ramonmercado
CyberPunk
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2003
- Messages
- 58,319
- Location
- Eblana
Siberia?
Link is obsolete. The current link is:
https://forums.forteana.org/index.php?threads/the-russian-stonehenge.19075/
Last edited by a moderator:
Siberia?
The science is with the fact that man was at a higher stage of advancement then previously thought at a earlier date.
Examples being: Göbekli Tepe, the sphinx (forget about Zahi Hawass) and the recent report of finding in Siberia.
Something else that would last from a previous civilization, even over geological eras, is pottery, or more generally any ceramic artefacts, even broken they'd last if buried in sand or mud that eventually became sedimentary rock. Glass would last as well, though it would change in appearance over the eons. Translucent coke bottles buried in sandstone might be the only evidence that whatever succeeds us in a few 10 of millions of years finds of our civilization.
Of course the chances of finding them would be minute...
... Edit: my point is why depend upon the geological record alone?
Yith:
You confused me with this edit. Are you subsuming possible paleontological and archeological evidence within your 'geological record'?
The fact that they are now extinct is probably due to the actions of one man:I'm betting that within the next 50 years we discover a huge carved statue of a Gorn-type creature in Earth orbit:
... I'm betting that within the next 50 years we discover a huge carved statue of a Gorn-type creature in Earth orbit ...
In truth I only used 'geological' as that features in the article's headline. I could have asked "Surely there would be more indication of an ancient civilisation that just fossils and twisted junk and its environmrntal footprint? I wouldn't be surprised to see indisputable evidence of not only existence but also intelligence.
There is actually some evidence now that we are in a long period of low Sun activity and that it would be a lot colder if we weren't (allegedly) warming up the planet with our activities.The thing that puzzles me about this whole debate is that, geologically, the Earth is normally hotter than it is now, with intervals when it is colder - that is, in an ice age. Years ago the argument was that we were not in fact fully out of the last ice age and it might have another kick before we revert to normal. What if the current stability at an unusual level is the product of our civilisation - not only fossil fuels but the incredible amount of deforestation we have caused.
By messing with what we do we might in fact trigger that last kick. Which will be a lot less pleasant than just adapting to the world going back to what has been its normal temperature for most of the time that animal life (animal in the sense of animal, vegetable, mineral) has existed?
The thing that puzzles me about this whole debate is that, geologically, the Earth is normally hotter than it is now, with intervals when it is colder - that is, in an ice age. Years ago the argument was that we were not in fact fully out of the last ice age and it might have another kick before we revert to normal. What if the current stability at an unusual level is the product of our civilisation - not only fossil fuels but the incredible amount of deforestation we have caused. ...
There was a little Keep Britain Tidy figure, as seen from the charity's PIF:
There was also a kangaroo cartoon, but he didn't catch on.
... Only a hundred and fifty years or so from the Wright brothers to the ISS. ...
I doubt there was any kind of civilisation similar to ours in the distant past.
I base this on the lack of any material remains.
A few stone carvings etc do not a civilisation make; at least not a technical one. One would expect to find remnants of objects made from materials such as stainless steel of nickel that to not degrade naturally very quickly.
If you consider that, at the beginning of the Roman empire we had only limited knowledge of metallurgy. Then think on the advances over the last two thousand years, it seems obvious that an earlier civilisation should have been much more advanced before it disappeared.
INT21
Why is it obvious?
Modern man has existed for less than 100,000 years. We have had “civilisation” in the sense of cities, agriculture, writing for perhaps 7,000 of those. An industrial civilisation for 300 years.
Why should an earlier civilisation have been much more advanced? What if it hadn’t got even to the Iron Age before some calamity wiped it out?
..Sometimes there are tales of out of Out Of Place/Time Artefacts, any of these stories stand up to scrutiny?..
The best example of ooparts is the AntiKythera artifact. And that is only around 2000 years old. Non of the explanations for it's existence really stand up to examination.
So, that is relatively modern. What is there for something supposedly tens of thousands of years old ?
INT21
... Why should an earlier civilisation have been much more advanced? What if it hadn’t got even to the Iron Age before some calamity wiped it out?