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This topic has been archived.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

#7591    Oniomancer

Oniomancer

    Soulless Minion Of Orthodoxy

  • Member
  • 3,385 posts
  • Joined:20 Jul 2008

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:28 PM

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 08:09 PM, said:

Not sure about the relevance of this post Mr O.

It reads like a children's war story.

No one is going to read that and come away with a clear idea of what PP was for or who built it.

Almost excruciating to read it; very little insight but mountains of assumption.

Is that what I was meant to get out of it?

I'm never quite sure with some posts.

Sometimes history is like that. Suffice it to say the rumors of a people with no memory of their past are greatly exaggerated.

"Apparently the Lemurians drank Schlitz." - Intrepid "Real People" reporter on finding a mysterious artifact in the depths of Mount Shasta.

#7592    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:35 PM

View PostOniomancer, on 24 February 2013 - 08:21 PM, said:



That's funny, because that's exactly the opposite of the point I made there. It doesn't take a catastrophe to displace large objects, just a minor disaster.

Edit: and highly localized at that.

Not just displaced.  Shattered.  Blocks weighing hundreds of tonnes !

That's no minor localised incident.

The spin you guys put on things is unbelievable.

One thing that all investigators agree on is that PP was destroyed by some devastating cataclysm.

One team of Russian archaeologists suggested a nuclear event.

Since they are archaeologists I would have my suspicions but the scale of the destruction is unarguable.

No minor event.  Look at the images for yourselves.

Posted Image


#7593    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:40 PM

View PostOniomancer, on 24 February 2013 - 08:28 PM, said:



Sometimes history is like that. Suffice it to say the rumors of a people with no memory of their past are greatly exaggerated.

You talk in riddles Mr O.

I can only guess at your meaning which on this occasion I take to mean that it is unlikely for tribal people to have little memory of their past since their culture is folklore based.

I whole heatedly agree which is why I disagreed with Abe.

The Aymara should have recalled the construction of PP and mor importantly it's destruction.

The fact that they have no recollection is debunks the Aymara theory.

Well done Mr O.

Posted Image


#7594    DingoLingo

DingoLingo

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,114 posts
  • Joined:05 Jul 2011

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:40 PM

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

Technology acquired from where?  
Technology learned of many years of practice..

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

Why was it lost?  
that has been explained to you time and time again each time you bring this up.. go back and reread..

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

How did mankind go from living in caves to producing megalithic precision stonework?
you make it sound like man had stepped out of the cave one day and built PP etc the following.. seriously.. you really need to actually look at timeframes of man before you open your mouth..

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

With what means?  
been answered..

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

With what tools
again been answered.. and with pics of the tools themselves found at the sites

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

and for what purpose?
answered again..

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 12:22 PM, said:

With absolutely no substantiation whatsoever of how the feats were accomplished.
wrong.. again.. this has been answered.. your just to stupid to admit it..

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 12:22 PM, said:

If you are happy with that then fine, but please do not claim that the position is supportable or scientific.
yet you can post up pseudo science and call it supportable and scientific.. please.. give me a break..

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 12:22 PM, said:

It just is not.  
yes.. ours is.. because it has fact.. proof and proper scientific studies behind it.. what does yours have? just pure speculation with no proof at all..

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 12:22 PM, said:

Humans may have well have been there but we have totally zero evidence that they created these artefacts.
again wrong.. go back to the start.. and actually read what has been posted..

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 12:22 PM, said:

High technological feats require high technology.
wrong.. this was not a high technological feat (for us that is for them yes) that was done using basic tools and maths.

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 12:22 PM, said:

Not copper tools or dolomite pounders.
again.. wrong..

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 12:23 PM, said:

I agree.

It's time they looked at all the evidence and stopped clinging to outdated puerile mainstream beliefs.

I think it might be more to the fact that we keep trying to explain things to you.. and you doing the ducking and weaving when our evidence gets to much for you.. that you have to cut and run the discussion.. ..

outdated and puerile.. heh.. I would rather outdated and puerile science over psudeo and juvenile science

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 04:16 PM, said:

Slight problem.

Not everyone shares your confidence with dating PP.



http://ancientaliens...4/puma-punku-2/

Oh and it wasn't built by the Aymara either.

Again dozens and dozens of sources will dispute the classic mainstream dating.

You can only argue on what is undisputed.  The dating of PP, The Trilithons, The precision artefacts in Peru are all hotly disputed.

Sorry.

though.. have you really looked at the dozens and dozens of sources .. all seem to stem from one or two sources..

then you have hundreds and hundreds of sources on dating PP etc.. stemming from dozens and dozens of sources..

and they are not really hotly disputed.. hotly disputed would be.. scientific papers being tabled.. lectures at major universities.. so on and so forth.. have not seen either of those.. so please.. forget your puerile attempts of saying all this is hotly disputed..


#7595    Norbert the Incredible

Norbert the Incredible

    They knew too much about flying saucers!

  • Member
  • 27,152 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:41 PM

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 08:35 PM, said:

Not just displaced.  Shattered.  Blocks weighing hundreds of tonnes !

That's no minor localised incident.

The spin you guys put on things is unbelievable.

One thing that all investigators agree on is that PP was destroyed by some devastating cataclysm.

One team of Russian archaeologists suggested a nuclear event.

Since they are archaeologists I would have my suspicions but the scale of the destruction is unarguable.

No minor event.  Look at the images for yourselves.
Archealogists (albeit Russian ones, who can be a bit imaginative) are suggesting a nuclear explosion, but you doubt that because they're archeologists? I'd have thought you'd have leapt on it as proof that Pumu Punka was another nuclear power plant like the Pyramids, albeit in this case perhaps one run in a similar fashion to Chernobyl.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


:cat:


#7596    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:46 PM

View PostDingoLingo, on 24 February 2013 - 08:40 PM, said:


Technology learned of many years of practice..


that has been explained to you time and time again each time you bring this up.. go back and reread..


you make it sound like man had stepped out of the cave one day and built PP etc the following.. seriously.. you really need to actually look at timeframes of man before you open your mouth..


been answered..

again been answered.. and with pics of the tools themselves found at the sites


answered again..


wrong.. again.. this has been answered.. your just to stupid to admit it..


yet you can post up pseudo science and call it supportable and scientific.. please.. give me a break..


yes.. ours is.. because it has fact.. proof and proper scientific studies behind it.. what does yours have? just pure speculation with no proof at all..


again wrong.. go back to the start.. and actually read what has been posted..


wrong.. this was not a high technological feat (for us that is for them yes) that was done using basic tools and maths.


again.. wrong..



I think it might be more to the fact that we keep trying to explain things to you.. and you doing the ducking and weaving when our evidence gets to much for you.. that you have to cut and run the discussion.. ..

outdated and puerile.. heh.. I would rather outdated and puerile science over psudeo and juvenile science



though.. have you really looked at the dozens and dozens of sources .. all seem to stem from one or two sources..

then you have hundreds and hundreds of sources on dating PP etc.. stemming from dozens and dozens of sources..

and they are not really hotly disputed.. hotly disputed would be.. scientific papers being tabled.. lectures at major universities.. so on and so forth.. have not seen either of those.. so please.. forget your puerile attempts of saying all this is hotly disputed..

Sorry mate.

Loads of people disagree with mainstream dating on PP.

Because it was taken from the remains of tribal people who were wandering the area.

It's all flawed.

The people had no recollection of the construction or demise of the site when the Spanish arrived.

Far more significant than some highly flawed carbon dating.

Also there is no precedent for indians creating precision work in Andesite to that quality.

If there is prove it.

Sorry to put the kibosh on the university findings.

If I were you I would practise some thinking for yourself instead of believing any old pap written by a university.

Edited by zoser, 24 February 2013 - 08:47 PM.

Posted Image


#7597    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:49 PM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 24 February 2013 - 08:41 PM, said:


Archealogists (albeit Russian ones, who can be a bit imaginative) are suggesting a nuclear explosion, but you doubt that because they're archeologists? I'd have thought you'd have leapt on it as proof that Pumu Punka was another nuclear power plant like the Pyramids, albeit in this case perhaps one run in a similar fashion to Chernobyl.

Let's just say that there are other ways to discern the truth about ancient remains rather than just reading the party line.

If that's entirely good enough for you then good luck.  Some people prefer to think for themselves.

Edited by zoser, 24 February 2013 - 08:50 PM.

Posted Image


#7598    DingoLingo

DingoLingo

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,114 posts
  • Joined:05 Jul 2011

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:50 PM

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 06:19 PM, said:

If you left this thread alone what might happen is that dozens of others may join in with original ideas and investigations.

Until then they most probably have no wish to be bulldozed by skeptic dead heads religiously plugging the university view that most common sense folk now believe to be nonsense.

I have not allowed any of you to do that.  That is why there has been so much kicking and screaming over the last few months.

Sorry but you did ask.

lol.. actually the good thing about this thread is your helping convince others that the AA is a load of tosh..

every time you post up a AA theory.. we post up facts that kinda shows the AA bit is just rubbish.. so in reality zoser.. your actually working against what you believe in ..


#7599    DingoLingo

DingoLingo

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,114 posts
  • Joined:05 Jul 2011

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:51 PM

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 06:20 PM, said:

Saying of Zoser:

its Zoserism..

so..

what it would be..

Another Zoserism

"Repetition is good for the soul".


#7600    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:52 PM

View PostDingoLingo, on 24 February 2013 - 08:50 PM, said:



lol.. actually the good thing about this thread is your helping convince others that the AA is a load of tosh..

every time you post up a AA theory.. we post up facts that kinda shows the AA bit is just rubbish.. so in reality zoser.. your actually working against what you believe in ..

Very doubtful that the AA hypothesis is doing anything but escalating.

If you had some wit you would know where to look to find out.

Posted Image


#7601    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:53 PM

View PostDingoLingo, on 24 February 2013 - 08:51 PM, said:



its Zoserism..

so..

what it would be..

Another Zoserism

"Repetition is good for the soul".

When wit, facts, and plain thinking fail, resort to character attacks.  The religion of the skeptic.

Posted Image


#7602    DingoLingo

DingoLingo

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,114 posts
  • Joined:05 Jul 2011

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:58 PM

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 08:46 PM, said:


If I were you I would practise some thinking for yourself instead of believing any old pap written by a university.

actually I think I have said it a couple of times now.. I was like you.. then I looked into it myself.. and woke up..

I suggest you do the same.. go on a holiday.. look at what there is around.. ask questions.. you would be doing yourself a favor..

you see I did do that mate.. :D unlike you I actually went and looked at these things in australia.. I looked at the art.. I spoke to the elders.. I wrote copious letters.. emails when the internet first came out.. it took me about 10 years before I could actually say AA is pure bunk.. I would keep questioning what i found while looking and what I believed..


#7603    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:59 PM

See you tomorrow everyone.

Remember these points for now :

That the Aymara who allegedly built PP have no recollection of either it's construction or it's destruction is shattering to the mainstream theory.

Also that Indians in history have never been known to create precision stone work in andesite.

To that precision or that design.

That this never occurs to the great university minds of our time is to put it bluntly not inspiring.

No wonder then that in modern times such things are hotly disputed and will no doubt continue to be.

With that I must bid you all a very good night.

Posted Image


#7604    DingoLingo

DingoLingo

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,114 posts
  • Joined:05 Jul 2011

Posted 24 February 2013 - 09:00 PM

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 08:52 PM, said:

Very doubtful that the AA hypothesis is doing anything but escalating.

If you had some wit you would know where to look to find out.

actually mate.. its not.. I'm sorry truely I am.. and I do understand why you fight against it so hard.. I've been where you are now 20 years ago.. you say to us.. open our eyes to the evidence.. I did mate.. and it showed me that what the AA put forward.. is crap.. so I went from being a die hard believer (like you) to a skeptic..


#7605    lightly

lightly

    metaphysical therapist

  • Member
  • 6,450 posts
  • Joined:01 Apr 2009

Posted 24 February 2013 - 09:00 PM

kalentrance.jpg . .  .  .  .  tiwanakugate.jpg

  .. a before and after  shot at Tiwanaku. I can't find a photo i have of the gate to the sun laying broken and half buried.

..notice how VERY OLD looking are the steps and flanking stones.


    *  correct me if i'm wrong.. but  there is none of the puffy polygonal masonry at either Puma Punku   or  Tiwanaku ?

Edited by lightly, 24 February 2013 - 09:31 PM.

Important:  The above may contain errors, inaccuracies, omissions, and other limitations.