Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stonehenge: Neolithic monument found near sacred site

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 49 posts

Re: Stonehenge: Neolithic monument found near sacred site

#21

Post by Broken_Hippo »

dragonwriter wrote: post #10
thaumaturgy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a tantalizing idea ripe for nerd sniping, but there are practical limits to how advanced previous civilizations could have become. If all of humanity were catastrophically wiped out right now, and 50 million years from now, another species was investigating the planet, they'd find microplastics in rock and ice strata around the world, all at approximately the same age. There's no natural explanation for this…

You don't present an argument for an upper limit on how advanced past civilizations can have been without detection but for an excluded middle, because, sure, a civilization at our level would be easily detectable, but one that developed to where it could operate without environmental pollution and which could clean up the pollution that it made on the way to it's advanced state would not be so detectable.

Let me ask you: If the earth had some major event tomorrow and basically everything quit working, do you think we'd forget about things such as the internet, phones, indoor plumbing, vehicles, or electricity?

No, probably not. We'd rebuild, though some areas of the world would rebuild better or more equally than others. I don't know why folks think the past was any different. This is the main reason I highly doubt the past was some weirdly advanced paradise. I mean, why the heck would we need to invent, say, the chimney if the past was so advanced? Sure, folks in the past were smarter than we give credit for and sure, we've eshewed some things in the past - but the major things have stuck around.

Re: Stonehenge: Neolithic monument found near sacred site

#22

Post by throwaway_pdp09 »

jedberg wrote: post #11
crispyporkbites wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a silly argument, we could build pyramids 100 times bigger than the Egyptian ones if we wanted to today, and we can build engines that are far more efficient and powerful than the Apollo ones. Just because the specific methodology became obsolete doesn’t mean we lost anything along the way

> and we can build engines that are far more efficient and powerful than the Apollo ones The F-1 (the engine in the Saturn V, used in the Apollo missions) remains the most powerful rocket engine ever built. [0] So no, we can't build them bigger, or even as well as, we used to. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_orbital_rocket_e...

"because that was the biggest, we therefore we can't make them bigger" doesn't follow.

Re: Stonehenge: Neolithic monument found near sacred site

#23

Post by jedberg »

throwaway_pdp09 wrote: post #22
jedberg wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and we can build engines that are far more efficient and powerful than the Apollo ones The F-1 (the engine in the Saturn V, used in the Apollo missions) remains the most powerful rocket engine ever built. [0] So no, we can't build them bigger, or even as well as, we used to. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_orbital_rocket_e...

"because that was the biggest, we therefore we can't make them bigger" doesn't follow.

See my sibling comment. We’ve been trying to make a bigger engine for decades, and have yet to succeed.

Re: Stonehenge: Neolithic monument found near sacred site

#24

Post by throwaway_pdp09 »

jedberg wrote: post #23
throwaway_pdp09 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"because that was the biggest, we therefore we can't make them bigger" doesn't follow.

See my sibling comment. We’ve been trying to make a bigger engine for decades, and have yet to succeed.

Your sibling comment (I presume https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23667336) says nothing of the sort.

It doesn't say nasa has been trying to make a bigger one for decades.

> They still haven't figured it out.

...is not what the article said. They lost the plans, they're recreating them.

Re: Stonehenge: Neolithic monument found near sacred site

#25

Post by jedberg »

throwaway_pdp09 wrote: post #24
jedberg wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See my sibling comment. We’ve been trying to make a bigger engine for decades, and have yet to succeed.

Your sibling comment (I presume https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23667336 ) says nothing of the sort. It doesn't say nasa has been trying to make a bigger one for decades. > They still haven't figured it out. ...is not what the article said. They lost the plans, they're recreating them.

> They lost the plans, they're recreating them.

Which is exactly the point I made at first. That we've lost the knowledge to make the engine.

Re: Stonehenge: Neolithic monument found near sacred site

#26

Post by stareatgoats »

AlotOfReading wrote: post #3
apaz037 wrote: post #2

I'm of the firm belief at this point that we are a species with severe amnesia. I find it significantly more plausible that cataclysmic events we no longer remember occured in our past and wiped away a rich history in which we may have feasibly been far more advanced technologically than we currently are.

This is a pretty old idea that was recently rebranded as the "Silurian Hypothesis". If you put in a bit of thought, it'll be obvious that it essentially boils down to one of two things: Either every paleoanthropologist, archaeologist, and geologist out there is in a massive conspiracy to hide the truth, or all of the people in those disciplines are complete idiots. An event like that would leave strong genetic, palyn…

You could be right. It is certainly a compelling argument; "either scientists are in a conspiracy or complete idiots" (paraphrased). The answer is however unequivocally: we don't know. And it behooves to be a bit more humble when it comes to these things, and investigate each claim individually instead of making blanket statements about everything such.

There are several aspects one can take into account that can inspire a more nuanced approach: one is that these kind of theories is an "entry-drug" for interest in archaeology and related sciences. To get on a high horse and nip such interest in its bud is counterproductive from a scientific perspective and is reminiscent of the defensive position that many professions are taking in the open data age that has opened for masses of amateur researchers doing much better work than a tiny cadre of elite professionals could do on their own.

Another aspect of this dismissive attitude is that the notion a petrified and fact-resistant "establishment" is opening the field for all sorts of nut case Youtube channels that exploit this types of interests instead. Including the age-old nazis with their Atlantis and similar theories.

So no, let's assume that we don't know, that anything is possible. But let's also inspect the evidence for each fantastical claim with best of our knowledge.

Re: Stonehenge: Neolithic monument found near sacred site

#27

Post by thaumaturgy »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #21
dragonwriter wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't present an argument for an upper limit on how advanced past civilizations can have been without detection but for an excluded middle, because, sure, a civilization at our level would be easily detectable, but one that developed to where it could operate without environmental pollution and which could clean up the pollution that it made on the way to it's advanced state would not be so detectable.

Let me ask you: If the earth had some major event tomorrow and basically everything quit working, do you think we'd forget about things such as the internet, phones, indoor plumbing, vehicles, or electricity? No, probably not. We'd rebuild, though some areas of the world would rebuild better or more equally than others. I don't know why folks think the past was any different. This is the main reason I highly doubt th…

Ehhhh. It might be because so many recent events have given me cause to be disappointed in people, but I don't think a massive loss of cultural memory is all that implausible. We have great numbers of people now who either don't believe vaccines are safe, or don't believe the Earth is round, or don't believe in evolution, or don't believe in anthropogenic climate change. Even as little attention as this thread is likely to get, probably someone's going to read this comment and not believe at least one of those things. The irony of not believing one of those things while reading the comment on a device built by science, over a vast technological network of other devices built by science, likely won't occur to them.

Now also think about how much of modern stuff we take for granted rests on technological principles that are totally unknown to the average person. I have no idea how a toilet works. It would probably take me years to build a working one from scratch. I read about the principle of the plumbing in a toilet, once, but I can't recall it right this minute. Toilets are among the inventions that have had the greatest positive impact on human societies, and I could do no better right this minute than dig a hole somewhere and put some dirt on top of it.

Given a strand of copper and some magnets, I could make a crude motor or generator. But I have no idea how to extrude fine copper wire, how to identify copper ore, mine it, or refine it. I know enough to make a crappy magnet out of some iron, but it would take me a hundred years to manufacture a motor and a lead-acid battery, and without modern medicine, I could hope for maybe 20 years.

I think there are plausible scenarios where something like a sufficiently destructive solar flare could do enough damage to reset the last thousand years of technological development, and in those scenarios, people would within just a generation or two stop believing that things like an internet ever existed.

Re: Stonehenge: Neolithic monument found near sacred site

#28

Post by throwaway_pdp09 »

jedberg wrote: post #25
throwaway_pdp09 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your sibling comment (I presume https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23667336 ) says nothing of the sort. It doesn't say nasa has been trying to make a bigger one for decades. > They still haven't figured it out. ...is not what the article said. They lost the plans, they're recreating them.

> They lost the plans, they're recreating them. Which is exactly the point I made at first. That we've lost the knowledge to make the engine.

They lost the plans. For this particular engine type. That's not the same as losing fundamental knowledge of how the engines work, or the ability to recreate one larger.

And you have not acknowledged you misrepresented what the article said.

What is it with you types that have to feel we're failing, going backwards? I had an argument once with a guy that insisted there were compiler optimisation that aren't used any more because they are now lost - there are literally books on those opts, web articles accessible in a few clicks, probably youtube vids (in fact, see godbolt's stuff) - why are you types so set on failure and ignorance? What exactly are you thinking when you post this inaccurate and negative stuff?

Aren't there enough problems in the world without making up nonexistent ones?

Re: Stonehenge: Neolithic monument found near sacred site

#29

Post by dmix »

thaumaturgy wrote: post #19
dragonwriter wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is a line of thinking that wanders away from intellectual curiosity and into intellectual madness. When we’re talking about the prospects of a more advanced human civilization in a time from which we have artifacts (but, obviously, not ones that are more obviously advanced than standing stones into which people read improbable histories), if you aren't going to lean hard into intellectual madness, what's the p…

Heh. I tend to pretty rapidly lose interest in subjects when they go from "huh, that's kinda neat" to young-adult fantasy storytime. It's a mental self-defense against the kinds of ideas that sneak up on clever people and trick them into believing dumb things.

This sort of historical fantasy is surprisingly rampant. From History channel pushing 'ancient astronauts' to the founder of the 1619 NYTimes project writing an article claiming African people were helping mesoamerican Aztecs build pyramids and the Olmec stone heads - predating the arrival of Columbus and the Europeans [1].

I'm always skeptical of any sort of hidden ancient advanced culture claims. The capabilities of bored humans over an extended hundreds/thousand year timescales is always underrated. Even without modern technology trading and just the night sky to be inspired by.

Same the complex earthworks and manipulations of the environment created by indigenous Americans which is the thesis of 1491 book [2]. Or even in the complex large scale network of Eel farming in by natives in South Australia which surprised the European explorers [3]. Or even how Convergent evolution works in nature.

[1] https://www.scribd.com/document/466921269/NYT-s-1619-Project...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1491:_New_Revelations_of_the_A...

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/23/budj-bim...

Re: Stonehenge: Neolithic monument found near sacred site

#30

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

thaumaturgy wrote: post #27
Broken_Hippo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me ask you: If the earth had some major event tomorrow and basically everything quit working, do you think we'd forget about things such as the internet, phones, indoor plumbing, vehicles, or electricity? No, probably not. We'd rebuild, though some areas of the world would rebuild better or more equally than others. I don't know why folks think the past was any different. This is the main reason I highly doubt th…

Ehhhh. It might be because so many recent events have given me cause to be disappointed in people, but I don't think a massive loss of cultural memory is all that implausible. We have great numbers of people now who either don't believe vaccines are safe, or don't believe the Earth is round, or don't believe in evolution, or don't believe in anthropogenic climate change. Even as little attention as this thread is lik…

It literally took a millennium for Europe to rediscover the lost knowledge of the Romans and Greeks and to reorganise itself to a comparable level of political and economic sophistication. And the ancient world wasn't operating at anything like the level we have today.

Technical knowledge is incredibly fragile. It requires a global network of raw materials, energy sources, processing systems of various kinds, and logistics - all maintained by overlapping knowledge concentrated in a relatively small number of individuals and institutions, none of whom have a complete picture.

So even if the knowledge survived in book form, it would still be useless at a local level if the supply chains that feed it were broken.

The absolute best you could hope for is some kind of partial memory in a few local pockets, and maybe the odd genius would turn up every century or two to make another attempt at deciphering the ancient wisdom.

Post reply on HN