Larger, Older Stonehenge Found New It's Little Brother

[Marvin]

If I remember from my meager education in Archeology, natural deposits of sediment would be even, often with sedimentary layers, reflecting seasons, wind, water or other gradual sources of deposits. Man-made would be uneven, larger deposits more like shovels full or baskets/barrows full. Sometimes frauds try to bury an artifact at a known site to fake a discovery or to discredit someone else's discovery. Even if they rebuild all the soil around the immediate area, an experienced person could spot the unnatural "look" of the soil because a person can't really duplicate the gradual deposit of soil.

After 3000 to 10000 years of weathering and settling, by what criteria does one discern the difference between buried by man or naturally buried... especially with large structures?

If you are familiar with a tel (or tell) structure, the tel mound is rarely interpreted as being created by man burying anything (but created by the weathering of the construction materials like mud brick, and building over the site, over and over again). I think Gogekli Tepe is considered to be a tel… thus the question, by what criteria is the assertion the structures are buried by man and not naturally "buried"?


M

[Doc]

After 3000 to 10000 years of weathering and settling, by what criteria does one discern the difference between buried by man or naturally buried... especially with large structures?

If you are familiar with a tel (or tell) structure, the tel mound is rarely interpreted as being created by man burying anything (but created by the weathering of the construction materials like mud brick, and building over the site, over and over again). I think Gogekli Tepe is considered to be a tel… thus the question, by what criteria is the assertion the structures are buried by man and not naturally "buried"?


M

I did a quick Google to see if I could find some criteria
and got nothing. I am fairly certain that any deviation from the surrounding area would have to be plausibly explained by
known natural forces. If questionable, they would call in a geologist who could survey the area and give a pretty
definitive answer as to whether the area in question is consistent with the surrounding landscape. I will search for more information after work
but for now I'm off to a longish day. I will leave you with this: At Calico, the control pit is 20 feet or
so deep with sheer sides that are dated as to approximate age by some sort of radiation dating. You can tell by looking that the strata are undisturbed, going back something like 120,000 years. Even a lot of it looks the same, had it been dug at or otherwise disturbed it would be instantly recognizable to anyone who could see and no one could duplicate the unbroken strata and blend it in such a way as to hide the disturbance.

[Marvin]

I did a quick Google to see if I could find some criteria and got nothing. I am fairly certain that any deviation from the surrounding area would have to be plausibly explained by known natural forces. If questionable, they would call in a geologist who could survey the area and give a pretty definitive answer as to whether the area in question is consistent with the surrounding landscape. I will search for more information after work but for now I'm off to a longish day. I will leave you with this: At Calico, the control pit is 20 feet or so deep with sheer sides that are dated as to approximate age by some sort of radiation dating. You can tell by looking that the strata are undisturbed, going back something like 120,000 years. Even a lot of it looks the same, had it been dug at or otherwise disturbed it would be instantly recognizable to anyone who could see and no one could duplicate the unbroken strata and blend it in such a way as to hide the disturbance.

I understand and I am not in disagreement, but what I am trying to point out... with the long and sometimes intermittent human occupation of a "tel," it becomes a bit more complicated to speculate that humans buried the site on purpose (as to hide something) or they were simply continuing to build on top of the old (in a constant battle with nature), multiple times... over time. For example, over a 12,000 year period in a place like Gobekli Tepe, even if man lived on the site for 4,000 years (intermittently through time, out of the past 12,000 years)... that would leave 8,000 years for nature to do a lot of burying on its own.


M

[Doc]

I understand and I am not in disagreement, but what I am trying to point out... with the long and sometimes intermittent human occupation of a "tel," it becomes a bit more complicated to speculate that humans buried the site on purpose (as to hide something) or they were simply continuing to build on top of the old (in a constant battle with nature), multiple times... over time. For example, over a 12,000 year period in a place like Gobekli Tepe, even if man lived on the site for 4,000 years (intermittently through time, out of the past 12,000 years)... that would leave 8,000 years for nature to do a lot of burying on its own.


M

I did get that (after I posted last) and I was trying to explain my understanding that there are differences that are noticeable and measurable between natural forces and man-caused burying. I can recall sites such as Troy where successive cities built on one-another could be distinguished with periods of no activity for centuries in between. I am not able to find criteria, as you requested, but since I now want to see it in print I will keep looking just to satisfy that my memory is not wrong.
There are, however, these, which can be used to support my point that there is a noticeable difference. Man-caused filling would not conform to these principles and would be noticeable upon examination of the strata.


Principles of Relative Geologic Age Determination

All credit to Geology 101 Syllabus of Wenatchie Valley College, R Dawes is mentioned as author or editor

1. The principle of original horizontality - sedimentary strata are initially deposited as horizontal or nearly horizontal layers.
   Note: If sedimentary strata dip at an angle other than horizontal, or are folded into various angles of tilt, then the layers of rock have been tilted or folded after the layers originally formed.
   
2. The principle of lateral continuity - sedimentary strata extend sideways for some distance.
   Note: If a sedimentary stratum occurs on one side of a stream valley and a seemingly identical stratum occurs at a corresponding level on the other side of the valley, then presumably they were once a single, laterally continuous layer that was later partly eroded away as the valley was eroded.
3. The principle of superposition - In a sequence of sedimentary strata, the stratum that is underneath is older, the stratum that is on top is younger.
   Note: This is probably the simplest and yet most powerful principle of relative age determination. However, to make sure it correctly applied, you need to be sure which way was up when the sediments were initially deposited, because in some geologic structures (faults or folds) it is possible for a layer of rock to be turned completely upside-down.
4. The principle of inclusions - A piece of rock that is included in (completely surrounded by) sedimentary rock is older than the sedimentary rock in which it is included.
   Note: If rounded pieces of granite are pebbles in a layer of conglomerate that lies on top of the granite, then the granite must have been exposed, weathered and eroded prior to the conglomerate being deposited.
5. The principle of cross-cutting relationships - A rock body or geologic structure that cuts off other layers or structures that would otherwise tend to continue is younger than the layers or structures that it cuts off.
   Note: If sedimentary beds are cut off by a fault, then the fault must be younger than the layers of sediment.
6. Principle of faunal succession - Within a geologic era, period, or epoch there are certain fossil types that occur in strata of that age that are not found in strata of other ages.
   Note: This principle is a powerful tool for determining the age of sedimentary rocks. Index fossils are ones that only occur within limited intervals of geologic time. Much geological research has been done to determine the extent of geologic time through which particular index fossils occurred.
   
   http://commons.wvc.edu/rdawes/G101OCL/Basics/geotime.html

[southerncross]

Another article with images and a map of the site. Part of the walls were indeed aligned with the rising sun on the winter solstice when the sun turns to return to planting time or could be a reference to the resurrection of the sun and longer productive days associated with fertility. Just thinking out loud.

http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2015/0...e-and-purpose/

image.jpg

[majicbar]

In listening tp BBC radio report Saturday morning, the stones had been pushed down and only had to be buried with two to three meters of soil. It sounded as though they were in a ditch which would have helped in lessening the amount of soil needed to cover them, but this also days the burial was human caused and not natural processes. They offered no further answers as to why they were pushed down or when.

[Longeyes]

Thought I had posted about this a longtime ago but can't find it.
Scientists at the University of Edinburgh have found that Gobekli Tepe might be a warning or marker for a cataclysmic event that happened 10950 BC ± 250 yrs perhaps the 'Younger Dryas event'?

An Article here
https://theedinburghreporter.co.uk/2...e-astronomers/

Full paper here
http://maajournal.com/Issues/2017/Vo...017%281%29.pdf