Jump to content

Ancient Aliens - history channel


Recommended Posts

[b]pilot episode[/b]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qtjI8eGtvM

[b]season 1, episode 1, part 1 - The Evidence[/b]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrm6bjn_o8s

[b]Episode list:[/b]
[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Aliens"]http://en.wikipedia..../Ancient_Aliens[/url]

check part 8 & 9 of episode 1.
very interesting theories
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair I haven't truly watched that show. But I have seen bits and pieces. It's enough to make me know that watching the whole episode might just make me physically ill. No, if Atlantis existed it wasn't some high tech paradise. No, the Pyramids weren't built by aliens. There were no ancient astronauts or spaceships. Easter Island and Stonehenge aren't some mystical things that somehow were created due to special knowledge or to signal aliens. -Could- that all be true? -Could- those fantastic theories and ideas be true? Sure. My sink -could- also empty out into a very, very, very tiny black hole too. I'm no plumber, I have never checked.

I like true historical fact on my History channel. I love informative programs and documentaries on things that have happened. I also love science fiction. I also like to speculate on things. Just remember though that these are unproven and unsubstantiated theories. As much evidence as there is for these ideas, there is as much if not more to cast doubt on most of them. Keep an open mind, but guard it with skepticism.

Sorry if my little rant upsets anyone or hurts any feelings. Such off base speculation like this bothers me. Not because people speculate it, feel free and go ahead. But because people will believe this stuff based off of very, very little evidence just because it is on tv and some guy with a diploma said he thought it was so.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ah it's Mr Von Daniken again. With his own TV show. yay

I read his 'Chariots of the Gods', it's got some interesting stuff in it, although I didn't like one element of his reasoning in that he will suggest a possibility in one chapter, and you think, OK ... hmmm ... and then in the next chapter he'll say 'as I showed in the previous chapter, so-and-so, so therefore, such-and-such', so he can deny saying things with 'I never said so-and-so, I only suggested it', yet at the same time he will use his postulations as 'facts' later on in the book.

There's a lot of weird stuff in there though, I certainly wouldn't want to say aliens definitely haven't visited us in the past ... who knows, those plane models built hundreds of years ago look pretty convincing (if they are genuine), and I've also read the original passage in the Apocryphal texts (they're easy to get hold of) of Enoch, and it does sound very much like a spaceship landing. Worryingly so.

Assuming it wasn't the opium/hashish, a bad (or good :( ) mushroom or combination thereof, I'd be a lot happier with the explanation that it was aliens from another planet rather than supernatural beings.

I think a good deal of what Mr VD says is hokey, but there are a few things that do merit attention. But please someone stop him banging on about the astronaut in his cockpit in the mayan carving ...

Like Graham Hancock, probably a fair bit of his theories aren't correct (or aren't provable one way or another), but there does appear to be kernel of truth in there worthy of further study. I prefer Hancock's core theory anyway because it is realistic in that there could well have been agrarian societies on the scale of ancient Mesopotamia before the last ice age that built stone structures. That core theory could be sound, as not many archeologists look at submerged ruins, and carbon dating on them would be a bit tricky.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Tienbau' timestamp='1300257209' post='36651']
Assuming it wasn't the opium/hashish, a bad (or good :( ) mushroom or combination thereof, I'd be a lot happier with the explanation that it was aliens from another planet rather than supernatural beings.
[/quote]
I feel as though the 'shrooms probably helped...

I've seen that show, but never found any of it to be remotely interesting. It's like looking at Rorschach blobs - these people see what they want to.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

well as i said, interesting _ theories_ :lol:
i personally think Daniken is a bit, kind mad man, or obsessed, to the point of forging proof, but i wouldn't dismiss many ideas and theories.

i really like the ones about pyramids, nazca lines, and other big and precise constructions.
the electricity sounds probable too, and so do depictions of "gods" or "travelers".

i posted it as a general interest and mostly, as it definitely relates to Ancients in Earth and Beyond and Stargate.:P

btw, check [b]Vril article in wikipedia[/b]:
[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vril"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vril[/url]

[quote]
[b]Plot summary[/b]
The novel centers on a young, independently wealthy traveler (the narrator), who accidentally finds his way into a subterranean world occupied by beings who seem to resemble angels and call themselves Vril-ya.

The hero soon discovers that the Vril-ya are descendants of an [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antediluvian"]antediluvian[/url] civilization who live in networks of subterranean caverns linked by tunnels. It is a technologically supported Utopia, chief among their tools being the "all-permeating fluid" called "Vril", a latent source of energy which his spiritually elevated hosts are able to master through training of their will, to a degree which depends upon their hereditary constitution, giving them access to an extraordinary force that can be controlled at will. The powers of the will include the ability to heal, change, and destroy beings and things; the destructive powers in particular are awesomely powerful, allowing a few young Vril-ya children to wipe out entire cities if necessary. It is also suggested that the Vril-ya are fully telepathic.

The narrator states that in time, the Vril-ya will run out of habitable spaces underground and start claiming the surface of the Earth, destroying mankind in the process if necessary.

[/quote]

despite the bad mojo from the nazi controversy, i'd say V'rix and Vril aren't very far in both word and intent, and could be that Vril were one of many inspirations used for creating the V'rix in the game, the "weapon" of the ancients.


[b]throwing more stuff at the topic:[/b]
[url="http://ancientastronauttheory.com/"]http://ancientastronauttheory.com/[/url]

[b]more ideas:[/b]
[url="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100506184719AAwIwlE"]http://answers.yahoo...06184719AAwIwlE[/url]
[quote]
[b]Have you heard of the Ancient Astronaut Theory? Yes, I'm talking about aliens!?[/b]
I will fill you in. Located in modern day Iraq, or the Cradle of Civilization, from 3500 to 1900 BC was the first civilization. It was built by the Ancient Sumerian people. They were the first to build cities, streets and sewage systems. They also developed the first known writing system. Archaeologists have uncovered 22000 clay tablets from Sumerian ruins and the majority of these tabs have been translated. Many tabs go into great detail about an alien race called the Anunnaki (Sumerian for “those who from heaven to earth came”) It is said they were here to mine gold because their atmosphere had become depleted of the valuable resource. The Anunnaki viewed homo-erectus as unintelligent, primitive beings and because they needed workers to mine the abundant amount of gold they found here; they created Adamos. Adamos were created as a slave race. They were the FIRST MODERN HUMANS; created by the anunnaki by genetically mixing their DNA with that of prehistoric man. This is carved in their stone, its part of Sumerian history. Some refer to Adam and Eve, they may have been the first modern humans. But perhaps they were the first of the genetically created human beings. There are many similarities in the ancient Sumerian text and the Bible. Not just in the stories but in the language as well. Adam is Hebrew for "first man" while Adamu is Sumerian for "first man". Coincidence? Ancient stories and depictions of ancient aliens come from all over the world. From China to The Americas from Iraq to South Africa. An abandoned gold mine in South Africa was recently discovered. It dates back to over 150,000 years ago. Why believe this was an "alien gold mine"? In many African languages, the native word for star means "bringer of knowledge or enlightenment". Many cultures believe we have been visited for tens of thousands of years by vistors from the stars. Zulu legends speak of a time when the visitors from the stars came to Earth to excavate gold and other natural resources. Humans were not making metals 150000+ years ago, so why would they be mining for them in mass quantities? Heck, according to the majority of the worlds beliefs system humans weren't even around 100,000 years ago! But they were. It's a scientific fact. I could go on and on about this, but I will leave you with this. Much of this may be a lot to take in, but I assure you these are not fairy tales or far fetched fantasies but facts. There is even additional evidence of alien mining half a world away; on the American continent. Check it out for yourself. Google Ancient Astronaut Theory[/quote]

[b]150,000 year gold mine:[/b]
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/196147-Ancient-Human-Metropolis-Found-in-Africa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[b]Atrahasis:[/b]
http://www.viewzone.com/adamscalendar33.html
[quote]The seal image [[b]above[/b]] depicts the legend of the "Great Flood" which consumed mankind. Many Sumerian legends are strikingly similar to Genesis. Like Genesis, the Sumerian legend, [i]Atrahasis[/i], tells the story of the creation of modern humans -- not by a loving God -- but by beings from another planet who needed "slave workers" to help them mine gold on their extra-planetary expedition![/quote]

[b]Nephilim and Anunnaki:[/b]
http://www.halexandria.org/dward185.htm
[quote][font="arial, Arial, Helvetica"][i]Nephilim [/i]is often translated as “giants”, a legitimate and appropriate interpretation, but one which may be only partially accurate. A better definition might be “those who came down”, “those who descended”, or “those who were cast down.” The [i]Anunnaki[/i] of ancient [b][u][url="http://www.halexandria.org/dward183.htm"]Sumerian[/url][/u][/b] texts is similarly defined as “those who from heaven to earth came”. Sitchin [1], Gardner [2], and Bramley [3] have all identified the [i]Nephilim [/i]as the Anunnaki, more specifically, essentially the rank and file. [/font][/quote]

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_phenomenon"]http://en.wikipedia....2012_phenomenon[/url]
some people say 22-23th Dec 2012 is the day the ancients return.

i just set the flames up, lol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='C Del' timestamp='1300264256' post='36656']
these people see what they want to.
[/quote]

There is very interesting evidence being presented in the shows, what about those models of planes alone? The Wright brothers came up with the idea of a tailfin only after years of painstaking research and failure. It's not an obvious design, only obvious to us after seeing planes with tailfins since we were born.

Why did the Nazca people invest so much time in engineering straight roads through mountains? What the hell are those shapes meant to be for? We'll never know.

If the anomalous evidence conflicts with your world view, you will only see what you want to - 'it's a hoax!'. As a race we've dedicated a lot of time to thinking about and looking for extra-terrestrials. Is it such a leap of faith to think if there was an advanced civilisation somewhere maybe they would have the same thoughts and try to find life elsewhere?

NASA has spent billions on the question of life in the solar system alone, and look how exited people got when exoplanets were discovered to be common, and the first time a rocky exoplanet was found! The next thought was - could they support life? How could we find out?

I think shows like this fire the imagination. There probably is a mundane explanation of why there are aerodynamic model planes found in archeological digs (made up by Pedro down the road, and stuck there during the night for a laugh? To be fair, I would LOVE to do something like that and see what the scholars made of it); but far better to have presented this evidence and a theory for it and been wrong, than to never have said anything to begin with.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't mean to say the "ancient aliens" theories are impossible, but they do seem highly improbable, and the evidence their proponents put forward really seems quite lacking to me. What makes it seem unlikely to me is that human society dates back about 10,000 years (nice round number for simplicity), while the universe is believed to have existed for around 13.75 billion years. This means that humans have been settling and building villages, towns, and cities for about 0.0000007% of universal history. Given that we are as yet unsure whether faster-than-light travel is possible, it seems incredibly improbable that a highly intelligent form of life would be able to find us and visit us if it so desired. That said, I think that life of at least some form is out there, being that there are somewhere on the scale of 10[sup]22[/sup] stars in the observable universe, I just don't think it's likely that any form of life would have been able to reach us, especially within this narrow temporal window.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CDel, check episode number 3 of season 2.

structures were found in the sea, close to Cuba and to Bahamas (Bermuda's Triangle), close to Japan (Dragon's Triangle) and close to India, ranging from big street blocks to pyramids, as high as 60meter, and as deep as 650meter from the surface.

[b]what special have they in common?[/b]
- they aren't natural occurrences for sure, they were built by us or by something.
- they sank or got flooded 9,000 to 10,000 years ago, and they are as old as [u]40,000 years old.[/u]

human history dictates we are as old as 10,000 years old, in terms of civilization.

either we didn't built these structures (we didn't had tools, organization, society or knowledge in the primordial ages) or we are actually older than that, and there was one or more declines in societies and civilizations in the past - extinctions.

and from the same clip, just to note, Europe strechted into the sea in such a way, that it could fit in it not just 1 Portugal and Spain, but actually 3 Portugals and Spains (maybe Atlantis was there after all). A lot of land around got flooded by 10,000 B.C., from what they report, as much as a whole Europe and China all over the world.

given that and the facts mentioned above, we are really missing a lot of human history. there could be much more we aren't seeing. perhaps we were more advanced, 20,000 or more years ago.

also, the two triangle regions are also the place of high magnetic disturbances, where everything from radar, to compass and electronic equipments fails to functions, and where UFO spotting (since colombus!) are very very common, as well as ships and planes crashing and disappearing (or even just the crews) frequently. they are very odd places. that's a strong point torwards strange events that were described in the past.

[b]other things to think about, but from the Pilot episodes:[/b]
- the nazca lines on the mountains: it's not just the lines! the summit of one or more mountains are gone! where's the vestiges? how is it so perfectly cut?
- how perfect the cuts are done in many structures around the world, in times where we didn't had tools that could do that at all or in any reasonable time? unless of course, we used to be more advanced than we were in 5.000 B.C.
- why are the pyramids everywhere? why are these astronauts/visitors depicted in so many places? it's not coincidences. god/gods, visitors, prophets, well something it is, something it was, people or not.

i'm inclined to believe there's much more to know, and maybe there was/is something else out there, but i'm not taking it for granted.
i can't discard any or all ideas without proof first.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='LPCA' timestamp='1300398455' post='36770']
human history dictates we are as old as 10,000 years old, in terms of civilization.
[/quote]

Human history is an incomplete record. Just because we do not know what society was like 20,000 years ago doesn't mean there were no societies around 20,000 years ago.

Also I will note the Cahokia Indians from my home town area [url="http://www.cr.nps.gov/worldheritage/images/Cahokia-TownsendMural.jpg"]built pretty amazing things[/url] even though they never ever discovered the wheel. Humanity is a wonderful source of ingenuity. We can and will accomplish things that we by rights shouldn't be able to based on the technology of the times. It's hard for me to think of anything less than a Gameboy or a modern watch being considered a computer. But those same devices were more powerful in terms of computing ability than what put Man on the moon.

[quote name='LPCA' timestamp='1300398455' post='36770'] or we are actually older than that, and there was one or more declines in societies and civilizations in the past - extinctions.
[/quote]

I am leaning to this. Ice ages suck, especially if all you have is a mud hut and some furs. Also earthquakes, tectonic plates shifting, volcano's changing landscapes. All of these things could be a nuisance over a few decades. But over several thousand years I do not doubt these things have cleared most of the planet's surface, sadly, of traces of severely ancient civilizations.

[quote name='LPCA' timestamp='1300398455' post='36770']also, the two triangle regions are also the place of high magnetic disturbances, where everything from radar, to compass and electronic equipments fails to functions, and where UFO spotting (since colombus!) are very very common, as well as ships and planes crashing and disappearing (or even just the crews) frequently. they are very odd places. that's a strong point torwards strange events that were described in the past.[/quote]

" Documented evidence indicates that a significant percentage of the incidents were inaccurately reported or embellished by later authors, and numerous official agencies have stated that the number and nature of disappearances in the region is similar to that in any other area of ocean." [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermuda_Triangle"]Source. With additional sources at the bottom of the page of this link.[/url]

[quote name='LPCA' timestamp='1300398455' post='36770']
[b]other things to think about, but from the Pilot episodes:[/b]
- the nazca lines on the mountains: it's not just the lines! the summit of one or more mountains are gone! where's the vestiges? how is it so perfectly cut?
- how perfect the cuts are done in many structures around the world, in times where we didn't had tools that could do that at all or in any reasonable time? unless of course, we used to be more advanced than we were in 5.000 B.C.
- why are the pyramids everywhere? why are these astronauts/visitors depicted in so many places? it's not coincidences. god/gods, visitors, prophets, well something it is, something it was, people or not.

i'm inclined to believe there's much more to know, and maybe there was/is something else out there, but i'm not taking it for granted.
i can't discard any or all ideas without proof first.
[/quote]

Define perfectly cut? Do you know what the average variation in height is? [url="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Cerro_Negro_Nequ%C3%A9n_Argentina.JPG"]And it's not as if large stone formations that are flat at the top and have erosion on the sides appear in nature or anything.[/url]

There is a difference between more advanced and ingenuity. As an example I remember hearing one idea about how the Egyptians leveled the ground for the Pyramids. They would square of the entire area with stakes and strings (somewhere between 1-3 feet per side, but that's not important). Then they would fill that area in one square at a time with water. As the water soaked down into the sand, the -water- was perfectly level. They would simply use a flat rake to keep the sand on the same level as the water as it soaked down. If you keep the sand and water level then when the water is fully below the sand, the sand should be very, very level. This may not be how they did it but it is an example of how they could've achieved incredible accuracy with incredibly simple tools. They weren't dumb.

Pyramids and mounds are everywhere because a triangle is the most stable 2 dimensional structure, and a pyramid/cone is the most stable 3 dimensional structure. It is the easiest to build, you can build a pyramid higher with less materials than you can build a block structure. Height was impressive, so why would a builder who was trying to build as high of an altar as he could to please his gods use a design which would take up more resources, more time, and possibly not get as high?

I also believe there is much more we can learn. However I think the difference here is I will gladly discard ideas without proof that are not offered with proof. It is not my job to disprove these theories, it is the supporter's job to prove it. I cannot disprove Zeus, but that doesn't mean he exists. Edited by Eviticus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[url="http://www.world-mysteries.com/sar_1.htm"]http://www.world-mys...s.com/sar_1.htm[/url]
http://www.arcturi.com/AncientAliens/PiriReisMap.html

[b]INTRODUCTION[/b]
In 1929, a group of historians found an amazing map drawn on a gazelle skin.

Research showed that it was a genuine document drawn in 1513 by Piri Reis, a famous admiral of the Turkish fleet in the sixteenth century.

His passion was cartography. His high rank within the Turkish navy allowed him to have a privileged access to the Imperial Library of Constantinople.

The Turkish admiral admits in a series of notes on the map that he compiled and copied the data from a large number of source maps, some of which dated back to
the fourth century BC or earlier.

[img]http://www.world-mysteries.com/sar_1_a.jpg[/img]
[b]The Controversy [/b]
The Piri Reis map shows the western coast of Africa, the eastern coast of South America, and the northern coast of Antarctica. The northern coastline of Antarctica is perfectly detailed. The most puzzling however is not so much how Piri Reis managed to draw such an accurate map of the Antarctic region 300 years before it was discovered, but that the map shows the coastline under the ice. Geological evidence confirms that the latest date Queen Maud Land could have been charted in an ice-free state is 4000 BC.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[b]origin of Hyperia from enb?
[/b][url="http://atlanteanconspiracy.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=talk6&action=display&thread=106"]http://atlanteancons...play&thread=106[/url]
[img]http://atlantis.haktanir.org/athanasius_kircher1.gif[/img]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

some ruins in caribbean sea floor. nice pictures

Previously undiscovered ancient city found on Caribbean sea floor
[url="http://www.heralddeparis.com/previously-undiscovered-ancient-city-found-on-caribbean-sea-floor/65855"]http://www.heralddep...sea-floor/65855[/url]
[url="http://www.heralddeparis.com/got-ruins-undersea-archaeologists-release-new-photos/66899"]http://www.heralddep...ew-photos/66899[/url]
[url="http://www.heralddeparis.com/more-from-caribbean-site-new-detail-images-just-released/65927"]http://www.heralddep...-released/65927[/url]

this topic in turning into a general ancient history / ancient theories hehehe

http://www.alienswerehere.com/AncientAlienEvidence.html
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='LPCA' timestamp='1300643381' post='36906']
The Piri Reis map shows the western coast of Africa, the eastern coast of South America, and the northern coast of Antarctica. The northern coastline of Antarctica is perfectly detailed. The most puzzling however is not so much how Piri Reis managed to draw such an accurate map of the Antarctic region 300 years before it was discovered, but that the map shows the coastline under the ice. Geological evidence confirms that the latest date Queen Maud Land could have been charted in an ice-free state is 4000 BC.
[/quote]

One of your links says "The Piri Reis map shows... the northern coast of Antarctica. The northern coastline of Antarctica is perfectly detailed." while the other link says " Piri Reis Map which clearly depicts the South American Coastline and part of what looks very much like the coast of Queen Maud Land which is a section of Antarctica." So which is it? Is it perfectly detailed, or does it "very much look like"? Here, let me answer it for you. Neither. Why? Look at the map. The entire west side, there is no break between S.America and the Antarctic. That is one connected land mass. You copy and pasted the 'controversy' from the first link, but did you actually look at the map and analyzed what claims were made about it?

[url="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/75/Piri_Reis_map_interpretation.jpg"]It is not even remotely accurate.[/url] To be accurate those to pictures which are to scale with each other should have the red lines going in the same directions and have the same length. Also this map was said by Piri Reis himself by his own writings on the left hand side of the map to have been made via a compilation of many other maps that he simply scaled to eachother and condensed onto one map.

[quote]From eight Jaferyas of that kind and one Arabic map of Hind [India], and from four newly drawn Portuguese maps which show the countries of Sind [now in modern day Pakistan], Hind and Çin [China] geometrically drawn, and also from a map drawn by Qulūnbū [Columbus] in the western region, I have extracted it. By reducing all these maps to one scale this final form was arrived at, so that this map of these lands is regarded by seamen as accurate and as reliable as the accuracy and reliability of the Seven Seas on the aforesaid maps.[/quote] [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piri_Reis_map"]Source[/url]

[quote name='LPCA' timestamp='1300644716' post='36909']
some ruins in caribbean sea floor. nice pictures

Previously undiscovered ancient city found on Caribbean sea floor
[url="http://www.heralddeparis.com/previously-undiscovered-ancient-city-found-on-caribbean-sea-floor/65855"]http://www.heralddep...sea-floor/65855[/url]
[url="http://www.heralddeparis.com/got-ruins-undersea-archaeologists-release-new-photos/66899"]http://www.heralddep...ew-photos/66899[/url]
[url="http://www.heralddeparis.com/more-from-caribbean-site-new-detail-images-just-released/65927"]http://www.heralddep...-released/65927[/url][/quote]

While it is possible those are ruins, there are a few red flags that pop up. One, to quote the main article, "Guarding the location’s coordinates carefully, the project’s leader, who wishes to remain anonymous at this time" which sadly means this cannot be double checked by anyone. If I were to photoshop some ruins into a satellite photo of a crystal clear blue Carribian Sea photo and then release those to a archeology organization anonymousness, they would probably be mildly interested at best because they have no way of verifying whether or not the photo is a hoax. And rightly so.

Second, these look very much to me like [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compression_artifact"]compression artifacts[/url].
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pareidolia.

Rubbish like this should not be encouraged. Science and history are interesting enough; there's no need for making crap up knowing the public is too stupid to analyze it and realize it's crap. The History Channel should be ashamed.

Also anyone making money off the 2012 doomsday trash should be charged with fraud plus whatever else one is charged with when yelling "fire" in a closed room. Religious leaders included. Edited by Mneme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Mneme' timestamp='1300832069' post='37040']
Pareidolia.

Rubbish like this should not be encouraged. Science and history are interesting enough; there's no need for making crap up knowing the public is too stupid to analyze it and realize it's crap. The History Channel should be ashamed.

Also anyone making money off the 2012 doomsday trash should be charged with fraud plus whatever else one is charged with when yelling "fire" in a closed room. Religious leaders included.
[/quote]


[font="Calibri"][size="3"]While I agree most is pretty far off and hard to buy it "lock stock and barrel", I don’t see any harm in having an interest in any of this, and reading. I find this interesting and it only shows me that others have an open mind to differing ideas.

I don’t think you can discount the following. Or perhaps you :)n :)
[/size][/font]

[font="Calibri"][size="3"] [/size][/font]

[font="Calibri"][size="3"][url="http://www.world-mysteries.com/sar_4.htm"]http://www.world-mysteries.com/sar_4.htm[/url][/size][/font]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'll remind that i posted this because much of Earth and Beyond (and also StarGate) background is based on Ancient Aliens theories.

therefore it is relevant to the game, players and people interested in fiction in general, be it history or fiction.

enb, stargate and these theories aren't meant to be fraudulent or cause massive panic worldwide.
take it as interest! :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, certainly, and in fact I use "ancient astronauts" (in a manner of speaking) in my own fiction. It's a fun subject. But it's [i]fiction[/i], not trying to pass it all off as a valid archeological theory. The guy mentioned earlier has made his fortune off this stuff and has not only tried to do exactly that, but has sold enough books that the media also sometimes try to pass it off as legitimate so they can also cash in.

[img]http://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/20101126.gif[/img]

As for the Antikythera, what's there to account for? It's an astronomical clock. A Greek genius or geniuses (such as this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero_of_Alexandria ) made it. No aliens are required, any more than aliens were required for Kepler to derive the laws of planetary motion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism Edited by Mneme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's okay if you or 99% of the people post here saying the theories are conjectures or unproven, but i ask, try avoiding saying it's fraud or fake or something that extreme, when you post.

cause i'm not either saying religion and gods do not exist or that humans are imagination of gods or something that extreme.

also, IMO, the theories are about artifacts, ideas, "proof", etc, and not about who made them. i don't care if it's that german guy i forgot the name or larry probst or carl sagan or whatever who invented them.

it's fun to debate if we let go of fundamentalism :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if something is an obvious fake or forgery, it will be called out as such. I am actually a little sorry if it causes some people distress for me to say some things they believe are lies. But I am not going to call a duck a bicycle when it is obviously a duck. Like the underwater ruins pictures. I am not positive those are faked photo but I am more than 50% certain that they are. So I will be dubious with them. If I was more certain, I would say they were fake. As it is now I just think they are not reliable or should be considered anything more than pretty pictures until there is at least more documentation on them.

Also -who- makes a claim has absolutely no bering on whether or not it should be considered true. If satan himself says force equals acceleration times mass it doesn't make F=MA any less true. But this is in part because we can test F=MA. We can't test supernatural or fantastical claims such as alien intervention. So being unable to confirm a hypothesis the only thing we have to go on is who is making the claim.

And what fundamentalism are you talking about? I haven't seen any here yet. Edited by Eviticus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

fundamentalism?
the such that explicitly says for example, aliens do not exist, or, god does not exist, or, aliens exist, etc, and then rejecting anything else, instead of being in doubt, open to ideas, unsure, uncertain, etc.

like this:
[quote name='Mneme' timestamp='1300832069' post='37040']
Pareidolia.

Rubbish like this should not be encouraged. [u][i][b]Science and history are interesting enough; there's no need for making crap up knowing the public is too stupid to analyze it and realize it's crap[/b][/i][/u]. The History Channel should be ashamed.

Also anyone making money off the 2012 doomsday trash should be charged with fraud plus whatever else one is charged with when yelling "fire" in a closed room. Religious leaders included.
[/quote]

[quote name='Mneme' timestamp='1300839347' post='37051']
Oh, certainly, and in fact I use "ancient astronauts" (in a manner of speaking) in my own fiction. [u][i][b] It's a fun subject. But it's fiction, not trying to pass it all off as a valid archeological theory[/b][/i][/u]. The guy mentioned earlier has made his fortune off this stuff and has not only tried to do exactly that, but has sold enough books that the media also sometimes try to pass it off as legitimate so they can also cash in.

(...)
[/quote]
funny pictures don't make it less visible.

ancient aliens is not fiction. it's a theory.
theory != fiction
theories come from formulas, clarified thoughts and proof attempts.
fiction comes from imagination and creativity. or being crazy or from smoking pot.

there's plenty of theories around, like plausible location of atlantis, existence of atlantis, how the pyramids were built, and so on...

what is fiction are the every day games, movies and tv shows we see around, which mostly don't revolve around facts or theories, or if they revolve they change it too much.

if i had a dog and someone claimed it flew, that would be fiction (or lunacy).
if i questioned if dinosaurs became extinct because of asteroid collisions, that's a theory.

enb for example is bit based on ancient aliens theory, but it's evolved a lot past that, into the future and imagination, turning enb into fantasy and fiction, with only a small part made of theory, and a even smaller part made of actual history (glory's orbit monuments depictions of history for example).

see my point?
i'm trying to pass that it's just a theory, probably never going to be proven or unproven fully, and it takes us to imagine and ponder on things, which is actually healthy.

it's a very gray area, but we can draw a line between fiction and theories if we have patience.
don't call or make these people sound lunatics (or me for that matter, since i'm posting) just because they invented weird or improbable theories.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='United States National Academy of Sciences']
Some scientific explanations are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them. The explanation becomes a scientific theory. In everyday language a theory means a hunch or speculation. Not so in science. In science, the word theory refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature supported by facts gathered over time. Theories also allow scientists to make predictions about as yet unobserved phenomena.
[/quote]

Your "theory" certainly doesn't fit that description. It isn't even an hypothesis, which is a proposal meant to be tested and verified/falsified. It's not exactly speculation, because speculation requires that one be attempting to find the actual truth of the matter rather than just making a claim and saying "it's worth discussing because I said it was". "Rubbish" is a good word and I'll stick with that. If that makes me a fundamentalist, fine. I'm also a fundamentalist regarding the fact that evolution isn't a lie invented by Satan, that various physical laws are in fact laws and not bendable by magicky-woo and wishful thinking, and that the sun is actually a star and not Apollo and his chariot or whichever god a particular cult chose to talk about this week.

The lack of logic and science in education in this country that allows anyone to believe any rubbish "theory" that any crackpot comes out with is amazing and appalling--such as the above, or the idea that we didn't actually go to the moon (one I've been trying to get this teenager to get over even though it's hopeless). I could find a rock in some ruins somewhere painted blue and say the culture was influenced by the Pleaideans (since Alcyone and Maia and etc. are blue stars) and probably make enough of a case to convince at least a few gullibles. That doesn't make the "theory" valid or worthy of anything but scorn, nor would I expect anyone to be obligated to do an in-depth inquiry before labelling it as rubbish.

Awareness of pareidolia is one of the key ingredients to any meaningful inquiry into this subject or many others.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The default position that in my opinion is the only rational one to have is to disbelieve something unless it has been proven. To take the opposite view, to believe something until it has been disproven, leads one to be open to beliefs on all matters of non-existent things. There is no way to disprove the claim "pink fairies exist, they just cannot be detected by those who do not truly believe they exist due to their special powers".

Next, if I do not believe something exists, I say it is untrue/non-existent/fiction/fair tales/etc. For example I do not believe pink fairies exist. They are fiction and should not be considered part of the real world unless someone can prove that there should be sufficient reason to believe they do exist. Calling them fiction is not a fundamentalist view point. A fundamentalist view point would be "Pink fairies cannot exist and no matter what you say, absolutely nothing can convince me otherwise". A good example is the saying used in some christian fundamentalist websites I have seen stating "if there is a difference between the bible and the scientist, the scientist is wrong". A fundamentalist is closed to change, I am positive if you could prove to Mneme one of these theories he would change his mind.

As I hope I made clear earlier I do not think there is anything wrong with people theorizing or making guesses. My problem, and I think maybe Mneme's, is the History Channel usually has documentaries on. Historical fact. Things heavily documented and proven very thoroughly true. Like having WWII vets talk about WWII in a show about WWII.

Seeing Ancient Aliens on the History channel feels like I turned the TV to the cooking channel and they are showing Mexican wrestling.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...