It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Quetzalcoatl and Jesus

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 09:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Harte
a reply to: Byrd
I gave you a star, but the Hyksos were not the Sea Peoples.

As far as no ocean invasion, the Sea People were (reportedly) turned back when they invaded - by sea: en.wikipedia.org...

Harte


Can I blame my floofy-headedness on this dratted cold (and the fact that I'd just finished a term paper on Hatshepsut?)




posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 10:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: Harte
a reply to: Byrd
I gave you a star, but the Hyksos were not the Sea Peoples.

As far as no ocean invasion, the Sea People were (reportedly) turned back when they invaded - by sea: en.wikipedia.org...

Harte


Can I blame my floofy-headedness on this dratted cold (and the fact that I'd just finished a term paper on Hatshepsut?)

Good for another star Byrd.

Harte



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 03:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Marduk
because the dinosaurs were long gone by the time humans arrived


That is likely not the case:

People Saw Living Dinosaurs





riiiight, so I am a God now


Of course. Hasn't it been said that we are gods? A shame we don't act like it:

“The Mind… is of God's very essence - if such a thing as essence of God there be - and what that is, it and it only knows precisely. The Mind, then, is not separated off from God's essentiality, but is united to it, as light to sun. This Mind in men is God, and for this cause some of mankind are gods, and their humanity is nigh unto divinity.”
-Corpus Hermeticum XII verse 1

edit on 2-2-2016 by cooperton because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 04:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Marduk
because the dinosaurs were long gone by the time humans arrived


That is likely not the case:



Err, yes it is, its been 65 million years since the dinosaurs were here, do the math. Birds have evolved since then from them, you think they are still around, its going to take more than someones unqualified opinion on the internet. Where are all the bones that the surviving lizards left behind over those millions of years.

Dragons for instance were not based on dinosaurs, though fossils may have added to an already existing legend, all the oldest dragon stories have the monster living in the sea. Then are retold with the sea creature gaining legs as the culture telling the story moves inland and loses its marine familiarity as farming becomes sufficient to raise large populations at the end of the bronze age




posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 04:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Marduk
because the dinosaurs were long gone by the time humans arrived


That is likely not the case:

People Saw Living Dinosaurs

Really? Two doofuses on an online forum? That's suppose to convince people that humans and dinosaurs coexisted?

Man, if all it takes to convince you of something is for someone to say it's true, then how can you not be convinced that humans and dinosaurs never coexisted?

After all, people are saying that's true, aren't they?

Harte

edit on 2/2/2016 by Harte because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 04:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Harte

After all, people are saying that's true, aren't they?

Harte


Remember the golden rule of the fringe,
BELIEVE EVERYTHING
unless someone qualified has an opinion and then
BELIEVE THE OPPOSITE

edit on 2-2-2016 by Marduk because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 04:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Harte

Really? Two doofuses on an online forum? That's suppose to convince people that humans and dinosaurs coexisted?

Man, if all it takes to convince you of something is for someone to say it's true, then how can you not be convinced that humans and dinosaurs never coexisted?

After all, people are saying that's true, aren't they?

Harte


originally posted by: Marduk

Err, yes it is, its been 65 million years since the dinosaurs were here, do the math. Birds have evolved since then from them, you think they are still around, its going to take more than someones unqualified opinion on the internet. Where are all the bones that the surviving lizards left behind over those millions of years.

Dragons for instance were not based on dinosaurs, though fossils may have added to an already existing legend, all the oldest dragon stories have the monster living in the sea. Then are retold with the sea creature gaining legs as the culture telling the story moves inland and loses its marine familiarity as farming becomes sufficient to raise large populations at the end of the bronze age



Rather than blind ridicule, perhaps you could refute the following questions in the link I posted:

-How is DNA found from organisms that lived "millions of years ago"?
-How is other organic tissue found from organisms that lived "millions of years ago"?
-How were these ancient people able to accurately depict living dinosaurs?
-Why are the remains of humans in the same geological stratum as dinosaur remains?



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 04:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

Rather than blind ridicule, perhaps you could refute the following questions in the link I posted:



-How is DNA found from organisms that lived "millions of years ago"?

it isn't, the actual claim was that they found Collagen. So your facts are wrong, colour me surprised, In Jurassic park they claimed that they could do it with mosquitoes, but mosquitoes hadn't evolved at the time, are you using Michael Crichton as a source lol


-How is other organic tissue found from organisms that lived "millions of years ago"?

It gets locked in by the iron in the blood


-How were these ancient people able to accurately depict living dinosaurs?

They didn't, they depicted mythical monsters, it took the modern science of palaeontology to influence you into believing that is the case, but the ancients didn't have that. I could show you pictures that show how the images you are talking about changed from a boat into a sea monster, but nah, you wouldn't be interested in evidence, you have already formed your belief


-Why are the remains of humans in the same geological stratum as dinosaur remains?

Because again, you have your facts wrong, that is a claim made by creationists on flimsy or even fabricated evidence

Now a question for you, have you ever even bothered just once to check the facts on anything you read...



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Marduk

DNA isn't found, the actual claim was that they found Collagen. So your facts are wrong


No, you are wrong, DNA was found: "DNA sequence from cretaceous period bone fragments":

Abstract: DNA was extracted from 80-million-year-old bone fragments found in strata of the Upper Cretaceous Blackhawk Formation... DNA isolated from these bone fragments and the resulting gene sequences demonstrate that small fragments of DNA may survive in bone for millions of years.

-OR, it demonstrates that dinosaurs are not that old.



It gets locked in by the iron in the blood


Riveting




They didn't, they depicted mythical monsters,


Go, find any child, or adult and ask them what the following animal is:

Mystery Animal Picture 1

Mystery Animal Picture 2 and 3



Because again, you have your facts wrong, that is a claim made by creationists on flimsy or even fabricated evidence

Now a question for you, have you ever even bothered just once to check the facts on anything you read...


You have presented no sources, what can I even refute besides your pointless insults?



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Marduk

DNA isn't found, the actual claim was that they found Collagen. So your facts are wrong


No, you are wrong, DNA was found: "DNA sequence from cretaceous period bone fragments":

You're all over the place, I thought that claim was later debunked and all they actually found was collagen, either way, it does not support your claim for dinosaurs in living memory, maybe you should google "cretaceous"








originally posted by: coopertonGo, find any child, or adult and ask them what the following animal is:


The following animal that you presented is actually been drawn on a slab by a young earth creationist, the original indian art that it is derived from turned out to be a composite image that only superficially looks like a dinosaur




originally posted by: coopertonYou have presented no sources, what can I even refute besides your pointless insults?


Exactly, because I don't want a drawn out discussion on dinosaurs when you clearly haven't done any real research to support your claims in a thread which isn't about dinosaurs
Maybe you could start your own thread and stop hijacking this one with your beliefs ?



btw, telling you that you have your "facts" wrong is not an insult, stop pretending to be hurt, just because your claims have been dismissed as an utter fantasy

edit on 2-2-2016 by Marduk because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Marduk


btw, telling you that you have your "facts" wrong is not an insult, stop pretending to be hurt, just because your claims have been dismissed as an utter fantasy


"Remember the golden rule of the fringe,
BELIEVE EVERYTHING
unless someone qualified has an opinion and then
BELIEVE THE OPPOSITE "

Your mockery is unpleasant. It Does not insult me, it is just something you should cut out of argument, because it takes the joy out of discussion.

And yes this is relevant because dragons and dinosaurs were likely the same entities. Both large serpentine creatures. Dinosaur wasn't a word before 1850, so anyone prior to that date referring to a large serpentine creature would have been referred to as a dragon; Quetzacoatl. Which had feathers. Contemporary science has confirmed some dinosaurs were feathers.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Marduk


btw, telling you that you have your "facts" wrong is not an insult, stop pretending to be hurt, just because your claims have been dismissed as an utter fantasy


"Remember the golden rule of the fringe,
BELIEVE EVERYTHING
unless someone qualified has an opinion and then
BELIEVE THE OPPOSITE "


Your mockery is unpleasant. It Does not insult me, it is just something you should cut out of argument, because it takes the joy out of discussion. :

I find your credulity unpleasant, for instance, you are complaining about an insult which
1. wasn't an insult
2. wasn't directed at you




originally posted by: cooperton And yes this is relevant because dragons and dinosaurs were likely the same entities. Both large serpentine creatures. Dinosaur wasn't a word before 1850, so anyone prior to that date referring to a large serpentine creature would have been referred to as a dragon; Quetzacoatl. Which had feathers. Contemporary science has confirmed some dinosaurs were feathers.


Again as I already told you that all dragon stories are derived from stories about sea monsters, it would seem that you are incapable of learning or even simple fact checking.

Take Tiamat for instance, slain by Bel Marduk, in the primal ocean, the story later stolen by the Hittites when the sacked Babylon, ends up being retold in religious rituals, where a thousand years later it becomes the George and the Dragon story, it then passed to the Catholic church and when they lost Anatolia, the story reappears transplanted by the church to England in the 11th Century. But the facts are that it features a Knight who by that point was dead for 900 years and a Dragon from which the original legend claims that the Earth was created from. So how is George fighting it in Oxfordshire
Well he isn't, it was a religiously inspired nonsense, but you won't ever be capable of learning facts like these because you just jump straight from "Dragon" to "Dinosaur" but in doing so, you are telling anyone who has taken the time to actually study the subject (i.e. not you) that you don't know anything, yet you have formed a belief...

Which is laughable really, because your belief isn't based on anything factual at all


And I'll tell you again, because you are so far off the topic of this thread,
this is how Quetzlcoatl, was depicted by the ACTUAL people who worshipped him

Which dinosaur is this ?
lolol

edit on 2-2-2016 by Marduk because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 05:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Marduk

DNA isn't found, the actual claim was that they found Collagen. So your facts are wrong


No, you are wrong, DNA was found: "DNA sequence from cretaceous period bone fragments":

Abstract: DNA was extracted from 80-million-year-old bone fragments found in strata of the Upper Cretaceous Blackhawk Formation... DNA isolated from these bone fragments and the resulting gene sequences demonstrate that small fragments of DNA may survive in bone for millions of years.

-OR, it demonstrates that dinosaurs are not that old.


I read the paper, written in 1995.

* it's FRAGMENTS of DNA, not DNA
* It was agreed that it was 80 million years old (by researchers and everyone else)
* it was controversial and not accepted (questions contamination control, as I understand it)


You can read more about it in this paper, including the history of extracting ancient DNA. This is a press report, so for folks who might find their eyes glazing over when you hit a huge chunk of text, it's pretty readable. press.princeton.edu...




Go, find any child, or adult and ask them what the following animal is:

If you ask any adult who's actually studied rock art of the area and who has talked to the people living there, you'd have an answer... and it's not "dinosaur."


Mystery Animal Picture 1

And that's the way cartoonists of the 1800's drew dinosaurs. More modern cartoons of dinosaurs have them depicted somewhat more realistically.

If you have worked on dinosaurs (I have) or saw one in real life, you would not draw it like that.


Mystery Animal Picture 2 and 3

I don't have time for full research, but I seem to recall that the first one is a real rock art that's been modified by a hoaxer. I recall seeing some "before and after" pictures but I'm headed off for the evening and don't have time to look. Perhaps others can help.

I don't know about the second one, but the figures look "wrong" to me (I can be wrong). What I don't see is a link to any site that says what culture produced them and where in the Amazon they're found. When I google "Amazonian rock art" I don't see anything that matches the style.

Can you give us a source that has place and culture so we know it's not some sort of fake?



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd

I had expressed this just as what I personally believe my friend.

But as we both known Byrd, we have had these discussions.

The world started before the internet, and neighsayers can be found on every topic.

It is items such as this www.truthontheweb.org... that provoke my curiousity. Yeah, I go there, and from my personal opinion, I believe this is evidence Ancients where here. We'll dwell on Egyptians at some Point, but since this Los Luna Stone is here, it must be addressed how, enter the Sea People. The Phoenicians and Minoans. They only live in the Levant for periods

History dating from 3500 BC to 1200 BC as demostrated in materials suh as www.phoenician.org... and for clarity we can seen this www.phoenician.org... to understand the capabilities of the Vessels the Phoenicians constructed.


People have remarked that those cargo ships which sailed the seas for many hundreds of years B.C. were comparable in size to the ones Columbus sailed to America in 1492 A.D. Thor Heyerdahl, the modern-day explorer, noted that the Phoenicians could have sailed to Central America themselves. I don't know if they did or not, but well-informed people see it as being within the capabilities of Phoenician ships and navigators. That is quite a compliment to these early people of the sea and what they were able to accomplish.


No where here is there any specific indications the simple act of Sailing to the Americas in a BC world, could not be accomplished.

And there is this to consider, www.phoenician.org...


In other words, the Phoenicians were well-differentiated from the peoples around them in the Levant prior to 1200 B.C. As mentioned earlier, Moscati and Bondi observed that the Phoenicians were clearly differentiated from peoples around them after 1200 B.C. They and others such as Glenn Markoe further noted that the Phoenician cities and society were unchanged throughout this period.[xvi] When these three elements are brought together, we see strong evidence that the Phoenicians existed before, during and after 1200 B.C. Therefore they could not have originated at that time.


They where there long before as suggested


Byblos stood, along with Sidon and Tyre, as one of the leading cities of the Phoenician people.[xviii] It has also been often cited as one of the oldest, continuously inhabited cities in the world, with some signs of habitation going back to 6000 B.C.[xix] This city still exists today in modern Lebanon, often being shown on maps as Jbail—reflecting its ancient Phoenician name of gbl—rather than the Greek-applied name of Byblos. Since the Greek name is traditionally used by scholars for this city, that practice will be continued here. So let us examine when Byblos emerged as a Phoenician city, then look at the founding dates of the other major Phoenician cities to ascertain the location and date of origin of this society.


There is also how, the Phoenicians disappeared, without being conquered, as Tyre demostrates, ( it was abandoned for some time, but never destroyed), as neighbouring cities saw.

And suddenly we have the Minoans, and then harbors, wharfs, and storage facilties with multicultural influences, showing up in Crete, and then Santorini, the disappearance of the Minoans and the resurrection of Tyre. This material is also addressed within the same link

By any of this, the Sea People are the Phoenicians/Minoans.

Ciao

Shane



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 07:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Marduk

Hello Marduk

Question for you.

Is that Carbon Dating that the 65 Million figure come from? I respect the point of view, but I have difficulty accepting the validity of Carbon Dating, when testing for time before some 15000 years or 10000 years BC. Just asking?

Look forward to your reply.

Ciao

Shane



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 07:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Byrd

I read the paper, written in 1995.

* it's FRAGMENTS of DNA, not DNA
* It was agreed that it was 80 million years old (by researchers and everyone else)
* it was controversial and not accepted (questions contamination control, as I understand it)


It was large enough fragments to be able to discern that it coded for mitochondrial cytochrome b. Of course it was assumed to be 80mya, you can't get published claiming it to be in the thousands of years. Even if carbon dating demonstrates it is somewhere between 4,000-40,000 (now we're really getting off topic)



You can read more about it in this paper, including the history of extracting ancient DNA. This is a press report, so for folks who might find their eyes glazing over when you hit a huge chunk of text, it's pretty readable. press.princeton.edu...


I will come back to this.





If you ask any adult who's actually studied rock art of the area and who has talked to the people living there, you'd have an answer... and it's not "dinosaur.

If you have worked on dinosaurs (I have) or saw one in real life, you would not draw it like that.


It's not like they had access to crayola crayons or anything. In y opinion, Their limited art equipment would likely produce something that looks as basic as these depictions.




Can you give us a source that has place and culture so we know it's not some sort of fake?



Located South of Rome, Here's the palestrina mosaic depicting a creature that translates as "Crocodile-Leopard". Implying an agile reptilian creature.

Nile Mosaic of Palestrina

Here's a written description of a familiar dinosaur:

"Lo, I pray thee, Behemoth, that I made with thee: Grass as an ox he eateth.
Lo, I pray thee, his power [is] in his loins, And his strength in the muscles of his belly.
He doth bend his tail as a cedar, The sinews of his thighs are wrapped together
His bones [are] tubes of brass, His bones [are] as a bar of iron..."

There's more if you're genuinely interested.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 08:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shane
a reply to: Marduk

Hello Marduk

Question for you.

Is that Carbon Dating that the 65 Million figure come from? I respect the point of view, but I have difficulty accepting the validity of Carbon Dating, when testing for time before some 15000 years or 10000 years BC. Just asking?

Look forward to your reply.

Ciao

Shane


Shane

The extinction of the dinosaurs is based on a geological layer known as the Cretaceous–Paleogene boundary, approx. 66 million years ago. Dinosaurs are found before it, but not after
Geology
Carbon dating is only accurate to 50,000 years ago




originally posted by: cooperton

Here's a written description of a familiar dinosaur:

.


You must have accidentally posted a quote from the bible there, Behemoth in Jewish apocrypha and pseudepigrapha is described as having horns, which means that its probably just an elephant or bull and the fact that it is also described as having a ring through its nose, would indicate the latter. So what happened to the written description of a dinosaur ?
Something else you didn't fact check lol

edit on 2-2-2016 by Marduk because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 08:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shane
It is items such as this www.truthontheweb.org... that provoke my curiousity. Yeah, I go there, and from my personal opinion, I believe this is evidence Ancients where here. We'll dwell on Egyptians at some Point, but since this Los Luna Stone is here, it must be addressed how, enter the Sea People.

Ah, the Los Lunas Decalogue stone... I've actually seen it in person. Unfortunately (and unsurprisingly), however, it is a relatively recent hoax. The fact that you believe it to be anything else only serves to indicate that you've done little to no actual research, instead choosing to rely on fringe claims.

Among the many problems with the inscription, are the mixing of characters from different, non-contemporaneous alphabets, and the presence of multiple symbols that were not in existence at the time the fringe claims it was created. The prevailing belief (and my own) is that it was carved by Mormons seeking to fool others into believing that there might be some legitimacy to their silly beliefs.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 11:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shane. We'll dwell on Egyptians at some Point, but since this Los Luna Stone is here, it must be addressed how, enter the Sea People.


Mormon pious hoax. It's not authentic


The Phoenicians and Minoans. They only live in the Levant for periods

History dating from 3500 BC to 1200 BC as demostrated in materials suh as www.phoenician.org... and for clarity we can seen this www.phoenician.org... to understand the capabilities of the Vessels the Phoenicians constructed.

I'm not sure why you linked that... it basically says what I was saying: general Mediterranean trade, Phoenicians and Minoans dominated it until the collapse of their civilization, no evidence they could actually sail the ocean.


People have remarked that those cargo ships which sailed the seas for many hundreds of years B.C. were comparable in size to the ones Columbus sailed to America in 1492 A.D. Thor Heyerdahl, the modern-day explorer, noted that the Phoenicians could have sailed to Central America themselves. I don't know if they did or not, but well-informed people see it as being within the capabilities of Phoenician ships and navigators. That is quite a compliment to these early people of the sea and what they were able to accomplish.


Err... weren't you talking about the Phoenicians going to the Americas? They aren't the same as Polynesians. The boats that Hyerdahl built were not modeled after Phoenician boats, but after Egyptian and other types of reed boats.



And there is this to consider, www.phoenician.org...


In other words, the Phoenicians were well-differentiated from the peoples around them in the Levant prior to 1200 B.C. As mentioned earlier, Moscati and Bondi observed that the Phoenicians were clearly differentiated from peoples around them after 1200 B.C. They and others such as Glenn Markoe further noted that the Phoenician cities and society were unchanged throughout this period.[xvi] When these three elements are brought together, we see strong evidence that the Phoenicians existed before, during and after 1200 B.C. Therefore they could not have originated at that time.


Right. Marduk corrected me on this one.



There is also how, the Phoenicians disappeared, without being conquered, as Tyre demostrates, ( it was abandoned for some time, but never destroyed), as neighbouring cities saw.

They didn't disappear. They were assimilated into the other cultures.


By any of this, the Sea People are the Phoenicians/Minoans.


Actually, there were 9 nations (or cultures) that made up the Sea Peoples... Egypt refers to them as "the nine bows" (the Wikipedia article lists them in alphabetical order.) The actual origin is disputed, but Minoans are considered one possibility for some of them. en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

None of which (to bring it back to the topic title) helps prove that Jesus and Quetzalcoatl were the same. If anything, it completely disproves the idea, since the Sea Peoples were active about 1500 years BC.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 11:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shane
a reply to: Marduk

Hello Marduk

Question for you.

Is that Carbon Dating that the 65 Million figure come from? I respect the point of view, but I have difficulty accepting the validity of Carbon Dating, when testing for time before some 15000 years or 10000 years BC. Just asking?


Carbon dating and radiometric dating are two different things. They don't carbon date anything older than 50,000 years (because all the radiocarbon's pretty much gone by then.)

Dinosaurs are dated by a number of different methods including stratigraphy as well as by radiometric methods. And yes, the dates are pretty solid (they're found in rocks a good distance underneath the soil (in quarries)... not within the topsoil/dirt. And dinosaur mummies are extremely rare, but they DO exist. Collagen (gristle) actually survives pretty well under those conditions.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join