reply to post by SLAYER69
Funny, I wouldn't have noticed that, had you not pointed it out. A sharp eye. Now it sticks out like a sore thumb.
All things being equal, hasn't this always been part of the problem among academia? We have geologists, archaeologists, engineers, architects, and
more studying and theorizing, each from their particular expertise, yet we can't seem to put together all the pieces to form a picture we can examine
as a whole. If you'll pardon the analogy, it seems a lot like the old days, when intelligence agencies refused to share and consider info from one
That last picture to me, is so telling. To me, we're looking at two different eras. Stonehenge meets Ziggurat.
I wonder if there were a few periods of development from various cultures and as stated earlier those who came later utilized earlier much much older
Just my opinion, and I'm not an expert obviously, but I must agree whole-heartedly. It makes sense that later peoples used these sites, and were, I
assume, just as enamored and mystified as we often are. They became sacred sites, and the finders became caretakers, and added their own mysteries
over time. And here we are trying to sort out two or sometimes three different cultures, or at the least, periods of time, as if they're one.
Which leads me to another thought about periods of development. I still have this belief that a few civilizations in the far ancient past may very
well be responsible for many of the legends and mythology we still cling to today. A few civilizations that were so far ahead of the rest (in
comparison), they seemed like gods.
I question just how accurately these sites are dated?
Agreed. I also wonder sometimes just how accurate they CAN be dated, especially considering your own thoughts on the possible history involved. A lot
of variables to be considered. But surely not impossible. Somewhere, in all of this, there must be a consensus of data that is often overlooked.
edit on 12/15/2012 by Klassified because: (no reason given)