It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by SavedOne
That's because he's not attempting to prove what they are, only contest that they are airstrips for spaceships. Do you think that spaceships that could travel from other star systems would need the same type of landing strip that an earth-bound aircraft needs? It makes no sense. Surely an advanced spaceship would have VTOL capabilities and would have no need of landing strips. Besides, why would there be landing strips without structures? As large as they are and considering how many of the "strips" cross over each other, surely a control tower of some kind would be required. Not to mention hangars for repairing craft, refueling stations, etc. Seems unlikely that the strips would remain while all other "evidence" has somehow disappeared.
Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
Like another posted stated, you can't really debunk Ancient Alien theories, it will persist until these mysteries are solved beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
The "Ancient Aliens" theory is based on how things appear to us today, without considering how these ancient artifacts are supposed to function. Sure, to our modern eyes the Nazca lines appear to be runways, in that some of them are long and straight, but ignoring the crazy-quilt patterns most of them make or the fact that some of them run straight over hills and valleys. But how could they function as a landing strip when they're literally just scratches in the dirt? Try landing a multi-ton winged air- or spacecraft on them and I think you'll find out very quickly they're are decidedly not landing strips.
Honestly, who builds a runway right over a mountain?
Originally posted by deloprator20000
What we are really talking about here is both history and archaeology. Though the artifacts of ancient civilizations are real, the main point of controversy is how we interpret them. Interpretation is not an exact science, even for history that is widely accepted.
The basic questions are; do the artifacts represent a purely imaginary vision of what ancient peoples thought of as god, are they based on actual encounters with ET's, or something else? Without recourse to a time machine it may be difficult to answer these questions.
We can ask an even bigger question, are religions that claim that certain people in the past where divine simply an imaginary vision of what ancient people thought god would be like, are they based on actual encounters with ET's, or something else? ----- > This is the bigger question.
Though if ET's are proven to exist, and if it is shown that they have been here since the beginning of recorded human history, then it would be possible that they may have had recording devices, if they had recording devices they may have recordings of these ancient cultures, if they have recordings of these ancient cultures and we can authenticate the recordings then we can verify or falsify the ancient alien theory.
These recordings may be the most shocking recordings in human history, for they may verify or falsify some of the most influential religions on earth. Imagine if they had recordings of Jesus Christ, or of Moses, or of Muhammad, though at first we may be excited, it may turn to sadness, for we may see that there is no divine content in any of these religions - or we may see the opposite there IS divine content in the religions!!
Originally posted by filosophia
I think that the main theory that the ancient alien theory dismisses is that it could very well be a human civilization that is building all these advanced things. That means our ancestors were more intelligent than we think them to be...
Originally posted by filosophia
. Why they would try to ignore this is the next big question. Are they trying to cover up the fact that civilization can deteriorate and fall? Just like it is doing now?