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.


- - - - -

The Pleiades Enigma


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1    UM-Bot

UM-Bot

    News, media and articles

  • 6,196 posts
  • Joined:21 Mar 2001
  • Gender:Male

  • Beep Boop

Posted 01 June 2012 - 02:45 PM

<strong class='bbc'>Image credit: Henrique Senna</strong>
Image credit: Henrique Senna
Leonard Farra: "Are we alone in the Universe?" is a question that intrigues scientists and the public alike. Astronomers involved in the SETI project scan the depths of space waiting for the radio signal which will confirm that life also exists in other parts of the universe. Many Ufologists, on the other hand, believe that the thousands of unexplained UFO sightings reported over the years are indications that we are being visited, or monitored, by extraterrestrials. Another important line of thought is that, if there was an ET visit to Earth, thousands of years ago, then its not impossible that the same is happening now. Over the past 30 years I have been studying the Ancient Astronaut theory and I have also followed current UFO reports.

Posted Image View: Full Article

This is an official comment thread for a main site news story, article or video.
Please keep comments civil and on topic.
Thank you.

#2    Taun

Taun

    A dashing moose about town...

  • Member
  • 5,511 posts
  • Joined:19 May 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tornado Alley (Oklahoma)

Posted 01 June 2012 - 04:43 PM

Any 'link' to the Pleiades that earlier civilizations had was (IMO) due to two factors and two factors alone... The coincidence of the star cluster 'rising' at a certain time of the year, and the legends/lore that grew up around the event...

Our planet is somewhere around 4.5 Billion years old... It took most of that time to develop any form of life at all, and an even greater amount of time to develop a noticibly intelligent species (us)...

The oldest star in the Pleiades cluster is about 400 million years old... There is evidence of planets forming now - which means there are most likely NO planets there that could have evolved/developed life - of any form what-so-ever...

If ancient aliens visited the Earth (which I doubt very seriously), they did NOT originate in the Pleiades cluster...

Edited by Taun, 01 June 2012 - 04:45 PM.


#3    Mikko-kun

Mikko-kun

    New life

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,475 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amniotic fluid of consfious life

  • Observation, individual resourcefulness... what would we be without them?

Posted 01 June 2012 - 06:21 PM

I know next to nothing about age-measuring sciences, like measuring age of an object based on some semi-radioactive isotope, but, is it possible, that the further you try to determine the age of an object, the more there is room for some unknown or semi-known little metaphysical rule to make the object's age seem different from what it actually is? Just saying that I dont know if we know how much room for error there really is. If the number of known exoplanets is not impressing, then it's not likely that there's more developed life than us in the universe, but how reliable are those methods? What's considered to be their "extent of knowledge"?

I've been born again 31,8,2014 approximately 21:35 local time. A moment free of clutter in the mind, emancipating myself like an escapist, allowing myself to breathe life in a stronger, less physical level... though it does resonate to physical world. It's the oomph.

#4    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,373 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 01 June 2012 - 06:23 PM

Perhaps they originated in Orion?


#5    J. K.

J. K.

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,465 posts
  • Joined:09 Jan 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX

Posted 01 June 2012 - 06:29 PM

If the answer to "Are we alone in the universe?" is no, then the next question should be: "How did they find us?"  What is so significant about our solar system and planet that they would have come and looked?  Is our star even bright enough to be seen beyond our solar system?

One's reality is another's nightmare.

#6    Mikko-kun

Mikko-kun

    New life

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,475 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amniotic fluid of consfious life

  • Observation, individual resourcefulness... what would we be without them?

Posted 01 June 2012 - 07:04 PM

J.K., maybe they probed all the possible exoplanets they knew and could probe, and we're likely the most or the second or third most developed species they've found, presuming there's been space-travelers here from other place. Even if their technology was higher, it doesn't mean that they'd be more developed in every possible aspect and science, and I think they'd acknowledge this and let us rather keep developing if they acknowledge this. It's more useful for them to copy from the parts where we excel more or take footnotes of sort at least, than to just destroy and invade. Even more useful is to study us and the ways we became to see things they didn't, the "how did they come up with that", not just "why does the thing they come up with sound good".

I've been born again 31,8,2014 approximately 21:35 local time. A moment free of clutter in the mind, emancipating myself like an escapist, allowing myself to breathe life in a stronger, less physical level... though it does resonate to physical world. It's the oomph.

#7    Taun

Taun

    A dashing moose about town...

  • Member
  • 5,511 posts
  • Joined:19 May 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tornado Alley (Oklahoma)

Posted 01 June 2012 - 07:04 PM

View PostJ. K., on 01 June 2012 - 06:29 PM, said:

If the answer to "Are we alone in the universe?" is no, then the next question should be: "How did they find us?"  What is so significant about our solar system and planet that they would have come and looked?  Is our star even bright enough to be seen beyond our solar system?

Yes, our sun can be seen beyond the boundaries of our star system... For example the star Tau Ceti - is roughly 12 light years away and it is slightly smaller and less 'bright' than our own sun... yet it is (barely) visible to the naked eye...
So our sun would be noticable (to un-aided human eyes) perhaps as far out as 15 light years... farther than that would require either much better vision than humans have, or something similar to a telescope...

There is nothing unusual about the sun to draw attention to it, unless it is exactly the type star an alien searcher is looking for...
However... while the sun itself isn't remarkable - the Earth is...

We have been broadcasting a 'radio bubble' for the past 150 +/- years.. this is roughly a radius of 150 light years and is the area that Earth originating radio signals have travelled since radio/telegraphy was invented...  This would be a very noticable beacon to any who have the means to detect it...

Edited by Taun, 01 June 2012 - 07:06 PM.


#8    ThickasaBrick

ThickasaBrick

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 387 posts
  • Joined:22 Jul 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

  • "Your wise men don't know how it feels to be thick as a brick." "I'll judge you all and make damn sure that no-one judges me."
    -Jethro Tull

Posted 01 June 2012 - 07:05 PM

It is possible that early civilization occurred during the last ice age. Humans tend to stay near the oceans and coasts. During the last ice age the sea level was lower. If there were early civilizations on the coast before the ice melted, their cities and settlements would have been abandoned. This is one possible reason why the earliest civilizations, that we are aware of, seemed to spring up at nearly the same times. There may be evidence buried miles offshore or the abandoned cities were eroded during the intervening years. Or this could all be complete bull, it is just one possible theory. Maybe if the Great Library hadn't burned we would have many of the answers to the questions we ask today. Speculation is wonderful!

Modern technology has given most of us the idea that the ancients were not as intelligent as we are today. They were just as intelligent, less knowledgeable in some areas but more knowledgeable in others.


#9    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 8,966 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 01 June 2012 - 09:37 PM

Well, ET or not, visitation or not, the article's author appears to be fabricating his claims from thin air.
To wit:

Quote

The Annunaki leader was called Enlil, and his seven assistants were known as the Council of Seven. Another Annunaki leader was called Ea. Followers of the Ancient Astronaut theory will already know about the Annunaki but they may not be aware that they were associated with some mysterious objects called the Maskim. The Maskim were the Throne Bearers of the Gods which 'flew through the sky'.

Sorry, but "Maskim" is a Sumerian word that means something like what we call a county clerk, a judge or possibly a bailiff:

Quote

maškim [N] (PA.DUcecig)
judicial officer {freq. 19}
ETCSL (electronic corpus of Sumerian literature)

Quote

maškim
judicial officer
Source: ETCSL

Quote

  
maškim
judicial officer   
Source:ETCSL

Obviously, you can think what you want.  However, the above was more than enough reason (as far as I'm concerned) to stop reading this silly article at that point.

Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#10    Rlyeh

Rlyeh

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,048 posts
  • Joined:01 Jan 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The sixth circle

  • Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Posted 05 June 2012 - 04:24 PM

View PostMikko-kun, on 01 June 2012 - 06:21 PM, said:

I know next to nothing about age-measuring sciences, like measuring age of an object based on some semi-radioactive isotope, but, is it possible, that the further you try to determine the age of an object, the more there is room for some unknown or semi-known little metaphysical rule to make the object's age seem different from what it actually is?
Basically invoking "magic" when the evidence doesn't support the conclusion.


#11    Sir Wearer of Hats

Sir Wearer of Hats

    SCIENCE!

  • Member
  • 10,305 posts
  • Joined:08 Nov 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queensland, Australia.

Posted 07 June 2012 - 04:44 AM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 01 June 2012 - 06:23 PM, said:

Perhaps they originated in Orion?
Unlikely, as the stars in what we call the Orion cluster are younger then our own by a considerable margin. That based on what we know of planetary development and the development of life on planets - the Orion worlds (assuming there are actually planets there) are too young to have anything other then macrobacterial life.

I must not fear. Fear is the Mind-Killer. It is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and to move through me. And when it is gone I will turn the inner eye to see it's path.
When the fear is gone, there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.

#12    rcarp89

rcarp89

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 15 posts
  • Joined:06 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 June 2012 - 07:49 AM

View PostRlyeh, on 05 June 2012 - 04:24 PM, said:

Basically invoking "magic" when the evidence doesn't support the conclusion.

So in other words it is 100% impossible that current science may either be wrong in certain ways or that it has 100% taken into account every possible equation and factor that may determine the age of an object lightyears away? Science is infalliable, and anything outside current realms of understanding is not possible avenues of science yet to be discovered, but in your words 'magic'? He was asking a question, why is there such a need to be so judgemental? I can see arrogance reigns supreme when it comes to issues such as these, on both sides of the argument.


#13    Rlyeh

Rlyeh

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,048 posts
  • Joined:01 Jan 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The sixth circle

  • Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Posted 09 June 2012 - 09:11 AM

View Postrcarp89, on 09 June 2012 - 07:49 AM, said:

So in other words it is 100% impossible that current science may either be wrong in certain ways or that it has 100% taken into account every possible equation and factor that may determine the age of an object lightyears away? Science is infalliable, and anything outside current realms of understanding is not possible avenues of science yet to be discovered, but in your words 'magic'? He was asking a question, why is there such a need to be so judgemental? I can see arrogance reigns supreme when it comes to issues such as these, on both sides of the argument.
Did you even bother to read the question? Some "metaphysical thing" that changes the age of the object the more accurate your measurement is. That's right, magic.

Please think about what you're saying, science is what has been tried and tested. Pulling imagined factors out of your behind has nothing to do with possibilities.


#14    Hawkin

Hawkin

    LiverEatenJohnson

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,608 posts
  • Joined:21 Jun 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

  • Some say he is dead.
    Some say he will never be.

Posted 18 August 2012 - 04:37 PM

I think science should take at least consideration on what ufologist and ancient astronaut theorist are proposing.
If science looks back on their history 500 years ago, Religion was the dominate player on determining the creation
story and when science had there own theory,  Religion burned people at the stake for their heretical idea.
Now that science is a big player they are not open to new ideas and basically considering them heretical.
Now I realize there's no evidence, but the theories should be explored to possibly find that evidence.

It's good to have some skepticism so you won't be gullible & naïve. But to much skepticism can make you arrogant & egotistical.

#15    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 13,641 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 19 August 2012 - 12:15 AM

View Postrcarp89, on 09 June 2012 - 07:49 AM, said:

So in other words it is 100% impossible that current science may either be wrong in certain ways or that it has 100% taken into account every possible equation and factor that may determine the age of an object lightyears away? Science is infalliable, and anything outside current realms of understanding is not possible avenues of science yet to be discovered, but in your words 'magic'? He was asking a question, why is there such a need to be so judgemental? I can see arrogance reigns supreme when it comes to issues such as these, on both sides of the argument.
You sometimes have to overlook Rlyeh, he's intelligent but sometimes "lackin' in what they call the social skills"  :w00t:

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users