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.

 

11,000 Year old house discovered

page: 2
37
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


Thanks for the information. It makes my "arguement" that much of a farse.

I wasn't aware that there are other dating mechanisms other than carbon dating.




posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP


Now an off-topic question: why are all people in the video wearing jackets, is it cold in England now or was this filmed some time ago?




Well it's probably protection from the rain as much as the dirt and so on..... but yeah.... been raining a bit here.... Summer happened back in May/June :shk:



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Pottery? Generally contains organic matter which can be dated.


Actually, I was correct in my statement that they can't carbon date clay pottery.


Carbon dating cannot be used because ceramics are made from finely-grained mineral clay, and alternative dating methods are complex and costly.


www.rsc.org...

Although, they just found a new way to date pottery in 2009 (pretty recent when thinking about the field of archeology).



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nutter

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Pottery? Generally contains organic matter which can be dated.


Actually, I was correct in my statement that they can't carbon date clay pottery.


Carbon dating cannot be used because ceramics are made from finely-grained mineral clay, and alternative dating methods are complex and costly.


www.rsc.org...

Although, they just found a new way to date pottery in 2009 (pretty recent when thinking about the field of archeology).


While this might hold with 'fine' ceramics, I'm referring to more primative pottery that contains a tempre added to the paste for strength. This could be straw or shell...sometimes just sand. If there is a high enough amount of organic material available, it ought to be usable for carbon 14 dating. In addition, one might find organic residue on the interior of the shard. I am also speaking from a North American First Nations context, here...we're not talking Wedgwood...though the same statements could be true in an older Old World scenario like the one in this thread. But again, one date is no date.

And please don't think of your initial argument as a farce...if you don't ask questions, you don't get answers



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


I see what you are saying about the organics.

One question though. How do they differentiate between what is concieved as an organic used in the mix (the straw etc. that you mentioned) or an organic that has been in the soil for centuries and then dug up and used in the pottery?

I like the idea of using water infiltration into the ceramic as a means to date them. Although I have a few questions on that one too. Like how do they account for the fact that masonry and ceramics "breath"?

BTW, I am not a person who believes that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Just that maybe sometimes the order of things gets mixed up (I have seen many "vertical seams" of rock layers in my day....meaning that something got turned topsy turvy). And therefore it is hard to say "this so and so is this exact age" IMO. Not that it's impossible but just that sometimes the chaos theory must intervene.


[edit on 11-8-2010 by Nutter]



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 01:50 PM
link   
Nice find, I will be following this story to see what else they find.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 02:14 PM
link   
I haven't read the article but just a quick look at the picture and it's obvious those trees were cut with a saw. Definitely no axe, stone or otherwise.

So, did they have saws in that time period...?



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nutter
I see what you are saying about the organics.

One question though. How do they differentiate between what is concieved as an organic used in the mix (the straw etc. that you mentioned) or an organic that has been in the soil for centuries and then dug up and used in the pottery?


Ok, you're stretching my thumbnail theoretical skills here, but I'll give it a whirl...
For starters, this is where the 'stratigraphic superposition comes into play. If there are two objects side by side in a sealed matrix, then one can assumed that they were deposited at the same time. Now consider that organics decay in an aeobic environment. Sure, laying down a piece of 500 year old wood, a thousand years ago, is going to skew the data, but ordinarily, stuff rots.

But, once again, that's why one date is no date. Back up...be it relative dating in context of what's found around it, or seriation...how the design of the object compares to others of similar age and source...can also taken into account.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


sweeeeet.

This would be only a full 10,000 years after they landed there I think. (confirm me please).

Wow. The whole of human civilization to develop that house. Next 11,000 years would create wonders of our modern world.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Nutter
 


I take it you have not heard about the finds from the dig into the Indian mounds in the south.

They dug into a mound in Tennesse and found a metal wire... from this they extrapulated that these people had electricity.

They dug into a mound in Alabama and found a small single metal wire ... they extrapulated that these people had the telephone.

They dug into a mound in Mississippi and found nothing...
from this they extrapulated that these people were totally wireless.



[edit on 11-8-2010 by hdutton]



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by hdutton
 


LMAO good one.


Logical conclusion given the evidence or lack thereof.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


Thanks again. I guess you've answered my questions. From what you've told me, they (archeologists) do take all this stuff into account.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   
does anyone know if there has ever been cases where remote viewers have visited sites like these?



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 04:55 PM
link   
Great story blup.
Apparently civilisation and culture in the UK began in Northern England.

Re-assuring that some things have never changed.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by mythatsabigprobe
 


You beat me to mate!

I was just about to write exactly the same thing.

The tree...the 11,000 year old tree...has a sawn trunk.

Look at the artist's rendition and interpretation, released to public TV as probable and close to authenticity for the period, see the guy, bottom right with the antler or flint axe felling the tree?

See the state of the trunk? See how it tapers, and is rough and gnarly. It looks like a gang of beaver have had a gnaw on it!

Now look at the base of the tree again...this was sawn, not hacked with animal bone or stone.

And this is the impression tpb always push to the public about humans a relatively short time ago. They were obviously a lot more sophisticated than they are portrayed.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by spikey
 


The archeologists could have sawn that piece for the testing.

It looks too smooth to even be hand sawn to me.

Or the ancients could have had a way to cut trees precisely. The precise stone working of the pyramids comes to mind.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Freeborn
Great story blup.
Apparently civilisation and culture in the UK began in Northern England.

Re-assuring that some things have never changed.



Indeed.

Cheers mate.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by blupblup
 


sweeeeet.

This would be only a full 10,000 years after they landed there I think. (confirm me please).




Well they would have come just after the last Ice Age so maybe less.
It's fascinating to think about though....

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Nutter
 


Take a look at the AP video of the interview and pan around the dig.

There's more than one tree that is flat bottomed and not tapered.

The pyramids and the craftsmanship the went in to their creation was supposedly carried out 'only' 4,500 years ago. This tree is 11,000 years old, and felled by humans with supposedly primitive tools.

No saws. No metal, certainly. Yet, here we see multiple felled trees with smoothly and precisely cut ends.

Yet they report them as having primitive technology. The artists drawing, officially released as a reasonable artistic assessment, showing essentially a band of savages, one of which is hacking out chunks and splintering away at a tree with a crude type of axe.

The artists depiction cannot be accurate.

Remember though, another unexpected aspect of this dig, is that they have discovered evidence of skilled carpentry.

A series of large and thick wooden boards affixed as the boards of a jetty might look.

They were cut and shaped and skillfully squared off, evenly too, by the looks of it, before being laid down and affixed one after the other.

I'm not saying that i think human living 11,000 years couldn't of done this, quite the opposite, i'm sure it goes a lot deeper than that. I think they were much more capable and technologically sophisticated than academia has ever given them credit for, perhaps shockingly advanced.

I'm just making an observation as to the image we are being officially presented of humanity and their way of life back then.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 06:30 PM
link   
You don't need metal to make a saw, although a metal saw is better than a bone or stone saw.

And they may have used another method that stopped being used when they started using saws, we should never forget about that possibility.




top topics



 
37
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join