Originally posted by Nohup
That being said, the thing about this topic I don't understand is how, specifically, are the things being discussed here proven to be "extraterrestrial," rather than, say evidence of time travel?

The so-called "Mimicry-Hypothesis" I posted about earlier prefers the explanation of the intervening-beings told of in the ancient texts being time-travellers rather than extraterrestrials.

As far as Im concerned, the "interveners" could be ETs, or Time-Travellers, or Interdimensional Beings, or all of the above. But before going there, the public would have to start considering the notion that some sort of intervention has indeed happened.

And if you can't positively dismiss either one of those options, then you really haven't proven anything, and are really stuck with "We don't know what these things are."

I dont know what they are and neither have we proven anything. But given the overall evidence I think its safe to say that something is amiss with the schoolbook-version of events.

So what do we have that definitively proves beyond any doubt that such and such an artifact or piece of artwork has to do with an extraterrestrial civilization? And not time travelers?

The concept of ETs as opposed to time-travellers comes from the ancient myth of "Gods" that dont look entirely human and claim to come from the sky and the heavens. But the idea of time-travellers cant be dismissed of course.

UFO NEWS 2008

plenty.

It has to be REAL.

We need to start getting more serious on this thread and put our minds together, I swear, the answers are right at our fingertips, Something about zero-point technology? Aren't all the groundbreaking alien/breaking the laws of physics, "about", an unknown that is right in front of us as we type?

Originally posted by Nohup
..
Unfortunately, this tends to lead to the problem of trying to use one unexplained thing to prove another unexplained thing. Similarities of descriptions are the weakest kind of link, since we are all human beings and all think like human beings in the same kind of images and symbols -- Jungian archetypes.

"For instance, in ancient times, people all over the world looked at the Sun and the Moon zooming across the sky, and the thought that came to their heads, whether they were in America or China or Europe or Sumeria, was that it was a vehicle -- a boat, chariot, horse, etc. -- driven by somebody. And they drew pictures of who they thought was driving the thing. It's not that there actually was a driver, but because we're human and think in the same way, that's how the images turned out. As another example, nearly all mythologies have chimeras, half-human, half-animal creatures. Are/were they real because everybody described them? Or maybe that's a common thing for people to imagine."

yes, I think that cultures´religious consciousness changes within thousands of years.
sumerians DID think, pray and live socially different that modern men.
same with egypt, early christian, roman, medieval, baroque or modern mankind.

religios thinkin´ was much more part of every day live. in fact, modern scientific thinking was developing from this. and modern state forms.

..
Again, if we can't nail it down specifically between ET's, time travelers, demons, angels, tulpas, or whatever, we haven't proven anything. And what that does is just add a lot of data to a big pile of data we already have that we have no explanation for. But to claim that this data is evidence of "extraterrestrials," is just plain facetious. "

and in detail thats a hard job to distinguish between these entities, and
I guess not possible any more, because of what I just wrote .

the hierarchy of spiritual beeings bound with planet earth, higher spirits, archangels, angels, demons etc play all a role in our evolution.

furthermore, there could be extraterrestial beeings, but..

you know, thats a reason to prove this findings. many of them are done, ´debunked´whatever. and thats good, because the interesting cases remain, it there are some.







[edit on 10-12-2008 by anti72]

It would be much more easy if we had this ´time machine´ from our black project Lockheed shadow gov´t NWO ´friends´.

When searching for answers from those in authority, whether its crop circles ,ufo,s or the many unexplained. When there is a report in the press that x occurred why is it that those in authority are the FIRST on site to get all the info? they want to speak to those who witnessed x, get evidence, if the info returned to the interested public is poor excuses or lies as to what was seen ,heard or experienced, then why are the officials sooooo eager to get there first?

*DELETE POST*

Just seen Anti72 is dekooning...



[edit on 10-12-2008 by SKUNK2]

More on the Baigong pipes!!! That was some interesting stuff. Very cool. It reminds me of the supposed granite rocks being discovered/used to support the Nazca water irrigation system. Anyone got any info on this? I'll spend the afternoon hunting down some information but I read this stuff in an old 1970's book so it might have been debunked by now... hope you guys can help, it might put your mind off all those trolls....here's hoping

Originally posted by TheGreensGoblin
More on the Baigong pipes!!! That was some interesting stuff. Very cool. It reminds me of the supposed granite rocks being discovered/used to support the Nazca water irrigation system. Anyone got any info on this? I'll spend the afternoon hunting down some information but I read this stuff in an old 1970's book so it might have been debunked by now... hope you guys can help, it might put your mind off all those trolls....here's hoping

If you find any more let us know.

And by the way: Saying "That is Debunked" is not the same as showing that it is Debunked, Why it is Debunked, Who Debunked it and Who Confirmed the Debunk.

Originally posted by Lokey13
I would propose to anyone who is here that is actually trying to obtain information on this subject that you ignore both anti annd harte; it will make your viewing experience of this data much more enjoyable: two more people to IGNORE!!!!

Sure, everyone should ignore established fact.

Otherwise, how could you believe any of this?

Here's what I said in the post Lokey reccomends you "ignore":

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by unknown known
What about the fact that although the Egyptians kept very careful records about everything they ever did; every king they had, every war they fought, and every structure they built, there were no records of them ever having built the pyramids?

You must be talking about some other Egyptians.

The Egyptians from planet Earth certainly did not do this.

Here a poster has declared that the Egyptians kept rigorous and meticulous records of every structure they ever built (among other things.)

That is not so.

According to Lokey, you should ignore the fact that the Egyptians didn't do this because if you don't ignore it, it doesn't seem all that strange that there are no Egyptian records regarding the construction of (I guess) the Great Pyramid.

If Lokey wishes to maintian that it is true, why doesn't he provide us with the detailed construction plans and records for, say, the Funerary Temple of Ramses at Medinet Habu?

Or, how about the Temple of Hathor in Dendera? Now, I mean the Egyptian one, not the Ptolemaic and Roman add-ons that came later.

Or how about records documenting the Temple of Karnak at Luxor? How about the Sphinx Temple? What about the Temple of Ptah in Memphis?

I'd dearly love to see the construction plans and details for these structures. Surely Lokey, or Unknowknown will provide us with access to the Egyptian's documentation for the construction of these fabulous temples. After all, everyone here is commanded to ignore my claim that they don't exist. That can only mean that Lokey knows that they do.

I'll check back later to get my hands on this previously unknown Ancient Egyptian documentation.

Also in that post (which you are to ignore) is:

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by unknown knownDid you know that the height of the pyramid (481 feet) is almost exactly 1/1,000,000,000 of the distance from the earth to the sun (480.6 billion feet)?

It's closer to 490 billion feet actually more than 490 billion), and no, neither number is "almost exactly." On top of that the distance you quoted is the average. The Earth's distance to the Sun varies over the year because all orbits are elliptical.

Look it up. The Earth is (on average) more than 490 billion feet from the Sun.

Also, all orbits anyone has ever calculated, all of them, are elliptical, not circular, meaning that the Earth's distance from the Sun gets greater and smaller over the course of a year (one orbit.)

Lokey insists you ignore this fact as well, because if you don't, you will be unable to pretend that the height of the Great Pyramid (which is today missing the capstone anyway so what are we talking about here) is "almost exactly 1/1,000,000,000 of the distance from the earth to the sun."

Let me ask, what if this were true? It's not, but what if it were?

Why would anyone, aliens included, need to so closely model the Earth's average distance to the Sun anyway?

What possible significance could this figure (if it were true, and it's not) have?

Harte

Originally posted by Harte

Sure, everyone should ignore established fact.


Harte

Like you ignore page 21 post 14? Like the rest of the debunkers ignore the list of evidence? (which is about 1% of all the evidence availible btw)

[edit on 10-12-2008 by Skyfloating]