Slashdot Mirror
11,000-Year-Old Temple Found In Turkey
Ralph Spoilsport writes "In Southeast Turkey, the archaeologist Klaus Schmidt has discovered an 11,000-year-old temple. Established civilization theory suggests that agriculture created cities, and cities created monuments. This discovery suggests just the opposite — people got together to build a huge monument to their religion, and in order to sustain it, communities were formed and agriculture (already in development) quickly followed on to sustain the population. Truly a startling find with significant implications."
...turkey found in 11,000-year-old temple sounds much more delicious.
The bible says the earth is 6000 years old so it CANT be 11,000 years old! Simple math people!
"Trying to pick out symbolism from prehistoric context is an exercise in futility."
We've known about the rings at Stonehenge for how long? What do we know about them? Not much.
The simple fact is that we are still discovering evidence of what man did before inventing writing of any sort. I'm continually amazed at the apparent opinion of many that what science knows now is all there is to know, or that it is not possible that it is not quite right.
Alluding to an earlier post, massive drastic evolutionary changes just don't make sense to me. There has to be more history in the dirt than we know about. Chances of us finding it... meh!
I don't think that the curve of knowledge acquisition of the last 500 years is a linear projection of the millions of years before them. I think this whole gain in knowledge is rather logarithmic in nature. Meaning that the first several thousand centuries passed without writing, without lasting evidence to show we had been there. Stonehenge, the Sphinx... how many others? They all stand there with no written account of who or why they were erected. We are still arguing about how the great pyramids at Giza were built. (they made them of concrete).
Point is, this should not be surprising. What should be is that it has taken this long to find it, never mind any other corroborating evidence of early man's efforts to create. What the temple could mean in terms of sociology or religion is pittance compared to what it means to evolution IMO. The technology and effort used to create it means a lot. Guesses about agriculture and social groupings are just that. I have a sneaking suspicion that socially, mankind evolved from pack/clan culture early on. There are so many similarities to that, but we just don't see it in modern society, or ignore it. sheeple anyone? They need a pack leader, right?
Anyway, I hope that further study/excavation shows us something more meaningful than what has been found. We, as a species, need it to fully recognize where we came from, for that is how you understand what direction to go. Just an opinion.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
Wikipedia entry on the subject is more clear and concise. Also it's not exactly a news - wiki entry dates from four years ago.
Since large communities and cities are not possible without agriculture, I highly doubt that agriculture sprang up after communities and cities.
Asserting that it did work that way (as the OP does), is like asserting that gasoline was developed to fuel all those gasoline engines that were already lying around.
when i play the aztecs, i can usually get my obelisk built before my starting worker even finishes his first few roads, nevermind that i haven't even discovered agriculture yet. of course, this is because the aztecs have mysticism as a starting tech, and assumes i'm not cranking out warriors to combat barbarian threats so...
wait, we're talking reality?
sorry
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
So Germans found some cooper wires deep in the ground near Berlin and concluded that their ancestors used electricity way before anyone else, circa 1,000 years ago. Later on, the British found near London some glass way deeper than previous German team and concluded than optical cable was used on British 2,000 years ago. Turkish people kept digging and digging and found nothing. They concluded that their ancestors from 11,000 years ago have used wireless.
sounds more probable
both for reasons of its greater chance of being left alone and untouched, in regards to the original inhabitants and later tomb raiders, and also for its greater chance of surviving physically, intact and inert for millenia
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Jesus did. With falsely pre-aged faith testing blocks.
I record my sleeptalking
Pretty much all of today's theories are wrong, in the sense that they are inaccurate and incomplete. General relativity fails us at the beginning of the Universe and at the centre of a black hole. Quantum mechanics gives us no description at all of gravitational effects. In cases where we need to use both theories together we end up with infinities and singularities and contradictions all over the place.
A new theory will dramatically change our description of these exotic systems. But in order to work, such a theory must agree with the current theories in domains where those theories are known to be valid. General relativity replaced Newtonian gravity, but it could only do so because it made nearly the same predictions in conditions where Newtonian gravity worked. Newton's theory is still used for interplanetary navigation, because the calculations are so much simpler and the error is small - but if you had to do a gravitational slingshot round a neutron star you'd go to Einstein.
I'd just add that no scientific theory is ever proved. You want proof, the mathematics department is next door. You want certainty, there's a church down the road. In science we accumulate evidence, and the more evidence agrees with our predictions, the more confident in the theory we become - but you can never test every possible case.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
Why do archaeologists always declare that old buildings are temples? It could have been a Sandwich Shop or a Greasy Spoon for all we know.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
So some silver-tongued geezer persuades a bunch of nubile young lovelies that they'll suffer eternal damnation unless they polish his wood. After he finally croaks in the middle of his ninth threesome of the week, a bunch of less-talented pick-up artists find that no amount of funeral preparation can wipe the grin off the old goat's face. They assume this is proof that he's still getting his wand waxed in the afterlife, and build a monument to a god they now regard as eminently worthy of worship.
And it all goes from there. I gotta write me a prayer book.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Actually, sad to say, what you do there isn't "science in support of faith", it's "bullshit fallacies in support of faith."
E.g.,
E.g., at some point the majority believed that the Earth is flat. It didn't make it so. It didn't even make it a safer bet. That belief is completely orthogonal to how reality actually is.
Plus, "the majority of humans alive today are religious" is mis-leading right there. Those people believe wildly different and mutually-incompatible religions. Which of those religions do you believe? Hinduism can't be true at the same time as Christianity, for example. So painting it all with a "they're religious" brush creates a false majority there.
Taking Christianity for example, it claims some 2 billion adherents worldwide, though that's got more to do with what you've been baptized to, than whether you're actually a devout christian. Well, that's less than a third of the world's population. A majority of the world isn't christian, so by your reasoning, it stands to reason that it's more likely that Christianity is false.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.