1927 replies to this topic

[Neem]

Why are people so quick to denounce the ancient astronaut theory? Sure, Danikan's book may have some inaccuracies, and so does Sitchin's book (which I have read). The evidence is there. I mean, there is no conceivable way that ancient peoples built those pyramids. Yes, it can be reenacted, but we are also stronger; were just men used, or also women and children? Also, I do believe that Lord Pacal's sarcophagus represents an alien ship and he's controlling it. There is no one in the ancient world that was 7-8 feet tall. The Nazca lines I am on the fence. As for biblical descriptions, most used metaphors to explain things, but only if they were intelligent; you can still see remnants of "alien contact" in non-intelligent paintings etc. I also believe that the Greco-Roman Gods and other dieties (like Gilgamesh) represented ancient astronauts.

I dunno. Perhaps skeptics are too "single-minded" to accept another view?  

http://en.wikipedia....thera_mechanism
http://en.wikipedia....imanika_Shastra
http://en.wikipedia....ronaut_theories

Edited by The Dancing Bear, 26 December 2009 - 03:18 PM.

[ShadowSot]

Quote

I dunno. Perhaps skeptics are too "single-minded" to accept another view?

I could say the same to you.

Daniken was caught faking evidence for his books.
Stitchin has been caught lieing about information in his books.

There are many concievabl ways the pyramids were built, keep in mind there is steady build up to the pyramids at Giza, starting with the step pyramids designed by Imhotep.
The Bent pyramid, the Red Pyramid, and the Collapsed pyramid are evidence of the refining of construction techniques.
Evidence indicates that following the growing season, the people of Egypt, who had much spare time on their hands, were put to work building the pyramids.

[Neem]

ShadowSot, on 26 December 2009 - 03:20 PM, said:

I could say the same to you.

Daniken was caught faking evidence for his books.
Stitchin has been caught lieing about information in his books.

There are many concievabl ways the pyramids were built, keep in mind there is steady build up to the pyramids at Giza, starting with the step pyramids designed by Imhotep.
The Bent pyramid, the Red Pyramid, and the Collapsed pyramid are evidence of the refining of construction techniques.
Evidence indicates that following the growing season, the people of Egypt, who had much spare time on their hands, were put to work building the pyramids.

I am open-minded.  

[ShadowSot]

The Dancing Bear, on 26 December 2009 - 03:23 PM, said:

I am open-minded.  

Hate to say it, but there's a difference between being open minded and letting your brain fall out.

I grew up reading every fringe and new age publication I could find on the pyramids, on stone henge, and on the many other ancient wonders of the world.
Nowadays, I find them to be almost small minded.
Instead of marveling at the feats of our for fathers, they believe their is no way they could have constructed them, and claim greater powers at work.

The Egyptians built many impression buildings, of which the pyramids only outplace them in size, but not in design or skill.

[KennyB]

The Dancing Bear, on 26 December 2009 - 03:13 PM, said:

Why are people so quick to denounce the ancient astronaut theory? Sure, Danikan's book may have some inaccuracies, and so does Sitchin's book (which I have read). The evidence is there. I mean, there is no conceivable way that ancient peoples built those pyramids. Yes, it can be reenacted, but we are also stronger; were just men used, or also women and children? Also, I do believe that Lord Pacal's sarcophagus represents an alien ship and he's controlling it. There is no one in the ancient world that was 7-8 feet tall. The Nazca lines I am on the fence. As for biblical descriptions, most used metaphors to explain things, but only if they were intelligent; you can still see remnants of "alien contact" in non-intelligent paintings etc. I also believe that the Greco-Roman Gods and other dieties (like Gilgamesh) represented ancient astronauts.

I dunno. Perhaps skeptics are too "single-minded" to accept another view?  

http://en.wikipedia....thera_mechanism
http://en.wikipedia....imanika_Shastra
http://en.wikipedia....ronaut_theories

I believe the 3 Gisa pyramids were built by the aliens long before man was even created. All the other pyramids were built by the Egyptians, trying to copy the first 3, but never coming close to achieving it. All the information on the Gisa pyramids is falsified by the Egyptians themselves to make it look like they are the mighty race of antiquety.  The truth is, they have no idea who built the Gisa pyramids or their purpose. When the Westerners first came to Egypt, nobody there had any knowledge of the pyramids or could read the hirogliphics or anything else about them. As far as they knew, the pyramids had always been there. (which isn't too far from the truth)

[Black Hound]

Well after watchung the HISTORY CHANNEL last night and how they presented the ancient astronaut theory or theories, I think it has some merit. It seems to pose more questions than it answers.

[ShadowSot]

The Egyptians couldn't read ancient Egyptian for much the same reason we can't read old English, or Gaelic, or what ever your home countries origin may be.  The Egyptians were conquered by the Assyrians, the Greek, the Romans, and the Ottoman Empire. Their culture and religion was destroyed, and was replaced by that of their invaders.


The History Channel is a poor source of information, when it shows programs concerning history, it skews the show towards sensationalism.

[Black Hound]

ShadowSot, on 26 December 2009 - 06:54 PM, said:

The Egyptians couldn't read ancient Egyptian for much the same reason we can't read old English, or Gaelic, or what ever your home countries origin may be.  The Egyptians were conquered by the Assyrians, the Greek, the Romans, and the Ottoman Empire. Their culture and religion was destroyed, and was replaced by that of their invaders.


The History Channel is a poor source of information, when it shows programs concerning history, it skews the show towards sensationalism.

Same could be said about most forums when  comments are allowed that show liittle responsibility to fully back up what is said to discredit another person'd comment. Plus it was the only thing that was on that was the least bit interesting. I guess I could go back and read my disertation to see what I can find  in it that would be considered sensationalism.

Edited by Graveyard Hound, 26 December 2009 - 07:44 PM.

[Agent. Mulder]

Graveyard Hound, on 26 December 2009 - 07:42 PM, said:

Same could be said about most forums when  comments are allowed that show liittle responsibility to fully back up what is said to ddiscredit another person'd comment.

like you backing up nothing? aside from saying "i saw it on the history channel".

[Black Hound]

Hey Fox, glad you came along. I was getting bored with rational arguments on irrational topics. I'm sure you can provide some insight into the entire matter.

[ShadowSot]

I got tired of posting links backing my statemetns when they get ignored.

Kenny, so you agree with the dating of the pyramids, excepting the pyramids at Giza?

And what of the number of other pyramids aside from at Giza, are those aliens or bad copies?

[KennyB]

ShadowSot, on 26 December 2009 - 08:04 PM, said:

I got tired of posting links backing my statemetns when they get ignored.

Kenny, so you agree with the dating of the pyramids, excepting the pyramids at Giza?

And what of the number of other pyramids aside from at Giza, are those aliens or bad copies?

If the dating method is resonably accurate, any of them before 2400 years ago were probably built by the aliens, anything after that time, by the people. Just my opinion.
KennyB

[jaylemurph]

Graveyard Hound, on 26 December 2009 - 07:42 PM, said:

Same could be said about most forums when  comments are allowed that show liittle responsibility to fully back up what is said to discredit another person'd comment. Plus it was the only thing that was on that was the least bit interesting. I guess I could go back and read my disertation to see what I can find  in it that would be considered sensationalism.

Ahh, there's the rub.

Fringers seem to suffer from the delusion history has to be interesting to be worthwhile.

(Although to be honest, I've never once met someone who /wrote/ a dissertation who couldn't subsequently spell the word.)

--Jaylemurph

[ShadowSot]

KennyB, on 26 December 2009 - 08:24 PM, said:

If the dating method is resonably accurate, any of them before 2400 years ago were probably built by the aliens, anything after that time, by the people. Just my opinion.
KennyB

So, the pyramids that predate the Giza pyramids, the bent pyramid and the collapsed pyramid, then, and the red pyramid?

[Black Hound]

Just a word of caution, never use the History Channel as a source of wwhere you got any info. from. Seems it's not pc enough to be considered an objective source of information. Sticks to FOX or MSNBC.