i'm not convinced of it has no bearing on the meaning of the symbols at gobekli tepe which was built by different people far away at a different time it doesn't prove anything about gobekli teppy because gobekli tapi isn't included look at the chart and the animal symbols that are listed that were analyzed from the caves bison rhino horse lion how many of these symbols are found on pillar NUMBER_TOKEN at gobekli tepe zero the only connection to lands further east would be the data from chateau hayek but we don't have a proper spread of samples from chateau hayek as we do from europe and chateau hayek is also too far removed from europe to assume any connection actually work after this paper was published has shown that the stag symbol or stag animal painting and not the fox probably represents the constellation aquarius in european paleolithic cave art if we take that into account the statistic becomes even better it goes up to about NUMBER_TOKEN in NUMBER_TOKEN billion moreover if we combine this result of NUMBER_TOKEN in NUMBER_TOKEN billion with the one from pillar NUMBER_TOKEN quebec tapi of NUMBER_TOKEN in NUMBER_TOKEN million we get a combined statistic of around one in NUMBER_TOKEN quadrillion now that is incredibly tiny i would like to hear dr swetman explain how it's scientific to combine the results of a probability test conducted with subjective data in one region of the world with a separate probability test conducted in another region of the world with no overlapping data between the two tests into an overall probability figure for the entire hypothesis a conclusion can only apply to the population from which you took the random sample of independent measurements basically what we have proven in a scientific sense now is that the zodiacal hypothesis is correct these animal symbols definitely represent constellations it would be irrational to think that they don't it would be irrational to think they do science always needs to consider plausible alternative interpretations of an observed result dr swetman seems to think we can dispense with all that so this has profound consequences most obviously for the disciplines of anthropology and archaeology so it means that current theories for the origin of civilization and the origin of religion and the origin of writing that they are probably not quite correct they need to be adjusted to take into account the younger driest impact coherent catastrophism and this ancient interest in astronomy and the ancient zodiac and of course it means that our understanding of the history of astronomy is completely wrong so for example it's generally thought that the uh our constellations it's generally thought we get those or we obtain those from the mesopotamians so that's babylonians or the sumerians in the second or third millennium bc but this looks to be wrong by many tens of thousands of years likewise procession of the equinoxes was thought to be first noticed by hipparchus of ancient greece in the second century bc and of course now we see that is also wrong by tens of thousands of years and so on and uh this discovery even has consequences for many earth sciences so remember that many aspects of modern earth science have traditionally been built on the edifice of gradualism which which rules out cosmic impacts from the very beginning and now we now know this is very clearly wrong even
NO_SEGMENT_TOKEN