Question:

Is the 10,000 BC movie based on the alternative archaeological theory that a civilization existed then that.?

by  |  earlier

0 LIKES UnLike

was advanced enough to build great buildings

OR is it based on the 70's (?) movie 1,000,000 BC where Raquel Welch apparently wears a furry bikini for cave fashion?

 Tags:

   Report

8 ANSWERS


  1. Well, if Sumer was first, and scholars think it was (by definition) then your date would pre-date Summer by about four and a half centuries, so what you're talking about...ain't no 'theory'.

    It might be someones idea, postulation, belief, guess...but hit ain't no, 'theory'!

    It's almost certainly wrong.

    Sorry, I read your note. I thought the question was serious. Sorry!

    This is if we agree that the definition of a civilization is a collection of diverse peoples attempting to live together and .more or less succeeding with minimal bloodshed


  2. It's just a Producer.. seeing the successes of "Gladiator" -- and going back even further... and then, knowing the CGI of his own films (he did the "Godzilla" remake, after the "Jurassic Park" series made so much money)... and thought: gee? why not woolly mammoths & saber tooth tigers, instead of dinosaurs.. kids love these things... and, if course, the plotline is always, but always unfortunately a thrown-together hodge-podge of scenes they think would LOOK impressive.. no matter there's a girl with eyeshadow and a boy with a shaved chest & cheeks/chin.. reality doesn't matter... and yes, they no doubt collected as many of the "genre" movies they could -- cavemen movies, and stole.. ummm... evoked scenes from each, for the "inside" jokes that Hollywood writers giggle about, and like to outsmart each other that they recognized (from the press releases mentioning them).. Raquel Welch is the most obvious.

  3. I have not seen the movie but judging from the ads and previews I'ld say its just more BAD research or NO research by Hollywood.

    While there could have been a few surviving terror birds mammoths were never in Africa and sabretooths in Eurasia?

  4. The ancient Egyptians sighted civilization begining around 10,000 years ago and called it "The First Time."  Its also when the original form of the Spinx (probably a lion) was first carved.  But the movie is pure fiction.

  5. There are not unexplained archaeological finds dating to that time that are ignored. Humans had been around for quite awhile by that time, but the pyramids were not built for several thousand more years.

  6. It's fiction, good computer graphics. Will make lots of money. Go, enjoy, no it's not science.

    Meanwhile about "unexplained archaeological stuff and it seems those finds are ignored"

    Yes, we don't know everything. At the same time much of the proposed 'evidence" are single isolated items or someone's interpretation of things.

    Consider "Mystery Hill" in New Hampshire. Whoops, it's been renamed "America's Stonehenge." It's a tourist site. One writer (They all Discovered America") had Phoneticians, Welsh, Irish, and Vikings living there or passing by.

    The problem is that there's not one artifact from any of these groups. The known Greenland settlement in Newfoundland was occupied for only a few years but numerous artifacts used by European people were found. So why can't Mystery Hill produce a bronze axe or something?

    The current owner's explanation is that the site was looted, stones were hauled away to build sewers and an former owner dug around discarding stuff that didn't fit his theory.

    The rule in science is "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." In short the owners of Mystery Hill can claim anything they want. It will bring in tourists and pay the bills. However, to be taken seriously, they need to produce some evidence that people from Europe lived there before 1492. No evidence, no case. No, just because "Science can't explain..." doesn't mean a case is made or that there is any reason to believe the claims.

  7. what unexplained archeology stuff?

    its all explained

    10000 BC is a fantasy

  8. Closer to the latter. It's just Hollywood. Not a history lesson. Reality check!

Question Stats

Latest activity: earlier.
This question has 8 answers.

BECOME A GUIDE

Share your knowledge and help people by answering questions.