Civilizations leave massive amounts of evidence-and I mean massive. There is absolutely no doubt as to the existence of the main Ancient
Civilizations, with milliions of artifacts found, thousands or surveyed habitations and tens of thousands of inscriptions.
The closer to our own time, the more 'evidence' and data. We have no difficulty finding and evaluating data from the last century, but as we work
ourselves back in time it becomes increasingly difficult.
Who were the people who built Göbleki Tepe? What do you know about them, their culture, their beliefs? Nothing really. Had the site not been there,
then you would not even have suspected their existence, and you would have spent your intellectual resources arguing against the possibility of such a
'civilisation' - because of absence of 'evidence'.
For missing civilization 'x' there is nothing. Alternatives and fringe try to create possibilities by looking for commonalities amongst
civilizations and cultures but ignore that humans tend to create technology to solve the same problems, myths that have common elements and art that
also has common links, because that is what we do and we tend to think alike.
Saying that there is no data of a missing 'civilization' is a false statement IMO, but then again it depends on how you define a civilization, and
you probably refer to some type of technologically advanced, world-wide civilization.
There is data, but it is scant, inconclusive, which allows for someone who doesn't want to deal with it to side-track it, reduce or ignore it.
Let me give you an example of such data. Owen Gingerich is a former Research Professor of Astronomy and of the History of Science at Harvard
University. In his excellent work "The Origins of The Zodiac", he notes that early hunter gatherer cultures in Europe, Asia and America depicted the
star constellation Ursa Minor as a Bear. If you look at Ursa Minor, there is really nothing bearish about it. You can make just about anything out of
it, a fox, a snake, take your pick. Saying that people all over the world randomly came to the same conclusion that Ursa Minor shows a bear just
doesn't work. This means that at one point in time, someone decided that Ursa Minor depicts a bear, and that knowledge/definition spread world-wide.
Gingerich also concludes that this astronomical knowledge was probably brought by Siberian tribes to the Americas over the Beringia land bridge. When
that crossing took place is still up for grabs. Mainstream archaeologists today say no earlier than 16 000 years ago, geneticists say more like 21 000
In any case, we're dealing with astronomical knowledge found in the greater part of the world, which dates back at least 16 000 years.
To me, that is a possible sign of shared knowledge that goes back before the deglaciation approximately 12 000 years ago, when our current cultures
and civilizations germinated. So it belongs to a culture that pre-dates our civilization.
Thank you for this uplifting thread about the Chakana Trueman. I have myself visited many of these extinct cultures in South America, and the Chakana
is a very much present pre-columbian symbol. The thing is, it takes different sizes, proportions and shapes in various cultures, therefore I'm
hesitant to accept it as a geometric marker for the union of science and religion. Sometimes the center ring is missing, sometimes the number of steps
vary, as in this Chakana from Ollantaytambo, Peru:
My guess is that the meaning drifted from culture to culture, but that it connected to the ancestors...