I'm not sure if Turkey and Thailand were concepts as we have them today 12,000 years ago.

The distance between Turkey and Thailand is ~7500km.

They didn’t have km back then.

Yeah but neither Turkish nor Thai state or culture really existed 12k years ago.

The concept of states, time itself, and trolling on internet forums didn't exist 12k years ago either, but that hasn't stopped ya'll.

It's neither Turkish nor Thai for obvious reasons:

- Thailand is in south-east Asia

- Turks weren't around that area, not even close, until ~700 years

Considering that the majority of asia minor was Greek for millenias before, calling this site "clearly Turkish" is like calling Machu Picchu "clearly Spanish"

It is not Greek either, The area had been under control of tens of different civilizations in the last 10.000 years. Calling it Greek would be equally ridiculous.

> was Greek for millenias before

... But not _that_ many millennia. This wasn't Greek (nor was it Turkish, of course); way too early.

I didn't say it was Greek either. Just pointing out how cringely wrong it is to say it's "clearly Turkish"

he meant turkey with turkish but you greeks are too easy to get triggered when you see smth about turks

I interpreted the comment thread as talking about the website being clearly Turkish, because that was what my first thought when I saw the Turkish text. It didn't even occur to me they could be talking about the archeological site, as you clearly interpreted it. Kind of interesting how the same sentence can mean multiple things, one being wrong and one being right.

Also kind of interesting to consider the relation between both meanings of site. It makes perfect sense, but I stopped considering that because website took on such a much larger meaning in my life than physical site.

>>Considering that the majority of asia minor was Greek

hahaha not anymoreeeee :)

Thanks for proving my point, inadvertently, that artifacts of a culture shouldn't be attributed to their colonizers.