Skip to comments.Prehistoric Desert Town Found In Western Sahara (15,000 Years Old)
Posted on 08/20/2004 9:10:09 AM PDT by blam
Prehistoric Desert Town Found in Western Sahara
Thu Aug 19, 2004 01:52 PM ET
RABAT (Reuters) - The remains of a prehistoric town believed to date back 15,000 years and belong to an ancient Berber civilization have been discovered in Western Sahara, Moroccan state media said on Thursday. A team of Moroccan scientists stumbled across the sand-covered ruins of the town Arghilas deep in the desert of the Morocco-administered territory.
The remains of a place of worship, houses and a necropolis, as well as columns and rock engravings depicting animals, were found at the site near the town of Aousserd in northeastern Western Sahara.
The isolated area is known to be rich in prehistoric rock engravings but experts said the discovery could be significant if proven that the ruins were of Berber origin as this civilization is believed to date back only some 9,000 years.
"It appears that scientists have come up with the 15,000-years estimate judging by the style of the engravings and the theme of the drawings," Mustapha Ouachi, a Rabat-based Berber historian, told Reuters.
Berbers are the original inhabitants of North Africa before Arabs came to spread Islam in the seventh century.
The population of Western Sahara, seized by Morocco in 1975 when former colonial power Spain pulled out, are mostly of Berber and Arab descent.
I wonder how you figure out the name of a 15000 year old town. Does it have "Welcome to Arghilas pop. 1043" on the road into town?
I'd just find a water bill. That would have the name on it.
I'd just find a water bill. That would have the name on it.
Above from a website on glaciation. Ye Gods---a TOWN from before the end of the last ice age!!!! I wonder what they thought about the "global warming" of the day.
The scientists haven't described the location of the holiest structure on the holiest street in the holiest city yet. As soon as the local terrorists establish a base there they will have it located. Or at least it will be established as soon as the media find out where the terrorists are making their stand.
If people don't live in deserts, then maybe when the town was there, and people were living there...it wasn't a desert.
> I wonder how you figure out the name of a 15000 year old town.
Ummm... you don't, unless there are stories of such a town being in that area (and then you're still speculating).
If there was text in the town, you might eb able to read it off that... but damn, a written language 15,000 years old... I seriously doubt we'd figure it out.
Now comes the point in the program where people start argueing about the ethnicity of the inhabitants...
I know, but I didn't really understand what dead was trying to say, and it seemed like he wanted attention, so I answered.
He was repeating an old comedy routine. Sam Kinison I believe.
Out on the coast is a prehistoric seaport dock. It was already old when civilization began in Mesopotamia.
The more we look, the older we get.
Great find. WoW! Wonder what else is hidden under the deserts of the world, I've always thought the Gobi desert was a prime candidate for hidden cities. Sahara makes sense, if it was wetter and maybe even, if some of the new researchers claim, this was contemporaneous with ancient, ancient Egypt.
They were Berbers? I'm stuned!
made a killing in carpets from what ive heard.
15,000 years old??? A town??
I could be wrong but isn't it hard to have a town without agriculture?
The first farms discovered so far have been dated to around 9000 yrs old.
This isn't sounding right.
Lost City of Atlantis Found
- Underneath Sahara Desert!
Nov 26 '03
THE LOST City of Atlantis is not deep beneath the ocean -- the ancient metropolis is buried under the sands of the Sahara Desert!
Archaeologist Dr. Carla Sage points out that according to ancient accounts, the Mycenaean, Cretan and Egyptian civilizations all traded with Atlantis -- which would have been unlikely if it lay in the North Atlantic as many believe.
"Atlantis was clearly within easy trading distance of Troy and the other city states of the Mediterranean," she says. "I believe Atlantis was the capital of a vast North African empire with ports on the Gulf of Sidra.
"Atlantis was destroyed, not by earthquake, floods or volcanoes, but by the steady march of desert sands that smothered the civilization.
"The empire did not sink into the sea as is commonly believed -- it was swallowed by the dunes."
While the theory flies in the face of traditional views of Atlantis, Dr. Sage points to tantalizing evidence that supports the Sahara model.
Nomadic desert Bedouins, especially after sandstorms, often see marble columns sticking up out of dunes, notably near the Ahaggar Mountains of southern Algeria, the British expert reveals.
Even more surprising, scientists have discovered that within comparatively recent times in geological terms, the Sahara region enjoyed a temperate climate that would have made it an ideal site for human civilization.
"Eleven thousand to 12,000 years ago, when the ancient Greeks say Atlantis flourished, the Sahara was lush, fertile land," Dr. Sage observes.
"Artwork etched in Saharan rocks at that time depicts giraffes roaming freely. Archaeologists have also found pictograms of domesticated cattle, horse-drawn chariots, as well as large caravans -- confirming that trade played an important role in the region."
But the alarmingly rapid transformation of the region from paradise to dry desert would have wiped out all agriculture and killed off livestock.
"More significantly, as sand encroached on the empire, clogging caravan wheels, it made travel nearly impossible -- which would have put an end to an empire based on trade," Dr. Sage says.
"It was not until centuries later, around 100 B.C., that people began to use camels for transportation in the region -- an innovation that came too late for Atlantis, long since buried and forgotten under the dunes."
A few diehards continue to believe that Atlantis was literally a continent in the midst of the Atlantic Ocean.
But most modern experts agree that theory was blown out of the water in 1912 when scientist Alfred Wegener demonstrated that the known continents once fit neatly together like a jigsaw puzzle and have drifted apart over the eons.
Although Plato, drawing upon earlier accounts, wrote of a watery end to the great Atlantean civilization, Dr. Sage believes that the ancient Greek philosopher misinterpreted an Egyptian word meaning "movement of water."
"It was not water deluging Atlantis, but the departure of water from the region, that caused the calamity," she says.
Next spring, the expert hopes to lead an international expedition, including archaeologists from the United States, Britain, France, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, that will begin combing the 3.5 million-square-mile desert using high-tech equipment in search of traces of the lost empire.
"I am convinced that buried beneath that vast, arid no-man's-land we will find Atlantis," Dr. Sage declares.
sorry, should read
AAAA AAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAA SK BTTT AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Considering the age of the earth is roughly 6,000 years, this is tyruly an "interesting" find!
Thanks, this is the first I've heard of this idea.
Well, their dating methods are at best unreliable and they like to pontificate about their theories till they end up wearing egg. So I never listen to anything they say about dates. Just watch the find and look at the facts and ignore most of the conclusions unless there is solid support for them.
Too much coffee this morning?
More crap. lol
Interesting. The word 'atl' in one of the mesoamerican languages means water or has something to do with water.
They can tell it's 15,000 years old by the style of the engravings???
If man is millions of years old as evolutionists claim, there should be a lot more ruins of civilization and signs of agriculture than what we find. It is simply not believable that man existed for millions of years with current cranial capacity and the ability to use tools, but did not discover agriculture or writing prior to the last 15,000 years.
If man is millions of years old as evolutionists claim
Evolutionists claim no such thing. The species homo sapien is generally considered to be about 300,000 years old.
For most of that time, they lived primarily as hunters and gatherers. It is generally believed that they began forming civilizations about 15,000 years ago, though scientists disagree on that number.
THEY DONT NEED MONEY! THEY NEED A F**KING UHAUL!!
300,000 or a million. It's still not believable that man was smart enough to use tools but not smart enough to realize that plants grow from seeds and start planting what he liked.
um,...15,000 years ago, it wasn't a desert.
Early man lived as hunters and gathers. Many people still live that way. It has nothing to do with smarts.
About 15,000 years ago, some enterprising homo sapiens decided that they might try living in one place permanently and see how it worked out. It really caught on and remains the popular choice even today.
It would be hard to miss. First of all, people would chew on all kinds of plants, roots, seeds, berries; some would be tasty enough to look for on purpose like a bear that prefers a particular brand of beer. This time of the year there are seeds flying everywhere on the breeze. If nothing else, children sometimes play with some seeds. It would be no trick to gather some seeds and keep them over the winter rather than eat them and then notice that they sometimes start to grow and become the same kind of plant. You would have to go out of your way to not notice.
It's still a ridiculously long time to go without discovering agriculture.
I think the Bible is more credible. In one generation (or less) Cain began growing crops while Able became a hunter and livestock herder. And we have been growing and hunting and herding ever since.
You think maybe we just don't know everything there is to know?
Why not? It had to have happened sooner or later; it just happened to have happened later.
You do realize, of course, that there are people living in South America who never discovered agriculture until contacted by explorers?
Channeling Sam Kennison?
No, it happened sooner. The start point just wasn't 300,000 years ago.
You have a reference? That's pretty hard to believe given the ancient empires of South America. It is easier to believe that a jungle people might choose not to use much agriculture, simply because the Jungle provides sufficiently. But to not even be aware of it, I think is suspect.
Hell, in Africa, we have the bushmen of the Kalahari who still lead a stone-age hunter/gatherer existence despite having frequent contact with their more civilized neighbors. IIRC, there are still tribes of pygmies in the central parts of Africa that haven't made the leap from the stone age yet either.
In the latter example, that's a choice. They choose to live a hunter\gatherer lifestyle.
I suspect that is the case in the former example too. I doubt seriously they had never had contact with the outside world. They chose to minimize it.
And, your point?
It's human nature to have one group not adopt certain advances, i.e. the Menonites with Electricity.
But it is also human nature to explore and expand, even to the point of leaving the tribe to do your own thing.
That a tribe chooses not to embrace certain cultural advances, is far different, from assuming that in 300,000 years ALL men would reject such obvious advances.
They got 15,000 from the 'style' and theme' of some engravings? yeah right... Might as well throw a dart at a timeline posted on the wall.