Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 112 (8734 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-30-2017 4:51 AM
445 online now:
frako, PaulK, ThinAirDesigns (3 members, 442 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Post Volume:
Total: 802,213 Year: 6,819/21,208 Month: 2,580/2,634 Week: 243/525 Day: 2/74 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
3456Next
Author Topic:   Research for a book - Survey of various dating methods
damoncasale
Member (Idle past 2180 days)
Posts: 41
From: Seffner, FL, USA
Joined: 12-09-2010


Message 16 of 82 (595759)
12-10-2010 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by jar
12-10-2010 10:09 AM


Don't know where to find it on the web, but you can read about it in "Egypt: Image of Heaven" by Willem Zitman.

http://www.amazon.com/...ere-Cradle/dp/1931882541/ref=sr_1_1

Used copies of it are apparently quite cheap.

Damon


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by jar, posted 12-10-2010 10:09 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by jar, posted 12-10-2010 10:27 AM damoncasale has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 28460
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 17 of 82 (595761)
12-10-2010 10:27 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by damoncasale
12-10-2010 10:23 AM


Sorry, what I have read by Zitman has just been silly. If you actually can provide a link that shows exactly what tablet is under discussion then we may be able to discuss it.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by damoncasale, posted 12-10-2010 10:23 AM damoncasale has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by PurpleYouko, posted 12-10-2010 10:36 AM jar has responded

  
PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 713
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 18 of 82 (595765)
12-10-2010 10:36 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by jar
12-10-2010 10:27 AM


It's pretty easy to find a bunch of web sites that mention this artifact.
here are a few that i uncovered in about 5 minutes of googling

http://historicconnections.webs.com/mesopotamia.htm
It's labelled "sumerian start chart" and is about half way down the page

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/...yed-Sodom-5-000-years-ago.html

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/31/kofels_asteroid/

It seems the thing was found in the royal palace of ninevah


This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by jar, posted 12-10-2010 10:27 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by jar, posted 12-10-2010 10:47 AM PurpleYouko has not yet responded
 Message 23 by damoncasale, posted 12-10-2010 11:04 AM PurpleYouko has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15485
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 19 of 82 (595767)
12-10-2010 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by damoncasale
12-10-2010 9:31 AM


Umm...have you heard of the planisphere that was discovered in Mesopotamia? (Tablet K8538 in the British Museum in London.) It basically showed that ancient peoples were using constellations to represent places on Earth. So having Orion represent Egypt -- however accurately or inaccurately the pyramids were built to match the stars of Orion -- isn't exactly far-fetched.

It is just possible that they did.

But Hancock goes further. He goes: OK, let's assume (without actual evidence) that they were trying to match the stars of Orion. But they don't exactly match the stars of Orion. So the Pyramids must have been built in another era when they did exactly match the stars of Orion. Oh, but you object that even back then they didn't exactly match the stars of Orion? Oh well, no-one's perfect (thus undermining his original argument).

And he gets all that from the proposition that the builders might have been trying to imitate Orion's belt.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by damoncasale, posted 12-10-2010 9:31 AM damoncasale has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 28460
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 20 of 82 (595770)
12-10-2010 10:47 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by PurpleYouko
12-10-2010 10:36 AM


Yeah, still don't see much there. The quote "Long thought to be an Assyrian tablet, computer analysis has matched it with the sky above Mesopotamia in 3300BC and proves it to be of much more ancient Sumerian origin." is pretty suspicious.

Would like to find more info on it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by PurpleYouko, posted 12-10-2010 10:36 AM PurpleYouko has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15485
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 21 of 82 (595772)
12-10-2010 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by damoncasale
12-10-2010 9:31 AM


Nevertheless, I'm still looking for any kind of archaeo-astronomical dating methods that might possibly be used to date prehistoric artifacts and events. (Things like the eclipse observations of ancient Babylon, I already know about, but those don't really help me to understand the time period in question -- from roughly 3500 BC back to the end of the last Ice Age, and even before if it's had an impact on later human civilization.)

Yes, well, there may be no archaeo-astronomical dating methods that will help you in that respect. Just because it would be way cool if there were doesn't mean that you should leap at any flimsy ill-evidenced story that there are.

---

If you were writing a book to make people go "Gee whiz, archeo-astronomy, hoorah!", then of course you should put all this stuff in. But if you want to write a sober book about archaeology and dating methods as they pertain to our understanding of religion then you should stick strictly to what has been rigorously proved, and not drag in flaky pseudoscience.

The same goes for the other aspects of your book. You should think about this. Do you want people who know no better to think: "Gee whiz, that's amazing!", or do you want people conversant with the facts to think: "I'd never thought of it like that ... you know, he's got a point"?

'Cos you can't do both.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by damoncasale, posted 12-10-2010 9:31 AM damoncasale has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by damoncasale, posted 12-10-2010 11:14 AM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5705
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 22 of 82 (595773)
12-10-2010 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by damoncasale
12-10-2010 9:31 AM


Source?
Umm...have you heard of the planisphere that was discovered in Mesopotamia? (Tablet K8538 in the British Museum in London.) It basically showed that ancient peoples were using constellations to represent places on Earth.

Please show a source for this speculation. I have not heard of this before and would like to see some real background info on it.

In a quick Google search there is lifttle about this. But everyone seems to agree it dates to about 700 BCE, not 3000 BCE. All the information about this seems to come from this book.
A Sumerian Observation of the Kfels' Impact Event

Here is one review of the book

quote:
For those who do have these interests, I think you will find what I did, and what the authors themselves admit from the very beginning, the arguments are very circular. The authors use what they want to prove as part of the argument. They want to show that the Kfels' formation near the village of Kfels' in Austria was an impact crater rather than a slide or volcanic structure, that it occurred in the period from 3500-2000 BC, and that Sumerian disk shaped object K8538 in the British Museum's cuneiform collection, generally referred to as the "Planisphere," depicted this event. They then proceed to adjust the data of all sides until it fit's their proposal. Data which does not agree with the theory is discredited or reread. Their basis for this is generally acceptable research by others, but the research results are by no means consensual among the field's professionals. This doesn't mean that the results are "wrong," only that they have not withstood the scrutiny of time and further study. In fact, the reports the authors use, are just that: "further study" and part of the scientific "scrutiny" in the field.

Source

Sounds like unevidenced new age hooey to me.

More

quote:
In a self-published book[2] co-authored with Mark Hempsell, an engineer at the University of Bristol, Bond claimed to have deciphered an Assyrian clay tablet dated to 700 BC that they argued might describe an asteroid strike causing a landslide at Kfels in Tyrol in 3123 BC. They relate this to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.[3] The landslide is normally dated to about 9800 years ago[4] long before the tablet was recorded and over 4500 years before the Bristol researchers date.[5] Bond and Hempsell have suggested that there was contamination, a claim that has been denied by other research.[6] The impact theory had already been proposed in 1936 by the Austrian scientist Franz Eduard Suess and later on by Alexander Tollmann, who hypothetized impacts in around 7640 BCE and 3150 BCE, respectively. The issue of whether an impact caused the landslide has been researched and no evidence was found for an asteroid, meteorite or comet, and geologists believe it was caused by other factors such as 'deep creep'.[7].

Also from the wiki on Mr. Bond.

quote:
Alan Bond is an engineer, with a degree in Mechanical Engineering. He worked on liquid rocket engines, principally the RZ2 (liquid oxygen / kerosene) and the RZ20 (liquid oxygen / liquid hydrogen) at Rolls Royce under the tutelage of Val Cleaver, and he was also involved with flight trials of the Blue Streak at Woomera.

Real expertise in the subject matter I see.

I would be real careful if I were you before I relied on this self published, non peer reviewed, collection of pages with writing on it, for anything.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by damoncasale, posted 12-10-2010 9:31 AM damoncasale has not yet responded

    
damoncasale
Member (Idle past 2180 days)
Posts: 41
From: Seffner, FL, USA
Joined: 12-09-2010


Message 23 of 82 (595776)
12-10-2010 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by PurpleYouko
12-10-2010 10:36 AM


Hmm. Hadn't heard of the Sodom and Gomorrah asteroid impact hypothesis, and I'd rather not even pursue that line of inquiry.

But the scientists' mention that Sumerian astronomy wasn't advanced is laughable. Astronomical knowledge and observation techniques has *declined* from roughly 3500 BC onwards. It's only gotten worse, not better.

There is a book titled "Civilization One" by Christopher Knight and Alan Butler which discusses the way that ancient peoples were able to create standardized units of weight, measurement time, etc., based on astronomical measurements. They understood that the earth was a sphere and somehow knew how to calculate latitude and even longitude (using lunar eclipses, apparently).

Creating such standardized units is easy:

1) Draw a large circle on the ground, subdivided into 366 parts (easy to do with twine laid out along the circumference, then folded until you get down to a 366th of the original length).
2) Place wooden poles at two neighboring points along this subdivided circle, at opposite ends of one of the subdivisions.
3) Wait for a star to pass in front of one pole.
4) Take a weighted pendulum (pebble on a string, or whatever simple equivalent available to ancient peoples) and measure how many full swings it takes for the star to reach the second pole.
5) Adjust your string length and repeat this process until you get exactly 366 swings.

Congratulations, your pendulum string length is equal to half of a megalithic "yard". From that one standardized unit of measurement, you can create other standardized units, from time, to weight, to volume, etc.

Astronomy was hugely important to ancient peoples, most likely because it was a survival trait for prehistoric peoples to use to try to predict climate changes.

Damon


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by PurpleYouko, posted 12-10-2010 10:36 AM PurpleYouko has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Theodoric, posted 12-10-2010 11:36 AM damoncasale has responded
 Message 29 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-10-2010 12:08 PM damoncasale has not yet responded

    
damoncasale
Member (Idle past 2180 days)
Posts: 41
From: Seffner, FL, USA
Joined: 12-09-2010


Message 24 of 82 (595780)
12-10-2010 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Dr Adequate
12-10-2010 10:52 AM


Yes, well, there may be no archaeo-astronomical dating methods that will help you in that respect. Just because it would be way cool if there were doesn't mean that you should leap at any flimsy ill-evidenced story that there are.

So archaeo-astronomy is basically unverifiable, is that what you're saying?

That's fine if that's the case. I just didn't know one way or the other. What I do know is that it's now generally accepted that Stonehenge was originally a prehistoric observatory, whereas that theory sent shock waves through the establishment when it was first presented. So I do know that ancient peoples were commonly making astronomical observations (since stone circles like this one, aligned to solstices, able to predict lunar eclipses, etc.) are very common. But other than that, I'm very unfamiliar with what's accepted and what's not.

As far as Dr. Adequate's assessment of Graham Hancock's theories, yes, that's exactly why I *don't* think astronomical synchronisms are at all reliable methods of dating.

Regarding Jar and Theodoric's posts, look, I haven't been able to find further documentation on this myself. If you guys are going to complain that it "sounds suspicious" or whatever, go ahead...but I'm not interested in discussing that. If you want to read Zitman's book and see what he says about it, fine, but I'm not about to excerpt massive parts of his book on this forum. I'm not in the mood to do your research for you, sorry. If you can find other *scientific* research or analysis into this tablet and can post what you find, I'd be interested in that, but otherwise, let's move on please.

Damon


This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-10-2010 10:52 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-10-2010 11:58 AM damoncasale has responded

    
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5705
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 25 of 82 (595785)
12-10-2010 11:36 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by damoncasale
12-10-2010 11:04 AM


Really?
Astronomical knowledge and observation techniques has *declined* from roughly 3500 BC onwards. It's only gotten worse, not better.

So you are proposing that astronomical knowledge and observation techniques were more advanced in 3500 BCE than they are now?

There is a book titled "Civilization One" by Christopher Knight and Alan Butler which discusses the way that ancient peoples were able to create standardized units of weight, measurement time, etc., based on astronomical measurements. They understood that the earth was a sphere and somehow knew how to calculate latitude and even longitude (using lunar eclipses, apparently).

This has nothing to do with the topic, but it shows us clearly where you are coming from. You have no interest in actual history or science. Your intended book will just be another tome of new age woo.

Christopher Knight does not seem to be a scientist or even a historian.

quote:
Christopher Knight is an author who has written several pseudoarcaeological and pseudohistorical books dealing with theories such as 366-degree geometry and the origins of Freemasonry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Knight_%28author%29

Everyone should peruse the titles of his books and do some research on them. I think it will quickly show what damon thinks science and research is.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by damoncasale, posted 12-10-2010 11:04 AM damoncasale has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by damoncasale, posted 12-10-2010 11:47 AM Theodoric has responded

    
damoncasale
Member (Idle past 2180 days)
Posts: 41
From: Seffner, FL, USA
Joined: 12-09-2010


Message 26 of 82 (595787)
12-10-2010 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Theodoric
12-10-2010 11:36 AM


Re: Really?
So you are proposing that astronomical knowledge and observation techniques were more advanced in 3500 BCE than they are now?

Possibly to some degree, but I was referring to ancient astronomy, not modern astronomy.

This has nothing to do with the topic, but it shows us clearly where you are coming from. You have no interest in actual history or science. Your intended book will just be another tome of new age woo.

I call personal attack. Discussion over.

Hopefully it has been obvious *to others* that I'm actually interested in science and not "new age woo." Especially as I accept when others in this thread have mentioned things that were unreliable or unverifiable and I've accepted such.

Damon


This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Theodoric, posted 12-10-2010 11:36 AM Theodoric has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Theodoric, posted 12-10-2010 4:16 PM damoncasale has not yet responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15485
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 27 of 82 (595788)
12-10-2010 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by damoncasale
12-10-2010 11:14 AM


What I do know is that it's now generally accepted that Stonehenge was originally a prehistoric observatory ...

No, it's the other way round.

They didn't align the megaliths in order to measure the position of the Sun at the winter solstice, how in the world would they do that? And why? --- they may have lived in the Bronze Age but they weren't stupid.

They aligned the stones according to the measurements they'd already made using things that were easier to move, such as (for example) wooden pegs and string.

Observatory, scmobservatory. Yes, they knew one or two things about astronomy. But obviously they didn't find these things out by building Stonehenge. They built Stonehenge on a plan based on knowing these things.

You might as well say that because the chancels of English churches point east, English churches are giant compasses.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by damoncasale, posted 12-10-2010 11:14 AM damoncasale has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by damoncasale, posted 12-10-2010 12:04 PM Dr Adequate has responded

  
damoncasale
Member (Idle past 2180 days)
Posts: 41
From: Seffner, FL, USA
Joined: 12-09-2010


Message 28 of 82 (595789)
12-10-2010 12:04 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Dr Adequate
12-10-2010 11:58 AM


Why would you think that I meant to say that the ancient Britons discovered these things by building Stonehenge? Of course there were wooden pegs and string originally.

Damon


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-10-2010 11:58 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-10-2010 12:10 PM damoncasale has responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15485
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 29 of 82 (595790)
12-10-2010 12:08 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by damoncasale
12-10-2010 11:04 AM


But the scientists' mention that Sumerian astronomy wasn't advanced is laughable. Astronomical knowledge and observation techniques has *declined* from roughly 3500 BC onwards. It's only gotten worse, not better.

Where did you even get that idea from?

We can see things twelve billion light years away and can measure the distance to the Moon so accurately that we can say that it's receding from the Earth at a rate of 38 millimeters per year. The Sumerians didn't even know how many planets there were and were geocentrists.

Really, how could they be better? We have the Hubble Space Telescope and laser ranging. They had the naked eye and string.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by damoncasale, posted 12-10-2010 11:04 AM damoncasale has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15485
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 30 of 82 (595791)
12-10-2010 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by damoncasale
12-10-2010 12:04 PM


Why would you think that I meant to say that the ancient Britons discovered these things by building Stonehenge?

Because you called it an "observatory". Which is a place where you discover truths about astronomy.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by damoncasale, posted 12-10-2010 12:04 PM damoncasale has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by damoncasale, posted 12-10-2010 12:14 PM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Prev1
2
3456Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017