Neanderthals built mysterious cave structures 175,000 years ago .

It's obviously a cattle kraal...

They had to keep their cave-cattle somewhere...

Much like the ancient people of South Africa had to have somewhere to keep their millions of cattle.

originally posted by: Zimnydran
Not to sound overly critical... but science educators "Teach" things as facts instead of stressing that it is a theory and nothing more.

Please don't confuse science educators with scientists.

Most science teachers did NOT major in any branch of science - they majored in education and had the equivalent of a minor in science. This is not true for all science teachers, but it is true of the majority (quite often in America, the school's coach teaches science and I can assure you that they majored in physical education and not science.)

Many researchers that go against mainstream beliefs and dare publish their findings have their careers ruined and not until after they are long dead and buried do they have their names vindicated.

Actually, in science this is expected. Science is not the same thing as religion. The religion of our fathers is generally not questioned and you certainly don't see church doctrine being overturned on a yearly basis.

Science and history must move forward. You don't want to be learning from textbooks with material that was last updated in the 1800's. Likewise, you don't want a surgeon to be someone whose education was limited to texts published in 1900 (before antibiotics and practical anesthesia and so forth.

So now we have a new "fact".....and a new birthday for cavemen.... and it will be taught as fact.. and someone will dare write a paper that pushes the date back a little farther....and his peers will point at him and yell HERETIC!! and make an example of him......

Actually (and I'm speaking as an anthropologist) we say "Cool! Better data! If you're going to publish research or write about these folks, use the latest data." Nobody makes an "example" of them and in some cases (in Egyptology in particular), these older scholars whose work is VERY solid but outdated are still used in references in the latest papers (as in "Budge indicates this material came from..." (without using Budge's poorer (or incorrect) translation.)

and bright minds will be afraid to explore new ideas and then they will learn to make the data fit the theory...or else

You don't get a PhD by learning to make data fit the theory. You don't get papers published or accepted by conferences by making the data fit the theory.

originally posted by: Byrd
This is not true for all science teachers, but it is true of the majority (quite often in America, the school's coach teaches science and I can assure you that they majored in physical education and not science.)

Sad, but oh, so true.

Ours taught algebra and science. And sadly, neither was really up to it.

a reply to: Spider879

Given the scale of these things, I wonder if they were created by the same urge that drives us to create rooms? They appear to create boundaries inside the cave like symbolic spaces. I don't mean 'symbolic' in a spiritual sense rather than the piles of stalagmites mark out the difference between one area and the other.

originally posted by: Terminal1

Just saying. Neanderthals weren't quite the knuckle draggers as thought.

haha knuckle draggers and caves.. seems appropriate for some borderlandish reasons.

a reply to: Spider879

Just a heads up, this was already posted awhile back.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Byrd

Don't despair Byrd...
As the self appointed Neanderthal Ambassador I decree that a drop of Neanderthal is all u need to be one of us...



-Chris

a reply to: peter vlar
thanks peterv,

I think the area this cave is in is more important than the cave and its contents themselves, because its one those areas that has an amh occupation on top of a very old neanderthal presence that persisted into the amh era.

why do they assume it was neanderthals? Göbekli Tepe is a 12000 year old megalithic site. did cavemen build megaliths as well? the archaeological community is so firmly planted in their rhetoric.

a reply to: Byrd

Actually, in science this is expected. Science is not the same thing as religion. The religion of our fathers is generally not questioned and you certainly don't see church doctrine being overturned on a yearly basis.

its what happens but it isnt healthy. when scientists are confronted with ideas they are against they mock and snicker like kids. the behavior that rational human beings should show is curiosity. they should respond to such ideas with a simple "wow thats very interesting we should look into that". i think science would move much much faster if that was the attitude shown by scientists.

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
why do they assume it was neanderthals?

Because at 175k BP, it's over 100 KA older than the first HSS leaving E. Africa, it's too fat east and south for H. Altaiensis and post dates Heidelbergensis. There were no other hominids in this area at this time.

Göbekli Tepe is a 12000 year old monolithic site. did cavemen build megaliths as well?

I would hardly call the cutting and stacking of stalagmites and stalactites a megalithic construction. One created rings inside a deep cave. The other required moving massive blocks.

the archaeological community is so firmly planted in their rhetoric.

How so? This is new data previously unseen. The anthropological and archaeological communities are actually based on the concept that new data can completely alter current paradigms. That's hardly equitable with being "firmly planted in their rhetoric" when they are eager for new data and happy to change or admit error when presented with new evidence.

a reply to: punkinworks10

I definitely agree that the overlapping of HN and AMH is a very important aspect of this site. However, to me, the important part is that it demonstrates just how well Neandertgal were able to cooperate amongst each other and emphasizes their language skills. To be able to light their way and perform the necessary work THAT deep in a cave complex is, to me, pretty damned impressive and far beyond what most people I worked w in grad school were willing to consider possible. And that's less than 2 years ago. Between work like this, the NGP and sites like Sima de los Hueso... The next couple of decades are going to be amazing.

originally posted by: Syphon
Looks like a pleasure cave to me.

the 2 circles of stalagmites might be representing phallic symbols to me... the 2 circles are self-explanatory

my guess it was indeed a sex ritual set-up

not much need for vocabulary as another poster was wondering about the lack of 'language' by the 'Thals

Given the scale of these things, I wonder if they were created by the same urge that drives us to create rooms

Feng Shui for the prehistoric cave common area


the orderliness speaks that this was not a area of mass congregation...but of personal separation, privacy with a partner of opposite sex


or am I making a complex and elaborate white-elephant from a simple & primal non-entity

a reply to: St Udio

Feng Shui for the prehistoric cave common area the orderliness speaks that this was not a area of mass congregation...but of personal separation, privacy with a partner of opposite sex

or am I making a complex and elaborate white-elephant from a simple & primal non-entity

It's ripe for speculation so no harm making guesses.

I've looked at local topographical maps and now wonder if it's a representation of the area? Peaks and basins etc.

a reply to: peter vlar

well to build GT they would have had to drink and eat right? howd early man do that. agriculture supposedly wasnt around until a few thousand years later....

and since when did early man build monoliths? why would they do that. they hunted and gathered. carving out massive stone blocks and then purposefully covering them up sound like early man type behavior to you?

thats what i mean when i say planted in your beliefs.

the only thing they do with new data is shove it into their already planted bias. they refuse to change their rhetoric.

Because at 175k BP, it's over 100 KA older than the first HSS leaving E. Africa, it's too fat east and south for H. Altaiensis and post dates Heidelbergensis. There were no other hominids in this area at this time.

you really feel comfortable that we know everything about # that happened almost 200 thousand years ago? please dude.

a reply to: AVoiceOfReason

well to build GT they would have had to drink and eat right? howd early man do that. agriculture supposedly wasnt around until a few thousand years later....

If you have the time, look for a paper by Klaus Schmidt called 'The 2003 Campaign at Gobekli Tepe.' It discusses the animal iconography on the stones and lists a few too: snakes, foxes, wild boars, wild cattle, gazelle and wild ass. If you think about it, these animals tell us today about the environment back then, right? Aside from them being 'food on the hoof,' they also let us know that the ecosystem had enough water, grasslands and tree thickets to sustain such animals.

By extension, the builders of Gobekli would have been able to eat them and have access to water, fruit and vegetables.

and since when did early man build monoliths? why would they do that.

We had to start somewhere, right? Since when did early man start using iron, bronze or silicon chips? Why would they do any of that? Why did they decorate the caves at Chauvet?

a reply to: peter vlar

Kandinsky's comment,

It's ripe for speculation so no harm making guesses.

I've looked at local topographical maps and now wonder if it's a representation of the area? Peaks and basins etc.

Is very thought provoking, if that were to be the case, it's a huge leap in our understanding of how they percieved the world around them and their place in it.
I was also intruiged by the fact that a great number of the stalagmites were of a fairly uniform size and length, and had to be cut that way. Which also attests to their social and communication skills.

Peter, have you seen this paper, Evolution, revolution or saltation scenariofor the emergence of modern cultures? Francesco d’Errico1,2,*and Chris B. Stringer3
Its very good.

Abstract

Crucial questions in the debate on the origin of quintessential human behaviours are whether modern cognition and associated innovations are unique to our species and whether they emerged abruptly, gradually or as the result of a discontinuous process. Three scenarios have been proposed to account for the origin of cultural modernity. The first argues that modern cognition is unique to our species and the consequence of a genetic mutation that took place approximately 50 ka in Africa among already evolved anatomically modern humans. The second posits that cultural modernity emerged gradually in Africa starting at least 200 ka in concert with the origin of our species on that continent. The third states that innovations indicative of modern cognition are not restricted to our species and appear and disappear in Africa and Eurasia between 200 and 40 ka before becoming fully consolidated. We evaluate these scenarios in the light of new evidence from Africa, Asia and Europe and explore the mechanisms that may have led to modern cultures. Such reflections will demonstrate the need for further inquiry into the relationship between climate and demographic/cultural change in order to better understand the mechanisms of cultural transmission at work in Neanderthals and early Homo sapiens populations.

a reply to: Kandinsky

it doesn't add up. the site was built at some point in time and then covered up around 12000 years ago. and that iconography isnt your dads iconography. the work put in to carve those animals so they rose up out of the stone is some next level #. also there is possibly a pyramid in Indonesia that archaeologists have dated back to 20 thousand+ years old. according to them they are being harassed and blocked from actually finishing digging that pyramid out of the ground.

either way we have to assume that humans were more advanced 12000 years ago then we previously believed. if we assume that then we can also hypothesize that all the other megaliths may have been built before that time. such as the pyramids,Stonehenge, etc. and then something happened. look to Randall Carlsons work to get an idea of what im talking about. this radically changes our history.

and guess what if all of the sudden our history as weve been told is wrong the people who've taught us that history have to let go of their rhetoric and admit they are wrong. since when do people do that? they dont. humans are not rational beings. as is my point. survival instinct does not allow people to step down and let someone else take over. they do not allow people to think they are wrong. entire careers are built around being right. if they arent right they probably lose their career and/or their reputation.

there is a high possibility backed by evidence that advanced society's operated on earth before 12 thousand years ago and then they were wiped out by a cataclysm. again look to Randall Carlson. i suggest watching him on the joe rogan podcast. the evidence he presents is very persuasive.

a reply to: AVoiceOfReason

You say, 'It doesn't add up.' Have you looked at the paper I mentioned?

Rogan's cool and I've listened to a lot of his podcasts. I'll listen to the Carlson one too if you read the Schmidt paper.

originally posted by: Christosterone
a reply to: Byrd

Don't despair Byrd...
As the self appointed Neanderthal Ambassador I decree that a drop of Neanderthal is all u need to be one of us...

-Chris

*glee*!!!

Love the graphic!