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 14
Alphamale06

The Ancient Alien Theory Is True

10,149 posts in this topic

I think I'd like to join a religious Community. I haven't decided which, though. I'll think about it and let you know what I decide.

And why the hell would UFOs navigate by stones? Its outrageous to even think that they traverse tremendous distances in space, (with no direction signs), they make it here, plus they naturally have a birds eye view of the lie of the land/continents....but have to swoop down low enough to look for stone navigation beacons?

Are you a raving lunatic?

Ah, no, the idea I think, as perpetrated by some people in the "Earth energies" field, is that they act as kind of focuses, or is it foci, for the energy lines that, as is well known, criss-cross the planet. (and quite possibly the universe as a whole, on a larger scale). The theory is that UFos navigate, and/or perhaps use for propulsion, by means of this energy grid, and they might use them much like radio beacons, in order to navigate to points of interest. That might similarly be how they traverse tremendous distances in space, (with no direction signs), by using this energy grid as 'highways', and the points whetre they cross as beacons. As it is on the large scale, it might be repeated in a smaller scale on a planetary basis. It's an interesting theory, I feel, even though, of course, conventional Science would deny it utterly, just because they haven't found it yet (have they even tried)?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an interesting theory, I feel, even though, of course, conventional Science would deny it utterly, just because they haven't found it yet (have they even tried)?

have you looked into whether its been studied or not? Its just a hypothetical idea.But this wasnt an ancient belief at all. The origin of the idea came into being with a book written by Alfred Watkins in 1921... hardly an ancient belief....

More to the point tho, is that the original meaning of the ley line was simply a path for navigation, with the theory being that ancient man, much as we do today, looked for points of reference in the landscape simply to navigate by. and the landscape at that time was mostly wooded. And we all know the shortest or best line between 2 points is a straight -ish line isn't it?

Ive not looked into this before as it never crossed my mind, but heres what I found on wiki, following on from mention of the original book from 1921

"In 1969, the British author John Michell, who had previously written on the subject of UFOs, published The View Over Atlantis, in which he revived Watkins' ley line theories and linked them with the Chinese concept of feng shui.[2] The book, published by Sago Press, proved popular and was reprinted in Great Britain by Garnstone Press in 1972 and Abacus in 1973, and in the United States by Ballantine Books in 1972. Gary Lachman states that The View Over Atlantis "put Glastonbury on the counter-cultural map."[21] Ronald Hutton described it as "almost the founding document of the modern earth mysteries movement".[22]

Michell's mingling Watkins' amateur archaeology with Chinese spiritual concepts of land-forms led to many new theories about the alignments of monuments and natural landscape features. Writers made use of Watkins' terminology in service of concepts related to dowsing and New Age beliefs, including the ideas that ley lines have spiritual power [23] or resonate a special psychic or mystical energy.[24][25] Ascribing such characteristics to ley lines has led to the term being classified as pseudoscience.[26]

In 2004, John Bruno Hare wrote:

Watkins never attributed any supernatural significance to leys; he believed that they were simply pathways that had been used for trade or ceremonial purposes, very ancient in origin, possibly dating back to the Neolithic, certainly pre-Roman. His obsession with leys was a natural outgrowth of his interest in landscape photography and love of the British countryside. He was an intensely rational person with an active intellect, and I think he would be a bit disappointed with some of the fringe aspects of ley lines today".[27]

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

So..it would seem then once again, a book was written, then reinterpreted by another author with fanciful notions, and the subject of leys/energy lines was developed.

So its just another Eric Von Daniken type scenario once again isn't it?

Well Im glad I spent 2 mins looking into this concept, but its just a load of modern age mumbo jumbo, based on a book written by a probable stoner, which in turn was based on a book written by a guy who just wrote about pathways....that somehow has got its foot into modern beliefs. Well, some believers anyway.

The bottom line is tho....its not an ancient principle/belief, at all. So bang goes another theory! Plus a bigger bang to the theory of ufos needing them for whatever.... :tu:

Edited by seeder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ley lines could not, perhaps, be a modern name (and interpretation) for something that's been there all along? So you assume that it's all a load of mumbo Jumbo because a source online (i.e. Wikky Pedia) suits the conclusion that you have already arrived at, and refers to a couple of boooks that agree with that preconception? That doesn't seem very open minded. See, that's the trouble with this forum; if anyone even mentions anything outside of what mainstream convention agrees on, then instantly it's rubbished (complete with quotes from Wookie Pedia) as a load of mumbo Jumbo.

Anyway, did I say it was my theory? Just that is what the theory basically seems to say, and however much people may wish to rubbish it I still think it's interesting.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, did I say it was my theory? Just that is what the theory basically seems to say, and however much people may wish to rubbish it I still think it's interesting.

No you didnt say it was 'your' theory but you posed the question and I'll quote you:

"conventional Science would deny it utterly, just because they haven't found it yet (have they even tried)? "

So in order to answer the question I looked it up for you and hence discovered what I posted. And no the ley line theory didnt exist before the books. Find a shred of evidence they did and I will sing your praises all day long. With a cherry on top.

Then you say:

"See, that's the trouble with this forum; if anyone even mentions anything outside of what mainstream convention agrees on, then instantly it's rubbished"

Thats not entirely true of all subjects posted. But this particular subject on ley lines would certainly appear to be rubbish. And what kind of a forum would it be if only the fairy minded believers who never looked for facts, and just wanted to chat about mystical places and ufos and little green men were the only people who posted?

I will make myself as clear as I can. I love a mystery like any-other does, but I also like to get into a subject and discover more of the mystery, rather than just see/hear/read something and then believe it.

I actively search for the truth/facts of a mystery, of ufo's, of ancient structures...because I TOO WANT TO BELIEVE IN LOTS OF STUFF.

It just seems to be the case tho... that usually - there isnt any truth/facts to be found.

Sorry to burst peoples bubbles.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ley lines could not, perhaps, be a modern name (and interpretation) for something that's been there all along? So you assume that it's all a load of mumbo Jumbo because a source online (i.e. Wikky Pedia) suits the conclusion that you have already arrived at, and refers to a couple of boooks that agree with that preconception? That doesn't seem very open minded. See, that's the trouble with this forum; if anyone even mentions anything outside of what mainstream convention agrees on, then instantly it's rubbished (complete with quotes from Wookie Pedia) as a load of mumbo Jumbo.

Anyway, did I say it was my theory? Just that is what the theory basically seems to say, and however much people may wish to rubbish it I still think it's interesting.

You must understand that Seeder did present some facts. To rebut, you must do the same.

I see you like to bash Wikipedia. Although there are accuracy issues here and there, it is correct nearly all of the time. After looking into it, I found that there are 20 universities that do nothing but check new enteries for accuracy.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Published on Oct 23, 2012

Ian illustrates the striking difference in architectural styles on one archaeological site alone. The examples in Peru are endless, and there are countless ways to demonstrate that the megalithic architecture of Peru was not built by the Inca, who used small, rough blocks, sometimes held together by almost as much mortar as the Spanish used in their cathedrals. The Inca attempted to ape the ancient architecture which they found on site, and that much is clear from this video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Published on Oct 23, 2012

Ian illustrates the striking difference in architectural styles on one archaeological site alone. The examples in Peru are endless, and there are countless ways to demonstrate that the megalithic architecture of Peru was not built by the Inca, who used small, rough blocks, sometimes held together by almost as much mortar as the Spanish used in their cathedrals. The Inca attempted to ape the ancient architecture which they found on site, and that much is clear from this video.

the penny hasnt dropped yet has it? You can keep on posting vids, keep on watching vids, but no matter what you do, the PP claims - that try to insinuate man was just barely stone aged.. and so couldn't have cut or shifted stones.... -.is so 70's. As I have posted about the history of mans tech achievements LONG before PP was built...why do you keep banging the same drum? Man was piping gas, creating wheelbarrows, making street lights, playing chess..inventing compasses...BEFORE pp was even built..

when will you get up to date?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the penny hasnt dropped yet has it? You can keep on posting vids, keep on watching vids, but no matter what you do, the PP claims - that try to insinuate man was just barely stone aged.. and so couldn't have cut or shifted stones.... -.is so 70's. As I have posted about the history of mans tech achievements LONG before PP was built...why do you keep banging the same drum? Man was piping gas, creating wheelbarrows, making street lights, playing chess..inventing compasses...BEFORE pp was even built..

when will you get up to date?

Another way to look at it is the more one sees the more one learns. This is a brilliant clip showing close up images of PP. Listen the author as he describes his amazement at seeing the precision artefacts.

Enjoy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You must understand that Seeder did present some facts. To rebut, you must do the same.

I see you like to bash Wikipedia. Although there are accuracy issues here and there, it is correct nearly all of the time. After looking into it, I found that there are 20 universities that do nothing but check new enteries for accuracy.

Rebutting? Why should I want to Rebut? it's just an interesting idea, which may have no Scientific basis to it all, but that doesn't really matter.

Heavens sake, will people stop taking everything so seriously and be prepared to entertain a few interesting ideas from time to time without always insisting that they have to be backed up by Scientific fact. No wonder that people are reluctant to open their mouths if any ideas at all (that aren't backed up by Scientific fact) are always instantly leapt on by people who seem to constantly want to be so adversarial.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No you didnt say it was 'your' theory but you posed the question and I'll quote you:

"conventional Science would deny it utterly, just because they haven't found it yet (have they even tried)? "

So in order to answer the question I looked it up for you and hence discovered what I posted. And no the ley line theory didnt exist before the books. Find a shred of evidence they did and I will sing your praises all day long. With a cherry on top.

Then you say:

"See, that's the trouble with this forum; if anyone even mentions anything outside of what mainstream convention agrees on, then instantly it's rubbished"

Thats not entirely true of all subjects posted. But this particular subject on ley lines would certainly appear to be rubbish. And what kind of a forum would it be if only the fairy minded believers who never looked for facts, and just wanted to chat about mystical places and ufos and little green men were the only people who posted?

I will make myself as clear as I can. I love a mystery like any-other does, but I also like to get into a subject and discover more of the mystery, rather than just see/hear/read something and then believe it.

I actively search for the truth/facts of a mystery, of ufo's, of ancient structures...because I TOO WANT TO BELIEVE IN LOTS OF STUFF.

It just seems to be the case tho... that usually - there isnt any truth/facts to be found.

Sorry to burst peoples bubbles.

See? classic example of what I was talking about. Why so adversarial? Why should I want my praises singed? I'm not even trying to promote the idea (or want my praises sung), just that this was an idea that has been floated by some people, and this was possibly what the notion of UFOs being interested in Megaliths may be to do with. it's not my idea, and whether people like it or not is not my concern.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another way to look at it is the more one sees the more one learns. This is a brilliant clip showing close up images of PP. Listen the author as he describes his amazement at seeing the precision artefacts.

Enjoy:

who is the author? what are his credentials? why has he/she convinced you? Clearly I didn't watch your vid I just read the comments under it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last one for this evening.

Another detailed look at the breathtaking precision in the Coricancha.

At 8:00 Foerster gives his opinion on the metal clamps. The reason for posting this is that this is the first time I have heard him confirm what I already concluded.

That the clamps were not mechanical connectors but electrical. I came to this conclusion after seeing the ridiculously small metal clamp moulds in the blocks at Ollyantaytambo that in no way would provide mechanical strength for blocks weighing tens of tonnes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOcmGMFcii8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last one for this evening.

Another detailed look at the breathtaking precision in the Coricancha.

At 8:00 Foerster gives his opinion on the metal clamps. The reason for posting this is that this is the first time I have heard him confirm what I already concluded.

That the clamps were not mechanical connectors but electrical. I came to this conclusion after seeing the ridiculously small metal clamp moulds in the blocks at Ollyantaytambo that in no way would provide mechanical strength for blocks weighing tens of tonnes.

Brien said so - its true? Ok we can play along. did you know, ONE SPOT of weld, about size of a large match head, will hold ONE Ton of weight?

My brother is a welder BTW

what was the purpose of electrical connectors? They didnt have hi-fi back then so why need electric?

Edited by seeder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brien said so - its true? Ok we can play along. did you know, ONE SPOT of weld, about size of a match head, will hold ONE Ton of weight?

My brother is a welder BTW

Depends on the size of the shear force applied to the blocks rather than the weight of the blocks per se. Those links at Ollyantaytambo would simply shear at the first sign of any respectable shock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on the size of the shear force applied to the blocks rather than the weight of the blocks per se. Those links at Ollyantaytambo would simply shear at the first sign of any respectable shock.

get real zoser, you've lost this argument long ago, and if all you can do, as a self quoted intelligent person, is NOT think for yourself but be swayed by Brien, then thats a prime reason he's making money out of mugs

be a smart guy - email Brien on YT and invite him to this discussion? If not, why not? If so...I'm waiting!! But I bet he wont come where there are no bum kissers

Edited by seeder
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey zoser.. no comment back on the alignment of easter island.. nasca and the pyramids ? I've told you how to check to see that they are not in a straight line.. did you bother to try it?

or on the wall of the imperial palace..

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About that Imperial Palace in Tokyo:

Over the centuries, many old castle structures were either destroyed by fires and earthquakes or demolished to make way for newer buildings. On May 29, 1945, the Palace grounds took a huge blow during the Allied fire-bombing raid, which destroyed most of the structures. Less than two months after, August 15 marked the end of WWII when Emperor Showa (Hirohito) declared Japan’s surrender from the basement of the Palace library.

http://www.kcpwindowonjapan.com/2012/02/the-grandeur-of-tokyos-imperial-palace/

The modern Imperial Palace in Tokyo is the main residence of the Japanese Emperor and the Imperial family. It is made up of what is left of the old Edo Palace, which was inhabited by the Tokugawa Shogun before the 1868 Meiji Restoration, which restored the Emperor to power and opened up Japan to trade with the West. When the Emperor took up residence in Edo Castle, it was renamed as the Imperial Residence. It burned down in 1873, but the same site was used for the new palace, which was built in 1888, called the Palace Castle.

Many of the old Edo-era structures disappeared in the Meiji era in order to make way for modernizations, including new buildings, or due to earthquakes and fires. The Palace Castle itself was destroyed by Allied bombing during World War II and it was from the concrete library basement that the Emperor declared Japan's surrender in 1945. The Palace was rebuilt yet again in 1948 and was named Imperial Residence. The inside was renovated and modernized in the 1970s, so now parts of the inside look a bit dated.

http://www.examiner.com/article/the-tokyo-imperial-palace

>>> http://aliveintokyo.wordpress.com/2012/10/15/a-look-at-edo-castle-japanese-politics-and-imperial-power/

The area that now survives as the Imperial Palace East Gardens is where Tokugawa Ieyasu originally began construction of Edo Castle, around 1600. Altogether, 3,000 ships were required to haul all of the stone used to build up the castle walls and fill the moat.

http://aliveintokyo.wordpress.com/2012/10/15/a-look-at-edo-castle-japanese-politics-and-imperial-power/

3000 ships. Space ships, lol??

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last one for this evening.

Another detailed look at the breathtaking precision in the Coricancha.

At 8:00 Foerster gives his opinion on the metal clamps. The reason for posting this is that this is the first time I have heard him confirm what I already concluded.

That the clamps were not mechanical connectors but electrical. I came to this conclusion after seeing the ridiculously small metal clamp moulds in the blocks at Ollyantaytambo that in no way would provide mechanical strength for blocks weighing tens of tonnes.

[media=]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOcmGMFcii8[/media]

Sorry, I didn't make it to 8 minutes after all his new age drivel:

New age drivel keywords: "Spiritual", "Atlantean culture" , "12,000 years old", "esoteric area", "energy travels through it"..

And I do love all those tiny dents on those "vitrified" stones Foerster shows us.

.

Edited by Abramelin
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears I did make it through to 8 minutes after all.

"The reason for these clamps is that they tried to get the stones as close fitting as possible, but they can never be perfect"

Great quote, eh?

:yes:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears I did make it through to 8 minutes after all.

"The reason for these clamps is that they tried to get the stones as close fitting as possible, but they can never be perfect"

Great quote, eh?

:yes:

Absolutely, I just watched the first minute..then ffwd to 8 min and yes indeedy - Abe's correct of course!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And why the hell would UFOs navigate by stones? Its outrageous to even think that they traverse tremendous distances in space, (with no direction signs), they make it here, plus they naturally have a birds eye view of the lie of the land/continents....but have to swoop down low enough to look for stone navigation beacons?

Are you a raving lunatic?

A lunatic? Moi?

I certainly hope so mate, because 'fools' think outside the box, try it sometime.. ;)

"Become a fool by the worlds standards in order to become wise" (1 Corinthians 3:18/19 )

(Incidentally my solicitor sent me for psychiatric analysis in connection with a court case I was involved with some years ago, maybe he was hoping the shrink would pronounce me bananas so he could try to get me off on a "guilty but insane" plea, but to our amazement the shrink found me to be sane!

His written report concluded:- "Mr X is a very strong-willed individual and his behaviour was appropriate throughout the interview"

MWAAHHH I don't want to be "appropriate", I'd be bored!

"The great secret of the successful fool is that he's no fool at all"- Isaac Asimov

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay, back to my sensational 'ANCIENT STONES AS UFO NAVIGATION BEACONS' theory- Perhaps UFO occupants don't "see" in the same way we do, so even if they're very close to earth they can't see it, all they see is a black void, therefore they need navigation beacons in order to find earth by lighting it up like a Christmas tree, and also to direct them to certain spots on it.

(Stone circles, stone avenues and ley lines might therefore be a "UFO routing system" like modern airways).

We can therefore assume that "pathfinder scout vessels" planted such beacons in ancient times.

ufo-stonehenge.gif

Obviously the beacons don't look like electronic gadgets because the aliens disguised them to look like stones, and to us, they may well look completely like stones in every way, and even if we cracked them open we'd find nothing in their rock-solid interiors.

That's because the very atoms and molecules themselves are broadcasting on a frequency undetectable to humans:

"God goes by me but I see him not" (Job 9:10)

It's not rocket science, UFO's need nav beacons to avoid more accidents like this.. :)-

sunufo2.gif

http://www.telegraph...nd-turbine.html

Edited by Crikey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rebutting? Why should I want to Rebut? it's just an interesting idea, which may have no Scientific basis to it all, but that doesn't really matter.

Heavens sake, will people stop taking everything so seriously and be prepared to entertain a few interesting ideas from time to time without always insisting that they have to be backed up by Scientific fact. No wonder that people are reluctant to open their mouths if any ideas at all (that aren't backed up by Scientific fact) are always instantly leapt on by people who seem to constantly want to be so adversarial.

It's the way you put them across mate. Many times I too have thought you were in a completely different path to that which you were. Quite often when you speculate, they way you do it sounds like you are quoting fact. I understand where seeder is coming from because I have been there. I do not think it is neither you nor us that actually "be in the wrong" for want of better words, but I'd like to illustrate that I have noticed a few people mistake you this way. And vice versa I have noticed. Nothing wrong with it either, just thought I would point out that it does come across as much more serious than you intend. Maybe it is the general tone of this place? I do not know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No offence mate but I don't give a rat's ass what Catholics say.. ;)

(It's nothing personal, I don't give a sh** what Mormons, Jehovahs, Baptists, Calvinists, Rapturists, Pentecostalists, Munchkins etc say either)

You are a very rude man aren't you!

Bachelor of Education, Master of Learning Innovation, Graduate Certificate in Christian Theology

That is dedication, and much af a persons life into the very subject you claim to be so up to date on. If you do not give a rodents rectum for the word of someone who actively studies what you claim to have figured out, the least you could do is acknowledge and show respect to ones chosen profession.

Just because it shows that WOH is leagues in front of you in every aspect of this discussion, you dimiss him. I guess the guys are right, You are a troll. That is why the real world listen to people with bit of paper like WOH, and people who have "cracked it" take that a step further and become a total crackpot in society.

I think we can all see, you do not hold a candle to WOH where this subject is concerned, faith standing or not.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lunatic? Moi?

I certainly hope so mate, because 'fools' think outside the box, try it sometime.. ;)

"Become a fool by the worlds standards in order to become wise" (1 Corinthians 3:18/19 )

Different box mate.

I think that night be where you are going wrong.

It's not rocket science, UFO's need nav beacons to avoid more accidents like this.. :)-

sunufo2.gif

http://www.telegraph...nd-turbine.html

LOL, The Sun? Why not Pravda? Or National Enquirer? Even the NT news LOL. I bet you could get some made up stuff there too! The only thing that makes that rag worth picking up is page 3!

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can therefore assume that "pathfinder scout vessels" planted such beacons in ancient times.

ufo-stonehenge.gif

Obviously the beacons don't look like electronic gadgets because the aliens disguised them to look like stones, and to us, they may well look completely like stones in every way, and even if we cracked them open we'd find nothing in their rock-solid interiors.

That's because the very atoms and molecules themselves are broadcasting on a frequency undetectable to humans:

"God goes by me but I see him not" (Job 9:10)

LOL, I see how you fit into this thread!!

Stone beacons that operate in secret!!! LOL. Good God man, maybe you should try for a job at The Sun? I have a feeling that a man of your talents would be quite welcome there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 14

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.