I'm so confused as to what really is the oldest civilisation found???

Originally posted by tetsuoatx
humansarefree.com...This might be it.

edit on 10-6-2011 by tetsuoatx because: (no reason given)

I'm pretty sure you won't find evidence on that page. There are some real "howlers" (errors that just make you laugh hard) on the page -- like "came from a planet close to Orion."

Orion's a constellation, not a small spot in the sky or a star. The individual stars of the constellation move constantly (so the constellation's shape changes over time) and they're quite far from each other (several hundred light years). Some are closer to the Earth than the others.

I think you oughta remove that one from your "evidence" file. Personal opinion, of course.

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by thePharaoh
they claim that all three religions are abrahamic...no... islam is not abrahamic

Actually, it is. An Abrahamic religion is one that uses what Christians call the Old Testament as one of its holiest books. And the OT is a holy book for the Muslims -- or, more specifically, the Pentateuch and the Psalms of David (see this link for details). Remember that the story of Ishmael from the Bible is the story of the founding of their people and their faith.

yea but doesnt adam, noah and others have just as much to do with islam as abraham. islam started with muhammed not abraham.

the only way i think you can link islam with christianity is with one person/thing.... the angel gabriel!

peace

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
reply to post by thePharaoh

 

national geopraphic just his month revealed a civilization much older than that, it's more or less is the dawn of the neolithic era

external link to article

The assemblage was built some 11,600 years ago, seven millennia before the Great Pyramid of Giza. It contains the oldest known temple. Indeed, Göbekli Tepe is the oldest known example of monumental architecture—the first structure human beings put together that was bigger and more complicated than a hut. When these pillars were erected, so far as we know, nothing of comparable scale existed in the world.

One thing most folks have not noticed about Gobekli Tepe, is that the columns have an incised line between the upright part and the top part. The line defines the top part as a horizontal member, known as a "lintel." This implies that post-and-lintel construction had been known and used for a long time previous to the construction of Gobekli Tepe in stone. Earlier examples were no doubt in wood, and surely have not survived. It seems, then, that civilisation can only be easily noticed by the discovery of stone artifacts, but who is to say that towns of wood were not civilised? I think "civilised" is mostly a mental construct.

Originally posted by thePharaoh

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by thePharaoh
they claim that all three religions are abrahamic...no... islam is not abrahamic

Actually, it is. An Abrahamic religion is one that uses what Christians call the Old Testament as one of its holiest books. And the OT is a holy book for the Muslims -- or, more specifically, the Pentateuch and the Psalms of David (see this link for details). Remember that the story of Ishmael from the Bible is the story of the founding of their people and their faith.

yea but doesnt adam, noah and others have just as much to do with islam as abraham. islam started with muhammed not abraham.

the only way i think you can link islam with christianity is with one person/thing.... the angel gabriel!

peace

A topic for a different thread, I think. And while Islam started with Mohammad, it's an Abrahamic religion. They are worshipping the deity defined by the 10 commandments; the one who made Adam and Eve and who was the deity worshipped by King David and King Solomon (Solomon is an important religious figure to them.)

You can get the full details on Wikipedia, for starters.

Originally posted by Lazarus Short
One thing most folks have not noticed about Gobekli Tepe, is that the columns have an incised line between the upright part and the top part. The line defines the top part as a horizontal member, known as a "lintel." This implies that post-and-lintel construction had been known and used for a long time previous to the construction of Gobekli Tepe in stone. Earlier examples were no doubt in wood, and surely have not survived. It seems, then, that civilisation can only be easily noticed by the discovery of stone artifacts, but who is to say that towns of wood were not civilised? I think "civilised" is mostly a mental construct.

Actually, they WOULD have found remains of houses (they didn't use wood in the region because there weren't that many trees. Mudbrick, yes, which collapses. But other things, such as fired pots don't disintegrate that easily and traces of houses that age can still be found.

As far as I've read, it's a worship site ... but we don't have signs of a city supporting the site (hence, no "civilization." It might have been the actions of an early version of a warlord, where a united bunch of villages came together to build something... but I really don't know the full range of evidence and they're still digging.

Thanks for your replies I have been too busy to look until now.I will look at some things mentioned tomorrow when me kids are at school.

Originally posted by Byrd


You can get the full details on Wikipedia, for starters.

thanx for that link..it cleared up the consensus on the similarites...as the link states "the monotheistic faiths emphasizing and tracing their common origin to Abraham or recognizing a spiritual tradition identified with Abraham"

so its the monotheistic link...ok i understand....but couldnt i throw akhenatens monotheism in with those??

so they are the same god...but perceptions in the role and aspect of life is what is different amongst these three religions? i see...

but an interesting question...our understanding of our history can be manipulated...untill i see hard proof that civilisation existed pre 7000 yrs ago, i will stick with the faith...lol

peace

Originally posted by Uncertain1
I've done a bit of research in ancient civilisations but I'm just more confused.
There are too many different finds that claim to be older than what we are told is the oldest civilisation.I'mlost and need help from some of the great minds on this site please no theories I just want to know what finds are real and suggest we are thousands of years older than we think but have been hidden cleverly by TPTB.

So you are confused about this are you? Well welcome to the club, so is everyone else. At this point there is no 100% right answer just guesses. You will not get a real answer to this question just yet as it changes from day to day. The simple truth is no one knows for sure. There is a great many unanswered questions about things that happened 5 years ago that can not be answered for sure so when you are talking 5,000 or 50,000 or even 500,000 years forget it. There is some things we will never know the answer to. We just can guess based on what little evidence we can find.

reply to post by thePharaoh


No evidence eh? that's a load of b.s like I stated in my original post it really depends on your definition just check out this article. Discovering the oldest man made structures. now I know my original statement of 100,000 yrs B.C.E was a bit over the top but I am not that far off. The people who made all of these structures had culture and information. As far as I am concerned that's enough. to believe that the Sumerians are the oldest is incredibly one large leap of faith. I may not have the time and resources right now to go through with you and hold your hand to show you that people were around and doing things at an earlier point and I am glad your a skeptic just remember every scholar has an idea to protect and boundaries that hold back theories to really progressing the field.

Originally posted by tonyinawareness
reply to post by thePharaoh

 

No evidence eh? that's a load of b.s like I stated in my original post it really depends on your definition just check out this article. Discovering the oldest man made structures. now I know my original statement of 100,000 yrs B.C.E was a bit over the top but I am not that far off. The people who made all of these structures had culture and information. As far as I am concerned that's enough. to believe that the Sumerians are the oldest is incredibly one large leap of faith. I may not have the time and resources right now to go through with you and hold your hand to show you that people were around and doing things at an earlier point and I am glad your a skeptic just remember every scholar has an idea to protect and boundaries that hold back theories to really progressing the field.

The word "civilization" has a meaning that is fairly well defined. Not in concrete, but fairly well.

It has nothing to do with how intelligent the members of a culture are, or with what they could build.

Get over yourself. A link was provided to a reasonable definition of the term. Had you read it, you might have come to understand how wrong you are.

It's just semantics, really. But not to Anthropology it's not.

Just like fool's gold is real pretty to the ignorant, but not so much to a prospector.

Harte