This is a map of the earth during the last ice age compared to now, notice all that land mass that is now under water...

This is a map of the earth during the last ice age compared to now, notice all that land mass that is now under water? Thats where humans of that time would have been living, next to the coast. There is now strong evidence supporting the theory that the ice caps melted rapidly due to meteorite impact meaning the oceans would have risen over night destroying anything in it's path
cont.

Other urls found in this thread:

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1994902/
theguardian.com/world/2010/jan/11/great-pyramid-tombs-slaves-egypt
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlit_Yam
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

This is a picture of a brick wall that has been eroded naturally by the ocean. If there were any stone structures at the time of the ice caps melting there would be no sign of them by now.

The Egyptians had a story about their city fathers, that they cam from a city that was flooded by the ocean. Likewise the story of Noah comes from an ancient sumerian legend, of god wiping out their civilisation with a global flood.

The megalithic structures of Gobekli Tepe have been carbon dated to have been buried about 11 thousand years ago but they could have been built much earlier than that and less than 10% of the site has been uncovered

This is an image of the earth surrounding the sphinx. It appears to have been caused by thousands of years of water erosion. Meaning the sphinx itself my be much older than we have previously thought possible, maybe more than 11000 years ago. In the past this has been dismissed because we did not believe man was building large stone structures back then but with the discovery of Gobekli Tepe we now know that isn't the case

oops

The oldest remains of modern humans that we have found goes back 180 000 years, and thats just from what we have uncovered Yet modern scientists would have us believe we did nothing of any note until about 11 thousand years ago.and thats just because of Gobekli Tepes discovery before that they were saying 9 thousand years ago.

Human civilisation has existed long before Mesopotamia, long before we even know. But scientists shut down anyone who dares suggest this. Why? Because they want us to believe that before modern WESTERN science there was nothing and that man is nothing. They want us to feel weak and stupid and they do this by telling us that our ancestors were weak and stupid.

Do not buy the lies. Human civilisation is far older and far more mysterious than we currently understand

Shame. This thread started off so interesting, and then out came the tinfoil hat.

classic use a term the CIA coined to disregard anything that goes against your beliefs that have been enforced by a standardised education system

I also find these theories quite interesting. I too, wonder how they managed to build some of those insane walls that we see in Cuzco or in Egypt, and places where there is evidence of two different building styles, in a way that more advanced builders have first built it, vanished and then later someone else came and build less advanced shit on top of it, like in some Inca structures and cities.

I'm not saying it's true or false.
But I am asking; what does it matter?
If it turns out to be true, that civilizations excisted before ice age and a lot earlier than we thought, what difference does it make?

It's not like only then we will suddenly uncover their amazing skills of cutting granite like soft butter and we will lift our society to a new, grand utopia.
No one cares, nothing will change and everything will stay just as miserable.

Because finding the remains of their civilisation might lead to clues about their culture and philosophy, discoveries that could have an impact on our modern civilisation

Why exactly do you think scientists want us to feel weak and stupid? If they did in fact want that, then why wouldn't they have just said Gobekli Tepes was built more recently? It's not like anyone who wasn't a scientist could disprove them. Seems more like they're basing their assessments on the available evidence and then adjusting that assessment when new evidence comes to light. You know, like science always does.

Also, on the subject of man being weak before WESTERN science...

First of all, none of the currently acknowledged cradles of civilisation are WESTERN. Two are in the middle East, one is the Indus valley, one is China, and (assuming I haven't forgotten one) the others are all in the Americas. WESTERN science isnt covering up the accomplishments of early humans to make the WEST seem better- by all accounts when the first civilisations needs forming most of the WEST was living in ditches throwing their shit at each other.

Besides, even if the earliest humans had civilisations long before our current estimates, as the other user pointed out, what does that change? It's interesting, certainly, and I'm sure we could learn all manner of fascinating things about these people, but it's extremely unlikely they would have progressed to any degree that would exceed even that of the Renaissance.

Also, please don't insulting all our intelligences by bringing up aliens.

How and why were the great pyramids built?

>There is now strong evidence supporting the theory that the ice caps melted rapidly due to meteorite impact
source or fuck off

>This is a picture of a brick wall that has been eroded naturally by the ocean. If there were any stone structures at the time of the ice caps melting there would be no sign of them by now.
brick =/= stone

>Yet modern scientists would have us believe we did nothing of any note until about 11 thousand years ago.
no evidence of writing at gobekli tepe, not civilization by the anthropological definition.

>Do not buy the lies. Human civilisation is far older and far more mysterious than we currently understand
evidence or fuck off

my mind is completely open to the idea that things may be different than our current understanding, and I'm very aware of the ice age sea levels and that potentially civilization(meaning writing) could be older than we understand it. without evidence, there is no reason to jump to these conclusions however. your rants are completely unscientific.

By a large number of people over a long period of time through extreme difficulty and for the love of their god-king.

Oh god you're actually going to say ancient aliens aren't you. Goddammit.

Here's a thought, don't ancient aliens imply that humans are weak considerably more than WESTERN scientists do? WESTERN scientists are saying that mankind was strong, resourceful, and intelligent enough to build the pyramids by itself. Ancient aliens theorists will tell you that man is too weak and stupid to have managed it alone.

>By a large number of people over a long period of time through extreme difficulty and for the love of their god-king.
Sheer man power is not enough to account for the accuracy needed to build the structure.
>love f their god king
yeah right, if it was built for one man you'd think their would be more inscriptions and art work depicting this

No I don't believe aliens were involved, dickhead.

Do you know where the word Alchemy comes from?

You thinking behind raised the pyramids out of the ground using equivalent exchange?

rain

No. Just that ancient Egyptians had some understanding of chemistry and physics and that the pyramids may have been their attempt at building something to that was a physical symbol of their knowledge in order to pass it on

Was covered by sand for far too long. If it was from rain then the Sphinx is still older than many archaeologists would like to admit

Well i cant think of any chemistry that would be much use, but I'll accept that maybe their knowledge of physics was more advanced than we give them credit for. Unless you're saying that it was better than ours is now.

The water erosion around the sphinx is heavy on ONE side, not around the entire thing. The contemporary explanation for this is that the visible incline to that side caused monsoon water to flow down and affect one side more heavily.

You are not telling the full truth. Can you provide a counterargument to this information that supports your claim that the sphinx is old as you say?

>Why? Because they want us to believe that before modern WESTERN science there was nothing and that man is nothing.

But they don't teach that, what are you talking about? The foundations of civilization are accepted to be EASTERN by western science.

>western science

>Sheer man power is not enough to account for the accuracy needed to build the structure.

user I really want to believe civilization is older than we currently have evidence for as well but you are stating your opinion here as if it were fact. The truth is that it is NOT a perfect symmetrical structure and manpower could have definitely created it. Why do you think it could not? It is not even a perfect pyramid.

this study suggests there was an impact

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1994902/

however 2 key points are important

1: it is not conclusively proven as per the high scientific and academic standards required to prove something like this

2: Randall Carson was not involved in this discovery

I think it is important to exclude Randall Carson for practical reasons, he constantly spews forth a tirade of logical fallacies and enough time has been wasted on him already. I am open minded but life is short. At this point only actual science is going to yield meaningful conclusions.

Still would have taken thousands of years
You're not being very honest, user.

W E S T E R N S C I E N T I S T S
E S T E R N S C I E N T I S T S
S T E R N S C I E N T I S T S
T E R N S C I E N T I S T S
E R N S C I E N T I S T S
R N S C I E N T I S T S
N S C I E N T I S T S
S C I E N T I S T S
C I E N T I S T S
I E N T I S T S
E N T I S T S
N T I S T S
T I S T S
I S T S
S T S
T S
S

Is what I meant and what you fucking knew I meant faggot.

What did I say that is incorrect or dishonest specifically?

nice fucking proof you got there mate

>Why do scientists not acknowledge these theories that have no scientific evidence?

Gee, I really wonder. Must be a global conspiracy!

Cool study, but there's the slight problem that the possible impact is associated with significant cooling, not the end of an ice age and flooding.

It's still an important event, and one that would have led to extinctions and shifts in human behaviour, but not the destruction and complete effacing of early civilisations.

Also, the authors are only speculating about large changes to the climate in North America, not worldwide.

>The megalithic structures of Gobekli Tepe have been carbon dated to have been buried about 11 thousand years ago but they could have been built much earlier than that and less than 10% of the site has been uncovered

Not only is it wild that Gobekli Tepe was built 10,000+ years ago but that it was inhabited for almost 2,000 years (with the dates subject to change, more than likely being pushed even further back) and what's even wilder, this megalithic culture was spread across the entirety of Europe and into the MidEast.

And it’s not like ancient humans achieved this overnight, there’s a whole “package” of technology, practices and thought processes that had to be developed to get to that point.

Do you think they buried it as a time capsule of some sort or was it a form of ritual sacrifice, without sacrificing a living thing or or objects but instead their knowledge, skill, and labour? Or maybe they only meant to have it buried temporarily?

When they built the Megalithic stone circles all over Europe the sea was obviously a lot fucking lower.

Pic related. Er Lannic, Brittany, France.

Doggerland, my friend.

>Because they want us to believe that before modern WESTERN science there was nothing and that man is nothing.
AYO HOL UP

>WESTERN SCIENTISTS
>ESTERN SCIENTISTS
>STERN SCIENTISTS
Well, which is it?

>I too, wonder how they managed to build some of those insane walls that we see in Cuzco or in Egypt,

It's simple: Ancient people were every bit as smart and ingenious as modern people are.

>First of all, none of the currently acknowledged cradles of civilisation are WESTERN.

Egypt and Sumer are the progenitors of western civilization.

>yeah right, if it was built for one man you'd think their would be more inscriptions and art work depicting this

You mean like this?
theguardian.com/world/2010/jan/11/great-pyramid-tombs-slaves-egypt

Really? What do Chinese scientists say? Is it the same exact thing?

There is no "western" science, science was invented in the west but it is a global endevor that is the same everywhere.

No you tard, that's called "erosion". The circle was built on a promontory that has since largely eroded away, it hasn't "sunk".

And neither of those are WESTERN. Op is acting like westerners are burying discoveries to make themselves look good, when the existing discoveries also make white people irrelevant until Rome.

BOTH of those are western you thick twat. "West Asia", you ever heard of this term?

No they aren't, you thick twat. Western civilisation is traditionally a European thing. Just because they're west of the fucking Indus it doesn't make them WESTERN as it is commonly known.

I take it from you taking a reasonable stance that our dating could be off and then contorting it into a pseudoscientific conspiracy-theorist rant that you just finished reading this, OP?

Everything is west of something you retard, that's not what "the west" means in a "western civilization" context.

DEEERR IT DA CIA?

NO WAIT IT DA J00S

NO IT DA BILDABERGS

NOO IT DA NWO SATAN LOOOOOOOOOL

>when you spin the conspiratard russian roulette

Western civilization begins at Sumer, if Sumer isn't "western" then there is no western civilization.

I'm glad my post on maltese ruts sent off this recent wave of people getting educated.

>if Sumer isn't "western" then there is no western civilization.
>If something came from something else they must fall into the same category

We came from apes but apes aren't homo sapiens. You came from your dad but your dad isn't you. I don't say that as an insult to Sumerians by an unfavorable comparison to apes (or to your dad), I say it because your taxonomy is fucked up. "Western Civilization" is ill defined enough but I've almost never heard anyone try to lump Sumeria into it based on the premise that civilization in general started there.

Sumerian civilization is civilization, western civilization is civilization, they're both sub-headings of that categories.

No, traditionally speaking western civilisation is Latin civilisation that sprang up after the fall of the Roman empire. Alternatively we could use the coming definition, what people usually mean by western civilisation, in which case two currently Islamic countries definitely don't count as western.

Regardless, at the times of the Sumerians there was indeed no western civilisation.

Morons.

Not an argument you fucking tardigrade.

wow really made me think

>science was invented in the west

That just shows they weren't slaves, moron

Autism aside, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a substantial human population in what is now the Gulf of Persia, that got forced out as the ice caps melted, causing population density in the region to rise and possibly contributing to the invention of agriculture in the region in the long-term in order to sustain such a population.

...

> that's called "erosion".

No, you can see the land slopes gradually into the water and you can still see some of the still-standing stone circle underwater, it’s not a broken cliff face.

The site was flooded as the ice melted and raised sea levels, just like the Atlit Yam site in Israel;

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlit_Yam

"Atlit-Yam provides the earliest known evidence for an agro-pastoral-marine subsistence system on the Levantine coast. The site of Atlit Yam has been carbon-dated to be between 8900 and 8300 years old (calibrated dates) and belongs to the final Pre-Pottery Neolithic B period. Today, it lies between 8-12m (25-40 ft) beneath sea level in the Bay of Atlit, at the mouth of the Oren river on the Carmel coast. It covers an area of ca. 40,000 square meters (10 acres).

Underwater excavations have uncovered rectangular houses and a well. The site was covered by the eustatic rise of sea-levels after the end of the Ice age. It is assumed that the contemporary coast-line was about 1km (a half-mile) west of the present coast."

>No they aren't, you thick twat. Western civilisation is traditionally a European thing.

No, ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt are part of Western civilization.

...

>No, traditionally speaking western civilisation is Latin civilisation that sprang up after the fall of the Roman empire.

In the narrow sense and much later then we're talking about here Medieval Europe < Romans < Greeks < Egyptians < Mesopotamians.

>You will never explore the wild tundra of Doggerland
>You will never traverse through the dense jungles of the Sunda rainforests
>You will never cross from africa to arabia
>You will never be part of that H-G pack that discovers and crosses Beringia for the first time
>You will never fight off ravenous Megalania in Australia-PNG-Tasmania
>You will never island hop the peaks of Zealandia and catalogue all the different birb species you find there
>You will never taste fresh not frozen mammoth meat
>You will never walk across the Adriatic plain and witness the great Alpine glacier

FOREVER A NEOLITHIC PLEB

>old kingdom and middle kingdom are barely expanded beyond the banks of the nile
>suddenly new kingdom GIANT EMPIRE FROM ANATOLIA TO PUNT

Did the Hyksos just beat the Egyptians into getting gud?

>The oldest remains of modern humans that we have found goes back 180 000 years, and thats just from what we have uncovered

Indeed.

>Yet modern scientists would have us believe we did nothing of any note until about 11 thousand years ago.and thats just because of Gobekli Tepes discovery before that they were saying 9 thousand years ago.

So here's the thing: scientists can't say shit if they don't have evidence.
You dig up the oldest village / town? That will be the "new "oldest village / town.
You find the evidence of an older civilization? That will be the "new" oldest civilization.

Also: we must define 'civilization' and 'prehistoric'.

CIVILIZATION

The stage of human social development and organization which is considered most advanced.

The process by which a society or place reaches an advanced stage of social development and organization.

The society, culture, and way of life of a particular area.

The comfort and convenience of modern life, regarded as available only in towns and cities.

cont.

PREHISTORIC

>Relating to or denoting the period before written records.

We need records. Evidence. Actual physical evidence.

And while there are some interesting theories about the Sphynx or ancient undiscovered civilizations... we'll need evidence.

I agree that many scientists can't accept unorthodox theories.
Also I agree that we should check those underwater shores - maybe there are other remains.

But will we find some very weird and unexpected ancient civilization?
I'm afraid they will find simple jugs, small statues, hovels, etc.
These discoveries are fantastic - archeologically and historically.
But they won't prove the existence of ancient aliens, mighty cities or the last fleets of the Hyper War.

>The comfort and convenience of modern life, regarded as available only in towns and cities.
like diabetes and fluoride water?

>implying we could build walls like that
We can, with all our tools and technology, but how did they do it?
Not trying to say it was aliens or anything like that, but they must've had some technology we don't know about.

they didn't have unions forcing us to hire a bunch of lazy, under skilled, retards who work for about 5 hours a day as slow as they can and fill the rest of the day with smoke breaks.

>Scientific method invented in the West
Your head was invented far North up your ass

>Scientific method wasn't invented by Hermes Trismegistus in Egypt
you're a joke mate

You're wrong, read the bible

>But scientists shut down anyone who dares suggest this. Why? Because
Because archaeological evidence proves no great civilisations beyond that point. It would be extremely fucking visible. We have fucking dinosaurs fossilized from 130 million years ago, how would world wide civilisations slip under

>We have fucking dinosaurs fossilized from 130 million years ago
Oh really? You really believe that? Pretty whacked out beliefs you got there

One half of his work was on philosophy, the other on magic. It was so far from formalized it doesn't even resemble science.

If they're really underwater for one

Amerindian civilizations were superior tho.