I would say that it is the job of a mythologist to determine whether there is any truth to a myth. If he finds some truth, he should publish his evidence and expect that some individuals will accept the evidence. Like any science, there is no guarantee that the new knowledge will be accepted. It may take years for acceptance and for mental states to change for that acceptance.
To say that there may be racial memories, might be a stretch. Memories would have to be stored in DNA or transfered through the transfer of maternal DNA. There is little evidence for acquired knowledge to be transfered through genes.
Or do you just mean knowledge passed down through myth in human groups. Of course, stories of great floods and disasters will be told for generations but tend to die out fairly soon like stories my father told me about great snows with snow to the second floor and need to get out the up stairs windows. The trouble with myth is that one can begin to believe that the world is actually like the events in the stories and like fairies in England are real for some.
Don't be too hard on scientists. The job is not easy and with the exponential growth of knowledge and new measurement methods it is surprising that science can stay so stable. But with any individual, it is in the eye of the beholder what can be decided upon as acceptable.

But, are there not many cases where myth was indeed based in fact? Every culture has a flood myth, and it has taken hundreds of years of gathering data just to get to where the mainstream accepts there was some form of flood. The last Ice Age alone may have left the racial memory. My view is science must take into account all possible sources of data without bias, and then use them to corroborate each other as they may.

Velikovsky had a hypothesis which needed to be tested over and over with evidence before it would become a theory. continental drift was a hypothesis until enough evidence was found for it to become a theory and thus become accepted. Sagan and others could not accept something mainly based on interpretation of myths and extreme speculation. He, by definition, was not a pseudo-scientist who use myth and unsubstantiated speculations as their proofs. Over time as evidence increases, scientists, sometimes needing older generations to die out, get closer toward the truth, unlike those who use myth and other religious faith directed arguments do.
Every human brain, due to biases in programing and experiences, can, without a herculean effort, become rigidly full of mental myths and create the beliefs of knowing the truth. That is the reason for needing an actual scientific process to eventually get closer to the truth about objective reality.

Freedom has a point Carl Sagan was a member of the cabal the roasted Velikovsky. While his theory was a bit off the wall, he did have a decent collection of facts and an alternate explanation for certain data that others simply rejected because it was not "mainstream". Egyptology suffered from the same type of stolid "concervatisim" that had no room for error or adjustment, which is obviously a foundational premise of science. Sometimes you just are not right, or exactly right. Debate and investigation is always good. Look at Continental Drift, which was laughed at originally because it was "extreme". Icons invariably develop rigidity of thought.

For one who, appears to have no great education in science, you are a bit hard on Carl Sagan. Though I did not agree sometimes with him on climate, he certainly was not a pseudo-scientist and wrote against such science that sometimes turns up here in the Gulch.
Too much attempted trashing of conservation of energy and angular momentum by cometary orbits and collisions with them, along with electromagnetic affects causing orbital changes and rotation changes.
Mythology and religious writings, certainly, should not be given high scientific value.
Also, everyone, learn the difference between a scientific theory and a hypothesis and what it takes to substantiate them.

Good one.
Newton ruled, and then along came Einstein. NOTHING is impossible.

Better yet, "scientists" produced incontrovertible "proof" it was completely impossible too fly, until the Wright brothers proved them wrong. Change the conditions, change the truth, so very true in so many things today that people think are "absolute".

I would have to ask, why?

from the article: "A number of the pillar symbols suggest that long-term changes in the Earth’s rotational axis were recorded by the early astronomers using an early form of writing."

I call bullshit!

Those are pretty good odds considering all the factors in play: distance from sun, orbital velocity, rotational speed, size, molten iron core, silicate crust, plentiful liquid water, presence of gas giant in same system (asteroid/comet attractor) just to start...

Gobekli Tepe has been puzzling archaeologists for many years. This is just one more puzzle that the site presents. It is one of the "Impossible" places that are found in Central and South America, India, Africa and other places on earth that no one seems to be able to understand as to how they were even created or why. All of the more imaginative explanations for their existence seems to be dismissed as either fiction or pseudo-science. Just remember it was only a little over 100 years ago that it was generally believed that anything going faster than the speed of sound would not survive..

Not the "mini" ice age. It triggered a Full Blown Ice age...
Mini Ice ages are a reference to Grand Solar Minimums of which we have just entered.

Thank you.

Exactly true and that leads to the whole question of how did they know of precession?

The handbags are evident in almost all the ancient drawings, the Egyptians had their version as well. GH addressed the bag issue several times, and also identified it in almost all the reliefs of the SA societies.

The Apkallu are seven Sumerian sages, demigods who are said to have been created by the god Enki to establish culture and give civilization to mankind.

The handbags on pillar 43 "the vulture "and the interpretation of them is fascinating as I have seen those handbags on reliefs from the Sumarian Annunaki. I will add a link
http://firstlegend.info/The%20Apkallu...

Hi Nickursis,
The shafts in the great pyramid line up with stars in the Orion constellation the first is Sirius, then Al Nitka, and Kochab. The three pyramids line up with Orion's Belt and the size correlates to the three stars sizes and the line up matches the sky at about 10,000bc.
As many know the night sky shifts as the the earth wobbles on its axis. The shift is one degree every seventy two years. An entire constellation is replaced every 2160 years. This is called the obliquity of the eliptic. Every 25,920 years the sky is a perfect match. This info is encoded in the many megaliths around the planet. I find it astonishing that they knew these things.

You are correct I misspoke. I will try to send you further discussion but work is workish today.

Jan

Jan, there is truth in Dobs comment below, and also there is a new technique of dating stone, where they vaporize part of it and then look as specific isotopes and date from that, I will find the article somewhere's, I even think we have discussed it here at some point. But it has yielded some different information. Anything done with carbon is limited simply because you have to make some assumptions that it was placed there at the time of the building, and use, which may not be valid. One reason they are very careful when excavating, as the layer position of the material is critical to setting it's position in time.

This is an example of Hawass considering new information http://www.dailygrail.com/Hidden-Hist...

Hi Jan ,
With all due respect, the link listed above lacks sufficient evidence to conclude the dating of the great pyramid is correct. Stone cannot be radiocarbon dated . Organic material is what can be dated.Where was this material obtained to date. Sites such as these are used by successive generations. The biggest problem I have is it is a study that Dr. Zahi Hawass was involved with. He is a biased ass! As the Csar of Egyptian antiquities
He is very biased. He has thrown out or shutdown "digs" that don't conform to his narrative. He refuses to have dialogs with opposing views.
I would have the same opinion of a paper proving global warming that Al Gore was involved in.
Schmidt does not endorse? Of course he didn't.
Dragos Gheorghiu "River runs through it.... Was published in 2015 . Klaus Schmidt died 7/20/2014

Hi Jan ,
If you are referring to: "river runs through it.....
...Gheorghiu it was published in 2015 Schmidt does not endorse it because he is dead as of 7/20/2014.
Re: the link you reference is far from convincing
It says nothing of how material was gathered to age the great pyramid. The fact that Dr Zahi Hawass was involved is to me similar to Al Gore funding a legitimate Global Cimate report ,not a chance! Hawass is an ass and he is the Czar of Egyptian antiquities he is biased. He has shut down archeological projects to protect his narrative. These sites once built are often used by later generations. IE.could the material have been later generations. Stone cannot be carbon dated.
I don't know the age of the great pyramid nor do I know the purpose but I am certain they were not built as mausoleums and to attribute it to Khuffu lacks sufficient evidence.
In the America's when I was in school America became inhabited by people crossing the land bridge in Alaska to Russia aprx 1500 to 2000 years ago now we know they were off by at least 25000 years. Now it is a hard push to get things aged properly and most folks who discovered evidence that is inconsistent with the mainstreams
dating find themselves ridiculed ,discredited and maligned. If that was not such a recurring theme I would believe the leaders of these fields want to seek the truth.

I agree that we tend to underestimate how advanced ancient civilizations were, falsely equating technology with intelligence, and these conceptions are frequently being overturned eg the 200K year old ocher mines in Africa and the copper ax of the Iceman. But it does not matter what lines up with what: If radioisotope dating limits the building to 4th C BC, then we have to include that datum.

Jan

Jan, one of the primary basis for the claim is that if you look at the pyramids (the main ones on Gaza), all of them have a tunnel that goes up to the top, and they all align to Orion's belt. However, the only time that they all lined up so that they matched in relative position, and reflected the belt in their position on earth and to each other, is approx 12K years ago. Otherwise there is always a variation. If you would like an alternative interpretation of a lot of the "accepted" history, look up Graham Hancock's "Magicians of the Gods". He makes a very convincing case, and it all ties together with Gobekli Tepe as well as a rather astounding discovery that many major megalithic sites through out the world. all have this alignment built into them. I am watching UFO Files, The Lost Evidence" on AHC channel, and they have just been discussing many of these topics and some new information on artifacts released by the Mexican government. They are also very, very cautious with their statements and assumptions, but the examples they use are very interesting.