In any event, having deduced the ancient zodiac from observations at several sites, it is the objective statistical test against Palaeolithic cave art radiocarbon data that scientifically validates the hypothesis.
Given the lack of any alternative explanation for this correlation, it in my view constitutes a proof.
By this self-aggrandizing statement, one assumes that your "proof" refers to an image of paleolithic felines in your article "Decoding Prehistory" which carried the following statement:
Replica of lion paintings in Chauvet Cave, France, likely representing the constellation Cancer on the spring equinox 34,000 to 35,000 years ago
Unfortunately, had you engaged in any actual science and not merely relying on the unproven 72 years per degree view of precession much loved by Wikipedists, you would not have built your hypothesis upon a false premise.
Had you interpolated the findings of the brilliant Simon Newcomb, the astronomer and mathematician who prepared ephemerides which are tables of computed places of celestial bodies over a period of time as well as tables of astronomical constants, and not relied upon Stellarium, you may have understood that the Rate of Precession is not a constant.
If you bother to read these results from the table below, you will find some disturbing data which undermines your theory to a significant degree.
As you can see, the period of revolution in the age to which you refer (Chavaux Cave) is approx. 33,000 years, an addition of approx. 7000 years to the timeline, which at 2160 years per zodiacal age, equates to three zodiacal ages thus proving that these felines were not painted in the Age of Cancer at all.
Now, extrapolating this result to Gobekli Tepe will mean that you are going to have to have another crack at decoding prehistory.
Good luck, old chap.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 18-Aug-19 22:57 by Barbelo.