Printer-friendly versionSend to friendPDF version

Göbekli Tepe: Older Than Stonehenge, Pyramids, Anything

— Filed under: People & Culture
Part of a megalithic structure at Göbekli Tepe...

Image via Wikipedia and Jonas Rejda at the Qatar Academy

Monolith at Göbekli Tepe

When people think of ancient temples, they often think of Stonehenge, which most archaeologists agree was built about 5,000 years ago. But Stonehenge is actually trumped handily by a little-known site in modern-day Turkey called Göbekli Tepe, which is 11,500 years old. The site is composed of circular rings and T-shaped monoliths, many with carvings of animals on them.

Although Göbekli Tepe (which means “potbelly hill”) got a bit of press in 2008 when The Guardian and Smithsonian Magazine ran articles about its newly realized importance, it didn’t really receive the wider public acclaim and notice that it deserved. According to many archaeologists, this is one of the most exciting finds ever unearthed, a real game-changer in terms of our understanding of civilization, settlement, agriculture, and religion.

The sculpture of an animal at Gobekli Tepe, cl...
What does this carving mean?

Previously, it was generally believed that humans settled, started farming, and built residential buildings before they built temples. That assumption is now being turned on its head, as it appears that Göbekli Tepe was built by hunter-gatherers as a place of worship, the world’s first temple. The Smithsonian article states:

"Scholars have long believed that only after people learned to farm and live in settled communities did they have the time, organization and resources to construct temples and support complicated social structures. But [excavation leader] Schmidt argues it was the other way around: the extensive, coordinated effort to build the monoliths literally laid the groundwork for the development of complex societies."

Ian Hodder, Stanford University professor of anthropology, elaborates:

"Everybody used to think only complex, hierarchical civilisations could build such monumental sites, and that they only came about with the invention of agriculture. Gobekli changes everything. It's elaborate, it's complex and it is pre-agricultural. That alone makes the site one of the most important archaeological finds in a very long time."

To put it in context, Göbekli Tepe “predates pottery, metallurgy, and the invention of writing or the wheel,” as well as the Pyramids, the walls of Jericho, and just about every other ancient building found so far. Hodder continues, "Many people think that it changes everything It overturns the whole apple cart. All our theories were wrong."

Urfa - Göbekli Tepe #1

Image by Deniz Tortum via Flickr

The exact function of the megalithic complex remains under investigation, as the excavation is ongoing and could take many more years. Klaus Schmidt, the German archaeologist leading the effort, believes that Göbekli Tepe was used by a death cult. Others suggest that it represents the beginning of cultivation of plants, especially grains.

Why did ancient pre-Neolithic hunter-gatherers (who didn’t generally live in one place) build such a large structure? What did they use it for? Why was it intentionally buried by hundreds of cubic meters of soil in 8,000 BC? What does this discovery mean for our understanding of the timelines of agriculture and religion? Are the animal carvings, as Schmidt puts it, "the earliest representation of gods?"

*** UPDATE: User Chinajon has contributed a response to this article, and a new interpretation of the significance of Göbekli Tepe.  Please read "Göbekli Tepe Remastered"! ***

Anonymous's picture

Göbekli Tepe


Carol's picture

amazing...why have we not

amazing...why have we not heard of this before now

Selma's picture


The same reason Americans don't know that Noah's Ark/Mt Ararat are also in Turkey. Turkey is a predominantly Muslim country and America is predominantly Christian and a friend of Israel/ the Jews. The education system in this country downplays anything positive if it involves any Muslim country, even if that country has a democracy in place. Even though America considers Turkey an ally, it's only because of its location and that the US can use Turkey that it's considered an "ally".

Joce's picture

Oh, please.

Oh, please.

Jean's picture

I agree, oh please. I know

I agree, oh please. I know where Mt. Ararat is and I'm not even that smart.

timedesign's picture


Er... The Pyramids?

Dave's picture

isn't Egypt Coptic Christain?

isn't Egypt Coptic Christain?

MrShaw's picture


You mean the ones that are not Muslim (a fair few, to say the least), Jewish (not so many, funnily enough) or tourists? the answer is yes, and "Coptic" originally referred to an Egyptian citizen.

Anonymous's picture

The Pyramids were built by

The Pyramids were built by polytheistic pagans but stand far above ground so their existence cannot be discounted. 

timedesign's picture


And what about Santa? He was Turkish and the Americans love him.

Anonymous's picture

Santa did come from a place

Santa did come from a place that is now in Turkey and American do love him, but how many Americans know that St Nick is from Turkey? You, me, and Martha Stewart.

timedesign's picture

and I'm not even American.

and I'm not even American. And I've got my doubts about Martha Stewart, I thought she was Coptic Christian.

MrShaw's picture

Talented Northerners

timedesign wrote:
and I'm not even American.

Or Welsh, does this mean you can spell and drive at more that 50 mph? Lucky arrogant Northerners...ay!

Anonymous's picture

Martha Stewart

Martha Stewart is the Lizard queen and probably a descendant of the Anunaki

Anonymous's picture

1. a peice of wood was found

1. a peice of wood was found on mt ararat,  not the "arc" 
2 it isnt hidden because of religion, or area blah blah blah, it's hidden because of the timeline quit trying to confirm your own beliefs and start seeking truth, 13 000 years kinda kills the "1st civ was babylon (sumer) " theory and that intelligent civilization goes back alot longer than darwins THEORY of evolution allows, not to mention the mental limitations implied by you being the spawn of an ape vs the potential you have as a being with a devine gift.
3 you all need to do your research on "santa" look up the sami people and their traditions,especially the ones around the winter solstice

just for the record i'm not part of any religious fanclub, they all have truth hidden within, but darwin was a shmuck and there is NO evidence to evolution whatsoever 

Steve Aldridge's picture


Try doing some serious study on the theory of evolution and you'll find that it all hangs together very solidly.

Just a point.  There is no evidence for the truth of any of the world's religions.

Hal's picture

The theory of Evolution


Last time I checked Evolution was a theory. Now lets take a look at theory.

noun, plural -ries.

1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity. 2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. 3. Mathematics . a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory. 4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory. 5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.  There is no real proof of Evolution, if you could see an animal or species evolving in all of it's current stages then I would buy into the hog wash that it is real, And for the simple fact of explaining it's existence by stating a lie that states it takes millions of years for evolution to be proven is NUTS!!!  To bad you will only live to be 60 and there forth you will never prove Evolution is real :-) I take comfort in that fact, that you and NUT cases like you will never live forever and so it is. 

Leofwine1's picture

Theory: noun, plural


noun, plural -ries.

1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity. 2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. 3. Mathematics . a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory. 4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory. 5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.  

In terms of evolution the relevant definition is # 1. You seem to think it is # 2, when in fact # 2 does not ever apply when discussing science.

In regards to the following:

"There is no real proof of Evolution, if you could see an animal or species evolving in all of it's current stages then I would buy into the hog wash that it is real, And for the simple fact of explaining it's existence by stating a lie that states it takes millions of years for evolution to be proven is NUTS!!!  To bad you will only live to be 60 and there forth you will never prove Evolution is real :-) I take comfort in that fact, that you and NUT cases like you will never live forever and so it is."

I would like to know how you think the vast diversity of life came to be if not through evolution?

Al Truist's picture

Watch bacteria build immunity

Watch bacteria build immunity to antibiotics in a petri dish. it doesn't take millions of years.

Leofwine1's picture

I know this I was supporting

I know this I was supporting evolution.

Anonymous's picture

There's 10 times more

There's 10 times more evidence for the worlds religions than there is for evolution, as a matter of fact Darwin's theory of evolution was originally named the Darwin Wallace theory of evolution after charles and his collegue Alfred Wallace, but when Wallace started to further his research he met a man named William Crookes and together with others, they began researching  the paranormal and metaphysical. Darwin and friends didn't approve of this because he was finding things that coincide. So the powers that be removed Wallace's name from the theory. Then on Charles death bed, it's argued that he said "How I wish I had not expressed my theory of evolution as I have done" and  " I would like to speak to them of Christ Jesus and His salvation". There has been alot of refusal of these statements by his followers and family. I wasn't there so I couldn't tell you. lol. However, show me 1 transitional species and then we'll talk but till then I refuse to believe that I started as the herpes virus... Maybe you should do some looking at the Theory of evolution. I've done my homework.

Leofwine1's picture

You are wrong. Oh so very very wrong!


I would like you to provide even one piece of evidence for any religion, that does not come from that religions holy texts.


In response to:

"Then on Charles death bed, it's argued that he said "How I wish I had not expressed my theory of evolution as I have done" and  " I would like to speak to them of Christ Jesus and His salvation". There has been alot of refusal of these statements by his followers and family. I wasn't there so I couldn't tell you."

I appreciate that you weren't there and so cannot speak to the truth of these statements. However it is a documented fact the Darwin was an atheist and such it is highly unlikely that he would have wished he had talked of Jesus and salvation. It is also documented that Darwin never said anything like "How I wish I had not expressed my theory of evolution as I have done" as anything more than wishing he had been more clear.


While it is true that Wallace worked out a virtually identical theory it is not true that Darwin and Wallace published together. In fact Wallace asked Darwin for advice on weather he should publish his theory or not, well before Darwin was ready to publish his own, and Darwin advised him to do so. Darwin's theory was never associated with Wallace any closer then that.


For an example of a transitional species look at Tiktaalik, Archeopteryx, or look at this site for more.

In conclusion:

Maybe you should do some looking at the Theory of evolution. I've done my homework.


I have a Bachelors of Arts degree in General Science with a focus in Anthropology form Mercyhurst College, Erie PA

Sxxxx Wxxxx's picture

Another Example - Us...

As long as you're going to play the mental hopscotch of discussing with someone who doesn't care about facts or about what evidence is out there, more than manipulated and plagiarized words from an often retold story... humans are one of the best examples of evolution. 

Beyond the millions of years of bones left by the protozoa that became vertebrates and then mammals and finally primates themselves; that "cavemen" slowly start to eventually look like people (but why use that you might ask...) - WISDOM TEETH, the APPENDIX, the shoe rounded FOOT, the more modern functionality and functionally balanced and formed HAND, the accretion formed and process-bound BRAIN, and those are just the easy to draw examples.  Behaviorally, how about the recent evolution and separation from a ritual nature, where doing and saying things without more reasoning than a primitive "because someone said so," or without making full use of their capabilities, and an inability to do more than mimic or mock that which they can't or don't want to understand...? 

That they out number the epistemically bound and evolved version of what they still can't understand or admit to being, by probably 10 to 1, does not bode well for the unbroken line of their dominance. Kind of like the Neanderthal. But, there's always hope. Not as much when it revolves around opposition for opposition's sake, or the current state of things...

mghvdeli's picture

Charles Darwin & faith

I understand Darwin gave up on his Christian faith after losing his wife & daughter prematurely to illnessess. His putative atheism was a negation of a prior faith in God not a positive choice based on scientistic scepticism.
His publication of theory had no anti-Christian overtone to it; on the contrary, it had a forward written by an Anglican churchman to the effect that understanding the process of change and development among God's creatures should deepen a RATIONAL FAITH.
The entire American Fundamentalist anti-Darwin sh*tstorm arises in the 1920s with the famous Scopes 'Monkey Trail', which set the template for our contemporary inane debate of science -vs.the defense of God (as though He needed defenders!). The 'debate'is illogical on both sides and resembles Muslim invective against Christianity - childish, wilfully ignorant caricature posing as enlightened reason. The tragedy here s that both sides in this shouting match leave no room for traditionally reasonable faith, entrenched as they are in denying their respective opponent's views. This is what you get in a society so profoundly ignorant of the intellectual material of both traditional faith (thanks, secular Protestantism!)& basic science. We are a decadent society manipulated by cynical technocrats, ripe for exploitation and very compliant to their agenda. Ever heard of divide and conquer? We are a divided and thus conquered people.

Ivan's picture

1. Agreed 2. Darwin's THEORY

1. Agreed

2. Darwin's THEORY of evolution wasn't 'discovered'. It is simple deductive reasoning that cognitive reasoning pieced together.  Evolution has been trudging along for billions of years. It's arrogant to think that humans should have an opinion on whether or not it is true. We've only existed for a blink of an eye.  

3. St. Nick is from Patara in Turkey. I've been there. You need to do YOUR research.  The Sami also fed reindeer magic mushrooms, and drank the reindeer's piss to get high. I don't recall any xmas carols recounting THAT tradition.

I'd recommend this article before you embarrass yourself again:

I'm really embarrassed for the dark age we live in today. It seems we've taken so many steps backward in the face of all the freely available knowledge. I'd love to be there in 200 years when history books laugh at how backwards we are today.

Martyn's picture

You can't spell, so I assume

You can't spell, so I assume your educational background is limited. You have therefore probably not given Darwin any intellectual thought beyond the devastating decision to dismiss him as "a shmuck". Perhaps this is the result of listening to religious leaders whose logical thought process works something like this: " I am a Christian because I believe in the Bible; I believe in the Bible because I am a Christian". Oh for Darwin's sake, I wish religious nuts would grow up!

Honesty's picture

More Truth

Could you stop all the America bashing.  Again, assuming Americans are arrogant, rude, dumb and ignorant is because of the actions of a few Americans that the news media and entertainment media focuses on.  Such an attitude is directly akin to racism.  Unfortunately, even if only 1 in every 100 Americans are dumb an arrogant that still leaves over 3 million stupid assholes.  

Most Americans do know Santa Claus was not from the USA. It's taught in very early school years.  But many do not know where he was from (or remember years later at least.) If you want to be technical, the place that Santa Claus originated from was NOT a part of Turkey at the time he was alive.  At that time it was a part of Greece. Saint Nicholas of Myra gets the name Santa Claus from "Santa meaning Saint" and Claus from Nicolas "niCOLAS".  He is accredited with being a gift giving person (or gnome or elf in some cultures) because he was very religious devoted to Christianity and really did give gifts to the very poor often.

MrShaw's picture

Jingle Balls

Nobody knows where Santa originated from...but I did find once source that said he was Greek. I also found a source saying he was Robert Maxwell and that he smoked crack for breakfast. Who knows?

Honesty's picture

Get Real.

Nobody knows?  Really?  Funny, it's in recorded history through out the world and that history closely matches most everywhere.  All you had to was G**gle it or wiki-search it, or... visit the library.

Anonymous's picture

St. Nicholas lived some 1600 yrs. before Turkey was invented

Please, don't be ridiculous. Avoid anachronisms, like placing the Byzantine Saint Nicholas in "Turkey". He was an important and much-beloved Bishop present at the First Ecumenical Council convened at the behest of Emperor Constantine, to settle the Arian controversy. He slapped Arius in the face for his heresy and suffered temporary 'administrative leave' as a result. This is history, recorded by chroniclers of the Roman Empire and Church officials: not a mere 'legend'.

Go pick up a book instead of trolling the web; you might learn about something.

Ann's picture

Obscure because it's not sexy or controversial

There are no celebrities involved and nobody can make headlines by blaming any political party or ideology for it.

Same reason that unless they can scare people with it or sell it to people, scientific and technical discoveries of all kinds don't get covered.

Though Selma finds a way to blame the US, at least!

Selma's picture


I can only blame the US for its lack of proper education. Noah's Ark and St Nickolaus both do originate in what is now Turkey. That is a fact, not just an opinion. Are you saying that other countries also lack proper education? I wouldn't know for sure. I may have to take your word on that until I can investigate further. I can only speak for/against the US because it was here that I grew up and was/wasn't educated. I had the good fortune of having a mother who was born and raised in Turkey, thus I had someone who knew enough to fll me in. You shouldn't ever believe what you're told but don't be so naive or ignorant that you don't seek the truth. It's up to you. Check it out. Don't let your own bias stand in the way, otherwise you're no better than the Americans that stick their heads into the sand. Seek and ye shall find. Isn't that what your bible says?

MrShaw's picture

Santa's Turkey?

Selma wrote:
Noah's Ark and St Nickolaus both do originate in what is now Turkey. That is a fact, not just an opinion.

Except he was Greek, or Roman. Clever old riddle isn't it. He was rich though. And ended up in Italy, with Turkey requesting his remains back...surely they could just invade Italy and have done with it though. Would make it easier.

Anonymous's picture


Is this why we have Turkey at Christmas???...just Virtually every story in Genesis comes from the sumerian text as well as many others .This pre-dates the bible and Christianity by thousands of years. Keep religion and Santa Claus (guy in red suit who delivers gifts) in the same mythical sentence where they belong......LMAO!!!

Anonymous's picture

NOT Turkey

Again, avoid your anachronistic citation of this modern entity called Turkey. The saint was not "rich" but was noted for his generosity and personal poverty. He is probably the most popular saint beside the Virgin Mary. He did not go to Italy until Italians stole his relics from Myra in Lycia and enshrined them in Bari. The relics of the saint belong not to any Turks, secular or Muslim but to the Orthodox Church with whom Bp. Nicholas served.

Jon's picture

wait a second...

Thank goodness for Selma's mom.  If it weren't for her, Selma might be believing things that are just outrageous, such as the idea that Americans would neglect a story like this out of systemic ignorance of predominantly Muslim countries, rather than a general apathy towards history and science.

Get real, Selma.  Modern American culture is in a sad state, when it comes to the general public's lack of interest in things that are actually important.  However, claiming that this was ignored based on the fact that it is in a Muslim country and not a Christian or Jewish one is absurd.  It's time to step out of your mother's paranoid shadow.

Lynda's picture

Noah's Ark in Turkey? Well....

Noah's Ark on Mt. Ararat? Sorry, I hate to break it to you because this obviously means something to you, but it's been accepted as a hoax. First off, wood decomposes very quickly. Ever had a stump in your back yard? Unless by some divine intervention (which I guess, for those who believe in Noah's Ark, that's not a hard leap to make) Noah's Ark would have been in much worse condition than this structure. Please, read this webpage before saying that the Ark in Turkey is a fact, not just a possibility. Also, here's another webpage:

Not to mention, when you look at Christianity and you look at other world religions, Christianity is the one of the very few that takes their mythos literally. More often than not, religions accept that many of their stories are simply parables. And Jesus himself spent a lot of time talking in parables. It's very possible that Noah is yet another story. That being said, there is evidence of a massive flood on the Earth, but no flood that covered every inch of the world, and no flood tall enough to reach Mt. Ararat. Divine Intervention to protect the Ark, to make sure it survived for future followers? Then why divine intervention to hide all other evidence of a massive, world covering flood?

Eliot Vernet's picture

Archeology and the contemporary country known as Turkey


1. Westerners (including Americans) are just in love with anything different, foreign, exotic.

2. They are crazy about Pharaonic Egypt, the Mayas, the Aztecs, the Far East, the Islamic Orient, and so on.

3. Egypt has been a predominantly Muslim country for about 15 centuries. This has not prevented Westerners from being fascinated by Pharaonic Egypt at least since the Renaissance.

4. Westerners love Turkey. They know more, however, about Istanbul and Western Turkey, because they are more accessible and touristic, than about Eastern Turkey, an impoverished place where a nasty little war - the Turks attempting to suppress a Kurdish rebellion - has been going on for nearly 40 years.

5. The Biblical or historical places or figures that you mention are not Turkish in the way that Ancient Athens and the Ancient Greeks are related to Modern Greece. They belong to completely different civilizations and ethnicities. The Turks, a nation from Central Asia, came to present-day Turkey 1000 years ago, as invaders.

6. Until the beginning of the 20th century, half of present-day Turkey was neither Muslim/Turkish nor Muslim/Kurdish but rather Christian/Greek and Christian/Armenian, with many Jewish enclaves in the cities. It was Turkified and Islamized in the most atrocious way : through genocide (Pontus Greeks, Armenians), mass expulsion (Ionian Greeks), pogroms, deportation and exile (Jews in 1934, 1942, 1955, the remaining Greeks in 1955).

7. I am shocked that you say "your bible". The Bible belongs to Humanity as a whole, just like the Quran and any great book, either religious or profane. It is your Bible as well.

Jettturk's picture

Thats what u think. Genocide

Thats what u think. Genocide did never happened. That is  a hoax created for future manipulation of Republic of Turkey. There are no evidence that Turks killed Armenians, in fact there are many evidences that Armenians killed many Turks. Turks may invaded the land 1000 years ago, but did not killed Millions like Americans still doing it in Afghanistan and Iraq. Like they did it to Red Indians.(Some say about 30 million Indians) Any country Americans went, corruption was inevitable. Look South America, how many countries Natural Reserves are run by American companies? They are all in ever growing debts, which was all set up by CIA. CIA only committing about 100.000 serious crimes each year, and you are calling all of this DEMOCRACY. I bet u also believe that American Army is Fighting for Freedom in Afghanistan or fought in Irak. Let me tell u something; Fighting for Freedom is like Screwing for Virginity. Now stop reading the Common papers or watching TV. Open your Eyes, and look whats going on around you. Elite rules are screwing our lives and we are fighting for whatever the crap they telling us. Religion, TV, Newspapers, Nationality etc. are all bullshit. They make you forgot that you are a human being. Read about Illuminati, Skull and Bones, Bohemian Club and also watch Zeitgeist, Esoteric Agenda, Loose Change online, it may help you to WAKE UP!

Sxxxx Wxxxx's picture

Wake up?  You don't even know

Wake up?  You don't even know your own country's history and you're telling the people that do, which is most of the rest of the educated world, to wake up?  Turkey officially acknowledged the Armenian Genocide when the post-war Ottoman government convened tribunals in 1919 regarding the conduct of the war and the Armenian Genocide. Lower ranking officials were dealt with individually, while the party as a whole was indicted for the crimes of conspiracy and massacre. THE TURKS FOUND THEIR OWN - GUILTY of capital crimes, and yet they were tried in absentia and persona non grata because they had already fled. Educate yourself.

Jetturk's picture

Oh yeah I believe that.

Oh yeah I believe that. Genocide is a hoax, prove it, don't make it up. I know a real crime of Karabag, which the Armenians killed many Turks in Azerbaijan. We did not killed Armenians, but we did kick them out of the country as they were traitors and wanted the imperial occupation in our own country. I am sure no one would allow that unless you support imperialism.

Anonymous's picture

Yaya to schooling Selma!

Yaya to schooling Selma! WOOT.

heliogabulus's picture

Right on

Selma is right, as always. I've been following her posts since the dawn of civilization and she never fails to put ethnic prejudice—into historical perspective.

Göbekli Tepe is not widely known because the builders were Muslims. Proto-Muslims, to be sure, but given their location in Turkey, a Muslim enclave; and given the fact that the builders worshipped rocks, just like the first pilgrims to Mecca—well, that seals the deal.

Of course there's a conspiracy. Americans are as much obsessed with Muslims and their humiliation as they are with humiliating the Toronto Maple Leafs. Go to any bar and strike up a conversation on the subject. There's sure to be a Molson in it for you. Aimed directly in your face, perhaps, but this is a violent, Islamic culture after all. Be thankful they don't have exploding shoes.

Manitoba is also predominantly Muslim but how many Americans know it? Probably no more than would fill an average Canadian skating rink made into a mosque on a given Friday night. Where is the love? Where is the outrage? And where, by the way, is Osama bin Laden? In Manitoba, probably. Or maybe across the border with a season ticket to the ski lift at Banff. Wrapped up against the sun and cold. 

Turkey is an ally. We can use it. Sure, they put us to sleep every Thanksgiving resulting in who knows how many traffic fatalities, but what of the leftover sandwiches the day after? They will probably attack us while in a tryptophaine coma one of these years, but until then they're an ally, god only knows why. Probably because our only difference is deciding between a sweet potato and a yam.

Turkey rocks. Either that or it sucks out loud. You be the decider. As for massacring the Armenians, well, be honest, you don't give a shit either way.

Turkey, the pet rock of planet Earth. Neither good nor bad, neither on the side of the west nor the east, neither Muslim nor secular, neither a democracy nor a military junta, not on good terms with its neighbors like Iraq, nor at loggerheads. Go for the beer. Which they got from Germany.

Lisanne's picture

I probably shouldn't bother

I probably shouldn't bother replying (feeding the trolls and all that) but I've lived in Manitoba my entire life.  This is the first I've heard that we are predominantly Muslim. 

We have an extremely multicultural population, but a simple drive through the city streets will inform you that the Mennonites have completely taken over. 

Mungo's picture



"Göbekli Tepe is not widely known because the builders were Muslims. Proto-Muslims, to be sure, but given their location in Turkey, a Muslim enclave; and given the fact that the builders worshipped rocks, just like the first pilgrims to Mecca—well, that seals the deal."

Im sorry, but calling a 12000 year old culture "proto-Muslim" is pretty silly, even if it co-locates with the current Muslim world.  The Gobekli Tepe site was only discovered in ...what...1995, and not fully excavated until pretty recently.  Ascribing the lack of knowledge of the site to Islamophbia is, well, silly.  It's like saying most Americans can't read Egypian Heiroglypics because they hate Muslims.....

Anonymous's picture

Right On - Gobekli Tepi

My goodness! I know this is old, but me, dumb 'Yank' that I am, only just heard of Gobekli Tepi, on my favorite t.v. show "Ancient Aliens", and I just read all these comments, and I can't believe anybody got upset by THIS particular comment. I laughed til I cried. So funny - it's a JOKE...

"Right on" - I second that emotion.  hahahahaha!  ROTFL.

And screw you, Selma. You're a rabble rousing loud mouth, with an ignorant chip on your shoulder. 

This discovery is fantastic and amazing. I am more than intrigued. But Americans (being one, I can speak for most) are more interested in football, their local news, what their kids are doing in school and just getting on with their normal, everyday lives -why does the rest of the world think that we regular, everyday Americans give a shit WHAT they think or what goes on in their country? We DON'T! We could care less. Why should we? Our politicians and rotten corporations, now THAT'S a different story. THEY are the ones that care about YOU foreigners - not us. I'm reading this article and then I'm off to Walmart. I need toilet paper and paper towels and dog food (that's food for my dog - not food made of dogs). THAT'S our real life in the States. We're not sitting around consciously wanting to oppress Muslims, or non-Christians or giving a shit, either way. Sorry, Selma, to burst your paranoid, ethnic bubble. Sheesh!    

Steve's picture

Caring less

"We could care less. Why should we?" I don't think anyone believes you should care even less than you do. Saying that you could care less (which of course only tells us that you care to some extent) doesn't tell us anything about how much you care or why you think you should care that much. I suppose it could have been a typo for "We couldn't care less; why should we care more?" though that's a fairly extreme typo.

Anonymous's picture

you're an idiot. die in a

you're an idiot.

die in a fire. 

Anonymous's picture

An intelligent answer based

An intelligent answer based on fact is far more reasonable than an emotional answer based on closed minded emotion.  If we as a human race would look at the evidence of mankind as clues for the eternal question of where did we come from, then maybe we could advance as a human race, and not go backwards as who is best or what is best.  We need to solve the past origins together.

Sxxxx Wxxxx's picture

I'll reply because I think

I'll reply because I think you've scared most of the other folks away or confused them with common sense. Good point and keep at it. Someday people will wise up to their own self-absorbed, self-bias and self-centered nature. As close as most are to being more caveman than enlightened primate, we can only hope it isn't an end of the world reality, in our face and restricting our chances and choices, that will be what eases people over the decision to realize OBJECTIVITY, INFORMATION, and REALITY are the only way to determine what "TRUTH" is ours - and not just their side's. 

Anonymous's picture


You douche, as a PROUD American, I must tell you that I learn about this in the 8th grade in 1997, go fuck yourself

Lisanne's picture

I learn about what?

Anonymous wrote:

You douche, as a PROUD American, I must tell you that I learn about this in the 8th grade in 1997, go fuck yourself

Huh? What did you learn about? Wha? Do you come with a translator? What does this have to do with Gobekli Tepe?

Wayne's picture

Turkey barely an ally

     Then why is Turkey trying to join the European Union? 

Anonymous's picture

It's actually quite a bit

It's actually quite a bit more simple than all that. As a former US Marine and native Californian I can tell you that the ignorance of the American people should never be underestimated. We have become the some of the most arrogant, uninformed people the world has ever known. Kim Kardashian, experts...math and science, not so much.

Anonymous's picture

Check out Ancient Aliens

Check out Ancient Aliens

dave's picture

Not older than anything.

The Tumulus of Bougon - 4800BC - that's 6800 years ago.

Kuncen's picture

The article states Gobekli

The article states Gobekli Tepe is 11,500 years old, much older than The Tumulus of Bougon.


Rosalinda's picture

Göbekli Tepe surprising?

I don't know why scientists ought to be so surprised by this... Cave/wall paintings clearly indicate that hunter-gatherers were congregating in established sacred places 50 000yrs ago. Its only rational that, in the absence of some handy natural structure, they would build what they needed.. And that these monuments would be made to last (unlike their own more temporary accomodations).
Scientists are frequently reported as being surprised by 'discoveries' that seem obvious to the rest of us... Is the reporting over-stated or are scientists just easily surprised?

Dave's picture

It's amazing because it shows

It's amazing because it shows that the first building ever built was most likely a temple, before people became sedentary. Previously it was believed that people became agriculturists and settled in one place before they built temples.

Please provide a link w/ proof about hunter-gatherers' religion 50,000 years ago.

So, this discovery is new and exciting for archaeologists around the world, but somehow old news for you? I guess that makes you smarter than all the archaeologists around the world! Anything else that you care to share about the world, before science discovers it? ;)

Anonymous's picture

One moment, sir

Dave wrote:
the first building ever built was most likely a temple

This is what I feel is wrong with the mindset of this article. It cannot be proven that the the first building was most likely a temple. Not at all. What this shows is that a probable temple survived. We have no evidence to support the theory that these ancient builders made only this structure.

DaveR's picture

Well duh...

Anonymous wrote:

This is what I feel is wrong with the mindset of this article. It cannot be proven that the the first building was most likely a temple. Not at all. What this shows is that a probable temple survived. We have no evidence to support the theory that these ancient builders made only this structure.

That's fair, but I guess that nothing can be outright proven in the field of archaeology.  It's just the best information that we have right now.  We have no evidence that these builders built only Gobekli Tepe, but there's no evidence that they built anything older, either.  That's why everyone's so worked up.  It's the oldest building found, and nothing's ever been found that's older.

IAM Your Fathers God's picture

Missing the point

This is what I feel is wrong with the mindset of this article. It cannot be proven that the the first building was most likely a temple. - Anonymous

 It appears you are missing the general point of the article or like most scientist leaning individual don't like the notion of religion first. 

The dominant scientific and logical theory is that a sophisticated structure of this nature would have been built AFTER societies transitioned into more advanced farming development. Because it is the very nature of farming = sedentary that gives logical rise to stone structural development. Logically there really would be no need for sophisticated structural creation among hunters and gathers or early stage farmers for the sole purpose of domestication. Hence this time period gives STRONGER probability to the notion that the first sophisticated structural buildings WERE religious in nature. It is the other evidential pieces of human development that gives notion to RELIGION first is the HIGHER probability in sophisticated structural development outside this discovery by itself. In other words the lack of any other find (a you put it) really doesn't disrupt the higher probability being asserted by this article. Macro Evolution can be discredited by easily saying "ah but not ALL the evidence is possibly available, some could be lost" And that statement would be true. But ALL Macro Evolutionist use the higher probability as reason to accept it as truth. Accepted observation theories are all based on higher probabilities. The Big Bang is another example of the higher probability theory, after all who was really there to see it? Yet we accept it.

Anonymous's picture

right hand photo

That photo on the right is pretty self explanatory, The lizard is saying, let get out of here before that bloody rock falls like the Yanks economy.

Dave's picture

The beginning of religion

So this building could be the first temple, and those carvings signify the beginning of religion! The first time that people decided they wanted to mark something and recognized the possibility of something bigger than themselves.

timedesign's picture

Karl Rove is King of the Gypsies

those carvings signify the beginning of religion!

So it's their fault! Buggers.

MrShaw's picture

King of the Gypsies

OK, I admit defeat, this is the second reference to Karl Rove being a "Thieving Gypo ..............". Whuuut do you mean?

timedesign's picture


What a horrible slander against the Gypsy community.
I wrote Karl Rove is King of the Gypsies because most people on this site won't know who Jeremy Kyle is. Hope that clears it up.

MrShaw's picture


Can you remember the hoohah created by Viz about our friendly campers? I think I must be thick, because I still don't get it. I can imagine Jeremy Kyle as a Big Wheel attendant though. "Scream if you think I am the MAAAAASTER"!

Rosalinda's picture

No; not the first sign of religion/faith

Sorry to disappoint Dave; the indigenous people of Northern Australia were gathering for animistic religious purposes 50 000yrs ago... I've seen the places myself. Its us Euro-heredity people who've apparently been behind!

Dave's picture

First temple then

Okay, fine. It's the first temple then.

Ethan's picture

History and revisionism

Rosalinda, on the contrary Europeans as well as Neanderthals were practicing religion long before 50,000 years ago. I don't know how you came to the ridiculous conclusion that we are somehow catching up to the Aborigines. European cave paintings in France date to at least 32,000 years ago. The Aborigines are a great source of information on how ancient man would have lived but they were certainly not unique so long ago in their religious practices. The date of 50,000 years ago is also highly disputeable for their arrival into Australia. 40,000 years ago is more likely.

All ancient people practiced some form of religion. That is a fact. It was certinly not a Roman invention as one poster has speculated. How do we know this?
Well simple. Because people buried their dead. If they did not believe in an afterlife they would not have cared for the corpses. They also placed grave gifts in these burials which means they belived in an afterlife hence religion. I also point to the discovery of venus figurines from the upper paleaolithic found throughout Europe and Asia. They date to around 35,000 years ago. These are also proof of religion. To think that people who lived back then would build a site such as Göbekli Tepe with no religious significance is absurd.

Anonymous's picture

Alternate Theory about the Venus Figurines

First in science there is no such thing as proof, proofs only exist in math.

Second there is an alternate theory as to the purposes of the Venus Figurines. This theory is that instead of being religious figures they were a means of advertising the groups textiles.

Ethan's picture

no proof

Its true that we can never know for sure without actually going back in time which is impossible. however every group of primitive people that exist today or into recent times practices some form of religion.

With the Venus figurines, traces of ochre found on them suggest a religious significance to them and the fact they all are of ample proportioned women would more likely suggest a fertility icon rather than advertisement for textiles.

Anonymous's picture

RE: no proof

True the ochre does tend to suggest a religious significance, and the ample proportioned nature of the women depicted could suggest a fertility icon. However the fact that the most detailed elements of the figurines tend to be the head with what could be a basket or head covering of some sort. Admittedly the detail on the head could also be hair.

Also I  was not arguing against the idea that ancient man had religion merely that the Venus Figurines may not be evidence to support the idea.

Dave's picture

I never heard that theory

I never heard that theory about the figurines being used to advertise.. i have to admit i'm a little skeptical. The fertility symbol is a lot more famous.

Anonymous's picture

RE: I never heard that theory

First I'm also somewhat skeptical of the advertisement theory. I only presented it as an alternative to the fertility symbol theory. 

Anonymous's picture


Why is it that the first thing that comes to an archeologist mind is that it is a temple or a religious symbol or an alter for sacrifices. I am surprised at the detail of the carvings even with out modern tools but to immediately label it as a religious assembly is absurd. Think about something else. The town I live in just evacuated their city hall for a more glamorous palace and it had no religious significance, but it did have a political significance. There was nothing wrong with the old city hall, Its just that Politicians deserve better. Now have the humans advanced so much more than these people over ten or eleven thousand years? I think not. For the most part humans are liars, cheats, greedy, vicious, violent and impulsive, especially those who are given a little bit of power. It goes to their head and soon you have a government that is self perpetuating and evil. Only governments in the early world and today make wars, and as usual only the vulnerable youth are sent to be killed. Nothing changes in the human mentality. Religion is a more modern invention that began between the Roman Pagans and Constantine and the Byzantium empires. Assyrians and Babylonians also had Pagan Gods but we do not know how serious the Pagan beliefs were taken then. There were plenty of Temples but these were community projects of Beautification. Archeology is a fascinating career and subject but lets not just link everything to religion and diety worship.

MrShaw's picture

the purpose of Göbekli Tepe

The following theory published on Heritage Key refutes the theory that the structure was built for worship, and suggests a gathering place to ensure learning and survival. Interesting reading.

Anonymous's picture


that's an interesting article, and certainly very cleverly worded, but in the end I found it lacking. it seems that Ms. Atkinson has thought a ton about Gobekli Tepe, but hasn't actually read very much about it.

When she says "What if the buildings at Göbekli Tepe are not temples?", I'm tempted to shout back "Well what if they are?". she accuses the Newsweek writer of jumping to conclusions, and then does exactly that herself. and it wasn't even Newsweek that concluded it was a temple, it was the archaeologist they interviewed.

Then she says, "Göbekli Tepe looks to me just as much like an arena or entertainment space as it does a temple." well, who cares what it looks like to her? I'm more inclined to believe an archaeologist working on the dig than a journalist who makes sweeping statements without facts or even logical argument to back it up. another gem without any explanation: "Concluding that civilization sprang from religion and not the other way around is both intellectually dubious and socially irresponsible." How so? she doesn't elaborate.

An interesting viewpoint, but it just makes me laugh when a journalist says that she's right, and thousands of excited archaeologists are wrong.

MrShaw's picture

Fine hats and Blues

Give the woman a break, She wears fine hats, sings the blues and found her husband in a fortune cookie, whatever that means. Her opinion is shared by others, its just her bio was the weirdest/funniest/silliest...delete as applicable. I love journalists, they provide the humour that is so lacking in my life.

Sincock's picture

What? No seriously, what are

What? No seriously, what are you going on about? Religion was invented by the Romans? Temples were merely beautification projects?

We do know how seriously the Assyrians and Babylonians took their religious practices: very. How do we know? They wrote about it for one; we can see how their cities were organised along theocratic lines; we can see from examination of burials the importance of religion. For example: Shang Dynasty burials in China show that religious functionaries were buried in as much splendour as Royalty because of the importance of their roles in that society   Please, do some, even just a little, reading on a topic before you go spouting misinformation based on fantasy.

I love the bit about your local town hall, wins the prize for irrelevance in a sea of pointless statements. Did you read the article? Notice how these people were HUNTER-GATHERERS; that means they didn't live in towns, they didn't have town halls, or palaces, or shopping malls; get it?

mghvdeli's picture

temples to pride

Granted, a fancy city hall is by contemporary convention devoid of explicit 'religious' content but it's merely a matter of semantics to deny an implied hierarchy of values expressed in workmanship just as appropriately labelled 'religious'as not. To say, for example the cult of personality accruing around a Stalin, Mao, Kim, Saddam, or Bashar has no tincture of the religious derived from the store of feeling shared among the respective idolizers of various tyrants is plain denial of anthropological fact.
Obviously, your education is framed by a set of referenced exclusive of religous impulses so common among peoples. Orrather, your references are stripped of overt references to supernatural hierarchy and the highest place is reserved, as it was among French revolutionaries of the XVIII c., to an Unknown Good called Reason.
It is religion nonetheless for all your denial. Actually one has less handle on the religious impulses acting upon deep prejudices when one denies having religion. This is referred to as the 'return of the repressed'. Goya drew a frightening icon of the power of repressed reasoning ability in his 'Sleep of reason produces monsters'. If one wants to have a grasp of a thing, better to explore it without prejudice within one's own conscience to discover relevance of the idea and dispell illogical fears.

anonymous's picture

Can't wait!

I love the questions in the last paragraph. So intriguing. I can't wait for the answers. "Why was it intentionally buried by hundreds of cubic meters of soil in 8,000 BC?" It's as if someone ripped out the last chapter of a mystery novel.

Ethan's picture


It is an interesting find and is most likely a religious site. Religion was very important to almost all ancient cultures as there was no science so they used religion to explain most things in the natural world. There is much older evidence of religion but to find a stone temple like this that was intentionally buried is amazing and that is probably why it has survived until today. We can only guess as to its true meaning though as the culture which built it is long gone. Gilgamesh is great reading though for an insight into ancient religion and practices.

mghvdeli's picture

Ethan, You are proposing a

You are proposing a dichotomy between religion and science upon our ancestors which is entirely anachronistic.
Until rather recently, there has been no clear distinction between the two disciplines and it may be argued that in the West we have merely substituted a scientistic religion for a theistic one. Such dichotomy is fast being erased in some places (Russia springs to mind)where atheism is no longer requisite belief system for scientific inquiry- having been discredited in its most virulent form with the collapse of Communism.

To say that our ancestors had no science is then tantamount to saying they had no religion, unless you mean by the strict definition of double-blind falsifiable proof method. Our ancestors simply had more primitive TECHNOLOGY - but the seed of inquiry, if not a scientific method, was already present - otherwise they could not have progressed at all.
Religious quest for transcendence has always worked hand-in-hand with the scientific quest for knowledge and power to manipulate nature. Often religion has served to limit humanity's negative impulses, and science can arm a society against misuse of religion. We have always neede both tools to avoid on the one hand luciferic pride and the other superstitious fear.

Of Science & Religion 's picture

Like the Nazi's. The German Army belt buckles said GOTT MIT UNS

GOTT MIT UNS (German soldiers belt buckle) which means GOD WITH US. Nazi soldiers also took an oath to Hitler saying - I SWEAR BY GOD THIS HOLY OATH....TO ADOLF HITLER.... By using religion Hitler made himself seem close to god. And they were so scientific. Every human institution is only as good as the humans running it, and that includes religion.

mghvdeli's picture

Oh! you dropped the N-bomb! You lose the argument.

Wow, Mr/Ms religion&science whiz, you just abdicated all semblance of reasonable discourse by resorting to the supreme conversation-ender, THE NAZIS. Did you know Hitler was a vegetarian who loved dogs?

Lisanne's picture

What if it was buried as

What if it was buried as protection against misappropriation by an invading force? I can't wait to read every bit of news about GT. The implications and possible interpretations of this site are incredibly exciting.

Frank's picture

Just some thoughts

Well its an interesting site for many of the reasons already stated. As far as the purpose of the site I think it was just for socail organization, be it polical, faith, or entertanment. The important fact remain that it was center of socail devoplment. What was it used for will always be, as best, a guess.
The only thing it dose prove is that the builders has socail center to meet the needs of the people.

Herman King's picture

Post comments

Posts should be confined to subject, not name-calling.

timedesign's picture

I quite agree Herman. Someone

I quite agree Herman. Someone called me 'potbelly hill' once, it put me right off me chips.

Kuncen's picture


Hi Herman, I haven't noticed any name-calling on this thread.

If you see a comment that's abusive or off-topic, please flag it (you must be logged in).



Phlegm's picture

For anyone still doubting the

For anyone still doubting the significance of this site, please read the interview below with author Andrew Collins.. very enlightening, with a lot of info you wont find elsewhere. He suggests that Gobleki Tepe can help to explain the Garden of Eden and a lot of early mythological stories found in the bible.

Louie's picture

There are many places much

There are many places much older than the Pyramids and Stonehenge, Take Newgrange in Ireland for example.

Although Gobekli is facinating, there are still lots of places we dont know enough about.

Gobekli Builder's picture

What really happened was...

...we hunted there for countless generations, it was a wonderful place, we lived a life of ease and abundance...of course, in time, our chieftains gathered, we had periodic events, and we decided to build a place of homage to the gods who had given us such a paradise on Earth. Our best sculptors created the place, and we used to go there to thank the gods and pray the abundance would continue. But...then, a little before 9000 BC, some REALLY stupid guys, began something called "harvesting", and with it conflicts began...they wanted to "own" the land, they would go and DEFOREST the place, and start planting and putting up fences, war broke out...we expelled them from our tribe, our priests cursed them with exile, warned them they´d have to toil the land for food, but it was useless...more and more, people were seduced with the idea of "owning" land, and after a thousand years of struggle, by which time the forests had been all but destroyed, and game had become scarce, we decided at last to cover up our temple to protect it, and migrated there you have it all, a sad story of greed.

Winston Smith's picture

Great theory!

Wow, I really like this. Creative but also very logical, very possible. "Property is theft", eh?  :)

Lisanne's picture

Lovely theory complete with

Lovely theory complete with 'expulsion from Eden' and 'Cain and Abel' elements.  Well done.

Randy Ray's picture

What if...

...the Gobekli Builder' theory is a sad story of greed (land). The real question did those "several ton" stones/rocks get arranged/stacked as such over 11,000 years ago (including Stonehedge, the Pyramids, etc.)? Please follow me. The speed of light can travel around our Earth 7.5 times in a SECOND, yet our Milky Way Galaxy is 100,000 light YEARS across. There are an estimated >250 BILLION galaxies (not including orbiting planets). My point is...the images that I seen from pictures engraved on the stones/rocks themselves are not human form(s). How about a theory of ET (Extra Terrestrias) phoning home when it or they saw our "greed" coming? Again, please don't crucify me, it's just a thought (or is it a hypothesis?). Peace Brethren!    theorythth   h 

Lisanne's picture

We must never underestimate

We must never underestimate human ingenuity, despite the antiquity of these buildings.  In my opinion, all early megalithic building can be attributed to human intelligence and drive. Human beings have a very long history, much longer than previously thought (ie. over 4 million years of evolution rather than the previously thought 2.5) and we are only beginning to scratch the surface of our ancient past. 

Randy Ray's picture

Agreed Possibility Lisanne

Lisanne or anyone out there brainstorming, I may agree with you on human ingenuity as a possibility. I presume that most of us agree that the several ton rocks/stones at Stonehedge, the Egyptian pyramids, etc. could not of been a "pulling on the rope and pulley physics" and stacked by hundreds of humans at those angles/heights. I am may be leaning towards the scientific "liquefied lime" (primitive form of concrete) construction. Otherwise, ET is the only alternative. Again, peace to all!    concrete    O) ) 

Anonymous's picture

Learn to use Occam's Razor

You think that ET is the only alternative to primitive concrete, why. It is simpler to go with the theory were massive amounts of manual labor, which the Egyptians had in abundance.

Randy Ray's picture

Massive Amounts of Manual Labor?

Again, it is physically and scientifically impossible to move several ton blocks/rocks at those angles and heights even with a "ropes and pulleys" system, even with your "massive amounts of manual labor" theory. I can agree with "massive amounts of manual labor", only if strong superheroes like Superman and/or the Hulk showed up to help move them. Otherwise, coming back down to Earth's reality, primitive concrete or ET is the ONLY alternative, unless you have another LOGICAL SOLUTION.   

Lisanne's picture

Sure, it's absolutely

Sure, it's absolutely possible to build these things with manual labour.  The ancients had ingenious construction methods, which are attested to in the archeological record.  Evidence can't be conveniently ignored.  Remember, these were people essentially like us, not primitive brutes.  From all appearances, the people that built this structure were highly sophisticated and organized, not an impossible feat in the long history of humanity.  To me, it's far more exciting to imagine how our ancestors saw the world around them than it is to imagine some benevolent alien race bestowing all the gifts of civilization for the hell of it.

Anonymous's picture

Voice of reason

Thank you for adding another voice of reason to the discussion.

Anonymous's picture

Epic Fail

What is the Fail? I sense you about to ask,

"Again, it is physically and scientifically impossible to move several ton blocks/rocks at those angles and heights even with a "ropes and pulleys" system, even with your "massive amounts of manual labor" theory. I can agree with "massive amounts of manual labor", only if strong superheroes like Superman and/or the Hulk showed up to help move them. Otherwise, coming back down to Earth's reality, primitive concrete or ET is the ONLY alternative, unless you have another LOGICAL SOLUTION."

Yes your entire comment fails.

First it astounds me how so many would so willingly deny their own beautiful heritage in favor of the idea that humans were dumb, why aren't we to dumb to build skyscrapers then.

Second it is most definitely possible with the technology available to the Egyptians. There are ate least 3 competing theories that do not require super beings. All involve a ramp, 1) internal ramp 2) exterior spiral ramp 3) exterior straight ramp.

1) In this theory the ramp was built inside the structure and primitive cranes were used only for turning the blocks at the corners. When the project was finished the ramp disappears inside.

2) In this theory the ramp spirals around the exterior of the pyramid and is disassembled as they work their way down during polishing.

3) In this theory the ramp is a single straight run from start to top of pyramid. This one has the problem of after a certain height the ramp would require more materials to build than the pyramid.

So yes I have no only one MORE logical explanation than ET I have three.

Oh yeah and by the way the superhero references were a nice touch. Not that it could help any argument about this topic but still nice to see that others have to deal with you too.

Randy Ray's picture

Is it Three Theories or just Three Ramps you say?

Epic Fail, you can have your "non-open minded" (dinosaur thinking) Three Ramp Theory" and I'll stick by the "ET Theory" having been recently researched by reputable PhDs/theologians & receiving strong enough merit to be placed on the History Channel AND/OR by the "Liquefied Lime Theory" that was also highly researched with "proven" scientific data by The Times article dated 01DEC06 in which states a quote...

They found “traces of a rapid chemical reaction which did not allow natural crystalisation . . . The reaction would be inexplicable if the stones were quarried, but perfectly comprehensible if one accepts that they were cast like concrete.”  

As a suggestion, eat more carrots and less fried foods, so you may see/study more clearly.   

Anonymous's picture

First Being on the History

First Being on the History Channel is not, and has never been, a mark of strong merit. The History Channel is no longer a real educational network.

Second I am a senior in college. I am studying Archaeology. 

Third who are the reputable PhDs/theologians who support the ET theory. Oh and what does theology have to do with archaeology? My answer is nothing what so ever.

Fourth present some actual evidence or a link to some or this discussion is over due to it being between a thinking mind and a sheep (you being the sheep).

Lisanne's picture

Enough of the ET nonsense

Does liquefied lime need an extraterrestrial origin? Randy Ray, I would suggest exploring other lines of thought and then form your opinion. Try to challenge your thinking by becoming better informed.  Read more, watch less television.  Consult National Geographic, Scientific American, Archeology magazines, just for a start.  See what's out there. 

Randy Ray's picture

Wow, You Should be Proud!

Mr. Anonymous, ,,,            so you admit you are a senior in college studying Archaeology  and the only thing you can come up with is a "Three Ramp" theory? Wow! Lisanne, did you miss the liquified lime AND/OR the ET theory in my verbiage written? The "OR" part of English means that it could of been JUST the liquified lime theory without ET's involvement. At least the two theories that I support are more logical mathematically and scientifically then yours OR the "other" theories I have been reading AND/OR watching about. I sincerely hope you are not naive to think that our planet Earth (as being an extremely small part of our Milky Way galaxy of ONLY 100,000 light years across) AND knowing there are over 250 billion "viewable" galaxies, that a Deity made our entire third dimensional universe, just for us humans? Do you like the "bird people" AND the numerous "non-human" stone engravings throughout the world on these archaeology findings? I believe I made my case AND points stronger then most. Again, thinking outside the box, is when humans will continue to advance such as my "Genesis 0:0 - 1, 2, 3...In the beginning?" Peace from the Deist Idealist.    

Lisanne's picture

Randy, Randy, Randy....

My dear Randy:  this will be the last of my exchanges with you because, while I value open-mindedness (I really don't judge your ET beliefs, I just want you to maybe explore other possible explanations) I don't believe you value opinions that differ from yours.  While I had difficulty absorbing your last post and can't possibly address everything you said, I will say this - human/animal hybrids in art usually come from a shamanistic culture.  The shaman undertakes a spiritual journey led by an animal spirit guide, and in many cases, becomes the animal him (or her)self.  This is a worldwide phenomenon amongst shamanistic peoples.  The animal/human hybrids depicted in ancient cave art are most certainly portrayals of shamans.

Peace to you, and keep watching the skies.

Anonymous's picture

You assume too much

First  I did notice the or and merely did not discuss the ridiculous liquefied lime theory as I did not know enough about it to adequately respond, now I do.

     A) The theory claims that the shells in the stone should be in an ordered pattern if the stones were cut. This is not true the natural deposition of shells in the formation of limestone has little influence on the final arrangement of any that are visible in the stone as the pressures involved tend to move and distort the shells

     B) The idea that a chemical solution could be lost is a legitimate one, however there are examples of modern science replicating the ancient formulas or at least the effects of them. Greek Fire was lost until the mid twentieth century when modern science crated napalm which while different in composition possesses essentially the same properties, some of the chemicals used in napalm were unavailable to the ancients.

     C) Do you really think that we could not do the things that the liquefied lime theory claims today. The sources I have on this theory state that the formula only existed in the Arabian region. How than can the theory be used to explain the even more massive pyramid in Central America?

Second I said three ramp theories not "Three Ramp Theory" I was referring to three separate theories not one.

Third I am an atheist and as such do not think a deity created the entire universe just for humans. Though that does open the door to me asking you how you think that ET would come here with such a vast universe to choose from? What makes our little world in a unremarkable area of an unremarkable galaxy of interest to ET? This of course doesn't even touch on the fact that if they have the ability to come here why only help us build a few structures of stone why not give us useful help like medicine?

Fourth "Do you like the "bird people" AND the numerous "non-human" stone engravings throughout the world on these archaeology findings?" This is capably dealt with by Lisanne.

Fifth you say "I believe I made my case AND points stronger then most. Again, thinking outside the box, is when humans will continue to advance such as my" 

   A) No you haven't made your case. You present no evidence for your theory so no you do not use stronger points than most.

   B) How was that last sentence supposed to end. I agree that human thought will only advance if people think outside the box, but not if they ignore all that we know about science and history in the process. In other words think outside the box but keep the box in sight.

Finally once again I ask you to provide evidence for your theories. This will be the last time I comment on this issue without something substantial to address, IE: actual evidence.

Regards from the professional Archaeologist(yes I know still a student but I have done field work and could graduate now if I wanted to but for reasons of my own I choose to stay in school)

Randy Ray's picture

Lisanne, Lisanne, Lisanne

I never watched the skies looking for ET. However, if ET was or is here and is able to get here from mega lights years away and we as humans even can't get out of our own solar system, then "common sense" tells most of us that they are intellectually far superior to us humans and ET is not going to get caught and/or seen unless, ET wants to. Keep believing we evolved from apes/monkeys OR from a God (or Deity)that made the whole entire universe just for Earth's human race amusement.  Again, at least I gave or agree with two possible theories. You however, have just beaten up others theories because you are not wise enough to come up with own and/or agree with any of the logical mathematical and/or scientific ones. I do not dispute that you may be more educated on this subject but, overall I am and will always be much more wiser in terms of the hows, whats, whens wheres and whys of "attempting" to figure out the ways of third dimensional life!  

Omni's picture

All the answers are within ourselves

I am God. I created mankind. However, due to great problems elsewhere in the Galaxy, I could not intervene in the genocide of Armenians, nor avoid World War I, nor avoid World War II, nor the Holocaust, nor pedophiles, nor the 2003 tsunami, so, my existence at least for the moment is irrelevant, you have to solve your problems by yourselves.

I am an ET. I created mankind through genetic engineering. However, due to my being away back in my galaxy, or my  absolute indifference, I did not avoid WW I and WWII, nor Hiroshima, nor the Holocaust, nor pedophiles, nor the 2003 tsunami, nor malaria, so my existence for the moment is irrelevant, you have to solve your problems by yourselves.

I am Man. Everything I have, everything I know, I have had to conquer, to fight for, to face and overcome enormous difficulties and incalculable suffering. NO ONE has EVER helped me, NO ONE has ever given anything to me. I built Stonehenge, I built the pyramids, I built Gobekli Tepe. Thousands, millions, BILLIONS of me, had to suffer, to agonize, to die, so that I could be. THAT is why, I write "I" in capital letters. I conquered my world, and I will one day conquer immortality and the stars, without any help from anyone. I am the deadliest, baddest ass in the Universe. I am God, I am Man, and if ET ever comes along, I will vanquish him too.

Winston Smith's picture


Not sure I understood all of that, but what I did understand, I liked!

Anonymous's picture


When thinking of ancient history we should remember that separation of church and state and science, learning and entertainment are recent developments.  To say a relic or site has religious significance can be misleading if we don't understand that all these things were integrated in the minds of the ancients.

dude's picture


i just read most of this. thanks for stealing my time. really, that was a pretty exciting and sporadic thread; even has a guy in it that looks like todd from code monkeys, which is kind of creepy. 

anyway, thanks for the giggles.

voice of reason's picture

Just one problem, tell your

Just one problem, tell your mother, there were not Turks or even prototurks in what is now Turkey at the time Gobekli Tepe was built, at the time of "Noah's flood" or the good St. Nicholas, who most certainly was NOT a Turk, but a third century Christian, Greek or Armenian. And yes, we do give a shit about the "massacre" (genocide) of Armenians.

SarahP's picture


No! Santa was from Alaska! I Know! I KNOW!

He WAS you betcha! Waaa!

Shutup all of ya!!! WAAAa!

The Bobster's picture

Weight lifting for DUMMIES

A wise man once said to me, "Whenever you hear hoof beats, first think 'Horses' not 'Zebras'.

So, some people think that Stonehenge and its ilk were built by ET and his cronies (Possibly some inter-galactic phone booth.)

Others think that huge armies of labourers pulling on ropes did the job.

Nobody yet has mentioned the possibility of tame wooly mammoths being used like the elephants in the logging camps in Burma, but there is still time.

Meanwhile, watch the video clip linked below on youtube of a single person raising a concrete block the weight of two bulldozers from horizontal to vertical using no technology that was unavailable to our distant ancestors.

Then tell me your wooly mammoth hypotheses. I like a good laugh.

Manny Kohigan's picture


Isn't it great that we put religion before everything, and
extol it's virtues, and praise it all to hell and back when it has been the number one cause of wars-(even above money and territory)-throughout man's gloriously idiotic history?

God love ya! Allah and all the rest of them love ya!

Somebody's got to, 'cause we sure hate each other.

Anonymous's picture


I'm thinking we need more reliable public education by the look of the comments on this page. It's truly depressing and discouraging how many stupid people have posted on this article, so convinced of their delusional superiority they feel the need to bad mouth and condemn common sense and methods of discussion. You people are way too invested in argument and you need to be more invested in listening. You're the reason the world is pathetic and hopeless and stagnant in its progress.

PS Gravity's 'just a theory' too. Go ahead, deny it exists. Prove you're a complete moron.

Anonymous's picture

As much as I agree with the

As much as I agree with the person above me. I feel the need to point out that Gravity is not a Theory. It's called The Law of Gravity.

Theory simply means that it can not be proven either true or untrue. Obviously Gravity exists.

Leofwine1's picture


I feel the need to point out that your definition of theory "Theory simply means that it can not be proven either true or untrue." is completely wrong.

The relevant definition of theory is:

A coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.

Therefore gravity is a theory. While scientists use the term Laws of Nature they do not use the term Law of Gravity any more.

My point is that you should have looked up theory in a dictionary. I would like to know where you found your definition though.

Lars's picture

Age determination

Come on people. Leave the religion talks. If the dating of this site is correct, it probably dates back to a time long before humans invented today's major religions.

Maybe I didn't read this article carefully enough. But how exactly could they date this site to about 8000 BC? Did they find some old piece of wood?

Kuncen's picture

Put it in writing?

There have been some very thoughtful and eloquent comments on this thread.  If anyone would like to submit an article for publication on, all you have to do is create an account (takes 30 seconds) and then click the "Submit new article" link.  As long as your article is thoughtful instead of hateful, I'll try to publish it straight away.


Kuncen's picture

Article response

Chinajon has taken me up on this offer, and has posted his response as "Göbekli Tepe Remastered".  Check it out when you get a chance!


holzgrill's picture


So we think we know it all!

I think we have not even gotten to the point that we realise what 'all' means. To profess to be in a position to discount any new discovery is the pinnacle of naivety

Anonymous's picture



Celestial Elf's picture

Stonehenge Ancestors

For those who are interested in returning the Stonehenge Ancestors,
I am sharing my new machinima film
Stonehenge Is Our Temple
Please sign the e-petition in link below film and share the film so others will get the message, thank you ~

Marcel Proust's picture

The truth

Why are we talking about Arks,floods or any of the biblical anecdotes? They are so spurious only a fool would claim them true. Written by a bunch of medieval monks, they are hearsay and mythological renderings. Darwin at least had some evidence as opposed to saying that it is true because the bible says so.

Kuncen's picture

Not a temple at all?  New

Not a temple at all?  New article suggests GT was a place for settlers:


stikman's picture

thanks for the update

...i am not the sharpest pencil in the box.
But GT is interesting to me, i do not understand
why information on it is not more abundant.
seems to be a huge discovery (and recent also)
simply for the date and beauty of the work.
I was disillusioned with anthropology 35 years ago
because, to me it seemed like every artifact found
was most often attributed to religion and worship.
Will future archaeologist think we made Coke bottles
as a totem to our "glass gods". What if they unearth
Wall Street, "money gods"? (oops, too true)

Any way, thanks for the link to another point of view
on this amazing discovery.

Tetsuo's picture

It's simple - lookup ancient

It's simple - lookup ancient astronaut theory.

Leofwine's picture

I have a question

Why are you suggesting people look up the ancient astronaut theory?

  1. Because you agree with it or
  2. because you want to give people a laugh.
Tetsuo's picture


The first one. I believe it's a plausible alternative. Look at the quality of those carvings! I find it hard to believe that those were made with simple tools of man who lived those days.

Btw. I am no evangelist on that theory, just FYI that's something you can read about and judge yourself.

Leofwine's picture

RE: answer

To respond to "...that's something you can read about and judge yourself." I have read about it and judged it to be implausible. I do not say that it is impossible but I do not think it likely.

In response to the statement about the quality of the carvings idea I ask why you find it hard to believe that ancient man was clever enough to make them and the other ancient wonders? The reason I ask is that mankind is obviously clever judging by all that modern humans have accomplished why can't the same be true for humans with less advanced technology but dedication to completing projects they set their minds to?

And finally if aliens came and helped ancient man why would they build with stone instead of with more advanced materials, or why not help buy teaching us about science and medicine?

Dr. Mike's picture

Oh, what magnificent egoes, all without substance.

Kind gentlemen,

If this shoe fits.....

Whenever I read comments about such important topics as Gobekli Tepe, generated by such ignorant self-aggrandizing souls as found above, I am disappointed.  Your trite arguments are meaningless.  In this context, your personal beliefs, nationality and opinions are equally unimportant.  You generate petty argument rather than learned discussion, hoping someone will be impressed by your vocabulary or your tenacity.   The thoughtful and knowledgeable among us are not impressed.

I would suggest you set aside your personal politics, and endeavor to acquire a working knowledge of the scientific method, and it's application toward discovering truth.   Yes, Truth ... what else matters?   Who discovers it?   His beliefs?   His nationality or language?   Those are the concerns of politicians and self-aggrandizers, not scientists.

Thank you for your attention.

Dr. Michael Elder, P.E, PhD. M.D. retired.

Anonymous's picture


And your comment was not self-aggrandizing at all.  Oh no, not at all.

Anonymous's picture


Congratulations! You just stole first place for most aggrandizing argument with no contribution other than to brag about being indoctrinated.

Anonymous1's picture

None of you know what your

None of you know what your talking about so please shut up with your theories and wait to see what the archeologists unearth, then shut up more n keep ur dodo opinions to yourselves, in the meantime try 'evolve' a way to.. U guessed it... Shutting up talking crap. Thank you

Leofwine1's picture


That is not how we expand scientific understanding of the world around us. Science grows by having a lively discussion. Those with theories are allowed to present them, the community evaluates the theory, the community debates the merits of the theory until a consensus is reached. The origin of a theory does not matter, it can come from a person in the field or from someone outside. In your little world science could not function. Silencing those with whom you disagree is the act of someone who is afraid to listen to new ideas. Please grow up.

Ozzie's picture

Wow this truly thread

Wow this truly thread entertained me considerably.  I am agnostic - I have no clue and I am someone who personally requires proof to believe and I will admit that is sort of sad....I don't believe in a lot of things but I believe there is truth to many things that we twist for our own purpose.  The person who 'discovered' who built the pyramids was about to have funding cut off...quite a coincidence imo.  I think the ancient alien idea is interesting, as is evolution, as is creationism..what if they all had a play in our development?  Or what if it was none of them or one is right?  Yelling louder than the person you are arguing with does not make you right, it only makes their voice inaudible.  

What I do KNOW is that religion has been a cause of pain and suffering as well as a humanitarian benefit to all of mankind.  Much like paper created debt and all the things associated with it but it also enabled trade to go to the next level.  I just dream of a day when we look at things with an open mind and didn't criticize others for their beliefs let alone attack them or go to war with them.  Christianity, Islam, and Judaism have been going at it forever, yet don't all three come from the same Old Testament?  When people deny well documented facts *(like the genocide the Turkish and Nazi's have committed) it makes me rally sad.  Keep in mind though, the Old Testament gave the order to commit genocide on the current inhabitants of the 'promised land'.  If the land was theirs and Yahweh wanted them to have it, why not whip up another flood?  Why not spread a disease or virus that only the locals were susceptible to?  And remember Christians and Muslims..this guy was your god too, before another prophet came and 'added' to the John Smith out in America.  No different.  

I believe Jesus was a real person, as was Mohammed, but I think Jesus would roll in his grave (if he had not gotten up and split 3 days later) if he saw the atrocities committed by people in the name of Christianity.  World has stupid people, evil people, virtuous people, all kinds of people.  Some use religion for good, others for bad.  Same can be said for science - after all look how long a 'theory' becomes a fact before someone disproves it.  Just look at the changes we have made to our understanding of the Solar System the past 2 hundred years.... 

Thanks to you all for entertaining me, I can honestly say I do not know what Gobekli Tepe was am excited to hear more information as the dig occurs but let me leave you with this.  The archeologist that is digging the site has put forth a theory that will change the way we look back at the evolution of our civilization.  If he found an item or something that would quickly discount his theory, or worse someone else on the site discovered it, would he openly celebrate's it's discovery?  I hope so but the human ego is a powerful, powerful thing.  I hope I said something that sets off some people cause quite frankly, reading all this was fun.  Especially Selma whose posts, I hope this is an insult btw, are so ignorant I half think they were a troll.

Have a nice day.


Anthony Tucci's picture

I've read through most of the comments.. Had to laugh about Santa clause. WHO cares about Santa? It's for kids that are 5 and under. Christmas is about Jesus. That's probably what stinks the most about America.. It's all about toys and gifts and anything but Jesus.

2nd) people commenting about how God let's genocide, war, murder, cancer along with everything else, take place. So in your eyes he's suppose to make earth heaven? You say that because you are lost and haven't a clue of who he is. And his rules. This world is a cess pool of sin. This world isn't even real. It's basically a trial. you fail to understand that heaven is a real place, 100 times more real than earth.

3) Gobekli tepe, interesting place.. But carbon dating is so wack. Co 14 is a tricky way of telling accurate dates of time.

4) Dinosaurs for instance, a t-Rex thigh bone was found in America not too long ago. When cut open they discovered blood and soft tissue.. 65 million years?? Are you sure about that? I think a lot of these evolution scientists really think they are these giants in their own minds. Quit letting them and our public schools brainwash us and our children..

I visit this site religiously.. They even reply back proving all the nay sayers wrong. I love reason the comments. They always win lol.


Leofwine1's picture

"That's probably what stinks

"That's probably what stinks the most about America.. It's all about toys and gifts and anything but Jesus."

  1. Really you think America isn't dominated by the religious right!

"people commenting about how God let's genocide, war, murder, cancer along with everything else, take place. So in your eyes he's suppose to make earth heaven? You say that because you are lost and haven't a clue of who he is. And his rules. This world is a cess pool of sin. This world isn't even real. It's basically a trial. you fail to understand that heaven is a real place, 100 times more real than earth."

  1. Yes if God is all powerful, all loving, and all knowing then yes he should make heaven and not bother with Earth.

  2. This argument assumes that God exists. I do not believe God (at least as described in the Bible) exists.

"Gobekli tepe, interesting place.. But carbon dating is so wack. Co 14 is a tricky way of telling accurate dates of time."

  1. Just a minor correction it's C-14 not "Co 14".

"Dinosaurs for instance, a t-Rex thigh bone was found in America not too long ago. When cut open they discovered blood and soft tissue.. 65 million years?? Are you sure about that? I think a lot of these evolution scientists really think they are these giants in their own minds. Quit letting them and our public schools brainwash us and our children.."

  1. Just so you know Dinosaurs fossils are not dated using C-14 dating but K-Ar (Potassium Argon) dating.

  2. Could you perhaps provide a source for that T-Rex bone claim so that I can look at the evidence myself. Give me a chance to be convinced by the same evidence that convinced you.

  3. I don't think you understand how science works if you say things like “I think a lot of these evolution scientists really think they are these giants in their own minds. Quit letting them and our public schools brainwash us and our children." Scientists don't want to brainwash anyone nor do our public schools, except when controlled by the religious extremists.

Anonymous's picture

YOU stink

I am flattered that you took the time to go through my comment piece by piece and even correct me on my spelling like a true grammar Nazi.

I'm sorry you don't believe scientists aren't trying to push evolution as a real thing to get people to doubt Gods word. Evolution is an athiests religion.

You seem somewhat capable to type in the key words "t-rex bone blood" in ANY search bar. Even But I suggest, if I may, although Im clearly not as smart as you are because I believe in a god created world over a rock created world. That you should study the site CREATION.COM .. Use their search bar.. They have real facts from real scientists that show more support for a young earth than an Earth of billions. But something tells me if you truley wanted answers you would have done that already, and you would already have studied the bible enough to understand why we are hear.

I know it's tough.. That site has truth. It's like Garlic to vampires.. I dare you to spend 1 hour skimming through the articles in the search bar. Let me know if you accept the challenge.

If your going to ask why didn't God just create heaven instead of earth.. Earth was supposed to be a heaven.we all know what happened next...

Leofwine1's picture

I'll start with your last

I'll start with your last statement: "If your going to ask why didn't God just create heaven instead of earth. Earth was supposed to be a heaven. We all know what happened next..."

Yes according to your holy book a talking snake convinced a woman to eat a piece of fruit and humans gained the knowledge of good and evil, which by the way is the only thing that would have allowed them to know that eating the fruit in the first place was evil and not just against Gods will. Of course God, at least the one most Christians I know believe in, would have known all this was going to happen and even caused it to happen despite being all loving.

No I will not go to CREATION.COM. Not because I don't want to know the truth but because I do. Sites like CREATION.COM are biased and approach science wrong. Science is about looking at the facts and making your theory fit them not having a theory and finding facts to support it. Sites like CREATION.COM have a theory and cherry pick the data to make it look like the science supports it.

And while yes I can use a search bar I asked you to provide a link because the burden of proof is on you not on me. I won't bother with looking for the evidence because I follow science news and if something like that T-Rex bone had been found I would very likely have heard about it. I'm not saying I couldn't have missed it just that its unlikely. So your claim that a T-Rex bone with blood and soft tissue being found recently in America seems to have insufficient evidence to even bother looking at, until you show me some.

I am sorry you believe that scientists are trying to brainwash children.

I corrected your spelling not because I am a grammar Nazi but because I feel that it is important to help people understand science and if you had looked up C14 dating you would not liking found any useful information whereas looking up C-14 dating would have yielding better results. 

By the way calling me a grammar Nazi is an example of the ad hominem logical fallacy, which is attacking the person instead of their argument. In the future you may want to avoid doing so in order to seem more credible as a debater.

Anonymous's picture

I know why they don't talk

I know why they don't talk about Dino blood in your science sites.. Because they don't want to talk about it.

So in order for you to see it for yourself, you want me to paste the link for Instead of doing it yourself? I believe the only cherry picker is you my friend. Your missing out..

True science is searching for the truth.. I don't get you.

Anonymous's picture

Unpleasant truth

Around the globe there are many similar sites that get neglected by the mainstream media (f.e. The thing is when you dive into history you realize that it is not only pyramids. I am not implying anything, but there is something that embarrass the scholars nowadays.