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

More evidence of machined artefacts:

http://www.gizapyram...new article.htm

zoser50.jpg

zoser51.jpg

zoser52.jpg

You of course are making the assumption that it was bow drill and not something designed to spin in one direction only. I'm also curious why a civilization that would be thousands of years more advanced than us, would resort to what, would to them be, primitive tools to make holes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The evidence need not be physical, as the skeptic with ones head buried in the sand will force their mind to see and believe whatever they want it to, it is one of the greatest weaknesses of mankind.

The evidence surrounding the ancient astronaut theory is very simple and inarguable. Most believers make the mistake of making the arguement too complicated and fantastic, much like religion.

When in reality to simplistic evidence is all that is needed to assure the BASIC accuracy of the theory; Every single civilization since the beginning of time has documentation of humaniod beings coming from the skies and meddling in the affairs of man, posing as Gods. Their fantastic abilities easily explained by todays technology and that which is imminent in the future.

When one hears of a God described as a bronze bird spitting fire that blocked out the sun and shook the ground, not making the connection can only be explained by denial, and fear. The so called "theory" is so simple compared to every other explaination that has been offered to us, our minds have simply been trained since birth to reject such things.

To delve deeper, I challenge anyone on this earth to explain how we evolved into intelligent creatures overnight in terms of evolution. Where as every other thing takes hundreds of millions of years to make the slightest change our evolution occured at a literal magical rate.

Physical evidence is probably the most important thing when determining the validity of a claim.

Skeptics, by their very nature, are less likely to be taken in by those peddling their unevidenced, unsupported version of history as if it were fact. In reality, skeptics would love to believe that aliens were and are here but combine Common Sense, Logic, Critical Thinking and available evidence to come to their conclusions.

You do realize don't you, that every religion has borrowed from other religions and/or pagan rites don't you? For example, the Romans reused a great deal of the Greek mythology when creating theirs. As far as their fantastic abilities, can you, using today's technology, explain the ability to create the universe, change themselves into other creatures or into another substance, for example stone? Have you looked at the artwork depicting the gods or read the descriptions? Did you notice that in virtually all cases, the gods look exactly like the people that that worship them?

You do understand that the vast majority of stories in the writings of the various religions are not based on fact but are simply meant to teach a lesson don't you?

As far as evolution, this thread really has nothing to do with evolution so you should start another topic on that so it doesn't derail this one.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He actually got access to the core and checked it using the high-tech method of wrapping a string around the groove. He was personally called on the accuracy of this over on graham hancock's forum. Even so, this doesn't eliminate the possibility that the marks were made in the process of removing the core or a jammed tool. To my knowledge, no other extant cores have been examined for, and thus shown to have, similar marks.

My thoughts were along this line as well.

Edit to add: if we will believe in Dunn's claims.

Quote from from the same book pictures were posted:

Horizontal striations similar to the ancient ones on rose granite were visible both in the wall of the hole (Figure 4.26), and upon the core.

(Experiments in Egyptian Archaeology: Stoneworking Technology in Ancient Egypt, Denys A. Stocks, Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2004, page 135)

Edited by bmk1245

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey bmk!

I think what zoser was talking about is that the resultant hole is very wide, irregular and rough. He's right there. It is very crude and rough when compared to the wonderous examples AA theorists usually talk about. You know the ones, I'm sure you've seen them, they look like they have 0.001mm flaws!

I'm not saying that this means it was ET, but when Zoser said that hole was a mess, he was spot on.

Oniomancer, psyche, S2F already answered this, so repeating isn't necessary, I guess

Zoser claimed that copper pipes couldn't have been used for hole drilling. When showed it can be and was used to demonstrate on actual granite, he simply started I will grasp whatever straw routine. Just look at his masterpiece of mind:

[...]If the pipes were not perfectly circular then neither would the holes in the granite. Think about it.

It calls for

rf_fp.gif

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You of course are making the assumption that it was bow drill and not something designed to spin in one direction only. I'm also curious why a civilization that would be thousands of years more advanced than us, would resort to what, would to them be, primitive tools to make holes?

Not quite sure what your getting at; it's the archaeologists that are making that ridiculous claim about the bow, sand and tube. To those with an ounce of reasoning the way they did it must have employed some advanced method such as light or sound. Let's be clear; there is no other conventional explanation on the table other than the crazy bow and sand idea and that's what this debate is all about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oniomancer, psyche, S2F already answered this, so repeating isn't necessary, I guess

Zoser claimed that copper pipes couldn't have been used for hole drilling. When showed it can be and was used to demonstrate on actual granite, he simply started I will grasp whatever straw routine. Just look at his masterpiece of mind:

It calls for

You sound ridiculous. You are avoiding the issue. If they used pipes then tell us how they made them. Simple.

Now I refuse to let you skeptics get away with this one. Your either going to furnish the convincing argument as to how the ancients made deep holes in red granite, diorite and basalt, or you are going to retract the silly theories completely once and for all.

By holes I mean 2-3 inch diameter, and at least 2 feet deep.

An old boxing saying goes "You can run but you can't hide".

It's time to put up or shut up on this one.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you factor in all that must happen for an advanced alien race to reach the Earth, why they would help us build structures that are designed as humans would design them, and why they would choose to work in stone when they could manufacture lighter, longer lasting materials, alien intervention becomes the least likely.

Not necessarily.

As we make great strides in quantum mechanics and such, it becomes apparent that we humans are woefully ignorant of many laws of physics.

IF we have been visited, the visitors would have to build objects with what material was available, and in accordance with "local" physics rules, if you get my drift.

I'll reiterate my point--those who doubt the AA theory (and I'm happy to qualify it as a theory) do not offer a persuasive argument to the contrary. What they offer as proof is mere speculation, with many instances of use of the words "it is possible", "perhaps", etc etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oniomancer, psyche, S2F already answered this, so repeating isn't necessary, I guess

No they haven't; if you think they have could you quote it please. That hole you showed me was as rough as a rats tail. Nothing whatsoever like the perfect holes seen in South America and Egypt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not necessarily.

As we make great strides in quantum mechanics and such, it becomes apparent that we humans are woefully ignorant of many laws of physics.

IF we have been visited, the visitors would have to build objects with what material was available, and in accordance with "local" physics rules, if you get my drift.

And yet we have the same materials as they had back then, just better technology. How does your response address these visitors playing with rocks?

BTW what you just said has nothing to do with QM. Maybe it was an analogy? I don't know.

Edited by Rlyeh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why they would choose to work in stone when they could manufacture lighter, longer lasting materials, alien intervention becomes the least likely.

Maybe they liked stone? it is after all a natural element of the earth and has pleasing aesthetics.

Physical evidence is probably the most important thing when determining the validity of a claim.

Can you provide physical evidence of the Great Pyramid being built with primitive ramps, pulleys and copper chisels? Seems not. Nice try though, but you have failed to stick to the primitive tools to even build that abomination. They even had to bring in modern technology to complete it, because it was too hard to do with primitive tools, also look at the size of those blocks compared to the real pyramids.

What a pathethic attempt, Egyptologists ideas are no way better than even von daniken ideas.

0.jpg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To those with an ounce of reasoning the way they did it must have employed some advanced method such as light or sound. Let's be clear; there is no other conventional explanation on the table other than the crazy bow and sand idea and that's what this debate is all about.

Careful now, the skeptics don't want people to believe that ancients had advanced technological methods to construct buildings and artifacts way ahead of their time.

Heaven forbid if they did, the mainstream model would fall on its ass.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No they haven't; if you think they have could you quote it please. That hole you showed me was as rough as a rats tail. Nothing whatsoever like the perfect holes seen in South America and Egypt.

You have no idea what those holes looked like when they were recently made. Do you have any idea what several hundred years of weathering does to rock?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe they liked stone? it is after all a natural element of the earth and has pleasing aesthetics.

Can you provide physical evidence of the Great Pyramid being built with primitive ramps, pulleys and copper chisels? Seems not. Nice try though, but you have failed to stick to the primitive tools to even build that abomination. They even had to bring in modern technology to complete it, because it was too hard to do with primitive tools, also look at the size of those blocks compared to the real pyramids.

What a pathethic attempt, Egyptologists ideas are no way better than even von daniken ideas.

0.jpg

Good point; plus the above monstrosity is probably accurate to a few inches at best along it's entire dimension. The GP descending passage is to within 0.25 inch!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have no idea what those holes looked like when they were recently made. Do you have any idea what several hundred years of weathering does to rock?

Yes I do; it left the Egyptian and South American examples perfectly in tact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heaven forbid if they did, the mainstream model would fall on its ass.

With the utter nonsense that AA proponents use as evidence there is no danger of that happening any time soon ever. The AA argument boils down to 'I don't know therefore aliens'. There is nothing to support the idea at all. You want evidence of ramps and what not for the pyramids? How about showing something, anything alien to support the AA hypothesis. Good luck with that because I can practically guarantee that you can't.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How did you find out it wouldn't be necessary for aliens? Even if it wasn't necessary, how do you know that's not how they did it anyway for reasons of their own?

If we look at what has been done here on Earth in modern times. When a technologically advanced nation goes in to a country that is technology poor, they may use some locals as a workforce, but they always take advantage of the technology they possess. If they are replacing a bridge, the original may have been a simple rope bridge but it will be replaced by a better one of wood or stone based on conditions and availability of raw material. Similarly, if the technologically advanced nations of the world were to go to Egypt to build a pyramid, they would be using flatbeds to haul the stone and cranes to lift them. They wouldn't go to Egypt and then have thousands of workers build the pyramid using ramps. So a race thousands of years more advanced than we are would also use the technology at their disposal.

With the type of technology at their disposal, the pyramid would have taken no more than a month for the aliens to build in my estimation.

Since there is no evidence that aliens were in any way responsible for the building of the pyramids, I can say that it was done by humans. If however, evidence comes to light in the future, that does support aliens helping with the pyramids I will of course alter my conclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What it really boils down to is that people are going to believe what they want to believe it doesnt matter that theres evidence proving the AA theory is wrong. Some people just dont care and refuse to look at the evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far, much as you wish, you've been able to suggest nothing else he could be other than an alien. You need to say:

1. how he could be native to a planet he created.

2. how you could have built the place you were born in.

Until you can answer both you still have nothing but a strong wish of some sort.

Since there is nothing in the texts that show God was born but has always existed, then he would be a native to a the area in which he created the universe. So he would not be alien to whatever he created in that space. If you build a garage on your property are you alien to the garage or not? The answer is no. You created it, it is yours just like God creating the universe.

Can you explain how an advanced race could create the universe?

Until you can, your premise that God was a technologically advanced alien has no legs on which to stand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the utter nonsense that AA proponents use as evidence there is no danger of that happening any time soon ever. The AA argument boils down to 'I don't know therefore aliens'. There is nothing to support the idea at all. You want evidence of ramps and what not for the pyramids? How about showing something, anything alien to support the AA hypothesis. Good luck with that because I can practically guarantee that you can't.

How about ancient art in Europe, North America and South America that portrays inexplicable humanoids often wearing equipment that we directly relate to space travellers. What about the art portraying space craft in India and other parts of the world. How does one explain the Dogon mystery?

It's all there if you care to look. On the other hand if your big thing is bolting together outlandish explanations for such things to make it fit some outdated paradigm then I guess these things will pass you by.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No they haven't; if you think they have could you quote it please. That hole you showed me was as rough as a rats tail. Nothing whatsoever like the perfect holes seen in South America and Egypt.

Here ya go

It called finishing Paxus.

Have not read the whole thread have you mate. Not the best way to "come back" mate. I suggest you get a handle on what has been proposed. I doubt you will come to the same conclusions after reading the thread.

Correction, the edge of the hole is irregular and rough. Note that the block itself is rough and the spot where they set the drill is at least 2 inches above what would be the surface of the block if it were leveled and finished. That's still pretty accurate for a test run. You know what they say, practice makes perfect.

That said, compare with some of these self-same wondrously accurate drill holes:

http://www.oocities....ing_drills.html

Looks kind of hit or miss precision-wise.

wb1.jpg

This makes a round hole. Your ignorance inexperience with hand tools is showing...

(note emphasized parts).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you saying they're two different maps or two different ways of spelling the same thing, or don't you know? How are you claiming either or both have been debunked and what are you claiming is the truth?

For the Perry Reese map you will need to do your own research. As far as the Piri Reis map, just do a search on UM and you will find it included in several topics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about ancient art in Europe, North America and South America that portrays inexplicable humanoids often wearing equipment that we directly relate to space travellers. What about the art portraying space craft in India and other parts of the world. How does one explain the Dogon mystery?

It's all there if you care to look. On the other hand if your big thing is bolting together outlandish explanations for such things to make it fit some outdated paradigm then I guess these things will pass you by.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=uUUzQINoark

This video is a section of a video that booN posted a while back. I see you haven't watched it at all. Until you can address the points it brings to the table (i.e. the 'alien' images are actually traditional elements of the art style portraying angels etc.) then you are arguing from ignorance... again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point; plus the above monstrosity is probably accurate to a few inches at best along it's entire dimension. The GP descending passage is to within 0.25 inch!

A monstrosity indeed, a frankenstein of engineering. What is interesting though is how miniscule those blocks are in the Nippon attempt at reconstructing the Great Pyramid. Also, the nippon model was not sufficient enough to account for the interior walkways and rooms that exist within the Great Pyramid, with perfect accoustical resonance. The Great Pyramid is not a simple stone-upon-stone construction, its much more comlex than what nippon tried to achieve, fortunately Nippon failed miserably because they had not a clue what they were doing. In the end, it proved too difficult for them to use primitive methods so they so they resorted to modern technology to complete their pathethic abomination of a model of the Great Pyramid.

With the utter nonsense that AA proponents use as evidence there is no danger of that happening any time soon ever. The AA argument boils down to 'I don't know therefore aliens'. There is nothing to support the idea at all. You want evidence of ramps and what not for the pyramids? How about showing something, anything alien to support the AA hypothesis. Good luck with that because I can practically guarantee that you can't.

The ancient alien theory is already proven, the ancients worshipped beings that dwell in the stars, they engraved that in pictures. Yet, skeptics brand the mythoology as fairytales. When its anything but.

Also, your evidence is not any better.

The only evidence you have is proof that you can not replicate the ancient feats of engineering seen in the Great Pyramid with primitive tools. No, you drop the primitive tools and throw the toys and dummy out the pram when it becomes too hard, so you resort to modern technology and still can not duplicate it properly.

0.jpg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You sound ridiculous. You are avoiding the issue. If they used pipes then tell us how they made them. Simple.

[...]

Oh dear...

Ok, pipes:

1) molding (thicker wals);

2) casting, and then rolling (thinner walls).

[...]

By holes I mean 2-3 inch diameter, and at least 2 feet deep.

An old boxing saying goes "You can run but you can't hide".

It's time to put up or shut up on this one.

Say WHAT?!!! 8 cm - how many inches it will be? Just little over 3. Now, 6 cm (~0.2 feet) per 20 hours (or 10 hours for experienced drillers), two feet will be in 200 hours (or 100 hours). Do the math. Heck, add 50 hours for smoke breaks, and you'll have your 2 feet hole (drilling). How much left for finishing, depends on the finishing level.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you factor in all that must happen for an advanced alien race to reach the Earth, why they would help us build structures that are designed as humans would design them, and why they would choose to work in stone when they could manufacture lighter, longer lasting materials, alien intervention becomes the least likely.

That's been my biggest problem with the whole AA things. Well, besides the overwhelming lack of evidence.

What would be the point of aliens helping people build giant stone monuments? Why no show them advanced metal working, or medicine, or the amazing physics necessary to cross interstellar distances?

No... we'll just help you stack these rocks.

WTF aliens? You're useless.

Edited by Imaginarynumber1
2 people like this

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.