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.

 

Survey Results: Origins and Evolution

page: 62
82
<< 59  60  61    63  64  65 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2011 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Yes I know this is a bit off topic but how do you explain you're belief in god. And if their was an unrelated story to base the Gobeki Tepe off of.




posted on Sep, 4 2011 @ 12:41 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


Well you're making a couple of assumptions there.

See, there is none. No civilization, no anything. This is why Gobek is such an anomaly. Before, we thought "first came the city, than the temple". But here, we see nomadic people without a city bonding together to create a temple, and then no city. This is one of the mysteries and controversies ongoing as the temple is excavated. Simply put, we just do not understand anything about this site yet. It just sits there, staring at you, laughing and saying "hahaha, you cannot solve my mystery"

Besides that, you don't know if they started off here. They may have moved. In fact, we definitely know they moved, because they buried the entire complex and ran away.

Like I said, I do believe in a global flood. So It's of no concern for me if there's no water around. But I admit this is my own bias. So, like I just mentioned, go ahead. Let it mock you. The temple wants you to solve its mystery. It wants you to feel completely lost on how the hell it got there.



posted on Sep, 4 2011 @ 12:48 AM
link   
reply to post by KingJames1337
 


I believe in my God, the Judeo-Christian one, based off personal experiences totally off topic. I can go through them at length with you in PMs if you so desire.

As for the temple itself, and if there was anything beforehand that it itself may have been based off of, I've have an ongoing discussion with user Slayer69. over just this issue. We both share evidence and artifacts we find with other folks to sort of piece together ideas and mull over it. We've both come to the conclusion that History repeats itself. That man rises, gets put down, and then gets back up and rebuilds. How advanced he gets each time, we do not know. I can tell you that there are documents from 1750 talking about Hebrew inscriptions on ruins in Pennsylvania. I can tell you that South America's temples seem to indicate some very industrial and advanced people from eons ago ,just dying off. I can tell you that a pattern is in fact beginning to emerge that mankind has risen and fallen several times. Thus it is very likely that what we see at gobekli tepe is probably based off even older temples and myths.

What the data shows is this. Mankind was nothing. Then from about 50,000 to 10,000 years ago there's this sort of "lost era" of man, with lots of relics, but the question remains. What the hell was mankind doing for 40,000 years. Then suddenly we see these complexes start popping up around the globe about 10,000 or so years ago, give or take 2000 years. Then the Ice age ends and the Earth floods, and then mankind rebuilds. Then we see the rise of Sumeria, India, Indochina, etc etc. Then they all fall. Then we see the rise of Egypt, the rise of Minoa, the rise of others. Then they fall. Then we see the rise of Greece, and others. Then they fall. Then Rome, then they fall. Then we come to our modern rise out of the dark ages.

I think I'm going to sleep now. So reply to ya later.
edit on 4-9-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   
This was a good survey, but very hard for me to believe any of the questions being asked..

Most of my responses was neutral, and ironically when asked about our origin, i tended to go back to my childhood, with Sunday, school stories etc. etc. due to the lack of scientific proof, to tell me to think otherwise....


Actually any of the survey questions could be right, by the way.. Especially when we don't know, ourselves..




posted on Sep, 4 2011 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bicent76
This was a good survey, but very hard for me to believe any of the questions being asked..

Most of my responses was neutral, and ironically when asked about our origin, i tended to go back to my childhood, with Sunday, school stories etc. etc. due to the lack of scientific proof, to tell me to think otherwise....


Actually any of the survey questions could be right, by the way.. Especially when we don't know, ourselves..



The thing is, we can answer some of the questions with certainty


That's why it's baffling to see people completely ignoring FACTS...



posted on Sep, 4 2011 @ 04:12 PM
link   

interesting image from gobekli tepe.
photo taken by vince musi, found it on the national geographic site/ the caption claims they are dancing. i don't think so.
what i found interesting were their arm positions.

here's another one, although not from gobekli. this is abydos, egypt. same arm position. not a human


and another from abydos, not human. this is underwater scene



and more, also from abydos


they all have what i have come to call "Ra Arms." believing that they are saying to the viewer that they are from the Eye of Ra

in the egyptian text, the legend of the destruction of mankind, hathor is called ra's eye. so i did some research on hathor and found an egyptologist's theory that the symbol for hathor was this originally:



and that the curved limbs ended up representing hathor's cow horns although the symbol above is supposedly from an early cow goddess called bat who was later known as hathor. the egyptologist has lots of examples to support his theory.

so essentially, the arm shapes of these things are suggesting the Eye of Ra although gobekli tepe predated (supposedly) pharaonic egypt and the legend of Ra by thousands of years.

they could be dancing, not ruling that out, but just taking a gander at them, they sure look alot like the shorter reptilians in the abydos vase (the one where only one guy has his arms in that pose, although there are lots of other figures in the picture)



edit on 4-9-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   
More importantly, why fall back on a book of myths & legends when you are uncertain of the facts?



posted on Sep, 4 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   
here's a real oddity


seems the "Dancers" in the gobekli pic are also "connected" by tube like projections, to the figure in the middle


edit on 4-9-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2011 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Well we can throw out 40,000 to 10,000 BC because there was no writing but if we can't base anything off of Gobeki Tepe, than the only evidence we have is that of Sumeria, and India and so on.
edit on 4-9-2011 by KingJames1337 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2011 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by KingJames1337
 


that's like saying we should throw out the fossils of micro raptor just because we cannot find anything similar to it to understand its relationship.

You do not throw out data just because it doesn't fit what you want.

There's plenty of artifacts in those 40,000 years, and Gobek has plenty of visual similarities to what we find elsewhere.

Sorry, Sumerian texts and the lot are simply not the first. They are not to be trusted as primary evidence, but rather, the mid point of a story told over and over again, with elements added or removed depending on culture.

It is not more important. it is not less important.

You are propping them up as the be all and end all, but this is ignorant to do so. It's your personal bias. Just as my personal bias is for the Bible. We must not let our personal bias shade our objectivity. Let go of these myths you keep bringing up as some 100% accurate tale, and accept that they are nothing more than, let's say, the 5th person down a row in a game of chinese whispers.



posted on Sep, 4 2011 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Jewroaster might have been a Jew lost in Persia

There is a possibility that Aten's three-dimensional spherical shape depicts an eye of Horus/Ra. In the other early monotheistic religion Zoroastrianism the sun is called Ahura Mazda's eye. These two theories are compatible with each other, since an eye is an orb.

When I heard about the Judgement of the heart of the person being compared to the Mott it did sound a bit like Jewroaster.

During the late Old Kingdom and the First Intermediate Period, the Egyptians gradually came to believe that possession of a ba and the possibility of a paradisiacal afterlife extended to everyone.[32][37] In the fully developed afterlife beliefs of the New Kingdom, the soul had to avoid a variety of supernatural dangers in the Duat, before undergoing a final judgment known as the "Weighing of the Heart". In this judgment, the gods compared the actions of the deceased while alive (symbolized by the heart) to Ma'at, to determine whether he or she had behaved in accordance with Ma'at. If the deceased was judged worthy, his or her ka and ba were united into an akh.[38

So Jewroaster might have been a Jew who adopted this idea from Egypt



posted on Sep, 4 2011 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by KingJames1337
 


that's like saying we should throw out the fossils of micro raptor just because we cannot find anything similar to it to understand its relationship.

You do not throw out data just because it doesn't fit what you want.

There's plenty of artifacts in those 40,000 years, and Gobek has plenty of visual similarities to what we find elsewhere.

Sorry, Sumerian texts and the lot are simply not the first. They are not to be trusted as primary evidence, but rather, the mid point of a story told over and over again, with elements added or removed depending on culture.

It is not more important. it is not less important.

You are propping them up as the be all and end all, but this is ignorant to do so. It's your personal bias. Just as my personal bias is for the Bible. We must not let our personal bias shade our objectivity. Let go of these myths you keep bringing up as some 100% accurate tale, and accept that they are nothing more than, let's say, the 5th person down a row in a game of chinese whispers.


I might have not been clear, what I'am trying to say is there is no written evidence from 40,000 to 6,000 BC, now if there is some evidence of a flood, or Enki and Enlil, or anything even a picture of a serpent I'd gladly look at it and take it just as seriously as the Sumerian tales. But the only written evidence is that of the Sumerian tales, even if it is the 5th person down in a game of Chinese whisperers but it's the oldest written records we have unless you have anything else. They are not the be all and end all but what else do we have in writing? I try to keep my personal bias out of things but there is a slight one there and obviously the story had been tampered with but it's the best story we have unless you have anything else.



posted on Sep, 4 2011 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by KingJames1337
 


What I'm saying is, nobody sat down one day and decided to write that down. It was probably the result of a writer documenting several regional stories, and he applied his own religious beliefs to them....exactly what we are all doing.

This is why we cannot take it as proof.
edit on 4-9-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2011 @ 11:42 PM
link   
The poll was to question peoples 'belief' in a scenario that has been debated and will be debated until the end of time. Granted, the results will not come as a surprise to the vast majority of people both of 'faith' and athiests (or whichever non-god believing denomination you align yourself with) but the end effect, is to just give those athiests another baton to attack the believers with and in turn, is used by the believers as a baton to beat the non-believers with.

What everyone clearly needs to understand is that this poll proves nothing, other than that the vast majority of people who participated, do not believe in god. I don't expect us all to get along, I really don't, the evidence in this thread is that one side will attack and the other defend, then the whistle will blow and its time for the other side to attack.

You can call it debating, you can call it an 'informed' discussion, but the words the people use and the way they craft their posts, in 90% (if not more) of these types of so called debates, is to belittle and shame the person who does not agree with you, to call him stupid, to talk down to him; with the hope that he wont come back.

Yes, its not just this subject, its many others too and I believe it shouldn't be that way, it should be possible for us to be able to inform others of our belief whilst respecting theirs and vice versa, but it isn't and I guess it never will be and thats a shame.

I am a non-believer and I choose not to label myself as anything but that. I also understand and accept that a great many people do have faith in a deity / religion of some form and I respect that they have their reasons for doing so. This is fine by me, it should be for you too.

My final point for those of you that will cite 'religion being responsible for countless atrocities throughout history' is that no, religion isn't responsible; MAN did those things, yes he may have said it was in the name of god or christianity or islam or whatever religion you want to put here, but it was still man that did it.

Peace.



posted on Sep, 4 2011 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


huh.

For some reason I did not see it before, but now that I look, It looks like the top one is some sort of granary. Doesn't it look like a hamster cage?

The bottom one? eh. Don't look that related. Could just be the bottom one is people imitating a flying lizard.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 03:10 AM
link   
SCIENCE RULES!

But I'm not a scientist, I'm a Scientologist. So I'm not happy with these results.

I see that when it comes to creation, people mainly stick with the familiar and the comfortable, or what they were taught in school.

It's not a relevant enough subject for most people to delve into and have a strong opinion about.

I wonder how many will ever really feel like they know the truth.

It doesn't matter that much to most people that the science on this subject (especially on the cosmology side of things) really doesn't make any sense.

But most also seem blissfully unaware, or unwilling to deal with, all the evidence for ET contacts with earth dating back into the most ancient of times. Science doesn't accept it or talk about it, so there must be something wrong with it. This is the same follow-the-leader mindset that got us into every major war of the last century, led to every major economic upset and has kept in power increasingly inept people and their straw men.

So: How are we doing at denying ignorance? I guess it depends on your point of view.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 07:58 AM
link   
Hmmm 62 pages... Of arguing about religion and science...


Sounds about right...



As in the posters who quoted my statement about not being able to prove who or what or how we were create..

this is ignorant...

WE HAVE NO PROOF....

ZERO..

You have hypothesis, and theory...

If your referring evolution as your proof.. Well that is just funny..





ok I am done... You guys can have all the last words, now..

I am done paying attention to 62 pages of ignorance...


Their are things on this planet, we do not understand, let alone to try to understand our creation without even understanding the things we were created in, is like guessing the answer to the mathematical problem without solving the formula to get the right answer...


edit on 5-9-2011 by Bicent76 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by l_e_cox
 





But most also seem blissfully unaware, or unwilling to deal with, all the evidence for ET contacts with earth dating back into the most ancient of times. Science doesn't accept it or talk about it, so there must be something wrong with it. This is the same follow-the-leader mindset that got us into every major war of the last century, led to every major economic upset and has kept in power increasingly inept people and their straw men.


There is no OBJECTIVE evidence for ETs. All we have are subjective witness reports (who are clearly NOT proof), and ancient remains that highlight what people BELIEVED back then.

Calling it "proof" or "evidence" is like saying the Scientology e-meters are real science


I don't know if you watch the "Ancient Aliens" series on TV, but if you fact check their claims, you soon realize it's all speculation and/or hogwash. Just look at how often they say "could it be that...?" without providing even a shred of evidence to support that "rethorical" question.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by undo
 


huh.

For some reason I did not see it before, but now that I look, It looks like the top one is some sort of granary. Doesn't it look like a hamster cage?


they are underground. notice the four (2 on each side of the central figure) anthropomorphized "human" figures connected to the central figure by tubes that extend from the central figure's sides? notice they have no arms? i think that's the suggestion of egyptian canopic jars as those figures have animal heads like the four sons of horus. however, the site those were found in, predated the official sons of horus story. and would be more correctly placed in narmer's (nimrod) time. since nimrod/narmer/enmerkar is the founder of pharaonic egypt and the source of the osiris story, that image may help explain the evolution of the four sons of horus used as canopic jars.







edit on 5-9-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


I'm not so sure nimrod founded anything in Egypt.

Nobody founded Egypt. Egypt was an area that was similar to our own Mississippi valley, but then environmental calamity made it into a desert, and all the people flooded to the only remaining river left. Eventually local lords came around, and the indo-European pantheon migration gave them invented gods like Ra and the lot. Eventually Menes united the two present kingdoms, and Egypt was born.

No one man "created" Egypt. Egypt is the result of many rulers, many leaders, many builders, and many people. And this is reflected on the fact that they had many gods, constantly evolving and changing in their origin stories and myths. Because Egypt was not constant. There is no one culture or identity of Egypt.



new topics

top topics



 
82
<< 59  60  61    63  64  65 >>

log in

join