Lost Cities - An Oldest City and a legend verified

[ThaddeusAlexander]

No I don't think I do ... I never said I didn't know the definition of hyperbole did i

Boy you gotta lighten up a bit !

Cheers
~Thadalex

[Ethelred]

No one understand me. I just like to argue.

No one understands my jokes either. Too bad. I think they are funny and thats what counts.

[ThaddeusAlexander]

Originally posted by Ethelred
No one understand me. I just like to argue.

No one understands my jokes either. Too bad. I think they are funny and thats what counts.

I know you like to argue ... I do as well but maybe you just need to use more smilies so people know when you're joking ...

Cheers
~Thadalex

PS - If it makes you feel any better, I think you're funny sorry that was an easy one... do you want some water for that burn? zing again! ...

okay i'll shut up now ..... *Thadalex loads Civ3*

[ThaddeusAlexander]

BTW, where are the moderators? This thread should have been put in Off Topic ages ago, shouldn't it have? I think Ethelred first noticed it wasn't and posted something but that was a long while ago now ...



Cheers
~Thadalex

[Demerzel]

ouch we have an invoking of the moderators. run for cover boys!

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Actually, whislt on this subject, there was a fascinating Documentary shown here in Australia called "The Lost Pyramids of Caral" (I think it was Caral). These were pyramids, found in South America, which were part of a city which was 3,000 years OLDER than those in Egypt!! Probably old news to some of you, but I found it fascinating because this was not a small habitation, but an actual large CITY! Anyway, just FYI.

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

P.S: Yes this sould definitely be moved to the "Off Topic" area .

[Ethelred]

I don't think that is quite right. Neither does the BBC site for the documentary. Oldest in the New World though. Oldest found anyway. The problem with going on memory on this sort of thing is switching from BC to Before Present. Sometimes the two get confused and suddenly some thing from 3000 years ago becomes 3000 BC. The site is from 4600, of course it could be somewhat older than the C14 bags. The pyramid might have been started in 1400 BC based on C14 dated poles inside it.


Transcript of the BBC show:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2001/caraltrans.shtml

Part relating to the age of the settlement:

NARRATOR: They had no doubt Caral was a site of potentially huge importance. It made their dating of the shicra bags all the more crucial. They took 12 samples to the University of Illinois for testing. If the bags were from about 1400 BC Caral would certainly be an important discovery, but younger than Casma. Dates around 2000 BC would make it the oldest city in the Americas. Dates any earlier seemed inconceivable. Three months later the results arrived.

DR WINIFRED CREAMER (Northern Illinois University): I was at work and Jonathan called me and he said they are absolutely great, they're all early.

NARRATOR: The bags were dated at 2600 BC. Caral was nearly five thousand years old, as old as the pyramids of Egypt, older than anyone had thought possible.

Part about the age of the pyramid.:

NARRATOR: Tom Pozorski and his wife Sheila were about to make Casma into one of the sensations of archaeology because four years ago they unearthed some wooden poles inside the main pyramid. Wood can be carbon dated. The results showed it had been built in 1500 BC. It made Casma the oldest city ever discovered in the Americas and an instant candidate to be the mother city.

So the site is about the same age as the Egyptian pyramids but not older. The pyramid was built long after the Egyptian pyramids. The pyramids are just piles of dirt not stone. I think I heard of this place before. Didn't remember the name.

This site has a small picture of the mounds that are being called pyramids. Maybe they were at one time.

http://www.unknowncountry.com/news/?id=492

The picture on the BBC site looks like a photo but based on the other site above I think its an artists representation of what it might of looked like.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2001/caral.shtml

This one has the same small picture as the unkowncountry link but if you click on the picture below that one you can see a large 1024X768 photo of the largest mound with someone standing on the top. Looks pretty big but I don't think it was ever Cheops size plus the whole area is pretty hilly so it might have part natural before being added to.

Interesting photos on the Smithsonian site:

http://www.smithsonianmag.si.edu/smithsonian/issues02/aug02/caral.html

I particularly like the photo of the amphitheater. I am guessing it was a LONG photo take at night and it was lit a section at a time.

[gsmoove23]

Originally posted by Ethelred
Well the tower is in the second level at Jericho. This earliest wall is older from I have read before. The thing about dating with Jericho is that the Fundamentalists don't want ANYTHING older than they think the Bible allows. Since Jericho is in the Bible its treated from a religious point of view far more often than from a more academic archeologist viewpoint.

The first wall has nothing to do with the Bible, there were many walls of Jericho because it had such a long period of occupation. The one you're talking about came tumbling down, supposedly about 1400BC if you take the biblical archaeologists for their word. Fundamentalists aren't upset about earlier dates because the Jews didn't arrive til much later anyway.

Originally posted by Ethelred
That Turkish site didn't give the error range. So we can't judge it accuracy againt the Jericho tests. Especially since the dating may have been done longer ago than the Jericho dating. In other words with older equipment.

Carbon dating has a somewhat standard range of error. The further back you go the more range of error, therefore +/- 500 years is fairly standard for 8-10,000 year ago. This is one of the drawbacks of the technology. Often people will give the mid-year without the range of error too.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by gsmoove23

The first wall has nothing to do with the Bible,

It does for people that think the world is 6000 years old and the wall is 8000 to 9000.

there were many walls of Jericho because it had such a long period of occupation. The one you're talking about came tumbling down, supposedly about 1400BC

No I am talking about the first wall. Which was way before the cyclopein wall that some think is related to Joshua.

if you take the biblical archaeologists for their word. Fundamentalists aren't upset about earlier dates because the Jews didn't arrive til much later anyway.

Fundamentalists either ignore the actual age of Jericho by sticking to Joshua or they have to patch over the actual age of the city. They have issues with any site that is older than they think the world is.

Carbon dating has a somewhat standard range of error. The further back you go the more range of error, therefore +/- 500 years is fairly standard for 8-10,000 year ago. This is one of the drawbacks of the technology. Often people will give the mid-year without the range of error too.

If multiple samples are taken from the same item, say a log, and they give different results that increases the error range. Sometimes a surface sample might give a different date than an interior sample. Shouldn't be as bad as potassium-argon can be that respect.

[gsmoove23]

Originally posted by Ethelred
It does for people that think the world is 6000 years old and the wall is 8000 to 9000.

We still have those around? What sites have you been going to? Jericho has been studied by a great number of secular scholars but I've forgotten why I'm arguing this point.

Originally posted by Ethelred
If multiple samples are taken from the same item, say a log, and they give different results that increases the error range. Sometimes a surface sample might give a different date than an interior sample. Shouldn't be as bad as potassium-argon can be that respect.

If samples taken from the same item differ significantly then one of those samples is questionable and should probably be backed up by others. However, different samples will always give differing results.

[SpencerH]

I've always questioned that the middle east was "the birthplace of civilization". It seems like a western-biased notion to me. Surely there are more habitable places on earth that would be conducive to the growth of cities.

[gsmoove23]

Chances are there are thousands of earlier birthplaces of civilization. What archaeologists find are only the remains of settlement that can survive 10,000 years. People who build in stone, use long lasting materials or live in areas where the soil and climate is more conducive to preservation are going to be remembered while others will fade away.

The soil in northwest USA is highly acidic, Egyptian climate almost acts as a freeze-drier. Mississipian cultures and cultures in the southeastern US had enormous settlements when colonization began that were all virtually wiped out by disease before most europeans got there. They didn't build in stone, used no metal and archaeologists have to struggle to find even the smallest hint of settlement.

So in fact when we talk about the earliest cities we're really talking about the earliest preserved cities, and the rest is a big unknown.

[StingEx]

hmmm maybe a atlantis colony never nows
what the past hides before the human race

the Prince of Atlantis Has Spoken
a survivor from a lost race
maybe in aperence a human
but not a human,atlantien spirits inside
blood and so on.....
may the legends be presevet
for the glory of Atlantis
for my father
king of atlantis
his son the prince of atlantis
Akata Survived to this day
reborn/Astraly
we a atlantien dies
he becomes a astral wanderer
but the atlantien spirit inside
a human one,can chose
path to stay or go to a other
world,i chosen to stay
maybe my human soul
died,but my atlantien half
sucked my memories
to play on my human self
i mean i act to be a human
but i am not a human
Atlantien Survivor