Ancient Aliens

[scowl]

I might suggest the first real science was the "Greek Miracle" when philosophy turned from "the gods did it" to "natural processes did it." They often misidentified the processes in question, but sometimes they got it right.

I don't think their philosophy included the important concept of using a repeatable experiment to prove a hypothesis. Maybe that wouldn't have helped because they were arguing over things that aren't repeatable.

[cladking]

Don't forget to debunk this video Clad.

Do youmean the video in #538?

I saw it and considered all the conclusions and some of the evidence speculative

or speculative in their interpretation. This is exactly what everyone is doing; making

sweeping conclusions from almost no evidence. None of these theories fit together

or make accurate predictions which probably indicates that they are all essentially

wrong or can be essentially correct but apply to only a small part of the total mystery

or to a single aspect of all the mysteries.

The fact is that there just isn't any evidence from before 2000 BC upon which a para-

digm can be appended. Little snippets of facts do not a picture paint or the truth show.

Edited November 21, 2013 by cladking

[Myles]

Shall we start here?

[media=]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AItlDZmVLL4[/media]

This video Clad. Debunk it please. What has the AA debunker said that is wrong?

[DecoNoir]

Do youmean the video in #538?

I saw it and considered all the conclusions and some of the evidence speculative

or speculative in their interpretation. This is exactly what everyone is doing; making

sweeping conclusions from almost no evidence. None of these theories fit together

or make accurate predictions which probably indicates that they are all essentially

wrong or can be essentially correct but apply to only a small part of the total mystery

or to a single aspect of all the mysteries.

The fact is that there just isn't any evidence from before 2000 BC upon which a para-

digm can be appended. Little snippets of facts do not a picture paint or the truth show.

Thank you! You just explained everything wrong with the AA theory!

[cladking]

Maybe I should have said "Scientific Method".

Or maybe not! You could argue that many of these inventions were using informal scientific methods. Hunters tried different kinds of bows and arrowheads and discovered which ones worked. As buildings fell down, architects devised better methods of making them stronger and proved they worked by using them.

Knowledge didn't really take off until these methods were formalized as processes.

No.

It required a huge amount of knowledge and learning to invent agriculture and cities. To suppose

this knowledge arose without a formal metaphysics is simply ludicrous. You are assuming that science

must be based on observation and experiment because this is the only science we know. There might

be numerous scences that can exist but the most obvious is based on observation and logic. Indeed,

Harvard came out today and announced that based on this sort of science it has been shown that eat-

ing lots of nuts prolongs life.

It seems obvious beyond need to state it that ancient science was probably the exact same thing. It

hade a formal metaphysics but according to everyone (who are all wrong) there was no metaphysics

and no science.

In time this belief will simply go away. It doesn't work., It hasn't worked. And it won't work in the fu-

ture. It doesn't matter what we believe about ancient people, they were not superstitious and highly

primitive in their thought. They used the only metaphysics that worked for humans with the tools and

knowledge they had available. Modern people are confused and superstitious.

[cladking]

This video Clad. Debunk it please. What has the AA debunker said that is wrong?

This is very painful to watch and I could only skim it.

It seems well established that AA will say what is needed to assure an audience but I

don't know how a mercury vortex engine would work and doubt they do either. People

on both sides just seem to make stuff up out of thin cloth.

No one can seem to see that their beliefs are founded on millinea old assumptions and

almost no evidence at all.

People believe what they want to believe and take it to the grave. Then we're all sur-

prised by waste, war, and wanton destruction.

[seeder]

No.

It required a huge amount of knowledge and learning to invent agriculture and cities

Whoa there doggy! Lets see, you spend all your days running after wild chickens and pigs who dont want to be caught....day after day you chuck your spears and shoot your bows, and sometimes you get lucky,....and sometimes...you go hungry...

so, you start thinking how to make it easy... BINGO! A light-bulb goes on! And you think... Fark all that running about and sweating, lets just CATCH the animals and build fences round them, so they cant escape, and we can eat when we like without doing much... and so they did, and the fowl laid eggs, and the eggs not eaten became chicks, and soon become a size to eat.... and the boars too had young...and you realise...that farming is the way to go... catch your wild goat, and keep it fenced... you can drink its milk, see it bare young... eat it when its old....

No running about needed. So...its not a huge stretch is it, to think that food was planted....instead of foraged.. and communities came together, as there has always been safety in numbers.... everyone helps out, in return, everyone eats...

typos

.

Edited November 21, 2013 by seeder

[Skithia]

It surely didnt take any great learning to invent agriculture? The Human race were hunter gatherers but some of them settled in a fairly small area as grain and game were abundant a smart woman realised that where she had dropped a load of grain the plants started growing and she was smart enough to try doing it deliberately and in time she had a crop that the tribe could harvest each time their circuit brought them back to that spot. Hey Presto you have the start of agriculture - the next time the tribe ran into another friendly tribe she boasted to the women of that tribe about what happened - they tried it out and before you know it they were all at it.

[WoIverine]

Some of the episodes are interesting, far fetched, but entertaining.

Edited November 21, 2013 by WoIverine

[Kludge808]

Cladking, please define "metaphysics" for me.

[questionmark]

Some of the episodes are interesting, far fetched, but entertaining.

So is "Lost in Space"....

[cladking]

"Metaphysics" is the means used to gather knowledge. My definitions require that the

process actually works and that the knowledge is actually useful. For instance I might

"know" that water runs up hill under specific conditions but if this can't be shown and the

"theory" can't make any predictions then it is most probably wrong and the metaphysic

that generated the knowledge might not be true metaphysics. Any theory that can't make

accurate predictions is useless even if it were correct. There is no point to research of

any type if it can't lead to accurate predictions.

This is part of what's wrong today that causes so much trouble; flawed metaphysics and

incorrect assumptions.

Whoa there doggy! Lets see, you spend all your days running after wild chickens and pigs who dont want to be caught....day after day you chuck your spears and shoot your bows, and sometimes you get lucky,....and sometimes...you go hungry...

so, you start thinking how to make it easy... BINGO! A light-bulb goes on! And you think... Fark all that running about and sweating, lets just CATCH the animals and build fences round them, so they cant escape, and we can eat when we like without doing much... and so they did, and the fowl laid eggs, and the eggs not eaten became chicks, and soon become a size to eat.... and the boars too had young...and you realise...that farming is the way to go... catch your wild goat, and keep it fenced... you can drink its milk, see it bare young... eat it when its old....

No running about needed. So...its not a huge stretch is it, to think that food was planted....instead of foraged.. and communities came together, as there has always been safety in numbers.... everyone helps out, in return, everyone eats...

Lol.

You certainly have plenty of good company in this belief. It is the prevailing belief

among most "scientists" today. We also ascribe beaver's ability to build dams to trial

and error and instinct. Who wants to believe termites sat around planning their first

city or that bees had drafting bees to design the first honeycomb? It's just so much

easier to believe modern man wirth his technology is the pinnaclke of creation and

our ancestors and nature all got to where they were by trial and error.

I seriously doubt it. I often say that if roicket scxience were so complicated then no

one could do it. But there's another perspective; rocket science is no more complicated

then building an engine with more thrust then its weight. Brain surgery is no more com-

plicated than drilling a hole in the head without killing the patient. All of modern know-

ledge and technology were built up a little tiny piece at a time. Probably agriculture was

much the same but you might be underestimating the amount of agricultural knowledge

required to do even the most basic farming. That farming arose rather suddenly is beside

the point that it was extensive and required extensive learning. Building cities required ex-

tensive learning as well and these people didn't acquire their knowledge through trial and

error or instinct. They needed and must have had a framework, a metaphysic, for gather-

ing knowledge.

I laughed because your post reminded me of a farmer who decided it would be a good

idea and highly profitable to start raising venison for sale. Apparently the buck he decided

to corale didn't agree even in the least. In the process of not catching the deer he was in-

jured repeatedly including various broken bones. His description of the adventure is just

hilarious. Squab is quite a delcasy and commands hifgh prices yet no one is raising pid-

geons for sale. One can talk about cultivating a plant or animal but actually doing it can

be impossible even with modernb technology. Trying raising octopus, for example. It may

be done a little bit now days but for the mainpart, it just doesn't work.

How would the ancients have known the few things that could be domesticated? Actually

there might be some simple answers but like everything before 2000 BC it has been utterly

lost to us. All we have are mysteries.

[Oniomancer]

Squab is quite a delcasy and commands hifgh prices yet no one is raising pid-

geons for sale.

http://www.palmettopigeonplant.com/squab.html

[cladking]

Not illogical at all as one can take a scientific approach to the study and application of a process while still applying a religions rationale to the ultimate cause of said process, however illogical that itself may be.

There's nothing inherently illogical about belief even when that belief is in a deity. Many

people would argus that accepting this without metaphysical evidence is "logical" and I

can't entirely disagree with them. But belief can't lead to knowledge and only to support

for that belief. This is just natural.

This is in fact how science such as it was operated up until at least the mid-19th century, with the majority of the scientific community framing their inquiries within the context of biblical canon.

There's no reason that science can't be executed by someone who has beliefs. He must

practice detachment from that belief but any fact can be expressed within any belief system.

A Haitian bokor for instance may be as meticulous as a pharmacist in the preparation of a zombie powder yet still privately attribute the ultimate causative agency to a the action of a Loa. One sees this quite commonly in tribal cultures, where any given substance is viewed as having a "spirit" or "mana" at work behind it separate from but dependent on it's correct preparation. This is no different from those scientists today who manage to reconcile their science with their respective faiths, especially where those faiths are non-Christian.

Voodoo isn't repeatable. It doesn't make predictions. Until it can be demonstrated it is a

belief system.

When we examine any of the cultures most often associated with AA conjectures, in every case they commonly exhibit practices not easily interpretable in a practical, secular sense. Practices that can only be made to make sense in a religious context, such as providing for the dead, ritual sacrifice and the making and recording of offerings and prayers, with often very unambiguous intent. Try as you might, you can neither pretend they don't exist nor divorce them from the intellects that conceived both them and the technologies through which they were realized.

That we interpret all this as religious in nature may be no more than simple "sample

error". The fact is that most of what we know about all ancient cultures , and especially

those from before 2000 BC is derived from tombs and burial practices.

I don't doubt that ritual was of great importance to ancient people but that the basis of

this ritual is open to interpretation of very little evidence most of which has been derived

from tombs. I believe the interpretation is wrong.

[stereologist]

Following up on posts by Skithia and seeder it should be mentioned that there are transitional stages in which hunter/gatherers modify their environment to make their lives easier. They burn areas after hunting to keep back forests. They plant easy to climb trees next to spiky fruit trees to have an easier time collecting fruit.

Stating that it requires a huge amount of knowledge and learning to invent agriculture is not correct. It can be done in stages and there are going to be those transitional stages such as using trapped animals as bait to lure in other animals. Baiting is not agriculture but it sure can lead to it.

[stereologist]

but any fact can be expressed within any belief system.

That's a joke. How can a 4.6By old solar system be expressed in a YEC belief system? It can't. That's the problem. Facts have to be dissed when they conflict with your belief system. Some people can't handle the truth. They go crazy over the big bang theory because it conflicts with their notions of eternal reincarnation. How can the phases of Venus be expressed in a geocentric belief system? They can't.

Voodoo isn't repeatable. It doesn't make predictions. Until it can be demonstrated it is a

belief system.

"You been hexed. You gonna die." Sounds like a prediction to me.

[cladking]

http://www.palmettop....com/squab.html

Here's a place selling it for about $33 / lb.

http://buyexoticmeats.com/1whsq10to12o.html

I imagine it must be difficult to raise if such a high price doesn't entice more people to produce it.

A pound of squab by the by is about 6 bites.

Edited November 21, 2013 by cladking

[cladking]

That's a joke. How can a 4.6By old solar system be expressed in a YEC belief system? It can't. That's the problem. Facts have to be dissed when they conflict with your belief system.

God created the universe billions of years ago and created the earth 6200 years ago in seven days.

Obviously, conflicting tenets can't be held by sane people. The erath can't be both billions of years old and 6200 years.

[seeder]

God created the universe billions of years ago and created the earth 6200 years ago in seven days.

Obviously, conflicting tenets can't be held by sane people. The erath can't be both billions of years old and 6200 years.

fossils pre-date religion..by a massive margin... FACT!

[scowl]

It required a huge amount of knowledge and learning to invent agriculture and cities. To suppose

this knowledge arose without a formal metaphysics is simply ludicrous.

OK tell me exactly what formal metaphysical knowledge I would need to stick seeds into the ground, watch them grow, then harvest the crops they produce. I grew peas in my backyard this summer so consider me an expert.

You are assuming that science

must be based on observation and experiment because this is the only science we know. There might

be numerous scences that can exist but the most obvious is based on observation and logic.

That's the one that works. The other ones don't work. That's why we no longer use them and that's why we don't call them "science" any more.

Like I said, a little reading on Wikipedia will help you learn what "science" and "metaphysics" mean and how to use the terms correctly.

[Harte]

So is "Lost in Space"....

The old TV show (not the movie) was quite a bit more colorful as well.

Harte

[scowl]

"Metaphysics" is the means used to gather knowledge.

Wrong. Metaphysics is a philosophy used to describe and explain the universe. It does not practice gathering knowledge in any way, nor does it test any of the theories the practice generates. Those two shortcomings are why it doesn't work and is now mostly a form of entertainment.

Sorry, you can't make up your own definitions for words.

[cladking]

OK tell me exactly what formal metaphysical knowledge I would need to stick seeds into the ground, watch them grow, then harvest the crops they produce. I grew peas in my backyard this summer so consider me an expert.

You have to understand what a seed is, how plants grow, that they propogate only their kind,

that it is good for food, that they need sun and water, that they grow best in specific soils that

vary from species to species, that you can domesticate it, that it won't be stolen by lazy people

or animals, etc, etc, etc.

That's the one that works. The other ones don't work. That's why we no longer use them and that's why we don't call them "science" any more.

Like I said, a little reading on Wikipedia will help you learn what "science" and "metaphysics" mean and how to use the terms correctly.

Prove it! Use the scientific method to prove that experimental science is the only science

that works and the only one that has ever been on the earth. This should be easy since it's

basic to science.

The world seems simple only because our ancestors made it simple. Science seems com-

plicated only because people don't understand its metaphysics.

fossils pre-date religion..by a massive margin... FACT!

God created old fossils. Duh!

[SHaYap]

UM is very well endowed with the metaphysically learned and unlearned ... wonder when it'll go dot ORG or dot EDU ...

[Piney]

Stating that it requires a huge amount of knowledge and learning to invent agriculture is not correct. It can be done in stages and there are going to be those transitional stages such as using trapped animals as bait to lure in other animals. Baiting is not agriculture but it sure can lead to it.

The Eastern Agricultural Complex started in the North Central U.S when the Glacier Kame Culture moved into the Ohio Valley and saw that maygrass, amaranth,knotweed and tobacco grow where you drop the seeds. Then they grow better if you drop the seeds in mud, and they didn't even have pottery.

Signs of basic horticulture date all the way back to the Early Archaic in Florida. But people started purposely planting the stuff because they had to. Not because they wanted to. Population growth limited the wild supply and they had to make sure there was enough. Nobody wants to work when it grows wild. But when there isn't enough to go around, that's a different story. The Knowledge was there. Just not the need.