posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 07:15 AM
reply to post by Gawdzilla
i think you sound pretty patronizing. I cant figure out why, as i dont see anything earth shattering or fantastical in his theories. its just one
possible explanation that should at least be evaluated and taken seriously. why not? do you really think theres no alien life out there? or that
aliens visiting earth to seed a race of humans is impossible? You may consider it crazy, but many physicists and intelligent people take it very
seriously. so i think the ridicule is just uncalled for. Plenty of people who are much smarter i would guess, than most of us on this forum, take
these ideas very seriously.
i have read, incidentally, many scholarly papers on the objects daniken 'fantasizes' about. i found a lot of the explanations offered by
archaeolgists to be weak, ridiculous or just stupid.
one example is their explanation of the tonga trilithon as a seat for a king to drink kava on . that was pretty funny.
i have read some stupid things suggested by supposedly smart people.
i know the official explanation for the palenque stone. yes, mythology, underworld etc, all that. but i dont think its right. sure, thats the myth
it represents, to the indigenous people as they understand their legend. but so what? its clear that what it really represents - which clearly the
maya probly didnt understand when they saw it - is some guy in a rocket type ship or space ship. EVD's whole point is that they didnt understand
what they were seeing, so they made up explanations like feathered flying serpent or flying jaguar to explain/convey what they were seeing, which they
had no word for in their language, and no understanding of the mechanics of how it worked. (altho obviously they knew what they were seeing wasn't
'normal' within their experience and probably understood more or less what it was (ie. this wasnt some ominipotent god; these were 'gods' plural,
who flew around in ships. they were fallible, and human - like in the greek legends.) ; and they did their best at trying to interpret it and pass on
when roald dahl was living in africa he had to explain to an african friend of his that he was going to england to fly giant birds; just becuz there
was no african word for airplane. obviously the friend understood he didnt mean a literal bird; but a mechanical device. this would have been the
same in acneint times: the flying chariot or bird with the god in it was understood to be something special; not a normal bird; after all, the
indigenous people weren't stupid. they knew it wasnt a normal bird; or wasnt really a flying snake - this is why they went to all that trouble to
carve it in stone...and pass down legends about it.
[edit on 12-4-2009 by rapunzel222]