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.


- - - - -

What did Edgar Rice Burroughs know?


  • Please log in to reply
210 replies to this topic

#76    quillius

quillius

    52.0839 N, 1.4328 E

  • Member
  • 5,591 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LONDON

  • A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
    Albert Einstein

Posted 17 April 2013 - 04:06 PM

also just to add......do you think there is enough evidence to suggest the Government covered up aspects of the UFO phenomenon?

do you think that they may have thought the ETH was the answer? (please note I use the word thought as opposed to know)

If I have proof enough that confirms a cover up.....and I am then told I am looking at a duck...will I believe them about the duck...actually yes (with a slight doubt created from previous lies) however I would instantly turn my back and ask myself if they could be asking me to look at this duck so I am not paying attention to the elephant behind me that they didnt want me to see.


#77    Esoteric Toad

Esoteric Toad

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 699 posts
  • Joined:04 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

  • Where does one get certified as an "Ancient Astronaut Theorist" or "Cryptozoologist"?

Posted 17 April 2013 - 04:06 PM

View Postquillius, on 17 April 2013 - 03:58 PM, said:

not sure I follow, I dont think anyone has suggested anything like your theoretical with the duck.

I thought we could prove we went to the moon? does this 'positive' proof not instantly disprove the 'conspiracy' theory that we havent?
If that were the case then there would be no "Did we really land on the moon" posts any longer and yet they are all over the net and here as well. To me the prevalent conspiracies will ALWAYS exist. Many that present them are just doing so to get a reaction but then there are those that truly believe them. Proof for some is a cover-up for others.


#78    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,735 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 17 April 2013 - 04:07 PM

View PostEsoteric Toad, on 17 April 2013 - 03:36 PM, said:

Bee please do not take this the wrong way but I have noticed that you have, errrrr, a very open mind. It seems you would argue the sky is not blue on a cloudless day if it were presented by a skeptic. Just because Mars is about 35 million miles away and some people, through lack of decent equipment, believed wacky things does not make it even remotely feasible. If this were the case then we would still be wondering what the wrinkled, grey lump was in our heads. After all, EVERYONE knows it is our hearts that control everything.

and here, Frank is a perfect example of 'misrepresentation'....

the so-called 'sceptical' side of the fence do it all the time...

For the record, ET ( :w00t: )....one uses one's judgement at all times...about everything.


And anyway it was YOU who brought up the option of a Grand Conspiracy...I just responded to that.... :P



.


#79    quillius

quillius

    52.0839 N, 1.4328 E

  • Member
  • 5,591 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LONDON

  • A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
    Albert Einstein

Posted 17 April 2013 - 04:07 PM

View PostSlave2Fate, on 17 April 2013 - 04:06 PM, said:

Only to people who are rational with an honest intent of altering their position based on new or contrary evidence. It's the 'conclusion first, then I'll look at the evidence' kind of people who have a problem with such things.


I agree Slave, but doesnt assuming you are being told the truth instantly mean you are starting at the conclusion stage? I am suggesting that this works both ways and that nothing should be assumed.


#80    quillius

quillius

    52.0839 N, 1.4328 E

  • Member
  • 5,591 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LONDON

  • A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
    Albert Einstein

Posted 17 April 2013 - 04:11 PM

View PostEsoteric Toad, on 17 April 2013 - 04:06 PM, said:

If that were the case then there would be no "Did we really land on the moon" posts any longer and yet they are all over the net and here as well. To me the prevalent conspiracies will ALWAYS exist. Many that present them are just doing so to get a reaction but then there are those that truly believe them. Proof for some is a cover-up for others.


no the threads continue because not everyone accepts the 'proof' put forward. That doesnt stop the fact that if proof is supplied that shows we went to the moon then by default this disproves the conspiracy that we didnt,right? nbot saying everyone accepts this to be the case but nevertheless that is the end result.

' Proof for some is a cover-up for others'

I guess that depends on the proof


#81    Esoteric Toad

Esoteric Toad

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 699 posts
  • Joined:04 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

  • Where does one get certified as an "Ancient Astronaut Theorist" or "Cryptozoologist"?

Posted 17 April 2013 - 04:11 PM

View Postbee, on 17 April 2013 - 04:07 PM, said:

and here, Frank is a perfect example of 'misrepresentation'....

the so-called 'sceptical' side of the fence do it all the time...

For the record, ET ( :w00t: )....one uses one's judgement at all times...about everything.


And anyway it was YOU who brought up the option of a Grand Conspiracy...I just responded to that.... :P



.

I only brought it up since, at least to me, there is plenty of real scientific evidence to dispel the OP and yet many will say that there is a cover up by all powerful agencies for whatever reason. Sorry, it is the nature of this forum. T


#82    supervike

supervike

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,214 posts
  • Joined:16 May 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 April 2013 - 04:18 PM

Other famous Arthurs.

Arthur C. Clarke
King Arthur
Arthur, that cartoon guy
Bea Arthur


#83    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,735 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 17 April 2013 - 04:18 PM

View Postflbrnt, on 17 April 2013 - 04:02 PM, said:

Edgar Rice Burroughs (I am a fan) based his Mars on the ideas of Percival Lowell. The Black Pirates of Barsoom did not come from a Martian Moon at all. That was a myth current among their victims.

cheers for that....




.


#84    S2F

S2F

    Bloodstained Hurricane

  • Member
  • 7,321 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Right behind you!

  • I know someday
    you'll have a beautiful life
    I know you'll be a sun
    In somebody else's sky
    But why can't it be mine? -Pearl Jam

Posted 17 April 2013 - 04:18 PM

View Postquillius, on 17 April 2013 - 04:07 PM, said:

I agree Slave, but doesnt assuming you are being told the truth instantly mean you are starting at the conclusion stage? I am suggesting that this works both ways and that nothing should be assumed.

Yes that's true however I believe (there's that word...dangit! ^_^ ) that all of the evidence will point toward the truth regardless of obfuscation (woohoo! vocabulary rocks! :lol:). That's also one of the reasons why I put testimony toward the bottom of the list of evidences. It is good though to question everything and fact check and verify everything possible, preferably with independent sources, that way you know where you stand at any point during research. :tu:

Edited by Slave2Fate, 17 April 2013 - 04:20 PM.

"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


#85    Esoteric Toad

Esoteric Toad

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 699 posts
  • Joined:04 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

  • Where does one get certified as an "Ancient Astronaut Theorist" or "Cryptozoologist"?

Posted 17 April 2013 - 04:22 PM

View Postquillius, on 17 April 2013 - 04:11 PM, said:

no the threads continue because not everyone accepts the 'proof' put forward. That doesnt stop the fact that if proof is supplied that shows we went to the moon then by default this disproves the conspiracy that we didnt,right? nbot saying everyone accepts this to be the case but nevertheless that is the end result.

' Proof for some is a cover-up for others'

I guess that depends on the proof

No, for the hardcore conspiracy theorist NO PROOF is enough. Everything becomes part of the cover-up. If you present proof that you cannot simply physically produce then you become part of the conspiracy or a patsy for the 'powers that be'.

For me there is plenty of evidence that verifies that we landed on the moon and that there are no buildings on Mars. Based on our understanding of the solar system and evolution in general it is unlikely advance lifeforms could have developed on Mars. While there is a chance I am wrong I am willing to bet on it. Unfortunately until we get boots on the ground there it will likely not be answer definitively and even then the next conspiracy will be did we land on Mars?

edited for punctuation.

Edited by Esoteric Toad, 17 April 2013 - 04:28 PM.


#86    S2F

S2F

    Bloodstained Hurricane

  • Member
  • 7,321 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Right behind you!

  • I know someday
    you'll have a beautiful life
    I know you'll be a sun
    In somebody else's sky
    But why can't it be mine? -Pearl Jam

Posted 17 April 2013 - 04:26 PM

View PostEsoteric Toad, on 17 April 2013 - 04:22 PM, said:

Unfortunately until we get boots on the ground there it will likely not be answer definitively and even then the next conspiracy will be did we land on Mars.

Imagine the kind of fake landing we could do in a movie studio today! How do we even know if there are any landers on Mars now, or ever have been???

That'll give the CT'ers something to chew on...

:devil:  :lol:

"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


#87    quillius

quillius

    52.0839 N, 1.4328 E

  • Member
  • 5,591 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LONDON

  • A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
    Albert Einstein

Posted 17 April 2013 - 04:29 PM

View PostEsoteric Toad, on 17 April 2013 - 04:22 PM, said:

No, for the hardcore conspiracy theorist NO PROOF is enough. Everything becomes part of the cover-up. If you present proof that you cannot simply physically produce then you become part of the conspiracy or a patsy for the 'powers that be'.

For me there is plenty of evidence that verifies that we landed on the moon and that there are no buildings on Mars. Based on our understanding of the solar system and evolution in general it is unlikely advance lifeforms could have developed on Mars. While there is a chance I am wrong I am willing to bet on it. Unfortunately until we get boots on the ground there it will likely not be answer definitively and even then the next conspiracy will be did we land on Mars?

edited for punctuation.

try this side of the fence and arguing in favour of the ETH lol


#88    quillius

quillius

    52.0839 N, 1.4328 E

  • Member
  • 5,591 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LONDON

  • A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
    Albert Einstein

Posted 17 April 2013 - 04:30 PM

View PostSlave2Fate, on 17 April 2013 - 04:26 PM, said:

Imagine the kind of fake landing we could do in a movie studio today! How do we even know if there are any landers on Mars now, or ever have been???

That'll give the CT'ers something to chew on...

:devil:  :lol:

we dont...we just 'assume' we are being told the truth :alien: :gun:


#89    quillius

quillius

    52.0839 N, 1.4328 E

  • Member
  • 5,591 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LONDON

  • A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
    Albert Einstein

Posted 17 April 2013 - 04:37 PM

View PostSlave2Fate, on 17 April 2013 - 04:26 PM, said:


:devil:  :lol:

sorry for being off topic for the briefest moment, S2F do you remember a couple of years back we discussed starting a thread where both sides would argue for the opposite...i.e. those in favour of and those against the ETH??


#90    Taun

Taun

    A dashing moose about town...

  • Member
  • 7,570 posts
  • Joined:19 May 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tornado Alley (Oklahoma)

Posted 17 April 2013 - 04:38 PM

ERB did not have any mystic or insider knowledge of Mars... As another poster stated, he was drawing off the descriptions of Mars as provided by Percival Lowell and designed a "lost culture" in the vien of H. Rider Haggard ("King Solomon's Mines", "She", etc) which were extremely popular at the time...

Do I wish that ERB's vision of Mars - his Barsoom was real and truly existed? Heck yes!... I read the books many times as a kid (still do occasionally) and I can't count the hours I've spent "on" Barsoom, and finding my own Dejah Thoris (still looking BTW)... But wishing or yearning for a fantasy is not the same as that place actually exisiting...  And we must be able to seperate our fantasies from reality...





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users