Then why don’t you explain the reasoning behind using a link on
Byblos as an explanation for cities in the Amazon being 8000-20,000 years ago.
Thats simple. Using Byblos as evidence for cities of people around 10,000 years ago is much simpler than using the Amazon because 1) theres more evidence and 2) its much closer to Gobekli Tepe which is the area we are talking about.
As I said I mentioned the Amazon as another area where evidence is being found for large groups of people being organised like small cities. But its still being investigated. But so far the evidence shows similar cultural practices to people like Gobekli Tepe and other monolithic cultures.
Why then go through the agony of debating that less established evidence for the Amazon when cultures around Gobekli Tepe have more evidence to prove the same point. Which is that there were cultures around back when a major flood event happened who were advanced enough in knowledge and religion to be the origin of the flood stories that came later in Mesopotamia and other cultures.
There is no debate, the problem is with you when you can’t even recognize that Göbekli Tepe for example was a meeting place for hunter gatherers not a Neolithic village let alone a city.
We don't know that. In fact what is found at Göbekli Tepeis only about 10% of whar is possibly there. There are many tells and other pillars jutting out that are yet to be discovered. It may be an entire network of temples and communal places.
What is my basic arguement. Its that the cultures around 10,000 years ago were far more advanced than scientists thought. That because of this advanced knowledge and religion were able to come up with the flood myths as a result of a real major flood event they all experienced or heard about.
Your attempts to create logical fallacies in trying and limit measuring that advancement to whether they were cities or any other single measure are false representations. It doesn't matter how we measure them. Whether they were more settled and communities or hunters and gathers or both.
None of that negates the fact that these people were advanced enough in knowledge and religion to be able to come up with the flood myth which takes a certain level of belief compared to hunter gatherers. The idea of trying to say they were only hunter gatherers is to make out these people were primitive. But I am saying the evidence shows they were far more advanced.
So therefore around 10,000 years ago there may have been many advanced cultures all worshipping their gods. There was a common belief associated with the skies, the stars and astrology and animals. But nonetheless it was an advanced belief that even paraelles with the Egyptians in some ways.
So a major flood event at that time will be seen as something from the gods and being it was a global event at least for large parts of the northern hemisphere and the most major flood at the beginning of when cultures had complex beliefs it trumps all other floods it may be the source of the flood myth.
In other words those flood myths would have been around well before any other floods. I cannot see how any culture at that time did not know of this flood event. If there was any myth to be made about floods it was at this time.
Here we go again with this Gish Gallop.
How is that Gish Gallop. I made the point that to make these monoliths it requires the organisation of 1,000s of people. Just like it took 1,000s of slaves organised by the Egyptians to build the Pyramids. So if it took 1,000s of organisied people working together than they must have been far more organised as far as culture and community is concerned. They were not simple primitive hunters and gatherers.
But of course you missed that point altogether and call it gish gallop. If you are calling my arguements gish gallop then how are we to even debate this.
The only point worth responding to yet again, a great flood would have occurred at the same time in different regions, yet as the evidence shows this did not happen making them regional events.
You have this mindset when a refutation is made simply ignore it and carry on regardless as if it never existed.
Well thats only natural to ignore it when its just a claim without one bit of supporting evidence. The fact is a major earth shattering flood event would be experienced by many cultures at the same time.
Heres the logic. If this is the case and its the most major and first flood event when humans became knowledgable and religious enough to make this story then no other flood will trump it that comes later for that same culture. If the majority of cultures were around at that time or come from these cultures back then, then there cannot be a greater source.
Especially when I have actually provided evidence of a massive world shaking flood event that could be the origin of all cultures flood myths. Especially when the finer details of the stories all match. That would seem unreal that several cultures just happen to come to the same story detail.
Ten thousand years ago the Amazonian inhabitants were hunter gatherers who also used “incipient horticulture” which was a slow transition to full scale agriculture occurring 2000 – 4000 years ago leading to the organization structures you describe.
You are thousands of years off the mark.
Actually the structures in the ground, the shapes could be 10,000 years old. They mimick the monolith structures in stone as far as geometry and astrology. So we don't know. These markings were found by lidar so they may represent a culture well before the later structures like the Aztecs and Mayans made. They maybe the Gobekli Tepe of the Amazon. But more work is needed.
en.wikipedia.org
Absolutely amazing you have reverted to quote mining repeating the first and third links which have been refuted as they do not support the case of 8000-20,000 year old cities existing in the Amazon.
It proves my point made earlier you will simply ignore anything which is refuted.
It depends what you mean by cities and why cities are so important to proving a culture is advanced to be able to have complex beliefs about a flood myth. Like I said the evidence so far suggests that these geometric and astrological shapes are sim,ilar to other monolith cultures. If thats the case then these involved well organised cultures working together and coming together in religious ceremonies and linked.
Possibly 1,000s or more linked in a common belief and cultural practices rather than seperate hunter gather groups unrelated. In that sense it becomes more a city of people working together though they may have been dispersed throughout the land.
But once again why focus on me meeting the criteria of a city to prove that these cultures were advanced. That is not the only evidence. In fact take out the idea of a city. Delete that from the criteria. Now lets get on with determining whether these cultures were advanced enough to be the origin of the flood myth.
With regards to the second link comes the standard question do you bother even trying to read your links given the age of the geoglyphs themselves are considerably younger than the 10,000 year old land use practices in the regions.
"Calibrated radiocarbon dates indicate that the first Acre earthworks were initiated by c. 2500 BP, with construction continuing until 1000 BP."
So once again we have another quote mine that contradicts Amazon cities were 8000-20,000 years old not that it matters even if they were 10,000 years old is not evidence for the existence of cities.
That is about later layers. Some of the earthworks go back 10,000 years. My arguement is based on what the shapes represent which aligns more with earlier monolith cultures.
“The mounds promoted landscape diversity, and show that small-scale communities began to shape the Amazon 8,000 years earlier than previously thought.”
A University of Bern-led study shows that, starting at around 10,850 years ago, inhabitants of the Llanos de Moxos region in northern Bolivia began to create a landscape that ultimately comprised 4,700 artificial ‘forest islands’ within a treeless, seasonally flooded savannah.
www.sci.news
Like I said the Amazon is a fairly new area of research and evidence is changing all the time. The only reason most of the discoveries have happened is due to land clearing. But there is little access for archeology.
But like I said forget about the entire Amazon if you want. It doesn't change my point that cultures were far more advanced than scientists thought and they had sophisticated beliefs when the most major flood in the last 10,000 years or so happened. Thus possibly the source for the Flood myth of most cultures.
