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.
Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
Many things from ancient history rely solely on interpretation, but are generally accepted. For example: most scientists and archaeologist will tell you that the Egyptians built the pyramids, yet they have no evidence for how it was possible.
Intelligent interpretation of artefacts is one of the foundation stones of historical research. You shouldn't dismiss it because there are no cold hard facts. On the contrary, often will interpretation help lead the way to such facts.
Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Originally posted by ancientalien1981
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
So i guess when ancient civilizations made clay figurines of what looks like men in space suits, it was either just a coinsidence or they could tell the future right.
Note the bolded part of your sentence. Your "evidence" relies solely on your interpretation of a clay figurine. Subjective interpretations are not objective evidence.
Many things from ancient history rely solely on interpretation, but are generally accepted. For example: most scientists and archaeologist will tell you that the Egyptians built the pyramids, yet they have no evidence for how it was possible.
Originally posted by black cat
Disclosure should happen. The only people that would have their world rocked and their beliefs challenged by disclosure are those closed-minded people who refuse to believe anything else other than Human civilization is the center of the universe. Religious people should not have a problem with it as the Vatican recently proclaimed that it was O.K. to believe in aliens. Some religions may ask why the Bible did not mention aliens - well, the Bible never says anything about cats or dinosaurs either, but we know for a fact that they do (or did) exist!
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
Many things from ancient history rely solely on interpretation, but are generally accepted. For example: most scientists and archaeologist will tell you that the Egyptians built the pyramids, yet they have no evidence for how it was possible.
Intelligent interpretation of artefacts is one of the foundation stones of historical research. You shouldn't dismiss it because there are no cold hard facts. On the contrary, often will interpretation help lead the way to such facts.
Fair enough. To me, the clay figurine that looks like he's wearing a "space suit" to some may appear to me to be a deep-sea diving suit. I will assert the ancients were deep-sea divers and therefore the alien theory is null and void. Subjective interpretation is not valid.
Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
Well then you would look at all the other "evidence" to support your deep-sea diving theory - ancient texts, religious documents/artefacts, myths/stories...
I think the reason most people (at least on this forum!) would believe the clay figurine represents an alien is because there is more supporting "evidence" than there is for the deep-sea diver theory.
Originally posted by True-seer
reply to post by triplescorpio
It wouldnt surprise me, i'm currently researching and guess what The goverment has funded the history channel for this program.
All goverment funded and you know what that normally means.
Originally posted by USMC-oorah
Originally posted by True-seer
reply to post by triplescorpio
It wouldnt surprise me, i'm currently researching and guess what The goverment has funded the history channel for this program.
All goverment funded and you know what that normally means.
I would be really interested to see where you got that information from. I get all gitty when I think about disclosure, like a child on christmas eve.