Good good - coz we'll never really know.
There aren't any cave paintings I've seen that can be definitively interpreted to represent alien visitation. But AA hypothesizers certainly do love the ambiguity that our ancestors left behind in scratched or painted circles and whatnot.
I know, I said it's open to interpretation but some are so odd in that they don't fit with the art that was typical of the time/region - e.g. the african ones
You are talking about the Piri Reis map I would assume? It doesn't show Antarctica, despite the many people who claim it does. There are numerous references here on UM about this. For example.
I'm not sure - I guess so - well if it's been debunked I'll read it on that link - thanks
[EDIT] === I'm not sure if this is the map, if it is, then wherever I read it, they made it sound as if it was clear that a land mass (like greenland or one of the poles were what was shown on the map... This Piri Reis map is not very clear at all - hell even UM'ers can't agree on what it shows!
What giant drawings are you referring to?
Any and all the giant drawing on the Earth that can only be seen for what they are by flying over them at some height!
Some ancient structures are certainly intriguing, but not outside the capability of man to build. I wouldn't say that the ancients could melt stone, but just because it looks like it was melted does not mean that it was melted.
No way, no how, nu-uh - If you have read as much as I have on the topic, there can be no doubt as to the fact that we cannot explain how some of these things were done and the ETH is as good a theory as any.... It's not just that stones weighing sometimes hundreds of tonnes were moved, sometimes over continets (cannot be explained) but many other mysteries which we cannot explain that man could have done. As far as I know the stone WAs definately melted (shaped). If I get the chance, I'll find a link.
Pyramid type structures around the world actually bear very little resemblance to each other. I haven't heard about this mica bit before, perhaps you can elaborate on that bit?
Just google "Mica"+"Pyramid" or "Giza Pyramid" - it's not decorative or structural - so why did they put Mica in there? And HOW DID THEY GET IT FROM SOUTH AMERICA TO EGYPT?
I think we'd have to get pretty specific about particular texts to even begin discussing this part.
Fair enough, but it's odd the ammount of references to alien-like beings doing things which really sound like technology, some of which we nowdays already have
They looked at the sky. All the time. Why wouldn't they be familiar with the movements of celestial bodies? It isn't as though they had a lot of distractions after the sun went down like we do.
I've mentioned this before - If it were just IMAGINATION, I'd expect maybe HALF of ancient civilisations to have beings from 'above'/'heavens'/'space', the other half I'd guess earthly or why not beneith the Earth, or from Dreams.. why are they almost ALL from space/the heavens/the sky???
No worries mate. There are many disjointed puzzle pieces that AA hypothesizers have attempted to pull together. This generates an illusion of substance where there really is none.
I'll have to take your word for it - I have no idea if I've read more or if you've read more (about this topic). If you've read more, I'd bet my left nut that you are right and I'm wrong. However, where that leaves us, would still be with gaping holes in our understanding of the ancients...
Edited by Paxus, 30 January 2011 - 04:12 PM.