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.

 

Ancient Aliens Debunked?

page: 19
132
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by GhostLancer
 
You've used a straw man to attack the review format and poster without making any reference to the initial point that Cremo's evidence was limited in the alternatives he presented. The article is quite balanced, but you wouldn't know because you haven't read it.

Ironically, you then set up another straw man i.e. people should read books, to attack 'reviewers and debunkers' whilst again making no reference to either ancient aliens or Cremo's evidence.

The movie analogies are more bluff and thunder.

See how easy it is to use logical fallacies to attack and say nothing?




posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by GhostLancer
 


I have read it. Also, the review I posted was originally published in an archaeology journal. The person who wrote the review clearly knows archaeological research as he was aware of all of the articles Cremo and associates referenced in the book, but was also able to cite pertinent articles that Cremo was either ignorant of or knowingly ignored because they contradicted his hypothesis. If you had actually read the review you would have realized all of these things. The very fact that 25% of the articles Cremo cites are horribly outdated, many from the 19th century, should raise some red flags.



posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
Cargo Cults are the next topic. The issue with this is that physical evidence was left behind by those visiting tribes in airplanes. Crates of goods, airstrips, and other material evidence was left behind that could have been created by the tribes there. So where are the alien artifacts? Where are the tricorders and warp drives left behind by ETs? Why are the only so-called "alien" artifacts ones that can be explained as within the capability of the ancients? Stone monuments, pyramids, the Baghdad battery, all point to being manmade, not alien made. WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?


If there really where some great technologies and advanced machiney left behind by aliens or advanced prehistoric civilisations, do you really think that it would be revealed for the best of mankind?

I don't like to use Hollywood movies as proof of anything, but the way they removed the stargate from the excavation site in the first Stargate movie is what i believe most likely happens when/if something of that nature is discovered (*).


(*) I'm not stating that such technologies has beend discovered and hidden, but there are so many mysteries from the past that defies most of present day's logic (as to how it was made or accomplished) that I do lend a little belief to the thought that there might be many great things and technologies that has been discovered and hidden...



posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by mb2591
 


The best source I've found in regards to Calleman's hypothesis is Johan Normark's blog. Normark is an archaeologist from Sweden who specializes in the Mayans. He has debated against Calleman on a number of occasions and every time Calleman has run away when faced with incontrovertible proof that his hypothesis is wrong. Here is the first article Normark posted regarding Calleman, but he has a few others as well. Be sure to read the comments as well as Normark expands on what he says in his articles.

2012 Prophet of nonsense #1: Carl Johan Calleman



posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by GhostLancer
Winged Bull, there is an old saying: "He who asserts must prove."


That is very true. And I agree that he should have backed up his claims. However, not citing sources is not the same as attacking someone's character, it is careless and inarticulate arguing but not character assassination. Even if the claimant is wrong, it is still not character assassination.



posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by mb2591
 


The best source I've found in regards to Calleman's hypothesis is Johan Normark's blog. Normark is an archaeologist from Sweden who specializes in the Mayans. He has debated against Calleman on a number of occasions and every time Calleman has run away when faced with incontrovertible proof that his hypothesis is wrong. Here is the first article Normark posted regarding Calleman, but he has a few others as well. Be sure to read the comments as well as Normark expands on what he says in his articles.

2012 Prophet of nonsense #1: Carl Johan Calleman


Ok. Do you know if calleman based this "calendar" off anything from what I read it sounds like he has basically made it up.



posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by mb2591
 


It's a combination of part of the calendar from Coba Stela I and a complete misinterpretation of Tortuguero Monument VI. There's also some blatant lies thrown in, like the Mayans only built pyramids with nine levels.



posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 


Wow,... you guys have reduced this thread to the laymen's version of microscopic feces analysis....

Thanks...



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 12:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by GhostLancer
 
You've used a straw man to attack the review format and poster without making any reference to the initial point that Cremo's evidence was limited in the alternatives he presented. The article is quite balanced, but you wouldn't know because you haven't read it.

Ironically, you then set up another straw man i.e. people should read books, to attack 'reviewers and debunkers' whilst again making no reference to either ancient aliens or Cremo's evidence.

The movie analogies are more bluff and thunder.

See how easy it is to use logical fallacies to attack and say nothing?

Good points. No one is perfect. I am certainly not.
However, when Cremo's work was attacked without the presentation of supporting evidence, or at the very least examples, I defended him. And I still do. I do recommend that attackers read his book(s). That's all. As I said before, I am not trying to convince anyone or "convert" anyone. I made no assertions against anyone, as did Cremo's attackers, who provided no more "proof" than a review. I have been a movie reviewer, a writer of a weekly movie column in a regional newspaper. I know how tempting it is to SLAM the work of others without actually having written a screenplay yourself. I never sunk to that level. It is NOT fluff and thunder. Most reviewers THRIVE on slamming work they do not understand. If nothing else, it adds a level of unjustified superiority for having slammed a movie.

And, to say that I created a "straw man" by suggesting that people ACTUALLY READ BOOKS? That is like saying that I make people weaker by exposing them to an avenue that will EMPOWER them. I suggest that people read books so that they can make INFORMED DECISIONS ---not relying on the OPINIONS AND BELIEFS of a reviewer who may or may not have actually read the book(s).

Hey, people are going to agree and disagree with Cremo's work. That's fine. But to dismiss his work by stating that his research is "sloppy" --and the like-- without providing SPECIFIC EXAMPLES is a STRAW MAN argument. To accuse me of using straw man arguments in a defense of Cremo is like a SCHOOLYARD BULLY being upset that a BIGGER BULLY prevented the initial bully from beating someone up.

The fact remains that this entire conversation begain becuase SOMEONE WRONGLY ATTACKED CREMO'S WORK ETHICS AND CHARACTER **WITHOUT** PROOF/EVIDENCE. I defended him. I stated that "he who asserts must prove." So far... there has been no "proof" other than a review based on opinion. AGAIN: ANYONE CAN SAY ANYTHING ABOUT ANYONE ELSE. IT DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE OR ACCURATE.



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by ObvTruth
 

More than we do today? Can you provide an example?


Knowledge of the Sirius star system, for example.....

The Dogon tribe described the binary star system of Sirius A; the star Sirius B is not visible to the naked eye

How would they have knowledge of stars that we today can only see with powerful telescopes?



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 

They didn't. Though the Dogon had a long history invovling Sirius (no suprise since it's the brightest star in the sky) they likely heard about Sirius B from traveling Europeans.

Sirius figures prominently in the Dogon myths. The tribe has a periodic Sirius festival called the "Segui" ceremony; each celebration lasts several years (the last was in 1968-72.) The interval between ceremonies may be forty, fifty or sixty years.

Through the carbon dating of old ritual masks researchers have established the antiquity of the Segui ceremonies. Such criteria suggest that these periodic festivals have been going on for at least 600 years and possibly much longer.

But here's the rub: there is no archaeological evidence that the specific references to the twin hidden companions of Sirius are anywhere near that old. Furthermore, most Dogon symbology already has multiple levels of meaning; the sketches used to illustrate the Sirius secrets are also used in puberty ceremonies.


The Dogons have problems with other aspects of astronomy (sort of like Sitchin's tale).

In reply Temple produces evidence for the great antiquity of the Sirius cult. The number "fifty" has great signifance in ancient myths. He points out that the Dogon myths also describe a third star (astronomers would call it "Sirius C"), as yet undiscovered.
Where is it?



The Dogons hold that Jupiter has four moons when in fact it has at least 12, plus a ring, as any true extraterrestrial would have known. Saturn is not, as the Dogons insist, the farthest planet in the solar system. At least three are farther and at least one of them has rings too.

Source



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 08:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Titen-Sxull
 


I'm not a fan of yours, but I am a fan of your post here. Good job.



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by GhostLancer
 


As I said I have read Cremo's work and I have noticed many flaws with his methodology that puts his entire hypothesis into question. Furthermore, the review posted is not like a review one would read in the New York Times. It is published in a scientific journal that covers such things as archaeology and the origin of man. The author holds a PhD. and isn't so much reviewing the book as he is reviewing Cremo's idea of Vedic creationism. At the time the only basis for this was Forbidden Archeology. So, the author is not reviewing such things as Cremo's syntax, pacing, use of metaphor, etc. He is reviewing the actual content of Cremo's work based on his own research into the field and he has noticed what many others have noticed, that many of his sources are outdated, he ignores more current research that is pertinent to the topic, and disregards Occam's Razor by ignoring simpler conclusions. I specifically chose this review as it sums up these arguments well and points out specific parts in Forbidden Archeology where Cremo is clearly cherry-picking his data and cites relevant articles that Cremo ignores in favor of outdated research. As of yet you have failed to respond to any of the content in the review and instead are focusing on the fact that it is a review. So, before you respond again please read the article I have posted and then provide legitimate arguments for why Cremo's work has validity.



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Titen-Sxull
 


Don't get all wound-up dude, remember it's TV ... !! We live in a society where sensationalism is King. History Channel has been about facts and figures regarding history but everyone gets on the ratings/advertising bandwagon. Take things with a grain of salt. The show is entertainment offering up ideas, yes out of context and designed to "back-up" the purpose of the show's idea.
Many people now are interested in other ideas and not just satisfied being fed religion, etc.
Apparently you posted on a site dedicated to those with alternate ideas.
We are the type to watch the show. I for one love info. but don't believe everything even though it might entertain me for awhile.
No one knows the answers yet, decide for yourself, don't get wound up.
If it is all "bunk" on Ancient Aliens, don't think it was the first misconception ever thrown at the human race !!
TV remember.. what's the saying ????



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


No, you are incorrect.

You are trying to assert that Africans with advanced technology (since the gods were there 1st) got their information from Europeans????

Wow.

Don't even get me started.......



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


There is no evidence that the Dogon knew about Sirius B before Europeans did.



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


There is no evidence that the Dogon knew about Sirius B before Europeans did.


Other than recorded history, theirs and ours.

What do you need as proof, by the way?

Of course you want to give the Europeans credit over any African tribe, right?

You feel that Europe was more technologically advanced than Africans in the distant history?

Africa had knowledge of the stars, farming, mining, the elements, mathematics because they were civilized WAY earlier than the Europeans. Africa had at least 20 dynasties or so before Europe had their first.

SO YES Africa had advanced knowledge of the cosmos before any uncivilized Europeans did.



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 

Actually, the earliest known civilization is Sumerian. Not in Africa.
And yes, they knew there are stars and planets. All that takes is a pair of eyes, not technology.



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by ButterCookie
 

Actually, the earliest known civilization is Sumerian. Not in Africa.
And yes, they knew there are stars and planets. All that takes is a pair of eyes, not technology.


Sumerian.....not in Africa????

Where do you suppose ancient Sumer is?????

Boy old buy...you CRINGE at the thought of giving Africans their due credit of being the first technological race, huh?




To buttress our claims about Sumer's African origins we first point out that the ancient Sumerians referred to themselves as the "Black headed people." And there is no doubt that the oldest and most exalted deity of the Sumerians was Anu, a name that loudly recalls thriving Black populations at the dawn of history including Africa itself, the Arabian Peninsula, India and even Europe. Equally important is the skeletal evidence exhumed from ancient Sumerian cemeteries, Biblical references in which Nimrod (the Old Testament founder of Sumer) is described as a son of Kush (Ethiopia), architectural similarities, eye witness accounts and oral traditions. All of this data points to and supports an early African origin for the Sumerians of ancient Iraq.


The area, dear Phage, of southwestern Asia (modern day Iraq) that contains the Tigris , Nile, and euphrates Rivers is called AFRICA.

Not Europe.



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by ButterCookie
 

Actually, the earliest known civilization is Sumerian. Not in Africa.
And yes, they knew there are stars and planets. All that takes is a pair of eyes, not technology.


I am more convinced now that you never have ANY idea of what you assert as truth; its obvious that are ignorant (in denial?) of obvious history that all ATS'ers should see that you have no credibility, and here to only distract from the truth.

take care.



new topics

top topics



 
132
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join