Ancient Aliens Debunked?

reply to post by Amaterasu


Here is a review on The Lost Book of Enki, which is where your videos were quoting from.

Paranoia Magazine

In case people don't want to read the entire review here is a quote from the first paragraph:

The Lost Book of Enki is a work of literature written in the style of an Akkadian epic poem, and provides us with Sitchin's version of the original 'sourcebook' for the Mesopotamian/Egyptian mythologies. He has set the book out in the form of 14 tablets, written out by the master Akkadian scribe Endubsar. In the text, Endubsar claims that the tablets were dictated to him by the god Enki himself. The impression is given that the reader has in front of him actual historical material, and it's easy to see why many readers have taken this book at face value. But this book is in reality an historical novel, incorporating Sitchin's worldview.

looks interesting will read later

One of the things that really irks me about the whole AAH is the hypocrisy involved. People will claim that ancient man were too primitive to do such and such, but as soon as some astronomical sighting is mentioned they are infallible. I challenge the AAH believers to go look through the Aliens & UFOs board and see how many "UFOs" are things like misidentified bolides. Now, we actually know what bolides are and we still claim they're proof of extraterrestrials, so think about how ancient man must have felt when he saw these fairly common events.

reply to post by Titen-Sxull

FROM OP: "Few pseudoscientific ideas have captured the imagination like ancient astronaut "theory". The idea has become almost it's own religion as it often uses religious myth as a source of so-called evidence."

First, is quite important to point out that modern scientific DOGMA on the history of humanity and its evolution is indeed THEORY as well. Modern science effectively functions as its own RELIGION as well. Further, if you have read Michael Cremo's book "FORBIDDEN ARCHAEOLOGY," --along with several others by various authors-- you might get the (correct) impression that modern science and academia have ridiculed, ignored, dismissed and blatantly lied about discoveries that have proven that humanity has been around FAR LONGER than scientific BELIEF allows for.

So, before you go into your debunking, you should realize and acknowledge that "modern" science's understanding of the ancient world is as much *belief* and *theory* as ancient astronaut theory.

It is FACT that modern science refuses to fund scientists who wish to conduct "fringe" research. --"Fringe" meaning ANY RESEARCH OUTSIDE OF ACCEPTED SCIENTIFIC DOGMA. Therefore, scientists must conform to PREDISPOSITION in order to gain credibility and tenure. Further, even if those two previous qualites are attained, a scientist will be ridiculed into obscurity should he stray from the established path of curiosity.

reply to post by GhostLancer


Since you're claiming mainstream science is lying I would like to point out the irony in using Cremo as a source. If you look through the works he cites you'll find that many of them don't corroborate what he says or outright contradict his conclusions.

I agree with you on some of this but the keyword in Ancient Alien Hypothesis is HYPOTHESIS!

Originally posted by Chindogu

This one I haven't seen in many places but I've always found it odd, specifically because it appears to be shown from the front as opposed to the side like most Egyptian art.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b8a93543ed38.gif[/atsimg]
www.catchpenny.org...

It seems much more logical to suppose that the peculiar figure pictured is the image of a lotus blossom, with a bud on each side of it, placed in a vase or jar as an offering.

reply to post by infiniteobserver


Most people don't refer to it as a hypothesis though. It is commonly referred to as Ancient Alien Theory and because most people don't understand the difference between a scientific theory and the layman's definition of theory they believe AAT to be on the same level as a scientific fact like the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis. I would say that calling it the Ancient Alien Hypothesis is even too liberal a use of the word hyothesis, as a hypothesis usually has more basis in scientific research than AAT does. I think a more accurate title would be Ancient Alien Supposition.

reply to post by Pauligirl

And there's a ducky too.
I think aliens eat duckies.

Oh boy. Saturday again. Time to log off.

Telling people that the people who claim that there were ancient aliens start by assuming this fact, and then look to prove their allegations, and that this isn't the way it's done, is an incorrect assumption.

MANY scientific proofs start with an assumption or an observation, and then scientists and others lookj towards how they can proove that assumption or observation.

Assuming that ancient aliens did NOT come to Earth at the dawn of civilization is just the same as assuming that they did.

You debunked your entire post yourself within the first paragraph.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


Theory or hypothesis WHO CARES? Neither one claim it as fact. If people dont understand the terminology that's their own fault.

reply to post by babybunnies


There is a difference between what scientific research does and what AAT believers do. When a scientist performs research they do have a result they are expecting, but this is based on previous research that would lead a scientist to believe that their hypothesis is the most likely outcome. When von Daniken created AAT he started at the position that his conclusion was true and then did his research to support it.

reply to post by Titen-Sxull


I agree with most of what you have written. I think there is little true evidence suggesting Alien Contact with ancient cultures...especially the evidence that suggests that things like the pyramids were beyond early mans technical know-how. I think such arguments are actually sort of insulting to the ingenuity of ancient people. They were every bit as smart as we are today...they simply lacked certain technological achievements. No problem for them though...they had well honed techniques developed by their own scientists, and architects every bit as bright as ours of today.

None the less there is a few things I'd have to disagree with you on. One of the biggest is something you say about the pyramids, which I'll quote " And contrary to assertions often made by AAH proponents cultures did not all begin building pyramids at around the same time. In fact some pyramids were built after 1 AD while others such as those at Giza are over 2,000 years older." I'm not sure why you are bringing up famous pyramids such as those of Giza and suggesting that since they were built at different time periods it is an argument against pyramids appearing all over the world at roughly the same time. The Idea isn't about THOSE PARTICULAR pyramids...but rather about when the very FIRST Pyramids were built.....not the biggest, or the best...or the most famous......and indeed it takes little research to discover that surprisingly enough many of these cultures did in fact start building pyramids, all on their own with no apparent contact between each other at roughly the same time. Now I do say roughly because when you are dealing with time periods of such a long time ago, it is nearly impossible to define the date exactly....Often a few hundred years is as close as you are going to get. Considering this it is quite easily proven that many of these cultures did in fact begin to build pyramids within a similar time period...Perhaps not on the exact same date, or even within the same generation of people....but within a period of time that is at the very least plausibly considered as 'roughly the same'...And of course this is considering the fact that it's nearly impossible to pin down an exact date for most of these sites. They may much closer than 'roughly'.

reply to post by Phage


I'm a source. I was a stone cutter. I say this can not be done with modern technology.

Pred...

Haha, ancient astronaut theory is "DUH" to me. It seems pretty damn obvious that we were visited and helped. Just wait until they get here and remind you.

reply to post by predator0187

Thanks!

imho

i look for my proof of ancient aliens on the walls of pyramids and ancient egyptian pictographs

since i have seen etchings of ancient aliens on those 3000 year old drawings-not to be confused with any other etchings and distinctly unique, my conclusion is there were ancient aliens, because i can see the ancient pictographs

supporting my conclusion is the obvious fact that if the ancients did not see such a craft, why draw it?

any other conclusion makes no sense, except if one considers how the pyramids were built in the first place, as no other construction since has ever been built, even by modern building equipment, the pyramids are an impossibility and can not be reproduced

the logical and reasonable conclusion is that the pyramids all over the planet were built by ancient aliens therefore ancient aliens existed

of course if anyone wants to invent a different conclusion when faced with such visible evidence and invent mysterious methods of construction of our ancient monuments both above and below the waves go ahead and invent some science as well

reply to post by Phage


No problem. It is always much different to hear it from someone with the experience, and because I do have that experience, when I see cuttings and carvings I sit in amazement. Granite is a very tough stone, and if touched with anything but diamonds all it does is smooth the edges (very little), or nothing at all.

When granite is blown out of the mountain, it is in 5'x5'x10' chunks and then cut with either a large 16' diameter diamond saw, or with a diamond band saw to the thickness needed. The process involves unbelievable amounts of water, as almost anything done with granite does. When granite is cut dry, or anything done to it is done dry, the quartz heats up and will either explode or just chip out leaving a very, very rough cut, so rough that you will actually get quartz slivers.

The amount of water these people would have needed to cut this stone so precise is crazy in and of itself. Think of a garden hose being on, constantly. For all the cuts and polishing.

Pred...

Big people think big things. The theory of aliens coming down here or just mother nature striking as god's is irrelevant. Care to contradict this go ahead. The human race of 300 000 years of existence and the last 15 000 years a growth, brain mass civilization skills information skills etc. have never developed this fast nor been strategically more equip for survival . The good race of aliens set us up to be able to fight this war on our mind!
Believe in yourself first then everyone around you secret to life try to breath!!deep!!

This has become an iconic artifact amongst AAH proponents. If this is a plane as they suggest where are the engines? Where's the cockpit? Why are there clearly two EYES? And why exactly does ancient foreknowledge of the plane logically lead one to ALIENS? We humans invented the plane, not aliens, why would we credit them with this artifact? A civilization capable of crossing interstellar space wouldn't likely have need for such things and according to AAH proponents themselves ancient mythical accounts describe flying saucers NOT airplanes.

I remember when some team made "an exact replica" of the so called plane “ and it flew!”

Well I don’t see an airfoil on the original model, so no it would not fly…well unless it was an F-4