Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 19
Neem

Ancient Astronaut Theory

1,941 posts in this topic

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? :lol::tu:^_^

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaimanika_Shastra

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_astronaut_theories

Edited by The Dancing Bear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am open-minded. :tu:

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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? :lol::tu:^_^

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaimanika_Shastra

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_astronaut_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)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. w00t.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alien.gifJust 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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

alien.gifJust 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.

No, like I said earlier, History Channel is a poor source of information. It's pop history, and while it's not always incorrect, it usually glosses over a good deal within the confines of the show.

And faux news and the MiStakeN broadcasting channel are roughly the same, comedy stations give you a better trend of current events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

alien.gifJust 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.

Wouldn't use them either!

Use academic journals for information regarding science and history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Didn't you read what I said? None of them predate the Gisa pyramids, they were built by the aliens before there were any humans, regardless of what the dating shows. KB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't you read what I said? None of them predate the Gisa pyramids, they were built by the aliens before there were any humans, regardless of what the dating shows. KB

Actually they do.

Why would explains build so inexpertly exactly?

I can only hope you are doing all this for a laugh Kenny, I'm very scared if you are serious.

And it is Giza btw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't you read what I said? None of them predate the Gisa pyramids, they were built by the aliens before there were any humans, regardless of what the dating shows. KB

So you DO doubt the dating methods then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you DO doubt the dating methods then?

If they're not the same as Sitchin's, they're wrong. KennyB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually they do.

Why would explains build so inexpertly exactly?

I can only hope you are doing all this for a laugh Kenny, I'm very scared if you are serious.

And it is Giza btw.

Reword your second sentence so it makes sense. KB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, if aliens built any of these things, couldn't they have done a better job?

I mean there are examples of earlier failures of the pyramids in the deserts right? Some that are lopsided and uneven? So the aliens kind of stood by shouting "you're getting warmer!!"??

Oh, and couldn't they have taught them silly little things like, oh, non-eroding type of materials? Maybe waterproofing?

I am no expert on these things but just a bit of common sense tells you that it was either incompetent aliens or just good old fashion human beings. Some clever ones at that.

Again, going with the "aliens did it" theme...

Couldn't they have taught them helpful stuff? Antibiotics? Food preservation? Plumbing?

I'm assuming these aliens had ships with metal, electricity, plastics, medical supplies, etc. What did they do before they left? Cleaned up really well after themselves? I mean have we even found a minute piece of their equipment, food, materials?

Now, which theory makes more sense?

Nibs

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they're not the same as Sitchin's, they're wrong. KennyB

youre joking right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, if aliens built any of these things, couldn't they have done a better job?

I mean there are examples of earlier failures of the pyramids in the deserts right? Some that are lopsided and uneven? So the aliens kind of stood by shouting "you're getting warmer!!"??

Oh, and couldn't they have taught them silly little things like, oh, non-eroding type of materials? Maybe waterproofing?

I am no expert on these things but just a bit of common sense tells you that it was either incompetent aliens or just good old fashion human beings. Some clever ones at that.

Again, going with the "aliens did it" theme...

Couldn't they have taught them helpful stuff? Antibiotics? Food preservation? Plumbing?

I'm assuming these aliens had ships with metal, electricity, plastics, medical supplies, etc. What did they do before they left? Cleaned up really well after themselves? I mean have we even found a minute piece of their equipment, food, materials?

Now, which theory makes more sense?

Nibs

How do I know why the aliens did or didn't do the things they do. Hell, I've got some questions of my own. Even with all the questions, it still makes more sense than straight evolution or creationism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 19

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.