Steve, I just hate to be the usual party-pooper, but that dating is controversial and has not been confirmed by credible sources.
n October 2023, an article by Natawidjaja et al., published in Archaeological Prospection, claimed that Gunung Padang is the oldest pyramid in the world, dating as far back as 27,000 years ago. In March 2024, the publisher of Archaeological Prospection, Wiley, and the editors, retracted that paper, stating that:
...the radiocarbon dating was applied to soil samples that were not associated with any artifacts or features that could be reliably interpreted as anthropogenic or "man-made". Therefore, the interpretation that the site is an ancient pyramid built 9,000 or more years ago is incorrect, and the article must be retracted.[15]
The whole story is in the Wiki voice.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunung_PadangI may stand corrected but at the same time I see no evidence here of when these people that made a correction have assigned the time period. Often ‘credible sources’ do not produce any informative results for their conclusions so they themselves have little credibility. At least not that you have provided above . But they have given some dates in the link you provided, which as far as I can see are not substantiated, and may also show their personal bias about history and how it has unfolded.
Archaeologist Lutfi Yondri from the bureau of archaeology in Bandung has estimated that the structures at Gunung Padang may have been built sometime between the 2nd and 5th centuries CE, thus in the Indonesian late prehistoric period, whereas Harry Truman Simanjuntak has suggested a later date in historical times, between the 6th and 8th centuries CE.[9] Pottery fragments found at the site were dated by the bureau of archaeology in the range 45 BCE–22
Notice the above conclusions were taken from pottery fragments, which does not indicate how old the building is. Any body could have come and used the archeological remains for their usage far after it was built.
It sounds like I may stand corrected on this one. Since the estimate I provided has been retracted. Although the assessments that these men gave - which are much later - show no evidence here of how they came to their conclusions. Perhaps there will be more conclusive forthcoming evidence available.
Thanks 😊 let us continue to unravel the mysteries that have been found from periods way before what was thought to be true. As there are also many of those available, and this one may still be such an example. I do not see you as a party pooper mccoy but rather as a truth seeker and attempting to find the right attitude in our evaluation of ourselves. Many times we are under the illusion of false assumptions that need correcting on our spiritual journeys. I certainly am not immune to such false and at times naive predilections.
[attachment deleted by admin]
