Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Ancient Astronaut Theory


Neem

Recommended Posts

I think the above is brilliant!*

How very perceptive of you, Lightly! You certainly are a a most excellent judge of intellect! :w00t:

.... sorry Harte but this is stupid ^ ... tying the rope around both of you at the cliff is TWICE as stupid !

OMG your RIGHT!

Thank Jebus you said something!

Looky here, Jaylemurph, we gots us someone to remind us how stoopid we is.

Harte

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Just as I thought.. you people have nothing. I wouldn't matter what "facts" I come up with, just like the artifacts, you would all just say its fake.

That video was a test... my point has been proven. Now ofcourse I don't expect the rats in the maze (you) to know theyre being tested though.

problem is.. you are not coming up with facts.. or artifacts for that matter.. when you get some proper ones.. please feel free to let us know..

as for the video.. thing is.. your the lab rat.. being suckered in by stuff like that without actually look at it..

The majority of humans are very dumb, yet full of confidence in their intellect... in a room we have 4 or 5 humans picking on a single humans idea... by the laws of the stupidity majority percentage... I'm most likely the smart one with the right arguement.

It would be a mathematical impossibility that it were the other way around...

Right.. your logic.. is.. to be honest.. probably the most illogical thing I have ever read on here.. and I am including zosers posts in that statement..

Every single on of you have the classic sickness... If it proves me wrong it must be fake!

Its actually a psychological disease that infects the infantile majority (you).

Sadly there is no known cure except self discovery and acceptance of ones social brainwashing. Then the fight may begin

actually.. your wrong there.. there is no pyschological disease for that.. how do I know.. my girl friend is a pysch :D

now as for the one you suffer with.. gullibility there is a cure for that.. waking up and actually looking into things before taking it at face value.. good luck.. it is easy to do.. and once you do.. you will understand the truth that everything you believed in prior.. is really.. fiction..

Not only does the evidence prove me to be correct but the very nature that I'm being bombarded with idiotic comments and accused of lying and presenting fake evidence shows an occurence that has been happening since the beginning of time.

A small group discovers something amazing and has to fight against the large group of idiots to get it accepted....

Examples...

There is in fact something beyond the shores.

earth is not flat.

But what REALLY shows how stupid you all are is your lack of curiousity.

You are the first men that ganged up on the one that wanted to build a boat an go see if theres anything or anyone else out there and made him feel stupid.

You are the men that burned the first scientists to suggest there was such a thing as a universe.

Again, you should all be ashmed of yourselves, as you don't deserve natures gift of conciousness.

for your first couple of examples.. you really need to look at history.. you will find that both of those (like a few of your other statements) are false..

as for lack of curiosity.. funny enough.. all of us so called skeptics are curious about things.. and we really look at it..

no.. we are the men that show people the truth about things.. dispelling the fiction that people put up as fact..

so my friend.. you should be ashamed that you sprout this kind of rubbish.. and to be honest.. I dont think you actually have natures gift of consciousness.. you seem to be sucked in quite easily..

I'm done posting on this thread, as no one has the particular knowledge to argue against this theory

hmmm now I am wondering if there is such a thing as god now.. because this is a heaven sent statement

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mullet doesn't lie...

No, he's just convinced he knows what he's talking about (spoiler: he doesn't )

He fooled many of the gullible, unintentionally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

I could say the same to you.

Daniken was caught faking evidence for his books.

Stitchin has been caught lieing about information in his books.

There are many concievabl ways the pyramids were built, keep in mind there is steady build up to the pyramids at Giza, starting with the step pyramids designed by Imhotep.

The Bent pyramid, the Red Pyramid, and the Collapsed pyramid are evidence of the refining of construction techniques.

Evidence indicates that following the growing season, the people of Egypt, who had much spare time on their hands, were put to work building the pyramids.

Or they could be examples of failed attempts to copy what was already there when the Egyptians came on the scene.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or they could be examples of failed attempts to copy what was already there when the Egyptians came on the scene.

...but why is there copious evidence for the Egyptian culture and the previous cultures in the Nile valley and not a single item for these other? Where did the live?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or they could be examples of failed attempts to copy what was already there when the Egyptians came on the scene.

Between Carbon dating the charcoal in the mortar used in the pyramids, markings left by the Egyptian workers in places unreachable after the pyramid was finished unless you have access to dynamite, the tool marks, the remains of the worker's village and the bodies of the workers, all are pretty clear who it was built by, and when.

Think this is the only time a thread's been revived years later in response to one of my posts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...but why is there copious evidence for the Egyptian culture and the previous cultures in the Nile valley and not a single item for these other? Where did the live?

It's a mystery to me too. There seems to be a bunch of evidence that is starting to move the commonly accepted timeline of what we understand as human civilization. We harken it back to the Babylonians as the first civilization but Gobekli tempi is like 5000 years older than that date so wtf ?? And new evidence suggests that Machu pichu was built on older ruins. The older ruins being megoloithic block and the modern ruins being much smaller block. Puma punka is aligned like it was built 15000 years ago not 5000.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a lot of the ancient cultures that have megalithic buildings in their pantheon inherited them. None of the south and Central American cultures claim sole possession Of the mega sights they all state rather clearly that these places were sacred and holy before they ever showed up. If it was easy to say who laid what stone where and when why is Stonehenge a debate still Anyone can say what they want as long as everyone who can dispute them is long dead when they do. Something horrible probably happened to the previous tenants. Time erases a lot of evidence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a mystery to me too. There seems to be a bunch of evidence that is starting to move the commonly accepted timeline of what we understand as human civilization. We harken it back to the Babylonians as the first civilization but Gobekli tempi is like 5000 years older than that date so wtf ??

Sumer is the first known civilization - what we have seen of GT would mean it was a culture, I would suggest you might find Catalhuyuck of interest also as it nearly as old and quite interesting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%87atalh%C3%B6y%C3%BCk

And new evidence suggests that Machu pichu was built on older ruins. The older ruins being megoloithic block and the modern ruins being much smaller block. Puma punka is aligned like it was built 15000 years ago not 5000.

None that I know of for MP

PP you are referring to Posnansky's idea which has been shown to be wrong. PP isn't particularly old the main construction sequence was 1,500 years ago there were some older ruins there too much cruder which have not been successfully dated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do the locals expressly say they built onto not started then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a lot of the ancient cultures that have megalithic buildings in their pantheon inherited them. None of the south and Central American cultures claim sole possession Of the mega sights they all state rather clearly that these places were sacred and holy before they ever showed up. If it was easy to say who laid what stone where and when why is Stonehenge a debate still Anyone can say what they want as long as everyone who can dispute them is long dead when they do. Something horrible probably happened to the previous tenants. Time erases a lot of evidence

Actually the Maya did as did the Inca, the Inca claims are not backed in writing because they didn't have any. I believe you are referring to is Teotihuacan which was abandoned and found by the Aztecs but then its not particularly old.

The basic problem with your idea of a global civilization is a complete lack of evidence for same while at the some time there is evidence for the existing people being there. It isn't clear who built stone henge but its technology is rather crude

Why do the locals expressly say they built onto not started then?

Depends on which ruins you are talking about

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Puma and mp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Puma and mp

Okay thanks for the clarification please link to the source of the locals so stating that is contemporary to the time of the Spanish arrival

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Puma and mp

Please expound on your assertions in regards to Machu Picchu. There are very specific engineering requirements designed into the complex controlling water flow not only from a spring but also the large amount of rain the site receives per annum. The terraces have very specific features built into them as well as two faults utilized for water management. While pictures of it today show manicured lawn in spots the flora incorporated at the site during the time period it was occupied. Just putting a terrace would not keep it from washing downhill when a heavy rain event occurs. If the locals had the knowledge to properly make additional terraces why deprive them the ability to have designed the entire site ?

Dr. Ken Wright has a publicly available peer reviewed paper on M.P. in regard to the hydrology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do the locals expressly say they built onto not started then?

If, as Hans stated, you are not referring to Teotihuacan, then you might be thinking of the Inca claim (to the Spanish) that they didn't build Tiahuanaco.

Regarding your statement above, The Incans never said they "built onto it."

The reason they said they didn't build it is because they didn't build it.

They did, however, build Ollantaytambo, and told the Spanish they did. As well as several other megalithic sites.

Harte

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

It's a mystery to me too. There seems to be a bunch of evidence that is starting to move the commonly accepted timeline of what we understand as human civilization.

That's actually expected by archaeologists. However, they don't run around announcing "lost civilizations" until they actually find one.

We harken it back to the Babylonians as the first civilization but Gobekli tempi is like 5000 years older than that date so wtf ??

That's a site, not a civilization. As for sites, we have village sites that are far older than Gobekli tepi. There's a rock-working site that dates back almost a million years (to the time of homo erectus) -- so if you hear of earlier dates, don't be surprised.

The oldest (confirmed) village I know about is 120,000 years old: http://superbeefy.com/where-is-the-worlds-oldest-village/

The oldest "it looks like a town" in Europe is currently dated around 4,000 BC http://www.mnn.com/lifestyle/arts-culture/stories/europes-oldest-prehistoric-village-found-in-bulgaria

And new evidence suggests that Machu pichu was built on older ruins. The older ruins being megoloithic block and the modern ruins being much smaller block. Puma punka is aligned like it was built 15000 years ago not 5000.

It's actually a recent site.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.