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.

 

The Three Clinchers for Proof of Alien Life

page: 15
82
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 7 2009 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


There not sacrificing anything this is offerings for the god to secure passage threw the underworld there is lotus blossoms (your alien),dates, flowers ,fowl and even a pig shown in the hieroglyphs. But who knows maybe the pig is the alien? Please take the time to look at context see this is the problem with looking at a picture the observer interprets it any way they like. On the other hand an archaeologist must interpret it using context What were these people like what did they believe etc.

Now I could make an argument that the Egyptian gods actually existed and were in of themselves alien but thats another thread.




posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by platosallegory
They say that some UFO's are a a mistaken natural phenomena. Well doesn't it stand to reason that the ancients would experience this same phenomena if it occurs naturally?
I don't remember seeing any cave painting depicting a aerial phenomena, or stars or something like that?

Now I am curious about it'

Curiosity kills the cat! We don't wanna lose you!!


Ok, here's a mirror image painting of the constellation Orion on a rock found in Guam...


Courtesy: Guam.org

Some will say it's a depiction of a two headed monster! Probably! But isn't a two headed monster likely to be an alien?


There's plenty more but I don't have the time to post all of them here. More in the link below.

Cheers!



guam.org.gu...



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 



Are you sure?

Because an ATS debunker might come along and confabulate a theory about how this is nothing more than a depiction of the creation myth of a neolithic people - of which this symbol is Representative.

The diminutive female enthralled with passion, the male figure with piscene features, the meeting of the frictive loins of the two figures; all exactly what you'd expect to find when studying a culture from this period.

*Note the groin areas of the figures, and how they connect; to this particular primitive hunter-gatherer society this portion of the glyph was symbolic of the creation of mankind and the beginning of time itself. It certainly is not a two headed monster.

Clearly, what we have here is an artifact of a primitive sex cult - polytheistic - and based upon an inherited matriarchal hierarchy.

Why don't you know this...
.
.
.
.
Heck, How do I know this?

I don't! I just made it up... Like most ATS Egyptologists do ;-)

[edit on 8-4-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 02:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Ancient cave drawings with stars is nothing new it was very important in many cultures. They used stars to mark seasons told them when to plant. They spent a lot of time looking at the stars, China has some of the oldest continual astronomical records.

So what Im trying to figure out is why you felt this was something that people would need to debunk? See the point of ant archaeologist is to examine context not from are point of view but from the painters. This is why people see something think it proves there point problem with that is you cant go by what you think but what they were thinking when they made it.

Funny thing is people hasn't changed but are beliefs are all ways changing!



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 04:21 AM
link   
The Nazca "astronaut" was drawn in modern times by pranksters. You can clearly see the style differs a lot from the original nazca lines.
This conclusion comes from research, but i cant remember where i read it. I believe there's even another fake drawng at Nazca.

[edit on 8/4/2009 by errorist]



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 05:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by errorist
The Nazca "astronaut" was drawn in modern times by pranksters....
....This conclusion comes from research, but i cant remember where i read it.



You can't do that here.... or shouldn't...

We need links, examples, corroboration of some sort, etc, etc.

*We do it for you. ;-)



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 05:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by errorist
The Nazca "astronaut" was drawn in modern times by pranksters. You can clearly see the style differs a lot from the original nazca lines.
This conclusion comes from research, but i cant remember where i read it. I believe there's even another fake drawng at Nazca.

Huh? You mean this 'astronaut'?



If so, then this wasn't the work of pranksters.


These vertical geoglyphs predate the horizontal ones and possibly helped the Nazcans to perfect their unique drawing skills.The alleged alien landing strips were created many hundreds of years after this alleged alien was drawn!


Cheers!


www.traveladdicts.connectfree.co.uk...



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 06:01 AM
link   
The problem with all these "ancient astronauts" is that I saw drawings similar to them before I ever heard of that nut job von Daniken. Where, you ask, eager for more "evidence"! On refrigerator doors, the products of pre-schoolers with fingerpaints.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 06:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
The problem with all these "ancient astronauts" is that I saw drawings similar to them before I ever heard of that nut job von Daniken.


Please elaborate on how this poses a "problem" for you.

*And whose post are you responding to (in reference to Von Daniken )- where was he mentioned in this thread?



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 06:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
The problem with all these "ancient astronauts" is that I saw drawings similar to them before I ever heard of that nut job von Daniken.


Please elaborate on how this poses a "problem" for you.

*And whose post are you responding to (in reference to Von Daniken )- where was he mentioned in this thread?


It's a problem because very, very similar drawings have been done by 4 and 5 year olds without ever having come in contact with aliens. So saying that they represent ancient astronauts is simply nonsensical.

As for von Daniken, please try to convince me you haven't read "Ancient Astronauts" or one of its clones. Or at least seen a TV babblementary about how we "have been visited in past times".



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 06:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
As for von Daniken, please try to convince me you haven't read "Ancient Astronauts" or one of its clones.


Why would you want me to prove a negative?

*Since we are now using your logic, please try to convince me that earth was not visited by an intelligent species that did not evolve one earth ;-)

(That would be far more on-topic - though I do not expect you to attempt it)


Have you bothered to read any of Von Daniken's more recent books?

If so, which ones and what year were they first published?

Most people are only familiar with his older works, which Von Daniken admits contain flaws - flaws which are addressed and corrected in his newer books.
(This is why debunkers prefer use his older work as this allows them to ignore the retractions and updates made in his newer material. Poor form, predictably)



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 07:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
As for von Daniken, please try to convince me you haven't read "Ancient Astronauts" or one of its clones.


Why would you want me to prove a negative?

*Since we are now using your logic, please try to convince me that earth was not visited by an intelligent species that did not evolve one earth ;-)

(That would be far more on-topic - though I do not expect you to attempt it)


Have you bothered to read any of Von Daniken's more recent books?

If so, which ones and what year were they first published?

Most people are only familiar with his older works, which Von Daniken admits contain flaws - flaws which are addressed and corrected in his newer books.
(This is why debunkers prefer use his older work as this allows them to ignore the retractions and updates made in his newer material. Poor form, predictably)


I won't try to prove your thesis for you. Nobody ever has and I have to watch my grass growing (we all have our priorities.)

As for von Daniken, it's been proven in court that he's a liar and a embezzler. Convicted at least twice IIRC. Why people would put their faith in a man that is an established liar is really amazing to me.

His books are fashionably correct and the newer ones are simply lies with a fresh coat of whitewash.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla

I won't try to prove your thesis for you.


I asked you three questions, which you danced around:


Why would you want me to prove a negative?

Have you bothered to read any of Von Daniken's more recent books?

If so, which ones and what year were they first published?


*Please feel free to have another try at answering these questions - it would go a long ways towards bolstering whatever modicum of credibility you may still have ;-)


Cheers!!!!!



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 07:24 AM
link   
I haven't asked you to do anything, I just pointed out where you have failed to prove your point.

As for von Daniken, I have better things to do than read fantasies. Why would I bother to read a convicted liar's retread BS?



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 07:50 AM
link   
Thanks for the links and images, platosallegory and mikesingh.

After making that post and when I was already in bed I remembered that I have a book somewhere that shows a reproduction of a painting with the Moon and some stars, if I remember it well, I haven't seen that book in a very long time, I will look for it.

About those stars, mikesingh, I don't know if they are correctly identified, because the movement of the solar system through space makes the constellations change with time, that is why the star that is now the North Star is not the same it was 4000 years ago.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by platosallegory
***snip***
The skeptic can't even seperate UFO (Unidentified Flying Object) from extra-terrestrial and or extra-dimensional beings.
***snip***


WHOAAAA Neddie

That is exactly what we keep on complaining that Believers do. Anything that anyone claims is a UFO is implied to be "space buddies".

Anything that anyone claims to be a UFO is taken at face value in this thread as well as in other UFO threads. NOT scrutinized.

Someone posts a proven fake.
"Well done. Good find". Star and flag. Happens almost automatically.

Someone voices doubts.
"BUUUHH". Go away with your doubts. We only want posts from people who believe.

Just because a "pillar of society" claims something about UFO's doesn't make it the truth.
Somewhere here on ATS I read that Firemen witnessed these things. Firemen were beyond reproach because of their noble jobs.
Let me remind you that several Firemen have been caught as being serial arsonists. Beyond reproach. I think not.

This story must be true because "He is a senator". "He is a policeman". "He is a judge". "He is a banker". "He is the president".
EDIT (strike banker from list of trustworthy people).

SO WHAT.
ATS is crammed full of stories about those pillars of society being liars and cheats. Why not when it comes to UFOs?



[edit on 8.4.2009 by HolgerTheDane]



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 10:46 AM
link   
www.youtube.com...
hey guys/girls this is my first post at the site, sorry if this has already been posted, but this video is another clincher for me. Buzz Aldrin says he saw a ufo on the apollo 11 mission.

[edit on 8-4-2009 by IpsoFacto88]



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by IpsoFacto88
www.youtube.com...
hey guys/girls this is my first post at the site, sorry if this has already been posted, but this video is another clincher for me. Buzz Aldrin says he saw a ufo on the apollo 11 mission.

[edit on 8-4-2009 by IpsoFacto88]


Did Buzz say he say an alien space craft? No, he saw something he couldn't identify. If you get the full version rather than the sound byte you'll see that a reasonable explanation was forthcoming. And it didn't have little green men in it.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 10:56 AM
link   
What drives me crazy, when I read and watch movies or listen to people talk about alien life or E.T.'s or UFO's it always described like something out of star trek, or star wars. Its not being described with very few words or thoughts or emotions that animate the experience. The experience would be ALIEN. I would say out of all the literature and studies I have studied 99.9 percent of it was human imaginative Chronicles based off of human logic in my opinion. Proof of Alien life would be alien, would not make sense nor would the equation make a solution in our reasoning of understanding. Until this is learned or until this has been experienced by the people seeking the answers, the continued egotistical blood bath will continue, the war of words and belief's will also continue to keep from truth, or at least spreading that truth. Very few stories I have heard or seen that compare to ALIEN, and most of the time those people are treated the worst. Einstein, would be considered MAD in the 21st century.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by HolgerTheDane

Originally posted by platosallegory
***snip***
The skeptic can't even seperate UFO (Unidentified Flying Object) from extra-terrestrial and or extra-dimensional beings.
***snip***


WHOAAAA Neddie

That is exactly what we keep on complaining that Believers do. Anything that anyone claims is a UFO is implied to be "space buddies".

Anything that anyone claims to be a UFO is taken at face value in this thread as well as in other UFO threads. NOT scrutinized.

Someone posts a proven fake.
"Well done. Good find". Star and flag. Happens almost automatically.

Someone voices doubts.
"BUUUHH". Go away with your doubts. We only want posts from people who believe.

Just because a "pillar of society" claims something about UFO's doesn't make it the truth.
Somewhere here on ATS I read that Firemen witnessed these things. Firemen were beyond reproach because of their noble jobs.
Let me remind you that several Firemen have been caught as being serial arsonists. Beyond reproach. I think not.

This story must be true because "He is a senator". "He is a policeman". "He is a judge". "He is a banker". "He is the president".
EDIT (strike banker from list of trustworthy people).

SO WHAT.
ATS is crammed full of stories about those pillars of society being liars and cheats. Why not when it comes to UFOs?



[edit on 8.4.2009 by HolgerTheDane]


You are debating a point that was never made.

Nobody said that because these "pillars of society" says something that it must be true.

What you do have to do is weigh the credibility of the witness within reason and this is just common sense. We do it in all walks of life.

This is what so called skeptics and debunkers fail to do. They want all of these things to be weighted the same.

Have you ever seen a court case?

If the prosecution puts up a witness and the defense can't impeach the witness then that's a strong witness for the prosecution. If the defense can impeach the witness and they have alot of baggage then that's a weak witness for the prosecution.

Some lawyers will not even put witnesses on the stand if their not credible.

So, if Edgar Mitchell says aliens exist and he's a respected astronaut who can call the Joint Chiefs of staff and get a call back, that has to be weighed differently than if a guy just out of the mental hospital was saying the same thing.

So when a pilot, police officer, military, astronaut and more say these things you have to weigh the credibility of the witness within reason.

You can't say just because some of these "pillars of society" have lied in the past that all of them are lying.

If you can impeach the witness then do so. If you can show that the people making these claims are known liars or there known to make up stories then present the evidence.

When you try to belittle eyewitness testimony it makes no sense because we use it everyday in all walks of life as we gather evidence.



new topics

top topics



 
82
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join