Investigations related to ancient cultures and sites are sometimes the result of questionable arguments and inadequate techniques. Even the method of radiocarbon dating to assess the age of old sites and structures is far from perfect, as indicated in the following paragraphs (in italics) from Refs. (1 & 2).



"... carbon-14 dating has been shown to be far from perfect in measuring organic material. Seals that were freshly killed have been dated at 1,300 years old. Also, when scientists tested two parts of a frozen musk ox found in Fairbanks, Alaska, two vastly different dates were given. Radiocarbon testing falsely showed that one part of the musk ox was 24,000 years old, while another part was only 7,200 years old. .... ." Ref. (1)



'No matter how "useful" it is though, the radiocarbon method is still not capable of yielding accurate and reliable results. There are gross discrepancies, the chronology is uneven and relative, and the accepted dates are actually selected dates. This whole blessed thing is nothing but 13th century alchemy, and it all depends upon which funny paper you read.' Robert E. Lee, Radiocarbon: Ages in Error. Anthropological Journal of Canada, vol. 19 (3), 1981, pp. 9-29’. ………….. Ref. (2)

Thus the radiocarbon dating of “temples” etc. at Gobekli Tepe (or GT) site in Turkey at 12,000 years old (or from 10,000 BC, Ref. 3) raises serious doubts. Moreover, as indicated below in APPENDIX (Ref. 4), the claim that this site is from the Pre Pottery Neolithic (PPN) era and before the invention of wheel is highly questionable, considering that shaping and sculpting of extremely massive stone pillars etc. at the site, weighing as much as 50 tons, would not be possible without the help of metallic tools, the use of which is known to have occurred only after 4,000 BC (or 6,000 years ago).The GT site therefore, notwithstanding the claims of its association with the PPN era and as 12,000 years old (or from 10,000 BC) according to radiocarbon dating, appears to be much younger, perhaps only 3,900 years old or from 1,900 BC (the actual date corresponding to the apparent radiocarbon date of about 10,000 BC as per the Appendix in Ref. 2). Needless to say, the radiocarbon age of 12,000 years (or 10,000 BC) for GT seems to be off by a factor of about 3 (times) the actual age at 3,900 years (or 1,900 BC), keeping especially in mind the real possibility of the use of metallic tools to shape and sculpt massive stones for site’s temples.



Incidentally, in another case involving questionable and arbitrary assumptions and methodology, during the research to prove that agriculture originated in Turkey long ago and then spread to other places from there and that the mother of Sanskrit and other modern languages was spoken in Turkey long ago (Appendix A, Ref. 5), the researchers performed analysis on a computer by considering only two options for root of Sanskrit etc., the first a language spoken in Turkish Anatolia region about 8,500 years ago and the second a language spoken in Pontic steppes 6,000 years ago. As planned / contrived beforehand, i.e. ignoring the possibility of Sanskrit as the mother / root of other languages and instead considering in analysis only two options (languages spoken long ago only in Anatolia and Pontic steppes), the computer “confirmed” that the mother of Sanskrit and other present day languages was spoken in Anatolia (Turkey) about 8,500 years ago and from there its influence spread to other places (including India) with agriculture.



Even the use of genetic testing to identify certain genetic markers in people living in different places these days in the study of migrations of people during ancient times is highly questionable. The basic idea behind this technique is that the matching of certain genetic markers in people living these days in different places is the result of migrations of their ancestors long ago. However, this is not necessarily true, as explained in Ref. (6). For example, the similarity in genetic markers currently in people in different places can also be the result of epigenetics (caused due to people / families living for generations in different places with similar climate / weather and following similar lifestyles) and not just due to ancestors migrating long ago between those places. Since the current genetic testing does not distinguish and separate genetic markers due to ancient migrations from those due to environment (climate etc.) and lifestyle, the results indicating ancient migrations according to genetic testing are pointless. Furthermore, the statistical results and inferences based on the genetic testing of very small and insignificant samples currently are totally irrelevant and unsuited for confirming mass migrations of people thousands of years ago over thousands of miles (Ref. 6).





The recently excavated archeological site containing “temples” and other structures in Gobekli Tepe (GT) in southern Turkish region is thought to be from 10,000 BC (Ref. 3). But in reality it might be from 1,900 BC, after eliminating the uncertainties in radiocarbon dating as per Appendix in Ref. (2).


It seems that to justify the questionable age for GT (10,000 BC according to radiocarbon dating), the site is being overly hyped through writings and videos as the oldest in the world, pre-dating agriculture and belonging to the hunter-gatherer era, and having the Pre Pottery Neolithic (PPN) connection and before the invention of wheel.

Considering humans have used pottery (including clay pots and pans) since prehistoric times (well before 15,000 BC), the association with PPN for GT (with questionable radiocarbon date 10,000 BC) is quite preposterous.

Furthermore, since the site (“temples” for example ) at GT required cutting and shaping of huge stone pillars etc. (weighing in tons, as much as 50 tons), that type of enormous task would not have been carried out by builders without the help of metallic tools (made from copper, bronze or iron etc.) or at least until 5,000 BC (7,000 years ago) when humans first learnt the use of metals (or perhaps even as late as 4,000 BC when the use of metallic tools became common). Thus the GT site, rather than being of a Pre Pottery Neolithic era, appears to be much younger, belonging probably to the post-metallic age and coming after 4,000 BC (perhaps even as late as 1,900 BC, after making corrections to the apparent radiocarbon date 10,000 BC as per Appendix in Ref. 2).

The temples and other structures at GT (the southernmost point / hub in Turkey) probably arose initially (in 1,900 BC or so) to “serve” traders and other travelers from Egypt, India and Greece etc. passing near the southern part of Europe The artwork at the site (especially in GT temples), showing pictures (line sketches) of a vast variety of animals (lions etc.), is not just local but probably also reflects the influence and variety (including flora and fauna) from far-off places like India and Egypt etc.

It seems the GT settlements (temples etc.) survived as long as the ancient route / routes connecting India, Egypt and Greece etc. via GT remained active. But when the travel between Egypt, India or Greece etc., via GT, subsided a few hundred years later (a few centuries after 2,000 BC), after travelers probably started taking other (perhaps southern, shorter and easier) routes between India and Egypt etc. thus bypassing GT altogether, the sites in GT (including the “temples” etc.) had no more use, were abandoned and shut down.



(1) “Limitations of Radiocarbon Dating,” Discovery Magazine, Jan. 1, 2006, http://www.apologeticspress.org/DiscoveryPubPage.aspx?pub=2&issue=844&article=811



(2) “Radiocarbon Dating: Its Limitations and Usefulness,” Central Highland Christian Publications (Australia), 1998, http://www.chcpublications.net/radcarbn.htm



(3) V.S. Gopalakrishnan, “GOBEKLI TEPE (10,000 BC) AND UNDERSTANDING HUMAN CIVILIZATION,” Jan 11, 2013, http://creative.sulekha.com/gobekli-tepe-10-000-bc-and-understanding-human-civilization_597553_blog



(4) Subhash C. Sharma (Seva Lamberdar), ”To the archaeologically curious: A comment on the ancient Gobekli Tepe in Turkey,” Jan 16, 2013, https://such.forumotion.com/t9998-to-the-archaeologically-curious-a-comment-on-the-ancient-gobekli-tepe-in-turkey



(5) Subhash C. Sharma, “On the origins of the Vedas and Sanskrit (including the Aryan Invasion Theory,” Aug. 21, 2012, http://lamberdar.hubpages.com/hub/origins-of-vedas-and-sanskrit



(6) Subhash C. Sharma, “Genetic testing issues in the study of ancient population migrations in India,” October 17, 2012, http://lamberdar.hubpages.com/hub/genetic-testing_population-migrations





by: Dr. Subhash C. Sharma

(dated: Jan. 22, 2013 ..... http://creative.sulekha.com//questions-and-comments-on-the-study-of-ancient-sites-and-cultures_597851_blog)

"So do you think the people who erected these statues had metal tools? The largest of these weighed over 80 tons.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moai " ... Panini (https://such.forumotion.com/t9998-to-the-archaeologically-curious-a-comment-on-the-ancient-gobekli-tepe-in-turkey#77953)

>>> Interesting.

But compare the roughly formed "figures / statues" (dated: 1250 to 1500 AD) in the above (at Easter Island) with the neatly formed and sculpted structures at GT (10000 BC (?) according to RC-dating). You can see the difference. You can easily see whether or not the metallic tools might have been used at GT.

Compare to this?



I don't know, don't see additional sophistication here.

Just look at this (from Ref. 3), http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0HsEubEVhO8/T9w01PKCWEI/AAAAAAAABuo/6vHdkIk2CcY/s1600/gobekli-full_35417_600x450.jpg

Yeah none of those pillars are more sophisticated than the moai.

And the engineering challenge is bigger with the moai with the large heads and higher centers of gravity.

panini press wrote:And the engineering challenge is bigger with the moai with the large heads and higher centers of gravity.

The near identical shaping and sizing of several massive stone pillars, especially with sharp edges and flat surfaces, at GT would not be possible without the help of considerably harder and sharper tools and that certainly points to the post-metallic era.

I am not convinced. If the Rapa Nui erected those statues with stone tools, I can't imagine why people with stone tools could not build the structure in Turkey. I do share your concern regarding the reliability of carbon dating, but I would not dismiss it quite as nonchalantly based on nothing but conjecture.

panini press wrote:I am not convinced. If the Rapa Nui erected those statues with stone tools, I can't imagine why people with stone tools could not build the structure in Turkey. I do share your concern regarding the reliability of carbon dating, but I would not dismiss it quite as nonchalantly based on nothing but conjecture.

That aside, unlike in the case of crude and dissimilar massive ancient relics (e.g. huge statues, beams and columns etc.) carved out of stone long ago in other places by using clumsy, brittle and easily breakable, often blunt and difficult to handle stone tools, the nearly identically shaped and sculpted multiple massive stone pillars etc.(with right-angled sharp edges and uniformly flat surfaces) at GT (Ref. 3, http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0HsEubEVhO8/T9w01PKCWEI/AAAAAAAABuo/6vHdkIk2CcY/s1600/gobekli-full_35417_600x450.jpg) strongly point to the use of considerably stronger, harder, sharper and easy to handle metallic tools which became available only after the advent of metallic age about 6000 years ago or after 4000 BC.

Seva Lamberdar wrote: Thus the radiocarbon dating of “temples” etc. at Gobekli Tepe (or GT) site in Turkey at 12,000 years old (or from 10,000 BC, Ref. 3) raises serious doubts. Moreover, as indicated below in APPENDIX (Ref. 4), the claim that this site is from the Pre Pottery Neolithic (PPN) era and before the invention of wheel is highly questionable, considering that shaping and sculpting of extremely massive stone pillars etc. at the site, weighing as much as 50 tons, would not be possible without the help of metallic tools, the use of which is known to have occurred only after 4,000 BC (or 6,000 years ago).The GT site therefore, notwithstanding the claims of its association with the PPN era and as 12,000 years old (or from 10,000 BC) according to radiocarbon dating, appears to be much younger, perhaps only 3,900 years old or from 1,900 BC (the actual date corresponding to the apparent radiocarbon date of about 10,000 BC as per the Appendix in Ref. 2). Needless to say, the radiocarbon age of 12,000 years (or 10,000 BC) for GT seems to be off by a factor of about 3 (times) the actual age at 3,900 years (or 1,900 BC), keeping especially in mind the real possibility of the use of metallic tools to shape and sculpt massive stones for site’s temples, shown below in Figure 1 (Ref. 3: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0HsEubEVhO8/T9w01PKCWEI/AAAAAAAABuo/6vHdkIk2CcY/s1600/gobekli-full_35417_600x450.jpg).

Figure 1 ... Gobekli Tepe (Ref. 3)



Note, unlike in the case of crude and dissimilar massive ancient relics (e.g. huge statues, beams and columns etc.) carved out of stone long ago in other places by using clumsy, brittle and easily breakable, often blunt and difficult to handle stone tools, the nearly identically shaped and sculpted multiple massive stone pillars etc.(with right-angled sharp edges and uniformly flat surfaces) at GT (Figure 1) strongly point to the use of considerably stronger, harder, sharper and easy to handle metallic tools which became available only after the advent of metallic age about 6000 years ago or after 4000 BC.

Seva Lamberdar wrote:


Figure 1 ... Gobekli Tepe (Ref. 3)



Note, unlike in the case of crude and dissimilar massive ancient relics (e.g. huge statues, beams and columns etc.) carved out of stone long ago in other places by using clumsy, brittle and easily breakable, often blunt and difficult to handle stone tools, the nearly identically shaped and sculpted multiple massive stone pillars etc.(with right-angled sharp edges and uniformly flat surfaces) at GT (Figure 1) strongly point to the use of considerably stronger, harder, sharper and easy to handle metallic tools which became available only after the advent of metallic age about 6000 years ago or after 4000 BC.

Here is another reference ("Humans Are Free," Jan. 28, 2011, http://humansarefree.com/2011/01/gobekli-tepe-12000-years-old-temple.html) which considers the following possibility on the use of metal tools in construction of Gobekli Tepe.

VI. Evidence of machining.

Just like all ancient sites, Göbekli Tepe is covered in mystery.
One thing it's clear: this ancient civilization of hunters and gatherers couldn't built this huge temple (especially without any metal or sophisticated tools, like it's officially accepted).
But even more mysterious is this small piece of basalt:



This is a little black bead and it’s a very hard stone that is ~ an inch square and maybe a quarter of an inch thick. And it has a perfect hole drilled lengthwise, through the quarter-inch thickness. This is impossible to achieve without metal tools!