The mysterious monuments of Kazakhstan

[Brian G Turner]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/s...stan-that-resemble-ancient-crop-a6717766.html

Nasa has released pictures of huge patterns drawn on the ground in Kazakhstan, in an attempt to solve the mystery behind how they got there.

The huge formations are known as the Steppe Geoglyphs. Scientists have little idea how they were formed — but think that solving the mystery could lead to a huge change in how we understand early humans.

There are around 260 of the designs, which are carved into the ground and made out of piles of Earth assembled into shapes that include squares, rings and swastika shapes. The oldest of them are thought to be about 8,000 years old.

The patterns were first spotted by a Kazakh enthusiast in 2007, who saw them on Google Earth.

 

[SilentRoamer]

Its the Sectoids Brian!

I always find ancient structures that are visible from space to be really interesting. Especially those like the ones above that have some geometric significance.

 

[svalbard]

Fascinating. It is a mind boggling exercise to imagine what sort of life our ancestors led in those ancient times, what the landscape looked like, what it meant to the people who lived there.

Interestingly Kazakhstan has thrown up some oddities over the years. The Kurgan burial sites that hold the corpses of what seems like warrior women. It lends some sort of validity to Herodotus's tales of the Amazons.

 

[J Riff]

Clearly it only meant much to people who lived in the air.

 

[PartialMitch]

Clearly it only meant much to people who lived in the air.

Eh, for me such thoughts are too much of a reach. Medieval cathedrals were often designed to be shaped like a cross if viewed from above for the symbolic purposes of the church, not because anyone was flying overhead. Constructs like this are far more likely, in my mind, to serve such purposes than they would be to really require airborne viewing.

There's also the question of whether they can be seen from nearby hills. The Nazca lines, for example, are often pointed to in a similar manner by UFO-enthusiasts ("You can only see them from above.") ... but they are visible from nearby hilltops and rises. That fact is usually left out of accounts, particularly in works and programs that seek to hype the "alien" connection.

I'm continually impressed by the genius and creative potential of our ancestors. It gives me hope for the future to think that thousands of years ago we could come together to create such wonders as this or Gobekli Tepe or even the comparatively tiny Harhoog (my favorite name in all of archaeology). Every time friends talk about how people are savage, brutal, selfish monsters (usually when discussing the Walking Dead, lol), I think back to the cooperation, creativity and willpower shown so often in history. There are definitely rotten aspects to humanity, but overall, we're pretty good, and we're only getting better.

 

[Nick B]

I'm not saying its aliens, but...

 

[J Riff]

I'm not sure I like the 'we' word... looking around at this neighborhood.... but fine, it was meant to be viewed from.... balloons. During the Golden Age of Ballooning.

 

[BAYLOR]

A parking lot for flying saucers ?

 

[BAYLOR]

Eh, for me such thoughts are too much of a reach. Medieval cathedrals were often designed to be shaped like a cross if viewed from above for the symbolic purposes of the church, not because anyone was flying overhead. Constructs like this are far more likely, in my mind, to serve such purposes than they would be to really require airborne viewing.

There's also the question of whether they can be seen from nearby hills. The Nazca lines, for example, are often pointed to in a similar manner by UFO-enthusiasts ("You can only see them from above.") ... but they are visible from nearby hilltops and rises. That fact is usually left out of accounts, particularly in works and programs that seek to hype the "alien" connection.

I'm continually impressed by the genius and creative potential of our ancestors. It gives me hope for the future to think that thousands of years ago we could come together to create such wonders as this or Gobekli Tepe or even the comparatively tiny Harhoog (my favorite name in all of archaeology). Every time friends talk about how people are savage, brutal, selfish monsters (usually when discussing the Walking Dead, lol), I think back to the cooperation, creativity and willpower shown so often in history. There are definitely rotten aspects to humanity, but overall, we're pretty good, and we're only getting better.

Unless we find a way to fix the environmental damage that were doing , we're going cause our own extinction and there will be no one to admire whatever monuments we leave behind.

 

[PartialMitch]

Unless we find a way to fix the environmental damage that were doing , we're going cause our own extinction and there will be no one to admire whatever monuments we leave behind.

You know, we're so clever that I'm not particularly worried about extinction through environmental damage ... not of our species, anyway. Sure, we'll probably end up suffering greatly due to our negligence, but we (as a species, definitely not as individuals) will survive, possibly in ways that folks here and now can't even imagine. Oh, societies may collapse, and millions may die from starvation, but humans are smart and adaptable. Some of us will live.

It's the death of the natural world that troubles me. In part because I view all life as worthy of respect, so our casual extermination of the biosphere strikes me as a kind of blasphemy. All living things are children of evolution, inheritors of the billions of years of Earth's life history; I hesitate to kill even flies, out of respect for that heritage. More than that though, all life is tied together in the tangle of complex food webs, energy exchange and environmental cycles. We risk a lot of pain for our descendants by messing around with complicated systems that are beyond our understanding. Humanity is likely to survive for a long time, but our nasty habits will hurt us. They already are.

 

[BAYLOR]

You know, we're so clever that I'm not particularly worried about extinction through environmental damage ... not of our species, anyway. Sure, we'll probably end up suffering greatly due to our negligence, but we (as a species, definitely not as individuals) will survive, possibly in ways that folks here and now can't even imagine. Oh, societies may collapse, and millions may die from starvation, but humans are smart and adaptable. Some of us will live.

It's the death of the natural world that troubles me. In part because I view all life as worthy of respect, so our casual extermination of the biosphere strikes me as a kind of blasphemy. All living things are children of evolution, inheritors of the billions of years of Earth's life history; I hesitate to kill even flies, out of respect for that heritage. More than that though, all life is tied together in the tangle of complex food webs, energy exchange and environmental cycles. We risk a lot of pain for our descendants by messing around with complicated systems that are beyond our understanding. Humanity is likely to survive for a long time, but our nasty habits will hurt us. They already are.

The rate at which were wiping out species is very troubling. The Black Rhino is gone , it Sumatran Rhino and poachers in the congo are killing off the elephants. Many other species are on the edge . If we wipe out all the animals. how long can we survive?

Then there is destruction of the Rain Forests in South America . In Brazil they are destroying an area about the size of Rhode Island even year for farming and cattle grazing and charcoal manufacturing . They think the forest will grow back. It won't. As for the land they've cleared, it's exhausted soil . It might produce crops for one or two season but that it, and the grass that does grow is ill-suited to cattle.

In Equador farmers are given forested land land with the provision that they clear away the forest. The government in the country is run by by a bunch of short sighted idiots who don't care about the long term consequences of what they are doing.

 

[SilentRoamer]

Exhausted soil and the ability to produce food are going to be the things that kill us most likely - or a supervolcane, or a planetary impact, solar flair etc etc - I think it most likely to be a natural cause (of which I consider Global Warming a natural cycle - albeit one we have sped up)

I mean in the UK we already dig out tonnes and tonnes of seabed material to use as fertilizer - as a natural resource good soil is not a renewable (at least not in terms of a human timeline).

I have absolutely no doubt we will die on this rocky planet at some time in the future. I always like remembering that the Dinosaurs ruled this planet for millions of years and we have been on here a tiny time compared to them.

 

[Nick B]

Pessimism is a beautiful thing to watch. Personally, I dont subscribe to the doomfuture club.

 

[SilentRoamer]

Hey Quellist,

I don't think its a case of subscribing to anything - just seems like the logical conclusion for any planet based species - we are totally and utterly dependant on our environment, so much so that a change of a couple of degrees is disastrous on a global scale.

For me it can be brought down to three basic questions:

Given known scientific constraints and given human history as a precursor - can we look after this Earth and not destroy it? (by destroy I mean make it uninhabitable for humankind).

Assuming we can tackle or own destructive nature do you not think a planetary scale E.L.E is preventable?

Long term survival requires we leave our meagre little planet and spread to the stars - do you really think this is feasible?

I suppose I could be considered pessimistic - its not like I don't think we can try and its not like I don't think we are morally obligated to look after the world for our future generations. I just think long term it makes no difference. Much like the animal fighting for its last gasp of life I expect humans to fight to the very end - conflict is life and all that!

 

[Nick B]

Yes, I think leaving our tiny blue rock is feasable. I also believe that in order to survive as a species, it is crucial. One day an ELE WILL destroy the planet utterly. Wether it will be a moon sized comet next year, or in 4 billion years when the sun engulfs it, it WILL be destroyed.

I just dont do the whole 'mankind will inevitably destroy itself' thing. We will, however, die out if we dont bother planning long term survival.

 

[SilentRoamer]

Hey Quellist,

Thanks - I appreciate your answer but it seems dependant on humans being able to survive away from the Earth

How do you envision we are going to survive outside of the Earth and without the Earths biosphere? I think we could probably live on moons/asteroids and they might have the chemical requirements but I imagine that food resources would need to be shipped from a functioning biosphere.

If we assume that Alpha Centauri has a habitable planet then it still takes us almost 4 years to get there assuming near to C speeds and assuming unproven technology and that's out nearest option. It may be that Earth like inhabitable planets are plentiful in the cosmos - but I personally think it very unlikely we would ever get there.

It leaves the terraforming option - again I think the best bet here would be to fire some hydrogen and nitrogen rich asteroids into Mars and seed it with extremophile life forms - unfortunately you then have to wait a few billion years!

Personally I just don't ever see us having the requisite technology - not because I believe we are incapable but because I firmly believe all technology has a plateau and that humans will reach the peak whereby we understand almost all physical limitations (with the exception of infinite mathematics which I don't think we will ever understand - because I don't think it can be understood by 3 dimensional beings.)

None of this is an attack on your viewpoint - I am just interested in how you see humanity developing.

 

[J Riff]

Grrr... growl.... squeeek.... arfarf.... oops wait, I switch to human talk...

 

[J Riff]

The loss of contact with the aminals... is the worst bit. That needs to be fixed before advanced aliens will have anything to do with us. Imagine ET coming here - and seeing what we have done to Elephants and the other big critters... they would not be impressed with the swarming human concrete hives.... Too many two-leggers down there...

 

[BAYLOR]

Yes, I think leaving our tiny blue rock is feasable. I also believe that in order to survive as a species, it is crucial. One day an ELE WILL destroy the planet utterly. Wether it will be a moon sized comet next year, or in 4 billion years when the sun engulfs it, it WILL be destroyed.

I just dont do the whole 'mankind will inevitably destroy itself' thing. We will, however, die out if we dont bother planning long term survival.

They project The earth will be uninhabitable in 1 billion years because the Sun at that stage will be about 20 percent hotter.

 

[Nick B]

Our initial expansion into the galaxy will be slow, colonisation of the moon, mars etc and space stations. As long as we can take these baby steps succesfully there is no reason we cant expand into the greater galaxy. The solar system is resource rich, advanced robotic syrstems can do the gathering. Food production ista hurdle but can be done.

3 dimensional beings? Are we? I would say we are 4 dimensional, just including time. Anything more is beyond our knowledge for now. We may (and probably do) inhabit more (if they exist). We are limited only by our current understanding and knowledge.