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.

 

Why lie about an advanced civilization?

page: 1
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 10:57 AM
link   
After chatting in a couple of threads I started to wonder, why would governments, archeologists and scientists all lie about some wonderful advanced ancient civilization? Why would they lie about being created by the Annunaki? What purpose would it serve to lie about any of these conspiracy claims at all? I just can't see any logical reason or purpose served for doing so, and so I am asking the ATS community if they can explain what purpose would be served by lying and covering this up from the rest of the population on the planet. I just find it really questionable and odd that only those few who are "finding the truth" do so by selling books and paid entry lectures. Seems more reasonable to assume they are the real conspirators taking our hard earned money by fabricated truths.




posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 02:01 PM
link   
The first real instances of "covering up" an earlier epoch may have happened under the Egyptians, who occasionally wiped out the name and record of a disliked Pharaoh, but I don't think they ever tried to hide any previous unknown civilization. The Ancient Israelites also engaged in a good bit of historical rewriting, especially regarding the Canaanites.

I don't see any wanton cover up by any modern government to hide an unknown advanced civilization, if anything, you might have academics that ignore "OOParts" rather than risk their tenured status playing guess work, but then you really need more than one (or two) out of place artifacts before you can rewrite the history books. In these cases, saying they ignore ooparts may be too harsh, when it's more of a case of waiting for additional evidence to come to light.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 02:21 PM
link   
My guess is that there is a lot of money in religion. The Judeo-Christian religion has a strangle hold on the west. In fact, most of America thinks man has only been around 6 thousand years and at least a week of that was spent in Eden running around naked.

I don't doubt that things are covered up - if it doesn't jive with our present morals and values, we hide it. IE the Turin Erotic Papyrus. It stayed hidden deep in museums basements forever, but now they are talking about it probably b/c they figured out people were actually interested in sex and that sex museums were making money all on their own.
There's all sorts of things like that though - it might embarrass someone so we hide it.

But I don't doubt that the ancients were quite advanced - I don't have to go back to the Annunaki - I can simply look at the art and accomplishments of Greece and Rome.

But we don't study those too much anymore - we call their ancient moral guidelines 'myths' and teach them as mere stories, and we call them 'nasty pagans' in our churches. We focus in on the 'they fed christians (like us) to gladiators - they were barbarians!' and never mention the fact that they were so concerned about the pain of circumcision on infants that there was nearly a war started over it.

If it ain't convenient, and it upsets or could upset or morals and "Oh so advanced' values, we hide it. See, we just have to preserve our egos, collectively.

We have to be the MOST advanced, and the most enlightened. Everything else offends us and we simply CANNOT bring ourselves to believe it.

Bah - have to have this declaimer - I speak of the collective, not any particular group of individuals, and certainly not myself.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 02:52 PM
link   
What I am most interested in is due to the form of discussions I've been having with a couple people in particular is that they seem to literally think that there is some major cover up to hide an advanced civilization. They cite sources of evidence for this civilization by pointing at the sphinx and pyramids, or the pyramid like temples of the Mayans. They say that humans just weren't capable of building those structures and yet somehow they think it's perfectly OK to think we are able to create things like Jets and computers today without any intervention of any sort. I just don't understand the mindset I suppose. It's like they have some undying *need* for there to be something higher or advanced in the past. I feel like it's almost a religious mindset where they *need* this to feel special somehow. Like only *they* have the truth all figured out and those nasty governments and scientists are evil bastards hiding it from them. It's actually kind of scary!



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


It's "brown people can't stack rocks" theory. You'll notice that many, if not all of these people also believe that there is a pyramid in Bosnia, and are very certain ancient Bosnians built it.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Are you absolutely positive that we didn't have any help developing computers and jets and new forms of energy?



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
What I am most interested in is due to the form of discussions I've been having with a couple people in particular is that they seem to literally think that there is some major cover up to hide an advanced civilization.


Could some of this possibly causes directly by how some scientists handle science itself? For example, if a scientist claims that XYZ doesn't exist because it is not supported by science, then it could also be seen that such scientists have tried to cover-up XYZ. It could further be said that such rigorous scientific methods is a conspiracy to cover-up any knowledge about civilization XYZ, and the inertia to cover-up such details are done so simply by the words "it's not supported by science in any way."

XYZ could possibly exist, but if XYZ are the ones that made the scientific rules to say what is and is not supported by science then XYZ becomes that much harder to scientifically discover.

Are more details needed?



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Religion is a good point and more than just probably one of the main factors in the squelching of this kind of Fortean archeology.

Another issue might be identity and sovereignty. For instance, if say Atlantis was deemed authentic... you might have decedents claiming squatter's rights to whatever may still today exist of its national boundaries. Countries just don't like being forced to surrender territory.

Then there are those Sumerian stories that would basically make ET a fact and again, most religions out of point.

Today's world is already volatile with just the Muslims, Christians, Jews and Hindus but... we are still controllable enough in our own domains to make stirring this pot entirely unattractive, regardless of what the actual truth may be. .



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 04:22 PM
link   
It doesn't make any sense to cover up something that huge. Wouldn't someone *want* to be the first to make a big name for themselves with such a magnificent archeological find? Why would the government even care about it to begin with? Governments are about maintaining control and order over the masses, I don't see how covering something like an advanced ancient civilization would help them control the masses. If there was one, how would that have any impact on governmental capacities thousands of years after that civilization was gone? The only time government seems to care about science is when it helps out their military, so it just doesn't make sense to cover up ancient history of past civilizations that have no impact on modern times.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by redoubt
 



Another issue might be identity and sovereignty. For instance, if say Atlantis was deemed authentic... you might have decedents claiming squatter's rights to whatever may still today exist of its national boundaries. Countries just don't like being forced to surrender territory.


Wouldn't people have to prove to be descendants of Atlantis, if they actually did exist.


Then there are those Sumerian stories that would basically make ET a fact and again, most religions out of point.


Personally, I think religion would adapt and use it to their advantage and say see I told you we were created.


Today's world is already volatile with just the Muslims, Christians, Jews and Hindus but... we are still controllable enough in our own domains to make stirring this pot entirely unattractive, regardless of what the actual truth may be. .


True, but I haven't seen any archeological finds that have stirred any form of violence or mass hysteria's, so why would it be any different for something like an older advanced civilization?



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 10:42 PM
link   
reply to post by TheIrvy
 


I've seen examples of technology that led up to what you now recognize as jets as computers, as well as the various attempts through history to make similar devices.
We didn't need help to invent the various technical devices. We started trying to make them the moment we started walking, possibly before.
Technically, we've found several civilizations that were remarkably advanced for the time. A few that surpassed the Greeks, but were much earlier.

Indoor plumbing, up to the second story being an example.

Edit:Accidentally double posted.

[edit on 11-11-2009 by RuneSpider]



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 11:19 PM
link   
[edit on 11-11-2009 by RuneSpider]



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 11:44 PM
link   
Quite simply because there is no conspiracy to cover it up. Its just "pop consipracy".
Religious reasons doesnt give a reason for a cover up, there is a archaeological record for all sorts of religions that intefere with the Abrahamic faiths.

A civilisation (not society) needs to be an established people with an array of lithic remains, complex religion, music, art, science etc all that leave imprints on the earth. We can get evidence dating back over millions of years of life activity, including dinosaurs.
If there was such a civilisation, it would have left an imprint.

I would like to be believe Atlantis existed, more so to see that it was more likely a contemporary ancient society with perhaps slightly different sciences and social structures. If it did exist, my hypothesis is it wasn't a large civilization, rather a society. Could be wrong, but nothing since the archaelogical record began to be uncovered in the 19th century has anything tangible been found.



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 12:42 PM
link   
I know you folks are out there, I poked my head in a few of your threads. Anyone who actually believes there is some grand cover-up to hide the "truth", can you please explain to me why and for what purpose? It really makes no sense to me.



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Life is pretty simple and predictable. If you're a dilettante history buff with few job opportunites, it's relatively easy to get a book published with all sorts of fantastic theories about lost civilizations. These are harmless claims where there is no fear of libel or other legal recourse.

Publishers are in the business of selling books, not verifying everything they publish. And time has shown the wilder the conjectures the more of a market there is for it.

Von Daniken kick started this industry in the late 60s. Many have made careers strip mining pseudo archeology and fantasy ancient history.

In the 19th Century it was Atlantis, Lemuria, et al. Now it's Nibiru, the pre-cataclysmic lost civilization.

All bunk that anyone knowledgeable of these fields sees through immediately.

But fiction outsells fact. The more outlandish it is the better it sells.


M



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 03:23 PM
link   
THe main reason I could think of would be, people after sensing they are safe and friendly might want to go with them. And everyone may not be able to go. Some of us may be used for biological advancments in these advanced societies. Who knows.



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 03:47 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Personally, I'm of the opinion it has more to do with the fact that the Annunaki are not the sole advanced civilization in the Multiverse - nor are they the only advanced race to have seeded the planet we call home.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by GENERAL EYES
 


Cane you expand more on that please? That was just a bit to vague for my liking.

Second line.



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 09:14 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

reply to post by sirnex
 


Forgive me - I'm very new to this field of study. (Alas, my bookshelf is not as prolific as I would like...I primarily have interest in Vedic texts - which I am still saving up for.)

As for the original premise of why so many people "lie" about the Annunaki origins, is it possible that they were merely the abondoned children of the Annunaki, stuggling to come to terms with their own self identity after generations upon generations of being raised by increasingly nomadic tribes - where the oral tradition of the origin stories may not have been uniform and transmuted over time into our compounded modern texts?

That's one approach to try and explain where I'm coming from...while I do not doubt the profound influence the Annunaki had on the Cradle of Civilization by any means, but I also believe there have been other advanced races who have - over the generations and in other regions - taken it upon themselves to influence mankind in some way, shape or form - though not nessecarily in the same fashion as the Annunaki.

_________

As far as explaining the Multiverse and things like superintelligent shades of blue, I'd be getting into the realm of mysticism, and I am by no means able to explain these higher elevated concepts at this point in time.

__________

Thanks for bearing through my ignorance...




As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 11:18 AM
link   
So, no one else who thinks the world governments and scientists are covering up the 'truth' can chime in?

I am genuinely curious as to what motive or purpose would exist for covering up possibly one of mankind's greatest discoveries and why there would be no mass clamor to claim the first to discover such a rich and potent history for our species.

For me, the mentality behind this defies all logic and I would honestly love to here any idea's on why this would occur considering people are more prone to sensationalizing themselves and their discoveries to lay claim to fame rather than hide them from the rest of the world.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join