Hi Anthony,
You wrote ; "Ergo, it would be illogical to assert that because they could build a temple that they MUST have built permanent residences. I think you've got the logic switched around here."
I don't think I swithced logic. Observing the evolution of Homo sapiens sapiens, we can see how tremendous important worship and religion could be, hence how tremendous important it was to settle down in the close vicinity to be able not only to assure the continuity of the worship, but also to assure the maintenance of the sacred places.
You wrote ; "...considering we not only have no evidence of settled communities at this time (= 10000 BC) in Turkey... but anywhere in the world, to my recollection."
But see Tommi in his link on Natufian settlements ; "After the last Ice Age, as the climate became warmer and rainfall more abundant, the formerly nomadic population of the eastern Mediterranean began to establish the first permanent settlements. The site of Eynan/Ain Mallaha, situated between the hills of Galilee and Lake Hula in the Levant, was inhabited from 10,000 to 8200 B.C. during the Natufian period."
If you look at this map ; [
www.urgeschichte.org]
GöbekliTepe
you can observe that the Natufian settlement of Eynan/Ain Mallaha, aged between 10,000 to 8200 B.C., is situated in the same region (the Levant) as the site of Gobekli Tepe-temple (also 10000 BC).
One thing is for sure, the cradle of humanity is situated in the Levant, Central Anatolia and Mesopotamia, not in the Adriatic Sea-region and Bosnia .....
Regards,
Ronald.