> It is absurd It's not if we base it on evidence that we have. It's silly to assume otherwise until any evidence at all is discovered. Why would Doggerland be

> It is absurd It's not if we base it on evidence that we have. It's silly to assume otherwise until any evidence at all is discovered. Why would Doggerland be fundamentally different to the surrounding areas which are at a higher altitude? > Göbeklitepe If there were major stone structures at the bottom of the sea we would have very likely found them already. Also.. I'm not even trying to imply that there weren't any complex societies in Doggerland (of course it's extremely likely that there weren't) but they would have likely primarily used wood to construct structures due to obvious reasons and any remains would have been very unlikely to survive. IMHO associating "monumental" architecture or remains with complex societies and "civilization" is flawed. Just consider https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maidanetske https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maidanetske