by AFL
CATEGORIES

 Military  
 Current events  
 Religion 
 Technology 
 Countries 
 Politics 
 Society 
 Other 






There are currently no top
rated posts : don't forget you can "thumb" up or down posts.

Website intro. Please login or register (it's very fast and free).



  • Index
  • » Other - Room 1
  • » Ancient civilization? by J.4.bergen
  •    Debate on whether an advanced civilization inhabited the earth before 12 000 BC.

    Modern humans have roamed the earth for about 200 000 years now yet the earliest evidence of a "civilization" dates back to around 13/12 000 BC.

    this means that apparently we've been wandering the earth as nomads for about 180 000 years.

    My believe is that it is very possible that there has been an ancient civilization that was highly advanced but somehow met its end due to some unfortunate turn of events either by the people themselves or a natural event.

    Many people tell me however that if this was the case, surely we would have evidence of this..
    Partially.. i'd agree with this.. but think of the fact that.. due to events, it is possible that sights are abandoned.. cities become deserted and after many generations they become stories and myths.. until a new (or old) society rediscovers the sights and decides to live there.. building, changing and basically updating the old city completely renewing it.. stories of the old city might be lost.. generation after generation lives on and no one knows what happened before...

    just think about it..

    Edit

#1 2014-07-10 16:23:14

          Taiwan (ROC)    Archduke
               Reply
   0    

Re: Ancient civilization?




How advanced is advanced?

Offline

#2 2012-10-30 04:15:33

          Canada    SgtPeppers
               Reply
   0    

Re: Ancient civilization?




@calibur 

3. the establishing, existence, fall, and total decay of a civilization would take time, by using Southeast Asia, it hugely reduces the timeframe from more than 100 000 years to only tens of thousands, which makes the decay doubtful

4. But those are human ancestors who migrated separately, modern humans were fully developed in Africa before they migrated, which reduces the timeframe drastically.

Offline

#3 2012-10-30 03:48:19

          United States    calibur
               Reply
   0    

Re: Ancient civilization?




@SgtPeppers 

3: I don't understand, could you restate that?
4: really? There are homo erectus remains in eastern Russia, and Australopithecus remains in at least South Africa. You really think modern humans couldn't have gone outside africa before the last ice age?


As I said earlier, just exploring possibilities.

Last edited by calibur (2012-10-30 03:52:30)

Offline

#4 2012-10-30 02:02:52

          Canada    SgtPeppers
               Reply
   0    

Re: Ancient civilization?




@calibur 

3. If you move to Southwest Asia, than most of the timeframe in which this civilization came about, existed, was destroyed and evidence of it was eradicated shrinks dramatically

4. Not amiable to agriculture was based on the fact the only place humans were around long enough for all the steps listed above to have occurred reasonably was in Africa. The timeline we have is almost certainly true as it matches all the archeological and genetic information we have and #3 I'm not saying the climate couldn't have changed, but I'm saying we know the climate since long before humans existed and such change didn't occur

Offline

#5 2012-10-30 01:21:10

          United States    calibur
               Reply
   0    

Re: Ancient civilization?




@SgtPeppers 

3: Only in recent years have we suspected the Harrappan culture died out from climate change. So it's possible. We're talking more about SW Asia, but you're right, glaciers there is a ridiculous proposition.
4: Why is it impossible that the timeline is wrong, why must it be in an area not amiable to agriculture, and #3 Who says the climate couldn't have changed?

Offline

#6 2012-10-29 07:32:16

          Canada    SgtPeppers
               Reply
   0    

Re: Ancient civilization?




@calibur 

3. Glaciers in Africa? Or major change that is significant enough to erase a civilization but has gone totally undetected by climatologists?

4. Because that would require a massive shift in the timeline of human development and require that it occur in an area which is not amiable to developing agriculture.

Offline

#7 2012-10-25 20:29:39

          Ukraine    IVort
               Reply
   0    

Re: Ancient civilization?




To come close to understanding some points in the theory of high developed ancient civilization's existence, we can compare it with our modern civilization. Especially how long will exist signs of modern society if we disappear. Some time ago I saw the modelling of the Earth's history in case if all mankind cease to exist. According that model every single evidence of our existance will be destroyed by nature in two-three thousand years. We are starting to use green-technologies which allow widely used materials to decay in the short term. We write informanion on a fast decaying paper and info-carriers that require special devices to read. So it would be not surprise if someone even thought of a possibility of highly developed ancient civilisation's existance.

Offline



   

#8 2012-10-24 03:34:16

          United States    calibur
               Reply
   0    

Re: Ancient civilization?




@SgtPeppers 

1: very well.
3: Glacial movements and environmental change could well have shifted specific geography of the land.
4: Such groups were certainly a limit to the Babylonians, and who's to say the surrounding groups would not have adapted pastoralism yet?

Offline

#9 2012-10-23 19:22:42

          Canada    SgtPeppers
               Reply
   0    

Re: Ancient civilization?




@calibur 

1 and 2. The specifics are debated
3. Civilization of the type he described leaves indelible marks (especially the key to civilization as we understand it, agriculture), we have scoured most of the continent looking for tiny fragments of the bones of human ancestors, if a culture had arisen, these same fossil rich riverbeds would be a treasure trove of artifacts, instead, we have nothing
4. They both ran into cultures, not as advanced, but able to resist. China had culture in India (moving North is mostly a frozen wasteland, not much worth expanding into, unlike resource rich central Africa). And Rome had the Germanic peoples (who were assisted by natural barriers). In the scenario described however, the only contest would be small groups of hunter gatherers, not much danger to a civilization

Offline

#10 2012-10-21 15:41:02

          United States    calibur
               Reply
   0    

Re: Ancient civilization?




@SgtPeppers 

1&2: "reached anatomical modernity about 200,000 years ago"
"arriving in Eurasia 125,000-60,000 years ago"
3: Yes, but we have not even nearly explored half of the entirety of areas where civilization is likely to arise, not that far back.
4: Then why did Rome not move further north? China?
5: True

All good points, just being a possible devil's advocate.

Offline

#11 2012-10-21 08:30:55

          Canada    SgtPeppers
               Reply
   0    

Re: Ancient civilization?




Hate to be the bearer of bad news here, but it simply isn't possible.

1. The estimate of 200 000 years is a gross exaggeration, for at least half of that we were homo sapiens, but a less advanced version, built on gradual progression in intelligence and social building

2. For a further 50 000 years, we were confined to Africa, a continent which aside from not being particularly amiable to civilization by the modern definition also featured a massive near extinction event that massively reduced human population a few thousand years before we left Africa, it took us until the agricultural revolution to recover our numbers

3. There is a complete lack of evidence, which given the amount of archeological exploration we have accomplished, is rather damning for this idea

4. If a single civilization rose to advanced status with no competition, then there is very little (only a massive natural catastrophe, none of which occurred in the time frame) that could have destroyed it, because the only limits on a civilization are other civilizations and lacking that, you would have nearly limitless expansion potential. At the least, it would expand to the degree that signs of its existence would be obvious, clearly it never did

5. We know what the people of this time period were doing because we have relics, they were living in small communities and were developing early religious ideas, no signs of advanced civilization potential to be found

Offline

#12 2012-10-14 15:53:56

          United States    calibur
               Reply
   0    

Re: Ancient civilization?




Good point. Although, agriculture does not mean just farming. It includes herding as well. And this does not account got the loss of pottery, weaving, and to some degree, metalworking.

Offline

#13 2012-10-14 09:48:05

          Germany    Dasding23
               Reply
   0    

Re: Ancient civilization?




As research has shown, farming was not the most effective way to gather your food.

1. hunter-gatherers would not spend as much time on getting their daily calories as farmers were in order to grow it.
2. Our bodies are evolutionary built for a hunter-gatherer life. The permanent settling and farming had a lot of disadvantages. The health of farmers was in general worse compared to their forager counterparts.
3. They needed more calories to produce their calories so they basically had less to eat.
4. Because they were bound to their land they were more vulnerable for attacks so they had to spend more ressources for their defense.
5. These disadvantages were only later overcome through better techniques.


Also there were some civilizations which destroyed themselves through non sustainable use of their surounding.


My conclusion from that is, that it is possible an ancient civilization died exist but died out due to non-sustainable use of ressources and/or attacks or natural desasters from the outside.
Because hunting-gathering was superior in this period of time, other people didn't  follow the example.


My last point is the question if farming is a requirement of 'civilization'. There were indeed nomad civilizations which didn't farm e.g. the mongols.

Offline

#14 2012-10-13 00:59:26

          United States    maps12
               Reply
   0    

Re: Ancient civilization?




Well, like the Dorians destroyed Mycea, same could have happened to this civilization.  Only problem is that farming and such was in the neolithic era, and people would not have developed enough to support full blown civilizations.

Offline

#15 2012-10-12 23:47:21

          United States    calibur
               Reply
   0    

Re: Ancient civilization?




@Dasding23 

Yes, but people in the surrounding countryside didn't forget how to grow grain and work iron.
Valid point, though.

Offline

#16 2012-10-12 22:05:49

          Germany    Dasding23
               Reply
   0    

Re: Ancient civilization?




@calibur 

not so dubious if you look at what happened to rome after it fell to barbarians, it took more than 1000 years to the renaissance until all of the techniques were re-invented or rediscovered

Offline

#17 2012-10-11 00:26:52

          United States    calibur
               Reply
   0    

Re: Ancient civilization?




I actually saw something on the history channel about this a week or so ago. I'm convinced that it's quite possible. I do find it a bit dubious that we lost even the most basic of technologies, lost all scientific and cultural progress...

Offline

#18 2012-10-10 22:05:25

          Netherlands    J.4.bergen
               Reply
   0    

Ancient civilization?




Modern humans have roamed the earth for about 200 000 years now yet the earliest evidence of a "civilization" dates back to around 13/12 000 BC.

this means that apparently we've been wandering the earth as nomads for about 180 000 years.

My believe is that it is very possible that there has been an ancient civilization that was highly advanced but somehow met its end due to some unfortunate turn of events either by the people themselves or a natural event.

Many people tell me however that if this was the case, surely we would have evidence of this..
Partially.. i'd agree with this.. but think of the fact that.. due to events, it is possible that sights are abandoned.. cities become deserted and after many generations they become stories and myths.. until a new (or old) society rediscovers the sights and decides to live there.. building, changing and basically updating the old city completely renewing it.. stories of the old city might be lost.. generation after generation lives on and no one knows what happened before...

just think about it..

Offline

Board footer

Created by AFL, powered by FluxBB
© 2011 theworlddebating.com