Göbekli Tepe dating plain wrong

  

 

“Regarding the topic of evolution in general I am of the opinion that

the strong tendency towards the dressing of large stones at Göbekli Tepe

had its origin in the Acheulean tradition of the Mousterian culture”.

 

Pietro Gaietto

  

 

 

 

“History is Wrong” declares one site regarding “The Mystery of Gobekli Tepe” (2018): https://coolinterestingstuff.com/the-mystery-of-gobekli-tepe

 

…. many have proposed that Gobekli Tepe can even be a temple inside the Biblical Eden of Genesis. Is it possible that what we know about the ‘uncivilized and primitive’ prehistoric men is not at all true? Is it possible that advanced civilizations existed before 6000 BCE and their tracks are simply lost in time? Or is it possible that extra-terrestrials interfered and helped men to build monuments throughout the history of humanity? The questions are certainly compelling.

 

Man was supposed to have been a primitive hunter-gatherer at the time of the sites’ construction. Gobekli Tepe’s presence currently predates what science has taught would be essential in building something on the scale such as those structures. For instance, the site appears before the agreed upon dates for the inventions of art and engravings; it even predates man working with metals and pottery but features evidence of all of these. ….

 

which site finds it all so incomprehensible as to have to resort to this extreme suggestion:  

 

Ancient Aliens

 

If ancient aliens visited Earth, can evidence of their existence be found in the mysterious structures that still stand throughout the world? Inexplicably, megalithic structures found on different continents are strikingly similar, and the cutting and moving of the massive stones used to build these magnificent feats would be a struggle for modern day machinery, let alone ancient man. Ancient astronaut theorists suggest that the standing stones in Carnac, France were used as an ancient GPS system for ancient flying machines. The recently discovered Gobekli Tepe in Turkey, which has been dated back 12,000 years, has finely chiseled pillars that experts describe as a Noah’s Ark in stone. Is it possible that extraterrestrials assisted primitive man in constructing these unexplained structures? If so, what was the purpose of these grand projects?

 

[End of quotes]

 

The truth is that Paleolithic man was nowhere near as primitive as proponents of evolutionary development imagine. See e.g. my multi-part series:

 

So-called Paleolithic man was not dumb

 

commencing with:

 

https://www.academia.edu/38355575/So-called_Paleolithic_man_was_not_dumb._Part_One_Long_cultural_tradition_of_sky_watchin

 

but consider especially this one potentially linking Australian Aborigines with Göbekli Tepe:

 

So-called Paleolithic man was not dumb. Part Four: Australian Aboriginal link to Göbekli Tepe?

 

https://www.academia.edu/38411076/So-called_Paleolithic_man_was_not_dumb._Part_Four_Australian_Aboriginal_link_to_G%C3%B6bekli_Tepe

 

“We start with a comparison between the only female figure discovered at Göbekli Tepe, and a rock painting depicting a well-known creator being from Arnhem land, Yingarna. The likeness between these two images is immediately striking; we recognise similar posture with the same positioning of the legs and breasts, cartoonish exaggeration of the female genitalia, and clearly inhuman heads”.

 

 

Pietro Gaietto (Intelligent Cells and their Inventions, p. 42) considers Göbekli Tepe to belong to “the Acheulean tradition of the Mousterian culture” of what the author calls “modern post-Paleolithic”:

 

To my knowledge, the most ancient civilization that we might define as modern post-Paleolithic, was discovered at an archeological site called Göbekli Tepe, an area which includes the south-eastern region of present day Turkey. The Göbekli Tepe site is a peculiar cultic locale, without habitations, although they exist just a few miles away. A large number of geometric stelae-statues in limestone have been found, decorated with bas-reliefs and engravings of animals ….

Anthropometric free-standing tall squared stones, and pilaster in a T-shape, carry representations, in high or low relief, of animals such as foxes, lions and scorpions; and vultures flying or not; deer, bovids, spiders, snakes, cranes, ducks, ostriches, crocodiles, herons, leopards and wildcats. Regarding the topic of evolution in general I am of the opinion that the strong tendency towards the dressing of large stones at Göbekli Tepe had its origin in the Acheulean tradition of the Mousterian culture. I believe that the Göbekli Tepe civilization may well have been the end result of a mixing of two different cultures, although we know nothing at this point regarding the commingling of different populations in those archaic periods of time.

[End of quote]

 

Dr. John Osgood has, in his far more satisfactory arrangement of the Stone Ages, greatly lowered on the timescale the Acheulean (and Mousterian) phase (“A Better Model for the Stone Age”): https://creation.com/a-better-model-for-the-stone-age

 

The Model: A Preliminary Hypothesis

 

From the dispersion of Babel into the virgin forested lands of Palestine came the families of Canaan - Genesis 10:15-19. The initial number of families is unknown, but they are represented culturally by the Palestinian Acheulean artifacts.

 

Their culture was consciously adapted to their new environment of heavily forested country and wet climate with large lakes in land basins, much of the water being left-over from the great Flood. The wet climate would have produced heavy sedimentation of the open land and friable conditions in many caves, which nonetheless were good protection from the climate.

 

From the Acheulian background two different developments came - the Mousterian and Aurignacian of Palestine. At Carmel the Mousterian shelters suffered collapse, possibly from earthquake, 15:176 ending Mousterian habitation in them. Geographically at least, the Aurignacian appears to have given rise to Kebaran culture.

 

The Natufian appears to have been invasive, probably from the north, but possibly having a memory of a riverine background:

 

‘All that may be said at present is that the Natufian settlers came from an Alluvial environment and brought with them a tradition of building in clay or pise.’¹⁸

 

Moore affirms that Natufian to PPNA then PPNB formed one cultural continuity.

 

A new invasion from the north came with the PNA culture, continuous with PNB. But against the biblical model, this also must have been a Canaanite culture,^5:23 as was all before it.

 

Proto-Urban possibly followed, contemporary with Ghassulian culture (North8) and possibly had a relationship with the Esdraelon culture of the North Palestine area. But with it came rock-hewn tomb burials, suggesting a possible connection with the Hittites of Genesis 23:9.

 

We seem to be on surer ground when identifying Ghassul with the Amorites (see ‘The Times of Abraham’, this volume), a wave of Canaanites which came down through southern Syria. They were perhaps related to the defunct Hassuna culture driven out by Halafian expansion, which enveloped Hassuna and Syria, and more particularly, Aram-Naharaim. ….