Evidence of ancient nuclear wars?

Originally posted by Byrd
Actually, we've debunked this one before. The "scriptures" are faked and don't appear anywhere in any Hindu text (in fact, the ONLY place they appear is on websites that fell victim to the hoax -- they do not show up in any English translation of the Mahabharata... something you can easily check for yourself.)

Thanx for clearing up this. Hoax is hoax and there's quite abit of it on the internet...

Blessings,
Mikromarius

If this is true, it backs up the beliefs of the origin of people the Nation of Islam teaches.

The story goes something like this:

66 trillion years ago a wise scientist had an argument with other wise scientists because he wanted the entire earth to have one religion and speak one language. When the scientists rejected his idea, the scientist drove a missile into the earth and he set it off attempting to destory all of mankind. And when he set it off, a piece of the earth was broken from the earth and that piece the became the moon...

a great amount of time to us, but to the universe nothing more than a catnap. however, throughout the eons of evolution from monkey to man, we have come a great way. consider this,

so far you are assuming the soldiers of these 'space wars' are human. that doesn't neccesarily have to be the case. in a monkeys lifetime, we as man can train it to do simple things, like understand things and learn and listen to us. over even a million years, do you not think it possible for them to have evolved into a level where they could've figured their own civilisation. not even monkeys, just any ancient beings. so little is known about what did live back then, but our ancestors could've developed quicker than i like to think many people belive. for a long while i've entertained the idea of civilisation occuring before africa 7ooo years ago. the recent rebirth of humanity, starting 1o,ooo years ago after the end of the last ice age, has brought us from living under trees and hunting and gathering, to caves, to shack type abodes, to houses, to towns, to cities, to empires, to the nations of today. is it not to say that during a similar period in the last few eons, that an event like this has happened before? maybe they destroyed themselves through use of their weaponry, like we try so hard not to do. who knows?

Byrd, I didnt say that I believed the entire article, I just posted it for discussion.

However, there *is* some very interesting facts that exist that dont fit anyones established models to explain everything. That is likely why such facts tend to fall by the wayside and be ignored. I personally think that is faulty science, and the more unusual a fact is, and the more that it doesnt fit into the established theories, the more it should be explored.

In particular, I am very interested in the "vitrified forts" as we have no current theory to explain them

Kegs, if you do go, and are able to, please do try to get a sample!!!!!!

xaos -
I thought that, according to what records we have, language appeared to have developed spontaneously?

Originally posted by Gazrok
asteroid impacts seem to cause similar effects (i.e. Tunguska Blast in Russia). Maybe DR would be better suited to explain it...

Tungska has many things in common with nuclear blasts, even though it happened over 30 years before atomic weapons were developed.

Written language developed spontaneously

I doubt that, more like it slowly evolved from symbols and pictures.

XAOS

This is really interesting thing to discuss, but its something I have always found to be divided between people who can actually believe that BS of darwin's and those who feel we at least arent glorified apes, though from there the opinion seems to drift.
As a couple side notes....whoever it was talking about darwin's bunk....try to do up the odds of humans developing from single cell life, even given the what,4.5 billion years, and the fact that you're not even figuring odds for life actually OCCURING, and humanity evolving in conjunction with that, and you'll see that the scientific rule of proof by probability is amazingly missing when it comes to evolution.....and it amazes me that anyone could believe it, even with that aside, since the only evidence FOR it, at all, are some skulls that arent even necessarily human,and even if they are, whoppee, I mean, people in general look quite a bit different now than they did at the beginning of recorded history, by and large, and thats only a few thousand years.....so, basically, its at least as likely we're say.....an alien project, as anything else.....anyways, I won't rant anymore about that foolishness.....
the other point, while those quoted lines from the indian manuscripts don't exist as far as I know, I do know that there are sanskrit texts that do at the very least talk about flying machines, verified for me personally by a professor of indian studies, or whatever his specific title was, though these apparently havent been translated to english.....I believe there are some sites online that talk of these too, not sure....those are always hard to find the gold among the dross, but war scene's aside, vimana's are a legit reference....

You fellows are always so fun.

First you say that we are not glorified apes. Of course not, we are a disgrace to primates, look at us. And on that note, look at us. We have so much in common with apes that it is impossible to refute Darwin. People who do are just one step above being racist. How can you say that our species is superior? But back to similarities.

Have you ever looked at an ape and then looked at a human? There are very little differences between us. Except that they are furrier (note: does not work in France, Russia, or Alabama), and have a lot less repressed anger.

And as for single celled life occuring, you admitted that there was a possibility, and in an infinite universe, everything possible, must happen.

And while ancient texts have talked of flying machines, others have talked of dragons, so did dragons exist too? Is that what you're telling us? That the movie Reign of Fire has basis in fact. Because that is what it sounds like you are telling us.

XAOS

Originally posted by xaos
You fellows are always so fun.

You're not so bad yourself either

Have you ever looked at an ape and then looked at a human? There are very little differences between us.

Look at their inside then. A tiny brain, and close to none of the internal organs seem to even look like our's. Then take a brief look inside a pig, all it's internal organs are close to identical with our's. Looks like we have more in common with Winnie the Pig than with King Kong. And how about this: most animals can walk around with metal and stuff inside, with humans the case is abit different. You can't just replace a human bone with a metal "bone" like you can with most animals for instance. The human body rejects most metals etc.

Except that they are furrier (note: does not work in France, Russia, or Alabama), and have a lot less repressed anger.

Well eat this: some of the only places a monkey doesn't have hair is in it's behind and in it's face. Somehow these places are among the only places we have hair. I always thought that evolution taught us that we have somehow lost our fur, not gained fur. But what do I know, perhaps only women have evolved from monkeys, or perhaps the monkeys have evolved from us? And the bone we have in our tongues that allows us to speek and articulate... Where did that come from?

And while ancient texts have talked of flying machines, others have talked of dragons, so did dragons exist too?

Of course there were dragons. Some are even still around today. One of them is even called dragon, the Komodo Dragon. Most dragons died out some 60 mill. years ago. You have probably heared of creatures like the Tyrannosaurus Rex and the Stegosaurus. Some of the old dragons could even fly. These stories you refer to have probably come up after some guy found some huge fossils and skeletons in his back yard and like the scientists do today, they started making fairytales and psevdo-scientific myths about them

Blessings,
Mikromarius

listen, I do not have time to go in depth right now, but I will jump for the last bit. Komodo dragons are very distantly related to dinosaurs, birds are closer. And you must believe in evolution as you said that komodos evolved from dinosaurs.

XAOS

Originally posted by xaos
listen, I do not have time to go in depth right now, but I will jump for the last bit. Komodo dragons are very distantly related to dinosaurs, birds are closer. And you must believe in evolution as you said that komodos evolved from dinosaurs.

XAOS

I never said that nothing has ever evolved from dinosaurs, I simply stated that some dragons are still around, the komodo dragon for instance. Perhaps I should rather have said crocodile. And for the bird part... hehe... How can something weighing tens of tons suddenly, without any middle stadium, become seagulls and sparrows wighing just a couple of grams. Evolutionists never stop amazing me. How can you believe that crap? Where are all the middle stadiums, there should be pretty many fossils I guess, only we haven't found any, right? When Jesus said that it was just as easy for a rich man to enter heaven as for a kamel to walk through a needle's eye: with the logics from evolution this isn't just possible, but even plausible. Going from tyrannosaurus to sparrow should equal going from kamels to flees. Still a bit tricky for the kamel-flee to walk through the needle's eye, but much simpler than when it was a kamel.

Blessings,
Mikromarius

Yeah, I heard of ancient nuclear warfare. The most famous one is in this site.

www.world-mysteries.com...

scroll down to the quote at the middle end of the page.
It is pretty interesting.

Um, crocidiles are not related to dinosaurs, they are not even classified together, despite the fact that they were around at different times. And how do you explain the variety of animals and how they came to be now, without any evidence in the fossil record. And why the creatures in the fossil record that are like them aren't around any more. Hmmm? And how did ancient myths about magic come about without it. And dont tell me you are wiccan. Just because someone imagines something that it exists. Also, if you are a creationist who thinks that aliens created us, how do you explain the aliens coming about?

XAOS

Originally posted by xaos
Um, crocidiles are not related to dinosaurs, they are not even classified together, despite the fact that they were around at different times.

Crocodiles did live at the same time didn't they? There are even findings of dinosaur bones that resemble those of the crocodile: www.cnn.com...

And how do you explain the variety of animals and how they came to be now, without any evidence in the fossil record. And why the creatures in the fossil record that are like them aren't around any more. Hmmm?

God moves on. He created them and he destroyed them.

And how did ancient myths about magic come about without it. And dont tell me you are wiccan. Just because someone imagines something that it exists.

I'm definately not a wiccan. What made you think that?

Also, if you are a creationist who thinks that aliens created us, how do you explain the aliens coming about?

I've never met an alien as far as I can recall, I'm amazed about how shy they are if they do exist and is present here on Earth. I believe in an ever existing God, him who is. More eternal than space; the beginning and the end. What was your question again?

I believe in design, and I see it in nature. The species on earth are obviously created.

Blessings,
Mikromarius

Well a form of the crocodile lived back then.

to tell you the truth i dont believe in go, so if you say god just "moved on" then i find that stupid. the idea of a supream being is just nuts if you ask me.

aliens creating us??? yeah, they created us then left us alone for oh say ,a couple billion or million, years?

Im a more scientific person, so if you want to prove some thing to me show me evidence, not a belief.

Yeah, the only similarities this thing had with a croc was its head. Otherwise, it had a fin, it walked on two legs and had tiny forearms. Does that sound like a crocodile to you? Dinosaurs are nothing like crocodiles, they are two different types of reptile. If Dinosaurs even were reptiles.

Why did God destroy those creatures? Why did he create them in the first place and was he wrong in doing so? And if the universe is only a few thousand years old, why are those creatures from millions of years ago?

XAOS

I'm sorry people but this is a complete work of fiction. There's no way I'd ever believe BS like this, and you should definately not listen to gold diggers such as Stan Friedman. That man is seriously full of sh*t.

Does anyone else feel that way about him? I think he's like a government plant or something.

Okay, Back to marius' original post. He said that our brains are much bigger than an ape's "tiny" brain. First this is quite false, while our brains are bigger they are not much bigger. Second, it is the ratio of body size to brain that really matters. There are plenty of creatures with bigger brains than us, but you dont see them flying airplanes do you?

As for the metal implants, what about all of those people with pacemakers, and artificial knees and hips?

Our behind and face are the furriest places on a human? What about arm hair and chest hair and back hair and leg hair and well other hair?

And just for the record, we do not have a tongue bone, our tongues are pure muscle. And a bone in the tongue would probably hinder speech and articulation, rather than help it. Our ability to speak and articulate stems from the brain, not the mouth. This is why parrots can repeat whatever you say, at the right time, yet do not get engaged in philosophical debates.

Just correcting some of your statements about dinosaurs: First, the reptiles that could fly and swim, like the [u[Quetzalcoatlus[ and plesiosaur. Dinosaurs are a special type of reptile that lived millions of years ago, but the term does not apply to all reptiles at that time.

Hope this helps,
XAOS

has to do more with surface area (if I remember correctly), in regards to intelligence. Ours simply has more folds, so when you calculate that in with it...you get our brains as bigger....

Originally posted by xaos
Okay, Back to marius' original post. He said that our brains are much bigger than an ape's "tiny" brain. First this is quite false, while our brains are bigger they are not much bigger. Second, it is the ratio of body size to brain that really matters. There are plenty of creatures with bigger brains than us, but you dont see them flying airplanes do you?

We have fastgrowing hair where they don't. Show me a mammal without hair. Even whales and dolphins have hair I think. Our hair only tells us we are mammals and not reptiles or birds. Our brain is significantly more advanced than the monkey's. A monkey's brain is more or less a fat limbic system...

As for the metal implants, what about all of those people with pacemakers, and artificial knees and hips?

In humans we must use hi-tech alloys like surgical steel, and we can use gold and sterling silver, and there are even people who react to these metals too. If you were a monkey they could have used iron or bronce for that matter.

Our behind and face are the furriest places on a human? What about arm hair and chest hair and back hair and leg hair and well other hair?

First of all, it was a joke. Second; us having hair the way we do only indicates that we are mammals. Evolution theory is racistic, stupid and, well, a lie.

And just for the record, we do not have a tongue bone

Yes, indeed, we do have a tongue bone. It's called os hyoideum in Latin, and is important for us to being able to speek and articulate. Hey you can even brake it... Go to Grey's anatomy to learn more about this sweet horse shoe shaped bone that's called lingual bone in English: www.yahooligans.com...

Blessings,
Mikromarius