It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Legitimate claims of advanced civilization existing before 5,000BC?

page: 4
25
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 04:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Marduk
Nah.
I'm not into that sort of thing.

You understood me, good, do you concede I was being honest ?

or do I have to get Harte in here to confirm it





posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 04:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Marduk

If Byrd shows up too, you're on.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 04:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Marduk

If Byrd shows up too, you're on.

Byrd doesn't know anything about it.

clue
bottom of the page




posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 04:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Marduk




Byrd doesn't know anything about it.


The hell with it then.
No deal.


edit on 3/26/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 04:16 AM
link   
Fine you're a sexual genius Marduk, but that doesn't really relate to the topic on hand. This topic of ancient societies is interesting.

In the current understanding of civilizations:

When did cities-states arise?

Was it a global event or did it start out as a regional thing and kind of spread from there?

It's been all but confirmed that the Phoenicians mined copper in north America, and that some kind of trade occurred between Egypt and greater Africa as well as the possibility of other trades occurring too. We know that the Nile used to run east to west and not south to north. There are even some evidence of cities along the old east/west Nile having been established in the past. India had a massive culture going before Alexander the great arrived there, and nobody is really sure how big or ancient the Celt Empire was. So I would expect cite-states to have existed before 5K BC.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 04:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

The hell with it then.




no, that's just what I do on the nightshift
life's tough for the Angel of the Abyss

< what, you don't know what this ATS emoticon is called or why I always use it..

MBWAHAHAHAhaha hahahawhawaha...



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 04:30 AM
link   
This depends on your definition of "advanced" imo.

Prior to the proto-indo-europeans there was little in the way of symbolic writing to indicate probably the most basic criteria most would use to declare a culture "advanced." And it is likely myths and cosmologies held by them were dispersed into subsequent cultures as they migrated and evolved.

However, even prior to that there were large cities (such as in what is now the Gulf of Cambay,) and things like the temple at Göbekli Tepe which may date to the 9th millenium BC.

None of those qualify as the fantastically advanced "Atlanteans" of course, either in technology or geography, but that story arose much later of course.

Peace.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 04:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Guyfriday

When did cities-states arise?



Uruk and Ur, were the first city states around 3000BCE


originally posted by: Guyfriday

Was it a global event or did it start out as a regional thing and kind of spread from there?

Regional, Mesopotamia



originally posted by: Guyfriday
It's been all but confirmed that the Phoenicians mined copper in north America,

Always difficult to confirm things which have no credible evidence


originally posted by: Guyfriday
We know that the Nile used to run east to west and not south to north.

it ran more westerly, it never ran east to west.


originally posted by: Guyfriday
So I would expect cite-states to have existed before 5K BC.


Well Atlantis is described as a city state, but officially it was Ur and Uruk, because as you know, Atlantis is completely fictional and not based on any real place, its absolutely definitely incredibly 100% not plagiarised from an earlier text freely available at ETCSL, Harte even calls it a fable..




originally posted by: AceWombat04
However, even prior to that there were large cities (such as in what is now the Gulf of Cambay,).


Yes the announcement was amazing, unfortunately, very few people caught the follow up where the Indian authorities promised not to let the minister in charge of Marine tourism, Murli Manohar Joshi, make announcements to the press about archaeology, without at least checking with the National Institute of Ocean Technology, first. They also added that the minister who made the announcement was definitely not at all corrupt and certainly hadn't been a participant in Dalit massacres
Yanno, though I'm pretty sure you don't believe me, you'll probably think this is one of those made up news reports
timesofindia.indiatimes.com...
You're familiar with made up news, I'm assuming that because you inadvertently brought the subject up

Graham Hancock was the only one stupid enough to run with it...
I lol'd all the way home



edit on 26-3-2017 by Marduk because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 05:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Marduk




Uruk and Ur, were the first city states around 3000BCE

Those can't be real names. Did you make that up? Those are words that comic book cavemen use.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 05:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Marduk




Uruk and Ur, were the first city states around 3000BCE

Those can't be real names. Did you make that up? Those are words that comic book cavemen use.

Wow really, anything I type is doubted by you today

URUK

UR

I think you're joking
I hope you're joking
you're joking right ?






posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 05:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Marduk

When you bold it, it actually looks more like someone is puking.


Yeah. I'm fully foolin'.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 05:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Marduk

When you bold it, it actually looks more like someone is puking.


Yeah. I'm fully foolin'.


ASSUR you are




posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 05:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: intrptr

Besides Hercules is a greek myth character, like Luke Skywalker, lol.


Luke Skywalker is a Greek Myth character

I did not know that, thanks, you know, its true, you learn something new everyday


Every culture has its mythos, ours will be Starwars or DC comics, not sure which.

Oh snap, I got it. Future archeologists will have Luke using the force in battle against anther ancient priest clown deity named Ronald. Instead of the "pillars of Hercules" the battle will rage under the "golden arches".



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 06:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Marduk

Timaeus
Critias



Heh, our translation source is the same. I actually have a complete 54 book set of "Great Books of the Western World", published in 1952.



None of those things rewrote the history books though, they just added to the knowledge and fit right into the already existing historical framework. Rewriting the history books would be something along the lines of the decipherment of Akkadian, or the discovery of the Hittites.


Oh come on. Antikythera mechanism? That rewrote stuff. Before they ran that puppy through an x-ray machine in 1971, I bet people had no freaking clue that the ancient Greeks were capable of 18th century clockwork technology. We find undiscovered stuff in the new world ALL THE TIME. Considering the Spanish were prone to subjugation, we can't exactly view them as an unbiased source of information on Mesoamerica. How is the decipherment of Mayan somehow "less important" than the decipherment of Akkadian? And don't we already know that the Hittites existed in modern day Turkey?

Like I said, not a castle.

Edit: Or if it is a castle... It's more like a crumbly, dilapidated castle that is desperately in need of repair.

edit on 26-3-2017 by DrWily because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 07:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Marduk

Firstly, thank-you for the correction.

Secondly, why are you "pretty sure" I don't believe you? The facts seem clear, looking at them now. You're making assumptions about me based on my being misinformed about something I read more than a decade ago. Not checking again before I posted is my bad, and I'll take that and thank you for the correction.

But...

I'm neither a historian nor an archaeologist, and was posting from memory to the sincere best of my ability. Since you yourself acknowledge that "unfortunately few caught" the subsequent debunking of those reports (which happened many, many years ago,) I will thank you for the correction and add it to my imperfect layman's comprehension of history which is always being revised - as it should be - precisely because of lessons like this.

But I will also suggest that informing someone of good intentions and sincerity of an error without the snark, sarcasm, and extrapolating (incorrectly) about them that they "probably won't believe you" when corrected, would be very greatly appreciated. Not everyone here is looking to argue with you when corrected, you know. I'm happy to be correctly informed of my errors. Seriously. The contempt is not required or beneficial.

People tend to equate factual correctness with righteousness online for some reason, and think this makes it ethical to "take people down a peg" when they get something wrong. They feel if they're correct and the other person incorrect, it means it's okay to engage in what is - effectively - intellectual bullying.

That's all well and good for most, I'm sure. And this isn't your fault or your responsibility just want to make that clear - but I'm just saying, in case it never occurs (or simply isn't something anyone cares about - which is your prerogative of course,) for someone as withdrawn and un-confident as I am, this is the kind of interaction that makes me want to just stay away from the internet as a whole, rather than continuing to exchange ideas with people and expand my knowledge - the knowledge you're taking me to task for having an incomplete grasp of.

But, do as you will. I'm not trying to attack you or say you're "mean" or what have you. I'm just rambling. Time for me to take another extended break from the net methinks.

Peace.
edit on 3/26/2017 by AceWombat04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 08:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: AceWombat04
But, do as you will. I'm not trying to attack you or say you're "mean" or what have you. I'm just rambling. Time for me to take another extended break from the net methinks.

Peace.

Oh, he' mean alright.
Very mean.
Did you read that link on the Gulf of Khambat?
in particular, this:

"How can one make such a claim without even sending a diver or taking pictures or involving any archaeologist?", Rao, who was here on Wednesday to attend a meeting on Ocean and Antarctic Science organised by the National Geophysical Research Institute, said in an interview.
"You cannot date a civilization from a piece of wood that could have come from anywhere," he added.
DOD Secretary Harsh Guta said taking photographs were impossible as the water was turbid. "The wood piece was buried a metre deep. How else will it come there?" he asked.

What a dumbass. That gulf receives fully one-third of the drainage from the Indian subcontinent. "How else will it come there?"
Maybe he meant "Other than rivers, how will it come there?"

It's statements like those that reveal lines of BS. We should all watch for them.

Harte
edit on 3/26/2017 by Harte because: of the wonderful things he does!



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 10:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: AceWombat04
a reply to: Marduk

Firstly, thank-you for the correction.

Secondly, why are you "pretty sure" I don't believe you? The facts seem clear, looking at them now. You're making assumptions about me based on my being misinformed about something I read more than a decade ago. Not checking again before I posted is my bad, and I'll take that and thank you for the correction.

.


Well this is a new thing for me, twice in one day people making credulous statements turned out to be credible
But that's the way of the world, I didn't start researching properly myself until someone took the piss out of my beliefs, I was so sure they were credible, it sucks to have to learn like that, I agree, but what's important is the truth and the facts of the matter. I'm sorry if you felt insulted Acewomble, but I'm pretty sure you won't be posting "from memory" again, so the average quality of information just went up a little bit on the internet. Yayay

As for how did the few artefacts get there, its a mystery, how would artefacts get into the bay which is supplied by three rivers in a country where for thousands of years the custom has been to throw anything into the river as a sacred offering. They even throw their dead relatives in the river, I don't know, its just another one of those mysteries


edit on 26-3-2017 by Marduk because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: DrWily

Oh come on. Antikythera mechanism? That rewrote stuff. Before they ran that puppy through an x-ray machine in 1971, I bet people had no freaking clue that the ancient Greeks were capable of 18th century clockwork technology. We find undiscovered stuff in the new world ALL THE TIME. Considering the Spanish were prone to subjugation, we can't exactly view them as an unbiased source of information on Mesoamerica. How is the decipherment of Mayan somehow "less important" than the decipherment of Akkadian? And don't we already know that the Hittites existed in modern day Turkey?


You really want me to answer these directly, you don't want the opportunity to find out that it wasn't the mechanism that surprised people. it was just the complexity, that quite a few other mechanisms have been found, that even famous kings are reported to have clockwork mechanisms, IIRC even the famous Solomon had a clockwork chair which makes the Antikythera mechanism seem like a child's toy

As for why is Akkadian more important than Mayan
Well, Mayan stories didn't end up in the bible, Mayan wasn't the Lingua Franca for the Ancient near east for 800 years, it wasn't used in Egypt as a diplomatic language by Akhenaten, there wasn't a Mayan language school in Egypt following the Kings around as they were born and died, making each new city a royal city and setting up with their teaching tablets of already known school texts, in each Royal city until after 600BCE when Aramaic took over.

All these cities had an Akkadian scribe school
Akhetaten: (c. 1353 BC - c. 1332 BC) - Akhenaten of XVIII dynasty
Thebes: (c. 1332 BC - 1279 BC) - XVIII dynasty and XIX dynasty before Ramesses II
Memphis: XIX dynasty during rule of Seti I only
Pi-Ramesses: (1279 BC - 1078 BC) - XIX dynasty starting from Ramesses II and XX dynasty
Tanis: (1078 BC - 945 BC) - XXI dynasty
Bubastis/Tanis: (945 BC - 715 BC) - XXII dynasty
Tanis or most likely Thebes: (818 BC - 715 BC) - XXIII dynasty
Sais: (725 BC - 715 BC) - XXIV dynasty
Napata/Memphis (715 BC - 664 BC): The Ku#e XXV dynasty rulers were based in Napata, Sudan but ruled Egypt from Memphis
Sais: (664 BC - 525 BC) - XXVI dynasty

check out those cities and dates Harte, Amazing isn't it, think of the stories that the Egyptian priests must have learned and how that influenced history


There wasn't a Mayan, teaching scribes in Egypt how to write and spell in Akkadian cuneiform so that diplomacy didn't falter for 800 years, and most of all, Akkadian wasn't affected by anything any religion ever tried to do to erase it, its bullet proof and easily factually provable that most of western culture, which we thought up til the discovery of Akkadian was based on the Bible, or the Greeks, was actually based on the whims of Sargon the Great, the first Empire builder known to history. So considering the applecarts that overturned as most of the early translators were priests and men of faith, Woolley, came back from Ur with his faith completely destroyed by what he found, "I think it was the Ram what did it"

As for the Hittites, I feel I should let you research that one, I've probably said waaaay too much already..


edit on 26-3-2017 by Marduk because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 11:32 AM
link   
I don't have much time to reply, but I'll say what I can.


That's exactly what I meant with the mechanism, the complexity. Complexity that approaches (or perhaps even exceeds) 18th century clock making skills. I think you might be understating the value of that. I know there are lots of other mechanisms. I know that religious leaders would often employ engineers to create mechanical automata. But most of them are lost and only written about. I've seen hydraulis and know the ancients made extensive use of water technology. But the Antikythera mechanism is like a mechanical computer... That's a whole different animal completely.

Don't you think you are being a little biased with the languages thing? From a western perspective... Sure, Akkadian is way more important. But from a pre columbian American perspective? Akkadian is meaningless. Vice versa for Mayan language in the west. Both have their rightful place as important. Besides, you might be singing a different tune if the Spanish had not burned whole Mayan libraries, leaving us with just a handful of codices.

Doh! Out of time.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Marduk



You should also look up the difference between "Theory" and "Hypothesis", they are not the same thing


Did I make any correlation between theory and hypothesis? I believe i used 'theory' in the same sentence and context as 'rumors'.....
I see youre a cynic, so im sure there will be something wrong with this post too.
If you want to debate or argue validity of claims, first you need to find a person whos making them!




Again, where did you get that from, "Anything", you go too far, its been proven that the pyramids are made out of limestone, when do you think that will be disproven, or how about, Egypt is in Africa, when is that one going to be found fallacious, if you insist on "anything", then please provide examples.

As far as "anything proven will be disproven" i was referring to theories. Not building materials or downright facts. Forgive me for assuming the reader would be educated enough to understand that.
Heres an example...


The hell you say!!! It turns out cigarettes are bad for your health!

What do you mean Pluto isnt a planet!? I can find 2 DECADES worth of text books that say otherwise!




So you've been listening to the normal claims from pseudo archaeologists "The reason I have no proof for my claims is because theres a cover up".
The truth is there is no proof for the claims, because the claims are nonsense.


You were quick to point out the fault in my terminology in regards to my use of the word "Anything", yet you seemed to miss this part of my post:


I also read the independent, 'new school' Archeologists, a.k.a., the crackpots. I

I would assume 'crackpots' would be a good enough synonym for "pseudo archaeologists" but I guess not huh?
Thanks for restating the aforementioned!

Youre assuming im stating these CLEARLY STATED RUMORS/THEORIES, NOT HYPOTHESIS', BUT THEORIES as fact! Since you decided to cherrypick my post, as well as pull everything from context, ill show you the part you DEFINETLY missed or ignored AGAIN:


I read the reports from well known, highly respected Archeologists, and I also read the independent, 'new school' Archeologists, a.k.a., the crackpots. I find its a good dose of fact(from the main streamers), and a healthy portion of theory, and "what if" from the crack pots.

Before you start to pull that apart and put your assumptions on it, by "what if" Im talking about those way out there, Ancient Aliens type theories. Is that clear enough? If not, please, OH PLEASE show me how to think like you! Let me say this now, and PLEASE read this, I DO NOT BELIEVE ALIENS BUILT THE PYRAMIDS OR ANY ANCIENT CIVILIZATION.
Do I need to word that any clearer for you?

I also said:


No solid proof, just rumors and theory.


And dont forget:



there is alleged proof that egypt is more than 13,000 years old.

I didnt mention a source, because its ALLEGED PROOF.
If youd like something to disprove, instead of restating someones entire post, or attempting to read between the lines as if I have an ulterior motive, ill start posting ALLEGED evidence and solid fact! Then you can spend all day writing, 'im-smarter-than-you' typical ATS cynic comments.
Hmmmm...... maybe I will do that... In this post I stated a couple rumors, and got a helluva response by making NO CLAIMS whatsoever, I wonder what would happen if I started sourcing Scott Wolter, and Hutton Pulitzer...

When I mentioned "Atlantis", I should have clarified that I was using "Atlantis" more so as an umbrella term to describe an Ancient Civilization. I do not believe in the Atlantis mentioned in Platos writings, nor the Atlantis referred to by Edgar Cayce.
Apologies for the confusion.

WTH is wrong with people! I can understand the cynicism if I was stating the aforementioned as fact, hell, i would be the cynic in that case! But i CLEARLY stated the words, rumors, theories, alleged in the hopes fellow readers would take my post for what it is. And thats a lighthearted comment, which tries to convey the message that if you really like Archeology and history (as I do) HAVE A LIL FUN WITH IT! Do your fact finding in the lab, but on your free time, its ok to think outside of the status quo! If you want to believe Aliens built the pyramids, good for you! If you want to believe Lincoln faked his assassination, right on!
Now if you wanna state facts, have all your ducks in a row, because they will be put to the test WHEREVER you go.
Until you're writing your thesis, or in the lab its ok to use a lil imagination in your thinking!
And now Im no better...

DISCLAIMER: I am in NO WAY stating imagination, and far out theories should be used in in the pursuit of actual facts and proof.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join