift is at the start of the Neolithic around 11,000 years ago, sites like Nevali Cori and Gobekli Tepe appear from nowhere seemingly.

Proponants of interventionism theory generally concern themselves more with earlier human developments, the transformation from ape to human, the Neolithic transformation i'm concerned with here could be seen as the last stage in any number of developments.

Intervention Theory

Edited March 27, 2011 by Kantzveldt

[Oniomancer 1,972]

You're falling prey to the "looks like therefore related to" line of thinking.

There are other natural sources which also produce patterns similar to those depicted.

In fact, the builders of Gobekli Tepe had a particular mad-on for one such source, several different examples of which were native to the region:

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

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

[TheSearcher 313]

As far as I'm concerned, I know that in the neolithic, patterns were very important to most early settlements and civilisations, even now we like repetitive patterns. It's in our nature.

However, I contest your link to DNA or aliens for that matter. That's your interpretation of it, an assumption, it's not based on any solid evidence, nor is the mural evidence of anything. You'll have to do better than that.

And taking the doctorate dissertation of a student of Ohio State University as proof for something, sorry that isn't evidence either. It only shows you know how to use google.

The author (a Doctor of Philosophy, Anthropology) of the paper now works at San José State University as lecturer in anthropology. Maybe we should contact her and ask her what she thinks of this idea of yours.

[Kantzveldt 0]

However, I contest your link to DNA or aliens for that matter. That's your interpretation of it, an assumption, it's not based on any solid evidence, nor is the mural evidence of anything. You'll have to do better than that.

And taking the doctorate dissertation of a student of Ohio State University as proof for something, sorry that isn't evidence either. It only shows you know how to use google.

The author (a Doctor of Philosophy, Anthropology) of the paper now works at San José State University as lecturer in anthropology. Maybe we should contact her and ask her what she thinks of this idea of yours.

The premise is based upon examination of solid evidence, it's ridiculous to state the mural isn't evidence of anything...!!!

I fail to see why the anthropological study cannot be used as supporting evidence, if i had selectively quoted or misrepresented the study then you would be entitled to rant, but one is entitled to speculate based on evidence provided by others.

[Kantzveldt 0]

You're falling prey to the "looks like therefore related to" line of thinking.

There are other natural sources which also produce patterns similar to those depicted.

In fact, the builders of Gobekli Tepe had a particular mad-on for one such source, several different examples of which were native to the region:

You're right about the serpent being an integral aspect of Neolithic patterns, but fail to appreciate the reason why. The pattern of the serpent was directly related to 'the tree of life' pattern which was derivative of DNA structuring.

Here's an example of Neolithic serpent patterns on bone;

The earliest literary evidence for the nature of the tree of life is Sumerian, the Huluppu tree associated with the serpent and Lilitu, that tree is the Populus Alba, with good reason, here are the bark patterns

Thus the bark naturally creates serpent patterns, correspondant to the geometric patterns of the Neolithic, as well as lip shaped nodules relating to the seductress Lilitu. The name Populus Alba means 'white people', and this was what the genetic bottleneck come breeding programme of the region produced. The tree symbolism is concerned with sex and patterns of reproduction, and was thus sacred to Inanna/Ishtar.

Huluppu myth

Again, a modern illustration of B DNA, below it a pattern from Catal Hoyuk, both capable of being symbolised by the Populus Alba, or the serpent.

[Abramelin 2,502]

Just as a comparison, look at the art created by the Shipibo indians of Peru:

http://students.cis.uab.edu/archived/ewhitby/frame_e.htm

Or look at this drawing on stone in Newgrange, Ireland:

Now, does this art prove the ancient Irish or the ancestors of the Shipibo indians had discovered the Belousov-Zhabotinsky reaction??

.

Edited March 28, 2011 by Abramelin

[Kantzveldt 0]

Just as a comparison, look at the art created by the Shipibo indians of Peru:

Now, does this art prove the ancient Irish or the ancestors of the Shipibo indians had discovered the Belousov-Zhabotinsky reaction??

A pointless rhetorical question, there is irrefutable evidence that the Neolithic patterns related to women giving birth, that is an appropriate context for the patterns realting to DNA...indeed the patterns were actually painted on women figurines lest there be any doubt

[Abramelin 2,502]

Well, I am very sorry, but although interesting, I find it totally unconvincing.

[Kantzveldt 0]

Well, I am very sorry, but although interesting, I find it totally unconvincing.

That's fine, you believe the Neolithic involved the selective reproduction of any number of plants and animals but not humans...despite the remarkable advances of the period

[Abramelin 2,502]

That's fine, you believe the Neolithic involved the selective reproduction of any number of plants and animals but not humans...despite the remarkable advances of the period

I can believe they selectively bred animals and plants. My father was a farmer's son, and I remember hearing him talk about that.

But he never heard of DNA or genetics.

I think you put to much money on your cards.

[Harte 10,356]

The name Populus Alba means 'white people', and this was what the genetic bottleneck come breeding programme of the region produced. The tree symbolism is concerned with sex and patterns of reproduction, and was thus sacred to Inanna/Ishtar.

Fascinating!

I never knew the Sumerians spoke Latin!

Harte

[TheSearcher 313]

The premise is based upon examination of solid evidence, it's ridiculous to state the mural isn't evidence of anything...!!!

I fail to see why the anthropological study cannot be used as supporting evidence, if i had selectively quoted or misrepresented the study then you would be entitled to rant, but one is entitled to speculate based on evidence provided by others.

The mural is probably evidence of something, however it is not proof of your idea, neither is the anthropology work. Sorry but very unconvincing and in your own words, speculation. And mate, I didn't rant, trust me, when I start ranting, you'll know the difference.

However, I'll try to contact the author of this piece and will ask her if your idea is what she had in mind, this way we'll have a professional opinion.

[Art Vandarley 0]

Don't you think that, if aliens caused this culture's art, there shouldn't be more evidence and not just a few drawings?

[Kantzveldt 0]

Fascinating!

I never knew the Sumerians spoke Latin!

Harte

I did mention the Sumerians refered to it as the Huluppu, in the Semitic language it was simply refered to as lbne/white. some see etymological connection between lbne and alban, but yes the Populus naming is from the Latin.