The Three Clinchers for Proof of Alien Life

page: 3
82
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 4 2009 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic_al
reply to post by jkrog08
 




1. The Nazca lines, these can be made without using aircraft and just using
fixed lengths of string and a handful of people. The scale and dedication
to task is impressive.
But we interpret them differently, big head, big eyes, must be a Alien.
If fact, it's not much different to how children draw their parents today,
stick figures with giant round heads and big eyes.

[Quote]

Are you implying children made the Nazca lines?




posted on Apr, 4 2009 @ 10:36 PM
link   
After reading this information, my belief that ETs are real just got stronger. I mean 5,000 or so years ago how many human beings were really bald? i mean they didnt really have the means to shave themselves so why draw paintings of strange "humans" with no hair if all they saw was hairy humans? You tell me. But great information and pictures keep it coming.



posted on Apr, 4 2009 @ 10:37 PM
link   
Well i for one dont need to see anymore evidence, i made up my mind a long time ago about the existence of aliens. It seems pretty blantently obvious to me that life is out there, and to think that we are the only intelligent lifeforms in the universe is ignorant and stupid reallly.

I believe most people who definatley dont believe do so because it conflicts with there current beliefs especially about religion, the same type of person who couldnt grasp the fact of infinity and when they talk about being 'logical' well im sorry but the most logical thing is that there are advanced and less advanced alien races out there. In fact it would be highly illogical to think otherwise.

So maybe we should stop trying to convince people who really deep down dont want to believe it anyway, I mean who really cares if they want to remain in the dark? you could show them a alien being and make them shake its hand then they still would try to debunk it in someway. I think if the evidence thats out there already doesnt confirm it then not alot else will to these people, let them wallow in the darkness its just wasted energy used to try to tell a chicken its a frog. By the way awesome post OP and that starmap is further proof to reinforce my beliefs (not that i even needed it)



posted on Apr, 4 2009 @ 10:39 PM
link   
Until someone can correlate what I've "heard" since I've been in the military then I would have to remain a sceptic.

Good posts though, rather thought provoking.



posted on Apr, 4 2009 @ 10:41 PM
link   
I don't know much about the others, but the landing strip really does not support the ETH. If we assume that some UFO's are actually craft from another civilization, then we have to take into account that what separates a UFO from an ordinary aircraft is their ability to hover in mid-air and defy our understanding of the laws of nature. Why exactly would you need a landing strip for a VTOL vehicle? Wouldn't such craft simply take off and land from virtually any where with out the need of a runway?



posted on Apr, 4 2009 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by GeeGee
 


Yea I've always interpreted the "strip" as just a flat surface,possibly for a smooth,even landing of very large craft.Not really a runway,just a spot to sit down.



posted on Apr, 4 2009 @ 10:45 PM
link   
reply to post by ConspiracySquid7
 


Good point,that is what I was trying to say earlier!



posted on Apr, 4 2009 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Skinon
 


Yea it just goes back to what I said in my OP about people(some)not wanting or willing to shift their paradigm out of fear or whatever.But you know what I could be wrong we all(believers)could be..............I doubt it.



posted on Apr, 4 2009 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


I kinda gag at your post. Didn't you ever read Poe. My posts to G. Noory are one liners. He reads them, or Tommy does.



posted on Apr, 4 2009 @ 11:56 PM
link   
What about Oannes and the Dagon?



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 12:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by jkrog08


Yes,and in the other drawings(taking into account different cultures and the artistic style and ability)the creatures look remarkably similar,close enough that for the in similarities you can account for those by the passing down of stories and memory.There are also stories all over the world of strange creatures like the Wandjinas,for example the Dogon tribe in Africa talk of the "Nommos" from Sirius,Native American legend of "star brothers",etc.


Here's a picture of Aboriginal rock art depicting an Aboriginal woman being fertilised by a fertility spirit (snake):



Here's one showing mythical stick figures at Kunminyini Springs:



Both taken from here:

www.ozoutback.com.au...


More different beings, even an alien looking woman, it's all a matter of interpretation really.
Just the same with 'modern' art.

Compare a portrait of a woman by Picasso to a portrait of a woman by Da Vinci.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 12:13 AM
link   
I find the historical images the most fascinating and they are the very things that sold me on the theory that we have been visited for thousands of years. The Hill abduction and map appear to be airtight and the NASA evidence, all of it is amazing.

I really think that there will be people that will never accept that we have been visited or are being visited....even if they pull up on the White House lawn. They will say it is a hoax...


Great thread, thanks.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


I think you're really off base in judging people who question the evidence you're presenting. It's illogical to assume we're the only intelligent life in the universe, yes. I don't think anyone would argue with that. But that's not what this thread is about.

You made this thread to prove alien life has been here since the beginning of intelligent life on this planet. The evidence you presented simply does not prove, at all, that any extra terrestrial life has visited our planet no matter what you WANT to believe. It's all highly subjective.

I know I would love to believe that something extrodinary has happened with aliens in our history, but your "clinchers" just aren't.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 12:20 AM
link   


I showed somebody this thread earlier, and he said some of the pictures resembled something out of an anime he saw. Is it of any significance?



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 12:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Funshinez
 


I wasn't bashing anyones opinions,I just made a thread with very strong events that are the hardest to disprove,infact the only disproving as been interpretation of one of the three.I welcome all opinions and like usual(and like I said in my OP) I invite all to come discuss,believers and skeptics alike.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 12:31 AM
link   
reply to post by redhead57
 


No problem,that is the reason I created this thread.I wanted it to be kind of a "combo" of evidence and events so even people who are not familiar with the large ongoing saga of believers vs. skeptics can see.I wanted it to be something that at least subdued the argument of "do you believe" so we can concentrate on "why are they here,how long,and for what" and so we can move on and try to get this "universal,UFO on White House lawn piece of evidence".I guess also I want this thread to kinda' be a 'beacon' so maybe some neutral members or viewers can get easy to understand and read evidence from the "believers"side.

[edit on 4/5/2009 by jkrog08]



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 12:41 AM
link   
If I had to point to any one phenomenon as proof I would choose the Nazca Lines. It's hard to believe that amount of effort would be expended without some sort of an extraterrestrial payoff for the creators of the artwork. I think they were responding to visitors from the sky and perhaps they were aided by those visitors when forming these figures. The dimensions and clarity of those depictions would take substantial time and effort with advanced technology. And perhaps these people had advanced technology at that time. I think the greatest stretch of the imagination is thinking these were simply artistic expressions of terrestrial subjects.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by Funshinez
 


I wasn't bashing anyones opinions,I just made a thread with very strong events that are the hardest to disprove,infact the only disproving as been interpretation of one of the three.I welcome all opinions and like usual(and like I said in my OP) I invite all to come discuss,believers and skeptics alike.

Interesting.


Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by Skinon
 


Yea it just goes back to what I said in my OP about people(some)not wanting or willing to shift their paradigm out of fear or whatever.But you know what I could be wrong we all(believers)could be..............I doubt it.


Darn those fearful ignorant sheep not willing to shift their paradigm to my belief system.

As far as none of your other proof being contested, I agree the star map is somewhat compelling but it's still all stuff you have to take at face value. All it is, is a nice story that meshes with your preconceived notions. There's no reliable source to back it up. The NASA recordings are interesting but linking to a youtube video of supposed NASA recordings is NOT proof. Anyone could have made those recordings for any reason. Astronauts could have even made them, they could authentically be from NASA but what if the astronauts did them as a joke? We just don't know from a youtube video. Both of these things lack real source material that can undergo scrutiny.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, I want to believe in this stuff but wanting to believe and having a convenient story just isn't enough. Show me the fossilized remains of those aliens that the cavemen drew. There must have been at least one crash right? Or how about you address my original concern of the massive gap in documenting these alien visitors? Why is this all prehistory and post roswell?



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 12:47 AM
link   
Again, what about Oannes and the Dogan.

It's just strange that with entire cultures undiscovered due to our incomplete knowledge of history. There is an account of a creature that can only be called an alien, teaching mankind civilization in one of the main places where civilization started.
Here is the account, I copied from mindspring.com. Just Goggle Oannes, and you find this in many locations. It is written by a Babylonian priest from the 13th century B.C., and talks about the start of Sumerian civilization, right after the great flood.

"At first they led a somewhat wretched existence and lived without rule after the manner of beasts. But, in the first year after the flood appeared an animal endowed with human reason, named Oannes, who rose from out of the Erythian Sea, at the point where it borders Babylonia. He had the whole body of a fish, but above his fish's head he had another head which was that of a man, and human feet emerged from beneath his fish's tail. He had a human voice, and an image of him is preserved unto this day. He passed the day in the midst of men without taking food; he taught them the use of letters, sciences and arts of all kinds. He taught them to construct cities, to found temples, to compile laws, and explained to them the principles of geometrical knowledge. He made them distinguish the seeds of the earth, and showed them how to collect the fruits; in short he instructed them in everything which could tend to soften human manners and humanize their laws. From that time nothing material has been added by way of improvement to his instructions. And when the sun set, this being Oannes, retired again into the sea, for he was amphibious. After this there appeared other animals like Oannes."



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 12:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by djvexd
I am not a debunker but a believing skeptic...you have shown nor proven nothing. . .


Lies.


Jkrog has no doubt spent several hours putting this thread together.

He has filled it with images from around the world - taking the time to research, upload and source each one of them.

To say he has 'shown nothing' is a lie - and proof is relative.

So, why did you lie?





new topics

top topics



 
82
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join