PPN notes

[Tiompan]

ESPECIALLY NOT THE HOLED STONE'S LOCATION AT GOBLEKI TEPE.

Yet another wonderful Freudian slip .

Why did you ignore the problems with holed stones when repeating the incredibly unlikely Collins claim for the holed stone . Did you never wonder why there is no pic of the “alignment “ ? or did you simply accept the reproduction without question because it suited your agenda ?
There are various holed stones at GT most of them are quite low down on the pillars but the recent find has been claimed to have been a sighting hole for the putative “alignment” but the description and subsequent image give a false impression , the picture of the holed stone between the pillars is not how it was found , it’s merely a wishful thinking reproduction . Look at the holed stone in enclosure C , i.e. in it’s actual; position , not a “reconstruction “ you would have to lie down to see through it and you still wouldn’t see the horizon , it was not used for “sighting “ anything .
Not only does the reproduction site a holed stone where there was no evidence for one having been it provides an impression of a view to the north that may not exist , as we don’t know the extent of the dept of the debris at the top of tell which currently blocks the view .The open aspect of the site , roughly to the south is a given and if you want to suggest an alignment, then that is far more likely , if still contentious , to be in that direction The northern direction ,where the sun is never seen to rise or set is eschewed in the vast majority of alignments in all cultures .

[E.P. Grondine]

There are various holed stones at GT. Most of them are quite low down on the pillars but the recent find has been claimed to have been a sighting hole for the putative “alignment” but the description and subsequent image give a false impression , the picture of the holed stone between the pillars was not how it was found, it’s merely a wishful thinking reproduction.

Look at the holed stone in enclosure C , i.e. in it’s actual; position , not a “reconstruction “ you would have to lie down to see through it and you still wouldn’t see the horizon , it was not used for “sighting “ anything .

Not only does the reproduction site a holed stone where there was no evidence for one having been it provides an impression of a view to the north that may not exist , as we don’t know the extent of the dept of the debris at the top of tell which currently blocks the view .The open aspect of the site , roughly to the south is a given and if you want to suggest an alignment, then that is far more likely , if still contentious , to be in that direction The northern direction ,where the sun is never seen to rise or set is eschewed in the vast majority of alignments in all cultures .

Provide online links to the other holed stones if they exist.

[Tiompan]

Why didn’t you enquire earlier when I had mentioned the other holed stones previously ?
You actually mean that you were unaware of them and are incapable of googling to find them if you were ?

Read the Schmidt report from 2010 "Gobekli Tepe -Stome Age Sanctiaries " then search for the numerous mentions of of fonds of porthole stones .


More Collins type rubbish , but scroll down and you will see some examples .
http://whiteknightstudio.blogspot.co.uk ... chive.html
These are pics ,now you provide a pic of the of the "holed sighting stone" as depicted in the reproduction , no need to ask if one exists , as we know it doesn't .

Could you also respond to the real problems about the putative “holed sighting stone “ ?

[E.P. Grondine]

Why didn’t you enquire earlier when I had mentioned the other holed stones previously ?
You actually mean that you were unaware of them and are incapable of googling to find them if you were ?

More rubbish , but scroll down and you will see some of the other examples .
http://whiteknightstudio.blogspot.co.uk ... chive.html
These are pics ,now you provide a pic of the of the "holed sighting stone" as depicted in the reproduction , no need to ask if one exists , as we know it doesn't .

Could you also respond to the real problems about the putative “holed sighting stone “ ?

I think I'll let your link to your associates speak for you, DOLT.

Just to be clear for the really retarded, I'm speaking about the PPN circular holed stones.

[Tiompan]

Associates ? What are you talking about ?
I was clearly talking about the holed stone nonsense from Collins at GT , the other examples ,mentioned by Schmidt ,and in the pic were also from GT .
You asked for examples and got them .
Now you provide a pic a of the "holed sighting stone" as "reproduced " by Collins and attempt to respond the problems instead of resorting to your only available tactic of spouting bile .

[E.P. Grondine]

Associates ? What are you talking about ?
I was clearly talking about the holed stone nonsense from Collins at GT, the other examples, mentioned by Schmidt, and in the pic were also from GT .
You asked for examples and got them.
Now you provide a pic a of the "holed sighting stone" as "reproduced " by Collins and attempt to respond the problems instead of resorting to your only available tactic of spouting bile .

[Tiompan]

Yet again when unable to respond with anything meaningful we get the the fingers in the ear tantrum.
Do you have any idea of how how childish and pathetic that appears ?.
However it is probabaly better than attempting to making further embarrassing comments that will only get you deeper in the mud .
Want some more holed stones from GT that are more obvious than the one in the fantasy representation , and are as far off being oriented from deneb as it is possible to be, and also from the same enclosure ?

[E.P. Grondine]

If the “ folks at Cahokia “ don’t know what henge is then they might learn , you have no excuse you were told a long time ago and still ,unsurprisingly , persisted with the error .

The basis of the problem was Warren Wittry who named the Cahokia timber monument “Woodhenge” after the English monument , like you he was confused and misused the term Henge ( the timber monument at Cahokia is not a henge ). It was not the only thing he got wrong , his “astronomy “ and “alignments” suggested at the monument were worthy of your alignments towards the invisible comet ,or anyone else who can’t “do “ alignments .

How can you possibly know the “sky practices in the area “ ? even those who know the archaeology , astronomy and archaeoastromy of the period and area wouldn’t be so presumptious , for someone who knows nothing of the various disciplines it is a joke . Yes , we know the sky was different in the past , but Giacobini Zinner was not to be observed in the north and almost certainly not at all .
However , none of this has anything to with GT which was originally built after the end of the younger dryas , and you still haven’t explained why you made the link to the Kennet paper .

George, you could always take up Wittry's "mistakes" with him personally.

[Tiompan]

The basic error in the misuse of the term “henge” and or “woodhenge “ for timber circles that are sited within a henge would have hopefully been realised a long time ago .
The astronomical claims for the timber circles were shown to be fantastical many years ago , by a number of archaeoastronomers and it is only the gullible uncritical alt. crowd who still have any faith in them .

[E.P. Grondine]

George, I'm afraid that that ship has already sailed.

letr's spend our time in a more entertaining way, gossiping about the politicking excavation rights.

[Tiompan]

It's apparent that some missed the boat and others didn't know there was a sailing .

I have no interest in politicking or excavation rights .

[E.P. Grondine]

It's apparent that some missed the boat and others didn't know there was a sailing.

We can both agree on that.

I have no interest in politicking or excavation rights .

But that is how archaeology gets done, George.

No science is pure, probably least of all archaeology.
All of them take money,
and usually people pay for what they want,
unless the mechanisms of government are very broken.
(As is the case here in Ohio with the Ohio Historical Society.)

I find it fascinating that archaeologists never turn anthropological tools on themselves.

There are a series of PPNB sites in the area.

Now generally, an archaeologist's status comes from securing excavation rights to a site that people want excavated.

There are exceptions, as an extremely talented excavator will progress. Consider Bill Kelso - the slave quarters at Monticello, Bermuda Hundred, Jamestown.

Let's start with the US -

Any US institution that has been excavating in the occupied territories is pretty much out of the running. I believe that includes the group out of Boston.

The Oriental Institute has had two excavations going on in Syria, and due to ISIS now has people familiar with the area available. They have a long history of teaching Turkish students, Turkish staffers (the Hittite Dictionary project), lots of friends, AFOT, etc.

The Oriental Institute sets up or supports several local educational institutions, and ultimately the excavations and tourist management of the sites will be done by Turks. But the Turkish money to further develop their tourist industry is limited now.

Of course, the site of Karahan Tepe is in private hands, so the Oriental Institute would need a large chunk of change to obtain it. Any institution will, whether they be British, French, Poles, Canadians, Japanese, etc. So a problem all of them will face will be finding a sugar daddy, probably one from the new tech wealth or other new wealth.

The Germans are pretty well occupied with Gobekli Tepe, so they are probably out of the running for the other sites.

[E.P. Grondine]

This just in.
The source appears to be reputable. But we'll see.

http://www.evoanth.net/2015/07/30/massi ... terranean/

[kbs2244]

10K YBP boats???
Reed boats do not leave much of a trace.
Unless they have been tarred.

[E.P. Grondine]

raw paper on megalith:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 9X15300535

the quarry may lie nearby.

Date:

"Extrapolating ages from the local sea level curve, we infer that seawater inundated the inner lands at 9350 ± 200 year B.P., the upper limit which can be reasonably taken for the site abandonment."

In other words 7,400 BCE.

"The idea that early human ancestors once lived at the sea-floor of modern seas easily fascinates and attracts our imagination. What is more surprising, and until recently poorly recognized, is that an extensive archaeological record of early settlements still remains on the sea-floor of our continental shelves. Almost everything that we do know about prehistoric cultures derives from settlements that are now on land, and that were tens to hundreds of kilometres distant from the coastline when they were occupied. The vast majority of marine geophysicist and archaeologists have now realized that to trace the origins of civilization in the Mediterranean region, it is necessary to focus research in the now submerged shelf areas."