I was always fascinated by archaeology and I assume that there has to be at least some others out there that feel the same way that I do. As much as I am interested in the subject, I am also aware that things like reasons for ancient construction and dates, can be very controversial. Sometimes things get so confusing that we are not even sure if something is actually a structure, or just a natural formation. One of the best examples of this are the underwater "ruins" off the coast of Japan. The "ruins" seem to be the work of humans, but some archeologists point to the fact that the smooth blocks of stone could have been created by the action of the ocean. Some claim that there are giant faces that can be seen when you back off, but others say that it is only a trick of the brain and eyes. I guess we could continue this discussion of this particular site all day, but the result would be the same. The bottom line is, it may be a human structure that somehow fell to the bottom of the sea.

It is important to talk about places like this, because it shows how imprecise archaeology can be. Sometimes things are believed for hundreds of years, because some archaeologist discovered something and then gave us his or her interpretation of events that he or she thought caused the main event. Today we are a lot more careful with our opinions and we do not treat them like some mystery novel, as was done in many areas in the 1800s and before. This was even the case in the early 1900s in some places. Some of the stories we were told about why things happened the way that they did in antiquity, have turned out to be complete fiction and only guesses by the archeologist that found a site. He or she based these guesses on the flimsiest of evidence, which we later found out to be entirely wrong. An example of this might be the fact that a lot of broken statues were found of a pharaoh in a certain place and the archeologist knowing that statues were sacred to the ancient Egyptians might have surmised that this was done on purpose by the ancients, to stop a pharaoh from going to the afterlife and this was assumed in at least one case and it turned out to be completely wrong.

There are many different dates that are given when we ask, "what is the oldest man made structures in the world". Some experts will tell us that the oldest man made structure is the temple on Malta, which they believe dates to about 3600 B.C. That would make it a few hundred years shy of being 6,000 years old. The Great Pyramid, on the other hand, is said to be about 4,700 + years old. This is the most widely accepted age, but there are many others that claim all different ages for the structure. Some have said that carbon dating of organic material found inside the pyramid shows that it is at least 400 years older. Others have said that the pyramids are much older, perhaps being at least 10,000 years old and that they were not even built by the Egyptians. The evidence for who built them is pretty strong. One family built all three. They were built by the Pharaohs Khufu, Khafre and Menkaure. They were grandfather, father and son, but there was a fourth pyramid and it is said to have been grander than all the others. It was built on a hill about five miles away and known as the pyramid of Djedefre. It survived for over 2,500 years, until the Romans took over Egypt and hauled away much of the stone and what was left was taken by the townspeople of the area, over the following centuries. The pyramid was built by another member of the same family, he was the son of Khufu. It is hard to refute this type of evidence, since the ancient Egyptians had records of everything and even if a direct record wasn't found, you can find historical evidence mentioned in many other places, such as on tomb markings and in temples.

When I hear things like this, things about pyramids that we never knew existed, it makes me wonder if there is anything else lying out there that we don't know about and I have to say that there probably is? So where is all this taking us? It is really taking us back in time, because we are now finding older ruins. First of all, if the "ruins" off the coast of Japan are manmade, they are estimated to be at least 8,000 years old by some experts. I don't know how they came up with this figure, but there you are. This makes them over 3,000 years older than the great pyramid, but since we are not 100% sure that they are manmade, we can't count them yet. So are there ruins that have been found that are older than the pyramids? Well some think that Stonehenge is a few hundred years older, but the real breakthrough came when a stone circle that has been dated as being OVER 12,000 years old was found. It is being called a temple, I guess that if worship took place there, that this would be correct. The structure is located near the border between Turkey and Syria and is on the Turkish side. The archeologist that found it stated, "This place is a supernova, within a minute of first seeing it, I knew I had two choices: go away and tell nobody, or spend the rest of my life working here."

Why did the archeologist feel this way? It was because this site goes against everything we have ever been told about humans. To give you an idea of what the age of this structure means, it is at least 7,000 years older than Stonehenge, but wait, there are believed to be at least twenty of these things in the area and four have been excavated so far. They predate the first known cities by 5,000 years According to science, people were not building anything back then, yet here these things are, staring us right in the face and telling us that we are completely wrong on what we imagined that human history truly was. It is said that the people that built these things didn't even have pottery yet or know how to cultivate crops, they were pre-agricultural. Archeologists have been digging at the site for over 10 years and have only uncovered a fraction of what is there. It makes you wonder what other wonders await us? Maybe this site is on top of even older sites. One of the things that humans seem to love to do is build on top of former sites.

You have to wonder why this site, which was actually discovered in 1964 has been under wraps for so long? It was almost like we were not supposed to find out about it. There are round megalithic buildings that once stood there, that are said to have been houses. The Megalithic period is described with varying times groups, but it was about 11,000 years ago. At the site, carvings of foxes, lions, cattle, wild boars, herons, ducks, scorpions, ants and snakes were found. It turns out that the people of that time were accomplished artists. These figures were carved into the pillars of the structures. Some tools have been found in the area, they include scrapers and arrowheads. It seems that the site was abandoned in 8,000 B.C., but before it was, it was covered with dirt. Why? I guess it was still considered sacred. To me, one of the most significant finds there was a tiny statue of a sphinx. Yes you heard me correctly. There are more than a couple of questions that need answers here.

Sphinx

The first thing that I would like to discuss, is the sphinx at Gaza. There has been an awful lot of controversy about when this was built. Some say that it was built by Djedefre to honor his father Khufu. This was "supposedly" proved because an archaeologist stated that he matched the face by comparing it to all the known statues of pharaohs All I have to say about this is, that the face on the sphinx is so beat up, how can anyone say that they are sure that it matches anything? Second of all, there is that school of thought that states that the sphinx was built thousands of years before the pyramids and to prove their point, they state that the sphinx has water marks on it and these could have only come from a flood and that happened last in that area, about 10,000 years ago. If we want to take this into the paranormal, Edgar Cayce, the famous sleeping prophet, stated that the sphinx was far older than the pyramids and that there was a room under it and that the room contained records from Atlantis. We may never know what is in the room under there, but tests have show that there is a hollow space under one of the paws. The Egyptian government has never consented to allow anyone leave to go down there and see if there is actually a room there.

Egypt has been digging under the pyramids for years and one has to assume that they have dug under the sphinx If the sphinx is not an Egyptian creation, they will never reveal it. They get over nine million tourists visiting the pyramids and sphinx every year and they have no intention of jeopardizing this income flow. Even if it is proven that there is a room and not just a hollow space, I am sure that by now, any evidence would have disappeared that might have indicated that the sphinx or even the pyramids were not built by Egyptians.

In summary, we are finding that human structures may go back a lot further than we suspect. Who knows what other surprises await us? Maybe there will be some point, if we go back far enough, that we will begin to find technology? Wouldn't this knock the whole theory of human existence on it's rear end?