The cradle of civilization was not in Mesopotamia

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
193
63
Nakusp, BC
Natives of Australia and Papua New Guine lack the characteristics of a civilization, namely:

Large population centres
Monumental architecture
Written language
Agriculture
Division of labour
Organized religion
And generally a social hierarchy and organized warfare.

That does not mean that the aforementioned people were intellectually inferior; it just means that they lack the characteristics of a civilization, not all of which were good.
Yes, there is a big difference between culture and civilization. Most civilizations are not civil at all.
 

Danbones

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 23, 2015
24,505
2,198
113
Gobeki tepi indicates there was a full fledged civilization before the ICE age and it was world wide.
 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
8
36
Gobeki tepi indicates there was a full fledged civilization before the ICE age and it was world wide.

One thing is for sure, we are a much older species than was thought up until very recently and pre-glaciation civilizations cannot be totally out of the question. A bit more evidence might help. You also have to wonder why evidence didn't survive in the unglaciated south if there was one.
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
193
63
Nakusp, BC
Gobeki tepi indicates there was a full fledged civilization before the ICE age and it was world wide.
I am aware of Gobeki tepi but not that it was world wide. There may have been many different civilizations world wide but not necessarily that one. So what happened that brought us down to having to start all over again after the ice age?
 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
8
36
I am aware of Gobeki tepi but not that it was world wide. There may have been many different civilizations world wide but not necessarily that one. So what happened that brought us down to having to start all over again after the ice age?

I guess that we'd still notice some background radiation. Perhaps some other weaponized natural phenomenon that we haven't yet thought of ...."Higgs Boson Bombs" ... "gravitation bombs" ...
 

Jinentonix

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 6, 2015
11,619
6,261
113
Olympus Mons
This is a good proof that the atheist and the non-religious is almost not trusted and not fair.

How is this?

Because if the atheist is truthful in his claim and denial .. he cannot say this absolutely .. he may have some right to say: most probably Adam and Noah may not be real, but to insist on his claim that they are mythical .. it gives a lot about the thinking of these atheists.
Oh for.... Adam comes from the ancient Hebrew and means "son of the red earth". The name, like the story of Eden is allegorical. The name Adam was used because it expresses multiple points about the "first man" in one name. We know he was male because of the word "son". "Red" describes his complexion meaning he was ruddy skinned and God made Adam from the dust of the Earth, supposedly.
Obviously at some point, the first human males would have evolved but I doubt there was just one. Which brings up an important question. Which species of human would "Adam" have been? Denisovan? Cro-Magnon? Neanderthal? Modern human?

The story of Noah was blatant rip off of the saga of Gilgamesh.
However, there is a more mundane background to both story. The Fertile Crescent used to have a habit of flooding. Some years the floods would be pretty bad. It's quite likely that some village/town leaders along the Tigris and Euphrates rivers (and Greater and Lower Zab rivers) would have built boats large enough to save their villagers as well as at least some of the livestock. And there is some evidence to suggest that.
Noah may well have been a real person although the religious texts written about that period were still slipping in and out of the allegorical. But it is entirely possible Noah was one of those village or town leaders that had the foresight to build some kind of boat when he realized that flooding throughout the Fertile Crescent was more than just a rare occurrence. Just that his story got made into something way bigger than it was and passed into legend and mythology.
 

Danbones

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 23, 2015
24,505
2,198
113
One thing is for sure, we are a much older species than was thought up until very recently and pre-glaciation civilizations cannot be totally out of the question. A bit more evidence might help. You also have to wonder why evidence didn't survive in the unglaciated south if there was one.

You didn't notice any pyramids or temples lying around...no red haired white people in Florida 7000 years ago?...how long were they there for, were did they come from?
No world wide common DNA?...like the greeks and cherokee?
No world wide common phonetics?...like the words "Ma" "Chi"or even "Tipi"?

Not looking is not the same as not finding.
;)

Not to mention certain groups that would lose EVERYTHING if the truth were out.
..and they own a lot of media and control most institutes of education in one way or another.

BTW: there was a time when the seas split apart and people walked across ocean bottoms:
It was called the ICE AGE...
Sorry there MOE if that fvcks up your "we are gods chosen people" story somewhat.
Tough.
 
Last edited:

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
115,962
13,790
113
Low Earth Orbit
Oh for.... Adam comes from the ancient Hebrew and means "son of the red earth". The name, like the story of Eden is allegorical. The name Adam was used because it expresses multiple points about the "first man" in one name. We know he was male because of the word "son". "Red" describes his complexion meaning he was ruddy skinned and God made Adam from the dust of the Earth, supposedly.
Obviously at some point, the first human males would have evolved but I doubt there was just one. Which brings up an important question. Which species of human would "Adam" have been? Denisovan? Cro-Magnon? Neanderthal? Modern human?

The story of Noah was blatant rip off of the saga of Gilgamesh.
However, there is a more mundane background to both story. The Fertile Crescent used to have a habit of flooding. Some years the floods would be pretty bad. It's quite likely that some village/town leaders along the Tigris and Euphrates rivers (and Greater and Lower Zab rivers) would have built boats large enough to save their villagers as well as at least some of the livestock. And there is some evidence to suggest that.
Noah may well have been a real person although the religious texts written about that period were still slipping in and out of the allegorical. But it is entirely possible Noah was one of those village or town leaders that had the foresight to build some kind of boat when he realized that flooding throughout the Fertile Crescent was more than just a rare occurrence. Just that his story got made into something way bigger than it was and passed into legend and mythology.

Gilgamesh was Noah? If I remember the gilgamesh story he went on a hike not a boat ride.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
The cradle of human civilization has been reinvented many times in many places by many related humanoids some closely related some barely related and the Gods have failed to tame them every time. This planets geological and human features are in constant motion, this planets last God was Saturn and Venues was witnessed being born by humans who suffered it's birth pains, this systems planetary configuration is also a matter of adjustments when necessary to correct orbital stability from time to time. So any guessing origins is fun but futile.
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
65
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
Bar Sinister; said:
Natives of Australia and Papua New Guine lack the characteristics of a civilization, namely:

Large population centres
Monumental architecture
Written language
Agriculture
Division of labour
Organized religion
And generally a social hierarchy and organized warfare.

That does not mean that the aforementioned people were intellectually inferior; it just means that they lack the characteristics of a civilization, not all of which were good.




I'm not sure that societies in which villages flourished on agriculture and hunting do not constitute "civilization". For example, many Native American "tribes" or more correctly, Nations, did not have large urban centers, architecture, or written languages. But I would be very hesitant to accept the notion that they or their ancestors who lived much like them were not part of any civilization. I guess it depends on who is defining the term.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
I'm not sure that societies in which villages flourished on agriculture and hunting do not constitute "civilization". For example, many Native American "tribes" or more correctly, Nations, did not have large urban centers, architecture, or written languages. But I would be very hesitant to accept the notion that they or their ancestors who lived much like them were not part of any civilization. I guess it depends on who is defining the term.

The criteria listed are standard for the definition of a civilization. The only culture that does not seem to properly fit this mold was that of the Inca, who had no writing system, but did have a system of record keeping that worked for them. The cultures of the Anasazi and the Mississippi come close to these definitions, but do not quite reach them.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississippian_culture



''It was composed of a series of urban settlements and satellite villages (suburbs) linked together by a loose trading network,[2] the largest city being Cahokia, believed to be a major religious center''


This does seem to be within the guidelines you cited. However, it does not quite predate the eras we are referring to.

One of the problems with studying both of the cultures you mention is that their inhabitants disappeared before they could be properly documented. However, the remnants of their culture would certainly define them as a civilization, although as you say, not a particularly early one compared to Mesopotamia.
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
65
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
Civilization has not been invented yet.







Quite a good book. I may have to re-read it some day.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
I'm not sure that societies in which villages flourished on agriculture and hunting do not constitute "civilization". For example, many Native American "tribes" or more correctly, Nations, did not have large urban centers, architecture, or written languages. But I would be very hesitant to accept the notion that they or their ancestors who lived much like them were not part of any civilization. I guess it depends on who is defining the term.
Yes thankyou but do you in fact have a position?


yes no or maybeHURRY THE FUK UP WE DON'T HAVE FOREVERE DO YOU IN FGACT HAVE A POSITION, SORRY MY KEYBOORD ZERO HAS BECOME STICKY FOR SOME RESASON

CARRY ON GOPHER, YOU ARE A SWEATY SOLID NICE HUMAN STUFF i THINK

asMUCH AS i THINK i ACTUALLY THINK, I THINK

bUT THERE ARE THESE THINGS THOUGHT INTO HARDWARM ALL OVER THE PLANET, things of incredible beauty and mind and math and mass and matter and spirit, what a bunch of nice people we are.hahahahahahahaha I.m not kidding, how nice to find a little civilization in a sea of shjt.. Imagine that if you will. good evening frum the coast with the most

real man eating weather

At one time in the last century it was thought that PEI would shine above the rest of the Maritime provinces but it has recently been published in pere reviewd stuff that the potatoe has actually positioned itself 52.75 percent higher in value than the avertage Prince Edward Islander. I am horified shocked and mortified can hardley eat near death at this kind of horrible anti islander rumur,it is not truemany of them have learned to drive automobiles.
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
193
63
Nakusp, BC
We own nothing. Everything is on loan to us by our great grand children. There is no stability and comfort is our worst enemy. The Earth is sovereign and we are but a part of the life force we call the biosphere; the source of all life on this planet. There in nothing civilized about civilization. It is slavery. We have owners in this so called civilization. Indigenous people owned nothing. They were participants in life. We are more like spectators at the Roman Circus watching others kill each other, being thankful that it is not us, thinking that that makes us free. Freedom is being like the ancestors who had nothing. Our stuff enslaves us. It was taught that we use what we have and when it is gone, we use something else. We use stuff but we don't own it. When this "civilization" falls, and it will very soon, we will be free again.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
We own nothing. Everything is on loan to us by our great grand children. There is no stability and comfort is our worst enemy. The Earth is sovereign and we are but a part of the life force we call the biosphere; the source of all life on this planet. There in nothing civilized about civilization. It is slavery. We have owners in this so called civilization. Indigenous people owned nothing. They were participants in life. We are more like spectators at the Roman Circus watching others kill each other, being thankful that it is not us, thinking that that makes us free. Freedom is being like the ancestors who had nothing. Our stuff enslaves us. It was taught that we use what we have and when it is gone, we use something else. We use stuff but we don't own it. When this "civilization" falls, and it will very soon, we will be free again.

I can feel your real Cliffy. But being real again entails some uecomfortable mathmaticle and metapysicle explication, thirtybucks a month could save you, why not join us andmove forward, do you have grand children Cliffty?

I have no doubt whatever that love rules. If you shine with that love you will live forever, if you lust after chunks of matter you will burn in hell. I am reminded that I am not an expert about the real. I Imagine it's just slightly to the right of my visiojn.Of course you wil say that;s illusion at it's manistyfication sp if you are a recognized ratinal thinke
r you must also be a raving idiot.
A twenty-five bag can relieve the spose symtoms of compliance to groupthink, the worst place to be.Donate today for instant relif. 100 percent scientific review upo reguest, There is no greater contribution to the great mother than your seed stupid, stick with the plan you aint blid are you?