Ancient Aliens Debunked Trailer

reply to post by CosmicConsciousness


This will be a high quality debunking/documentary...not just a bunch of youtube clips put together.

reply to post by BlackManINC


I do not entertain the AA theory and I think Stitchin's work was amateur at best, I do find fringe theories fascinating (I include religious views in this category).

But Michael S. Heiser is not the pinnacle of truth, he is very bias and leans to his own religious and conspiratorial beliefs. I mean its hard to take a guy seriously who talks about inaccurate translations and the AA theory being pushed by global elitists who are part of the luciferian agenda.

Biblical interpretation is just that, interpretation. Most of the language of the bible has been mistranslated, edited or altered in some way shape or form to making any "conclusion" purely speculative, save things that can be backed up by physical evidence (which there is not much).

Brown-Driver-Briggs, Adam Clark, Hendel, all of whom were experts in their field of biblical study disagreed on the translation of the phrase/name "Nephilim". So which one is right and which one is wrong?

Is it the literalist, or the objectivist?

The bible is not math therefore it cannot be proven more true nor its interpretation more correct than what has already been said about it. Its a book of myths, legends and philosophical teachings with a dash of provable ancient history.

reply to post by FaceLikeTheSun

I grew up as an atheist so I know the whole idea of viewing "objective reality" through the eyes of science, logic and reason as the only way to discern truth. I found that THAT has faulty implications and has holes in them as well. So to each his own

Logic and reason are the only way to discern truth my friend. That's why for thousands of years we killed each other in the name of God (hell we still do!), because we could not reason. We had no reference level!!

We thought thunder was the voice of God and that is was a "logical" to be afraid of dragons. I mean...come on.

I am not saying spirituality doesn't have its purposes, I am a very spiritual person. But the most honest and valuable spiritual lessons are the ones which teach critical thinking, personal evolution, compassion and progress. Not dogma, slavery, and ignorance.

IMHO if this documentary has a christian slant than it immediately destroys its credibility because of the bias it has against...well logic. I'm not saying that you wont be able to prove the AA theories as BUNK, because they are most likely anyway. But again IMO your doing it for the wrong reasons, no offense.

Originally posted by steve1709
...So, if you feel like bagging out Ancient Aliens, may I suggest you not build your arguments on the shaky ground of dogma....Respectfully (with absolutely no animosity to you)

Steve

Steve,

You certainly said a lot there and so I will try my best to address each point. And thank you for the civil proposition. Too often I do come across hate.

The comment about Christianity and Islam being historically rooted was merely a point I was making in respect to the AA (Ancient Aliens) claims about which are mere speculation which are founded on misinterpretations, or flat out lies about the evidence provided.

As I mentioned in a post previous, the "sheered off mountain that can only be done with alien technology" turned out to be a mesa.

But let me real quick go back to the point about theism and specifically in my case Christianity. On case for theism, I believe there are good arguments between cosmological, teleological, ontological and moral arguments for the existence of a single God. But they don't prove the Christian God, but simply provide solid logical deductions about the knowledge we have about the universe to posit that yes, God does exist. It's not as fallacious or blindly led faith as one would presume.

Secondly, for Christianity, it is founded upon one man. Yeshua. Now you have to understand that there are two biases that are made against the evidence for Jesus. First, the Bible itself is never accepted by the ardent skeptic as if the first century authors who wrote it were not capable for reporting accurately the events that led them to believe who Yeshua was and what he did. In fact, there are plenty of extra biblical records of this man which are consistent with the biblical accounts. As guilty as I am with an appeal to authority here, Jesus of Nazareth is unanimously seen as a real man who existed in the first century by all scholars who look at the era, regardless of worldview or agenda. This should tell the people who vehemently deny his existence something.

Back to AA. Yes many of the evidences such as Baalbeck, Machu Piccu etc. are mysteries in their own right. In that regard, not even archeology can conclusively come to giving an explanation (of course if they opened up the cover ups about giants, there might be a more plausible explanation...which happens to be consistent with the Bible as well as other historic tribes, text etc...but I don't go there on this post). So the alternative is NOT that they were just ultra intelligent humans that must be responsible for it. Certainly, that could be the case for SOME of the claims, but not every.

What the debunking will do is take each claim (at least the big ones) one by one, and investigate what is actually known about them and compare them to what AA posits. Essentially what you will find is that some of the claims made by AA is a really big stretch. Others not so much. But given the agenda, and understanding it's for entertainment value, we want to show that speculation and faulty scholarship is where most of the AA claims come from. Not that it needs to be in line with Academia (because we all know there is suppressed knowledge there as well) but at least show that there is more to it than simply..."ALIENS!"

As for the first 5 books of the Bible being just a amalgamation of older text, yes it is true, but it also has to do with where you stand on philosophical grounds as to what the Bible is. If it is the inspired Word of God, then it's actually the retelling of the history in a concise and more accurate way than the previously transcribed versions. Why? Because if God is the author, then He knows the truth behind what happened. It would be like writing a book on WW II today to gain better understanding of what happened and why. You can reject it, but understand it's not philosophical grounds.

As for the tragedies in the name of god throughout history, well I'm not sure what the argument is. If the argument is that "The Bible is not true...or it's wrong because look at the horrible behavior of such and such" then your argument is a logical fallacy because how one acts "in the name" of anything doesn't really have any bearing on how true the claims are.

I'll give you an example. Stalin was an atheist and he killed millions of his own people. Does that mean atheism is wrong or horrible? No. Not at all.

Ironically Steve, I too believe that much of history is shrouded by political/economical/ecumenical agenda's which have shaped what we know about it. Ever heard of the phrase to the effect of, "those who win wars write history" ? So I am in the same boat with you, that our history is much more fantastic than what is promoted by main stream academia. But I would also assert that the Biblical records best explains these mysteries, as well as current events unfolding today.

So, hope that gives you something to chew on, and I'd be happy to dig deeper into a particular topic

Originally posted by FaceLikeTheSun
reply to post by CaptainBeno

 

You're right...if the expectation is that AA is wrong and the real truth is (this) than no. Again, I was only part of a team of researchers to debunk individual claims so I'm not sure how much of the Christian worldview Chris is going to inject into the film. But it's little things like Baalbeck which is another one I am working on currently.

AA claims of not knowing how the stones got there? Granted. From my biblical worldview, it was the Giants (Nepilim) who are responsible for a lot of the ancient megalithic structures which are unexplained. There isn't direct evidence, but there are plenty of cases throughout history of not only legends of giants, but also finding the skeleton of giants...in fact a lot of them right here in the US. Check out the work of Steve Quayle. He's done extensive research to document almost all of the claims of giants being found in the last 4 centuries.
...

It has been ages since I've posted on here but this one just couldn't be passed up. Giants???? Seriously? You discount the "theories" on AA, and that's really all they are is theories. I've watched the show many times and I don't recall a single time when they've said "this is a fact". But you actually believe that giants are responsible for the unexplained megalithic structures? Seriously? I am non-plussed.

reply to post by JeepGal


You look like your from Ohio...go look for the Giants discovered in your own backyard...

www.burlingtonnews.net...

that's just one link and many more have been documented.

BUT, I will say it's still a theory and so I couldn't tell you if that is for a fact. But it's more plausible given the archeological evidence.

I don't necessarily think the documentary is going to posit that theory...it's my thought process, not the film makers. In any case, I'm glad you were so provoked that you had to post...welcome back to ATS

reply to post by FaceLikeTheSun


It will be nice to hear another opinion, although I'm not too sure what can be debunked in only 2 minutes.

reply to post by OptimusSubprime


it's just the trailer

whole doc comes out in September

The reason AA covers so many subject areas is because you can disprove 99 out of 100 instances of AA, but if they can prove that even 1 occurance happend, then they are right about their theory.

Honestly, even a christian would have to admit that the AA hypothesis is correct, considering the belief in a superior intelligence that has influenced humanity, even creating it, and introducing a hybrid being that was human and supreme-being.

You can say it different ways, but then you're just playing word games.

reply to post by FaceLikeTheSun


While I do think the "Ancient Aliens" tv show often goes wildly off course in pure speculation, the ancient alien theory should not be dismissed with the show. If this is a documentary debunking the show itself, that is one thing, but if it is trying to debunk the theory by debunking the show, well... then that's flawed. The problem with this trailer is that they did not offer anything of what it will contain, outside of clips of the Ancient Aliens show. I don't mind having the theory itself challenged. I do it myself, but it remains a possibility, as does ancient human civilizations that were technologically advanced and anything else that could be plausible.

As for the poster who claimed religion is backed up with historical fact... You are wrong. There is nothing historical to back up the claims of religion. The bible is not a history book. Outside of that, there is virtually nothing.

Originally posted by Climax
The reason AA covers so many subject areas is because you can disprove 99 out of 100 instances of AA, but if they can prove that even 1 occurance happend, then they are right about their theory.

This reminds me of the saying that two wrongs don't make a right. In this case, 99 wrongs and one being right doesn't suddenly give their overall theory any credibility. Propaganda dictates that they must give some truth as a hook to get you to pay attention to and believe the rest of their bull sh!t, if you want to assume that any of it is true. Its like baking chocolate cookies and mixing it in with dog sh!t.

Honestly, even a christian would have to admit that the AA hypothesis is correct

You are sorely mistaken if you think real Christians take any of the BS peddled by the Ancient Astronaut theorists as the correct point of view, the Christian in the link below certainly does not.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I feel I should clarify my previous reply.
In that reply I did indeed made fun of that one guy's hairdo.
some people rightly pointed at the utter irrelevance of that external feature.
so i do agree with them
however, the point I tried to make is not about external features but about the fact that the main characters that show up in about every episode of AA do make a living from talking, writing, publishing about the topic. They have vested interests in keeping the story going (which of course doesn't imply the story to be wrong, or right, for that matter).

and you should see my hairdo. Why do you think I'm living like a monk

Can't wait for this. I'm eager to see how they will debunk all historic evidence. Ancient aliens may have made some wild conclusions, but that does not destroy the evidence. We can speculate upon it...as they do...if you remember before every "outrageus" claim they say..."according to ancient astronaut theorists"...so it's their belief. What's to debunk? You are either on board or you aren't. Same as religious belief.

This will be one of the classical debunks...they will find wrong conclusions and dismiss the evidence without explaining it. I'm dead certain they will not explain anything, only bash the "ancients".

reply to post by Telos


I never passed judgement on those who watch it, I merely said the fact that people buy into it frightens me. This isn't an attack on those people, I fully understand how persuasive pseudoscience and superstition can be. I tend to blame those in "authority" the folks who make money off of tripe like this rather than blame the misled folks who fall into it after all Ancient Aliens doesn't prominently feature any skeptics of it's own ideas, it doesn't provide any in-depth info on what mainstream archeology and science has to say about these things.

So I look forward to a good thorough debunking to show the other side of the argument and put this silliness in perspective.

reply to post by Titen-Sxull


Skeptics of their view were actually interviewed for the show. Michael Heiser was one of those apparently interviewed but was cut from the show as he couldn't see any evidence to support an ancient alien scenario.

History Channel Censors Facade Author Mike Heiser from its "UFOs in the Bible" Show February 6, 2003 Well, if you've clicked here you no doubt by now have seen the History Channel's special, "UFOs in the Bible" (aired 1/28, 29), or your curiosity was at least piqued by the front page blurb. Let me give you some brief background before I turn my attention to the telling and cowardly effort of Weller-Grossman Studios, who produced the show. Last February (2002), Weller-Grossman Studios (hereafter WGS) flew me out to Los Angeles to be interviewed for the UFOs and the Bible special. The reason was simple: they had heard of me from Guy Malone (also interviewed) of Roswell, NM's "Alien Resistance HQ". They learned from Guy that I had academic credentials in biblical studies and biblical languages, and an interest in UFOs. The choice was natural. When I received my list of questions from WGS prior to the interview, I noticed the questions were very stilted toward "confirming" that the Bible indeed gave evidence of ETs and UFOs, neither if which I believed. I called my contact at WGS, and told them up front that if they interviewed me, they would not get the answers they evidently wanted. I was told...

Full Article

The problem with ancient alien theory is that it is to broad, and the motto is man couldnt have built it so it must of been outerspace aliens.

All the ancient text that I read pertaining to UFOs has usually claimed that they came from the skies and not from another world. Some ancient text mention how man once achieved air travel. These Ancient flying machines have long been a tradition of many cultures across the globe. In India they had described airships called Vamanas that were even used for battle.

The Hopi Indians had magical flying shields called paatuwvota which existed in the Third World, a previous epoch destroyed by an immense flood. This was a time when great cities and trade routes were built, and civilization was flourishing. In an address delivered to the United Nations, Thomas Banyacya of the Hopi Coyote Clan said: "The people invented many machines and conveniences of high technology, some of which have not yet been seen in this age".

It was us all along.

So the AA theorists don't like the idea of having their theory challenged? That is bad-bad science. Real scientist willingly offer their theory up for peer review...that is...unless they are afraid it won't pass the test.

The AA theory only maddens me for one reason and one reason only...it disrespects our ancestors and our species. We are some clever mofo's...we need to give ourselves credit for figuring things out and thinking in new and clever ways. I started a small thread a couple weeks ago concerning the Neolithic revolution...the possibility that certain natural things caused a change in our brains and allowed us to chain together complex thought and theory. But that is another thread.

I have never said I don't believe in intelligent life in the Universe....from my point of view...it is almost assuredly out there. My issue is....How arrogant of us to think we matter enough for them to come and intercede and influence...by the idea of other intelligent life out there itself is enough to say we are not that important....we are just another species in the nature preserve...no more or less important than any other. To think that someone would go to the trouble and investment to travel, cleverly manipulate and make sure to hide all traces is absurd.

As I said before...only when we have documented, unquestionable proof that WE HAVE been visited (complex carbon fibers and advanced metallurgical alloys found in archaeological sites) will I consider the idea a possibility. and we don't have those.

I prefer to look, as the clock is forced to be rolled back, at just how clever our species is...just think...no one...none...would have imagined we were capable of making monolithic structures 12,000 years ago...but there it is...Gobekli-tepe...it is THE most awesome archaeological site to date (imo)...and there is still so much yet uncovered...it might go back even further than that. What will we do "IF" we find through that site that we were actually working with giant stones 25,000 years ago? I think...it will make us ponder....alot.

But I am not ready to sell out the intellect of our species to outside influence. We have been here...pretty much with the same mental capacity...for nearly 200,000 years....eventually the sparks flew and we took a giant step....why is that so hard for people to grasp?

I still don't see how some's eyes can't reach further than the shallow - 'Oh he's making wrong conclusions or rush conclusions, therefore he's a hoaxer liar'.

Use your own mind (if you have any), ignore Tsoukalos and all that you see there, do not say - I believe because he said so - think by yourself. All these descriptions, drawings, myths some claim to be reality. others really having happened (about Goliath the place was also non existent, Troy was a myth too, the red hair giants in Nevada was 'just a myth') and say - doesn't all this at least make you wonder if not make you certain, it could be real?

Remember, UFOs and today's claims about aliens do not come frm this theory, so these are two different things that have in common, and overlap. Doesn't it at least make you be open minded because there is so much info and no one would waste so much info for nothing.

So I absolutely disagree with bashing the general idea of visitations just because a bunch of HC guys make rush conclusions. It is the whole idea that matters, away from History channel.

But I am not ready to sell out the intellect of our species to outside influence. We have been here...pretty much with the same mental capacity...for nearly 200,000 years....eventually the sparks flew and we took a giant step....why is that so hard for people to grasp?

Our intelligence excuse me? I'm sure there could be a lot more intelligent species than us, we are not too far from the animals. Yes we make houses, we do work, we are more than animals, and so much for it. Why didn't I see a single species evolving like neanderthal?

Let's be scientific right? There is no casualty, everything is science, which you just don't know the maths. So saying that, oh it just happened to us, didn't happen to anyone else... LUCKY US!

Originally posted by Imtor
I still don't see how some's eyes can't reach further than the shallow - 'Oh he's making wrong conclusions or rush conclusions, therefore he's a hoaxer liar'.

Use your own mind (if you have any), ignore Tsoukalos and all that you see there, do not say - I believe because he said so - think by yourself. All these descriptions, drawings, myths some claim to be reality. others really having happened (about Goliath the place was also non existent, Troy was a myth too, the red hair giants in Nevada was 'just a myth') and say - doesn't all this at least make you wonder if not make you certain, it could be real?

Remember, UFOs and today's claims about aliens do not come frm this theory, so these are two different things that have in common, and overlap. Doesn't it at least make you be open minded because there is so much info and no one would waste so much info for nothing.

So I absolutely disagree with bashing the general idea of visitations just because a bunch of HC guys make rush conclusions. It is the whole idea that matters, away from History channel.

But I am not ready to sell out the intellect of our species to outside influence. We have been here...pretty much with the same mental capacity...for nearly 200,000 years....eventually the sparks flew and we took a giant step....why is that so hard for people to grasp?

Our intelligence excuse me? I'm sure there could be a lot more intelligent species than us, we are not too far from the animals. Yes we make houses, we do work, we are more than animals, and so much for it. Why didn't I see a single species evolving like neanderthal?

Let's be scientific right? There is no casualty, everything is science, which you just don't know the maths. So saying that, oh it just happened to us, didn't happen to anyone else... LUCKY US!

edit on 27-4-2012 by Imtor because: (no reason given)

Ad hominem arguments are well...what they are.

I simply don't see the proof....and I don't see the need. Clever and artistic things are not "proof" of anything.

I happen to love being Human and I love what this species has accomplished. I choose to believe the "Neolithic revolution" started earlier than we give ourselves credit for. And just like today...technology grows exponentially...which is why our society leaps forward faster and faster....but when you start with using rocks as weapons...it takes a big equation to get where we are today....just saying...(maybe you don't get that....so fine)

This film is so long overdue.

Sometimes the Ancient Aliens program spoonfed so much garbage that I felt actual sickness.

Lets hope whoever is making the trailer has actual evidence/proof to disprove this theory. Otherwise they
might call people haters, disinfo agents, and paid shills because of the huge holes in their "evidence".

A lot of the people in this thread (who hate the very idea of AA theory because it conflicts with their religious beliefs or "feelings" or even general beliefs) don't even like AA theory so they say :

1.This is so dumb.
2.They are just saying aliens did it.
3.The guy with the hair is crazy.
4.Aliens couldn't have done this because of this.


These opinions are actually on the very line of teenage gossip.

So the very people they are slamming on account of no credible evidence,
in return, have no credible evidence of their own.

I won't say any names; I can give examples.

Originally posted by spinalremain
This film is so long overdue.

Sometimes the Ancient Aliens program spoonfed so much garbage that I felt actual sickness.

Originally posted by FaceLikeTheSun
reply to post by boncho

 

what's worse is their scholarship...how many times do you hear..."according to ancient mythology dating back thousands of years..."

I actually partook in the research portion of this debunking project (which is why I posted here) and I ran into that problem. I could not find the hard source from which they were making their claims.

If the sources they derive the claims from are speculation or faulty, than the assertions that come from it are....you got it....ALIENS!

Originally posted by ThisToiletEarth
All the characters on that show are so full of S*H*!*T.
I believe it is plausible that we have been visited in the past but
to attribute every mystery in our history to aliens is just stooopid.

"Blah blah blah.. According to Ancient Astronaut Theorists... IT'S ALIENS"

Why would a self appointed AAT say otherwise?!

Morons.

edit on 26-4-2012 by ThisToiletEarth because: (no reason given)