Anna B Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 I think that you have the equation the wrong way around, I believe that it's more a case of whilst we have wars there'll always be arms dealers. You could be right, I would have said so in the past, but I'm afraid I'm much more cynical since the invasion of Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 If we were to regress to such an extent that we relied upon Stone Age technologies, we probably couldn't advance into a new Bronze Age again. We've mined all of the easy to reach ores already, we now have to have advanced technology to reach the deep pockets that are left. It would take millions of years for the Earth to replenish these surface ores. But the metals haven't just disappeared..they still exist but in a different form..couldn't they be smelted down again.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavegirl Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 But the metals haven't just disappeared..they still exist but in a different form..couldn't they be smelted down again.. Metal ores occur in quite handy colurful seams within rocks- they're easy enough to spot if you know what to look for and would have been plentiful back then. Modern metal objects will be buried underground- what do you propose? That future Stone Age people continuously dig up the whole surface of the earth in the hope they'll find the occasional scrap of metal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 Metal ores occur in quite handy colurful seams within rocks- they're easy enough to spot if you know what to look for and would have been plentiful back then. Modern metal objects will be buried underground- what do you propose? That future Stone Age people continuously dig up the whole surface of the earth in the hope they'll find the occasional scrap of metal? Occasional scrap....?you can't go anywhere today without seeing hundredds of tons of the stuff....why will it all be underground? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavegirl Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 Occasional scrap....?you can't go anywhere today without seeing hundredds of tons of the stuff....why will it all be underground? Stuff gets buried- that's why archaeologists have to dig it up. Take a metal knife in a house for example. Over time the house decays, plants grow over and around it, eventually the roof caves in then the walls, given enough time the bricks erode back into their clay particles and hey presto your knife is completely buried. The vast majority of the metals we produce today are smelted and forged in industrial furnaces- they require extremely high temperatures. Stone Age people have only camp fire technology, that's why copper and gold was smelted before iron- it didn't require advanced technology to smelt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 Stuff gets buried- that's why archaeologists have to dig it up. The vast majority of the metals we produce today are smelted and forged in industrial furnaces- they require extremely high temperatures. Stone Age people have only camp fire technology, that's why copper and gold was smelted before iron- it didn't require advanced technology to smelt it. Stuff gets buried as civilisations improve and build over things..if society was regressing would this happen..?Are you also saying that all the knowledge we've accumulated as a species up to know would be lost and forgotten forever? Genuine questions.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavegirl Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 Stuff gets buried as civilisations improve and build over things..if society was regressing would this happen..?Are you also saying that all the knowledge we've accumulated as a species up to know would be lost and forgotten forever? Genuine questions.. Sorry, I answered the first part in my edit above (thought I'd get there quick enough, but I didn't ). It's down to natural erosion processes that things usually get buried, rather than continuous building (though this happens too). Most archaeology is excavated from open fields for example though plenty is also excavated in town basements. Natural burial processes include windblown silts and sands, river deposits, glacial deposits, earthquake movements and general soil forming processes associated with plant growth and decay over an archaeological substrate. If it was a future Stone Age society (as Megalithic first described it) then, without the written word it's likely that over a long period of time all the knowledge we've accumulated would be passed down orally and like all Chinese Whispers, it would be lost, altered, improved (in terms of its applicability to the future society) and misunderstood along the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 Sorry, I answered the first part in my edit above (thought I'd get there quick enough, but I didn't ). It's down to natural erosion processes that things usually get buried, rather than continuous building (though this happens too). Most archaeology is excavated from open fields for example though plenty is also excavated in town basements. Natural burial processes include windblown silts and sands, river deposits, glacial deposits, earthquake movements and general soil forming processes associated with plant growth and decay over an archaeological substrate. If it was a future Stone Age society (as Megalithic first described it) then, without the written word it's likely that over a long period of time all the knowledge we've accumulated would be passed down orally and like all Chinese Whispers, it would be lost, altered, improved (in terms of its applicability to the future society) and misunderstood along the way. I understand what you're saying but we manufacture much more metal now than ever we did in past civilistaions..I don't think all or even a lot of it would disappear underground..even the buildings you say would bury it have vast amounts of metal in them (Bridges,tower blcks,modern factories etcetc)..I think it would be there for the picking..but hey ho.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavegirl Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 I understand what you're saying but we manufacture much more metal now than ever we did in past civilistaions..I don't think all or even a lot of it would disappear underground..even the buildings you say would bury it have vast amounts of metal in them (Bridges,tower blcks,modern factories etcetc)..I think it would be there for the picking..but hey ho.. If you can manage 7 hours of a documentary series then you might find this one interesting. It's called 'Life after humans' and it illustrates how long it would take for civilisation to disappear should humans mysteriously vanish from the earth. You'll find a lot of the answers to your questions in it: http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/life-after-people/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 Can you point to the evidence of that? As far as I'm aware there are no mass graves, no forts, no weapons that would be considered designed for war as opposed to hunting (such as swords) or any other evidence for mass murder from 12,000 years ago. There wouldn't be because humans hadn't started to build them, but that doesn't alter the fact that groups of humans would have fought over land and recourses, food being the main one or the fact they just didn’t like each other. Hamoukar is in far northeastern Syria, not far from the Iraqi border. It is a place where archaeologists believe one of the first large-scale military engagements occurred around 3500 B.C. The first archaeological record of what could be a prehistoric battle is at a Mesolithic site known as Cemetery 117. It was determined to be about 14,340 to 13,140 years old and located on the Nile near the Egypt-Sudan border. It contains a large number of bodies, many with arrowheads embedded in their skeletons, which indicates that they may have been the casualties of a battle. Some question this conclusion by arguing that the bodies may have accumulated over many decades, and may even be evidence of the murder of trespassers rather than actual battles. Nearly half of the bodies are female, and this fact also causes some to question the argument for large-scale warfare. Beginning around 12,000 BC, combat was transformed by the development of bows, maces, and slings. The bow seems to have been the most important weapon in the development of early warfare, in that it enabled attacks to be launched with far less risk to the attacker when compared to the risk involved in the use of mêlée combat weaponry. While there are no cave paintings of battles between men armed with clubs, the development of the bow is concurrent with the first known depictions of organized warfare consisting of clear illustrations of two or more groups of men attacking each other. These figures are arrayed in lines and columns with a distinctly garbed leader at the front. Some paintings even portray still-recognizable tactics like flankings and envelopments.[5] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.