37 pages and I still love this thread.

Gives me lots to read and many links to still look into. Still reading the Rainbow Serpents thread, which is also a good one.

Wanted to bump this thread since I think a few naysayers should check it out and have an open mind and not such a skeptical one. It's actually a really good one and a favorite.

Originally posted by mblahnikluver
...Wanted to bump this thread since I think a few naysayers should check it out and have an open mind and not such a skeptical one. It's actually a really good one and a favorite.

"Believers" could be closed-minded, too.

I've run into my share of people who WANT to believe in something like Ancient ETs so badly, that they chose to only consider things that support those pre-conceived notions, but totally close their minds and ignore the evidence that does NOT support those pre-conceived notions.

Being open minded is not a bad thing in general, but many "blind believers" are single-minded, not open-minded.

Granted, there are pseudo-skeptics who are single-minded, too. However "skepticism" does not necessarily mean "close-minded".

There is really too much overwhelming evidence in my opinion that points to AAT intervention in our past, I truly believe man ie, Homo Sapiens, is NOT from Earth, but from elsewhere, migrated here after some ancient war or cataclysm on their own planet

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

Originally posted by mblahnikluver
...Wanted to bump this thread since I think a few naysayers should check it out and have an open mind and not such a skeptical one. It's actually a really good one and a favorite.

"Believers" could be closed-minded, too.

I've run into my share of people who WANT to believe in something like Ancient ETs so badly, that they chose to only consider things that support those pre-conceived notions, but totally close their minds and ignore the evidence that does NOT support those pre-conceived notions.

True. In fact, you run right smack-dab into one when you read the OP in this very thread.

Harte

---

---

Good (resurrection of) topic! This seems to be an excellent compilation of Ancient Extraterrestrial theories (I admittedly haven't yet finished reading everything). The main concept that rests easily with me is how BOTH the creationists and the evolutionists were partially correct!

So basically this Anti-AAT is simply one more AGENDA, making sure to present the theory in bad light when as said earlier, debunks UNPOLISHED claims by AAT that have later been improved and with more findings.

The movie AA Debunked, is the same, some close mind's plan to present everything as hoax when some things in the theory should not be dismissed

Originally posted by ImpactoR
So basically this Anti-AAT is simply one more AGENDA, making sure to present the theory in bad light when as said earlier, debunks UNPOLISHED claims by AAT that have later been improved and with more findings.

"More findings?" Such as?

Originally posted by ImpactoR
The movie AA Debunked, is the same, some close mind's plan to present everything as hoax when some things in the theory should not be dismissed

Which things, exactly, should not be dismissed?

Harte

Originally posted by Harte
So, you admit then that there aren't any "UNPOLISHED claims by AAT that have later been improved and with more findings." And there exist no "things in the theory should not be dismissed."

There are unpolished claims and lots of the debunking of AAT is targeting those unpolished old ones, this is an agenda to prevent finding out actual things that happened throughout history. Like Livelock cave, Nevada, they saw the myth was not just a myth when they found arrows, tall bodies. Then someone decided to hide them forever. So much for them.

Originally posted by Harte
Sorry, but the only "cases" are modern day UFO sightings. There exist no "cases" from ancient history.

Some christian pictures could be simply symbolism. However, I do not consider the Nuremberg sighting which was clearly retelling an event, some drawings and things that do look like space suits in drawings and figurines... And the knowledge they got.

And since you know so much of evolution, what is the explanation about humans getting smart and not a single species evolved in that direction? This has not been addressed or not properly. Oh yeah it's said, it just one happened, the stronger survive, evolution involves adaptation to the environment etc etc, and what? No other animal started using fire. Even chimps - today even of they observed humans using fire they would not start thinking otherwise, because they are ANIMALS and they do not have the intelligence that humans received out of 'pure evolution' adaptation and mutation.

Oh and speaking of UFOs, UFOs are not real, they do not exist. It is all Chinese Lanterns like the ones I saw on Dec 31st. Seriously, if someone cannot distinguish non-conventional objects from Chinese Lanterns just no comment.

Also it is offensive to claim someone cannot distinguish a non-conventional craft from chinese lantern, it's almost like calling someone 'idiot' paraphrased.

I can see how a Chinese Lantern flies, want me to describe every move, brightness and path they traveled?

Originally posted by ImpactoR
And since you know so much of evolution, what is the explanation about humans getting smart and not a single species evolved in that direction? This has not been addressed or not properly.

And why is it that you think that species should all evolve the same traits such as intelligence?

Because you have no idea what evolution is or why and how it works.

I'm not your Biology teacher.

Harte