gobekli tepe merely represent the sky on a specific date but that they make reference to a comet impact that dr swettman and his colleague demetrios tikritsis believe occurred around NUMBER_TOKEN NUMBER_TOKEN bce the ruins of gobekli tepe have been carbon dated to NUMBER_TOKEN to NUMBER_TOKEN bce which is at least a thousand years later than that so if the pillar records the event it would suggest the inhabitants of the area still remembered it after a millennium that's a bit difficult to imagine if we compare the knowledge of other ancient societies even ones that had writing and this one did not they don't remember events a thousand years earlier very well at all you should also know that the comet impact hypothesis itself is controversial for our purposes we're focusing specifically on whether the zodiac that is the zodiac whose origins we were able to trace firmly only to about NUMBER_TOKEN bce in babylonia existed here thousands of years earlier actually not specifically the zodiac but the entire greek set of NUMBER_TOKEN constellations which we established last time to have been subsequent to the babylonian system so this too is controversial we won't at least in this video be going too far into the comet impact hypothesis only as far as necessary to discuss the greek constellation issue so what did we say in this paper we focused on pillar NUMBER_TOKEN that's the the key to understanding quebec tepee and therefore the key to understanding the origin of civilization i've been following um developments of quebec he said it was made public in about NUMBER_TOKEN but i was none the wiser until i read graham hancock's book magicians of the gods i didn't know until i saw this that the germ of dr swetman's idea originated with graham hancock it turns out that dr swettman is a big fan of alternative history and lost high technology and this interest preceded his work on the subject so it would seem his efforts were intended from the beginning to establish the truth of lost advanced civilization this is not to say that i think this makes him automatically wrong oh no as i said i think it's perfectly feasible for the animals on the pillars to represent constellations i bring this up only so that you know that he has a horse in the race in fact in the paper he and sikritsis say at the outset that their hypothesis about the contents of the gobekli tepi pillars may be just the written confirmation of the comet impact that the comet impact theory needs the only problem is what we end up with is several controversial hypotheses being used to support another controversial hypothesis and in his book he suggested that the vulture or eagle symbol here represents the constellation sagittarius and that this scorpion symbol represents constellation scorpius and that this bending bird symbol with down wriggling fish might represent the constellation of futures although it's not quite in the right position and that set of correspondences or correlations looked intriguing to me i thought there could be something to it since his hypothesis is a revision of graham hancock's he begins with graham hancock's identifications he hasn't said it here yet but the circular object that the vulture is
NO_SEGMENT_TOKEN