I just found this site about how man could be far older then anyone thinks. Its pictures of fossiles and greek artwork showing men fighting actual dinasaurs. It dont take long to read all the links but it poses questions as well.

http://www.geocities.com/tasosmit2001/millionyears.htm

A secondary link I am putting forth shows prof that Daedalus (father of Icarus) actually built a flying machin. It also shows flying models in the pyrimds of egypt.

http://www.geocities.com/tasosmit2001/flyi...ying%20machines

Enjoy!

[QUOTE] "Now! This is it! Now is the time to choose! Die and be free of pain or live and fight your sorrow! Now is the time to shape your stories! Your fate is in your hands!" -Auron

dragon, interesting theory and links but i think fossil evidence shows that the dinosaurs were long gone before we stepped foot on the planet. i dunno though, i try not to trust a belief too much, as that can be dangerous.

hmm i just got done reading those links...boy that IS interesting. kinda creepy though...as this does in a way support the theory that the human race has blasted itself back into the stone age before! i come to this conclusion because of the shoe. i dont know when humans started wearing shoes, but i think it was probably way after the stone age. really cool, interesting link dragon.

As usual in this type of article, both credentials and references are sorely lacking, so I have to go with conventional knowledge and what is actually presented. As far as the vases go, I can't really find anything too remarkable about them. After all, these are people who had an incredibly rich mythology full of chimeric creatures, and that a couple of them resembled what we believe to be what dinosaurs looked like is almost inevitable. Considering how many pictures of harpies are around, why aren't these people claiming that this is proof they existed?

Several of the fossil prints have already (and by this I mean about twenty years ago) been proven to be mistaken dinosaur prints. The Ica stones are outright forgeries, done by locals (my father is from Peru; it's pretty much an open secret thing for tourists down there). Also significant is that all the pictures of dinosaurs are the ones you find in the periods comic books, many representations which are now known to be incorrect.

Never heard about the Daedelus story. Since I have no way of researching the validity of the claim, and haven't found any references on it in any of the academic archeological journals, I'm inclined to believe there isn't a whole lot of corroborating evidence.

good point aquatas1...though that fossil of the shoe coudl be convincing...although it could just be a rock shaped like a foot that fell....

That is an interesting link. I'll read it another time and will get back with some comments

Test*

i think ill stick with fossil evidence too!

it only seems logical, although i think these theories are great ways of expanding the thought process!

this looks nothing like a dinosaur.

be careful... it might be just some untruthful hoax. you know.

I have a subscription to Discover Magazine and there was the most intersting article in it regarding this topic:

Discover Dialogue: Anthropologist Robert Martin
Man of Apes Resets Clock of Evolution
Did our primate ancestors make their debut during the age of the dinosaurs?


Anthropologist Robert Martin is provost of academic affairs and curator of biological anthropology at the Field Museum in Chicago. He has devoted his life to studying the biology and evolution of primates as a basis for understanding human origins. His textbook, Primate Origins and Evolution, established standard thinking in the discipline. But his latest thinking is that humans, as well as other mammals and birds, evolved far earlier than previously thought.

Why even bother to study evolution?

M: A lot of people say, “Well, what’s the point, you know? You reconstruct the evolutionary tree for primates and humans, but so what?” And my justification for that is it’s like history. In the same way that we’re interested in our cultural history, looking at our biological history is a valuable thing to do. It helps us understand human society today by giving us parameters to evaluate our biological and cultural selves. For example, it can tell us that race and gender differences in brain size are unrelated to intelligence.

So when did human life begin?

M: A better question is: When did the line leading to all modern primates diverge from other mammals? The classic story is that all modern mammal groups started to develop no more than 65 million years ago, after the end of the Cretaceous Period, when a probable meteorite impact led to a major extinction in which all the dinosaurs died. The standard explanation is that the evolution of the modern groups of mammals and birds didn’t get under way until after that. If you go to a paleontologist and ask, “When do you think the primates started?” the paleontologist will say, “Well, the earliest fossil we can find that’s definitely a primate is 55 million years old. So if we add a few million years as a safety margin, we can assume that primates evolved about 60 million years ago.”

But you say that’s wrong?

M: I was looking at bats, and it occurred to me that when you first find bats 55 million years ago, they look just like modern bats. All their key characteristics are developed. And so I suspected that things must go back further than that, unless you just believe they somehow popped into existence. So I got together with a mathematician and two graduate students, and we developed a model where we take the number of living species of primates along with all the fossil forms in time slices, and then repeatedly fit randomly branching trees following certain basic rules to estimate when the common ancestor emerged. And the answer is that the common ancestor of primates probably appeared about 20 million years earlier than people thought. So it’s closer to 85, not 65, million years ago.

Anthropologists are fond of pointing out that, despite what we see in the movies, dinosaurs and humans did not exist at the same time. But you’re saying primates were running around in the age of dinosaurs?

M: I’m not sure whether they were actually running around alongside the dinosaurs. All we can say is that they existed at the same time. But they may not necessarily have occurred in the same areas. There have been suggestions that modern mammals and birds evolved in upland areas, cooler areas, and that’s why birds and mammals developed control of their body temperatures. So it’s possible that these early relatives of modern mammals evolved in cooler, upland areas and that the dinosaurs were in the hotter, lowland areas. So they probably were around at the same time, but they didn’t necessarily see each other.

What did that first primate look like?

M: Our suggestion is that 85 million years ago, you had a creature weighing about two pounds that was tree living, with grasping hands and feet, large, forward-facing eyes, and probably a relatively big brain. In short, it looked like a modern primate. In recent years, molecular biologists have produced evidence that primates diverged from other mammals 90 million years ago and began to diversify at least 80 million years ago, so both of us are saying the same thing: You have a recognizable primate well back in the Cretaceous Period.

Why does 20 million years matter?

M: It suggests that primates could have originated in the landmass composed of India and Madagascar, not in Africa. At least 130 million years ago, Indo-Madagascar separated from Africa. More than 40 million years later, Madagascar broke off from India, which continued on its merry way until it collided with Asia about 60 million years ago. A few million years after that, fossil primates abruptly appear in Asia, Europe, and North America. There’s an emerging theory called the Indian ark hypothesis that says India carried with it a whole bunch of plants and animals. Primates couldn’t have been part of this if they evolved as late as is believed. I am looking for Cretaceous primate fossils in India to test my hypothesis.

FULL ARTICLE LINK

Well this is the way I look at it. When you watch or read about discovering dinosaur bones that 65 million years old. They talk about how hard it is to find a complete intact skeleton. Now this is where I think or bone diggers and people who don't want to deal with the fact that we were here for most of the time the earth has been livable, because they don't want to go along with any type of religion that says the world was created for us and afterlife and all that. They over look something they say all the time I mean it is said so much that I can't beleive nobody seems to bring up. If it is hard to find a complete skeleton that hasn't deteriated that is 50 feet tall how do expect to find a skeleton of something that is 5'7" tall. To my recolition they found an old skeleton that dated older than anything found before and it was peices incomplete and couldn't even tell if it were man or woman. Now you add a couple million years to that same skeleton I garruntee it won't be found.Heres a little hypothisis to play out and if you can answer it more power to you. If something were to happen like a meteor or all volcanos including yellowstone blows up. Say 90% of all humanity is distroyed how long will it take to make a camera thats in a phone thats only 2" big or a computer. When your life is threatened or in this case the very existence of humanity are you going to be worried about inventing or surviving. If you look at any ancient civilisations inventions didn't come until there was stability and all instructions to how they were built are not found but all their other writing is. Which to me is proof that something happened to make whoever was left in the area didn't have the knowledge of construction therefore caring out those tasks were not important to them but survival was and when it gets stable again we build again but with a different technology everytime. My proof for my theory is theres pyramids all different, cities all different and to this day any time a structure is built it is different from another that is similar. Even if it is something like all houses in this area were made of brick now their made out of wood and stucco. To me nobody can answer my questions because they're closed minded and act as if they know but when it all comes down to it nobody knows or it wouldn't be a mystery. You can have all the degrees in the world if you set out to prove specific theory how can you get the big picture by looking in a corner. The reason is for years we have said we were stupid monkeys incapable of great acheivements. But thats only because we compare the past with the present the way of thinking is different as for life agendas. Just imagine if something crazy happened and the scenario I gave a little while ago happened 5000 years later someone found a intact national inquire paper what would be said.I could see it now "paper found proving existence of man thousands of years ago writing unable to be translated but pictures shows men use to give birth"

If you haven't read it already you might find works by Micheal Cremo interesting.

My proof for my theory is theres pyramids all different, cities all different and to this day any time a structure is built it is different from another that is similar.
uhuh
all different right
http://www.geocities.com/dolph322000/
you were saying something about your proof ....................?

Cool link Marduk. More stuff I had never seen before. I believe the temples at Ankor would also fit right in.

The problem with the fossil record is the fact that everytime someone finds an anomaly, it has to be excluded because it has no supporting evidence.... This thinking boggles my tiny brain.

Controversy is just to scary for most folk.

I get what you're saying,
but there are anomalies in everything
take the piri reis map for instance.
the antartic coastline isn't really as accurate as many make out, and it may indeed be the coastline of argentina indicating that the map was copied from earlier source maps that weren't too hot on longitude or latitude.
That makes a lot more sense than saying its a leftover from an advanced pre ice age race.
But people still do.
There are about three other maps puported to show the same thing,
butthen consider the millions and millions of maps from that period that don't show what looks like the antartic coastline. Even maps of the world exist before Piri Reis that show no southern continent whatsoever.
Anomolies in other words have many explanations, some more mundane than others.
We as Human beings discount the boring stuff in favour of the fantastic.
We'd rather aliens than ourselves.
The fossil record is very incomplete as far as hominids go. but theres no room for aliens teaching us anything since we left the caves. no sudden leaps in technology.
just a few batteries here and there and occaisonally an old astrolabe.
And recently, even the batteries were stolen.
Civilisation started in a linear fashion.
we're just starting to see the evidence today that links it all together.

I can agree with your point on the maps, human created anomalies can be real, fake, accidental, misperception, any number of things. However there are a few things encased in stone that should not be, things not just made by intelligent hands but part of the earths strata. To me these create an issue not easily resolved. Either something strange happened there, or our geological dating system is a bit whacked, or each and every one of those is hoaxed. Only time will tell, or not

marduk: The fossil record is very incomplete as far as hominids go. but theres no room for aliens

The fossil record is very incomplete as far as every creature goes . . . and always will be. The plain fact is that organisms only become fossilized when buried fairly deep shortly after they die, or when being buried is the cause of death. Humans are the only ones I know of that purposely bury their dead. Oh, a bone or two might be buried by animals on occasion, and thus fossilize, but this hardly results in anywhere a reasonable record.

perhaps whatever left all that strange stuff was martians..at one time there was lakes on mars meaning there is the possibility of life.

they coulda came down here to do experiments and leave messesges that they were here.. like those huge pictures of insects and stuff.. stone henge spheres

Huge pictures of Insects ?
eh ?
wheres that then ?
And what message would you be giving by drawing a huge insect anyway ?
watch out for huge insects ?

[QUOTE]take the piri reis map for instance.
the antartic coastline isn't really as accurate as many make out, and it may indeed be the coastline of argentina



See thats what I'm talking about instead of taking in a possibility it scares them inside. It's true it's not an exact match but there is alot of good reasons why. But people just dismiss because it's not an exact match. Reason 1 you are the only one who has a xerox machine for when you need to make a map duplicate that will come out exactly the same I could see it now kinkos founed 800 b.c. Reason 2 the topography map made only helps shed light on the coastline but it is not exact because you don't know where they and when the map was created. There is more proof in the fact that everyone knows antartica slid down there skid marks for christ sake. Then there is the possibility that the map could have been made when it was in one of these spots along the way. Do you also think that peices of the land wouldn't fall off while sliding through the ocean. Remember all people like that have is a majority shared view they also lack the proof that we weren't alive way back and that we weren't hairy monkeys then either. You basically are saying you trust the minds of men who would change things because of the fear of being ridiculed and never having a job again over a view.Look at Albert Einstein discovered black matter in the universe but threw it out because it went against their beliefs. But it does exist.

So you think the piri reis map was made by aliens ?

looks like somethin out of marduks closet

I call this item
how did the Mayans know about Walt Disney ?
cos mickey mouse is sitting under the seat

Walt Disney was the real Quatzecoatl, who is entombed cryogenically.

The last time i checked the locals tradition i discovered that quetzlcoatl may very well be this fella

everything fits
the beard
the robe
the colour
the cranberry sauce

Did I say anything about aliens. As far as aliens go anyone smart enough to travel throughout the entire galaxy or universe pulls up to this planet and builds something short of I am nemo from mars. All I am saying is man is alien to himself. Did you get sad that the best thing you could come up with is aliens I'm talking about us not 4' tall grey guy with bug eyes. Look the truth of the fact is there is all these relegions out there and they all suggest that we were ceated after the animals to govern them and we did something stupid to get kicked out realize we can make people work for us and give them chump change compared to what we get. Dinosaur bones started being dated and the millions of years freaked out alot of people. I met one religous man and because of the timeline he believed in he said dinosuars were a fraud because man was made in the begining and so it wasn't millions of years ago only thousands. So to him all this stuff is fake. Which it isn't fake it just needs to be put together. If you only respond to whats infront of you how can you see whats around you? Make fun of quetzlcoatl but to this day you can travel to different parts of the country and display magic through technnology and amase people. Why aren't these people building computers or cars? You seem to have been technology pampered so much that you think of the past with eyes of the future. If it were 20,000 years from now in the past what would be your goal of invention. You only invent where laziness thrives. Think of everything you have today and ask yourself what is this for. 9 out of 10 times it will be something that makes it easier for you to do. Cell phones all that information in the palm of your hand and why there is a market for it some moron said I wish people could get ahold of me no matter where I go now you think you left work for your house and who calls when your half way home work. The A-bomb it blows up everything enough of them set off in one spot will blow the earth off it's axis ya you need a bomb that big.But see 20,000 years ago what would be getting built. It's certainly not a cell phone. When it all comes down to it you still haven't gave me proof that we were not around. Heres a thought you lose your keys to the car in a studio apartment, there is junk everywhere do you A: look down in bare spots and figure that the keys are not in there because you have not yet found them or B: tear the place apart until they are found.Knowing you will probably get your ignition rekeyed! I do apologize if this doesn't make any sense figuring i keep having to wake myself up.

"there is all these relegions out there and they all suggest that we were ceated after the animals to govern them and we did something stupid to get kicked out"
i'm pretty sure thats only one or two religions like that.
And i was asking you which aliens were responsible
i know that the piri reis map was made by humans
He was a turkish Guy, something to do with the Navy iirc
haha
can't rememeber his name though .
can you

It's not an exact match for Australia, Alaska or Zanzibar either........

Fact is: if item A looks nothing like item B, and item B was unknown to the maker of item A, then the likelihood is that item A does not depict item B

That's called common sense.....

Yes I agree. I like his other idea better
Antartica is bound to slip around across the worlds oceans because its made of ice and the Piri reis map could have been made at any point in its journey.
so when it was mapped as you say it was both uncovered with ice cos it was mapped and it was also covered with ice cos it was so slippy
Perfect logic if you ask me
i have a headache
Mr Spock must be literally spinning in his grave right now
I was completely unaware as well that nobody knows who made the piri reis map or where it was made
So that Turkish Admiral (still can't remember his name) Must have lied when he said that he put it together from older maps.
See i knew they decapitated him for something

excuse me....that is where it goes.
Some anti evolutionist activist trys to proof the evolution teory is wrong by any means..including fakeing up fossile evidence and writing nonsence

First the basis of the evolution: what is evolution? it is the cappability of a organism to adapt the enviroment. The organism will always try to adapt and do better than the past generation.
The observation against evolution are interesting but uintil now nothing serious have shown up. Must of those people try to disporove human descent by the apes (the ape in hte mind of some ppl are not a nobel animal)but beisee the fossile evidence and the dna studies even and I say EVEN if one day we understand we are not close related by apes it will not "destroy" the evolution teory.
If a animal didnt develop any significant changes during he eons it doesent mean the teory is wrong, but only the creature has found the optimal lifeform to survive in that and similar enviroment.

I see it sad to see people start a contest to disprove a nice teory...but why?
Of course they should be place for scientific debate...but IT MUST BE based on science and not nonsence.

About Piri Reis...the sea is not a invalicable barrier..the sea is more like a highway.
Give me now a good reson why humans should not have sailed to america and beyond before Columbus?
If they could reach America they could surely reach Antarktis...Piri Reis surely have bought the map from some arab sailors.
But im sure Columbus new about the territories on the other side of the ocean...he was a captain with many years of experience...he knew that there should be something outhere and maybe he has been there before who know.

"man older then we think?, are we older then every one says?"
well i am
i'm 35 but don't look a day over 30

Now I know why, you are a kid. I know the human leveraging paradigm for your age group...that is why you are as you are. I will cut some slack in favor of your youth.

don't cut me anything Ron my I Q is not normal for a 35 year old.
Just show me some new evidence i havent seen before
I may seem antagonsitic at times
But i have a real thirst for new information
You maybe need to start providing some
so far the best youve come up with is 20 year old daniken
thats not even close
ask yourself the same question
is daniken a good source ?
I completely agree that hes a great guy and i love him because he makes us think
One thing he has never made me think though is that any of his claims are credible