Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Ancient Astronauts Evidence

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by mojo4sale
 


ahh questions answered and a different refreshing viewpoint




posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
i never once professed that anything i stated was factual

now thats just a lie, you have stated several times that there is a cover up going on and that aliens are involved in earths history


Originally posted by metaldemon2000
self explanitory contradiction

I agree, I think the fact that you have based part of your belief on a man who has a record of being dishonest very self explanatory

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
no? since when are you an expert on my life? i never actually told you anything i know yet so you wouldnt know what it is that i know.

lol, you have stated again and again that you believe in aliens and that you don't know much about history.

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
The truth is you indirectly imply to be some sort of expert on the matter yet you have not replied to my other post asking what it is that you believe and i would like to know what makes you an expert on this matter.

how is answering this rubbish with credible evidence claiming that I am anything. I am telling you that you don't have a clue what youre talking about because you havent studied it. Feel free anytime to tell us how deep your knowledge on this subject goes.

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
BTW i never once said the the aliens were in on this conspiracy. This is going nowhere all you are doing is twisting what i am saying and attacking what it is you claim to think i know.

you want me to copy and paste that your previous statements where you have claimed that all throughout the time that youve been posting here.
if the aliens aren't in on it where are they and why arent they backing you up

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
But you have never answered a single question that i asked.


I have answered every question you have asked, you just didn't like the answers because they make you look like you don't know much about reality. thats not my fault. its yours


Originally posted by metaldemon2000
Just because i dont know the names of archeologists and scholars and egyptologists you claim i know nothing. I have read books, many books, the orthodox ones,

and yet you can't remember who write them
tell me another one that hasn't got bells on

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
and hey your know what? alot of those are based on old information too and most modern books are just regurgatated information from previous books,

well this is a phenomena called the scientific method. new theories are based on understandings collected from empirical data.
please link me to a book that discusses the evidence of aliens that predates HG Wells

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
the exception being any books regarding newer findings which really havent been very exciting anyways.

well thats it in a nutshell isn't it. you don't find the truth exciting so you have invented a new one.
"i reject your reality and replace it with my own" must be your catchphrase


Originally posted by metaldemon2000
Why is it that you care so much to bury this topic anyhow?

I value the truth

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
I have seen you trolling around the boards attacking this theory any which way possible asif you had nothing better to do. What purpose would it serve to obliterate it?

read the board motto "deny ignorance"

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
In all honesty out of all the wacky conspiracies and outlandish claims on the internet and in real life as well, AAT is the only theory with the most stigma surrounding it.

thats because its nonsense which only gullible people who havent studied the facts tend to believe

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
Why do you suppose that is? Why is it attacked and buried faster than anything else going around.

because its nonsense that only gullible people believe and gullibility isn't currecny

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
Ill tell you why. If i did not want someone to know about something that i was hiding, i would hide it in plain site.

thats nice. I think you'll find that everyone else would hide it in a concrete bunker 10 miles underground

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
Look at UFO theories for example. Its has become nothing short of a novelty. Everyone knows about it, most think its funny. It is because of that, that it doesnt get taken seriously because its become the norm to think about them as a fairy tale.

100 years ago it was fairies, now its U.F.O.s.
do you know what the acronym stands for. Its not "Alien mothership"

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
AAT is not known to most people, not talked about by most people, and is silenced fast.

everyone knows about it but the vast majority of people aren't stupid enough to buy into it.

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
Now most probably because its the only crazy theory that could actually be true.

nope its because its just a crazy hypothesis. please check your dictionary for a defintion of a theory

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
Nobody wants it in plain sight because the dots can and would be connected.

didn't you just say that it was hidden in plain sight. you're starting to unravel now arent you

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
I bet you have an easy time dealing with a few people such as i but i bet you wouldnt be able to explain to thousands should they become skeptiical to orthodox methods.

keep dreaming its never going to happen






[edit on 23-11-2007 by kerkinana walsky]



posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
reply to post by mojo4sale
 


ahh questions answered and a different refreshing viewpoint


he just said he has the same viewpoint as me, he even used one of my examples in his post

now you really are deliberately ignoring the facts arent you

I also used to believe in aliens

i was about 12 when I grew out of it

how old are you ?

btw who is Giambattista Vico


[edit on 23-11-2007 by kerkinana walsky]



posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 08:59 PM
link   


I would like to ask these questions to any skeptics on the thread. I know i asked earlier but it was to one individual. Unlike a few people around here, I am seriously interested as to what it is you believe. It will help me better my own understanding of my beliefs and for me to see where you are coming from.


I believe conventional science, in whatever branch to be 98% fact and 2 theory based on the facts. By default it can never be 100% fact, we were not there to witness it, therefore there will always be unanswered questions. If conventional science is used as the cornerstone to find the answers to the unknown, then any questions/speculations would be acceptable. If ignored in part or entirely, then it just amounts to pseudo-historical psycho-babble by those who wish to believe what they want.




And finally if the ancients believed they interacted with gods, spoke to gods, even had the offspring of gods, and lived in cities built by the gods, do you believe this was the work of gods at all?


Among other reasons, ancient peoples used the their various gods to explain forces of nature that they otherwise didn't understand. Sometimes according godhood on humans who performed deeds considered outside the norm. Asclepius and Imhotep were, after their death, raised to the status of gods.




They viewed their gods as appearing as human or demi human, they had names, personalities, and displayed emotion so im not looking for they mistook a sinister looking tree as an evil god or the wind spoke to them.


To the ancient peoples, what better way to understand something you don't know, than to put it in terms/give it qualities that you do understand. Rather like what "believers" do all the time.



posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 10:24 PM
link   
lol starting to unravel? no. lacking sleep yeah
im done with you on this particular subject, no point trying to convince someone whos mind is made up, so u win this round cuz yer just too damn relentless
however for the record i never went into specifics on what i do and do not know/believe.
1. sitchen and danniken are far fetched for sure and usually i dont take a small handfull of opinions as evidence as fact.

2. I do believe in ET's (not up for debate right now) however i was never 100% convinced we were in any way created by them, perhaps visited or observed in some way but that is only natural we would do the same should we become space faring.

3. i also believe civilization dates back further then recorded history suggests but i cannot begin to speculate on how far and to what level of society was achieved as i dont actually know.

For me recorded history has far too many unanswered questions and a fear that some facts have been diluted by religion which is not inconceivable due to the fact that religious institutions havent always gone baout things with the best intentions

I also believe that more recently published school textbooks are becoming filled with nonsense and half truths and seriously destroying the way people learn history now.

I do enjoy discussing AAT however because i can honestly say i think the theories are interesting while i dont actually believe most of them i think it more interesting to discuss it rather than the lame reptillian or lemurian garbage that seems to float around here alot. Not to mention that new age higher level of being 4th dimension mumbo jumbo.

U.F.O.s are just aircraft that havent been officially announced yet and are probably test craft or classified military craft or at times a drug fueled hallucination.

Mostly my main interest is in war, war tactics, weaponry. This is where my studies usually get eaten up. Although for a long time i did however read on ancient man (yes the orthodox stuff) my favorite reads usually include northern european history though and at times south american history, to me egyptology lately had been on a low priority read status for me but i can honestly say i have read on it.

So attack AAT if you must, dont attack me by saying i dont know anything at all its not cool at all i never said that about you.

ANyhow i look forward to debating you on other subjects that i do have facts rather than evidence



posted on Nov, 24 2007 @ 02:17 AM
link   
Dang I've missed some good stuff

Kudos to KW for some clear answers (if a bit strong)

Same to Cormac and Mojo

Just a few comments and notes



Dariloug: Are you sure? Really sure? And many of the artifacts and glyphs found (as well as ancient structures) say something completely different. The ancients very well knew what 'space' was. Just my two cents.


Howdy Dari: If you have some evidence that the ancient knew what space was please tell us about it. There actual writing about it would be preferred to a fringe writers opinion however.



Then again, it will always come down to 'who' was the last people to touch the historic records of anything that determines our past. Right? Manipulation has happened so much in the past that it truly comes down to who won or who had the most influence (money). It's THEIR history that we are taught, not necessarily the real history.


In most cases this doesn't apply to archaeology as the materials have come out of the earth. You can go to a German (and others) museum and look at an original Sumerian tablet - the dictionaries on how to read it are also available on line or in libraries - knock yourself out and learn the languages. the same for Egyptian H. Read what the ancients wrote.




KW: none of the debunkers here have trotted all over the globe to study history,


One gentle correction KW, I am doing that (which is why I live in the Middle East), I've been to all the major ancient sites except Mesopotamia (the Iraq part) and Harappa. My favorite places? Easter Island, Chicken Itza, Malta and GH. This spring I'll get to Peru.




metaldemon2000: Mostly my main interest is in war, war tactics, weaponry.


An interest of mine also, especially bronze age weaponry, the development of warfare from hunting and ethnolithology, have your read Drew's The end of the bronze age and Keeley's War before civilization?



posted on Nov, 24 2007 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune

One gentle correction KW, I am doing that (which is why I live in the Middle East), I've been to all the major ancient sites except Mesopotamia (the Iraq part) and Harappa. My favorite places? Easter Island, Chicken Itza, Malta and GH. This spring I'll get to Peru.


You dont how jealous that makes me!!
I'll trade you some pictures of Aboriginal rock art for some pictures of Easter Island.


Btw, Chicken Itza ?
i know its a bastardized way of spelling it but it always has me laughing.


Chichen Itza


The Maya name "Chich'en Itza" means "At the mouth of the well of the Itza." This derives from chi, meaning "mouth" or "edge", and ch'en, meaning "well." Itzá is the name of an ethnic-lineage group that gained political and economic dominance of the northern peninsula.



mojo



posted on Nov, 24 2007 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by mojo4sale
Btw, Chicken Itza ?
i know its a bastardized way of spelling it but it always has me laughing.



I always call it chicken pizza because I can never remember how to spell it



posted on Nov, 24 2007 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


no, do you recommend?



posted on Nov, 24 2007 @ 10:22 PM
link   
Haha, yes chickens. When I worked in Merida and were clearing some lesser ruins we use to have problems with chickens running around the sites. some didn't move fast enough and ended up as Pollo en mole.

M100
Yes I do recommend those two Keeley particularly. I worked on that subject for a few years. Mainly recreating materials, equipment and determing styles - we quickly determined why helmets were one of the first things created as man tools evolved from use in hunting to war.

Dang left off Australia as a place to visit - did get to Kiwi land thou

[edit on 24/11/07 by Hanslune]



posted on Nov, 25 2007 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by kerkinana walsky


I also used to believe in aliens

i was about 12 when I grew out of it

how old are you ?

[edit on 23-11-2007 by kerkinana walsky]



yet another revealing look into the mindset of the "scientific" establishment. I am impressed by the depth of thought...not.



posted on Nov, 25 2007 @ 05:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune


They can in certain circumstance but if so that defeats the main thrust of your argument. If they mean the same thing then your conspiracy falls apart. Do you deny that the majority of the worlds langauges have different words for sky and heaven?




So far I only know the words for sky/heaven in swedish, polish, russian, german, japanese and hebrew. And in those languages they match. Stay tuned for more as I find the time to expand on this.



posted on Nov, 25 2007 @ 05:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by kerkinana walsky
.

the words we use today are misleading. for instance the heaven we refer to as the realm of the dead in the ancient world was never in the sky. it was known as the underworld. the place we refer to as heaven when we think of as the place where god lives in the ancient world is always a mountaintop so was also never in the sky.



wrong. be it greek mythology or any other similar source, there were distinctions between underworld and heavens. Hence one translation as "underworld" and the other as "heavens".



posted on Nov, 25 2007 @ 05:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by mojo4sale
As KW states, ALL of the original gods are sun gods.



yes, thats what newsstand archaeology and school science teaches. And established teaching is hereby questioned. Not that many of the god depictions look anything like the sun. See the hindu link provided by rapturas.



posted on Nov, 25 2007 @ 06:55 AM
link   


So far I only know the words for sky/heaven in swedish, polish, russian, german, japanese and hebrew. And in those languages they match. Stay tuned for more as I find the time to expand on this.


Japanese? You SURE about that Skyfloating? There are least eleven words for heaven in modern Japanese and more in archaic as for sky there are two primary and two secondary meaning, only one of the heaven words is used with sky and guess what it means the atmosphere we can see.

I'd check again - are you using one of the free (and very limited) on line translation programs? If so your information will be flawed.

Heaven



天上界 (tenjoukai)
てんじょうかい (tenjoukai) - (n) celestial world
- heaven

常世の国 (tokoyo no kuni)
とこよのくに (tokoyonokuni) - (n) distant country
- hades
- heaven

天国 (tengoku)
てんごく (tengoku) - (n) paradise
- heaven
- Kingdom of Heaven

皇天 (kou ten)
こうてん (kouten) - (n) providence
- heaven

上界 (joukai)
じょうかい (joukai) - (n) upper world
- heaven

ヘブン (hebun) - heaven



Sky



天 (ten) - (n) heaven
てん (ten) - sky

久方 (kukata) - moon
ひさかた (hisakata) - sky



This conspiracy of yours sounds a bit shaky



posted on Nov, 25 2007 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
So far I only know the words for sky/heaven in swedish, polish, russian, german, japanese and hebrew. And in those languages they match. Stay tuned for more as I find the time to expand on this.


I see so finally you have reduced your evidence to lies
please post the links to the word for heaven in the languages you have specified from credible sources such as online dictionaries. I already know that what you said is incorrect. heres your big chance to prove otherwise. Of course now if you can't everyone will have seen you publically lie about it and will know just exactly who has lost this debate on this subject and any future one you decide to attempt to post your unsupported beliefs about




Originally posted by Skyfloating
wrong. be it greek mythology or any other similar source, there were distinctions between underworld and heavens. Hence one translation as "underworld" and the other as "heavens".

thats why I specified the difference, obviously your failure to understand my post must be because you have a comprehension problem. I will try to spell it out for you in words with less syllables in future
the simple fact remains though that in all cases the place where God came from no matter what pantheon in the ancient world was always a mountain. It was never outer space.


skyfloating has already been busted and had his posts deleted for trolling the same information which he has already lost on in a debate

I've started to take anything he says as that coming from someone who is akin to a religious fundementalist who doesn't care what the truth is as long as everyone thinks he knows it first

its quite clear that with his 100 year old theories and outdated evidence hes never going to prove anything so I see no reason to debate him further

you can only deny ignorance if they actually understand what the term means




[edit on 25-11-2007 by kerkinana walsky]



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 02:28 AM
link   
Howdy KW

I fine its better to give fringe believers as much rope as they need. Sooner or later they hit a fact or contradiction that cannot be over come. We saw that earlier when Skyfloating hit the dilemma of not being able to comment on the context of the Abydos inscriptions.

His present 'conspiracy" is most amusing and I look forward to his explaining how the evil people doing it have used their hidden hands to hide words from us.

Hey question when does the first concept of outer space come into existence/literature (as a place outside the atmosphere of earth and which the earth moves thru)?



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
Hey question when does the first concept of outer space come into existence/literature (as a place outside the atmosphere of earth and which the earth moves thru)?


with the Chaldeans around 1000bce I think (not 100% sure)
the greeks got their understanding of the universe from them and passed it to Egypt. All the claims for an outer atmosphere post date that point. They also influenced the Hebrews during the Babylonian exile. The Hebrews thought that a great idea
"hey you mean we can have a God who isn't corporeal, thats great news it means no one can prove he doesn't exist"
the Big clue is that YHWH first revealed hismelf to Abraham at Ur of the Chaldees. of course they got the timeline wrong but hey how were they to know someone at some point would notice. It was 2000 years and 200 million + dead heretics before anyone caught on they'd been conned



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
This necessarily means that all of the TRANSLATIONS done in the last hundreds and even thousands of years didnt have appropriate words for aircraft, saucer, airplane and had to resort to silly translations such as "flying egg", "flying barque", "flyship", "Gods in the sky" and so forth. It is rather obvious that our translators from the 16th, 17th and 18th Century didnt know how to translate words relating to technology.


More: Pillar of Clouds, Chariot



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 11:58 AM
link   
how fortunate then that most translations of ancient texts have all been done in the last 50 years or have not needed retranslating as they cntinue to be read in the language they were written in
these include
Sumerian texts all translated in the last 20 - 50 years
Akkadian texts all translated in the last 20 - 50 years
Babylonian texts all translated in the last 20 - 50 years
Sanskrit texts still readable in their original language
Greek texts still readable in their original language
Roman texts still readable in their original language
Egyptian texts all retranslated in the last 20 - 50 years
Chinese, Japanese and Korean texts still readable in their original language

please link to the texts that you are claiming have been translated incorrectly as to me this looks like yet another dubious claim to fabricate evidence that doesn't otherwise exist





[edit on 26-11-2007 by kerkinana walsky]





new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join