Göbekli Tepe

[MagsJ]

Yeah and it also seems quite similar to how the Egyptians wanted to join their gods in the sky (I mean literally, by flying to the sky). Maybe this whole idea started with the Göbekli Tepe culture.

From this ^^^ to non-dualism.. an interesting transition.

There are older civilisations than that.

[Eodnhoj7]

kiloquote=Age post_id=422894 time=1567374924 user_id=16237]

I assumed void and this is an assumption leading to a further assumption that assumes the original assumption as an empty form that is assumed "as is" and is assumed as a way of assuming because of "as is".

I know nothing as knowing is empty.

So you know the truth...do tell.

I find it hilarious that you once again MISSED it here. I could in a sense understand how and why you missed my given example in your thread on this issue, but I wrote the exact same example here now but never would have even thought that you could miss it again.

I told you the truth that I know in the quote of mine that you, yourself, just provided, and just responded to.

Then apparently you dont know the truth of how I think...and are ignorant.

I KNOW how and why those thoughts exist with that body.

I also KNOW why you keep MISSING my example of 'what is not assumed' even though you keep asking for it.
[/quote]
No you dont or you would no how to explain it since you know so much....

[Atla]

From this ^^^ to non-dualism.. an interesting transition.

Well.. as I see it Göbekli Tepe may have existed basically prior to dualistic thinking patterns. But you kinda need dualistic thinking patterns to realize nondualism, I think that came 5000+ years later.

There are older civilisations than that.

Which older civilisations? Tell Qaramel comes to mind but that's basically next to Göbekli Tepe.

[Age]

kiloquote=Age post_id=422894 time=1567374924 user_id=16237]


I find it hilarious that you once again MISSED it here. I could in a sense understand how and why you missed my given example in your thread on this issue, but I wrote the exact same example here now but never would have even thought that you could miss it again.

I told you the truth that I know in the quote of mine that you, yourself, just provided, and just responded to.

Then apparently you dont know the truth of how I think...and are ignorant.

I KNOW how and why those thoughts exist with that body.

I also KNOW why you keep MISSING my example of 'what is not assumed' even though you keep asking for it.

No you dont or you would no how to explain it since you know so much....
[/quote]

What is the 'it', which you claim I would know how to explain?

[Age]

From this ^^^ to non-dualism.. an interesting transition.

Well.. as I see it Göbekli Tepe may have existed basically prior to dualistic thinking patterns. But you kinda need dualistic thinking patterns to realize nondualism, I think that came 5000+ years later.

There are older civilisations than that.

Which older civilisations? Tell Qaramel comes to mind but that's basically next to Göbekli Tepe.

As far as I know non-separation thinking has been around for at least tens of thousands of years before you say the "first humans" existed.

The realisation that there is no-dualism has been in constant thought ever since it came to be tens of thousands of years BEFORE you theorized.

[Atla]

From this ^^^ to non-dualism.. an interesting transition.

Well.. as I see it Göbekli Tepe may have existed basically prior to dualistic thinking patterns. But you kinda need dualistic thinking patterns to realize nondualism, I think that came 5000+ years later.

There are older civilisations than that.

Which older civilisations? Tell Qaramel comes to mind but that's basically next to Göbekli Tepe.

As far as I know non-separation thinking has been around for at least tens of thousands of years before you say the "first humans" existed.

The realisation that there is no-dualism has been in constant thought ever since it came to be tens of thousands of years BEFORE you theorized.

And you know this about the earlier humans how?

[Eodnhoj7]

Then apparently you dont know the truth of how I think...and are ignorant.

I KNOW how and why those thoughts exist with that body.

I also KNOW why you keep MISSING my example of 'what is not assumed' even though you keep asking for it.

No you dont or you would no how to explain it since you know so much....

What is the 'it', which you claim I would know how to explain?
[/quote]

You don't know? How do you know that?...I think you are lying...you know everything...you said so yourself...

[Age]

Well.. as I see it Göbekli Tepe may have existed basically prior to dualistic thinking patterns. But you kinda need dualistic thinking patterns to realize nondualism, I think that came 5000+ years later.


Which older civilisations? Tell Qaramel comes to mind but that's basically next to Göbekli Tepe.

As far as I know non-separation thinking has been around for at least tens of thousands of years before you say the "first humans" existed.

The realisation that there is no-dualism has been in constant thought ever since it came to be tens of thousands of years BEFORE you theorized.

And you know this about the earlier humans how?

By being a part of, and listening to, the peoples of the oldest continuous cultures.

We do not have a word for 'I', as we are not separete from each other. We are also a part of the environment and not apart from it. The 'environment' also being the Universe.

[Age]

I KNOW how and why those thoughts exist with that body.

I also KNOW why you keep MISSING my example of 'what is not assumed' even though you keep asking for it.

No you dont or you would no how to explain it since you know so much....

What is the 'it', which you claim I would know how to explain?

You don't know? [/quote]

What?

How do you know that?...

What?

I think you are lying...

About what?

you know everything...

Do i?

you said so yourself...

Did I?

Will you provide some evidence of this?

By the way, if you just answered my question, then you would not appear to be deflecting, once again.

[Atla]

As far as I know non-separation thinking has been around for at least tens of thousands of years before you say the "first humans" existed.

The realisation that there is no-dualism has been in constant thought ever since it came to be tens of thousands of years BEFORE you theorized.

And you know this about the earlier humans how?

By being a part of, and listening to, the peoples of the oldest continuous cultures.

We do not have a word for 'I', as we are not separete from each other. We are also a part of the environment and not apart from it. The 'environment' also being the Universe.

There is no known culture that has been around for that long.

[Eodnhoj7]

No you dont or you would no how to explain it since you know so much....

What is the 'it', which you claim I would know how to explain?

You don't know?

What?

How do you know that?...

What?

I think you are lying...

About what?

you know everything...

Do i?

you said so yourself...

Did I?

Will you provide some evidence of this?

By the way, if you just answered my question, then you would not appear to be deflecting, once again.
[/quote]

Do you know that for sure without doubt?

[I Like Sushu]

But my point exactly, how do you know all the waffle you've spouted about the intentions and motives of the Tepe builders.(Oh! I see now, you're just repeating the opinions in that link of yours and passing it off as 'your' hunches. )

I read and watch what I can find and come up with a conjecture that could be wrong.
Only someone as dense as you would suggest that what I say is based on one link.
Right now no one knows what the site was intended for. The idea that they may have connected the top of the pillars with planks and placed the dead there, and waited for vultures, came from me actually, as a possible missing central piece for the puzzle.

Coming up with ideas about Göbekli Tepe is the whole point of the topic, are you really this fucking braindead?

Presumably you can link us to the evidence of the remains of the infrastructure, i.e. refineries, harbours, tools, etc needed to mine and ship hundreds of thousands of tons of copper ore around the planet? I really would be interested.

Ehh.. use google; thousands of pits, countless tools, at least one major harbour and some infrastructure were found. No melting factories however. Not "around the planet" you moron but at the Great Lakes and then downstream. It was the purest copper in the world back then. Almost all of it mined before 1200 BC.

Have I got you wrong? You said 'civilizational collapse' around 1200-1150 BCE but the Chinese seem to have been fine and dandy.

Ah I thought they were your ocean-farers or know about them.
Of course the 1200 BC collapse wasn't about the Chinese, everyone knows that.

So I can add selective reading to the typical confirmation bias of the interweeble loon then can I?

How do you think the Australian aboriginals got there? No don't tell me, they flew on sky-boats powered by mystical electro-magnetic totems.

As a school teacher, do you understand what an 'ocean' is?

By-the-by, do you now agree that the pyramids have a nice and clear progression of building development?

There have been regressions throughout history, what you said looks like something from a 1960s textbook.
Also don't tell me that a more advanced civilization can't give technology to a less advanced one.

I thought this was a philosophy forum not a poor man’s attempt at anthropological research or a site dedicated to archaeology? Anthropologists and archaeologists are very careful about misreading/misinterpreting data. Blind speculation on the archaeological site is of philosophical value only if it’s framed in some hypothetical and/or though experiment.

I mean the trash that people like Hancock dribble doesn’t have to come from a bad place to be utterly perverse and intellectually destructive - but it is destructive. Read Colin Renfrew or any number of renowned and respected PROFESSIONALS in the field than the hopeful stretches of some former pothead whose depth of research is so incredibly poor it’s almost laughable once you’ve actually done some REAL reading yourself.

My mother bought me Hancock’s first book thinking it would interest me. I read it all the way through, having already read scholarly work by the likes of Eliade and Yates ... at 16 years of age it didn’t take much to see through his childish scrambling around for pieces of data to fit his blind opinion. That simply isn’t how science moves forward, it is how science is held back (by looking for data that fits your pattern of belief and unconsciously hoodwinking yourself from contradictions that blow your opinions to pieces).

These people sound convincing because they don’t know enough about what they are talking about to see they are talking shite. If the likes of Graham Hancock actually went to university to study the subject properly and get a broader understanding of the scientific processes involved then they might be taken more seriously. Bu the excuse is the convenient ‘conspiracy’ against him rather than him being an incompetent buffoon who probably lacks the mental faculties to get a degree, or is simply too cowardly to even try. Either way it is not exactly an endearing picture!

[Atla]

I thought this was a philosophy forum not a poor man’s attempt at anthropological research or a site dedicated to archaeology? Anthropologists and archaeologists are very careful about misreading/misinterpreting data. Blind speculation on the archaeological site is of philosophical value only if it’s framed in some hypothetical and/or though experiment.

I mean the trash that people like Hancock dribble doesn’t have to come from a bad place to be utterly perverse and intellectually destructive - but it is destructive. Read Colin Renfrew or any number of renowned and respected PROFESSIONALS in the field than the hopeful stretches of some former pothead whose depth of research is so incredibly poor it’s almost laughable once you’ve actually done some REAL reading yourself.

My mother bought me Hancock’s first book thinking it would interest me. I read it all the way through, having already read scholarly work by the likes of Eliade and Yates ... at 16 years of age it didn’t take much to see through his childish scrambling around for pieces of data to fit his blind opinion. That simply isn’t how science moves forward, it is how science is held back (by looking for data that fits your pattern of belief and unconsciously hoodwinking yourself from contradictions that blow your opinions to pieces).

These people sound convincing because they don’t know enough about what they are talking about to see they are talking shite. If the likes of Graham Hancock actually went to university to study the subject properly and get a broader understanding of the scientific processes involved then they might be taken more seriously. Bu the excuse is the convenient ‘conspiracy’ against him rather than him being an incompetent buffoon who probably lacks the mental faculties to get a degree, or is simply too cowardly to even try. Either way it is not exactly an endearing picture!

I'm curious how human thinking developed throughout the ages, and this early period is very hard to piece together. But that's indeed more archeology than philosophy, if the mods don't like it they can delete the thread.
Hancock is a crackpot most of the time so I avoid him, is there anything in this thread that's coming from him and is probably nonsense?
(Cool rant btw)

[Age]

And you know this about the earlier humans how?

By being a part of, and listening to, the peoples of the oldest continuous cultures.

We do not have a word for 'I', as we are not separete from each other. We are also a part of the environment and not apart from it. The 'environment' also being the Universe.

There is no known culture that has been around for that long.

Are you being serious?

If yes, then I would do a bit more studying if I was you.

[Atla]

Are you being serious?

If yes, then I would do a bit more studying if I was you.

Guess I missed something really big then. Which cultures have been around for more than 12000 years continuously?