If there really had been an ancient super-advanced culture ..........

a reply to: bloodymarvelous


Personally, I think if there had been a super advanced prior civilization on Earth, they might have nuked themselves, but a more likely way they would collapse (without evidence of a prior nuclear war, which would be obvious looking at isotopes in sediments) would be the predictable micronova from our sun that occurs roughly every 12,000 to 15,000 years when our solar system crosses the galactic magnetic plane and the poles also shift, depending on what dating evidence you favor.

Unfortunately, since we are due for another periodic micronova from Sol again pretty soon, this question will be passed on to whoever re-populates the planet thousands of years from now, most likely. This is my 'vote' at least....

originally posted by: dogstar23

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: musicismagic
Whatever they had to leave they left no trace of any technical high-tech way of survival that's for sure.

Nor any low tech from when they were in that stage, no stone age tools, no copper, and well nothing.

I'm not saying there was an ancient high civilization, but I would think depending on how far back they went, might high tech debris be long buried? What does a few hundred thousand years of glaciation do to structures and devices? How long would ancient satellites stay in orbit? Hmmm...

Hey, the internet just ate my detailed answer. In short there would be significant evidence from archaeology to sediments and in the ice cores of Greenland and Antarctic, 130,000 to 800,000 years ago. We can find stone tools from 3.3 million years ago so if they existed and they were a modern civ. they would have left a massive industrial footprint just in mines and taking out resources.

Oh and the ice age only affected North America and parts of Europe most people then would have never seen the ice.

originally posted by: Fowlerstoad
a reply to: bloodymarvelous


Personally, I think if there had been a super advanced prior civilization on Earth, they might have nuked themselves, but a more likely way they would collapse (without evidence of a prior nuclear war, which would be obvious looking at isotopes in sediments) would be the predictable micronova from our sun that occurs roughly every 12,000 to 15,000 years when our solar system crosses the galactic magnetic plane and the poles also shift, depending on what dating evidence you favor.

Unfortunately, since we are due for another periodic micronova from Sol again pretty soon, this question will be passed on to whoever re-populates the planet thousands of years from now, most likely. This is my 'vote' at least....

interesting but these micronova don't seem to wipe out the animal life to any great degree. One can point to the lost of large animals in the Americas but that doesn't explain why some survived in Africa and especially how the large mammals in the Americas and elsewhere could have re-evolved in just a time span of 12-15,000 years, over and over again!

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

What would become of them?

Would they have nuclear weapons like we do today? Would overpopulation (and environment catastrophe) be a concern for them? Would they spread their way of life?

How widely would they spread their way of life?


Looking at the present, we now live in a time when much of the world really doesn't appear to want modern technology. They want parts of it, of course (such as modern medicine for their children.) . But they don't like being told their way of farming is wrong. They don't like being told they're having too many babies.

I guess we need to think about what it takes for an advance civilization to happen and it is not just intelligence. Life as we know it today is younger than 600 million years since earth basically knocked life back to its simplest form during the snowball earth phase, so we are not talking 4.5 billion years of evolution here and even 200 million can take life in crazy directions as 200 million years ago we are talking the end of the Triassic/Jurassic.

If we go back farther than 600 million years we have problems with not enough O2 to support advance life since all O2 had to be created first, so we are talking billions of years before something as simple as fungi came about. We have had some serious mass extinctions too that reset life a good number of times.

So after all said and done there really isn't much of a path for advance civilizations deep in earth's path. If we wonder if there was some lets say 20,000 years ago they didn't advance very far...There is the one theory that 12,000 years ago man was almost wiped out and everything he learned up to that point was gone, so one wonders where we were as a species 13,000 years ago. The problem is if we are talking billions of years any indication of advance life would be gone, but 13,000 years that proof would still be here.

Oh goodie. Super-advanced, pre-historical civs are a favorite interest of mine. While I don't believe any existed, I like to keep an open mind into such things.

Can you even imagine if a discovery was made and showcased, how glorious it would be? I mean, humbling yet incredible. One can only hope.

originally posted by: Hanslune

You will as you do, BM, argue for the 'possibility', and I will not, while possible the knowledge we have of real existing civilizations show they leave hyge, easily seen and detectable and massive archaeological, sedimentary & geological foot prints - so the plausibly and probably of the ideas - based on our current knowledge and existing evidence is nada.

In a billion years we will still have proof we went to the moon for another spices to find...I would think there would also be tell tell signs unless the earth in a billion years would cycle all surface lands back under ground.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

Advanced can mean many things. Our form of electronics tech is not the only way to become advanced.

It looks like the megalith builders were far ahead of us when it comes to masonry.

It is also possible to be advanced in the knowledge of self, consciousness, and the workings of the human mind.

a reply to: carsforkids

Unless we are talking millions of years we would see evidence of electronics and plastics from the past.

I really don't believe that computers were a thing before our time. They are new. If we destroy everything maybe electronics will be created again but I think we are the first to do this.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

And yet what I provided is information. Take it or leave it.

There is an abundance of physical evidence to support that not only did an ancient civilization have nuclear weapons or at least someone who came to the Mid East region did and that they were used...
Quite interesting to note that the regions with the most evidence also are known for ancient texts which tell of the Great War fought in the skies by visitors...

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
There is an abundance of physical evidence to support that not only did an ancient civilization have nuclear weapons or at least someone who came to the Mid East region did and that they were used...
Quite interesting to note that the regions with the most evidence also are known for ancient texts which tell of the Great War fought in the skies by visitors...

Sorry, there's not an atom of evidence of nuclear anything from any ancient civilization.

Harte

a reply to: Harte

Of course there is...
I won’t even bother to mention the ancient natural nuclear reactors...
Instead I’ll just point towards Mohenjo-Daro and the blast site...

a reply to: Harte

I wonder if you can imagine how much has happened on this planet
that there is no evidence for? I wonder if you've ever considered the
stupidity of thinking based only on evidence? I also wonder if you've
considered how cunning it might be, regarding control of information
and the narrative? I'm no expert. But I understand there's a lack of
evidence for a ton of academic facts that fit the scientific narrative.

In my opinion, it may be hard to determine, because our current frame of references don’t align with a culture hundreds of thousands of years ago.
They may not be materialistic and what defines “Advance Culture” can mean many things.

For example, whatever means a culture used to moved monolithic stone is currently beyond our technology level, so there’s that and they do exist, fact.

I think our current frame of references are tainted in that we assume that whatever advance culture we find will mimic ours in the sense of our Metal, Stone, Signal and Wave societies.
Almost reminiscent of Sci Fi flicks where dead worlds full of advance high tech cities, empty and void, long dead and forgotten.

I think many advanced cultures in the past existed and simply used common sense in building materials, like Stone. All areas of society and life can “Advance”, advance simply means a complex and efficient. That could translate to Farming techniques. I remember an old documentary about an old South American tribe that claimed to have perfected a soil that grew the largest and thickest fruits and vegetables, but that the “recipe” was lost among the people.

I don’t think there will ever be a finding of anything like our current age, rather, something different, what? Maybe it’s in what we think are natural formations.
What I also believe in is that the Earth undergoes cyclic devastation and change that effectively erases everything, leaving only traces of the most hardened locations. Believe it or not, I don’t think it’s as bad as some may think it may be, however it will be global cataclysm, but in the sense that there will be survivable areas unaffected, should you be lucky enough to be in an area. That doesn’t include after, the subsequent aftermath, if the initial global hit didn’t kill you, the post apocalypse might. In this case, we have survivors and thus, here we are today.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Hanslune

You will as you do, BM, argue for the 'possibility', and I will not, while possible the knowledge we have of real existing civilizations show they leave hyge, easily seen and detectable and massive archaeological, sedimentary & geological foot prints - so the plausibly and probably of the ideas - based on our current knowledge and existing evidence is nada.

In a billion years we will still have proof we went to the moon for another spices to find...I would think there would also be tell tell signs unless the earth in a billion years would cycle all surface lands back under ground.

Some of the crust is currently 4.4 billion years old some is brand new.

www.bbc.com... In the unprocessed crust all modifications to the soil and rock would still remain. So a 18 km tunnel that was put through a granite mountain would still be there along with countless oil pipe drill holes and every stake driven into the ground could also still be seen. Besides the fossils.

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous


Would they have nuclear weapons like we do today? Would overpopulation (and environment catastrophe) be a concern for them? But they don't like being told their way of farming is wrong. They don't like being told they're having too many babies.

They seem to want to be able to engage in holy and/or genocidal wars whenever population pressure sets in, but the existence of nuclear weapons forces the first world to kind of intervene, and make sure "terrorist cells" like Al Quaeda don't form and start trying to get weapons of mass destruction.

There would be rampant population explosions, but not in the "first world" (By which I mean not among those who had embraced high technology as a way of life - call it "education" if you want, but they're basically the same thing.)

Do we have overpopulation? Don’t think so... To many babies, not where I live

You probably live in a first world country. First world nations aren't overpopulating. Third world ones are.

Honduras' population, for example, has grown from 6.5 million in 2000 to 9.5 million today. Almost a 50% increase. Do you think they would be able to grow their economy by 50% to make room?

That would be an amazing feat of economics!!!!!!

Who doesn’t want farming advances, who believes that. Farming advances are money earned, where’d you get that from?

Actually, I heard it from a guy who had spent 2 years trying to teach modern farming methods to native villages in Peru.

He said they were very polite, and listened to everthing he told them. Then they went and did exactly what they had already been doing before he arrived. No change.

Part of it was their social structure. Everyone gets together and participates in tasks that really only require 2 or 3 people if you're doing it right.

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

Deleted kool story

An interesting moral tale or speculation, something like Plato might have created as a backstory for a commentary.

Unfortunately zero evidence for such an invisible civilization exists and if they had the technology to leave earth they would have left thousands of years of waste and ruins behind. In reality zilch is seen.

You will as you do, BM, argue for the 'possibility', and I will not, while possible the knowledge we have of real existing civilizations show they leave hyge, easily seen and detectable and massive archaeological, sedimentary & geological foot prints - so the plausibly and probably of the ideas - based on our current knowledge and existing evidence is nada.

Either that or they would have known how to bury it.

Why leave dangerous technology around for low tech savages to find and blow each other up with?


But seriously, all it takes is for the place they started to become a rain forest after they're gone, and we'll never find anything. Concrete degrades. Steel rusts out. Refuse piles get overrun by peat moss, and can vanish entirely.

originally posted by: ElGoobero
one theory is that there is a fair amount of evidence of this antediluvian civilization but it's dumped in museums or the Lost Ark warehouse forgotten and never properly interpreted.

suppose it was based in Antarctica before continental drift. no telling whats under all that ice.

Antarctica might be a good place for a high tech society to set up shop.

Heat engines give the best Carnot efficiency when the difference between the hot and cold parts of the engine are the furthest apart in temperature.

So it's almost paradoxical, but Antarctica would be a very good place to power a factory off of heat engines.

originally posted by: Arnie123
In my opinion, it may be hard to determine, because our current frame of references don’t align with a culture hundreds of thousands of years ago.
They may not be materialistic and what defines “Advance Culture” can mean many things.

For example, whatever means a culture used to moved monolithic stone is currently beyond our technology level, so there’s that and they do exist, fact.

No we can move any stone they did plus they didn't move very many large stones. Why? Because it was bloody hard to do. The largest thing we've moved on land was the containment structure for Chernobyl and that was 31,000 tons and it was moved 180 meters.

I think our current frame of references are tainted in that we assume that whatever advance culture we find will mimic ours in the sense of our Metal, Stone, Signal and Wave societies.
Almost reminiscent of Sci Fi flicks where dead worlds full of advance high tech cities, empty and void, long dead and forgotten.

If they are flesh they will need to eat and they will die. In doing so they will create waste and leave bodies and tools about. this will leave traces in sediment.

You could have a human society that could avoid detection but it would be difficult. I posted that at the end

I think many advanced cultures in the past existed and simply used common sense in building materials, like Stone. All areas of society and life can “Advance”, advance simply means a complex and efficient. That could translate to Farming techniques. I remember an old documentary about an old South American tribe that claimed to have perfected a soil that grew the largest and thickest fruits and vegetables, but that the “recipe” was lost among the people.

You may be referring to this the camellones system: news.bbc.co.uk...

Yes many years ago on another defunct forum I created the following list of how a civilization could remain undetected How a civilization can remain undetected

1. have very few people - but this will tend to limit your technological advancement
2. don't make fires
3. don't make pottery or bake clay
4. don't modify the environment in any way
5. don't domesticate animals or plants
6. don't eat shell fish (the middens are easy to spot)
7. don't bury people, destroy bodies at death and disperse the bones - crush the teeth
8. absolutely no use of stone for tools, do not modify ivory, bone or shells either
9. never disturb the earth (by driving in a stake)
10. don't hunt animals and if you do widely disperse their remains
11. move constantly to avoid a build-up of waste, both human and food remains
12. don't live near a lake or other place where sediments, pollen and pollutants gather

There if you do all that you'll be fairly undetectable The real killer is #5 without the food from agriculture you'd have real problems feeding a 'city'.

originally posted by: Hanslune

www.bbc.com... In the unprocessed crust all modifications to the soil and rock would still remain. So a 18 km tunnel that was put through a granite mountain would still be there along with countless oil pipe drill holes and every stake driven into the ground could also still be seen. Besides the fossils.

I always think about every diamond ring too. I think we can say the earth has been rather raw in nature until we came along and only one specie made it to the moon..

originally posted by: Hanslune

I think our current frame of references are tainted in that we assume that whatever advance culture we find will mimic ours in the sense of our Metal, Stone, Signal and Wave societies.
Almost reminiscent of Sci Fi flicks where dead worlds full of advance high tech cities, empty and void, long dead and forgotten.

If they are flesh they will need to eat and they will die. In doing so they will create waste and leave bodies and tools about. this will leave traces in sediment.

You could have a human society that could avoid detection but it would be difficult. I posted that at the end

It's not that difficult. Virtually all artifacts that get found from prehistory are either in areas that became desert, tundra, peat in the bottom of a marsh, or in caves underground. (Basically places that microbes can't get to in high enough quantities.)

Places something can be preserved for a long time.


How much of the world does that really account for?

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: dogstar23

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: musicismagic
Whatever they had to leave they left no trace of any technical high-tech way of survival that's for sure.

Nor any low tech from when they were in that stage, no stone age tools, no copper, and well nothing.

I'm not saying there was an ancient high civilization, but I would think depending on how far back they went, might high tech debris be long buried? What does a few hundred thousand years of glaciation do to structures and devices? How long would ancient satellites stay in orbit? Hmmm...

Hey, the internet just ate my detailed answer. In short there would be significant evidence from archaeology to sediments and in the ice cores of Greenland and Antarctic, 130,000 to 800,000 years ago. We can find stone tools from 3.3 million years ago so if they existed and they were a modern civ. they would have left a massive industrial footprint just in mines and taking out resources.

Oh and the ice age only affected North America and parts of Europe most people then would have never seen the ice.

Only if we assume that they had a large population.

But with mastodons around for food, and no particular need for a favorable young-to-old ratio, why would they do that to themselves?

Why not keep their numbers small, and enjoy life?

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
a reply to: Harte

Of course there is...
I won’t even bother to mention the ancient natural nuclear reactors...
Instead I’ll just point towards Mohenjo-Daro and the blast site...

There is no blast site at Mohenjo Daro. You've been taken in by an old lie.
And natural reactors were predicted in the 1950's - long before one was ever found. In other words, they were explained before there was even an example to look at.

Harte