You've all heard of Ancient Astronaut Theory, the idea that extra-terrestrial lifeforms have at some point visited Earth and even influenced ancient civilizations. Well, out of interest, I wondered if it would be possible to track and make a record of what the aliens were up to. It seems to me that the first recorded visitation was in ancient Egypt. There are many examples of hieroglyphs, carvings and religious beliefs that depict other worldly beings and advanced technology interacting with the daily lives of the Egyptian people. Go to http://www.alien-ufo-pictures.com/ for an example of some of them. At the same site you can see examples of other civilizations depicting similar entities: the ones with enlarged heads and black, almond shaped heads. Why were these civilizations so similar in the way they depict these entities when they were so far apart?

Then there's the whole story of Jesus Christ. A being capable of performing miracles and communicating with an entity that dwelled in the sky. Some of what we can do today with our technology would undoubtedly seem like miracles to ancient people, and we can communicate to people that are far away whom we can't even see. Was Mary artificially inseminated by aliens? Were angels advanced beings with flight technology? There are even references in the Bible of UFO's with beings operating them. Look at http://www.bibleufo.com/. Then there is of course, to those not in denial of the clear facts, the advanced astronomical knowledge in the Bible that would require superior mathematics to decipher: the significance of the number twelve in reference to the zodiacs and the many links to the sun, details of which can be found in a free internet movie called Zeitgeist. Look it up at google video.


Then as far as I can tell the alien activity dramatically changed for some reason. Recordings of them visiting and influencing Earth cultures seemed to dwindle down to nothing more than the occasional UFO sighting or encounter, such as 'demon' visitations and other folkloric stories. Why? Did Earthlings attitudes towards them change, did we become too violent for the aliens to handle? Did something natural happen to our planet that forced them to leave, such as a disease? They clearly didn't leave and never return, they still to this day seem to have some interest in us and our planet.

Much of history is a mystery. Yeah that rhymes, so what, you want to fight about it? Anyway, history from an alien point of view is even more mysterious. You can't say there isn't evidence. Maybe not empirical evidence, but evidence that has not yet been debunked, such as ancient depictions of these beings. Why did the Egyptians want to carve strange beings onto the walls of their pyramids? Were they just bored? That seems unlikely what with all the other historical examples found with the Aztecs and others. Hell, even cavemen has drawn them on their caves with primitive paint. Why did the aliens come here, who was Jesus Christ really, why did they suddenly leave, and could any of this possibly be true? All very interesting questions.

PS. I know some of the sites I offered heavily feature opinion. If you don't want that, just focus on the (decent) pictures, Bible verses and facts. And also I'm an atheist and I have no interest in your religious interpretations of the Jesus Christ story. Please keep your invisible sky man and his magical super-son beliefs to yourself, I've heard them all before.

But Anonymous51, Aliens and God are one and the same: Imaginary.

Thanks, I never considered that. That really opens up a whole new road of thinking. Suspension of disbelief people! Besides AA theory does have more evidence than theology.

Theoretically -

If we had established ourselves on another planet the question could be what would make us pull out and leave?

If the home world was destroyed we would stay so that would not be it.
If a disease broke out we would solve it in time so that would not be it.
Life does not appear to be so plentiful on other planets that disinterest would set in so that could not be it.

The simplest and the most likely answer appears to me to be that we would have to be driven off by another group, and since we were already established there it would be unlikely that the natives would be the ones who could do it since our tech level could easily monitor them and detect communications and movements among them easily.

That only shows you have a fundamental error in your understanding of what history /is/. I'd correct that before you deign to start lecturing about it again.

--Jaylemurph

Alright then educate me and teach me all the historical facts you have about all the unexplained mysteries that there are that I'm sure you have the answers to.

Suspension of disbelief is great for fiction. And 0 evidence for AA is not greater than 0 evidence for theology.

...when I use to play pikmin after a while I got bored or tired or just beat the game and went and did something else, of course every now and then I return to play the game again. If they be existing and as ancient myth and or lore says they be immortal, well then repetition isn't really an option more like a neccessity, James P. Carse Infinite and Finite games, of course he was talking figuratively but I see no reason why it shouldn't apply to the real deal, off season for 'them', or the quiet before the storm, if your that long lived a few thousand years aint shiz nit...me, I believe and emphasises that point 'believe' that this age we are in that of actual civilization is the last stage before the game restarts.


the whynsos

ahaha yes, ET life isnt real. were alone. good one

The problem isn't facts. It's the interpretation of them, of placing them in a coherent context. That's what history is, and that's what you're not doing.

History is the is the interpretation of facts. Rather like science, if it comes across something that can't be explained conventionally, it doesn't try to. It doesn't invoke fantasy or devise theories that raise more questions than they answer. It just says "We don't know."

If you want to posit aliens helping civilisations because you don't understand how or why they did things or built things, that's fine. But it isn't history. It's called pseudo-history, and in my experience, it's consistently rooted in individuals too lazy to do the real, tedious work of history, spending hours in libraries, actually learning about ancient peoples, going to out of the way places to meet people and justifying their work through slow, educated processes.

I notice you haven't actually collected any data, nor done the hard work of coming up with your own, new descriptive theories. You've sort of lolled out a tired old concept (based on what -- third, fourth-hand recollections of the convicted fraud and admitted liar van Daniken?) and tried to pass it off as your own. I don't seen any of the real work of historians: answering questions like "Why would these aliens do these things?" or "How did they do these things?"

I'd go so far as to wager you're not actually au fait with the real historical and archaeological theories that already exist about any of the structures and peoples you talk about. How is it, then, you can claim things like "History is a mystery"?

--Jaylemurph

edit: grammar

Zeitgeist=alien in disguise ...ET phone matrix

ok every time this conversation comes up i hear the same old debunking aliens dont exist all the planets we have found dont have life ok how many planets have we found a hand full out of how many we are talking about billons and billions plus we can say the one,s we have found dont have life but have we been there no have we actualy seen its up close the fact is all of the planets we have found so far could have life of some kind and to say you know for a fact they dont is crazy

There's a huge difference between saying life on other planets exists and saying that life from other planets came here.

If, indeed, the grammatical morass above was suggesting alien life exists.

--Jaylemurph

I was thinking the same thing.

It sounds to me that 51 wasn't preaching, but rather asking questions as to what 'could be?'. Notice their minimal use of absolutes such as 'should' or 'would'. His or her curiosity is what fuels these interesting topics. Not your ability of using so many words to call them, a chump, for not knowing your text book definition of "History".

And yes, I'am aware, that I, like you, contributed nothing to this topic.

Pardon the punctuation.

this is an extremely high chance that there is some other life out there, therefore classified as aliens, think about it like this. We are in one solar system, we still have no idea about how many planets make up it yet. There are hundreds of thousands of solar systems in one galaxy. Galaxies can be single, or in galaxy clusters which consist of around 3 in each cluster, there are thousands of these. Ok, think about this, you're saying that we are the only thing of our like?

It's not the manner in which certain structures were built that I consider the mysterious part - I've seen interesting documentaries about how they were achieved with primitive technology - it's the depictions of these aliens on carvings and paintings that I consider the unusual part, especially when you consider that lots of civilizations, most of which were incapable of communicating at the time, have such similar accounts of them. As I said, very carefully to avoid confusion, I consider this evidence, but not empirical evidence, only evidence that hasn't been debunked. No-one has come up with a sufficient reason as to why these beings were depicted. Because, unlike in theology when many different types of gods and their descriptions are wildly different from each other, the Grey's seem to remain consistent.

And yes I'm not saying history did happen this way, only positing that if it possibly did then why?

the whynsos could not have said it better...

You need to have some basic understanding of a subject before you complain that it isn't working right. If you don't understand /how/ an answer was produced, it doesn't do much good to say you don't like that answer. That's all I see here. I certainly don't see people even lifting a finger to find out what the answers actually are, let alone trying to find out why they are that way.

--Jaylemurph

...are you directing that comment at me merely because I agreed with ghost fly or are you actually trying to imply individuals on this board should actually try "lifting a finger to find out what the answers actually are"? Man oh man this is amazing, . "If your submission is nothing more than an opinion based on what you have read, channelled, heard, experienced, then I cannot guarantee that you will even have your submission read, let alone replied to. Please send opinions to relevant internet discussion groups, where you will be warmly received. " from Duncan Roads, a magazine right up our alley way. Man even here we can't breathe easy... lol

...the whynsos top story, "we're at the bottom of seriousness and still can't get at least a smirk"

Yep. I generally think it's a good idea to know what you're talking about. Awfully gauche, I know, but knowledge is generally more useful than ignorance.

--Jaylemurph

this is interesting also there is the theory that WE are infact the descendants of ancient alien colonist who inserted the first basic single celled organisms into our oceans and evolution carried on from there

...oh I agree with you, but still think ghost fly made a valid point, hence the agreement on his behalf, so not quite sure what your getting at...being that were on a board of SPECULATION.

the whynsos uh oh time to make the do...

Ancient Sumer may also have been influenced by aliens, as well as the mysterious ways of the ancient egyptians. Although, after I have done years of research on ancient egypt on the agricultural side I have only read so much on the actual mysterious happenings and some theories. Though they are quite interesting, most of them are just bogus.

DUDE! If you believe all of that, then I implore you to download Rael's book 'Intelligent Design - Message from the Designers' (for free!) at www.rael.org

It will explain everything!

-Josh

again this is built upon assumptions and error logic with a side of ignorance. Primitave man, cave man, did have language and a social structure. Their pictures which don't show much more than stick drawings, that you consider aliens might as well be trees. The interpretation of the image is a relection of the viewer, not of actual imagery. Civilization did not become born, for about 8000-10000 years after those paintings were drawn, almost all ancient humans were small clans of familes. All evidence of any aliens, or any alien designers or starting of our civilization by aliens has be debunked thoroughly with logic. Those that can not attain that level of thought, have to decend to the elementary beliefs of some type of mysticism because they can not piece together their own reality.

the origin of the sumerian and more importantly the why start civilization as we know it there in the mid east has yet to be clearly answered leaving plenty of room IMHO for assumption even assuming "they"were being guided to do such.

The whynsos

It might be interesting to actually look at ancient sumeria, and see how the beginings of agriculture and animal husbandry was a first step in civilisation, rather than speculating from an uninformed standpoint.
We can easily see how the phenomenon was an evolutionary social process, and absolutely nothing to do with aliens.

all it takes is a little reading, im constantly baffled as to why folk spend hrs and hrs reading bogus theories about the subject, but refuse to actually look at the real evidence available....its as if its too boring or too much hassle, most folk just want to be spoon-fed fantastic tales.

Edit to add:

Which is why a thread like this, and say, the 2012 thread (you should check it out btw, certainly is an eye opener) will always attract more attention than one on Sumerian farming techniques, early settlements, early tools and their evolution, early record keeping and inventories etc.
No one really wants to know how they organised their society unless there are dragons or aliens involved, cracking the whip or instructing humans on tilling the soil.

The fact is people prefer the 'stargate' scenario than plain old reality. And so would prefer to listen to some charlatan who actually knows very little than to some professor who has studied the boring bits for 40+ years.

I have a little name for the situation shown here and described by Lil Gremlin. I call it Jaylemurph's Law: Just because you don't know an answer doesn't mean that answer doesn't exist.
As LG points out, should you be willing to do the slightest actual research into the development of civilisation, this idea that it magically started, or was at once so advanced fades away into fantasy. It's worth noticing you're not bringing to the table any evidence of this magic development. It looks a lot like you read the idea at third- or fourth-hand, bought it completely because it appealed to you, and never bothered to actually find out the truth of the matter.

--Jaylemurph

Has yet to be clearly answered? Or is it more fair to say that it has not been clearly researched by you. Is it really so hard to believe that humans can advance on their own?

actually I am somewhat inform on the subject and there are two facts that leads me to speculate about the sumerian

1) where they came from

2) why they choose the area they did to settle

these two things for me as I mentioned in a previous post allows for at least laymen to speculate on the matter because they haven't been convincingly answered.

the whynsos

Allow me to point out -- again -- that just because you don't know the answer doesn't mean there isn't one. To wit:

1) They were already there. As were the Egyptians, the Chinese, the people of the Indus valley for their respective civilisations. See below.

2) Because it was a nice place to live: it was a fairly temperate region; the grains that would eventually be tamed into agricultural products already grew there; there were rivers that flooded fairly regularly to enrich the soil and mark time; the same rivers brought fresh water for drinking and (later) irrigation and could be used for navigation, and consequently trade; their were plenty of animals for hunting; the nearby mountains weren't bad protection from other marauding tribes, and were a source of other natural resources like metals and jewels.

No mysteries there, unless you feel the need to invent them.

--Jaylemurph

...ok....http://worldhistory1a.homestead.com/SUMERIA.html

this is a preliminary cause I am at the library (my puter is on the fritz) and I can't get acess to my books on the subject at the time, and yeah I'm at the library, and I'm also pretty lazy...but you knew that...


quotes from the preliminary website address above to the attempted 1 2 you threw at me in your last post:

1) There are, however, more questions than answers. For instance, modern scholars have no idea where the Sumerians originated. We do know that the Sumerians were not the first inhabitants of the 'Land Between the Rivers.' The primary evidence that there were earlier inhabitants comes from the study of language, in much the same way that the names Chattahoochee, Tallapoosa, Etowah, Coosa, Kennesaw, Apalacheecola, and Alatoona indicate that those who now inhabit our own state were preceded by others. At present, the best scholarly guess is that the Sumerians came from the same area that would eventually give rise to the Indo-Europeans, though the Sumerian language does not appear to be related in any way to the Indo-European languages, or, for that matter, any other language that has ever been spoken on earth.

...interesting choice of wording I might add "...on earth" lol....ya gotta know my speculation is on over drive with that one

2a) The Sumerians occupied the lower half of the Tigris-Euphrates valley, roughly the area presently known as Iraq. It was an area about the size of Massachusetts and had a hot, dry, wind-swept climate. There were no trees, and therefore no timber. It would seem that the only natural resources were the silt-laden waters of the rivers and the huge reeds that grew in abundance along the river banks. For the resourceful Sumerians, however, this would prove to be sufficient.

...I for one am by no means insulting the sumerians and simply am rehashing what the EXPERTS, which aint me already know and simply speculating by saying that it appears to me that one would have to question why they would go to this area, beautiful to look at maybe but on a survival level, uh, ya gotta have some drive regardless of how intelligent ya are cause ya can't do it alone. Maybe, you can speculate on that for me....

2b) To begin, contrast the Tigris-Euphrates valley with the Nile, the cradle of Egyptian civilization. The Nile was predictable. Though it flooded, it flooded with regularity, at the same time and with basically the same intensity every year. As we will see next class, this predictability is the key to understanding the longevity as well as the static nature of Egyptian civilization.

The flooding of the Tigris and the Euphrates, on the other hand, was violent and irregular, hence the mental life of the Mesopotamian civilizations became dominated by a sense of anxiety. The world was unpredictable and capricious, bringing life-giving rain and fertility one day and devastating destruction the next.

So technically I didnt invent any mysteries, they arose themselves due to lack of knowledge about the sumerians which I originally said. There is the link, and there are tons of websites, I have books at home so as we, if we continue this, I will be able to give more precise info and the book and author and such.

the whynsos to dols....



I am fairly up on the sumerian subject mainly cause of sitchin... because he is one sided. I did what alan alford said and read other works and found alot of things the sitchin man left out thus able to speculate my own thoughts, which are just that speculations ya dig...actually I'm surprise you posted what you did but I'm sure you got something up that sleeve...

When we settle Mars and later some other planets .. we too will be aliens..

If we can do it ... why can't others from other planets...

We see Mars.. the Moon and other planets as great mining opportunities...




we are already cheekily selling real estate for land on Mars and the Moon...

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/myst...day_040202.html



...Now just think of there are already advanced civilizations living subteraneanously .. we'll have to negotiate mining rights... if there are simple civilizations there... we can come as Gods... advance beings from another planet and help them along a little while we help ourselves to their resources...... we may even set up an embassy or two on these planets.. near the the best mining sites ...

We may even help/get the people of the planet build them for us.. and perhaps loan them some of our tools to speed things up..
Who knows .. some of the Earthlings may even grow rather fond of those from the mining planets and perhaps have a fling or two.. or hook up permanently... may even take some home and show them our planet!! We may even share our knowledge with them.. teach them about our planets.. our religious spiritual beliefs..perhaps help rearrange their social strata... dabble in their politics... Later once a base is established some rival companies will arrive try and get their share... some will try harsher methods... there may be some shonky business dealings... some poachers.... conflict could arise...We may bring forces to contain these infractions...


Wow that so sounds like those ancient stories of Gods from the stars... heavens!!!!

Ancient Mining

http://www.socarchsci.org/bulletin/9809/9809b.htm
http://www.atthecreation.com/wis.anc/%20cu.mines.html


http://s8int.com/sophis20.html

As fast as possible trenches were dug at Lions Cavern. The first dig produced a date of 7690 BC. This shifted back to 20 000 BC and finally came to rest at 40,000 BC. These dates are eons before man had officially discovered the metallurgical techniques necessary to utilize the ore for making iron.


http://www.novelguide.com/a/discover/aneu_...u_01_00074.html

I'm not sure where you're getting your facts from. It's from that odd little site you mention above (worldhistory1a.homestead), you need to be a little more thorough, and always taken with a grain of salt a site that doesn't give its sources.

The Sumerians, in their own mythology, tell of coming from a a bit further north, from something called the Sammara civilisation. This precedes the pre-historic period immediately before Sumerians called the Ubaid period. Despite your website's claims (which don't have anything to substantiate them), I'm not aware of any evidence of anyone being in what would later be called Mesopotamia, nor am I aware of any toponyms that predate the Sumerian language.
And I'm not sure what you're getting at by suggesting "Sumerian is not related to any other language in the world." That's not that odd. There are several language isolates around the world; implying unearthly origin is just indulging fantasy.

--Jaylemurph

Yeap you figured it out Rocket propelled Cavemen in space. Sounds like a great title for a B movie. Of course man is too damn stupid to figure out how to make a mud brick or that seeds from local grasses can be planted to create a harvest. Good thing to jump to the idea that we were genetically engineered, slave labor or were shown how to do the most mundane stuff. And to make this leap of judgement with no facts or evidence to substantiate your claims but rather a ludicrous theroy with the complete lack of logic.

...now were just getting started...

first...remember this in my previous post: this is a preliminary cause I am at the library (my puter is on the fritz) and I can't get acess to my books on the subject at the time, and yeah I'm at the library, and I'm also pretty lazy...but you knew that...
quotes from the preliminary website address above to the attempted 1 2 you threw at me in your last post:

...yeah I had a feeling you would call basic knowledge about sumer from a "odd little site"...wow a little to predictive. Any who first lets stick with web sites before we go to two books I have as sources (and all this just so I can speculate, but hey don't complain about a flood if in the dessert ).

...remember all I originally stated was that
1)the sumerians origin is in question or technically the "blackheaded ones", because it isn't known where they exactly originated and
2)questioning "why" they would settle in such a harsh environment especially one where they did not orginate from.

http://www.sron.nl/~jheise/akkadian/mesopotamia.html While the topic on geography doesn't have links, the many links to books that further ones knowledge

"The Tigris is rough and fast flowing. The upper course in particular is difficult to pass. The river cuts deep in the surrounding land and the water flow can hardly be used for irrigation.
The Euphrates is a lifeline. It can more easily be used by ships. The banks are lower, suitable for irrigation, with less violent floods. Precipitation in the mountains to the north is large and rainfall-agriculture is possible.

and

Euphrates vs. Nile delta. The Euphrates reaches its highest water levels at the end of March to the beginning of May, the Tigris a few weeks earlier. In both cases the crops are already growing on the field. The river flood can only be used for agriculture when the fields are shielded by a system of dams, dikes and canals. This contrasts with the Nile in Egypt. High water in the Nile are a result of the summer monsoon in Central Africa and has is highest water levels in September-October. The Nile fertilizes the land in the autumn and the crops can grow in (early) spring when no floods occur. Moreover the Nile, fed by rivers in a large area, has a more constant flow and carries the soluble salts and lime into the sea. The Euphrates is more easily prone to salination"

again this brings to question why anyone would settle there to begin with. We know the lands beyond the Nile were barren, but along the nile fairly regular and predictable. The Euphrates less severe but still severe more so then the Nile, but I am sure ya can read that here....

Next: "The origin of the Sumerians is unknown. The intriguing question keeps returning into the literature but has so far unsatisfactory answers. The Sumerians were not the first people in Mesopotamia. They were not present before 4000 BCE, while before that time village communities existed with a high degree of organization. "

Of course ya like trusted works so here is one of the two I have with author and book name and page citation as well:

Religion in Ancient Mesopotamia by Jean Borttero page 8 fourth paragraph second sentence reads, "We are still unable, and there is very little chance that we ever will be able, to satisfactorily identify this population, whose origins are so murky, or to link it to an ethnic, cultural, or linguistic branch of any kind."

The Sumerians Their History, Culture, and character by Samuel Noah Kramer (only one of the formost sumerian scholars) page 42 second paragraph first sentence reads, "Be that as it may, it is highly probable that the Sumerian themsleves did not arrive in Sumer until sometime in the second half of the fourth millennium B.C. Just where their original home was is still quite uncetain.

also from the same book, that original post that talks about the climate and geography of sumerians comes from this book, page 3 first paragraph third sentence reads, "Its climate is extremely hot and dry, and its soil, left to itself, is arid, wind-swept, and unproductive. The land is flat and river-made, and therefore has no minerals whatever and almost no stone. Exept for the huge reeds in the marshes, it had no trees for timber."


Jaylemurph said: "I'm not sure where you're getting your facts from."
This is where I am getting my facts from... here- http://www.sron.nl/~jheise/akkadian/mesopotamia.html

here- Religion in Ancient Mesopotamia jean bottero and
here- The Sumerians samuel noah kramer

Jaylemurph said: "you need to be a little more thorough, and always taken with a grain of salt a site that doesn't give its sources."

...I think this is a lazy thorough but sufficient for this board

Jaylemurph said: "And I'm not sure what you're getting at by suggesting "Sumerian is not related to any other language in the world." That's not that odd. There are several language isolates around the world; implying unearthly origin is just indulging fantasy. "

uh remember I didn't say it I just quoted it, this is used as evidence by sumerologist to show the sumerians where not from this area, in fact the names of their towns and such aren't even sumerian, semitic, or of any known language. Indulging in speculation with a sprinkle of fantasy my friend remember that where this all started from....



...uh now a question for you where are your sources and or citations and or links for this:

1) They were already there. As were the Egyptians, the Chinese, the people of the Indus valley for their respective civilisations. See below.

2) Because it was a nice place to live: it was a fairly temperate region; the grains that would eventually be tamed into agricultural products already grew there; there were rivers that flooded fairly regularly to enrich the soil and mark time; the same rivers brought fresh water for drinking and (later) irrigation and could be used for navigation, and consequently trade; their were plenty of animals for hunting; the nearby mountains weren't bad protection from other marauding tribes, and were a source of other natural resources like metals and jewels.

that is from your post right?

The whynsos just cause things flow don't mean you gonna go anywhere

hey Tommyo, you refering to me as well, ah man not you too? Let me breathe for a moment see if I can get the puter working and get back at ya...

man do people not know what speculation is or what....

the whynsos be back shortly

speculation is one thing, but to insult the human race that we are too damn stupid to figure out basic fundimentals of our reality or the world around us is tiring and VERY annoying. Especially when the speculation goes against every known fact and evidence out there. Your straw man arguement of the origins of the Sumarians is weak. They basically dont know wheather the tribes of the area united, were conquered in a tribal conflict or if a local force, that became organized, invaded the area and conquered the lands. This is basically all minutia. The basic premise of this is that the peoples were of the area and that they earned their spot in history as most do. With brains, blood and sweat. All that without Jar Jar Binks coming down and showing us how to make a mud brick or how to pick our noses.

(I bring up the mud brick being that this was likely the cornerstone of civilization, from the mud brick we realized that we could make more structures from other materials forming a similar design with the bricks, and viola! you have stone homes, wood homes, etc. Also with this was probably the invention of basic geometry, thus growing upon itself over millenia's, all the way up to current day.

Genetic Engineering In Ancient Times???????
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/14765












http://openseti.org/OSAppendix.html

the whynsos

oh yeah and where did I say anything about aliens, I believe I said something along the lines of "the origin of the sumerian and more importantly the why start civilization as we know it there in the mid east has yet to be clearly answered leaving plenty of room IMHO for assumption even assuming "they"were being guided to do such."

I read...very well I might add....

I'm waiting for you to cite some actual evidence of these people, not a passing reference of someone else talking about them. You know: names, village names, village locations, scholars working on them. I've already discussed the precursors to Sumerian civilisation and where they came from; none of sources (quid viz.) make any mention of these people.



I had no idea The Netherlands Institute for Space Research was such a respected bastion of Sumerian history/pre-history. It looks a lot like you've stumbled on someone's personal webpage -- the astrophysicist John Heise's, to be specific -- and are taking that as gospel. I might do the same for questions on X-Ray astronomy, but not on his history.



I think the above says enough about that.



Your history is specious enough for me to tell you that you *really* don't want to argue historical linguistics with me. Really. Especially if you want to try a little "sprinkle of fantasy" in it.



Oh all right:

1) Egypt. China. Indus Valley.

All three of these links provide a discussion for people who lived in these areas before the emergence of their individual civilisations.

2) This article is a pretty thorough discussion of climate in the area over the last few thousand years, with a definite pitch towards pre-Sumerian development. It mentions all the topics I did.

--Jaylemurph

1) I am talking about sumerian you brought up the other three and still have not shown any work about the sumerians, glad ya got links on the others but that wasn't what I ORIGINALLY posted about so lets stay on one topic shall we...if it isn't to much of a bother. I listed three well ya don't like the website, so I listed two books that clearly are in agreement(with the two websites I might add) as to the sumerians not being from the mid east where they eventually started civilization as we know it....I have more if ya like, oh I have more, would ya like more? Sometimes more isn't always good and if that makes sense to ya then I'll definitely be posting more sources. Hey again if these sources are out of date, just show me were such info or cite such info so I can look it up...Im game with spare time (that I should be studying for school, but is cool)

2) nice article, but uh kinda missing something like a rebuttal of what the two citations Religion in Mesopotamia, and The Sumerians source indicate about the geography and climate at the time when the sumerians appeared in other words what did they see when they got there and their origin whereabouts. Remember cause I do, you said something along the lines of it is a nice place to live, didn't see that in your link, although to be fair maybe you was speaking from the sense of a nice place to live after the sumerians moved there and established themselves...Ohhhh, now it makes sense . Lets see the soil being enriched, didn't see that in your link, um, the rivers being navigable, uh didn't see that in your link. These are major statments you made that you did not provide in the link there, and yes I read it and it postulates that there were indeed people there before the emergence of the sumerian civilization and postulate that perhaps civilization goes back further but those people, were semetic, not the black headed people who didn't speak semetic, the sumerians...here I'll do it for you and post it..."There fore we may ask the following questions: 1)Was there a beginning of civilization at the same time or even earlier then that in the Piedmont area?" if I picked the wrong, pick right

honestly I'm laughing here, ya picked one of my sources an internet cite that has links to other viable sources and attacked the website for what, being multitalented? not the info it provides, uh, ya made no mention of the two books I cited, hmm, ya talked about egyptian and chineses and some one else who I'm really to lazy to scroll up and look at and still my post is there (and yes I'm lazy but ya already knew that), and my citation are there citing what I orginally said, that the origins of the sumerian people that is to say the blackheaded ones are unknown and that one can question WHY they would settle where they settled due to the inhospitable area and create and maintain not just a civilization but one that boost over 100 first. Jaylemurph ya know what we need, I was thinking about this after my last rebuttal...We need a referee....

the whynsos maybe I don't see, maybe you don't see, but this here... E see...in fact I think 2 E see clearly 2 E see

...yes it's true, reading is fundamental.

I am a strong believer that humans can advance on their own, I'm in school right now for Medical Assistant and am advancing fairly well thank you. But back to this, I don't see anywhere I said that humans can't advance on their on...simply that there are things yet to be fully understood in regards to the sumerians in which because of lack of knowledge one such as a lay men on a board where speculation is prevelant can indeed speculate about such things that have yet to be clearly answered. No fuss, no tuss, not even a slight groan...

the whynsos

Bravo.......

...I think what baffles me is what is assmued that was posted rather then what was posted. To be fair there is disagreement about the two statements I made...but this book Ancient Iraq by George rux clearly states there are two camps divided in the archeological study of Sumer. But none of this negates a simple made point, as of today there is no consensus or clear cut ans to the origin of the Sumerians and why they would choose "there" to start the first civilization, leaving open the possibility to speculate these things till such things are at the very least agreed upon by the majority of sumerologist. Here ain't real or significant its speculation my fellow posters, and that's what I'm doing.

The whynsos

...see I like individuals who have and utilize their imagination...keeps the topic flowing so smoothly don't ya agree

the whynsos

and the answer is a simple philosophical one. Why not?

by no means am I insulting you, but I think ur missing the point I came from. Its precisely the reasons are unknown that i speculate. Now maybe it was philosophical but y do u think that?

The whynsos

Anonymous,

Why do you subject this board to "evidence" (see below) that is known to be fabricated by a thieving, unscrupulous conman?



The above picture - taken from page 2 of the site you linked - is of the Lolladoff plate, an "ancient" depiction of a ufo and an alien that was commissioned by Erik VonDaniken and created by a potter he paid in order to buttress his ridiculous claims of ancient astronaut visitation.

The plate's creator was tracked down in the 1970's by the BBC and presented on the BBC "Horizons" program (later shown in the USA on PBS's "Nova") in an episode called "The Question of the Ancient Astronauts" (or some similar title.)

When confronted by the BBC with the potter's statement that VonDaniken had paid him to create the plate, VonDaniken admitted the fraud. His excuse? "People won't believe me without some evidence.

Before you go on, I suggest you find yourself a new source.

Harte