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This topic has been archived.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

#7471    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 24 February 2013 - 10:12 AM

View PostDingoLingo, on 24 February 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:



did .. done.. and I do not see the evidence of ancient machining.. I see the evidence of ancient stone working techniques..

Care to elaborate on how these 'well known stone working techniques' could have produced such an effect?

No on has done that successfully so far here.

Posted Image


#7472    DingoLingo

DingoLingo

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,109 posts
  • Joined:05 Jul 2011

Posted 24 February 2013 - 10:15 AM

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 10:10 AM, said:

The problem you are having as I see it is that you have been educated to appreciate modern styles or styles over the last thousand years (namely Renaissence building and art).


Hmm.. the problem you are having as I see it is that you have educated brainwashed to believe that anything the AA crowd says as truth.. and do not appreciate that ancient man could actually build stuff by themselves without any outside influence..

you know.. you never did answer.. why are their not monoliths all over the world? (like the AA crowd says)..


#7473    DingoLingo

DingoLingo

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,109 posts
  • Joined:05 Jul 2011

Posted 24 February 2013 - 10:18 AM

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 10:12 AM, said:

Care to elaborate on how these 'well known stone working techniques' could have produced such an effect?

No on has done that successfully so far here.

They have.. you dont believe it because Danikin.. Dunn etc. .says its not true.. so for you.. its not true..

and you have not successfully explained how the 'aliens' would have done it.. I see a lot of .. maybe.. possibilities.. speculations.. but no real proof..

if its not softening.. its cutting with lasers.. or sound.. so on and so forth..

you see.. you say its up to us to prove its not aliens.. well.. its up to you to prove it was.. so far.. you really have not done a good job at that..


#7474    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,118 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005

Posted 24 February 2013 - 10:31 AM

View Postzoser, on 23 February 2013 - 08:33 PM, said:

All complete misinformation and lack of thorough research.

.

Then what is your explanation for this:

Third: A German expedition dug 1904/1905 through to the foundations of the temple. The temple platform is through and through of Roman origin. They found typical roman masonery, roman trash and so on, down to the bedrock. Nothing un-Roman was found! Btw: The temple platform was not built from massive stone, but typically roman honeycombed. Only the outer shell looks like a massive building.

http://www.ramtops.co.uk/baalbek.html


#7475    S2F

S2F

    Bloodstained Hurricane

  • Member
  • 6,980 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2008

Posted 24 February 2013 - 10:36 AM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 24 February 2013 - 09:21 AM, said:

Sorry, you really think that a bodged wall is more impressive than any cathedral that you care to name? If that really is the case, I really can only conclude, having tried very hard to be as fair as I possibly can, that you just don't actually mean seriously what you say, or that you really are completely deluded. I'm really sorry about this, I have tried to be fair, but your arguments are just... silly.

You may be aware but I came to that conclusion(s) quite a while ago. I think he is just yanking everybody's chains, giving the mean ol' skeptics a taste of their own medicine (however poorly). I've noticed that he likes to use similar vocabulary and argumentation as the skeptics. Unfortunately the facts are not on his side here, they never were.

"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


#7476    S2F

S2F

    Bloodstained Hurricane

  • Member
  • 6,980 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2008

Posted 24 February 2013 - 10:46 AM

I've also come to the conclusion that the AA hypothesis isn't just illogical but anti-logical. The theory seems to specifically shy away from what would normally be concluded by simple base logic.

"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


#7477    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 24 February 2013 - 11:15 AM

View PostAbramelin, on 24 February 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

Then what is your explanation for this:

Third: A German expedition dug 1904/1905 through to the foundations of the temple. The temple platform is through and through of Roman origin. They found typical roman masonery, roman trash and so on, down to the bedrock. Nothing un-Roman was found! Btw: The temple platform was not built from massive stone, but typically roman honeycombed. Only the outer shell looks like a massive building.

http://www.ramtops.co.uk/baalbek.html

Easy.

The Romans wanted to demolish it.  Found it was too much trouble and gave up.

How's that for a typically puerile archaeological explanation?

Except it may well be true.

Want another one?

The Romans were doing an archaeological dig to see if they could understand who put together such a gargantuan construction.

The more puerile the better for this forum it seems.

There is nothing to tie those trilithons to the work of the Romans.

It's exactly like saying that because material was found underneath the stones at PP then the Aymara must have been responsible for it's construction.

Just plain silly.

Sorry.

Edited by zoser, 24 February 2013 - 11:17 AM.

Posted Image


#7478    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 24 February 2013 - 11:19 AM

View PostSlave2Fate, on 24 February 2013 - 10:46 AM, said:

I've also come to the conclusion that the AA hypothesis isn't just illogical but anti-logical. The theory seems to specifically shy away from what would normally be concluded by simple base logic.

So how come that 90% of ancient construction is so hotly disputed over the world?

Give it some thought.

Posted Image


#7479    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Non gender specific

  • Member
  • 25,673 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005

Posted 24 February 2013 - 11:21 AM

View Postzoser, on 24 February 2013 - 11:19 AM, said:

So how come that 90% of ancient construction is so hotly disputed over the world?

Give it some thought.
is it really? By whom? Probably not by 90% of people who have some knowledge about it.

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:


#7480    seeder

seeder

    Nut Cracker

  • Member
  • 10,885 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2012

Posted 24 February 2013 - 11:28 AM

View PostZeta Reticulum, on 24 February 2013 - 07:48 AM, said:

Dingo by name dingo by nature



People in glass houses...and all that

"The reticulum is the second chamber in the alimentary canal of a ruminant animal

http://en.wikipedia....culum_(anatomy)

Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me... It's all the rabbit poop you stumble over on your way down...
“It's easier to fool people - than to convince them that they have been fooled.”  Mark Twain

"The tragedy of life is not that it ends so soon, but that we wait so long to begin it"

#7481    seeder

seeder

    Nut Cracker

  • Member
  • 10,885 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2012

Posted 24 February 2013 - 11:30 AM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 24 February 2013 - 09:21 AM, said:

Sorry, you really think that a bodged wall is more impressive than any cathedral that you care to name? If that really is the case, I really can only conclude, having tried very hard to be as fair as I possibly can, that you just don't actually mean seriously what you say, or that you really are completely deluded. I'm really sorry about this, I have tried to be fair, but your arguments are just... silly.


Kindly said and to the point.

Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me... It's all the rabbit poop you stumble over on your way down...
“It's easier to fool people - than to convince them that they have been fooled.”  Mark Twain

"The tragedy of life is not that it ends so soon, but that we wait so long to begin it"

#7482    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 24 February 2013 - 11:50 AM

Taken from some ruins in Turkey.

Notice in this image the cuboid cut outs.  Just like can be found all over Peru.  Evidence of whole block extraction.

Posted Image

Polygonal style precision again reminiscent of Peru in megalithic style.

Posted Image

Comparison with Peru:

Posted Image

Evidence of ancient machining.  The inset is an actual cut produced with a modern machine tool.

Posted Image

Posted Image

Then there is evidence of moulding.  

I'll leave you to check out the rest.

http://www.facebook....&type=1

More evidence of ancient contact across continents?

Posted Image


#7483    Lilly

Lilly

    Forum Divinity

  • 16,837 posts
  • Joined:16 Apr 2004

Posted 24 February 2013 - 11:51 AM

Honestly, I just don't see how something built of stone in antiquity equates with alien visitation. I mean, this could easily be due to ancient peoples having knowledge of stone construction that we modern folks have simply forgotten/lost. In order for ancient buildings to serve as some type of proof for ET we need something more, like an alien stone cutting lasar...some bit of alien technology to support this notion.

Until we have some type of hard evidence this is all just rampant speculation.

"Ignorance is ignorance. It is a state of mind, not an opinion." ~MID~

Posted Image

#7484    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 24 February 2013 - 11:53 AM

View PostLilly, on 24 February 2013 - 11:51 AM, said:

Honestly, I just don't see how something built of stone in antiquity equates with alien visitation. I mean, this could easily be due to ancient peoples having knowledge of stone construction that we modern folks have simply forgotten/lost. In order for ancient buildings to serve as some type of proof for ET we need something more, like an alien stone cutting lasar...some bit of alien technology to support this notion.

Until we have some type of hard evidence this is all just rampant speculation.

Technology acquired from where?  Why was it lost?  How did mankind go from living in caves to producing megalithic precision stonework?

With what means?  With what tools and for what purpose?

Posted Image


#7485    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

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

Posted 24 February 2013 - 11:56 AM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 24 February 2013 - 09:21 AM, said:

Sorry, you really think that a bodged wall is more impressive than any cathedral that you care to name? If that really is the case, I really can only conclude, having tried very hard to be as fair as I possibly can, that you just don't actually mean seriously what you say, or that you really are completely deluded. I'm really sorry about this, I have tried to be fair, but your arguments are just... silly.

In relation to the discussion on ancient high technology I think it is far more profound yes absolutely.

If we are considering other factors such as art (by modern educational standards) then that would be different.

This thread however is not about Rennaissance art or any modern cultural appreciation of art.

Posted Image