When do you think an advanced ancient civilization existed and why?

reply to post by Hanslune


It depends upon your definition of advanced i suppose. I think along the lines that an advanced past civilization would be one that was the source of agriculture, religion, town planning, etc rather than flying around in space ships and the like. Hence why i suggested the Northern Anatolian Plains and the Black Sea region.

Another region i would put forward is the Eurasian Steppes, for similar reasons as those previously given. There are already clues in some Greek texts that the Scythians (a nomadic people) had what was basically a town (on the lines of the Wild West cattle towns rather than a proper centre of population) - no evidence of this has been found but that doesn't mean it didn't exist. After all, plenty of Greek texts have proven fairly accurate over time! If this was indeed genuine, i would propose it is the sort of thing that is almost anathema to a nomadic plains people, almost more of a throwback, a collective memory from ancestors that this type of place serves a purpose.

Northern Anatolia definately seems to be where its at though for Neolithic sites at present and answers to our origins for modern man.

reply to post by Flavian


Yes, and with the domestication of rice you have centers in south-west Asia and of course along the rivers in China.

It would seem that to find the start of the 'advanced' peoples you need to follow what we know about domestication and rivers - but some of the smaller and older sites are not on rivers so - the search continues

Originally posted by BBalazs

1. weather patterns for the past 200.000 years.

....and they will point to a frozen antarctic or do you have another point?

2. human migration, OOA is so stupid, it goes against all scientific evidence.

?? so you don't seem to like ouf of Africa - which the evidence supports and what theory of man's spread do you hold to then?

3. the piri reis map, nothing special, accept antarica is present, but that my just be south america.

Actually no, fringe authors TELL you it shows Antarctica but a brief look for yourself will show they are incorrect




Black lines show the world, pink the Piri Reis.....

4. why does everyone assume, ancient civilizations would want to build skyscrapers and such?
food was abundant, population low. why would you start building skyscrapers, to work?

Do they; one of the first challenges is to define 'advanced', its a good place to start

Originally posted by Flavian


Another region i would put forward is the Eurasian Steppes, for similar reasons as those previously given. There are already clues in some Greek texts that the Scythians (a nomadic people) had what was basically a town (on the lines of the Wild West cattle towns rather than a proper centre of population) - no evidence of this has been found but that doesn't mean it didn't exist. After all, plenty of Greek texts have proven fairly accurate over time! If this was indeed genuine, i would propose it is the sort of thing that is almost anathema to a nomadic plains people, almost more of a throwback, a collective memory from ancestors that this type of place serves a purpose.

a scythian city is gelon [or helon] at belsk. its massive.

op: by 25000bc, the folks around dolni vestonice were making ceramics, weaving, burning coal, making amazing art, using grind stones and they had obsidian, all the metals if they wanted them, piles of aurochs, water and the best dirt in the world. 15000 years later their homeland was flooded. they proceeded to anatolia etc but noone ever looked under the flood to see how far they had gotten.

reply to post by Flavian


Helonus

Dolci V in the Czech Republic

reply to post by Hanslune


thank you hans.

to be more specific i should have said that noone ever looked under the loess plain [pannonian] between budapest and golubac where the flood occured ~10kbc

I like the idea that a small civilization with relatively "advanced" legal, agricultural and astronomical techniques existed on a pretty large landmass on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge during a brief peak warm climate period just prior to the Younger Dryas, and it was destroyed as a result of a catastrophe having to do with an asteroid impact. I like that story.

Unfortunately, that was a long, long time ago (14,000 years or so), and the catastrophe was so devastating -- with most of their work ending up smashed by tsunamis and then sunk to the bottom of the ocean -- that finding any traces of those people would be nearly impossible. So their story survives in myth.

I don't think they had flying saucers or ray guns or crystal power generators. They were just perhaps the first group of human beings to really benefit from a good climate and good social organization. Then they got hammered, and we had to start over again elsewhere pretty much from scratch. It's why human beings as we evolved and are today have been around 40,000 years or so, but civilization as we know it has only been around 7,000 years. It's not like we were stupid or lazy or something. We just had to start over.

Originally posted by Blue Shift
I like the idea that a small civilization with relatively "advanced" legal, agricultural and astronomical techniques existed on a pretty large landmass on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge during a brief peak warm climate period just prior to the Younger Dryas, and it was destroyed as a result of a catastrophe having to do with an asteroid impact. I like that story.

Unfortunately, that was a long, long time ago (14,000 years or so), and the catastrophe was so devastating -- with most of their work ending up smashed by tsunamis and then sunk to the bottom of the ocean --

The problem with that is

No sign of the land mass - and if it was destroyed - no crater, no sign either in the Greenland ice cores of such a disaster which would have thrown up a lot of dust, nothing from the lake and bog sediments of Europe or North America, no remains of tsunamis from that period on either side of the Atlantic .... so rather a stealth disaster!

Originally posted by Hanslune
The problem with that is
No sign of the land mass - and if it was destroyed - no crater, no sign either in the Greenland ice cores of such a disaster which would have thrown up a lot of dust, nothing from the lake and bog sediments of Europe or North America, no remains of tsunamis from that period on either side of the Atlantic .... so rather a stealth disaster!

Yeah, the lack of dust is problematic, although there have been suggestions (and it's even in Plato's description) that the interaction of the asteroid wasn't a perpendicular slam-bang, but more of a glancing blow off the existing ice sheet. Enough to shake things up, particularly along the very unstable Mid-Atlantic Ridge, but not enough to toss massive amounts of material into the air. Tsunami evidence? What with the rise in sea levels, I'm not sure that would be easy to find, particularly after numerous millennia of other tsunamis from later events.

Still, it doesn't hurt to keep looking for it. Like I said, I like the story, but admit the hard evidence for it is slim and circumstantial. Even if we found something, except for the age (which would probably be in dispute) I can't imagine it being that impressive. A pig pen is a great step forward in animal husbandry, but admittedly not that thrilling.

Originally posted by Blue Shift

Yeah, the lack of dust is problematic, although there have been suggestions (and it's even in Plato's description) that the interaction of the asteroid wasn't a perpendicular slam-bang, but more of a glancing blow off the existing ice sheet. Enough to shake things up, particularly along the very unstable Mid-Atlantic Ridge, but not enough to toss massive amounts of material into the air. Tsunami evidence? What with the rise in sea levels, I'm not sure that would be easy to find, particularly after numerous millennia of other tsunamis from later events.

Still, it doesn't hurt to keep looking for it. Like I said, I like the story, but admit the hard evidence for it is slim and circumstantial. Even if we found something, except for the age (which would probably be in dispute) I can't imagine it being that impressive. A pig pen is a great step forward in animal husbandry, but admittedly not that thrilling.

People have been looking for something that could have destroyed 'Atlantis' for a long time, the Mid-Atlantic would fit Platos story best but the lack of destructive evidence has seen 'Atlantis' moving around a bit

Tsunamis from asteroid impacts tend to be impressive

Good luck in your search

reply to post by BBalazs


By advanced, you mean what exactly?

As we all can attest to an advanced civilization, such as ours, will leave tell tale signs all over the place. While a few strange artifacts have come to light, nothing in the form of ancient type landfills filled with broken TV's, refrigerators, etc...have been unearthed to my knowledge.

reply to post by BBalazs

2. human migration, OOA is so stupid, it goes against all scientific evidence.

How does Out of Africa go against all scientific data? The theory comes from that very scientific data...

Originally posted by Parta
op: by 25000bc, the folks around dolni vestonice were making ceramics, weaving, burning coal, making amazing art, using grind stones and they had obsidian, all the metals if they wanted them, piles of aurochs, water and the best dirt in the world. 15000 years later their homeland was flooded. they proceeded to anatolia etc but noone ever looked under the flood to see how far they had gotten.

That's certainly an interesting site (and thanks for mentioning it!) The reports say that they were stone age people -- no indication that they were smelting iron. The burial of the old woman is interesting, too -- although I think they're a tad hasty in assigning the word, "shaman" here.

The Wikipedia article mentions something necessary for civilization advancement -- people were living longer and they had grandparents to help teach and improve technology.

As to "advanced civilization", I think that we are the most advanced civilization ever to arise on this planet -- at least, if you mean "technology." I think our social rules are advanced (we've moved beyond fairly simple rules needed to govern a tribe into ways of managing to govern nations (and maybe the world someday.)

But I think each ancient civilization has advances that were just amazing; things they specialized in. I would have dearly loved to go back to ancient Greece (as a man, NOT as a woman!) and talked to Plato and Socrates and Aristotle. I would have loved to talk to the druids -- during an age when memorization was one of the highest skills. I would have loved to see the Neanderthals hunt -- to watch homo erectus stalk prey. To see Native Americans take down one of the big mammoths that walked here.

Those advances aren't important to us now (we don't need to kill mammoths to live or chip flints to spears (though I can knap spearpoints)) but they were the foundation for our modern advances.

reply to post by BBalazs


Hello BBalazs,

People seem to be clever and there is no indication that our ability arrived from out side our world on a specific date a few thousand years ago.

Our current state of technology is known to have been developed in a few hundred years.

When one society takes over another the new dominate group burns down the libraries of the conquered.

There are scraps of data that point to advanced technology that seem out of place in the official history of todays civilization.

There is zero support or funding for archeology that reports findings that question the expected time line of gradual and continuous improvement of human technological development.

reply to post by Hanslune


I basicaly Wrote the piri reis map is nothin special. Reread.
Yes the poles were a
Different place. They were very much habitable. Fact.
Even in this era, the north pole (greeland) had crops grown on it before the little ia.

Ooa has pretty much been debunked. If you want i will list a link the lists all scientific discoveries in this area.
Humans moved around, waved out.
There may or mas not have been a cataspthrope 100.000 years ago, that meant he Mostly people in africa survided.
I would place my civilzation from 200.000 to 10.000 years ago.
Advanced means more advanced then preciously discovered civilizations.

reply to post by whatwasthat


I agree. This level of advancement is not hard to achieve.
In the 800.000 years of hominoid life, it is not a far cry, that it has happened.
After all, even the greek invented the steam engine, but took us another 2000 years or so o invent it.

Originally posted by whatwasthat
reply to post by BBalazs

 

Hello BBalazs,

People seem to be clever and there is no indication that our ability arrived from out side our world on a specific date a few thousand years ago.

We have been rather clever for a rather long time.

When one society takes over another the new dominate group burns down the libraries of the conquered.

Not always, the Roman's took over the Greek Libraries, The Mongols took over the Chinese and despite losing two world wars the German Libraries still exist

There are scraps of data that point to advanced technology that seem out of place in the official history of todays civilization.

Only by those who want them to be considered mysterious; there is no 'official' history of today's civilizations

There is zero support or funding for archeology that reports findings that question the expected time line of gradual and continuous improvement of human technological development

Really? Then why are there new finds being made? 'Who' coordinates this effort world wide and in such a manner no one in Archaeology is aware of it? lol

Originally posted by BBalazs

Yes the poles were a
Different place. They were very much habitable. Fact.

Sorry no, please provide evidence of this 'fact'

Ooa has pretty much been debunked. If you want i will list a link the lists all scientific discoveries in this area.

That would come to quite a surprize to the scientific community - why aren't they aware of this 'debunking'? lol

I would place my civilzation from 200.000 to 10.000 years ago.

Okay why no sign of them then?

Advanced means more advanced then preciously discovered civilizations.

Like Sumer? Or ourselves??

reply to post by seagull


Ohhh boy.
You should read up.
There is more evidence the humanoids arose many different places, interbreed and migrated all over the place.
Ooa was faked, admitedly by research assistant.
There are limits to dna testing, dna sample was small, etc. Time limits also.
We know humans have been around way before! And all over the globe.
So it is ridicolous to suggest they all died out, so a teibe from africa could spread out.
+ the neaderhal genes in everyone (ex african) is a deatg blow to that theory.