Ancient Astronauts Evidence

page: 16
2
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune

Hans: Why? Is this you rejecting a large body of knowledge so it fits your personal world view or do you have evidence of this? How do you explain the volume of materials that have been found from these time periods?



VOLUMES of materials dating back 12 000 B.C.?
Also, I am not rejecting evidence found. I am saying thats only a small part of what will yet be found.



Such an impact would be readily detectable, especially if it occurred recently.


Such as the possible impact into what is now called Hudson Bay.




Hans: I’m presenting evidence of what was going on then or what is thought was going on then that is supported by the evidence, especially 10,000 years ago I don’t recall making any comment on millions and billions of years ago.


Yes, thats what you are doing. And I am SPECULATING on what else might have happened. Ive admitted that I am not coming from what is already known, but from what might become known at a later date. Ancient Astronaut Theory is admittedly nothing but speculation. But you have to wonder why it is attacked ever so strongly. Some seem to be very uncomfortable with the idea.




Hans: Yet you seem to be so knowledgeable of this period as to not only know that the available evidence is wrong but that you also know what REALLY happened. How is that?


No, of course I dont know what really happened. I am speculating. Is that understood already?????

You say I have "no evdidence". I say I have provided evidence in this and other threads. Its just not evidence that is accepted AS Evidence by the majority. Does being in the minority mean being wrong? No. All unusual ideas are first in the minority.






Hans: You appear to have a religious like belief in that yes, unfortunately the evidence to support it is lacking. While the evidence for man being on his own and developing at his own pace is overwhelming. By the way I believe there are aliens out there somewhere but I’m also aware of how difficult interstellar space is to travel thru. I await evidence of alien intervention. I personally like to think an alien AI scout went thru this system many millions of years ago. Evidence, none


The evidence of a populated universe is only lacking if you come from a preconceived notion of being isolated and "ETs dont exist".




posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 08:58 AM
link   
Howdy SF



VOLUMES of materials dating back 12 000 B.C.?


Hans: Yep, there are over 400,000 pages of site reports from areas that go back that far (based on 1995 info). Have you actually ever read a real archaeological site report?



Also, I am not rejecting evidence found. I am saying thats only a small part of what will yet be found.


Hans: Yes that is a correct statement



Such as the possible impact into what is now called Hudson Bay.


Hans: Yes and we know about but if a civilization was that small and left no trace of itself then it was probably not that important. Here is a question for you. Lets say an asteroid hit Egypt around 1,500 BC and wiped out everything that is enclosed in the modern state of Egypt – would we know about the Egyptian civilization?



Yes, thats what you are doing. And I am SPECULATING on what else might have happened. Ive admitted that I am not coming from what is already known, but from what might become known at a later date. Ancient Astronaut Theory is admittedly nothing but speculation. But you have to wonder why it is attacked ever so strongly. Some seem to be very uncomfortable with the idea.


Hans: why do you think that is? Could it be because the basis of the AAT theory requires that all scientists are idiots or worse part of a vast conspiracy? That is the basis that all fringe writers start with. This somewhat annoys the people who actually know about these subjects.




No, of course I dont know what really happened. I am speculating. Is that understood already?????


Hans: Then your rejection of the orthodox scientists explanation that come from their ability to read the Hs at Abydos is what? Rejection by speculation????




You say I have "no evidence". I say I have provided evidence in this and other threads. Its just not evidence that is accepted AS Evidence by the majority. Does being in the minority mean being wrong? No. All unusual ideas are first in the minority.


Hans: Yes all new ideas start small but the evidence causes a massive expansion of its acceptance. Being a minority or majority has no effect on whether the evidence is valid or not. The basic acceptance of evolution, no flood, Norse settlement in NA, Minoan civilization etc was based on evidence not popularity.



The evidence of a populated universe is only lacking if you come from a preconceived notion of being isolated and "ETs dont exist".


Hans: that “preconceived notion” is based on the existing evidence. There is no evidence of a populated universe. It might be populated but at best it remains speculation – which is why the exploration of Mars is so important, we need to know how common the rise of life is.



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 09:48 AM
link   


Have you actually ever read a real archaeological site report?


yes.




Hans: Yes and we know about but if a civilization was that small and left no trace of itself then it was probably not that important.


So you say. By "wiped out" I mean "without a trace".




Here is a question for you. Lets say an asteroid hit Egypt around 1,500 BC and wiped out everything that is enclosed in the modern state of Egypt – would we know about the Egyptian civilization?


Maybe, from the tales of other civilizations. If it goes back 12 000 years thats a different story though. 2000 years - 12 000 years...BIG difference.



Hans: why do you think that is? Could it be because the basis of the AAT theory requires that all scientists are idiots or worse part of a vast conspiracy? That is the basis that all fringe writers start with. This somewhat annoys the people who actually know about these subjects.


True. The stance is no good. Ive seen the effects of that stance in this thread. I fall victim to it once in awhile.





Hans: Then your rejection of the orthodox scientists explanation that come from their ability to read the Hs at Abydos is what? Rejection by speculation????


Rejection by speculation of THEIR speculation.





Hans: that “preconceived notion” is based on the existing evidence. There is no evidence of a populated universe.


While you keep chanting "no evidence of extraterrestrials", "no evidence", "no evidence" allow the rest of us at ATS to continue to present the evidence. ATS was established, among other things, to present evidence of extraterrestrials. The reason we so easily believe in CONSPIRACY is because certain people keep chanting "no evidence! no evidence!" in the face of blatant evidence being put forward on a daily basis. Im not sure if you ocassionally take a look at other Forums here. You happen to be in a place where people take certain things to be evidence of ETs. You happen not to take certain things to be evidence of ETs.



[edit on 13-12-2007 by Skyfloating]



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 10:52 AM
link   


So you say. By "wiped out" I mean "without a trace".


Hans: If there is no trace of it why do you think it existed??



Maybe, from the tales of other civilizations. If it goes back 12 000 years thats a different story though. 2000 years - 12 000 years...BIG difference.


Hans: So by your logic there should be none, nada, no evidence of any culture 12,000 years ago? But the simple fact is there is lots, “tons” of evidence for human culture that far back. Why would only a selected part of it be invisible?



Rejection by speculation of THEIR speculation.


Hans: Your mistake is in wishing really, really hard that what you want to be true is true, sadly it is not. Egyptologists really can read the Hs and they know the context of the Hs in the temple. Only your comments are bias speculation to prop up a failed fringe theory. It’s a fact, so for your unsupported speculation to be correct the entire field of Egyptology must be instead a complete fraud. I find that highly unlikely. Again you are challenged to learn H and read the inscriptions yourself.



Maybe, from the tales of other civilizations. If it goes back 12 000 years thats a different story though. 2000 years - 12 000 years...BIG difference.


Hans: Again you are using a bias opinion to dismiss known data. Is there any evidence of human habitation before 12,000 years ago? Yes there is, both in proto-villages and numerous campsites, to include their technology, pottery and tools.

So exactly on what basis are you saying there is no knowledge of humans 12,000 years ago? There is, what there isn’t is evidence of an advanced or alien culture. Just boring old humans slowly coming up with the ideas and solutions that led to a fuller civilization.

So let me summarize what I belief your position is: You believe there was an advanced human or alien influenced civilization for which all evidence has been wiped out and that the proof of that is in the fact that we have no data of other civilizations/human culture from that same time period? Is that it?



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:40 PM
link   
I don't often post on ATS, but thought I'd share my 2cents...
When first looking at that those 2 pics of the heirolglyphs at Abydos, of what is supposedly a helicopter, I didn't see that at all. The first thing that came to mind was it looked like a ramp with a stone block on it! I think the 'rotors' are a horizon representation, to denote hieght. The tailpiece looks like a quick representation of a hill.
The 'submarine' type relief (I believe this is the one to the top, right of the 'copter'?), if you turn it 90°, it looks like a section of reed, or bamboo..
The glyph underneath it, which admittedley does look kinda like a saucer UFO - I have no idea about it, BUT, the paw print directly underneath it means they are related. Perhaps a stylised cave or something?
This whole section of glyph is pretty messy. You can see from how the 'chopper' passes right through the Ibis' head, into the 'submarine'. Egyptian writing was very clean, and the glyphs almost always had their own space, unless it was intended to show direct connections to the next glyph - pretty much like cursive writing, I guess.
Although they're pretty interesting anomalies, they're very much open to interpretation. The sincher for me about this spacecraft in Ancient Egypt theory is, that if it were true, that UFO/Alien presence was known to the Egyptians; that the astronauts gave knowledge and technology, and with it POWER, that they would get more of a mention in their important literature of their day (the heirolglyphs in Royal sites and tamples).
Seems to me a little odd that such an important occurance should be relegated to what is pretty much a 2 paragraph summary on page 38 of their historic newspaper...
Another thing is, this idea of knowledge was handed to the ancient Egyptians is pretty derogatory. I can see it being envisioned in peoples minds akin to the 'mysterious visitors' of South America, where the 'white' guy turned up to teach them how to do clever stuff.... Way to rain on their parade!
The Egyptians built some amazings structures. There isn't anything magical about it. It was hard work, ingenuity, and amazing socio-economic control that accomplished it.
On another note, early male religions were based around the idea of the sun giving life. In the Egyptian mindset, Ra(Osiris) was the solar phallus. His seed (the suns rays) impregnated the mother Earth (Isis). What is interesting is that the child born of Isis and Osiris is Horus (moon).
Another thing is that Osiris/Ra was known as the dead and dying god. As he passed the celestial vault and headed for the horizon, he was dying. When passed the horizon, he was dead. Once he was gone, Nuit and Horus took over, untill miraculously, he was re-born in the morning!! Very much symbolic of the Pheonix. Taking into account how much importance the sky held to the AE's, a metal object flying down to them from the sky would have been a HUGE event. But again, there is pretty much nothing inscribed on their records. Or, perhaps it was an everyday thing, and so common as to not be worth mentioning, lol.

[edit on 13-12-2007 by cruzion]



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 03:10 PM
link   
Another thing:
The Nile delta, circa 6000BC had the same percipitation levels as modern-day Norfolk in England. Norfolk is a very lush area, and is pretty much all farms.
There was debate a few years ago (and I'm sure there is debate about it on ATS, too!) when an upstart Geologist claimed that the errosion on the great pyramids was caused by water, and not by sand.
The two ideas mesh pretty well, so I am of the inclination that the pyramids are more than proabably older than the 'established' age cited by most Egyptologists.



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 04:48 PM
link   


Hans: If there is no trace of it why do you think it existed??


Because of the stories told and pictures shown by our ancestors. Flying "Gods", strange beings on pictures...uh...wait a minute...havent we been through this before?





Hans: So by your logic there should be none, nada, no evidence of any culture 12,000 years ago? But the simple fact is there is lots, “tons” of evidence for human culture that far back. Why would only a selected part of it be invisible?


Its really not that difficult to understand. Back in the ol days there were two classes of beings: The Commonors and the "Gods", which were either advanced humans or ETs. The "Gods" did not share their gadgets with the commoners, did not leave them lying around where you could find them...even back then...so you will hardly be able to find them today. Especially not after global disaster and the ruling caste hiding the rest. The evidence found today is that of the commoners, not factoring in the tales of the Gods which are dismissed as "fiction".





Hans: Your mistake is in wishing really, really hard that what you want to be true is true, sadly it is not


Its not that much of a stretch for a flexible mind, really. You dont have to wish that hard. Just pick up a few books written by your forefathers, perhaps beginning with the vedas, and you too will get the picture.



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by cruzion
 


Well, if it were only one slab of stone there wouldnt really be a case, would there? Ancient Astronaut Research has not only taken place in Abydos but in five continents, pointing out inconsistencies to orthodox dogma in nearly every damn ancient site. And ALL of them are explained away with pet theories that sound so ridiculous it almost makes the ancient astronaut theory look sane.



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 02:18 AM
link   
I understand research has taken place in 5 continents, but the question is, did they find anything!
I could look for gold in my garden...but that doesn't mean there's going to be any!



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 04:04 AM
link   
Howdy SF and Quizon



And ALL of them are explained away with pet theories that sound so ridiculous it almost makes the ancient astronaut theory look sane.


Oh my lots of noise and handwaving SF could you give us say three of these pet theories as examples - that I'm sure they have no basis in fact? Let go to another continent too? Let see you back up another of your wild statements.

So Skyfloating you are depending on myth for your evidence huh?

Okay lets say the myth are about real "gods".

Did these gods create the sun? The myths say the did - do you believe that?

The myths say they created the moon - did they? Do you believe that?

The myths say they created the earth - did they? Do you believe that?

We are still waiting for your criteria on how to tell the difference between myth and "real" stories - how do you do it?

Oh also Skyfloating perhaps you could explain why these highly technically advanced humans (or aliens) didn't leave a trace but Norsemen in NE north American left plenty of traces - and that was for only a century or two and less than a(at most) a few hundred people. Where are all the mines?

Good comments Quizon, the Abydos stuff is a damaged inscription, if you look at the layers of the glyphs they become easily readable. Of course if you cannot read H then it seems mysterious. I really like the oboe like Submarine - hilarious.



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 05:29 AM
link   
I agree. This cartouche at Abydos seems to be a major fulcrum of the argument for visitation by some type of astro-nautical, but the cartouche itself is damaged.
So not only do the hieroglyphs reside in the 'highly debatable meaning' section of peoples whims, but they have also suffered from what looks like either subsidence, or a whack from Thor!
I also remember reading that there is a later, second set of glyphs imposed upon the older, although I may have my sites mixed up.
The most fantastical of the glyphs, for me, is the UFO-esque saucer. I know that hieroglyphs are written in rows of columns ( I may have it reversed), read left to right (that I'm sure of!). That's why I commented upon the animal paw below it, as it is obviously connected to the UFO thing, but it does nothing to illuminate what the heck the ufo thing is meant to be. Alas, the glyphs following the ufo/paw are corrupted, and throw no light towards them either.
I'd be interested as to what a seasoned Egyptologist interprets these glyphs as.

///
I just found this link:
members.tripod.com...
Edited for link.

[edit on 14-12-2007 by cruzion]



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 05:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune

Did these gods create the sun? The myths say the did - do you believe that?

The myths say they created the moon - did they? Do you believe that?

The myths say they created the earth - did they? Do you believe that?





You can easily discern between "creator Gods", of which mythology and ancient text tells very little, and "local Gods" which were flesh and body Gods, humanlike in their form and nature.

And I think you actually know this. Why do act like you dont?



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 06:00 AM
link   
reply to post by cruzion
 


We´ve been through this many times in this thread and a thread before that, but I will explain it again:

1. If this is a language, they have still failed to translate it.

2. The theory of glyph overlay sounds really desperate, considering that this supposed overlay technique hasnt been used in neighbouring glyphs.

3. It is wrong that no other similar glyphs have been found (See for example the recent thread entitled "ETs, Saqqara, Egypt")

4. The piece shows FOUR objects that "just happen" to look like four modern transportation craft. Egyptologists have called this a "coincidence". And THAT is ridiculous.



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 06:46 AM
link   
Coincidence IS ridiculous at times! I'm sure we've all been introduced to serendipity and bad timing!
I remember a recounting of a story, maybe from the fortean times, about a guy in London, walking past a telephone box, and it rings. So he picks the phone up, and the woman on the other end asks his name, and he repies "yes, that's me", and the woman nonchalantly goes on to explain that there had been a problem with his payroll, and he was going to be paid a day late etc. He asks how she knew where he was, and she said she rang the number on his payroll. He told her he was in a telephone box, and she looked at the number again, and realised it was his account number she had rang, not his phone number.
Crazy coincidence, but it happens.
It may be in 100 years time that man will build more machines that look like hieroglyphs in other temples. It's just simulacra. Just like the 100's of threads here that have people picking faces out of moon rocks! It keeps them out of trouble though



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 06:52 AM
link   
Here you go Quzion

Skyfloating has a tendency to "misrepresents" what is at Abydos, here is a good summary with pictures of what is there. Since SF cannot read what is written there he refuses to believe he could possibly be wrong.




www.ufocom.org...


Originally posted by Byrd
You can see the overcarving all over the pampliset if you just know how to read hieroglyphics. I do (rather badly, I should add.)

Here's the semi-original (photoshopped) version:



Now, just look at what was done to the names:
Here's that darling son, Ramses, whose Praenomen is Setepenre Usermaatre


And here's dear old dad (Seti) - Menmaatre to his buddies -- the one whose temple his darling little boy was appropriating for his own glory:


And because my tracing is SO bad, here's what the two cartouches really look like (both nomen and praenomen):


Seti's full name (nomen and praenomen) is Menmaatre Sety-meryenptah and Ramses has a big mouthfull of a nomen and praenomen with Usermaatre-setepenre Ramesse-meryamun

Ramses the Modest's name can be loosely translated as "Powerful in Truth, Chosen of Ra" (and that was his first name) "Ramses - Beloved of Amun" (second name)

Anyway, that's why to Egyptology buffs like myself (and to archaeologists and so forth) that we know it's an overinscribed panel and that part of the old is showing through. And how we know what the rest of the title says.

I hope it's okay if I don't tie up our bandwidth with the rest of the exercise, which was done at that link above. But if you look at the original and look at the many other times this title was repeated (we have other examples), you can very clearly see the overcarving.

Oh yes, and the bee and plant next to the cartouches mean "king of upper and lower Egypt."






[edit on 14/12/07 by Hanslune]



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 06:54 AM
link   
Sorry Skyfloating but aren’t you deliberately misrepresenting that? You also avoided the question, did these gods do that? A yes or no answer will be sufficient. So what again is your criteria for telling which are real and which are myths?

Those same gods are the ones that did the creating, you know that, why all this talk about truth and keeping an open mind when you obviously shut your mind when the unpleasant reality of the world shows up, why do you act like you don’t know?

Please tell us who created, in Sumerian myth, the earth, moon and sun?

So please now that you have painted yourself into a corner please explain how Enki and Enlil are creator gods only and not aliens who walk amongst us – you know Sitchin says that ---did you forget? LOL

We look forward to your wild dismissal of yet another area of knowledge



We´ve been through this many times in this thread and a thread before that, but I will explain it again:





1. If this is a language, they have still failed to translate it.


It was translated hundreds of years ago Skyfloating, you know that already and are again misrepresenting the truth, and these particular glyphs were translated decades ago and show to several times – why are you acting like you donit know this?




2. The theory of glyph overlay sounds really desperate, considering that this supposed overlay technique hasnt been used in neighbouring glyphs.


Yet that is exactly what happens, as has been shown to you several times, yet you continue to act like you cannot see it, have you or have you not been shown the step by step recreation of how these items came to be? The only desperation is in your own soul and your refusal to accept that you are wrong.



3. It is wrong that no other similar glyphs have been found (See for example the recent thread entitled "ETs, Saqqara, Egypt")


Please give us a link please



4. The piece shows FOUR objects that "just happen" to look like four modern transportation craft. Egyptologists have called this a "coincidence". And THAT is ridiculous.


No the only one that remotely looks like anything is the “helicopter”, you have to be serious believer to see the other items. The really ridicullous aspect of this is that you, who cannot read the ancient Egyptian language are dismissing the expertise of those who can - that is seriously ridiculous, LOL

So isn't it time for you to try and change the subject or come forth with yet another long winded rant against skepticism??




[edit on 14/12/07 by Hanslune]



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 07:53 AM
link   
Here´s for everyone saying "Those pictures cant be found anywhere else".





posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 07:58 AM
link   
Reply to Hanslune:


There is a distinct difference between creation myths and tales of "Gods and Men". The former deals with things like "in the beginning the creator created the primal waters". The latter deals with things such as "And then there was a war between men and the gods".

That these types of report are different from each other though, is nothing new really. Its common knowledge.



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune


The only desperation is in your own soul and your refusal to accept that you are wrong.

[edit on 14/12/07 by Hanslune]



Disagreement with the common scientific interpretation of these "writings" is now termed as "desperation in the soul"?




posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 01:15 PM
link   
Yet another current example of how difficult it is for the closed-minded "archaeologists" to accept new information:


Even older





new topics
top topics
 
2
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join