Gobleki Tepe: 15 New Temples found

[kmt_sesh]

7 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

 

the dawn of civilisation 

That's a fair way to think about it, even though Göbekli Tepe never reached that status. Sites like Tepe and Catalhöyük started the evolution to more complex societies...in that region. Such sites probably had little to no influence on more distant sites like the Nile Valley.

[Unusual Tournament]

2 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

That's a fair way to think about it, even though Göbekli Tepe never reached that status. Sites like Tepe and Catalhöyük started the evolution to more complex societies...in that region. Such sites probably had little to no influence on more distant sites like the Nile Valley.

its a position that I've kept up through out this thread. it hasn't been easy passing on this new way of thinking. I'm just relieved that you're beginning to understand and i hope that others will embrace the idea that GT was much more than a culture of hunters and gatherers and that this advanced culture (at worse) and civilisation (at best) just didn't spring outta the ground as is. there must be hundreds if not thousands of years of culture before this to have left behind such a complex environment like GT. and more importantly why was it buried and this culture/civilisation disappears until thousands of years latter. 

also id like to draw attention to the photo i posted, as i think its important to realise the scope or rather limit that the excavations at GT are about. there is just so much that hasn't been touched yet. we just have no idea how large this site could be or what else they'll find. 

[Swede]

20 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

What have I said that is wrong? Archeologists and historians are baffled at the time frame, architecture and construction methods. The site is 12,000 years old. There is nothing like it to compare with. In fact until they found Göbekli Tepe no one believed that such a time frame could accomodate such ruins. The original archeologists thought it a Byzantine ruin. The site predates our knowledge of human development.

...but you can’t have two different rules for human progression. You just can’t say that agriculture and farming is present in all other cultures and civilisation that reached such construction only not in GT because you don’t wanna upset the current historical narrative. 

P.S. all your links are from other like minded individuals like yourself so what do you indend to achieve by posting them?

1) Amongst other things, your repeated insistence that Gobekli Tepe is the product of a civilization. It is not:

The people creating these megalithic monuments were still highly mobile hunter-foragers and the site’s material culture corroborates this: substantial amounts of bones exclusively from hunted wild animals, and a stone tool inventory comprising a wide range of projectile points. Osteological investigations and botanical studies show that animal husbandry was not practiced at Göbekli Tepe and domesticated plants were unknown (Notroff and Dietrich 2017).

2)This is the kind of phrasing utilized in sensationalized press reports and fringe literature. Somewhat surprised? Yes. Intrigued? Yes.

3) As of 2013, the earliest reasonably secure radiocarbon date is associated with Enclosure D. The calibrated date range (2 sigma, 95.4% confidence) is 9664-9311 CALRCYBC [with a centroid of 9487.5 BC] (Dietrich et al 2013:37, 38).

4) "The site predates our knowledge of human development". What in heaven's name is this supposed to mean? Hominin development extends back some 2.5 million years with hominid development extending much further.

5) With the exception of the ASOR overview, the references supplied are research reports by the investigators of Gobekli Tepe and associated sites. They thus contain factual data related to the sites presented in a professional manner. Read and learn.

Edit: Punctuation.

Edited July 28, 2018 by Swede

[Swede]

16 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

its a position that I've kept up through out this thread. it hasn't been easy passing on this new way of thinking. I'm just relieved that you're beginning to understand and i hope that others will embrace the idea that GT was much more than a culture of hunters and gatherers and that this advanced culture (at worse) and civilisation (at best) just didn't spring outta the ground as is. there must be hundreds if not thousands of years of culture before this to have left behind such a complex environment like GT. and more importantly why was it buried and this culture/civilisation disappears until thousands of years latter. 

also id like to draw attention to the photo i posted, as i think its important to realise the scope or rather limit that the excavations at GT are about. there is just so much that hasn't been touched yet. we just have no idea how large this site could be or what else they'll find. 

1) This is not supported by the documented recoveries. See above.

2) This is unsupported, idle speculation. Bear in mind that more recent history has a number of examples of cultural ephemera. Or do you regularly encounter "Mongol Hordes".

3) It is not likely that the culture "disappeared" but rather that the culture went through transformations and, to some degree, relocation. These processes could be related to a number of factors including environmental change, lifeway changes (such as early horticulture), and belief system changes. There are more modern parallels such as the Ancestral Puebloans.

It will be agreed that the results of the ongoing research will be of interest.

.

[Jarocal]

On 7/24/2018 at 11:25 PM, Captain Risky said:

You’ve missed my point entirely.

...my argument is that a low skilled constructed polis can be called a civilisation then why not a well made stone one. It’s harder and requires more skills to work with stone as opposed to dirt. It took 7 years of apprenticeship in the Middle Ages to make a stone mason.

Where does it say that farming lands or living areas need to be directly around temples?

You obviously have not studied Cahokia or you would have refrained from making that statement. The mound is constructed of layers comprised of clay soil with sand layers separating the clay ones in order to maintain a fairly constant moisture level. The clay of that area is referred to as smectite clay and is notorious for expanding and contracting more than other soils. If they had simply piled a mound of dirt, that would quickly erode with rain and drying. Construction of that mound took far more planning than shaping a few big stone blocks and standing them up.

And while I defer to Swede or Piney on Lithic technology regarding stone tools, I have been smacking rocks with blunt objects and stacking them in a pile for decades. But if you don't wish to listen to an actual stone mason...

Edited July 30, 2018 by Jarocal

[Unusual Tournament]

18 minutes ago, Jarocal said:

You obviously have not studied Cahokia or you would have refrained from making that statement. The mound is constructed of layers comprised of clay soil with sand layers separating the clay ones in order to maintain a fairly constant moisture level. The clay of that area is referred to as smectite clay and is notorious for expanding and contracting more than other soils. If they had simply piled a mound of dirt, that would quickly erode with rain and drying. Construction of that mound took far more planning than shaping a few big stone blocks and standing them up.

And while I defer to Swede or Piney on Lithic technology regarding stone tools, I have been smacking rocks with blunt objects and stacking them in a pile for decades. But if you don't wish to listen to an actual stone mason...

It’s a mound of dirt, sand and clay. Whop dedo.

[Jarocal]

4 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

It’s a mound of dirt, sand and clay. Whop dedo.

It is a well designed mound of Sand, dirt, and, Clay in order to have remained stable during its occupation period.

I work with stone materials everyday. Yes, the pillars at Gobekli Tepi are impressive. Impressive is not a synonym for impossible.

Edited July 30, 2018 by Jarocal

[Unusual Tournament]

12 minutes ago, Jarocal said:

It is a well designed mound of Sand, dirt, and, Clay in order to have remained stable during its occupation period.

I work with stone materials everyday. Yes, the pillars at Gobekli Tepi are impressive. Impressive is not a synonym for impossible.

Look, the boss of your little cabal of historical whitewashers (sesh) has already agreed with me that Goblekli Tepe is the dawn of civilisation. It’s more than a culture and more than likely a civilisation if not the beginnings of one. is what he has agreed with me. A full 11,000 years after the “great” builders of NA.

Comparring the North American mound builders with the builders of GT is not fair and only sits well with those that are afraid of upsetting Piney and his chainsaw.

 

[kmt_sesh]

12 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

Look, the boss of your little cabal of historical whitewashers (sesh) has already agreed with me that Goblekli Tepe is the dawn of civilisation. It’s more than a culture and more than likely a civilisation if not the beginnings of one. is what he has agreed with me. A full 11,000 years after the “great” builders of NA.

Comparring the North American mound builders with the builders of GT is not fair and only sits well with those that are afraid of upsetting Piney and his chainsaw.

 

No, no, no. Do not misrepresent me. I agree to "dawn of civilization" because it implies they may have been at the very start of the road leading in that direction. But a number of us have already clearly elaborated and demonstrated why Göbekli Tepe cannot be and is not considered a civilization. Archaeologically and anthropologically speaking, GT is a culture—not something more than or less than, and not a civilization.

[kmt_sesh]

And there is nothing "whiewashed" about this. Those of us arguing against you are following the research of professional historians. It is their conclusions we share. Therefore, we are stating facts; you are stating personal opinions and assumptions without proper corroboration.

[jaylemurph]

 

On 7/28/2018 at 2:14 PM, Swede said:

1) This is not supported by the documented recoveries. See above.

2) This is unsupported, idle speculation. Bear in mind that more recent history has a number of examples of cultural ephemera. Or do you regularly encounter "Mongol Hordes".

3) It is not likely that the culture "disappeared" but rather that the culture went through transformations and, to some degree, relocation. These processes could be related to a number of factors including environmental change, lifeway changes (such as early horticulture), and belief system changes. There are more modern parallels such as the Ancestral Puebloans.

It will be agreed that the results of the ongoing research will be of interest.

.

...that would explain a lot.

--Jaylemurph

[+Not A Rockstar]

Yeesh!

Speaking as a history loving hobbyist and armchair thinker, I am fond of the hope that as matters progress in this region including GT we MAY find indicators of an earlier civilization than we have documented yet, as I feel we may well have achieved civilizations before those we know about. 

However, hoping, being fond of an idea, and feelings are personal matters and not science nor proven as yet as regards GT. I want to thank very sincerely those experts here who are still posting and explaining and teaching because I am savoring every bit of it and I appreciate you and your time very much. It is not being wasted.

[Unusual Tournament]

6 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

No, no, no. Do not misrepresent me. I agree to "dawn of civilization" because it implies they may have been at the very start of the road leading in that direction. But a number of us have already clearly elaborated and demonstrated why Göbekli Tepe cannot be and is not considered a civilization. Archaeologically and anthropologically speaking, GT is a culture—not something more than or less than, and not a civilization.

Post 176... "That's a fair way to think about it, even though Göbekli Tepe never reached that status. Sites like Tepe and Catalhöyük started the evolution to more complex societies...in that region. Such sites probably had little to no influence on more distant sites like the Nile Valley."

...this is what you say concerning the 'dawn of civilisation'. if you're having difficulties making yourself clear or having doubts then that is your problem and in no way have i misrepresented you. 

Edited July 30, 2018 by Captain Risky

[Unusual Tournament]

4 hours ago, Not A Rockstar said:

Yeesh!

Speaking as a history loving hobbyist and armchair thinker, I am fond of the hope that as matters progress in this region including GT we MAY find indicators of an earlier civilization than we have documented yet, as I feel we may well have achieved civilizations before those we know about. 

However, hoping, being fond of an idea, and feelings are personal matters and not science nor proven as yet as regards GT. I want to thank very sincerely those experts here who are still posting and explaining and teaching because I am savoring every bit of it and I appreciate you and your time very much. It is not being wasted.

your welcome mate.

[Unusual Tournament]

6 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

And there is nothing "whiewashed" about this. Those of us arguing against you are following the research of professional historians. It is their conclusions we share. Therefore, we are stating facts; you are stating personal opinions and assumptions without proper corroboration.

sorry mate but you are wrong again... historians only study societies that leave behind written records. Gobelkeli Tepe is the sole responsibility of scientists. the problem is that historians like swede and co just don't know when to leave things alone that don't belong to their fields of expertise. archeologists can excavate and carefully catalogue but under no circumstances do they have precedence in interpreting what has been uncovered. that is why it was scientists that determined the age of Gobelki Tepe and not historians... that is why it was mathematicians that used computer programs to determined that the people of GT used astronomy and made records with their carvings and temple lay out.

any conclusions are those that i have mentioned and those that you and friends have are only guesses. 

Edited July 30, 2018 by Captain Risky

[Unusual Tournament]

5 hours ago, Not A Rockstar said:

Yeesh!

Speaking as a history loving hobbyist and armchair thinker, I am fond of the hope that as matters progress in this region including GT we MAY find indicators of an earlier civilization than we have documented yet, as I feel we may well have achieved civilizations before those we know about. 

However, hoping, being fond of an idea, and feelings are personal matters and not science nor proven as yet as regards GT. I want to thank very sincerely those experts here who are still posting and explaining and teaching because I am savoring every bit of it and I appreciate you and your time very much. It is not being wasted.

yes we may find answers but at present all we can do is speculate since there is just no precedent anywhere concerning anything like Goblekli Tepe. the age and the craftsmanship is just virgin territory for all. it defies logic that a culture/civilisation can progress to such a level without agriculture built by hunters and gatherers. it just has not happened anywhere before and there just is no logical reason why GT should be the exception. 

...nothing is known about the people that built GT an saying that it was hunters and gatherers is just pure and simply speculating specially since excavations haven't even unearthed 5% of the site. so it best i think that everyone has a go in thrashing about ideas but lets be respectful and mindful of the fact that we just don't know all the facts and those we know defy accepted logic.   

[cormac mac airt]

4 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

sorry mate but you are wrong again... historians only study societies that leave behind written records. Gobelkeli Tepe is the sole responsibility of scientists. the problem is that historians like swede and co just don't know when to leave things alone that don't belong to their fields of expertise. archeologists can excavate and carefully catalogue but under no circumstances do they have precedence in interpreting what has been uncovered. that is why it was scientists that determined the age of Gobelki Tepe and not historians... that is why it was mathematicians that used computer programs to determined that the people of GT used astronomy and made records with their carvings and temple lay out.

any conclusions are those that i have mentioned and those that you and friends have are only guesses. 

It is YOU who are still wrong. Archaeologists are not historians, strictly speaking, as they study both historic and pre-historic periods. The problem is that YOU don't know enough about archaeology and related fields to know WHAT they do, know, etc. Many/MOST? have degrees in multiple disciplines such as climatology, anthropology, palaeontology, geology, linguistics, dendrochronology and many other related fields. Interpreting what has been uncovered IS their job. 

cormac

[+Not A Rockstar]

5 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

Post 176... "That's a fair way to think about it, even though Göbekli Tepe never reached that status. Sites like Tepe and Catalhöyük started the evolution to more complex societies...in that region. Such sites probably had little to no influence on more distant sites like the Nile Valley."

...this is what you say concerning the 'dawn of civilisation'. if you're having difficulties making yourself clear or having doubts then that is your problem and in no way have i misrepresented you. 

do the twist much? 

Why the big propaganda push to make GT out to be a full on civilization when all it is today, with 5% or less even revealed, is one of the most fascinating and perplexing sites we have working atm? I would even go so far as to say it is our most promising to roll back the clock on what we know about cultural development in this region, presently. But, it is NOT a civ as yet. I have very high hopes it points us to proof that maybe it was indicative of a civ we have not discovered yet, but that is something to chit chat with a historian or archeologist over a drink, hoping for more insights if he entertained the notion and talked more about what is know as yet (and what is not), not get up in his/her face and say they are wrong for stating the fact that GT is a cultural site, barely gone into, not a civilization center, *based on what is known so far*. Calling it that is not an insult. Given the dating, it is very exciting. 

I live a few miles from Poverty Point, and anyone who can describe a mound complex built in an alluvial plain as a heap of dirt so dismissively is not someone very knowledgeable about architecture or geology, both of which are foundational sciences to archeology, among many. 

Sharing any knowledge requires a strict self policing of terms used to communicate fact to others, and a clear line between what is wished for and what is actually held and known. I want GT to reveal and prove an earlier civ, too, but it does NOT today. Maybe next discovery, but, not today. Just the truth.

[jaylemurph]

7 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

your welcome mate.

You need to rid yourself of the delusion you're an expert forthwith.

--Jaylemurph

[Unusual Tournament]

3 hours ago, Not A Rockstar said:

do the twist much? 

Why the big propaganda push to make GT out to be a full on civilization when all it is today, with 5% or less even revealed, is one of the most fascinating and perplexing sites we have working atm? I would even go so far as to say it is our most promising to roll back the clock on what we know about cultural development in this region, presently. But, it is NOT a civ as yet. I have very high hopes it points us to proof that maybe it was indicative of a civ we have not discovered yet, but that is something to chit chat with a historian or archeologist over a drink, hoping for more insights if he entertained the notion and talked more about what is know as yet (and what is not), not get up in his/her face and say they are wrong for stating the fact that GT is a cultural site, barely gone into, not a civilization center, *based on what is known so far*. Calling it that is not an insult. Given the dating, it is very exciting. 

I live a few miles from Poverty Point, and anyone who can describe a mound complex built in an alluvial plain as a heap of dirt so dismissively is not someone very knowledgeable about architecture or geology, both of which are foundational sciences to archeology, among many. 

Sharing any knowledge requires a strict self policing of terms used to communicate fact to others, and a clear line between what is wished for and what is actually held and known. I want GT to reveal and prove an earlier civ, too, but it does NOT today. Maybe next discovery, but, not today. Just the truth.

Do I twist? Not as much as sesh. Yes I can see why you highlighted the second part of his quote but if you were fair then you would have acknowledged how conflicting his words were especially the first part of his quote which to me means tacit approval of my views.

I have clearly stated that GT is somewhere between a culture and civilisation, i made this perfectly clear. Why didn’t you pick up on this? I don’t need your approval nor am I looking for anyone else’s. This is my opinion. so either you’re not reading what I write or you’re trying to impose your views on me. I’d like to clarify that even though scientists are the last word on these type of finds historians and archeologists play a big part also. But a site that has barely been excavated cannot be pronounced as anything by archeologists or historians. 

I didn’t dismiss any mound builders. In fact it wasn’t even me that brought it up. I can’t be bothered going back over it but I think it was Swede that invited the comparison. All I did was give an opinion. Take it up with Swede. All I said is that you just cannot compare the two. Building in stone is harder and has more advantages. is more advanced and requires greater skill and specialisation that layering soil and building wooded huts on top. I cannot believe that I’m still encountering such headwind from such a fact.

Now even if it doesn’t show to be a civilisation at this stage is unimportant since I have already stated that it might not be. But you can’t say one thing about making assumptions about cultures and civilisation and then disregard the fact that the resident historian brains trust on this forum have no proof that there was no form of agriculture and that nomadic h&g built something like GT on a whim. The burden of proof lies with them to prove that something happened differently in this culture/civilisation than in any other. So in this regard you are again wrong. You need to be fair and balanced with your criticism and address all points in order to have reputable skin in this argument.

[kmt_sesh]

9 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

   16 hours ago,  kmt_sesh said: 

And there is nothing "whiewashed" about this. Those of us arguing against you are following the research of professional historians. It is their conclusions we share. Therefore, we are stating facts; you are stating personal opinions and assumptions without proper corroboration.

sorry mate but you are wrong again... historians only study societies that leave behind written records. Gobelkeli Tepe is the sole responsibility of scientists. the problem is that historians like swede and co just don't know when to leave things alone that don't belong to their fields of expertise. archeologists can excavate and carefully catalogue but under no circumstances do they have precedence in interpreting what has been uncovered. that is why it was scientists that determined the age of Gobelki Tepe and not historians... that is why it was mathematicians that used computer programs to determined that the people of GT used astronomy and made records with their carvings and temple lay out.

any conclusions are those that i have mentioned and those that you and friends have are only guesses.

Oh, Captain, I've rarely seen such an incorrect summation. The problem is your drawing from personal opinion and thinking it will be as good as it needs to be, even though clearly you have a very limited understanding of historical studies. Nothing wrong with that—I have a very limited understanding of things like physics, but the difference is, I don't pretend I'm conversant in it just because I want people to think so. Know your limitations and abide by them.

That you think historians study only those cultures that had written records is quite a spectacular blunder on your part. You've thus just dumped all historical studies of all historical peoples who never developed writing: peoples of the Northern Plains and Woodlands and Southwest; vast collections of peoples from South America (a regioin in which my museum specializes), tribal groups all over Africa, et cetera. The people currently working at GT are mixes of historians and archaeologists, neither group of whom are technically scientists. What's true is that such researchers will draw on hard sciences to develop their understandings of an historical group.

History is the study and interpretation of the past. It's awfully nice when there are written records to draw on, but that is often not the case.

Wow!

And as a reminder, we do not and cannot still know what the designs on the T-pillars represented. "Astronomy and records" are a gross exaggeration and merely speculation.

[kmt_sesh]

10 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

Post 176... "That's a fair way to think about it, even though Göbekli Tepe never reached that status. Sites like Tepe and Catalhöyük started the evolution to more complex societies...in that region. Such sites probably had little to no influence on more distant sites like the Nile Valley."

...this is what you say concerning the 'dawn of civilisation'. if you're having difficulties making yourself clear or having doubts then that is your problem and in no way have i misrepresented you. 

LOL This post vividly shows how you think. You quoted me and then bolded the only part of my post you wanted to see. The amusing part is, you quoted me in full but completely ignored anything past what you wanted to see. I have never said GT was a civilization, and in fact I made this very clear when I wrote "even though Göbekli Tepe never reached that status [civilization]." It's historically established, GT was never a civilization.

Obviously, the phrase "dawn of" means the start of something. It doesn't mean "the full maturity of something."

My post was clear enough in talking about the very start of something more complex. But as is clear, you have the truculent habit of misrepresenting me and misreading me in the hopes that you can make my posts seem like something other than what I said. No one here is going to fall for that.

[kmt_sesh]

9 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

yes we may find answers but at present all we can do is speculate since there is just no precedent anywhere concerning anything like Goblekli Tepe. the age and the craftsmanship is just virgin territory for all. it defies logic that a culture/civilisation can progress to such a level without agriculture built by hunters and gatherers. it just has not happened anywhere before and there just is no logical reason why GT should be the exception. 

...nothing is known about the people that built GT an saying that it was hunters and gatherers is just pure and simply speculating specially since excavations haven't even unearthed 5% of the site. so it best i think that everyone has a go in thrashing about ideas but lets be respectful and mindful of the fact that we just don't know all the facts and those we know defy accepted logic.   

You say all of this merely because you have never taken the time to do some decent reading from the experts in the field, nor do you know how to interpret the evidence in the field. This is not so mysterious as you're attempting to make it sound.

[kmt_sesh]

33 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

Do I twist? Not as much as sesh. Yes I can see why you highlighted the second part of his quote but if you were fair then you would have acknowledged how conflicting his words were especially the first part of his quote which to me means tacit approval of my views.

...

Or perhaps tacit wishful thinking on your part—another hallmark of your posting strategy.

Face it, Risky. You were caught red-handed in your cherry picking. Misrepresentation and misreading.

[Unusual Tournament]

32 minutes ago, kmt_sesh said:

Oh, Captain, I've rarely seen such an incorrect summation. The problem is your drawing from personal opinion and thinking it will be as good as it needs to be, even though clearly you have a very limited understanding of historical studies. Nothing wrong with that—I have a very limited understanding of things like physics, but the difference is, I don't pretend I'm conversant in it just because I want people to think so. Know your limitations and abide by them.

That you think historians study only those cultures that had written records is quite a spectacular blunder on your part. You've thus just dumped all historical studies of all historical peoples who never developed writing: peoples of the Northern Plains and Woodlands and Southwest; vast collections of peoples from South America (a regioin in which my museum specializes), tribal groups all over Africa, et cetera. The people currently working at GT are mixes of historians and archaeologists, neither group of whom are technically scientists. What's true is that such researchers will draw on hard sciences to develop their understandings of an historical group.

History is the study and interpretation of the past. It's awfully nice when there are written records to draw on, but that is often not the case.

Wow!

And as a reminder, we do not and cannot still know what the designs on the T-pillars represented. "Astronomy and records" are a gross exaggeration and merely speculation.

Ancient stone pillars offer clues of comet strike that changed human history

https://m.phys.org/news/2017-04-ancient-stone-pillars-clues-comet.html