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 8
seeder

Ancient Alien theory

1,233 posts in this topic

I suggest we let the other AA thread die, and see where this new one takes us.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you do,PLEASE.... present something with a little more substance that the tired old "I dont see how, therefor alienzz" crap.... The other tread is filled with it.

If you want to do that.... go back to the crappy thread and do it there.

:tu: and thats always going to be where the AA theory falls down. Total lack of substance/evidence/facts..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:tu: and thats always going to be where the AA theory falls down. Total lack of substance/evidence/facts..

The only interesting about that thread must be from a psychologist point of view.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

accusing people of deliberately breaking the rules in order to troll? That's scraping the barrel of desperation, isn't it?

I can prove it if you want me to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Ive not completely made my argument yet. As said there will be a few sections! Each building on the previous...

The stonework will always be the killer though.

The most solid tangible evidence and it will never be destroyed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can prove it if you want me to.

Take it to the garbage thread... with the rest of your "evidence".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The stonework will always be the killer though.

The most solid tangible evidence and it will never be destroyed.

To add:

Any argument on the AA hypothesis without dealing head on with the stone evidence is just likely to be weak philosophy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The stonework will always be the killer though.

The most solid tangible evidence and it will never be destroyed.

*Sigh* -- "I dont know, therefore alienzzz" :td:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To add:

Any argument on the AA hypothesis without dealing head on with the stone evidence is just likely to be weak philosophy.

haha :clap:

this thread hasnt even got started yet.... baby steps.....(for people like you!)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

haha :clap:

this thread hasnt even got started yet.... baby steps.....(for people like you!)

Saying of Zoser:

Two AA threads are better than one.

I'll just wait for the right moment to strike. Once the philosophy is spent, Zoser will enter the room like a heat seeking missile.

See you soon.

Don't be angry please.

There is still much more to be revealed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all in the stonework.

That's exactly the problem.

The stonework does not display any advanced technology. Even with our primitive clunky mechanical tools, we humans today could do a much better job. These aliens flew across the universe and couldn't cut stones much better than ancient humans with stone tools.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's exactly the problem.

The stonework does not display any advanced technology. Even with our primitive clunky mechanical tools, we humans today could do a much better job. These aliens flew across the universe and couldn't cut stones much better than ancient humans with stone tools.

It blows me away that claims like zosers can make any sense, at all, to anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Saying of Zoser:

Two AA threads are better than one.

I'll just wait for the right moment to strike. Once the philosophy is spent, Zoser will enter the room like a heat seeking missile.

See you soon.

Don't be angry please.

There is still much more to be revealed.

:whistle:

You know what they say about people speaking of themselves in third person?

http://wiki.answers....he_third_person

No surprise there.

Edited by DBunker
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why didn't they bring some cool metals to build with instead of using stupid rocks?

Why didn't they make concrete instead of stacking rocks? All the ingredients were right here.

Zoser's contends that these aren't just stacks of rocks -- they're gigantic machines doing... something! He repeated the theory that the pyramids are giant electric generators but due to some false assumptions and his incomplete understanding of piezoelectricity, he was unable to explain how they could generate a milliwatt of electricity. He was even less successful in explaining how any electrical energy could have been transmitted out of the structure since there are no traces of copper conductors which the Egyptians could have easily manufactured.

Zoser chooses to focus on stacks of rocks and actively ignores other older yet similar structures that were definitely created by humans with far more precision. He dismisses these as "art" despite they are the same precise masonry that he claims is undeniable proof of alien visitation.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saying of Zoser:

Two AA threads are better than one.

I'll just wait for the right moment to strike. Once the philosophy is spent, Zoser will enter the room like a heat seeking missile.

See you soon.

Don't be angry please.

There is still much more to be revealed.

it's a very generous offer, but please, you needn't feel that you have to.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why didn't they make concrete instead of stacking rocks? All the ingredients were right here.

Zoser's contends that these aren't just stacks of rocks -- they're gigantic machines doing... something! He repeated the theory that the pyramids are giant electric generators but due to some false assumptions and his incomplete understanding of piezoelectricity, he was unable to explain how they could generate a milliwatt of electricity. He was even less successful in explaining how any electrical energy could have been transmitted out of the structure since there are no traces of copper conductors which the Egyptians could have easily manufactured.

Zoser chooses to focus on stacks of rocks and actively ignores other older yet similar structures that were definitely created by humans with far more precision. He dismisses these as "art" despite they are the same precise masonry that he claims is undeniable proof of alien visitation.

Watch the first few minutes of this. Hutchinson demonstrates powering a small motor from a lump of rock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Faeries used dragonfire to heat the rocks and their indentured workforce of gnomes to cut the softened rock.

the evidence is all there in the stonework.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ancient_aliens_by_gatoechado-d4wln7x.jpg
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ancient-aliens.jpg
7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[media=]

[/media]

Unfortunately, he seems to be the only one who can produce the effects, and he never did replicate them, at least not in the presence of unbiased observers.

His evidence consists mainly of his word and his video. In real science that is not enough.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, he seems to be the only one who can produce the effects, and he never did replicate them, at least not in the presence of unbiased observers.

His evidence consists mainly of his word and his video. In real science that is not enough.

I thought he never was able to reproduce the effect after that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's exactly the problem.

The stonework does not display any advanced technology. Even with our primitive clunky mechanical tools, we humans today could do a much better job. These aliens flew across the universe and couldn't cut stones much better than ancient humans with stone tools.

Lets not invite rock pics! Im covering the 'mission purpose' in my next section too, v. soon!! :tu:

:whistle:

You know what they say about people speaking of themselves in third person?

http://wiki.answers....he_third_person

No surprise there.

hehe I think he believes he is his own avatar.... weird :w00t:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why didn't they make concrete instead of stacking rocks? All the ingredients were right here.

Zoser's contends that these aren't just stacks of rocks -- they're gigantic machines doing... something! He repeated the theory that the pyramids are giant electric generators but due to some false assumptions and his incomplete understanding of piezoelectricity, he was unable to explain how they could generate a milliwatt of electricity. He was even less successful in explaining how any electrical energy could have been transmitted out of the structure since there are no traces of copper conductors which the Egyptians could have easily manufactured.

Zoser chooses to focus on stacks of rocks and actively ignores other older yet similar structures that were definitely created by humans with far more precision. He dismisses these as "art" despite they are the same precise masonry that he claims is undeniable proof of alien visitation.

and I shall be covering 'ancient machines' too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Watch the first few minutes of this. Hutchinson demonstrates powering a small motor from a lump of rock.

why do you find it hard to actually write zoser? You know, as I and everyone else does? Instead of hiding behind pics and vids? And just how many times have I told you to spend a minute or two checking your sources? And how many other times have I said you just regurgitate previous stuff? Because on the other thread when Bee chipped in about the Hutchinson effect I debunked that in 2 posts. As was PREVIOUSLY pointed out, (and again by others here) Huitchinson makes vids alone, ie, no witnesses, or at least no neutral observers...

There are claims that he makes videos on a rotating background, but with the camera fixed in place so we cant tell if what we are seeing is upside down or not, but I cant be bothered to repeat myself as you do - so do some reading

quote:

"While attempting to recreate the experiments of engineer Nikola Tesla in the late 1970s, Hutchison claims to have discovered many new phenomena, primarily manifesting in metals. The effects of his experiments supposedly included metal objects floating to the ceiling, shattering, becoming warm, fusing with other objects and other interesting manifestations. The collective term for these manifestations he named the "Hutchison Effect."

No attempt to replicate Hutchison's experiments by a third party has so far been successful. Many agencies, including NASA, have attempted to recreate Hutchison's Effect. After extensive testing, NASA's head of finding new propulsion methods for spacecraft stated, "This 'Hutchison Effect' has been claimed for years, without any independent verification — ever... This is in the category of folklore."

Hutchison himself claims to have replicated the results numerous times prior to 1991, while admitting some footage he has released since (at $100 per tape) was faked, as he is no longer able to recreate the effects. He assumed that nobody would notice that the "levitating" objects were held up with strings, which he initially tried to convince his audience were cords supplying power to the levitating objects. When asked why he is unable to demonstrate the results of his experiment anymore, he claims he is coerced by, and has had his work destroyed by the government"

http://rationalwiki..../John_Hutchison

http://www.skepdic.c...chisonhoax.html

scraping that barrel again eh... :tu:

.

Edited by seeder
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that there are people who firmly believe it is scientific fact that something just slightly more complex than a molecule somehow became alive, and through the offices of extreme lengths of time, fantastic luck in compiling just the right mutations in just the right sequences and combination, and pure random chance called "natural selection" is the common ancestor of all life on the planet and that this same process must have taken place in countless planets throughout the universe despite the ridiculously huge coincidences required, your argument that AA Theory is not valid due to the coincidences required seems weak.

That's ridiculous. Convergeant evolution is proof life will adapt to fil a niche despite it's origin, all you are looking for is a creationist argument, are you sick of the S&S forum? What does the initial spark of life have to do with the debate about Megalithic Structures's and proof that man constructed them, not the fanciful claims the resident zealot troll has made in the forum with as well as simply lying all along the way? The methods here show the claims on the AA show, which are echoed through their trolling mouthpiece here have indeed been in every way refuted soundly and examples given that do live up the their claims, unlike the clams made by the credulous zealot running around with the tin foil hat on his head. I do not think a thread about the AA show is an appropriate place for a p***ing contest about God. A forum exists for that purpose already.

The argument is certainly valid, it might pay to pont out any grievances you have with it instead of pushing the creationist argument in a subtle manner. Are the ET whacko's a last resort for creationist recruits or something? Simon Conway Morris seems to have a decent grasp on the subject you are approaching, but here there is no doubt that the claims made to date by the aforementioned sources are indeed outright lies that have been created to embellish a tall tale, obviously to make a few dollars from a poorly evidence entertainment show, and have been soundly refuted with verifiable means and evidences. If you have a problem with poorly evidenced claims for the intital spark of life, then you really ought to be more than disgusted in the claims made the the resident troll, and the outlandishly poor quality of the so called "History Channel" series. It is after all, and extreme and deliberate example of that which you protest.

Just a small example of the claims made, and the facts that refute them:

AA: “The stones that were used there weren’t sandstone, they’re granite and diorite.”

Well yeah, actually it is sandstone. You can’t blame him though for it becomes obvious that throughout the series he often just repeats things he has heard in Eric Von Daniken’s books. Von Daniken’s books are what the Ancient Aliens series is based on. Later we see Eric Von Daniken himself make the exact same, totally wrong claim.

AA: “Of course [Pumapunku was] made out of stones found on Earth, because you don’t transport granite or diorite from another solar system.”

Von Daniken continues building up this false dilemma:

AA: “One of these platforms is 800 tons.”

That is very incorrect, the heaviest block at Pumapunku is 130 tons[4], and most of the stones are much smaller than that. So he is off by a whopping 670 tons! Unfortunately we will come to expect this kind of thing from Von Daniken as we progress.

LINK

What about the refutation of the silly claims made by AA proponents in the above example would you call a "weak argument"?

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 8

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.