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: 36
132
<< 33  34  35    37  38  39 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 03:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


Thanks for responding, when I watched ancient aliens the first time it appeared to be a joke just baseless speculation on some lines or some animal pictures or how some structure was perfectly aligned with the stars(which is pretty remarkable actually but possible if these civilizations did have knowledge of astrology) as I continued to watch the show I became more convinced we were visited in the past but more just to look around and maybe make a contribution here or there. Bramley's book convinced me of the possibility they had a role in our past because of his consistency from the Sumerian texts to the bible stories and the ends of days theories and how we seemed to be continuously being pitted against each other. Unfortunately our history seems to be muddled ancient books being destroyed and people having to decipher a language full of symbols that are hard to interpret, with the deciphering person(Sitchin) even having to re-interpret the words to fit his views. Other things like pictures of Ufos tend to be over interpreted as having an impact on history when they might have just been passing like they do today or could have been other things. The Nuremberg photo is a bit strange but I would consider people in that era(1500s) would be able to know that these things were out of this world and at least would have been able to collect the evidence of crashed ships or provide written accounts of the battle. One of the strangest things that I or probably anyone else can't explain is the pictures of angels and others with circles around their heads, once again not solid proof but strange why they would be depicted this way.




posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 04:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Imtor
anti72,

ATS consist only of people who have limited or no knowledge about things, they are not professional debunkers, I really don't get what some want to say with 'this has been debunked many times' debunekd by who? Who are you? Nobodies, i am too, since im not professional investigator, sketpic, debunker or anyone having anything other than a PC and internet to read from.

Even if some are fakers, it is hardly the reason to rely on some ATS opinions, wtf is that?

If people were just making books and doing it for money, then why the similarities with contemporary descriptions of UFOs?

I dont get it? Why do you take yourself so seriously here, people? YOU ARE NOBODIES. No one can start wrld news cause you said something on a thread that there are aliens, also no one will accept your debunking for the same reason... Same for OP, do you think your opinion makes a difference to start this thread so will you look at that you must be speaking the truth? When someone makes a thread with a title 'X debunked' damn stupidity
edit on 17-8-2011 by Imtor because: (no reason given)


Imtor, yes, I should have written ´this has been ´debunked´ many times. ´..as I wrote, I think this stuff cant be debunked scientifically because its not scientific. It is more like a Pop-SciFi-tech based superstition. I bet its a lot of star gate and star trek fans who are into AAT..

People can read and write whatever they like here on ATS, many post without having even done research or having used the search function, so the same stuff comes up over and over. At that point it is no use to answer anymore.

and, no, you are wrong to believe you are NOBODY. You can believe what you want, as myself. But when doing an own thread somebody should investigate properly, I think.

The post of Kandinsky is right, too.

Me , personally, I´m very much interested in archeology and Puma Punku or the great pyramid are great to investigate. For the great pyramid for example, this year I found many details I didnt know at all..
..and all without any aliens..




edit on 17-8-2011 by anti72 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 04:49 AM
link   
reply to post by KingJames1337
 
I think Bramley's world-view is deeply embedded in Old Testament ideology and this directed his research and conclusions in the book. It's been over a year since I read it so these impressions could be inaccurate. The plague references and quotations were taken at face-value and not in the context of the cultures and period. Also, the only references to plague were the ones containing 'evil mists' and no conflicting descriptions. This naturally leads the reader to share Bramley's perspective. He didn't put the descriptions in a frame of superstition and ignorance or that communication between towns and villages was less extensive than now.

The people facing this awful plague could only interpret events through their own reference points in a world that had no knowledge of bacteria, viruses or gems. Mists and devilish mischief were reasonable explanations for the period. We now know that plagues are the result of infectious diseases spread through several species and passed along trade-routes and population centres. In that sense, Bramley's alien agents are off the hook and that disease is a constant companion of all life-forms.

The Nuremberg UFO account and painting remain fascinating and anomalous. Regarding circles around the heads of angels? This is an artistic custom going back further even than Christianity. Right across all belief systems we see haloes and similar light effects around the head or body. From an artist's view, if you sculpted, painted or drew a group of people and one of them was supremely holy...how would you highlight their holiness? What method would be easiest to make them stand out from the normal? It's hard to imagine any other way than a glow or halo that emphasises their spiritual qualities.

@Anti72 ~ Thank you



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 05:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


"Right across all belief systems we see haloes and similar light effects around the head or body. From an artist's view, if you sculpted, painted or drew a group of people and one of them was supremely holy...how would you highlight their holiness? What method would be easiest to make them stand out from the normal? It's hard to imagine any other way than a glow or halo that emphasises their spiritual qualities. "

I read, that basically the halo represents the whole-ness (holyness) of all the 3 bodies and 7 chacras of a spiritually highly developed man. The halo is a perfect circle to represent that.

edit on 17-8-2011 by anti72 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 05:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


That seems to make sense, there doesn't appear to be a way we can say 'that was an astronauts uniform' A perfect circle does seem like a way to represent holiness. The Nuremberg painting is a different story. I don't think it was imagined unless someone put something in the water they were drinking. That leaves only UFOs or a meteor shower or a fireworks show but the latter is unlikely. What do you think about Ahura Mazda? He really seems like an alien from his pictures.



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 06:45 AM
link   
Book of Joshua states this:

20 So the people shouted when the priests blew with the trumpets:
and it came to pass, when the people heard the sound of the trumpet,
and the people shouted with a great shout, that the wall fell down flat,
so that the people went up into the city,
every man straight before him, and they took the city.

21 And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.

Not very godlike in Jehovah's witness religion Jehovah's supposed to be the good god and the serpent that tempted adam and eve the bad god. Is there any other explanation for Jehovah's behavior?



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 10:50 AM
link   
The ancient astronauts hypothesis tries to connect dots. It makes a pretty good arguemtn. Although some of what is shown is a stretch.

it posts alot questions and I think it is meant to re think what we believe today.

people like the OP are like bible thumpers of yesterday. If it does not fit to the ruling ideas of today it is garbage. People like this inhibit progress to be honest. there is One way even if there is problems with it if we are at a majority one way!

There are many things that exist on earth that do not make sense. I was sure hoping you would included the picture of the solar system that tells of the missing planet known about back in ancient times.

I think, like the makers of the show, the op picked and chose what he could "debunk" "ridicule" off the cuff.

Ancient times has so much unexplained, and the advance in technology in modern times is unnervingly fast evolving... yet we still cannot explain how people were able to accomplish what was done back then. considering what we know from them they should not have been able to do it. If they did have the technology to do then in some ways they are more advanced that us which kind puts a black eye on established knowledge.

many people see explanations as these as ingnorant and lazy.. those same people are arrogant and very simple as they cannot think outside the box because. those are the people that inhibit progress.. the old timers that don't like change and want things to remain as they are not only because they know better but because that is just the way it is. we don't need not stinking new cockamany ideas from them whipper snappers.. next thing they will take derr jobs.

seriously it is a fun idea to think about, it has some good points except it reaches in some instances too much, closing your mind to it makes you ingnorant, believing it full fledged makes you a zealot. the truth as always is in between as both sides embellish.



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by KingJames1337
Book of Joshua states this:

20 So the people shouted when the priests blew with the trumpets:
and it came to pass, when the people heard the sound of the trumpet,
and the people shouted with a great shout, that the wall fell down flat,
so that the people went up into the city,
every man straight before him, and they took the city.

21 And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.

Not very godlike in Jehovah's witness religion Jehovah's supposed to be the good god and the serpent that tempted adam and eve the bad god. Is there any other explanation for Jehovah's behavior?



At that time God's people were the jews, the gentiles were "evil" adn corrupt. they were all to be killed due to their sin and corruption. that is pretty much explains why they were ordered to kill all. yes even the animals they owned were seen as unclean.

Destroying the corrupt is God like. At that time God had not given redemption to all man through his sons sacrifice.

If you are looking for a biblical explaination that is one off the top of my head.

if you want a closed minded one..

there is no god this behaviour is not consistent with what god is how hypocritical only ignorant small minded people believe in god. derp



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by yaluk

Originally posted by KingJames1337
Book of Joshua states this:

20 So the people shouted when the priests blew with the trumpets:
and it came to pass, when the people heard the sound of the trumpet,
and the people shouted with a great shout, that the wall fell down flat,
so that the people went up into the city,
every man straight before him, and they took the city.

21 And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.

Not very godlike in Jehovah's witness religion Jehovah's supposed to be the good god and the serpent that tempted adam and eve the bad god. Is there any other explanation for Jehovah's behavior?



At that time God's people were the jews, the gentiles were "evil" adn corrupt. they were all to be killed due to their sin and corruption. that is pretty much explains why they were ordered to kill all. yes even the animals they owned were seen as unclean.

Destroying the corrupt is God like. At that time God had not given redemption to all man through his sons sacrifice.

If you are looking for a biblical explaination that is one off the top of my head.

if you want a closed minded one..

there is no god this behaviour is not consistent with what god is how hypocritical only ignorant small lminded people believe in god. derp


Yeah they axtually killed children too yet religion does help people. Of course that's stating the obvious but there but religion tells us not to sin and have things in moderation which are things that should be believed in. Unfortunately the end of days theory always leads to people trying to get to the 'final battle' to achieve paradise on earth and that's when you get the crusades or some uninformed person like Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejhad trying to bomb Israel so all hell will break loose the savior(12th imam) will return and we will achieve spiritual salvation.



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 03:19 PM
link   
Genesis 3

 16 To the woman he said,

   “I will make your pains in childbearing very severe;
   with painful labor you will give birth to children.

If this is true than it can be safe to say......

God was sort of a dick



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   
This quote from a famous movie can help provide some context about our gods.

'The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides with the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who in the name of charity and good will shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon those with great vengeance and with furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know that my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee.' Ezekiel 25:17

This is actually a misquote the only part actually in it is

And I will execute great vengeance upon them with furious rebukes; and they shall know that I am the LORD, when I shall lay my vengeance upon them



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 07:18 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by yaluk
 




people like the OP are like bible thumpers of yesterday. If it does not fit to the ruling ideas of today it is garbage.


I think you completely missed the point and are also doing a poor job of attacking me instead of addressing my arguments. The reason why ancient alien claims fail is because of the lack of good evidence for such claims and the repeated use of logical fallacies and appeals to mystery used to hold them up. The fact that the claims happen to contradict the current paradigm is part of what raises the level of skepticism, that much is true, however if these extraordinary claims had the extraordinary evidence to back them up it wouldn't matter that they contradicted the paradigm. I want to follow the actual evidence and that's the opposite of Bible thumpers do.



I was sure hoping you would included the picture of the solar system that tells of the missing planet known about back in ancient times.


There were numerous celestial bodies that were thought of as planets. The number of planets hasn't always been constant. For instance in the 19th Century there were planets called Vesta, Juno and Ceres, you'll note we don't consider those planets any more. The ancients didn't have the scientific method in its current form and they didn't always have instrumentation or technology necessary to get to the bottom of things.



the op picked and chose what he could "debunk" "ridicule" off the cuff.


None of the claims in this show really need a debunking, most of them are reliant upon appeals to mystery and inserting aliens into those gaps in our knowledge (which is fallacious nonsense). But you're right about one thing, I definitely did my debunking "OFF THE CUFF" mainly because the holes in logic are so numerous and obvious that I hardly even had to do any research (also helps that I was familiar with many of the claims from researching them years ago).



yet we still cannot explain how people were able to accomplish what was done back then.


This is precisely why ancient alien claims fail, you are making another pointless appeal to mystery. When something from our past is genuinely a mystery we don't just get to insert anything we want into that gap. What we're better off doing is looking for evidence to lead to a conclusion, rather than coming up with the conclusion and then stretching the evidence to fit it (what ancient alien proponents are prone to do).



If they did have the technology to do then in some ways they are more advanced that us which kind puts a black eye on established knowledge.


There is a difference between not being able to figure out how something was done and not being able to do it ourselves. The claim is constantly repeated by ancient alien proponents that even with today's technology we couldn't build the pyramids of Giza again. How do they know this? They don't, they just assert it and occasionally pull out an appeal to authority by quoting a few modern engineers who say they couldn't do it.



those same people are arrogant and very simple as they cannot think outside the box because.


I'm prepared to think outside the box if the evidence leads outside the box. What I'm not prepared to do is leap to conclusions that have not been demonstrated by the evidence. Once again its an ad hominem attack from you, instead of commenting on the arguments of detractors you'd rather accuse them of arrogance and call it a day.




seriously it is a fun idea to think about


Time travel is a fun idea to think about, so are ancient myths and legends, I have nothing against folks who want to think about ancient astronauts... but when they start asserting it as a logical conclusion, as a conclusion that actually has evidence behind it, when folks start wholeheartedly believing its true even though there isn't any evidence, that's when I oppose the idea.



the truth as always is in between as both sides embellish.


Those who claim ancient aliens hold the burden of proof for making the positive claim. The conclusion closest to the truth is the one which has the most/best evidence supporting it.



It makes a pretty good arguemtn.


If by good you mean that their arguments often employ what I have termed Alien of the Gaps arguments, as well as repeated appeals to mystery. So aside from their arguments being logically flawed they are also entirely lacking in physical evidence.

When it comes to ancient mysteries we should admit we don't know until the evidence leads us to the best conclusion.
edit on 17-8-2011 by Titen-Sxull because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Woe unto thou....OooOowEe! Overbearing!



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Titen-Sxull
 


My question is if not aliens or god then can evolutionary theories really hold up? Mythology should not be used as conclusions but the Sumerian tablets are a strange case because unlike Romans and Greek cvilizations they were not super advanced so they probably were writing about what they actually saw and the Adam and Eve story correlates with it. Furthermore Jehovah was a god that killed people reportedly thousands was this all just myths created by the original Sumerian stories? Some historical evidence shows violence in Jericho such as bodies some doesn't but can we really think of Jehovah as a human if the Sumerian tablets match the story of Adam and Eve with the true good god being the devil and the bad gods being good. The bible has to be taken somewhat seriously but it was their only way of writing history some stories might be fiction but some stories are probably based on real events much like today, we have fiction and non-fiction. Though the source might be biased like a news source that has a certain political affiliation we have to look through it. There is no reason why gods should be allowed to get away with genocide campaigns and be praised and we should say 'there was a reason' because if we are to believe our supreme being is perfect or someone whose standards are worthy to live by than killing is no way to teach people lessorealm fact the opposite is true if someone misbehaves the best way to teach them a lesson is by excommunicating them from society and keeping them locked up instead of killing them. Nice thread and I look forward to your response.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 02:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
reply to post by yaluk
 



Those who claim ancient aliens hold the burden of proof for making the positive claim. The conclusion closest to the truth is the one which has the most/best evidence supporting it.



It makes a pretty good arguemtn.


If by good you mean that their arguments often employ what I have termed Alien of the Gaps arguments, as well as repeated appeals to mystery. So aside from their arguments being logically flawed they are also entirely lacking in physical evidence.

When it comes to ancient mysteries we should admit we don't know until the evidence leads us to the best conclusion.
edit on 17-8-2011 by Titen-Sxull because: (no reason given)


How does the Evolution theory explain the religous mysteries pieced together by the similarities of the Sumerian tablets and biblical stories? In the sense the evolutionary of the gaps argument can be employed because the brutal mistreatment of people by gods and gods wanting for people to fight evil even pointing out evil as believers of the other religion must be explained. The ancient aliens idea does have to provide the burden of the proof because evolutionary theories are backed by science unless alien DNA is found in our dan but these things must be explained.
edit on 21-8-2011 by KingJames1337 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by KingJames1337
 


I don't think there will ever be enough evidence. A large part of ancient history is based on assumptions and using our interpretations of their artifacts to fill in the missing gaps. The 'evidence' presented in this show is more thorough than what's available for many components of ancient history that we currently take as fact, but yet it still doesn't seem to be enough.

My point is, things that fit inside someone's way of thinking hardly require anything to back it up. This is so far outside of that box that people require more evidence of this than anything else in ancient civilizations, but there will simply never be solid enough evidence of events that happened thousands of years ago.

If you told me a cat was in my backyard, I would see a scratch in the dirt and believe it. But if you told me it was a boar, that scratch wouldn't satisfy my skepticism, I would say "Well this scratch could come from any number of things". But then I'd see a footprint, and I might believe it. However, if you told me an alien was in my backyard, nothing short of seeing it myself would convince me. No amount of markings, footprints, technology, etc, would convince me. You can see that some extraordinary claims would quickly become impossible to prove, as there's not enough evidence in the world to satisfy this exponential increase in skepticism.

What is the truth behind this? That I don't know, but it is interesting to think about. Maybe not he best interpretation of history, but who knows? In the grand scheme of things, we all know so very, very little.



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 03:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Akasirus
 


There will never be found ´enough evidence´ because there isnt..I think one reason why some belive into AAT is because searching in the undefined depth of history is a fine playground for the speculative mind, and they know its impossible to find proof. You couldnt find alien proof today, so 10.000 years ago? nope.

cheers



posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 03:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by anti72
reply to post by Required01
 


explain what? your ´theory´?..get a life man..

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"
so, go on. Its not me that believes in AAT.

and, dont get personal.


LOL i put the proof in front of your noise and asked YOUR opinion about them!

Yet you ignore everything in my last reply and come up with some vague exuse.

And you are telling me to get a life, LOL.

If your not adressing the post anymore and clealy ignoring what i replied to you.

And the "Big Bang Theory" is not a extraordinary claim? LOL!! Nothing exploding into EVERYTHING! Where is your extraordinary proof on that?

Stop humiliating yourself.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 07:21 PM
link   
Dear OP,
I have watched practically all of the Ancient Aliens episodes. They are indeed fascinating, but almost without exception the conclusions they reach are baseless. Many times it amounts to "we can't explain this, therefore it must be ancient aliens.". They present NO proof, just speculation followed by unsupported conclusions. I am constantly catching them contradicting themselves. On one hand, drawing figures on rocks, for instance, they drew EXACTLY what they saw, yet in others where they draw obvious things they knew in the sky, they didn't draw what they saw, but what they were familiar with to explain what they saw. Which is it? They do this repeatedly. Our ancestors were smart, so they could draw what they saw, so when they drew on rocks and it looked like aliens, it was aliens, but when they drew chariots in the sky pulled by horses, they were too stupid to draw what they saw, so it really looked like a spaceship, but they didn't comprehend ti, so they drew a chariot.

Then they make a lot of logical fallacies. Beings from space flying in ships powered by magnetism that can fly at incredible speeds yet stop and hover in an instant is a fine concept, but then to say they needed landing strips like common airplanes? Does not compute. They want to claim that they genetically engineered mankind into existence because they needed slaves to mine gold, but why would a civilization so advanced need slave labor, when even OUR technology is too advanced to make slave labor feasible? They should be able to extract any metals or ore they need using advanced technology that would make it as easy as pressing a button. There is NO logical, plausible reason for them to interact with humans except to enhance their civilization, but in NONE of the instances shown are their any advancements that are truly helping their civilizations advance. For instance, if we went to some third world country and found a people that were engaging in activities like human sacrifice, we would endeavor to teach them that this is wrong. If we didn't care about their culture, we would teach them all we know, especially our morals, but there is no evidence that any of the ancient peoples that seem to have some clever building techniques have anything beyond the morals prevalent at their time. The astronomy, which is often given as an example of knowledge they couldn't have come up with, is never shown to be something they "could not have known". All of the attempts to show that some structures line up with certain star clusters are not exact. This proves that the presenter of this information is trying to fit the stars and the structure together. Either the ancients gave them EXACT knowledge, or the distance they are off by is simple human error, or they weren't lining it up to anything and the presenter is just trying to make a connection that isn't there. There is no reason for aliens to come here except by chance, and certainly not for fellowship or breeding. Even now we are a primitive culture to one that moves easily amongst the stars. We have nothing they could possibly want that they couldn't take without us having any hope of stopping them. Get over it, we are not that important.
Yes, we could tediously address each and every point, but it is much easier to just ask if they are using the scientific method (which they NEVER are), are they presenting facts or conjecture (usually the latter), and are they reaching the only possible conclusion or just the one they want? What is more likely, aliens that we have NO proof for or evidence of, or something less fantastic but easily achievable by humans with enough thought and time? Me, I believe we are very clever and persistent little beings. Why sell us short?



new topics

top topics



 
132
<< 33  34  35    37  38  39 >>

log in

join