Chris is pointing in the right direction here. As with many areas of study, knowledge and understanding of archaeology has shifted in the last couple of generations. It is now generally accepted that the more easily (!) excavated evidence of large settlements is only one part of a much longer process. Many intersting and intriguing discoveries have been made for example at Gobekli Tepe in southern Turkey that point to the things we associate with 'civilisation' - organised religion, trade, making permanent buildings - happening around 9000 BC.
This is at least doubles the previously-held 'start' date of c3500 BC, which is when 'fully formed' towns start to be seen in the Nile Vally, Iraq, and the Indus Valley.
You have to bear in mind that needle in haystack doesn't begin to describe the randomness of field research - which is very dependent on funding and safety ie most archaeology does not take place in war zones.
However, I cannot accept wild claims that star-being and atlanteans had any role in the process, mainly because the evidence for these claims crumbles away when it is interrogated. Real evidence can be weighed, measured, photographed, discussed and re-evaluated, and from that conclusions can be reached and modified.