A 12,000-year-old obelisk with a human face was found in Karahan Tepe

Significance of the Find

• Pillars at Göbekli Tepe and related sites already had arms/hands suggesting they symbolized humans; this is described as the first T‑shaped pillar with a clearly carved human face.
• Commenters emphasize the importance for understanding Neolithic symbolism and see it as a “turning point” in research, but some think we already knew people 12,000 years ago could think abstractly.

Is It Really a Face?

• Some argue humans over-read faces into random patterns (pareidolia) and that the nose/eyebrow block could be a structural notch.
• Others counter that the style matches other human statues from Karahan Tepe, and that similar T‑pillars, faces, and body reliefs at Taş Tepeler sites strongly support a deliberate anthropomorphic design.
• One person notes that if it were a construction notch, we’d expect more of them and oriented differently.

Context: Karahan/Göbekli Tepe and Neolithic Life

• These sites are very early, roughly contemporaneous, predating agriculture at the location as far as current evidence shows.
• Several commenters see them as ritual/festival centers for semi‑nomadic hunter‑gatherers, a kind of “prehistoric UN” or seasonal gathering ground rather than cities.
• There’s intense debate over social hierarchy: some argue for egalitarian foragers based on burial patterns; others say lack of clear elite burials or defenses is not proof of equality and criticize overconfident narratives.

Methods, Reconstruction, and Technology

• People wonder about digitally reconstructing the original appearance. An archaeologist-type commenter notes: limited contextual knowledge, damage from backfilling, uncertain roof conditions, dating issues, and lack of high‑res scanning gear can constrain this.
• Discussion of pigments: evidence at related statues for red ochre, black (bitumen), white (plaster), and yellow ochre; pillars themselves show no obvious paint residues.
• Side debate on archaeologists’ technical skills and whether consumer LiDAR (e.g., phones) is adequate—consensus in-thread is that it’s not good enough for fine work.

Broader Implications and Alt‑Archaeology

• Some see Tepe sites as evidence that complex monumental building predates “classical” civilizations and may soften resistance to older-structure hypotheses (e.g., Sphinx weathering).
• Others push back: these sites don’t imply an “advanced” lost civilization; they fit within evolving hunter‑gatherer societies and known timelines.
• Alt‑archaeology (Atlantis, pre‑Ice Age high tech, water‑eroded Sphinx, Hancock-style claims) is widely criticized as speculative and methodologically weak, though a few remain open to older or cyclic civilizations.
• Religious/legendary connections (Noah’s Ark, Mount Ararat/Judi proximity) are mentioned but not widely engaged with.

Presentation, UX, and Reactions

• Many praise the article’s rich, high‑resolution photo gallery versus typical text‑heavy, image‑light science pieces.
• Others would like excavation-in-progress shots to verify context and methods.
• Various lighthearted reactions compare the pillar to a PEZ dispenser, “stonks” meme, Minecraft villagers, and other pop-culture faces.
• Technical aside: several note how browser translation (especially Firefox’s offline mode) makes non‑English archaeology coverage more accessible.