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

The discovery of ramp remains, tools, chisel marks, workers cemetaries, etc. are all evidence to support our view. All you have suggested is levitation and cutting tool using sound or light.

I have not suggested levitation or cutting tool using sound or light nowhere on this thread.

Also, the discovery of ramp remains, tools, chisel marks etc, means nothing unless you can replicate the great pyramid with such tools as far i am concerned.

Chisel marks could have been put there by anyone, way after the pyramids were already built. I don't see how that is evidence of your unproven theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not up to AA theorists to fund Egyptologists theories.

Conversely, it's not up to the punter to work out how AA theories are put into application.

You and I should be TOLD by the AA theorists how it was done, why it was done etc and not "we can't prove it was done any way, therefore aliens".

That is, interestingly enough, how theories work.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You obviously haven't understood that this topis is about ancient aliens as in technologically advanced aliens not mystical or occult. .

Who are you to say that the study of ancient aliens can not involve the mystical or occult? the latter words mystical and occult are both the same thing by the way, not that i would expect you to know that.

Who are you to say that aliens are not mystical ? i believe potential aliens are mystical and relate to the occult given the fact that they can be considered as mystical entities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who are you to say that the study of ancient aliens can not involve the mystical or occult? the latter words mystical and occult are both the same thing by the way, not that i would expect you to know that.

Who are you to say that aliens are not mystical ? i believe potential aliens are mystical and relate to the occult given the fact that they can be considered as mystical entities.

Yes, and I believe that there are faeries at the bottom of my garden and I have the mysterious ability to put the jinx on technology.

There's no evidence for either position but it's what I believe and I can sit here all day making claims, but I'd not be discussing anything.

Edited by Wearer of Hats
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are not experts. They are not sages.

I beg to differ. I would consider people who dedicate a lifetime of study to a particular subject an "expert" and indeed the definition of "Sage" sits quite well. These are people with profound knowledge that attained it through hard work, not some imaginative philosophical BS. That is the point of all the study and hard work - to become extremely proficient in one's selected field.

People who think they are "naturally smart" are only kidding themselves.

It's hard work and effort. Something hippies are adverse to, and come up with crappy excuses to get out of it and promote some drug induced epiphany. And to make themselves try to look worthy, they belittle the hard work of dedicated people. But only the ignorant look up to this sort of nonsense. Hard work takes effort. It seems not everyone is prepared to do that or we would have notable people with good qualifications supporting the claims in numbers. Why is to too hard from one of these "claimants" to go out, get a degree, and then continue to promote the "alternative" to that which science has unveiled? I suspect anyone who has tried would along the way realise the major flaws in their alternatives. It certainly explains the numbers vs qualifications ratio.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"we can't prove it was done any way, therefore aliens".

.

I am not restricted to the alien theory, i welcome other theories aswell. But so far, i am not seeing anything that would suggest that the "Great Pyramid" can be replicated by modern man applying primitive techniques. Therefore, i see their theory as unproven and unconvincing, its up to them to prove themselves right and so far they have not done that. They could not even replicate a smaller primitive version, that speaks volumes about the Egyptologists credibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are people with profound knowledge that attained it through hard work, not some imaginative philosophical BS.

Profound knowledge my ass. They misrepresent the meaning of the ANKH and its symbolic spiritual significance. You have a problem with imaginative philosophical views i see. To you its all bull****, to others its not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not restricted to the alien theory, i welcome other theories aswell.

As am I, the most convincing "it wasn't done exactly as presented by Egyptologists" theory I've heard has to do with some quasi-Atlantean, pre-Ice Age culture building knowledge storehouses across the globe and choosing the pyramid because of the way it interacts with physical impacts, dissipating kinetic energy across the vertices and withstanding it across the faces.

And that's the next most convincing theory to "they did it with ramps", and it requires so many leaps of logic that it might as well include the phrase "and then the Daleks invaded".

They could not even replicate a smaller primitive version, that speaks volumes about the Egyptologists credibility.

You mean people spitballing the practicalities of something, while under pressure to produce a valid result, with the budget that'd struggle to outfit a fishtank effectively, didn't produce something akin to one of the Seven Wonders of the World?

I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.

Profound knowledge my ass. They misrepresent the meaning of the ANKH and its symbolic spiritual significance. You have a problem with imaginative philosophical views i see. To you its all bull****, to others its not.

Hang on, IIRC the ankh represents life. What does it mean to you?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't have any idea what you're on about, i blame modern education for your ignorance. You do not have the faintest idea what super-conciousness or GOD-HEAD means. You are not an adept on occult matters, therefore you do not know what you are talking about when it comes to the ancient occult or the "Great Pyramid"

And BOOM goes the credibility.

There are sections of this forum more suited to Occult and alternative matters. This section is for discussing the possibility of Extraterrestrial life and the UFO phenomena. Rather than knowing what you are talking about, do you know where you are? A philosophical view of planets being seen as aliens does not really qualify the forums title. You will continue to be at odds with people when you are trying to discuss philosophical ideals as opposed to attempting to address a phenomena that has kept man fascinated for decades. That is why we are here. Maybe you could get yourself straightened out as to if you are speaking of planets of physical beings, or non-corporeal for that matter, so we can all sit on the same playing field.

Whilst the critical thinkers in this forum are very astute, you would be better taking your Pyramid argument to the Alternative History section where kmt_sesh can, and I am sure will, answer any question you might have. I woud consider him the most knowledgeable on this forum with regards to this subject. By a very long shot. You will see some of the posters from this section as well, but the environment would be more appropriate I think.

Unless of course, you want to start talking aliens and flying saucers.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not restricted to the alien theory, i welcome other theories aswell. But so far, i am not seeing anything that would suggest that the "Great Pyramid" can be replicated by modern man applying primitive techniques. Therefore, i see their theory as unproven and unconvincing, its up to them to prove themselves right and so far they have not done that. They could not even replicate a smaller primitive version, that speaks volumes about the Egyptologists credibility.

I am very open minded about every variation on 'how & why' & I do know one thing for sure...

The majority of people who presumably lived in giza around the time the pyramids were built were probably pyramid builders as now days there are probably very few around, so on that point I assume there were not many computer experts around then either, yet if you asked an egyptian who lived 5 thousand years ago to reproduce a computer they would probably find it hard pushed to build one!

Also, there were no tv's around then so I would guess the majority of people looked up at the night skies & had a lot of time on their hands in which case there were probably thousands of people with the knowledge of the constelations compared with the limited number of people who have complete knowledge today!

I do not believe that any one person has all the answers but I do believe that all the answers are out there somewhere but, hey,

it is good to discuss these issues! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quasi-Atlantean, pre-Ice Age culture building knowledge storehouses across the globe and choosing the pyramid

Why are you so dismissive of the idea of ancient cities that might have existed long ago on earth? the earth is a big place, you are talking deep water oceans and underground that stretch for miles and miles, does it not seem plausible to you that thousands of years ago there might have been something else that you have not heard of before? i know you won't believe it without mountains of evidence, but does it at least seem plausible to you?

while under pressure to produce a valid result, with the budget that'd struggle to outfit a fishtank effectively, didn't produce something akin to one of the Seven Wonders of the World?

I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.

They could not handle the pressure, oh great so they dropped the primitive tools and brought in modern technology to complete it. How convenient, they did not have a clue what they were dealing with.

Hang on, IIRC the ankh represents life. What does it mean to you?

To say its a symbol of life is a very vague term. They should be giving a much deeper explanation as to its meaning. The ANKH represents the key to the soul and heart chakra.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Profound knowledge my ass. They misrepresent the meaning of the ANKH and its symbolic spiritual significance. You have a problem with imaginative philosophical views i see. To you its all bull****, to others its not.

Hey go ahead and dazzle me. How is it you have the correct information about the ANKH???? More so than those who take the time and effort to spend countless years studying such? Time machine perhaps? Epiphany, dream, vision?

The experts official position is a guess based upon other aspects of culture. You know the big difference between your view and theirs? They are not lying about having anything. Do you claim to have the correct interpretation? They do not!

They actually state "We do not know, but this is our best guess"

What do modern Egyptians use the symbol for? Are they "clueless" as well? It's their culture!

Hrmmzz, Wiki even states:

Origin

It is by Egyptologists called the symbol of life. It is also called the "handled cross", or crux ansata. It represents the male triad and the female unit, under a decent form. There are few symbols more commonly met with in Egyptian art. In some remarkable sculptures, where the sun's rays are represented as terminating in hands, the offerings which these bring are many a crux ansata, emblematic of the truth that a fruitful union is a gift from the deity.The origin of the symbol remains a mystery to Egyptologists, and no single hypothesis has been widely accepted. One of the earliest suggestions is that of Thomas Inman, first published in 1869:[3]

E. A. Wallis Budge postulated that the symbol originated as the belt-buckle of the mother goddess Isis,[4] an idea joined by Wolfhart Westendorf with the notion that both the ankh and the knot of Isis were used in many ceremonies.[citation needed] Sir Alan Gardiner speculated that it depicts a sandal strap, with the loop going around the ankle.[citation needed] The word for sandal strap was also spelled ꜥnḫ, although it may have been pronounced differently.


  • magnify-clip.pngthe ankh, symbol of life, thoracic vertebra of a bull (seen in cross section)
  • the djed, symbol of stability, base on sacrum of a bull's spine
  • the was, symbol of power and dominion, a staff featuring the head and tail of the god Set, "great of strength"

So how did they misinterpret something they have not interpreted?????

Yes I have a problem with philosophical imaginative BS. This is not the place for such discussion. Again, the title of this section of this Forum is Extraterrestrial Life and the UFO phenomena, not philosophy, not spiritualism. Specific forums exist especially for those very subjects. They do exist for a reason. And I recognise that is what floats some peoples boats, but that is why I rarely if ever post in those sections. My views do not fit there, so I will not force those who want to talk about the subject, which is what you seem to be doing here?

If you wish to speculate upon the specific subject, being ET and the UFO phenomena, such is your prerogative. But that's not what I am seeing.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And BOOM goes the credibility.

There are sections of this forum more suited to Occult and alternative matters. This section is for discussing the possibility of Extraterrestrial life and the UFO phenomena. Rather than knowing what you are talking about, do you know where you are? A philosophical view of planets being seen as aliens does not really qualify the forums title. .

Occult can apply to the alien topic. It does not have to be left out, both are connected and related.

The idea of alien beings does not have to apply to only one form, you are thinking of the star trek form. Planets can also be considered as living beings, some have their own biosphere and eco-sphere. The gaia theory can be discussed as extraterrestrial aswell, considering that earth is only planet in a vast and expansive settings.

You are ignorant, i think you been watching too much hollywood and their idea of aliens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Says who? Egyptologists? why should anyone listen to them and their unproven theories?

Unproven? DB Said they were tombs, and you reject that. However, I am unsure how you could be unaware of the discoveries of bodies inside these structures.

No matter your freaky view of spiritual power plants, these structures housed dead bodies. That makes DB right even if they are giant spaceships ready to leap into some wormhole/blackhole. Hole of some sort anyway. They are still a tomb. That is proven.

800px-AncientEgyptianMummy-Antjau-CloseUp-ROM.png

See - dead body.

tomb

/to͞om/

Noun

  • A large vault, typically an underground one, for burying the dead.
  • An enclosure for a corpse cut in the earth or in rock.

Unless you are using some language from the ancients that offers an alternative interpretation? :rolleyes:

Edited by psyche101
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have said the same thing many times to psyche and others on this forum. It's not a personal problem it's a cultural one. The modern culture enforces a 2 dimensional sterile rote education on people that few ever escape from.

Ummm Zoser.

You have to enter it to escape it. There is no reason to consider that you so much as knocked on the door. You have been wandering the boundaries scratching you head for so long that you have convinced yourself that ignorance itself is an institution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Replicate the pyramids with the methods described and we will take you seriously.

Until then all you have is an unproven theory, speculation etc, no more different than our mysterious theories.

The egyptologists are only fueling other arguments, because they are lieing. And people can feel those lies.

No problems I will run the crew. I have plenty construction experience. You put up the cash and away we go, after all it is you questioning the conventional model, I think it is pretty decent of me to offer the run the project for you. At a reasonable and agreed cost of course.

Feeling lies LOL. Damn hippies.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I beg to differ. I would consider people who dedicate a lifetime of study to a particular subject an "expert" and indeed the definition of "Sage" sits quite well. These are people with profound knowledge that attained it through hard work, not some imaginative philosophical BS. That is the point of all the study and hard work - to become extremely proficient in one's selected field.

People who think they are "naturally smart" are only kidding themselves.

It's hard work and effort. Something hippies are adverse to, and come up with crappy excuses to get out of it and promote some drug induced epiphany. And to make themselves try to look worthy, they belittle the hard work of dedicated people. But only the ignorant look up to this sort of nonsense. Hard work takes effort. It seems not everyone is prepared to do that or we would have notable people with good qualifications supporting the claims in numbers. Why is to too hard from one of these "claimants" to go out, get a degree, and then continue to promote the "alternative" to that which science has unveiled? I suspect anyone who has tried would along the way realise the major flaws in their alternatives. It certainly explains the numbers vs qualifications ratio.

I'm not having it that just because they dedicate their lives on a subject they know everything & to close the book.. They obviously know more than someone who thinks on their feet, but sometimes people get lucky with their ideas, it happens all the time! I do agree someone to be a 'pro' after dedicating their whole life to a subject but come on, don't just discount someone's views because they have not been to colledge or an authority on the issue.. That's a bit narrow minded. There are plenty of people out there over history who 'knew it all' only to be found to be wrong years after their deaths ;)

When i'm more familiar with how these forums work I will prove it to you all.......

WATCH THIS SPACE!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I have a problem with philosophical imaginative BS. This is not the place for such discussion. Again, the title of this section of this Forum is Extraterrestrial Life and the UFO phenomena, not philosophy, not spiritualism.

You can not restrict the discussion of aliens to being only one form, for to do so lacks variety and vibrancy to the debate. Everybody can have a theory on extraterrestrial life, as long as it can be considered from the perspective of outside the earth, that perspective can also blend philosophy and spirituality into the mix for an interesting and tasteful recipe.

If you only want spaceships, klingons, laser weapons, go watch star trek. Of course you can talk about them here too, but thats only one form of alien out of many possibilities and theories. That form should not hold the monopoly of the debate.

Edited by LRW
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone tell me how to load a picture?

Please help :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unproven? DB Said they were tombs, and you reject that.

Of course i will reject it.

Why?

There was no mummies found in the great pyramid .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No problems I will run the crew. I have plenty construction experience.

Feeling lies LOL. Damn hippies.

Alternative theorists should not have to fund your project for you to try and explain or try to prove a theory. Team up with Egyptologists and lobby and campaign for private donations and don't forget to ask for coffins aswell. Those Great Pyramid blocks are heavy and extremely dangerous when lifted.

ts_pine-coffin.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you so dismissive of the idea of ancient cities that might have existed long ago on earth? the earth is a big place, you are talking deep water oceans and underground that stretch for miles and miles, does it not seem plausible to you that thousands of years ago there might have been something else that you have not heard of before? i know you won't believe it without mountains of evidence, but does it at least seem plausible to you?

I'm the guy here who actually does believe in pre-Babylonian civilisations. You're actually preaching to the choir on this one.

I don't need a mountain of evidence, in fact I need one piece of evidence, just the one. Something I can't explain away as being a result of something else, and I can rattle off a dozen or so things off the top of my head that I can't explain. Some of them even support the supposition of a pre-Babylonian culture, but I've heard those things explained equally convincingly as other things.

They could not handle the pressure, oh great so they dropped the primitive tools and brought in modern technology to complete it. How convenient, they did not have a clue what they were dealing with.

You're right on both points, but the important thing to remember is... they tried to prove their theory which is something sadly lacking from the AA side of the fence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ramp theory has been postulated now for decades. It was discarded by all serious investigators on the basis that it would have required as much material as the GP itself. The means of lifting was obviously some form of anti-gravity technology; remember the limestone blocks were not really the main problem. The Kings chamber is constructed of granite blocks weighing many tens of tonnes.

That is what needs to be explained.

What serious investigator discards it? And while we are at it, what is your definition of "serious investigator" I have a feeling we are on different tracks from the outset.

Anti Gravity? Lord you are a dreamer! You make me laugh and cry all at the same time. What "serious investigator" promotes anti gravity?

It is not postulation any longer, remains of a ramp on the South Side have been unearthed. Real physical evidence.

III. 2. The Discovery of the Ramp.

During the work of relocating the Sound and Light Show cables at Giza, we were able to excavate their route beginning at the Southwest of the Great Pyramid.

Also at this time we started the re-excavation of the cemetery GIS and the restoration of the tombs there.

As was discussed above the only possible side for the erection of the ramp during the reign of Khufu was the South side. The ramp was constructed of limestone chips, gypsum, and a calcareous clay called Tafla. Due to the hardiness of the construction materials what remains of the ramp, after the Egyptians removed it to build the tombs of GIS, should still exist on the South side.

We started to remove sand for the erection of the cables North of the paved road and South of the pyramid. During the work we found a big part of the ramp used to transport the stones from the quarry to the pyramid base. This part of the ramp consisted of two walls built of stone rubble and mixed with Tafla. The area in between was filled with sand and gypsum forming the bulk of the ramp.

On the South side of the paved road, South of Khufu's pyramid, we excavated down about 2.50 meters and found another part of the ramp. This part is in line with the Eastern and Western wall and is of similar construction. This discovery proves that the ramp led from the quarry to the Southwest comer of the pyramid and was made of stone rubble and Tafla.(see plans 2,3) The ramp rises to about 30 meters above the pyramid's base at its Southwest comer. The ramp would have leaned against the pyramid's faces as they rose. Somewhat like accretion layers wrapped around the pyramid with a roadway on top. The weight of this ramp is borne by the ground around the pyramid. Traffic could move along the top of this structure as both pyramid and ramp rose in tandem. The top of the pyramid could be reached with only one and one quarter turns. The slope would rise with each turn from a reasonable 65 degrees, for the first section, to as much as 18 degrees for the last climb to the apex. 19

You can only be flaming to claim to not know this and say "It must have been anti gravity" Zoser, that is not even thinking. That is just letting your brain vomit all over your keyboard.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course i will reject it.

Why?

There was no mummies found in the great pyramid .

I'm fairly convinced by the argument "they moved the bodies" as we have evidence from the time of the move saying (paraphrasingly) "we disinterred Bob, moved him somewhere secret so they won't steal from him". Now, Bob in this case was a Pharaoh, was it one of the Ramses? Anyway, they wrote down "moved X to new location". Admittedly Bob wasn't in a Pyramid, but he was disinterred and moved to the Valley of the Kings.

Is it not logical that they did the same to the bodies in the Pyramids?

Besides, they did find niches that'd fit sarcophagi.

There is a theory that may have some legs that the pyramids where a spiritual tomb and not a physical one, the bodies interred there for a time, allowing the spirit to leave the body and take up it's residence in the Great Hereafter and then moved on. No bodies left in the pyramids because there was no need the body would be kept safely in the Valley of the Kings and the spirit off to dine with Ra.

Edited by Wearer of Hats

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

people looked up at the night skies & had a lot of time on their hands in which case there were probably thousands of people with the knowledge of the constelations compared with the limited number of people who have complete knowledge today!

I do not believe that any one person has all the answers but I do believe that all the answers are out there somewhere but, hey,

it is good to discuss these issues! ;)

I agree that the ancients did look at the night sky and constellations a lot, they observed the cosmos, and discussed it. They were more in tune with nature and the general earth all around them, i also believe they were in tune with what they would describe as a spirit world. In modern times people don't care anymore. They are more in tune with overly commercialised entertainment using ancient symbols to appeal to the viewers sub-concious. That X for instance had powerful meanings to the ancients. Yet to modern people they associate with that Cowell idiot.

X-Factor.jpg

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.