Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * - 7 votes

The Ancient Alien Theory Is True


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
10148 replies to this topic

#331    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009

Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:30 PM

Then there is the issue of why?  What on earth did they have in mind when producing this?  Clearly nothing to do with ritual, art, or other fanciful embellishment, this looks to me as if it was done for some definite functional purpose.  The question is what exactly?

Posted Image

Look carefully at the finish.   Why the need to produce a block so exact to that specification.  It's as if cutting, moving, shaping, and finishing multi-tonne blocks was absolutely no effort.  The work of indians?  Really?

Edited by zoser, 29 November 2012 - 08:33 PM.

Posted Image


#332    synchronomy

synchronomy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2009

Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:34 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 29 November 2012 - 08:07 PM, said:


  I forget the name of the ancient map that Graham Hancock mentioned in one of his books, but how is it that the map depicted geography that we have discovered only recently?  How is it that at a time when most humans thought the world was flat, someone had already set up a very accurate system of latitude and longitude?
Humans knew the Earth was a globe back in the 3rd century.  That flat-earth stuff is baloney.  I'll search for the link and post it later.  I know it's been posted in these forums recently.  Hopefully someone will chime in with it, as I have to go out shortly for several hours.
...and Graham Hancock is dead wrong about that map showing Antartica without ice.  Again that's been debated here and been demostrated as such.

At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new.
This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense. -- Carl Sagan

#333    synchronomy

synchronomy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2009

Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:39 PM

View Postzoser, on 29 November 2012 - 08:19 PM, said:


Until a rational explanation is found, the AA hypothesis will stand.
Dear God man, do you realize how bass ackwards that thinking is?
That's obsurd logic.
It's not even logic.
It's...
*shuts prior to being banned*

At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new.
This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense. -- Carl Sagan

#334    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009

Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:43 PM

Here's something else not easily dismissed as the work of primitives:

Try working these stones with stone pounders to achieve that accuracy of fit!

Posted Image

Edited by zoser, 29 November 2012 - 08:43 PM.

Posted Image


#335    synchronomy

synchronomy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2009

Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:44 PM

View Postzoser, on 29 November 2012 - 08:30 PM, said:

Clearly nothing to do with ritual, art, or other fanciful embellishment, this looks to me as if it was done for some definite functional purpose.  

How can you eliminate ritual, art or anything else, then state it had some functional purpose?
You are contradicting yourself.

At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new.
This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense. -- Carl Sagan

#336    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009

Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:46 PM

View Postsynchronomy, on 29 November 2012 - 08:39 PM, said:

Dear God man, do you realize how bass ackwards that thinking is?
That's obsurd logic.
It's not even logic.
It's...
*shuts prior to being banned*

Try explaining the last few posts.

View Postsynchronomy, on 29 November 2012 - 08:44 PM, said:

How can you eliminate ritual, art or anything else, then state it had some functional purpose?
You are contradicting yourself.

Nothing in that particular piece of stonework suggests it.  Different to a statue for example.

OK how did they drill the holes?  Lets try that one for a start.

Posted Image


#337    Slave2Fate

Slave2Fate

    Bloodstained Hurricane

  • Member
  • 6,414 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2008

Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:46 PM

View Postsynchronomy, on 29 November 2012 - 08:39 PM, said:

Dear God man, do you realize how bass ackwards that thinking is?
That's obsurd logic.
It's not even logic.
It's...
*shuts prior to being banned*

You might want to check for bleeding, it looks like you bit your tongue pretty hard. :tu:

"You want to discuss plausibility then you have to accept reality." -Mattshark

"Don't argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level then beat you with experience." -Obviousman

You know... the plural of ``anecdote'' is not ``data''. Similarly, the plural of ``random fact'' is not ``mystical symbolism''. -sepulchrave


#338    synchronomy

synchronomy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2009

Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:49 PM

View Postzoser, on 29 November 2012 - 08:43 PM, said:

Here's something else not easily dismissed as the work of primitives:

Try working these stones with stone pounders to achieve that accuracy of fit!

Posted Image
It would not be easy for sure.  And it has been asked, why did they use the most complex method of construction, that being irregulary shape huge stones.
I respectfully submit, that if ET's or today's engineer's (travelling back in time) were to show these ancient folks how to build a structure that is strong and efficiently built, they would be built from small block all the same size, such as common bricks of today.
Why would ET's show them the most labor  intensive difficult method for building...
...and would they at least have shown them how to build flushing toilets and a sanitary sewer system?

At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new.
This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense. -- Carl Sagan

#339    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009

Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:50 PM

Try this.  Look carefully at the finish, the perfect holes, corners and perfect fitting of the blocks.

It's only 7 mins and highly recommended:



Posted Image


#340    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009

Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:51 PM

Just a couple more even shorter clips:





Posted Image


#341    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009

Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:53 PM

No I'm not flooding.  Just another short clip (last one) This is a fascinating subject.  Look at the finish of this huge block at the beginning.



Edited by zoser, 29 November 2012 - 08:54 PM.

Posted Image


#342    synchronomy

synchronomy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2009

Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:55 PM

View Postzoser, on 29 November 2012 - 08:46 PM, said:


OK how did they drill the holes?  Lets try that one for a start.
Honestly, I don't know for sure.  I read about theories about how it was done...and I admit I have doubts.  Same goes for the holes Egyptians drilled.
...but I don't assume AA's speculation is the answer.  I think the answer is that we need to keep digging.
AA stories are a cop-out for searching the truth.  Humans that built these structures were every bit as intelligent as the humans of today, and AA categorizes them as a bunch of morons.

At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new.
This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense. -- Carl Sagan

#343    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009

Posted 29 November 2012 - 09:01 PM

View Postsynchronomy, on 29 November 2012 - 08:55 PM, said:

Honestly, I don't know for sure.  I read about theories about how it was done...and I admit I have doubts.  Same goes for the holes Egyptians drilled.
...but I don't assume AA's speculation is the answer.  I think the answer is that we need to keep digging.
AA stories are a cop-out for searching the truth.  Humans that built these structures were every bit as intelligent as the humans of today, and AA categorizes them as a bunch of morons.

The problem is archaelology.  It proposes certain banal explanations that people just know are idiotic.  A classic example is that the relics at Puma Punku were apparently the creation of the Aymara indians.  No tools or means of achieving these awesome structures have ever been found.

So the derision to me is aimed at the casual experts; people with no engineering or architectural knowledge.

If it was not indiginous indians then who could it have been?  Darwinism just doesn't account for other plausible options.  Their-in lies another major problem.

Edited by zoser, 29 November 2012 - 09:03 PM.

Posted Image


#344    Sir Wearer of Hats

Sir Wearer of Hats

    Is not a number!

  • Member
  • 9,328 posts
  • Joined:08 Nov 2008

Posted 29 November 2012 - 09:05 PM

I'm trying to work out the various explanations for PP:
Aliens did it - why? Was it like some sort of summer home? Why not stay in their (presumably) safer spaceships? It's not sterile, so I can't see it being used as a surgery/laboratory. We The locals did it - how? It'd take precise technology, a lot of time, effort and skill. And to what purpose was the place put? We've dozens of ideas and legends about Stonehenge, but what about PP?
Hoaxers did it - why? Ohh this is the easy one, to make it look like aliens did it.


#345    synchronomy

synchronomy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2009

Posted 29 November 2012 - 09:09 PM

View Postzoser, on 29 November 2012 - 09:01 PM, said:

The problem is archaelology.  It proposes certain banal explanations that people just know are idiotic.  A classic example is that the relics at Puma Punku were apparently the creation of the Aymara indians.  No tools or means of achieving these awesome structures have ever been found.

So the derision to me is aimed at the casual experts; people with no engineering or architectural knowledge.

If it was not indiginous indians then who could it have been?  Darwinism just doesn't account for other plausible options.  Their-in lies another major problem.
So from that you conclude ET's assisted in building them.
You say there yourself that the mainstream theories make little sense, and I agree.  I don't believe that indicates the ETH.  To me, it indicates more research is required.
If ET's helped the ancient move boulders, then where are they now when political systems are breaking down worldwide and overall we a doing a good job of poisoning ourselves environmentally...not even to mention wars, disease, crime...and on and on....

At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new.
This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense. -- Carl Sagan