Ah, thank you!

quote:

Originally posted by TXJIM:
It's not out of the realm to consider that many civilizations rose and fell creating, and then taking to the grave, technology to which we have given credit to later civilizations for inventing.

As an engineer (and amateur science philosopher), when I hear about the technologies of ancient civilizations, I am not amazed at how much we have progressed, I am consistently amazed at how much THEY ALREADY KNEW.
Granted, we have a different explanation usually, that is more "science based", but the fact remains that they knew it and had an explanation that seemed totally credible within their own world-view.

While working on an Anthropology degree I came across several similar cultural finds. For instance at Fells Cave in the tip of Terra del Fuel in S. America, there are traces of human occupation that people lived there 10-11000 BC. It is listed in Wikipedia as Cuevas Fell. Other sites in America include traces of human habitation close to the eastern US and mid west that predate the Clovis tradition. Some areas of St Louis, Pennsylvania, Ohio, may have had sophisticated societies as far back as 20,000 years ago. This pre-dates the accepted theory of migration over the Bering land bridge and diffusion south and east by 10,000+ years. There is also Puma Punka, Mohenjo Daro, and many other world sites.

The traditionalists do what ever they can to dispute and bury these findings. But one must be sceptical in this field rife with forgeries. The jury is not in yet. Interesting stuff.

This one is interesting too. Starts at around 10m.



Edit - She gets a little wonky at 47m.

Here's another good one:

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Veeper,

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:
Seriously though, this is exciting to me. How is it we have the timeline of human development/innovation so wrong? How many times have there been technologically advanced civilizations that came and went *before* written history?

Not my lane, but from what little I know it seems to me that fields like archaeology rely on intepreting the evidence found, inferring motivations, abilities, and connections that reflect their own preconceived notions, perceptions, and biases rather than objective examination of what it could or couldn't mean.

Is it possible that ancient civilizations were actually more advanced than we are now, and destroyed themselves utterly and we are just in a cycle where we are slowly getting back to where they were?

Maybe what we are finding is just bits and pieces of that?

quote:

biases rather than objective examination of what it could or couldn't mean.

one of the very most interesting parts of 'those programs' typically hoo-hawed by many, relates to the "large stones moved about" and the "absolute precision cut 90* corners in ultra hard stone" with no clues how it was done without current technology.

The '100 ton' and greater stones moved miles across rugged terrain and installed perhaps at 9000' up a mountain trail, or the sarcophagus corners and precision round bore casting in similar hard stone begs more study to yield rational answers.

I firmly believe that most of our human history is unrecorded, or lost, or simply forgotten. There may have been some mention of this place in the burned library of Alexandria, for example. The excavations on Santorini island show a Minoan civilization that had three story structures and indoor plumbing, which don't show up again in civilization again for another 1,500 years in Rome. Santorini is starting to look more and more like the Atlantis Plato wrote about.

Imagine where we would be as a species if we hadn't spent so much time reinventing the wheel. I've yet to watch th clip, but I saw a snippet of a documentary the other day talking about there being eilvidence of a variety of domesticated and cultivated grains. We lost that knowledge, or didn't preserve it, and had to start all over again much later.