Ancient Aliens Debunked (Full Length Movie)

page: 3
22
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Hardstepah
 


I'm with you on this one! I hope to have time to view the entire 3+ hour documentary, however, there are too many places, artifacts, etc., and Indian STORIES which have been passed down for many, MANY generations that point to ancient visitation from other worlds. I just hope they return while I'm still alive to prove they really do exist! I'm hoping that's what going to happen 12-21-12!




posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Liquesence

Yeah, i know the method of *how* things are actually and supposedly debunked.

In this instance, I am asking for certain examples, such as which are tested and HOW, to those of us unable ot unwilling to watch a 3 hour video.

It's really not that hard to provide a few, and most good thread offer a few to peak interest and entice people to check out the vids.

Obviously, that's a bit too difficult for you to do.

Good day.


As per my previous posts, if you even bothered to attempt reading them, EVERY SINGLE TALKING POINT made by the Ancient Aliens series, on the topics discussed in this film, are covered, discussed, and explained.

For those of you too lazy to even go to the Companion Website , the points covered in the film on every single detail discussed regarding them, counterpoints and discussion is made on the topics of:


Megalithic sites:
Puma Punku, The Pyramids, Baalbek, Incan sites, Easter Island.

Ancient artifacts:
Pacal’s rocket, The Nazca Lines, Tolima “fighter jets”, Egyptian “light bulb”, Ufo’s in ancient art, The crystal skulls

Ancient text issues:
Ezekiel’s Wheel, Ancient nuclear warfare, Vimana’s, Anunnaki, Nephilim, Misc. and conclusion


Once again, you can GO to the website and each topic covered quite thoroughly in the video, is ALSO reflected in textual format, with citations, and supporting documentation.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Liquesence

Originally posted by FaceLikeTheSun

Originally posted by FissionSurplus
Like many of the other posters, presenting a video with no summary or views of your own makes me less likely to watch it.

I think ancient archaeology is all about interpretation. Anything found that is not readily explainable can have a myriad of interpretations as to what it is and how it got there.

I'm betting, without wasting even 15 minutes of my time, that the video is 3 hours of somebody's interpretation of archaeological findings that they say is more true than the Ancient Aliens theory.

When you as a poster bother to spend the time to explain your stance and the featured video, I will take the time to watch your video.


This is a key point to the video. The AAT people don't give all te facts or twist the facts to make te assumption for AAT sound more plausible than it really is.


My goodness, can you give *ONE* example of this????


Rather than me wasting time to type it all out why don't you watch 10 minutes of the video or better yet, go to the website to see the transcript and source material?



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by FaceLikeTheSun
 

How does one "debunk" a TV show that asks questions? How is that done, exactly? I watched them all. When facts were stated, they were established facts. When theories were presented, they were called "theory." So how des this youtube video debunk that? Curious minds want to know.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by FaceLikeTheSun
 


Too funny. Then explain to me how in the world SOOOO many cultures around the world that couldn't possibly have had contact with each other would draw the same thing? Astronaut looking beings when they didn't exist here on earth? I ask this because as others have stated, I'm not watching a 3 hour movie that's (odd's are) complete b.s.. But that's just my opinion. You're free to your own as well. Good day.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by FaceLikeTheSun
 

How does one "debunk" a TV show that asks questions? How is that done, exactly? I watched them all. When facts were stated, they were established facts. When theories were presented, they were called "theory." So how des this youtube video debunk that? Curious minds want to know.


That's the thing. The Ancient Aliens show stated many several sundry things as FACT, when in fact, they were NOT.

That's where this video comes into play; examining with extremely thorough attention to detail everything stated as "fact" in the series, as well as addressing many of the questions that supposedly hinge on these erroneous and sometimes blatantly false and glaringly untrue "facts".

The Companion Website to the film has all this in textual format with links listed and clickable on the front page.



Originally posted by CrashUnderride
reply to post by FaceLikeTheSun
 


Too funny. Then explain to me how in the world SOOOO many cultures around the world that couldn't possibly have had contact with each other would draw the same thing? Astronaut looking beings when they didn't exist here on earth? I ask this because as others have stated, I'm not watching a 3 hour movie that's (odd's are) complete b.s.. But that's just my opinion. You're free to your own as well. Good day.


Actually, odds are, since no one has any actual real proof that space aliens have ever visited this planet, that everything attributed to space aliens is in fact, just the work of people.

The video explains all this quite very thoroughly and leaves no room for doubt on the topic, but, since you've proclaimed to the world in an open forum how lazy you are in refusing to watch even a small section of the film, much less the whole thing, I suspect you'll remain ignorant to the very concise, detailed, and thorough explanations found in the film.

Science to the Left, Ancient Aliens on the Right:


This video is an example of the third frame down on the "Science" side: Takes account of all new discoveries.
In this case, the Ancient Aliens premise is being treated like a 'new discovery' and being taken into account, and examined thoroughly.
Ancient Aliens, however, does not stand up to the thorough examination and fails on all counts presented.

edit on 28-9-2012 by Druscilla because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by mark1167
I love these well put together, thought out, researched threads. " I watched a video on you tube and this is the way it is."

Dude seriously.


This is basically it. /thread



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   
Let's do a quick survey: How many ATS members who have watched three seasons of "Ancient Aliens," clocking in at 60+ hours think that three hours watching a video that debunks the AAT is a waste of precious time?



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by thektotheg

Originally posted by mark1167
I love these well put together, thought out, researched threads. " I watched a video on you tube and this is the way it is."

Dude seriously.


This is basically it. /thread


Way to summarily dismiss something you haven't even examined.


Seems a number of members have the ATS motto backwards in preferring to EMBRACE IGNORANCE.

Good luck with all that.

Keep closing your eyes and plugging your ears. Maybe one day, whatever it is you believe in might somehow magically happen.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xdream
reply to post by Hardstepah
 


I'm with you on this one! I hope to have time to view the entire 3+ hour documentary, however, there are too many places, artifacts, etc., and Indian STORIES which have been passed down for many, MANY generations that point to ancient visitation from other worlds. I just hope they return while I'm still alive to prove they really do exist! I'm hoping that's what going to happen 12-21-12!


Actually when it comes to the claims about the Vedic text etc you might disappointed to find out where the AAT in regards to the Vedic traditions actually comes from.

Secondly, there is a worldview that explains the "sky gods" but you're certainly not going to like it. It's found in Biblical Christianity. Go read Genesis 6. The point is, they're not aliens from another planet...although in truth, it's entirely possible that alien species exist. But the "evidence" used to support it for the AAT are a far stretch to reality. Nevertheless, ancient myths, stories, folklore etc come from somewhere. Again, go read Genesis 6.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Druscilla
 



Not sure that's strictly true re science and pseudo-science. Galleo just 500 years ago is a good example, we now know the earth isn't the centre of the universe yet he was treated as a heretic by those "scientists" of the day. Now, you'll say, yes but we've refined our scientific techniques and also the general discovery process plus also we now use technology to prove something. The technology of the day only allows you to prove as much as technology will allow. For example, theoretical physics may be considered a pseudo-science as a great many of the claims are just that, claims that can be mathematically proven but not able to be tested for.

The way I see it, the big problem with ancient aliens is that a) the guys try and present things as if they are definitely true which we cannot realistically know whether they are. For example, how can we know for real how ancient civilisations knew that Sirius was a twin star? We can postulate that they knew because of years actually scrap that, centuries of observation because that seems the most "reasonable" argument to the scientific mind. The key word being reasonable obviously which you'll probably now use to say yes but we've reasoned that must be the case. It may be but equally, it may not be and could be there was an alien presence. Neither is fact.
b) there is exaggeration to emphasise a point. Therefore, instead of saying large, it turns into massive or unbelievable.
c) They go too much into conjecture rather than staying closer to factually curious things. e.g. saying something looks like the Large Hadron Collider. There's loads of things that do!!

In a way it is such a shame as it means that, we often do not get the greatest minds to go near ideas such as highly advanced ancient civilisations given the above, they do not want to be tarred with the same brush.

Whilst I'm not a full believer of aliens visiting or not, I do know that our concept of the reality we live in is not the full picture. It can't be, as we think of things linearly, ie in terms of time because the universe is expanding, however, there's the age old question of what came before which if you take it to it's logical conclusion must mean that our understanding of our reality must be flawed. Yet, we as at most points in the history of mankind think that we're close to a universal understanding of reality and our world/universe.......... the quote "there's nothing more to discover in physics" was made by Lord Kelvin at the beginning of the 20th century. How wrong!!



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by csa981
 


I agree that our reality is bigger than we understand it to be. I think the biggest problem with the AA theory, as presented by Gorgio and the gang is that they are disingenuous with the information we DO know. They either omit it, or flat out say wrongful information to support their claim. That's probably why people don't want to go there. But as myself and Driscilla have stated, this film features an ancient language scholar named Dr. Mike Heiser. He has done some amazing work and is even the chief language editor for the Logos Bible Software. He is as credible as they come when it comes to ancient languages.

The issue is, people aren't willing to verify or test the claims made by the AAT. That's all Chris White did in this video. The findings were quite startling though.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 06:25 PM
link   


Way to summarily dismiss something you haven't even examined.
reply to post by Druscilla
 


How do you know I haven't examined it? I've examined this whole subject from both sides for years. Put in my own research and looked at both sides of the argument.There is nothing new in this video I haven't heard before. This whole subject is so redundant, like many others on ATS that have been rehashed and argued over for years. We can all take sides and play our little game of who's right and who's wrong and blindly support people who never use the search engine to examine a subject that has been beaten to death through hundreds of threads over the years. There, has so far in this thread, been absolutely no new information brought forward that changes anything.
So flame away. I hope whatever status (future mod) your looking for on ATS will one day magically happen. Remember the more stars and flags you have means your smarter and better than everyone else.
Good luck with that.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by mark1167



Way to summarily dismiss something you haven't even examined.
reply to post by Druscilla
 


How do you know I haven't examined it? I've examined this whole subject from both sides for years. Put in my own research and looked at both sides of the argument.There is nothing new in this video I haven't heard before. This whole subject is so redundant, like many others on ATS that have been rehashed and argued over for years. We can all take sides and play our little game of who's right and who's wrong and blindly support people who never use the search engine to examine a subject that has been beaten to death through hundreds of threads over the years. There, has so far in this thread, been absolutely no new information brought forward that changes anything.
So flame away. I hope whatever status (future mod) your looking for on ATS will one day magically happen. Remember the more stars and flags you have means your smarter and better than everyone else.
Good luck with that.


If you were actually a good researcher, you would be open to any information or other research that has been on the subject of your interest. I would be quite impressed if you knew every single point made in the video in debunking the AA claims.

Visit the site and take a look at all the categories and claims Chris goes into.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 06:39 PM
link   


There is nothing new in this video I haven't heard before.
reply to post by FaceLikeTheSun
 


If you were a good reader you'd see what I said. If there was anything new regarding Ancient Aliens or the debunking of particular theories I would definitely examine it for myself. Dude, this subject has been covered for so long people have been debunking it for year's. If you were a good researcher you'd have done your homework and not wasted everyone's time. We could go on and on arguing point's that have been argued over for decades. The only reason I'm here is because of your thread tittle , and as usual I get sucked into these kinds of threads hoping for something I don't already know, but I find this. And I'm only compelled to comment because I feel I've been misled.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 06:40 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by mark1167



There is nothing new in this video I haven't heard before.
reply to post by FaceLikeTheSun
 


If you were a good reader you'd see what I said. If there was anything new regarding Ancient Aliens or the debunking of particular theories I would definitely examine it for myself. Dude, this subject has been covered for so long people have been debunking it for year's. If you were a good researcher you'd have done your homework and not wasted everyone's time. We could go on and on arguing point's that have been argued over for decades. The only reason I'm here is because of your thread tittle , and as usual I get sucked into these kinds of threads hoping for something I don't already know, but I find this. And I'm only compelled to comment because I feel I've been misled.


well did you watch the movie?



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by FaceLikeTheSun

Originally posted by Xdream
reply to post by Hardstepah
 


I'm with you on this one! I hope to have time to view the entire 3+ hour documentary, however, there are too many places, artifacts, etc., and Indian STORIES which have been passed down for many, MANY generations that point to ancient visitation from other worlds. I just hope they return while I'm still alive to prove they really do exist! I'm hoping that's what going to happen 12-21-12!


Actually when it comes to the claims about the Vedic text etc you might disappointed to find out where the AAT in regards to the Vedic traditions actually comes from.

Secondly, there is a worldview that explains the "sky gods" but you're certainly not going to like it. It's found in Biblical Christianity. Go read Genesis 6. The point is, they're not aliens from another planet...although in truth, it's entirely possible that alien species exist. But the "evidence" used to support it for the AAT are a far stretch to reality. Nevertheless, ancient myths, stories, folklore etc come from somewhere. Again, go read Genesis 6.


Most of the legends that are handed down started before Christianity. How were native Americans, the Mayans, and the Dogon tribe in Africa supposed to tell the legends when they had never even heard of Christianity. Maybe it the other way around Christianity copied them.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by buster2010

Most of the legends that are handed down started before Christianity. How were native Americans, the Mayans, and the Dogon tribe in Africa supposed to tell the legends when they had never even heard of Christianity. Maybe it the other way around Christianity copied them.


Stories of common origin are discussed in the Anunnaki Section of the film, also mirrored in textual format on the companion website.


There are many similarities between these Sumerian writings and to the biblical accounts of the creation of man and Noah’s flood.

Some people think this is due to the writers of the Bible copying the earlier Sumerian writings. This is problematic because even the critics who specialize in this style of ancient literature say there is no evidence of literary borrowing[14], in fact just the opposite. They propose that they must be referring to a common source for the information.

One paper by A. Heidel, A.R. Millard and D. Damrosch concludes this way:
“Literary dependence cannot be demonstrated. Here, as in most of the parallels in the primeval history, it is considered more likely that Mesopotamian and biblical traditions are based on a common source. Some understand this common source to be a piece of more ancient literature, while others consider it the actual event.’ Hill & Walton, ‘A Survey of the Old Testament’, p. (2010).

Add to this that it is not just the Sumerian texts and the bible that are talking about the same basic story, but obvious elements of this story can be found in almost every early culture, regardless of its location.


Thus, the cases of Literary Dependence is examined and discussed where the point of Common Origin regarding such stories is represented as holding greater credence as compared to still other similar stories discussed, as well as the exampled Flood Story also already being ancient history to the Sumerians when they wrote it down themselves.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 09:53 PM
link   
OK, before anybody has a coronary about not checking the companion site...I checked the companion site. Specifically the references on Puma Punko as it was mentioned in this thread earlier. Specifically the stones used in the construction.

AA calls it granite AAD calls it sand stone or andesite. Of the three references in AAD, one was Wikipedia. While good for some stuff, I am not going to hang my hat on it. So we are down to two. A second had no link and is in Bolivia. So if some motivated AAD fan wants to go check it out of the library there, be my guest. The third I found and down loaded. A PDF file. It is over 400 pages so I used the search function as I want to go to bed tonight.

'Sandstone' yielded no results.

'Andesite' yielded no results.

'Granite' yielded results. An example: "The buildings in this complex are also set apart from the others by the care with which the white granite was selected for the walls, the superior quality of their fitted stonework, and the massive size of the stone lintels"

BTW, the Wikipedia page claims sandstone while the very reference it footnotes never says sandstone. Funny that.

So.....with that totally in depth scrutiny of the 'facts', I am not convinced AAD is above board. Rather it seems rather zealous to discount the AA T-H-E-O-R-Y.

Score one for the hair-doo'

Disclaimer: I think AA is just a theory too. Hard to 'prove' stuff that happened a 1000 years ago or longer.
edit on 28-9-2012 by ABNARTY because: sp





new topics
 
22
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join