circumspice wrote:The Telegraph article lost all credibility when it mentioned Graham Hancock & his book. Also, the use of all the superlatives & absolutes in the article smacked of yellow journalism.
kbs2244 wrote:"I realise that the authors are not writing in an area that fits their discipline , engineering , but that is no excuse ."
Sometimes it takes an "outsider" to prove, or dis-prove, the accepted dogma.
Tiompan wrote:Hi EP ,
Any possible problems with calibrating dates has no impact (pun intended ) on the the nonsense in the paper .
The hypothesis is based on a fantasy , i.e. the various animals and birds represent asterisms.
The fantasy then takes on another dimension by cherry picking the representations and suggesting they are in an order that fits in a date with the YD .
Not only does the cherry picking omit obvious components ,it doesn't work .
What is seen on the the suggested date ,time and place is another fantasy i.e. asterisms are not visible on summer afternoons .
When they do become visible the ones the important ones are below the horizon .
Fantasy to the power of 3 +errors = hilarious rubbish .
Tiompan wrote:E.P. Grondine wrote:I'm pretty sure that both of the Holocene Start Impact Events will show up in the phytolith sequence at Gobekli Tepe,
due to the climate changes they caused,
There are problems with that belief.
Tiompan wrote:There are a great number of engravings from the region and period , whilst interpreters can fantasize as much as they like about the content, climate change is a long way down the list of what would be acceptable from anyone who versed in the subject .
Tiompan wrote:A collection of animals and birds as subject matter is not the stuff of climate change imagery, it is however what we see among other engravings throughout the world post YD that are obviously not attempting to depict climate change As always “as is often the case the “interpretation”, like a rorschach test , tells us more about the personal obsessions of the interpreter than the actual markings .
Tiompan wrote:Further all the evidence points to Gobekli being built after the YD .
As for the impact of the YD at the time and place
See .https://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2014AM/final ... 247985.htm
Tiompan wrote:BTW , it goes without saying that any proper archaeoastronomical assessment of the night sky from any period
takes into account the changes in the appearance of the night sky and many other factors besides .
e.g. a very basic example:
one thing they did get right in the paper was the date for the summer solstice in the period.
Note how it differs from that of a contemporary solstice ,or that for when Stonehenge was built etc .
i.e. what matters is the declination of the sun .
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest