It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Why are we the only civilization?

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 07:22 AM
Its perigee according to people such as Sitchin, Martell, Solarion etc is between Mars and Jupiter, close to the asteroid belt. The dates of return are different from them though.

Solarion gives 2012 as the earliest arrival date, but within a reasonable time period after that. His reasoning being that the last pass was during the Israelite exodus from Egypt which according to Velikovsky's reasoning (which is a book in itself) was 1587 (or was it 1588?) BC. Velikovksy nicely describes the cataclysmic conditions that were apparent at this time in his books too. Add the 3600 earth year's for one Nibiru orbit brings you up to 2012, coninciding with other items such as the Mayan long count calendar's end.

Martell on the other hand maintains that we're not going to see Nibiru in our lifetime. I believe he bases this partly off his understand of Sitchin's tranlsations, directly linking times of civilisation advances with Nibiru's passes, making the last one approximately 200 BC. And partly off his own research into space - you can google him to find a couple of websites he has up on such matters.

Sitchin does not publically give a date, because he refuses to put anything into writing that he cannot categorically backup with evidence in the form of ancient writings and depictions. However those who have been to his seminars say that he guesses it will likely be within the next hundred years. But he won't be pinned down to a more exact date until he can back it up.

As for others, they don't really seem to base their dates on anything other than "channelled" messages, so I tend not to recall their dates ;-)

posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 09:45 AM
Of course, as always, I leave myself open to the possibility that I am wrong...

I have no problems believing that other civilizations existed before Ur and Erdu (the first known civilized cities, starting between 8,000 - 5,000 BC). As was mentioned, mankind has been around for about 6-7 million years.

However, I find it very highly improbable that we were ever at a state where we could have had a nuclear or space-age technology.

6-7mil years BCE - Sahelanthropus tchadensis is the oldest known species of human found, and is as apelike as they get (or, more accurately, chimpanzee-like). They aren't even entirely certain that mankind was bipedal at this point. The braincase was tiny, 350cc. (the average dog has double this amount).

2-1.5mil years BCE - Australopithecus robustus is the first oldest human fossil that even shows any evidence of using something resembling tools. Even this is is speculation as the "tools" in question are bones that were found with the remains might have been used for digging.

Now, Homo habilis has been shown to use tools and have the capacity for rudimentary speech. So we can reasonably assume that our starting point for humans to begin their technological leaps and bounds is at around 2 million years ago.


1.8mil - 300,000 years ago - Homo erectus is the first species found that probably used fire, and had anything resembling complex tools. Complex being: hand axes, spears, knives, that sort of thing.

That leaves us less than 300,000 years for our nuclear/space-age society to have sprung up. For those that argue that we might have just not found the right places to dig, I remind you that we have found ample evidence of lifeforms such as dinosaurs, protists, and such dating back millions or billions of years. If mankind existed before 7 million years ago, there is an extremely high probability that they would have been found by now, or at least some evidence that they should be there.

40,000 years ago - First evidence of complex tool kits establish Cro-Magnon culture. As most of these tools were used for hunting and cooking, along with dental variations found from this era, there strong evidence to indicate that cooked food and eating habits remained the primary evolutionary and technological drive until about 10,000 years ago. This would have left little room for much else. Lives were extremely short, typically in the vicinity of 20-30 years, so primarily the focus would most likely be on finding a mate and reproducing.

So, for the sake of arguement, let's say that some of the Cro-Magnon men managed to rise above such petty concerns, and concentrate on technology. Since the oldest known records of human civilization are at best estimates, between 7,000 to 10,000 years old (ie. Ur and Erdu, 8000-5000 BC), we can reasonably assume that it takes at least that many thousands of years to develope our present level of nuclear and space-age technology.

That leaves us an earliest possible range of nuclear capability at around 30,000 years ago. Fair enough?

Now, to consider what it took for us to get to our present-day point. It wasn't just a handful of people sitting in an isolated area. It took the interaction and cooperation of entire nations and civilizations, each producing some truly brilliant minds. It took inspirations from history and art. It took works of fiction by creative souls to inspire the more scientifically minded that it was possible. It took two world-wars to give us the huge rush in military technology. All of these things leave very visible and tangible traces. Namely, entire countries, cities, alloys, specially crafted metals, and plastics. Society produces trash and impacts the environment as well.

Additionally, technology and society changes the atmosphere. We are able to determine that the very first evidence of artificial change in atmospheric composition correlates directly with the beginnings of livestock, herding, and such. Herdbeasts like goats and such, in large numbers, produce a large amount of CO2, Methane, and Nitrogen. This happened around 8,000- 5,000 BC. It is the very first evidence we have of this happening. Even if our proto-civilization managed to develop an entirely clean energy source, completely biodegradable houses and cities, and subsisted entirely off of plant-life, they would not have done so without going through the middle stages of Agriculture that leave a marked change that can be found in rock and ice core samples.

So, even if their cities were completely buried under the ground and we just happen to have never come across them and immediately excavate them, evidence of their advances would have been found just based upon their effects on the atmosphere.

Given the mountains and mountains of evidence we have to show the progression of mankind, when and where he was and was not, and what level of technology existed, but only legends and scant circumstantial evidence of any sort of early nuclear/space-age cultures, I'm afraid that I must conclude that, no, there was not a society before us that had those capabilities.

The "hot" sands may easily be explained by the shifting of soil and the earth to bring up material that was surrounding radioactive isotopes, such as uranium. Earthquakes move soil, as do volcanoes, wind, and water. This is why in some places, earlier in history, one could occasionally find rough jewels, gold, and other precious minerals just laying about on the soil, without having to mine for it.

The legends can be explained as the imagination of mankind, and their attributing godlike powers to anything and everything they can, even themselves. And if our current weapons or technologies appear to resemble their stories, one could assume, much more logically, that our technology was inspired by those legends, and hence the similarity.

In final conclusion, I'm afraid that there were not, in fact, proto-civs with nuclear weapons or spacefaring ability.

[edit on 12/29/2004 by thelibra]

posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 11:54 AM
We are the supreme beings, the classifiers of animals and plants. We give names to the regions of earth which we roam upon, dig up, and destroy, and so from this arises the question: who is to stop us from citing ourselves as whatever it is that we will?

posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 12:23 PM

Originally posted by soothsayer
What everyone is writing, but no one is saying, is that how can scientists, scholars, etcetera say that this, the "modern" age, is the first of its kind? We have gone from swords and crossbows to sub-atomic energy within 500 years (which isn't alot). mankind has been around for how many millions of years?

modern man, homo-sapien sapien has been around for about 30,000 years, and homo sapiens originated around 130,000 to 200,000 years ago.

I was too lazy to read the whole thread, did anyone suggest you read graham hancock ?

I think there could have been advanced cultures between the last two ice ages, but nothing approcahing what we have today

posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 01:58 PM

Originally posted by thelibra
Of course, as always, I leave myself open to the possibility that I am...........................................................................

In final conclusion, I'm afraid that there were not, in fact, proto-civs with nuclear weapons or spacefaring ability.

[edit on 12/29/2004 by thelibra]

nice post,
the historical and archeological records appear to support the school of thought you are joined with. but....accomplished accountants also organize the data to 'paint the picture they want you to see' and in the end they say 'numbers don't lie', 'it's all there, in black & white'......

i like the Zoo idea brought up by ?....will future excavations reveal that elephants & lions roamed in the N America.- [oops, they won't know they've reached a wrong conclusion]

consider that Angels, Aliens, Magicians, Stargates, shape-shifters & miracle workers who created things out of thin air....and much/many of the myths & folklore are/were based on facts,,and humans were indiginous creatures that were genitically manipulated- -> [oops, instantly dissed as Fantasy-Cult-ist]

consider that ENTROPY affects every system, including the evolution of humans and their cultures, civilizations....the 'progressive evolution' model is just another 'accountant trick'...presenting the picture they want you to see.

Is it any wonder that all philosophical models, from scripture to vedas, show that civilization-culture-society began on a high-note and is progressively on a decline, decay-baser acts & Entropy.....
we have symbolically gone> from a head-of-gold> to the arms-of-silver> to the torso-of-bronze> to the legs-of-iron> to the final feet & toes-of-iron-&-clay

the humans that evolved on earth, with some genetic manipulations by the GOds, for their own sometimes nefarious ends, developed an independent theology & escaped the enslaving influence of the (fallen)-Angel host-masters. The humans, who were only flesh&blood corpreal entities, were essentially pets-servants instructed to idolize these vain entities that manifested as Angels.

All those advanced, Hi-Tech, accomplishments were real, but the primitive minds of humans made the myth as the medium of storing & passing along insights & wisdom...of the things & events & knowledge gleaned from their owner-masters. the humans became the insurrectionists, the rebels, the freedom-fighters,,,,and that trait is ingrained into the human psyche, ? don't we almost always root for the underdog??

i must stop here. thanks,


posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 04:03 PM
You do raise some good points, St. Udio. And, as I mentioned before, I do leave myself open to the possibility that I'm wrong. After all, scientific study of our Earth is not even remotely near completion and new instruments and tools of science in the future may prove things such as Atlantis existing, and having intimate contact with aliens, or that walking, talking lizards wielded their superior technology with an iron fist over the primitive humans. I also concede that both History and Science have the centuries-old problem of refusing to want to go against the grain of their preceding giants. After all, if Dr. X is such a great and noted mind, then if undergraduate Z finds something that goes against Dr. X's works, it will likely be shot down and never revisited. This train of thought horrifies me, as a future Physicist, because I know, before even going into the field, that I will probably have to hobknob for 20 years before being asked for my opinion, and to give it beforehand is more likely to gain a snubbing from one's peers, close numerous doors, and wreck one's career, than it is to turn any heads.

However... one must also admit that the proposition for advanced societies before ours is almost entirely speculation. It's a sexy idea, that somewhere, buried beneath the ground, could be the remains of a precursor society with technology we are either just now developing, or haven't managed to develop yet. In some cases, one can even find little shreds of evidence here and there to suggest that this might have been the case. In comparison against the mountain of very concrete data that has been collected and verified, the idea holds almost no geological, archeological, or historical merit. The only merit it presently really has is in the realm of mythology, folklore, and religion. Which is not to discount those areas as insignificant, but rather that they are not exactly sciences.

Someday this may change. Perhaps even in our lifetimes. We may find a buried city in South America that contains storage media archives of an entire race we never knew, and technology far beyond anything we ever dreamed existed. But until that time, I must side with the old coots who have had to do their own fighting, for decades on end, just to prove that mankind even managed to achieve the things we know about.

posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 06:51 PM
Those who watch from above saw what we were capable of
and decided to employ more effective pest control measures
on the other planets.

posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 07:12 PM

Originally posted by Gazrok

I've always liked the theory that the sphinx was really 13,000 years old..

Yes, but it doesn't take an awful lot of scientific genius to carve a big lion (what it was prior to the pharoah's screwing with it)...

You may not think so, but it hasn't been done since. The artistry, technique, and organization necessary to create something like the Sphinx and the Giza Pyramids is considerable, and could not be authentically replicated in today's cultures. The massive projects we build now are not usually things for the 'ages.' The closest thing I can think of is Mt. Rushmore.

posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 08:42 PM
Have you ever read the book "Guns Germs and Steel" it attempts to explain why one civilization out of all the rest could become soo powerful.

top topics

<< 1  2  3   >>

log in