Ancient Astronauts Evidence, page 2

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by LoneWeasel

If you want the debate to progress, lets have a look at this hard evidence.

A link has been provided.

If on the other hand you just posted to make the point that your thread had been trashed and you were upset about it, I would respectfully suggest that an e-mail to the mods would be a more appropriate way to go about it.

I opened this thread to present material referring to the ancient astronaut theory. I will continue to do so. I welcome scrutiny and rebuttal as it helps me to decide how strong or weak my case is. In the other thread I have accepted instances in which I felt that I was wrong or debunked. Other instances, such as that of the abdydos-picture are far from debunked.

...that's your interpretation, which it is your right to hold on to. However, it's my opinion that IsaacKoi actually did a very good job of debunking it. For what it's worth, the "helicopter" looks more like a pair of sunglasses, to me - perhaps evidence of Ancient Egyptian Ray Bans?

There are model insects from ancient South America that slightly resemble modern fighter aircraft. Coincidence? Yes. There are cave paintings that seem to depict faces that resemble what we now call greys. Coincidence? Yes. Indicative of ancient interaction with aliens? No. Evidence of ineptitude at drawing. You see what you want to believe is there, be it a face on Mars or a man in the moon or a helicopter in this rock. Quite aside from the question of authenticity, IsaacKoi undermines your point most effectively when he points out that if helicopters or saucers were actually a common occurence they would be on every stone in Egypt, and they aren't. Sorry, but in my view it's unrealistic to believe otherwise.

You started your case with a reference to sun discs. If I were an egyptian and I saw a massive fiery orb rise slowly in the morning and move across the sky to the other side, I too would assume it was in some way propelled. But it's a huge leap to suggest this is "evidence" of anything other than a lack of understanding of what made the sun move across the sky. You classify the word "myth" as a distraction - that's misleading, because it suggests myth making was not a deliberate literary movement - it was.

However, the point is you offered your opinions (and I still think they're opinoins rather than evidence) the majority of people who voted in the debate sided with your opponent. You are entitled to stick to your guns and I've no interest in trying to dissuade you. But I'm still struggling to see what the purpose of this thread is other than to revive a debate that it seems to me you have already lost.

LW