I dont understand the basis of stating the age of Tiwanaku or Puma Panku as 15,000 years...
The basis for stating the age of Tiajuanaco as somewhere around 12,000 BCE is 'precession dating'. The age of the Giza pyramids and other ancient structures has also been questioned due to the seeming discrepancies that exist between carbon dating and precession dating.
...It is now widely accepted that most if not all of these ancient structures were built on astronomical alignments which existed at the time. Knowledge of these alignments, coupled with our understanding of how they have since moved due to the ‘precession of the equinoxes’, provides us with a valuable tool in dating the ancient past.
Certainly it appears Tiajuanaco was built on celestial alignments which occurred up to 5000 years before archaeologists say it was founded, dating this ‘Incan’ city to around 15,000 BCE—way too early to fit the model propounded in your standard college history lesson!
Source
And then there's Gobekli Tepe. Even though this ancient temple in southeastern Turkey has been carbon-dated to around 10,000 BCE, there is still some debate as to its true age due to 'precession dating'. Some researchers say it might be even older!
Is everyone aware of Gobekli Tepe by the way? What an amazing find!
What is particularly mouth-watering about this site so far as archaeologists are concerned is that it has been carbon-dated to an incredible 10,000 BCE, predating the generally accepted construction dates of the Pyramids and Stonehenge by a staggering 7000+ years.
Source
My question is: if these structures were built on alignments to celestial bodies according to where those bodies were located in the heavens 15,000 or even 17,000 years ago, how can the structures be less than that in age?



