Final answer:
The statement about the territory of Tien Shan and Semirechye in 160 BC is likely false as there is no direct evidence in the provided references to corroborate this claim for that specific year.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement regarding the territory of Tien Shan and Semirechye in 160 BC is not supported by the provided references. The historical contexts mentioned refer to several periods, including the rise and fall of the Zhou dynasty, the trade during the Han dynasty, the disorder following the Tang dynasty, and the influence of the Tian Shan mountains. However, none of these references provide information about the control or state of the Tien Shan and Semirechye territories in 160 BC. Given this, we can infer that the statement is possibly false, as we lack direct evidence from the references regarding the specific year 160 BC in the context of Tien Shan and Semirechye.