(This post is not intended to be a religious argument. I want to approach the topic from a philosophical angle. My intent is to present what I
consider a certain line of reasoning. The line of reasoning may seem to resolve in a question of faith, but it goes much than a simple question of
faith. It gives shape to a particular world view. I present what I consider to be the flaw in that line of reasoning. If anyone feels able to show -
in a reasonable, well thought out manner - how my reasoning is flawed, I welcome discussion. I hope that this does not degenerate into a name calling
war between fundamentalists and unbelievers. Given the spirit of many discussions on ATS, I fear that it may.)
At the dawn of the twentieth century an ancient Greek shipwreck was salvaged off the coast of the Greek Island Antikythera. Various objects of
interest and worth were taken from the wreck. Among the many artifacts were statues, coins, and housewares. These each were cataloged by the National
Museum of in Athens and, over the years, investigated.
While researchers fawned over many of the recovered artifacts, one piece escaped the attention of curators as it appeared to not be much more than a
mass of calcified sand. It wasn't until the 1970s that the full import of this particular object was grasped.
In 1971 x-ra images were taken of the artifact and fascination with the "Antikythera Mechanism"
Most anyone with a rudimentary interest in conspiracy theories is at least aware of the Antikythera Mechanism. It has fascinated students of arc,
anthropology, science, and history since its make-up was first comprehended.
The Antikythera Mechanism seemed to contradict all of modern man's assumptions about the development of civilization and the place of technology
through the millennia. The Mechanism was, by all accounts, an anachronism (the ship thought to have sunk during the first century B.C.). It didn't
seem to belong on a sunken ship of its era. While some deductions about the Mechanism have been made over the last few decades and some of its
mysteries have been sounded, it is still a source of fascination to many diverse groups of people throughout the world.
Why does this collection of gears and wheels strike at the heart of historians, archaeologist, anthropologists and conspiracy theorists around the
globe? I would suggest that there are a few reasons.
The Antikythera Mechanism was, obviously, designed and constructed by some pretty intelligent people. (OK, some might say aliens. Whatever.) The point
is, whatever person or group of people designed and built this thing, there was a high level of intelligence involved.
Unless, of course, it wasn't actually built by anyone. Might it be possible that the Antikythera Mechanism just ... happened? In a cosmos of infinite
possibilities, can we believe that some rocks and some minerals and some metals just happened to come together in some natural event or series of
natural events and form this thing that we are all so fascinated with? Could it - in this cosmos of infinite possibilities - be the product of raw,
meaningless happenstance? Perhaps the right sized gears and wheels, sprockets and cogs, pins and axles were just randomly formed by natural processes
and assembled by random chance - in this cosmos of infinite possibilities - and this thing happened!
Would anyone agree with that hypothesis?
In all the years of study and discussion of the Antikythera Mechanism, I am not aware that any person or group of persons has ever proposed such an
idea. They would have been laughed at, ridiculed, dismissed and marginalized.
It is clearly evident that the Antikythera Mechanism was designed by somebody or somebodies. It is clearly a highly complex collection of components,
engineered and designed on purpose by someone who knew what they were doing.
DESIGNED WITH PURPOSE
The level of design present in the Antikythera Mechanism speaks to us of another concept, one that has been explored since the device's discovery:
It is evident to any thinking person that if anyone set out to engineer and build a device of such complexity and precision, they must have had a
reason, a goal, an end in mind. The device's very complexity speaks to us of intent, of reason, of purpose. No person - at least no person of thought
- ever looked at the Antikythera Mechanism, said, "Meh..." and walked away with no more thought than if it had been a shiny volcanic rock. Everyone
has always wanted to know what that thing was designed to do.
Most everything written about the Mechanism since it's complexity was first revealed in 1971 hypothesized over its purpose. We - thinking people -
could not just see it and leave it at that. We wanted to know why it existed, to what end. We were not content to just know who made it (though we
still would like to know that), but why they made it.
DESIGN AND PURPOSE VEILED
Now, let's take this idea of anachronistic technology just a little into the realm of conspiracy theory.
There is an idea among many thinking people who follow both current events in politics and world affairs and have some knowledge of certain elements
of archaeology and history that there are aspects and epochs of the history of man that have been purposefully hidden from general knowledge by people
who have an agenda of some sort. It is hypothesized that these chunks of knowledge are held in secret and that those who know them do not wish the
general population to know, for whatever reason.
The scope of this essay does not permit me to go into detail about these ideas, but anyone versed in conspiracy theory would know of at least a few
examples. Some of them include: the preponderance of evidence that there have been found remains of humanoids who were, by any standard of modern man,
giants; physical evidence that seems to point to some knowledge among civilizations in the distant past of the manipulation of matter at a molecular
or atomic level.
It is generally thought that the reason for suppressing these bits of knowledge are nefarious. The hiding of any kind of factual knowledge is
considered by thinking people to be a suppression of light, a hiding of something in darkness. And that is seldom done with good intentions.
edit on 2015 1 by incoserv because: continued