At the Alternative Archaeology website, the strange structure found by accident in 1994 in Turkey is called “The Eden of Ancient Turkey (Dawn of Civilization)”. Carbon dating (C 14 carbon recently shown to be 3500 years off in an article in the New York Times) shows the structure to date back at least 12th millennium BCE. This difference can mean the ruins might be even older than 14000 years. This puts these structures between 8000 and 11500 years before the mainstream scientists’ accepted timeline for advanced civilizations existing in the Fertile Crescent.
The site goes on to say “…no stone tools, or agricultural implements were found at the site, suggesting that a large civilization of hunter gather(er)s, people originally thought incapable of such constructions, created the oldest known stone temples in the world.” Obviously hunter/gatherer societies did not build such sites, but rather roamed around following their prey animals and seasonal harvests much as the Native American populations were doing as late as 125 years ago.
The archaeologists from the University of Heidelberg further speculate “…only 5% total of the site has been uncovered, which itself has taken over 15 years to dig. A possible 20 circles at Gobekli Tepe are thought to exist underneath tons of sand, which has prompted archaeologists to think that the original architects actually buried the site intentionally under 300 to 500 cubic meters of soil, as if to preserve it.” It has taken modern scientists fifteen years to dig out 5% of the site? How long, then would it take for primitive hunter/gatherers to ‘gather’ tons of sand to bury a site for no apparent reason?
Let’s be reasonable and try to think outside the box of modern scientific blither-blather for a moment. Imagine you are a primitive hunter/gatherer and during one of your hunting/gathering excursions, you come across a number of circles made of huge stone “T’s” in the middle of nowhere. Imagine further there are large deposits of stone around the area just right for building walls. Wouldn’t it be cool to get the rest of your tribe to use the “T’s” as supports for stone-walled constructions that would support a large number of tribesmen in relative comfort during the winter? Perhaps, even build the walls a little at a time or one at a time with each passing season, eventually using all 20 circles?
What about roofs, you ask? Skins sown together would do and be portable, too. Of course, I need more information. Have the archaeologists found materials used for roofs at these so-called ‘temples’? for example. I’m just having fun guessing.
But look at this picture gallery and you will see that the “T’s” seem far more technologically advanced than the wall in which they are embedded. I would definitely believe hunter/gatherers who were tired of hunting and gathering might have built the walls, but not the “T’s”.
Why do archaeologists always assume such sites are related to religion? I’ve read many times that primitive men (since homo sapiens sapiens appeared on the timescale) were exactly like us. That means they had advanced senses of humor and were capable of appreciating beauty. Which, in turn, means they should have been doing things just because or just for fun.
The “T’s” which also remind me of the supports we now build under our turnpike, interstate, and highway intersections, overpasses and underpasses are simply anachronistic even in the ancient walls around them. In Texas, for example, these types of supports are also decorated with stars and other symbols that are totally secular in nature and simply added to the structures for aesthetic purposes. What strikes me as strange about the engravings/sculptures on the Gobekli “T’s” is the way the carvings are bas reliefs, which would seem to have made the construction even more difficult. Why not quarry the stones and then carve the designs into them? Why carve the design and then quarry the huge stone slabs? Just strikes me as back asswards somehow.
The same idea concerning the use of the structure by primitive hunter/gathers as beams for shelters could be applied to the Great Stone Henge in England. Scientists assume that because they found burial sites around the henge and signs of inhabitants and tools from the time of the ancient hunter/gatherers, that the Henge was built by them. “USED” by them, perhaps, but not necessarily “BUILT” by them. “Worshipped” or “venerated” by the primitive people who first found it, but this doesn’t mean they built it. What say you? Does this make sense or not?
In another NY Times article the writer says “New radiocarbon dates from human cremation burials among and around the brooding stones on Salisbury Plain in England indicate that the site was used as a cemetery from 3000 B.C. until after the monuments were erected around 2500 B.C., British archaeologists reported Thursday.” People were buried there first and then the stones were brought there and erected? Here is an artist’s rendering of the sort of people who supposedly built Stonehenge. Really? They don’t even have clothes on! LOL! But then I have to ask why would the artist depict people with swords, shields and lances who lived in England where the weather is not really conducive to baring it all with no clothes on? Yet, even if we put bear skins or wool tartans on these two, do they really have the technology to move and position stones weighing thousands of pounds for no reason other than to sing and dance around twice a year and mark the place where Aunt Sally is buried? I think not.
Fortunately, I’m a writer not an archaeologist and I can say all kinds of crazy things without fear of damaging my reputation.