It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ancient Aliens Episode on History Channel

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by optimus primal
 


I cant remember who said it,

"it ok to have an open mind just not so open that your brains fall out."

thats how I feel about "the fringe"


The carving of pacal decending into the underworld is a perfect example.
It even says what it is right on it.

There is so much new age lunacy going on on the fringe these days that the bonafide studies are lumped in with the crazies and treated a such.


At least the sho didnt bring up any sitchin.




posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 06:13 PM
link   
I like the idea that there may have been various visitors from other times or planets poking around in our past, but there's no really good evidence for it.

You say there's a picture of an "electric light" carved on a wall in Dendera? Fine. Show me a working one. Or make one that works. Then prove it has anything at all to do with space or time travelers, and not with some incredible but completely human super genius like Imhotep.

You say a particular rock was carved by diamond tipped (alien?) machines? Fine. Show me one of those machines. Are you saying none of them ever broke down or were tossed in the garbage nearby? Very convenient.

Just show me an obviously machine manufactured screw or bolt proven to date from long before any kind of screw making machine was built. Aliens didn't use bolts? Then a piece of carbon fiber composite will do. Not something made of a rock. Our ancestors had rocks. Show me a broken, discarded circuit board. They didn't have those.

Just because you don't know how something was accomplished doesn't mean aliens did it. People generally don't give our ancestors nearly enough credit for their intelligence. Human intelligence hasn't actually increased over the last 20,000 years or so, we've just go more education. There were incredible brilliant people in the past, just as there are now.

And generally, looking at human history, if aliens really did have a lot of interaction with our ancestors, they sure didn't actually have that great of an impact. It's not like we went from chipping flint arrowheads to shooting laser rifles overnight. So if there were aliens around, they really didn't accomplish much, if anything, that we couldn't have accomplished on our own.



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Nohup
 


Imhotep was A SUPER GENIUS along the lines of Renee des'carte they changed the very future of mankind whith there ideas, for many years I have joked that those men were either aliens or time travellers.


My opinion is that if there were visitors to our planet they had very little interaction with us. Slightly more than today becasue they could pull the god card and not get called on it, like they would today.

They might have visited looked around taken samples and the like, but they certainly didnt teach us how to build the pryamids
or anything like that.



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Nohup
 




People generally don't give our ancestors nearly enough credit for their intelligence


there is so much truth in that statement.


A perfect example of that was demonstrated in a documentary where indians in the andes built a 300' bridge across a canyon, with no plans, only knowledge passed down from generation to generation verbaly.



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 09:11 PM
link   
I like the conversation going on here. I'd like to say that the one thing that made me shake my head most was the lame "scary" music they played in the background. It's the same thing with that BS UFO hunters and other shows.

I do not know much about the people who were on the show or where they are coming from, but I did pick up that this show was supposed to be aimed to the regular person who has never heard any of this type of stuff before. Unfortunately, the History channel is most likely most interested in making money, therefore leaving out the more complex and thought provoking material that this subject contains. The only channels I know that have the best information and least amount of junk are called books, research, or first hand observation



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by 7H3Y 4R3 C0M1N6
 


true, the do the same kinda music stuff on ghost hunters, it's so distracting and unnecessary. i also agree that books, online journals and the like are the best source for research



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by optimus primal
to harte: ( since reply to seems to be non functioning right now)

i would be curious to know that "fringe" magazine publisher's name and qualifications. i didn't get to see the entire show, and i can't seem to find it on history channel's website.

I don't recall. Whatever it was, it wasn't "Atlantis Rising."
I'm not familiar with any others, but his affiliation was given in the subtitle during most of his appearances on the show.


Originally posted by optimus primal
there's nothing wrong with fringe. it's the fringe who are continually keeping the rest of the scientific community at large on their toes. sure they may be wrong quite a bit, but at least their thinking. to show such disdain for the fringe, really is just saddening to me. and as my previous post show's, just because someone sells something doesn't make their opinions invalid.


Sure, fringe it up, I say.

Just don't lie, as was done right there on the show in question.

Or, are these people claiming that archaeologists can't really trranslate Mayan and Egyptian writings?

Also, the claim that "Pharoahs kept their secrets hidden at Dendera" was a line of bull calculated to make the ignorant think that that was why there were carvings of "lighht bulbs" in that temple at Dendera.

The program was loaded with such tripe, and make no mistake, tripe it is. Purposeful misrepresentation of various findings in order to convince the ignorant of the ancient astronaut theory.

Now, why on Earth would the publisher of a fringe mag want to purposefully lie to an ignorant audience and thereby convince them of the veracity of a fringe theory like the A.A. theory?

Surely not for magazine sales!


You want to fringe, then fringe. Don't lie, or you risk someone (like me) exposing you.


Originally posted by optimus primalalso, you don't have to be working as an archeologist with a degree and everything, to have opinions or study ancient cultures.

True, I have no degree in archaeology or anthropology.

You don't have to have a degree to lie to the masses either.


Originally posted by optimus primal micheal shermer, whom i saw on that show for 30 seconds, is a publisher...and is frequently used as an "expert" though as far as i'm aware (correct me if i'm wrong please
) is not an archeologist. nor is he a biologist. nor is he an astrobiologist, yet his opinions are used quite frequently in a myriad of shows.

Shermer has my dream job - professional skeptic.


Originally posted by optimus primal
you can't have it both ways

Who's asking for both ways?

I could point out a hundred blatant, and purposeful, lies in that program. Who cares if they were uttered by degreed, or non-degreed, liars?

Harte



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 12:33 PM
link   
The magazine publisher gave his own personal "example" of how torches wouldn't function in the tombs due to lack of oxygen. He said he took out a lighter and there was so little oxygen in the tomb it wouldn't light. I wonder how he was able to breathe down there? Sheesh.

The previous poster is correct. Shermer is a professional skeptic. He uses logic and common sense to get to the bottom of things. I've never seen him insult anyone either unless debunking myths is insulting. Another great guy is the Amazing Randi. That fellow is freakin' awesome!

[edit on 10-3-2009 by griffinrl]



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 02:38 PM
link   
There are many questions as to who taught the Mayans and other cultures in the Americas? They were so advanced, yet they did not invent the wheel? How did they move the objects that weighed hundreds of tons through the wet forests? Many of these civilizations started with a lot of knowledge only to lose it slowly. From the Egyptians to the Dark Ages, there was a ton of knowledge lost.

Again, I am not one to jump to the alien theory, but I do think an older civilization would help explain some of the anomalies that are out there. They thing to do is start looking for the evidence of such a civilization. (I am not talking about Atlantis, either.) Am I a loony for thinking about the possibility of a grand civilization that existed thousands of years before Egypt or the known civilization?



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 07:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by kidflash2008
There are many questions as to who taught the Mayans and other cultures in the Americas? They were so advanced, yet they did not invent the wheel? How did they move the objects that weighed hundreds of tons through the wet forests?

Have you tried at all to find this out for yourself, or do you just sit and ponder? (Not that there's necvssarily anything wrong with sitting and pondering!)


Originally posted by kidflash2008 They thing to do is start looking for the evidence of such a civilization. (I am not talking about Atlantis, either.) Am I a loony for thinking about the possibility of a grand civilization that existed thousands of years before Egypt or the known civilization?

Not in my opinion. However, you should be aware that there is no difference between "looking for evidence of..." some ancient unknown advanced civilization and looking for evidence of any other civilization.

The latter is constantly going on, but no evidence of "advanced" civilization has ever been been found.

Harte



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by 7H3Y 4R3 C0M1N6
I don't know if any of you are watching this show right now, but they were just talking about the possibility that ancient civilizations (Egypt, Iraq, etc) were using electric devices for things like artificial light.

They talked about there not being any light in the tombs in the pyramids, and not enough oxygen for torches, and they went on to say that the Egyptians were using light bulb like devices. They showed an etching found of what they looked like. Basically, it was a flower that was in an enclosed tube, with a string like thing inside the tube, and the stem of the flower coming out a hole in the tube.

Instantly I thought that what they did was light the string (wick), put it in the tube, and use the flower for oxygen to fuel it. I don't feel like it's as simple as that, but it makes sense to me.

Does anyone else know about this? Or did the show not give that explanation to make it seem more mysterious


I feel somewhat smart for coming up with this so DON"T LAUGH AT ME



Just kidding, but let me know what you think.

--C



I was almost going to post about it the other night but was busy. I'm glad somebody else saw it. The real trump card is that there is not enough oxygen to light torches.

Some suggest mirrors, but the light was not bright enough to reach far enough after reflecting off of multiple copper shield mirrors.

Then they obviously show a pic of a light bulb. Do people think that it would look exactly like our light bulbs do now??? prob not.

Then they poured the orange juice in the clay jug with the copper sheet and stopper and it conducted some voltage, and the longer it was in there the more the volts increased.


How can people deny this?

The one paleo skeptic they had on there was literally the dumbest guy I have ever heard speak. He gave no good examples or reasons why and would not answer the questions directly he would kind of spin it off into his own reasoning. Pretty lame at best.


But yea all I can say it that they now think we are ready for this information, well at least the types of people who watch those channels. Then soon the info will spread and more people will be ready for more info and then they will keep releasing it slowly all in hope that we don't get mega pissed that they lied to us at some point.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by 7H3Y 4R3 C0M1N6
 


I was thoroughly disappointed with the show, it offered no arguments for or against Ancient Astronaut theory that we haven't already heard. Why even make a new show if there isn't some new information to share on the subject?

While I believe its possible aliens might have visited human beings in the past I think its equally possible that human beings are simply more advanced than we realize. We really don't give the ancients their due credit when it comes to how advanced they were. I think we forget that thousands of years ago there was no television, no cell phones, no internet, and that the lack of luxury meant the people worked on things most of the time, especially peasants and slaves. So they had time to build pyramids and structures aligned with the stars.

Of course the mystery of how human civilization got started so suddenly is an interesting one. The question is open to speculation, and imaginative minds will continue to play out wild and fascinating fantasies on our distant past while searching for evidence to prove it so.

I just hope the History Channel waits to do another such show until they have something new to tell us.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by LucidDreamer85
I was almost going to post about it the other night but was busy. I'm glad somebody else saw it. The real trump card is that there is not enough oxygen to light torches.

Tombs were not frequented, no torches were needed if you didn't go in after the interment.

The idea that a temple didn't have enough oxygen to keep a torch lit is belied by the dozens of ancient Egyptian temples with soot all over their ceilings.

Didn't mention that little fact, did they?
Do you or do you not wonder why they didn't?
If not, what the heck is wrong with you?


Originally posted by LucidDreamer85
Then they obviously show a pic of a light bulb. Do people think that it would look exactly like our light bulbs do now??? prob not.

Anyone that can read hieroglyphics wouldn't think they were light bulbs because right there on the wall next to the carvings it plainly states that they are lotus bulbs.

Didn't mention that little fact either, did they?
Do you or do you not wonder why they didn't?
If not, what the heck is wrong with you?


Originally posted by LucidDreamer85
Then they poured the orange juice in the clay jug with the copper sheet and stopper and it conducted some voltage, and the longer it was in there the more the volts increased.

Only one "Bahgdad Battery" was ever found in an assembled state, and as it was found, it couldn't have produced a charge. IOW, they had to alter it to make it into a "battery" in the first place.

Others were found disassembled.

Also, the "batteries" found date to around 100 AD and were in no way connected to anything Egyptian whatsoever. The temple at Dendera with the lotus bulbs dates to around the same period. This places them both firmly as Greco Roman, again having no connection whatsoever with ancient Egypt (other than mythologically.)

Didn't mention those little facts either, did they?
Do you or do you not wonder why they didn't?
If not, what the heck is wrong with you?

Harte



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


I have looked, but now with a handicap it makes it harder for me to get out. (Believe me, I would love to get out and go to the ruins in the Americas and visit the pyramids of Egypt.) I do a lot of reading, and have always had many questions. I am curious as to what everyone has to say, including the fringe side of things. I do not see anything wrong with that, and I will not apologize for reading the likes of Mr Von Daniken or Mr Hancock (I do tend to agree that Mr Hancock may be on to something). Whether or not I believe them is another matter, but I respect their right to offer some other ideas.

I will not be intimidated by anyone else to not check out any theory offered on these subjects. I also respect your opinions and read your responses to the questions offered. I like to ingest both sides of the debate.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by kidflash2008
Again, I am not one to jump to the alien theory, but I do think an older civilization would help explain some of the anomalies that are out there. They thing to do is start looking for the evidence of such a civilization. (I am not talking about Atlantis, either.) Am I a loony for thinking about the possibility of a grand civilization that existed thousands of years before Egypt or the known civilization?


If you are loony then I am too!!

The following is a post written for an egypt thread but I feel the main content applies to this thread also.

"It has been repeatedly asked by both sides, “Where is the proof of pre-pyramid civilization?”
Barring the “lie of omission”, victorious civilizations are commonly built on the rubble of the conquered. Likewise civilizations are abandoned due to famine, natural disaster ECT. Not that these are explanations of pre-pyramid civilizations but it does raise the question: What could be found under the buildings of modern Egypt some of which were built with the limestone casing of the great pyramid.

Has anyone seen the History Channel show “Life After People”?
All of our technology will decay without maintaince.
All of our structures will eventually decay, faster than you might think.
According to this show the Hoover Dam will probably be the last recognizable structure standing but sadly it too WILL fall.
Example given in the show is the city at Chernobyl: A relatively new city at the time of the accident. It is no longer radioactive but in the 30 or so years of neglect the decay is so bad that the “new” city is unsafe and unsalvageable.

Observations I have made in the three years I have had internet access:
There is geologic evidence of magnetic shifts of the earth.
There are ice core samples from our disappearing glacial caps that show evidence of climactic changes in the distant past.
Myth has frequently been proven to have its origin in truth, the city of Troy comes to mind.
“We” have built a seed bank in Antarctica. (Just thought I’d throw that one in.
!!

This brings me to my final observation. IF Sanskrit writings do depict “flying cars” and nuclear type war could those people not also recognize the indicators of a magnetic shift? Would they not have built something big enough and stable enough to survive such an event and say “we were here”? A huge mostly solid Pyramid on a practically perfectly level surface seems like a decent “We were here”. Not to mention using the hardest type rock available to build a "lego type" structure.

IMHO:
I understand that you can find “reasonable” sounding explanations on the internet for ANY theory you care to consider. I do not have the means to travel the world and see these artifacts for myself; let alone the formal education to translate Sanskrit, Sumarian, or Egyptian, nor do I personally know any one who does.

I have absolutely NO doubt that there are people on this forum with far more formal education than I.
That being said, if you present an “uneducated” person with a proven fact that is far removed from their everyday life they will either scoff or panic.
By the same token if you present an “educated” person with theory that will rock their paradigm they scoff and thump their “accepted guide to history”.
Both examples reflect a closed mind. It’s not my place to try to open their mind. I can only pose a question to myself and do my best to chase it to what I accept to be the answer. The trick for me becomes the labor intensive search for reputable sources on both sides of the question.
My new problems are “There ain’t enough time to chase ‘em all”!!! And I’m running out of memory on my computer!!"

So no we're not loony, yes do keep an open mind, but don't forget to take a step back every once in a while. And remember some where between "he said" and "she said" (they were both telling part of the truth)you might find the truth



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 03:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Curiosityrising
 


That is a good point to bring up. Metals and metal work especially will decay, while the stone work will last for a long time. Thank you for your input.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by kidflash2008
 


Flash,
Not trying to intimidate you. I did say that there's nothing wrong with sitting and pondering. Not as long as you realize that pondering is all it is.

TYhe simple fact is, the Maya never did anything that required that someone "teach" it to them.

The Maya did invent the wheel - they utilized it in toys. Wheels were of little use without roads, and in a rainforest, roads don't last long and aren't amenable to wheeled travel anyway. They did, however, use rollers.

Re. being "loony" for speculating on a "grand civilization" previous to any currently known one, I'd say not. I'd say your just overly optimistic. Like I said, the only thing required to find such a thing is to look. And they've been looking for quite a while now and not finding.
]
Don't forget that there is no era in our past that archaeologists and paleontologists haven't found artifacts from. The further back you go, the cruder these artifacts become. That's not a good sign, though I agree it isn't "proof" of anything.

Harte



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


To me the fact that the ancient Americans did not make roads for wheels to use just brings up another question:

How did they move all those heavy granite pieces in the mire of the jungles? Getting stuck would of been a big problem with something that weighed a few hundred tons. It would of sunk down pretty deep.

I do agree that so far the search has not been very productive, but I am hopeful they will find something.



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by RuneSpider
reply to post by mvirata
 


And as for the pots... I know I keep saying this, but they couldn't have carried a charge, the guys who reconstructed them as batteries purposefully changed the designed to make them work.


Most people don't realize how easy it is to make a batery. All you need is a piece of copper and a piece of zink and you have a batery. Galvanized tin contains zink. Not only copper and zink will work mind you! any disimilar metals will do. There are probably atleast 10 different metals that will work in combination with one another they just have to be disimilar. (copper and zink work best)

Then all you have to do is stick them into the ground and viola you have an earth batery. Stick them into a potatoe, orange, lemon, or lime and you have a batery. Almost any fruit or vegtable will do. Here's the formula 2 pieces of disimilar metals and a reactive solution and you have a batery. The reactive solution is something high or low on the ph scale either acidic or base. Don't believe me ? very simple to prove all you need is a volt meter.

I just don't see how you can mess up 2 peices of metal in a clay pot



posted on Mar, 18 2009 @ 01:51 AM
link   
Puma Punku won me over.

BTW good read Curiosityrising

I won't preach about it but I'm open enough to believe we were visited by ETs. I'm willing to put money down on that.

I'm not trying to dumb down our ancestor's ingenuity...actually...with a little help/guidance I think our ingenuity really stands out.

With so much evidence in South America already..what will it take for people to finally believe....(or accept the fact...oh oh I'm in trouble now!) we were visited by ETs?

BTW here is the dvd to the episode in question....
shop.history.com...

[edit on 18-3-2009 by j619pinoy]



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join