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 Iceglazedchickenwings
Why some folks refuse to believe that our ancestors were responsible for the construction of ancient megalithic sites/structures is beyond me. I like to think that men of old were fully capable of building such things, and because of this, I refuse to accept the ancient alien theory. What was in their actual tool-kit? I don't know.
We broke away from the deep brainwashing of religion and felt that the bible was pure fantasy, then decided we would abandon the bible forever.
We begin to trust in science and view the world with a more logical approach.
Then we were
Its hard to 'accept' that because it simply does not add up.
Mass of slaves? Certainly, Makes sense. But who is the mass of slaves being directed by?
It is someone who understands geometry, alignment, measurements, aerial views and architecture. This same someone also needed to provide the slaves with tools that were precisely able to cut through granite, limestone, etc. What were the tools of that time period?
Consider the structure, fitting, and chamber making..
Consider the weight of each block, some as heavy s 20 tons each....What could have moved these blocks in place, according to technology of the time period?
No wheels, no pulley's, and no iron tools.
Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by ButterCookie
This is a perfect example of how the Ancient Alien Theory shuts down fruitful thinking. The design of the pyramids shows an extensive knowledge of geometry and astronomy. People with that much sophistication must be capable of solving the logistical problems involved in building the pyramids, after all, they did it. We know they had wheels, pulleys and levers.
Originally posted by ButterCookie
reply to post by SpearMint
The religious idea of a 'god' would be illogical in nature...
an omnipotent being who punishes you for not worshipping him, but he himself committed more murders than anyone in our human history...yes, that is illogical.
The AAT is not talking about 'that kind of god'. According to it, 'god' is not a single being- it was a common term to describe an extraterrestrial visitor.
The same way we today say 'alien'.
Originally posted by CloonBerg
With my current understanding of evolution, it is hard to imagine that our ancestral primates evolved into homo-sapiens so quickly (especially with the missing link).
Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by HumanitiesLastHope
See the thing humans like you tend to forget
you're not human?
This is a perfect example of how the Ancient Alien Theory shuts down fruitful thinking. The design of the pyramids shows an extensive knowledge of geometry and astronomy. People with that much sophistication must be capable of solving the logistical problems involved in building the pyramids, after all, they did it. We know they had wheels, pulleys and levers. They may have been able to overcome the limitations of heir bronze tools by a variety of techniques; carborundum and applied heat come instantly to mind. They had a highly organized, centralized society that could shift its assets as necessary. An open minded archaeologist can use all this to recreate how the Egyptians did it. The moment you think it can only have been aliens, your mind snaps shut.
The blocks, many of them weighing upwards of 200 tons, are in some cases held together by large metalic, I-shaped couplers, rather than enterlocking shapes as at Sacsahuaman or at Cuzco. Others were held together by silver rivets. The system used here is reminiscent of that used in the Egyptian ruins on Elephantine Island on the Nile. Most researchers believe that the metal was actually poured into I-shaped slots carved into the rock.
My girlfriend very much believes in the Bible, that the earth is only 6000 years old, that men once lived to be 500 to 1000 years old etc etc.
from The Evolution Evidence Page
Scientists have settled on the age of the earth of about 4.6 billion years as a result of research started almost 50 years ago. This conclusion was based upon carefully designed and conducted experiments that compared the ratios in rock samples of parent elements to daughter elements ( some of which would have been from radioactive decay of the parent, some of which may have been present in the sample at the time of formation). Since radioactive decay is known to occur at a constant rate, the age of a rock can be determined from the ratio of the parent element to the daughter element. The concerns about these dating methods were exactly the same that creationists continue to raise - presence of the daughter element at the time the rock was formed and possible loss / gain of either the parent or daughter element at some point in the history of the rock. For this reason, the tests were designed to account for those possibilities.