201 replies to this topic

[cladking]

Harte, on 09 October 2012 - 05:14 PM, said:

This continued comncentration on religion appears to be the only path left to people that want so badly to believe in the ancient aliens line of crap that they will grasp at any straw.

Too bad these people are not desperate enough to take a look at the actual evidence presented.

Truth to tell I've never found very much of the evidence for ancient aliens especially
convincing.  I think the site does a reasonably good job of showing more mundane ex-
planations for many of the facts usually cited as evidence for such aliens.

My beef is really with human nature itself.  Most of us are well aware that beliefs are
self perpetuating but they seem to overlook it when they consider their own beliefs. We
tend to laugh at how others can be so deluded when the truth is contained right in what
we personally "know" to be true.  We all tend to be blind to the evidence that as a species
and as individuals we really don't know much of anything; that we all are stumbling in the
dark seeking an elephant to describe.

The fact that one theory can be weakened by close examination doesn't lend any cred-
ence to any other theory in the complexity of the concrete world.  Ancient aliens haven't
really been disproven and even if they were it would not bolster anyone's beliefs.

I could certainly agree about the low quality of the TV program if that's what you want. But
even here I have to add I haven't seen it so my "belief" that it's low quality is in itself low
quality.  The real world is about probabilities.   It's the probability an electron will appear
in a specific orbit or that it will rain December 21, '12.  It's the probability based on the
knowledge at hand that we have the correct answer to questions.  Sure, we can leave it
in the hands of a deity and/ or take our chances but we need real world truth to make real
world progress and add new real world knowledge.  By this standard it would seem ancient
aliens have done as much or more for the human race as some of the orthodox beliefs. In-
deed were it not for the fact that only orthoidox beliefs are represented in acquiring new
evidence then ancient aliens have a real probability (> 0%) of doing much more in terms
of progress.

Beliefs are a superstition and they are stifling to the individual and the species.

[Harte]

cladking, on 09 October 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

I could certainly agree about the low quality of the TV program if that's what you want. But
even here I have to add I haven't seen it so my "belief" that it's low quality is in itself low
quality.

Clad,

You've been here a long time.  Surely you don't think that I care about the "quality" of some television show.  In fact, the cinematography of the show is really quite good.  It makes it worth watching (on 'mute.")

No, it's the claims.  It's always been the claims with me, and you know this.

I was refuting these same claims right here at U-M before I ever heard of Mike Heiser (this is the first I've ever heard of Chris White.)  The website provides an opportunity to those that care to view the refutations of these claims all in one place.  That is very rare on the internet, as I know extremely well.  With some of these claims, it would take several hours to dig up the actual evidence that disproves them (others - not so long.)

cladking, on 09 October 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

The real world is about probabilities.   It's the probability an electron will appear
in a specific orbit or that it will rain December 21, '12.  It's the probability based on the
knowledge at hand that we have the correct answer to questions.  Sure, we can leave it
in the hands of a deity and/ or take our chances but we need real world truth to make real
world progress and add new real world knowledge.  By this standard it would seem ancient
aliens have done as much or more for the human race as some of the orthodox beliefs. In-
deed were it not for the fact that only orthoidox beliefs are represented in acquiring new
evidence then ancient aliens have a real probability (> 0%) of doing much more in terms
of progress.

If a person wishes to leave it in the hands of a diety, that's their choice.  Me, I'm only interested in exposing the lies told by VonDaniken, Sitchen, Hancock, Cremo, etc.  That was my reason for creating this thread, and it is also ultimately the reason for my presence here at U-M.

Harte

[bee]

bee, on 09 October 2012 - 05:32 PM, said:

truth be told....it's you that is coming over as a bit desperate....and very keen for people to watch the video or

read the textual summaries....

so a TV show might contain some inaccuracies.

so what

that's hardly earth shattering

I've watched some of your video now and I'm not overly impressed.

.

Harte, on 09 October 2012 - 05:37 PM, said:

And you absolutely shouldn't be, if you've read any of my posts over the years (most of them before the show was even made) that concerned the inane claims the show has made.

Harte

some clarification needed....I'm not overly impressed with what I've seen of the Chris White Ministries video...

[Harte]

bee, on 09 October 2012 - 05:56 PM, said:

some clarification needed....I'm not overly impressed with what I've seen of the Chris White Ministries video...

Wrong guy to ask.

As I told Cladking, I'd never even heard of Chris White before the website went up.

I assume that his motivation is what you suspect it is, though.  However, I don't really care what his motivation is, as the things that are stated in the video match what I've been able to find out over many years concerning the "AA" claims.

Personally, my motivation could be considered to be even worse than White's.  At least, it's more petty.  I do this because I used to believe these inanities.  Once I found out how stupid I'd been, I didn't appreciate been made the fool.

It seems my ego is my own motivation. Not exactly the highest motivation, as I'm sure many would agree.

Harte

[shaddow134]

bee, on 09 October 2012 - 05:56 PM, said:

some clarification needed....I'm not overly impressed with what I've seen of the Chris White Ministries video...

Who cares as long as the facts he is putting over are correct,the fact is the fringe are not going to accept his more plausible explanations .

Let's face it,Von Daniken and his AA gang are probably a damn sight less impressive and a bunch of lying frauds to boot...

I thought AA Debunked was very well put together and completely blew AA theory out of the water....

Edited by shaddow134, 09 October 2012 - 06:50 PM.

[cladking]

Harte, on 09 October 2012 - 05:55 PM, said:

If a person wishes to leave it in the hands of a diety, that's their choice.  Me, I'm only interested in exposing the lies told by VonDaniken, Sitchen, Hancock, Cremo, etc.  That was my reason for creating this thread, and it is also ultimately the reason for my presence here at U-M.

Reasonable people "know" that all beliefs in aliens are held by a lunatic fringe.  If I express
any sort of support for any kind of alien theory then I'm immediately part of the lunatic fringe
because this is their superstition.

But just as I try to understand the world in terms of probabilities I try to rate theories on their
ability to make correct predictions.  The objective must be "utility" of all "beliefs".  It's OK for
the belief in Jesus to get someone into heaven and I'd never suggest someone shed any be-
lief for one more useful but to me "utility" involves the here and now.  My premise or basic
assumption is that the point of life is to have fun and to contribute to the degree we can. Both
of these things must take place in the here and now since we don't even know if we'll like play-
ing the harp.  We know we won't be able to communicate with the living to aid human progress
(or at least evidence for such is low probability)(and not useful).

The point here is that there are aspects of some alien theories that do make predictions that
I "believe" are probably accurate.  I am not the least offended by the concept of more intelli-
gent species than humans in the universe.  By the by this this can't be very offensive to some-
one like me who barely believes in human intelligence at all (never did).  The fact that direct
and convincing evidence for aliens is not in existence might simply mean we haven't found it
yet.

While most people believe only orthodox thought can be correct and usually is correct my un-
derstanding is very much different.  Everyone is wrong but no one can be completely wrong
(except Congress).  Truth isn't found behind fancy titles and lots of letters, Truth is found only
in a cogent argument.  Sure, if you can build a machine that embodies a truth this too supports
your argument and if nature bends to the predictions of an argument this is the ultimate sup-
port.  You list those authors as though they are somehow equal and equally untruthful but each
has a different take on the subject of aliens and each has a unique argument (I'm not familiar
with Creamo).  One thing is certain and that's that none of them can possibly be completely wrong.

[bee]

Harte, on 09 October 2012 - 06:20 PM, said:

Personally, my motivation could be considered to be even worse than White's.  At least, it's more petty.  I do this because I used to believe these inanities.  Once I found out how stupid I'd been, I didn't appreciate been made the fool.

I don't think you're stupid....not then or now....

but giving you the benifit of the doubt...perhaps it's like people who have given up smoking being the worst anti-smokers...

going from one extreme to the other.

shaddow134, on 09 October 2012 - 06:48 PM, said:

Let's face it,Von Daniken and his AA gang are probably a damn sight less impressive and a bunch of lying frauds to boot...

another extreme opinion....


I don't suppose any researcher is absolutely perfect all of the time...and evidence can be looked at in more ways than one...

We all have our own Big Picture...that we build up as the years go by...


Oh for a time machine then we could settle this once and for all.....

But even then.......

Someone would say the time machine could be faulty or influenced by consciousness and belief...




.

[shaddow134]

bee, on 09 October 2012 - 07:20 PM, said:

I don't think you're stupid....not then or now....

but giving you the benifit of the doubt...perhaps it's like people who have given up smoking being the worst anti-smokers...

going from one extreme to the other.





another extreme opinion....


I don't suppose any researcher is absolutely perfect all of the time...and evidence can be looked at in more ways than one...

We all have our own Big Picture...that we build up as the years go by...


Oh for a time machine then we could settle this once and for all.....

But even then.......

Someone would say the time machine could be faulty or influenced by consciousness and belief...




.

Who needs a time machine,there is absolutely no evidence for AA's period.If we had been visited in the past where are all the Alien artifacts,their technology that they might have forgotten. A BIG ZERO.

[Purifier]

shaddow134, on 09 October 2012 - 07:50 PM, said:

Who needs a time machine,there is absolutely no evidence for AA's period.If we had been visited in the past where are all the Alien artifacts,their technology that they might have forgotten. A BIG ZERO.

They usually respond to that by saying the pyramids or puma punka is the evidence itself, because of the way it was designed or constructed. Which indicates in their mentality that our human ancestors were ignorant and that there couldn't have been at least one human with a creative, ingenious, intellectual mind to create and complete such a impossible feat. No, it had to be ancient aliens. There couldn't possibly have been any ancient human beings that were ahead of their time, back in those days. No way. no how! Gotta be aliens.


That would be the typical response.

[questionmark]

kmt_sesh, on 08 October 2012 - 11:08 PM, said:

Or, as questionmark so artfully put it, BoolKrappy.*

*All rights and veneration reserved to the Ascended Master. All hail the Ascended Master.

Where I have to confess that I stole that genial word creation from Harte. Mine are generally not so PG-8

[Harte]

cladking, on 09 October 2012 - 07:17 PM, said:

Reasonable people "know" that all beliefs in aliens are held by a lunatic fringe.  If I express
any sort of support for any kind of alien theory then I'm immediately part of the lunatic fringe
because this is their superstition.

Considering the possibility of the existence of intelligent alien life is certainly quite a bit different from pointing at a monumental construction and saying "The Aliens did that!"

I don't think that the mere belief in the existence of aliens will put anyone in the fringe camp.  However, claiming one came to your house probably would.

cladking, on 09 October 2012 - 07:17 PM, said:

The point here is that there are aspects of some alien theories that do make predictions that
I "believe" are probably accurate.  I am not the least offended by the concept of more intelli-
gent species than humans in the universe.  By the by this this can't be very offensive to some-
one like me who barely believes in human intelligence at all (never did).  The fact that direct
and convincing evidence for aliens is not in existence might simply mean we haven't found it
yet.

And, until we do, it is all hypothetical.

However, the douches on "Ancient Aliens" claim that we have found this evidence.

The film, shows you why that's a lie in general, and completely exposes several lies in specifics.

cladking, on 09 October 2012 - 07:17 PM, said:

While most people believe only orthodox thought can be correct and usually is correct my un-
derstanding is very much different.  Everyone is wrong but no one can be completely wrong
(except Congress).  Truth isn't found behind fancy titles and lots of letters, Truth is found only
in a cogent argument.

Truth (not the philosophical kind - the factual kind) can also be found in an artifact.  Like diorite pounding balls that match scalloped grooves in granite quarries.  Like the pounding marks left on the andesite stones at PumaPuku.

Like the many panels depicting the Nebty Name of Seti I.

cladking, on 09 October 2012 - 07:17 PM, said:

  Sure, if you can build a machine that embodies a truth this too supports
your argument and if nature bends to the predictions of an argument this is the ultimate sup-
port.  You list those authors as though they are somehow equal and equally untruthful but each
has a different take on the subject of aliens and each has a unique argument (I'm not familiar
with Creamo).  One thing is certain and that's that none of them can possibly be completely wrong.

To the extent that they mention a few facts in their claims, they are not completely wrong.  But the facts they use they got from someone else.  Their own claims that they make are, in the majority, not only demostrably wrong, they are demonstrably lies.

Harte

[bee]

shaddow134, on 09 October 2012 - 07:50 PM, said:

Who needs a time machine,there is absolutely no evidence for AA's period.If we had been visited in the past where are all the Alien artifacts,their technology that they might have forgotten. A BIG ZERO.

and that is the way that YOU look at the evidence, which is your prerogative.

but like I said before evidence can be interpreted in more ways than one....

Now if you had said...'there's no CONCLUSIVE evidence, IMO'....you might not have sounded so dogmatic....


.

[shaddow134]

bee, on 09 October 2012 - 08:45 PM, said:

and that is the way that YOU look at the evidence, which is your prerogative.

but like I said before evidence can be interpreted in more ways than one....

Now if you had said...'there's no CONCLUSIVE evidence, IMO'....you might not have sounded so dogmatic....


.

Is there any other way to look at the evidence? Only if you want to distort it,mould it to fit your theory.


http://www.jasoncola...daumlniken.html


This link says it all,the main Architect of AA theory,a big fraud who faked most of his evidence in his original books..

http://www.jasoncola...e-evidence.html

[booNyzarC]

bee, on 09 October 2012 - 02:38 PM, said:

ps...I like the snow...

(booN's avatar)


.

Thanks, it was fun creating it.  

bee, on 09 October 2012 - 04:03 PM, said:

.




ya boo sucks

.

bee, on 09 October 2012 - 05:32 PM, said:

I've watched some of your video now and I'm not overly impressed.

.

Out of curiousity, which points raised in the portion you watched did you disagree with?

[bee]

shaddow134, on 09 October 2012 - 09:07 PM, said:

Is there any other way to look at the evidence? Only if you want to distort it,mould it to fit your theory.


http://www.jasoncola...daumlniken.html


This link says it all,the main Architect of AA theory,a big fraud who faked most of his evidence in his original books..

http://www.jasoncola...e-evidence.html

You say...MOST...of his evidence in his original books...but all the stuff in your link wouldn't make up enough for one book, I'd have

thought. Are you exaggerating? To mould it to fit your 'theory'....?

So EVD wasn't perfect.....I shouldn't lose any sleep over it if I were you.


and from your first link....

Quote

Von Däniken’s book was an instant success, selling tens of millions of copies worldwide and spawning a craze for ancient astronauts in the United States. A film version of his book, In Search of Ancient Astronauts, was narrated by Rod Serling and spawned the 1970s TV series In Search Of…. At the height of his popularity, Von Däniken appeared on the Tonight show and was interviewed in Playboy magazine. He would eventually publish more than two dozen books on the ancient astronaut theme, largely due to the restrictive nature of his first book contract, which denied him most of the profits from his biggest bestseller.

something obviously struck a chord with the public....and they LOVED it....


the article says that popularity waned in the 80s....but you can't maintain a high level of interest indefinately...


.