Forbidden Egyptology

reply to post by Skyfloating


You know Skyfloating, I am personally convinced that we definitely approaching an Earth shattering turning point in human’s history.
It will put our history records up side down, and the never-ending discussions about yes or no existed pre-historical advanced civilisations will be answered, and just as the question “who we humans really are, and where we come from”.
Many people beliefs will be shattered.
It will come in the form of disclosure of the Extraterrestrial reality, and when that happened, all those ifs and supposes and perhapses and no evidences will disappear as snow for the Sun.
Then they all say, o yea I had my doubts here and there but I always thought it good be possible.

reply to post by spacevisitor


Yes. "Extraterrestrials" exist since billions of years. We do too. The "10 000 year span" is tiny compared to that. Its silly to think in such narrow boxes, but there you go.


In fact, I believe we´ll not only find out that we and other races of the universe exist since billions of years but also that we time-travel. This would make the idea of "THE" history obsolete anyway. Even our "fringe" version of it.

First they will laugh about mainstream history...then, even later...they will laugh about our version of it.

What consistutes "Knowledge" and "Truth" is replaced as centuries passed. Todays truths are tommorows absurdities.

This "point in history that will change everything" you talk of...I think we´ve already been at that point a few hundred times in the last million years.

Time is cyclic. High civilizations come and go. All these "facts" are nothing compared to this infinitely large universe.

reply to post by Skyfloating


It really makes my day to see that I am not alone with my uncommon way of thinking.

reply to post by spacevisitor


You are far from being alone.. you are just amoungst those that will argue its merits,,,and as Sky says there will always be the band wagon followers.

12 000 year old temple found in turkey


So...how many more times will we have to date-back the "beginning" of civilization?

A prediction: Indefinitely.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
12 000 year old temple found in turkey


So...how many more times will we have to date-back the "beginning" of civilization?

A prediction: Indefinitely.

So far, none.

This site posted in the post you linked to states quite plainly what sort of people used this site. There was no civilization there. No evidence of homes, permanent or temporary anywhere in the vicinity, despite a decade of excavations.

Let me point out that, if not for the hated "mainstream," you wouldn't even know about the site. What happened to their conspiracy to keep ancient sites a secret?

It also states that the site has been under excavation for decades.
In fact, this Google search of ATS reveals a thread dated to 2003 on this very subject, among several other threads on this.

From the site the other poster linked:

Behind him are the first folds of the Anatolian plateau. Ahead, the Mesopotamian plain, like a dust-colored sea, stretches south hundreds of miles to Baghdad and beyond. The stone circles of Gobekli Tepe are just in front, hidden under the brow of the hill.

Compared to Stonehenge, Britain’s most famous prehistoric site, they are humble affairs. None of the circles excavated (four out of an estimated 20) are more than 30 meters across. What makes the discovery remarkable are the carvings of boars, foxes, lions, birds, snakes and scorpions, and their age. Dated at around 9,500 BC, these stones are 5,500 years older than the first cities of Mesopotamia, and 7,000 years older than Stonehenge.

Never mind circular patterns or the stone-etchings, the people who erected this site did not even have pottery or cultivate wheat. They lived in villages. But they were hunters, not farmers.
Snip

Schmidt is skeptical about the fertility theory. He agrees Gobekli Tepe may well be "the last flowering of a semi-nomadic world that farming was just about to destroy," and points out that if it is in near perfect condition today, it is because those who built it buried it soon after under tons of soil, as though its wild animal-rich world had lost all meaning.

IMO, the most significant find at Gobekli Tepe:

"Look at this", he says, pointing at a photo of an exquisitely carved sculpture showing an animal, half-human, half-lion. "It’s a sphinx, thousands of years before Egypt. Southeastern Turkey, northern Syria - this region saw the wedding night of our civilization."

All emphases are mine.
Link to page about this ancient site

No one's definition of civilization is met by the nomadic culture that erected these stone circles.

No one's, that is, but yours (apparently.)

Harte

Originally posted by Harte


So far, none.There was no civilization there.

What makes the discovery remarkable are the carvings of boars, foxes, lions, birds, snakes and scorpions, and their age. Dated at around 9,500 BC, these stones are 5,500 years older than the first cities of Mesopotamia, and 7,000 years older than Stonehenge.

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by Harte


So far, none.There was no civilization there.

What makes the discovery remarkable are the carvings of boars, foxes, lions, birds, snakes and scorpions, and their age. Dated at around 9,500 BC, these stones are 5,500 years older than the first cities of Mesopotamia, and 7,000 years older than Stonehenge.

A one-line post from a mod?

look:

A civilization or civilisation is human society or culture group normally defined as a complex society characterized by the practice of agriculture and settlement in cities.

Compared with less complex cultures, members of a civilization are organized into a diverse division of labour and an intricate social hierarchy.

Source
And

Civilization is a form of human culture in which many people live in urban centers, have mastered the art of smelting metals, and have developed a method of writing.

The first civilizations began in cities, which were larger, more populated, and more complex in their political, economic and social structure than Neolithic villages.

One definition of civilization requires that a civilized people have a sense of history -- meaning that the past counts in the present.

Source

Harte

reply to post by Harte


yes, I understand, thanks.

"The first civilizations sprung up in mesopotamia, etc...." is the party line..

Its my promise that I will find something to disprove this within my lifetime.

[edit on 18-4-2008 by Skyfloating]

"The first civilizations sprung up in mesopotamia, etc...."

As far as we know, yes they did. The main word being CIVILIZATIONS. There were many cultures and settlements however that existed before then. Do you want a list of some?

Its my promise that I will find something to disprove this within my lifetime.

If that happens, great. If not, we will still be finding other cultures and settlements going further back in time.

cormac

Sorry wrong post.
I try it again.

[edit on 19/4/08 by spacevisitor]

Originally posted by cormac mac airt

"The first civilizations sprung up in mesopotamia, etc...."

As far as we know, yes they did. The main word being CIVILIZATIONS. There were many cultures and settlements however that existed before then. Do you want a list of some?

cormac

Mac,
It appears to be a lost cause. Now this mod is trying to pretend that the argument that there was no civilization at Gobekli Tepe hinges somehow on the fact that no pre-Sumerian civilization has ever been found.

IOW, setting up yet another straw man.

Sky,

Why don't we define civilization as two or more hominids hanging out together for at least fifteen minutes? Then you'd have your ancient civilization and you could rest on your "laurels."

Harte

reply to post by Harte


No, I actually agree that the article in question is not yet sufficient proof of pre-historical civilizations.

The only thing that is a "lost cause" is trying to convince me of anything other than a galaxy full of intelligent life, frequent interactions between the earth and these civilizations and a civilized history spanning millions of years. That is a lost cause.

However, this is unrelated to me being or not being a "Mod". I am not posting here as a Mod but as a believer in the aforementioned nature of the Universe.

reply to post by Harte


I guess if someone wanted to lump concepts like culture, settlement and civilization together then they might as well include single cell organisms and claim civilization has existed for billions of years.

Prior to 3500 BC I can think of around 30+ settlements or other indications of mans influence that don't strictly fall into the area of civilization. Good indications that civilizations didn't happen in a vacuum.

cormac

reply to post by spacevisitor


Can you please repeat your question in another way? I dont "get it" language-wise. Thanks

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by Harte

 

No, I actually agree that the article in question is not yet sufficient proof of pre-historical civilizations.

The only thing that is a "lost cause" is trying to convince me of anything other than a galaxy full of intelligent life, frequent interactions between the earth and these civilizations and a civilized history spanning millions of years.

I agree with most of that myself - except the last part, of course.

Originally posted by SkyfloatingHowever, this is unrelated to me being or not being a "Mod". I am not posting here as a Mod but as a believer in the aforementioned nature of the Universe.

I know -just rattlin your cage!

However, look what you said about this site in Turkey- you gotta admit you claimed we were going to have to move back the dates for civilization, right?

And then there was

"The first civilizations sprung up in mesopotamia, etc...." is the party line..

You know better, don't you?

The earliest evidence of what Anthropologists call "civilization" is the evidence found in Mesopotamia. That is not "the party line," that's a simple, obvious fact.

Facts are sort of important, I think.

Remember in that other thread when I pointed out that we should all agree on what we mean by civilization before we argue about it?

My feeling is that we need to adopt the definition used by Anthropology - otherwise you can't criticize the mainstream about their time line - you would be talking about two different things.

Sky, think about this one. The culture at Gobekli Tepe was pre-pottery. They weren't even special.

I told you about the Jomon Culture of East Asia. They were making pottery four thousand years before Gobekli Tepe was even constructed.

The Jomon are not considered a "civilization" either.

Some of their villages are underwater today - covered by the sea when the ice melted at the end of the last ice age.

Sound familiar?

Harte

reply to post by Harte


Yes. Of course. Im not satisifed with labelling the turkey-find "civilization". Nevertheless...if you look over to that thread, people are quite content labelling it the "beginning" of civilization (yet another "beginning").

I´ll be satisfied when we find a crashed 10 000 year-old UFO from the bottom of the ocean.

My next care in this thread will be:

* To find quotes in ancient texts referring to Gods wanting to "get rid of" and "keep secret" evidence of technology, texts referring to a "clean up" before they left the planet.

* To find out more about the tunnels in libya, algeria, egypt and ethiopia.

reply to post by spacevisitor


I hope this is better?

Here is something I recognize again and again in many replies in this really magnificent thread.

Is this just by chance or is there a relation.
I see reply after reply that some persistent believers who say that the Great Pyramid is surely build by Pharaoh Khufu, at the same time say that Earth visiting Extraterrestrials, once existed lost civilisations, Atlantis, the Flood and on, isn’t true by lack of solid evidence.

Or.

Is this just a by chance or is there a relation.
I see reply after reply that some persistent believers of Earth visiting Extraterrestrials, lost civilisations, Atlantis, The Flood and on, at the same time say that the Great Pyramid is surely not build by Pharaoh Khufu” by lack of solid evidence.

Is it just by chance or is there indeed a relation, and why is that?

This is the way I see it.
I see really a relation by myself.
For instance, personally I don’t believe that the great pyramid is build by Pharaoh Khufu or the AE in general because of the lack of solid evidence.
The presented evidence is in my opinion very inadequate.
But I definitely believe in Earth visiting Extraterrestrials because of the available solid evidence, and find the evidence for lost civilisations [where under Extraterrestrial colonists], Atlantis, and the Flood and on, very convincing indeed.

I am not claiming here that all I say is the unquestionable truth, but it is how I personally see it.

The possible reason for that relation is in my opinion the different way of looking at the available evidence for those matters and is it in your personal interest?
Have you really studied the case, so you can make a right conclusion?



[edit on 19/4/08 by spacevisitor]

reply to post by spacevisitor


I understand now. Yes, obviously there´s a relation between believers-in-Khufu and anti-AAT/Atlantology. I dont know why that is so. Maybe you do.

In any case, if the "Gods" wanted to have all evidence dissappear (as ancient text says), then we are actually behaving ungodly by looking for evidence of ancient advanced civilizations.

reply to post by Harte


Uh...well...after looking at the pictures of the underground temple in that thread by Scott Creighton I have to retract my agreement with you that anything like this could be built and carved by uncivilized hunter-gatherers.

So I will file your statements as either Denial or Disinformation.

[edit on 19-4-2008 by Skyfloating]