What do you think about "ancient aliens debunked"?

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 29 2013 @ 11:04 PM
link   
reply to post by CrikeyMagnet
 


The evidence presented may have other explanations, and those explanations may be more "reasonable"... but that does NOT make those correct.

So the 'evidence' you refer to is merely evidence that something happened, not evidence that aliens caused it. And since there are more 'reasonable' – meaning probable – explanations for the same happening, there is not a shred of justification – meaning evidence – for believing they did. There is no basis for even continuing to entertain the thought. Life is too short to waste on barren speculation.


A "veritable certainty" like what? Speed of light? Mr. Tsoukalous' idea that it's all the result of Aliens?

The speed of light is as close to an absolute certainty as anything can be. I have no idea who Mr. Tsoukalous is, and I don't think I want to know.


It's not at all about what I believe or don't believe... it's about the process of "debunking", and about what you can PROVE. I suggest what is acceptable as 100% proof to you leaves plenty of loopholes and assumptions.

It seems your hostility to science is based on a muddled conception of what it is and how it works.

There is no such thing as absolute proof. There are only falsifiable statements that have so far resisted the most diligent efforts at falsification. The value of the speed of light is one such statement. The existence of ancient monuments is another. The claim that aliens built them is not.

If you wish to put such a claim on a falsifiable basis, you have to invent an experiment to test it. Find the correct X for the statement 'X is true if, and only if, aliens built the Pyramids.' Or if that's too hard, try for 'If X is true, then the probability that aliens built the Pyramids is significantly higher than the probability of any other explanation of how they were built.' Then devise an experiment to demonstrate unambiguously that X is true.

Too hard for you? Well, this is exactly how the accuracy of radiometric dating and the existence of extrasolar planets were established. It's the scientific method. And until aliens-did-it enthusiasts can bring something equally substantial to the table, only fellow enthusiasts and the credulous will find any merit in their claims.

edit on 29/5/13 by Astyanax because: of a D.




posted on May, 29 2013 @ 11:19 PM
link   
Not worth it.

edit on 29/5/13 by Astyanax because: it's not worth it.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 12:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
So you are in favour of a mass of 'grey', everything is possible, nothing proved or disproved?

AA didn't really need to be 'debunked' it never got out of the idea stage for the simple reason of lacking evidence to support it.

Interesting you couldn' come up with a single thing in archaeology that would meet your criteria. Is that the correct reading of your reply?
edit on 29/5/13 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)


I love the grey. I live in the grey. The grey is my business and business is good.

The correct reading of my reply is that my approach to matters of 100% proof is to laugh about them with disdain (Ha ha haaa!) and start looking for loopholes. It is also that I'm not going to start throwing out examples of what meets my criteria for proof. That would be a collosal waste of time. I've pretty clearly stated what I consider 100% proof.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 12:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


I'll answer you with a much favoured Newfie quote: "Lord Tunderin' Jesus!"

You're trying to say there's no absolute proof, and in the same sentence say that alien intervention is completely bunk. Do you see how you're arguing against yourself? How can you purport to be a person of science, or have a clue how it works, and yet hold two so diametrically opposed concepts as inviolable? Do you believe in science, or strongly held belief without room for movement. You. Can't. Have. Both.

Going to bed. 16+ hour work day will do that.

Editing to add: On a side note. Take your condescending attitude elsewhere, mate. Then read the discussion again, and figure out exactly what this discussion is about. Hint: It's about the validity of "debunking" in any discussion that dares to approach science.
edit on 30/5/2013 by CrikeyMagnet because: Just didn't want to leave it alone without...



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 12:47 AM
link   
reply to post by CrikeyMagnet
 


You're trying to say there's no absolute proof...

Yes.


...and in the same sentence say that alien intervention is completely bunk.

No.


Do you see how you're arguing against yourself?

I am not.


Take your condescending attitude elsewhere, mate.

Would you have preferred it if I treated your argument with naked contempt? You can hardly expect them to be treated with respect; it's nonsense.

edit on 30/5/13 by Astyanax because: of nonsense.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 11:44 AM
link   
didnt need to be debunked.that guys only there for the money.

god n aliens r an offense for human beings n all livin things in this planet.

our ancestors survived wit the help of animals,plants,etc.how we thank them?givin credit to god n aliens n noah fairy tales.

how idiots r we?



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by CrikeyMagnet
"Debunked" is very absolute. (Yes, I know "Very absolute" is redundant and unnecessary since absolute is all "boolean".)

In my mind, anyone who considers any topic "debunked" without knowing ABSOLUTELY every piece of evidence and having first-hand knowledge of the concept is debunked in the head.

In fact, I hereby sue for discontinuation (and cessation of all uses of) the term debunked. It is needless and it is rarely, if ever, used correctly.

In order to correctly debunk something, you must first thoroughly discredit every facet of the idea, and render it unusable, even in modified form in conjunction with any other concept, ever, in the entire future of the universe, anywhere, and everywhere, no matter what, double-sealed and stamped, and no returnsies.

So no. It's not debunked. Show me an unbroken fossil record. Show me a family tree traced back to infinity. Show me the lack of any civilization in the universe which is now or ever has been capable of space flight, benevolent intervention, malevolent intervention, genetic manipulation, and the occasional levitation of rocks, and I'll give you your "debunked". However, anything short of outright refuting of all of those points will constitute "not debunked".

You stand to win 8 letters. I demand a universe of knowledge in return. (That's with me not actually believing in the whole Ancient Alien thing either... yet accepting it as a plausibility.)




Emphasis (underline) added.


LMFAO



Awesome post. And I am completely stealing that (underlined part) for my signature.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by CrikeyMagnet

Originally posted by Hanslune
So you are in favour of a mass of 'grey', everything is possible, nothing proved or disproved?

AA didn't really need to be 'debunked' it never got out of the idea stage for the simple reason of lacking evidence to support it.

Interesting you couldn' come up with a single thing in archaeology that would meet your criteria. Is that the correct reading of your reply?
edit on 29/5/13 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)


I love the grey. I live in the grey. The grey is my business and business is good.

The correct reading of my reply is that my approach to matters of 100% proof is to laugh about them with disdain (Ha ha haaa!) and start looking for loopholes. It is also that I'm not going to start throwing out examples of what meets my criteria for proof. That would be a collosal waste of time. I've pretty clearly stated what I consider 100% proof.


So basically you cannot point to any actual examples.......I wonder why that might be?

Let me just for fun....... I would say the evidence for the pantheon being built by the Romans is conclusive but can we dismiss a claim that it was actually built by aliens 10,500 years ago. - based on your criteria?
edit on 30/5/13 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 11:16 PM
link   
In short No.

While AA Theory is full of holes and the History Channel show of the same name is a complete waste of time, there is still some pretty interesting indications of Alien contact in the distant past. Just because there is no evidence you can hold in your hands does not make the extensive oral accounts of alien contact any less plausible. To close your mind off to any and all possibilities is the height of human arrogance, and seems to be rampant on here with certain members with high post counts, mainly spent trying to tell everyone else how stupid they all are.

Truth is there is no reason to think an alien race who made contact with our ancient ancestors would leave behind any tangible evidence of their visit aside from oral tellings and retellings passed down by people who weren't capable of explaining exactly what they saw so instead they labeled it in terms they could more relate to. The Hopi Indians, the Aborigines, event the Egyptians, the list goes on and on, to dismiss their accounts as primitive superstition is to do a disservice to our ancestors.

But they did leave behind something. And that was knowledge. Knowledge which they gave to our ancient ancestors in the form of mathematics and astronomical data.
edit on 30-5-2013 by OpenMinds83 because: add



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by OpenMinds83
 


There is still some pretty interesting indications of Alien contact in the distant past. Just because there is no evidence you can hold in your hands does not make the extensive oral accounts of alien contact any less plausible.

What oral accounts are you referring to? Myths and legends? Ancient poems, sagas, folk-tales? They are not accounts of contact with aliens. They explain the events they describe very differently, usually as the work of supernatural powers, or sometimes of men with great powers of virtue, strength or magic. These tales are reinterpreted by enthusiasts as ancient-alien visitations, but that is not how the tales themselves tell it.

It is true that, here and there among the world's scattered tribes, there exist or did exist some folk-tales about animals, people or gods who came from the Moon or Sun or some other astronomical body. Given the fertility of the human imagination, it would be very surprising if such tales didn't exist. There is no reason to take them any more literally than tales about angels and devils, or mermaids and trolls, because they contain no corroborating evidence. If you wish to contest this, you must supply the evidence – but you have already admitted that there is none.


Truth is there is no reason to think an alien race who made contact with our ancient ancestors would leave behind any tangible evidence of their visit aside from oral tellings and retellings passed down by people who weren't capable of explaining exactly what they saw so instead they labeled it in terms they could more relate to.

But they did leave behind something. Knowledge which they gave to our ancient ancestors in the form of mathematics and astronomical data.

Very well. You admit there is no 'tangible' – that is, material – evidence of alien visitation in ancient times. That's good – it disposes of all the cave paintings of 'space helmets', statues taken to be representations of spacesuits, carved sarcophagus lids and the rest of the common dross of these debates. But then, what are we left with? Some stories that could be interpreted in a variety of ways, always including at least one that is more plausible than the ancient-alien hypothesis. That, and a claim of knowledge transfer which you cannot, of course, substantiate.

We are left, in a word, with nothing.

*


A word before you go. If you wish to believe that human beings encountered intelligent aliens on this world in ancient times, there is nothing in the foregoing – or indeed, on this thread – preventing you from doing so. It may very well be that such a thing happened, unlikely as it is. However, there is no evidence to convince anyone that it did.

If such evidence were ever found, I should be eager to hear of it; it would be the most exciting discovery in the world to me. In its absence, however, I am compelled to face the facts. You should try it some time; it's bracing.



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 12:07 AM
link   
Either way you look at, religion and aliens are just crutches people use for excuses on how they live their lives. Until we build a time machine no one will ever really know what happened in our ancient past.



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 12:52 AM
link   
I love the people that put those here with interesting theories down saying that there is no hard evidence or proof. They tell you to face reality, that your ideas are highly improbable and unlikely, that you suffer from delusions and that you are gullible and want to believe so hard in something, that you can't see the simple truth.

Keep in mind, that these same people told us that...we can't fly, the earth is flat, the earth is the center of the solar system, the moon is made of cheese, the liver circulates your blood and not your heart, protein is the key to heredity and not that simple DNA stuff, the atom is the smallest thing in existence, the earth is only 6000 years old, and on and on and on...because? Well there was no hard evidence of course! Those scientists and laymen, like us, who said they didn't agree and had better ideas were persecuted, ridiculed, belittled, ruined, laughed at and sometimes jailed and tortured and killed.

Keep an open mind please and...
Carry on!



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
Let me just for fun....... I would say the evidence for the pantheon being built by the Romans is conclusive but can we dismiss a claim that it was actually built by aliens 10,500 years ago. - based on your criteria?
edit on 30/5/13 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)


As the Pantheon was built during recorded history, I think the answer is pretty simple. The same could not necessarily be said for the Egyptian pyramids, despite the grade-school explanation we've all seen.



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 01:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


I think you "Mind firmly closed" really says it all. Your arguments hold no water, but you seem to have a high post count because you just keep going. You aren't willing to accept a viewpoint that isn't your own, which suggests to me that you might be a particular type of engineer. I work with a bunch of engineers, and they are an interesting breed. Great people... but my profession requires me to have a bit of a more fluid view of systems.

There is no argument that will crack that nut of yours, so I'm not going to continue cracking at it. Mind firmly closed. Believe whatever magical conclusions you want. When the absolutes you cling to are proven wrong, I'll be over here, completely unsurprised.
edit on 31/5/2013 by CrikeyMagnet because: tiny screen... tiny keyboard



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 02:03 AM
link   
reply to post by CrikeyMagnet
 


I think you "Mind firmly closed" really says it all.

People who lose arguments with me often say that. I keep that line there to cheer them up.


Your arguments hold no water...

In that case you should find it easy to refute them. I note that you haven't. Instead, you've been attacking a straw man of your own making – something about how I refuse to admit that Earth might have been visited by aliens in ancient times. That is not the position I hold; it's the position you think I hold.


You aren't willing to accept a viewpoint that isn't your own...

Have you shown yourself ready and willing to accept a viewpoint that isn't your own? I notice you're still clinging to your absurd ideas about the criteria of falsification in spite of being shown, more than once, by different posters, where you go wrong. You have a nerve telling me my mind is closed!


...which suggests to me that you might be a particular type of engineer. I work with a bunch of engineers, and they are an interesting breed.

I suppose you've been asking them to make water flow uphill without using a pump or something like that.



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 05:55 AM
link   
You have won nothing. Your demands for proof are clinging to an argument that you are participating in by yourself. Is this some kind of patented debate approach that you're patting yourself on the back for?

Show me where I tried to convince you that aliens have done anything except not have their existence ruled out. Note that the "lack of evidence" is not conclusive "evidence of lack". Failing that (as you have already failed) show me proof that you can prove anything Is 100% false with no way for anyone to directly observe it.

And don't simply return to your demand that I give examples. That was just ignorant when you started pushing it.

I'm all in for having my mind changed. You're just obviously not up for the job.



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 06:53 AM
link   
reply to post by CrikeyMagnet
 


Show me where I tried to convince you that aliens have done anything except not have their existence ruled out.

We were discussing the merits of the ancient-alien hypothesis, not what aliens may or may not have done.


Note that the "lack of evidence" is not conclusive "evidence of lack".

Noted. Carl Sagan had some illuminating things to say about that tired old saw.


Failing that (as you have already failed) show me proof that you can prove anything Is 100% false with no way for anyone to directly observe it.

You poor fellow! You're still wrestling with your big straw dummy.

Why don't you re-read some of my earlier posts and work out what I'm really saying, rather than trying to respond to what you think I'm saying?


And don't simply return to your demand that I give examples.

Are you hallucinating? When did I make any such demand of you?



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


There is often truth buried behind every myth. Discount the words of our ancestors all you like. Its your right to do so. But closing your mind to every possibility because YOU don't see enough evidence doesn't mean something didn't take place. It doesn't mean you are correct.

Oh and I am firmly rooted in reality, once again the attitude of superiority shines through. The facts clearly show that our ancestors came in contact with things they couldn't fully understand. These things tend to resemble what we would call ET contact. Truth is there are many interesting accounts of lights in the sky and contact in ancient times. I am not saying that it definitely happened I am however saying that the POSSIBILTY exists.

Something can only be, and I despise this word, Debunked when every facet of said theory has been thoroughly dismissed which so far has not been satisfactorily done. Granted many things can be easily explained there are the small % of which cannot and have not.

So in closing you go right ahead and keep your superiority complex. It fits you nicely. I, however, will keep my mind open to all possibilities until they are completely explained away. Truth is this universe and our history is far more mysterious than people like you care to admit. Its not your fault really, its the materialistic conditioning that has taken place on the majority of the population. And many are too weak to break free of it. Have a nice day.
edit on 31-5-2013 by OpenMinds83 because: spelling



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by amazing
I love the people that put those here with interesting theories down saying that there is no hard evidence or proof. They tell you to face reality, that your ideas are highly improbable and unlikely, that you suffer from delusions and that you are gullible and want to believe so hard in something, that you can't see the simple truth.

Keep in mind, that these same people told us that...we can't fly, the earth is flat, the earth is the center of the solar system, the moon is made of cheese, the liver circulates your blood and not your heart, protein is the key to heredity and not that simple DNA stuff, the atom is the smallest thing in existence, the earth is only 6000 years old, and on and on and on...because? Well there was no hard evidence of course! Those scientists and laymen, like us, who said they didn't agree and had better ideas were persecuted, ridiculed, belittled, ruined, laughed at and sometimes jailed and tortured and killed.

Keep an open mind please and...
Carry on!


All of the above is what is referred to as straw man arguments.

The moronic list above not only contains several errors of ignorance (myth of the flat Earth,) but also doesn't list a single thing that has ever been asserted by science.

Such baseless arguments are the meat and potatoes of the AA believers, since thay have no other avenues by which to put forth their inane and unevidenced beliefs.

Harte



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 08:36 AM
link   
AA theory itself is mostly flawed. Aliens would not travel this far just to build megaliths. However the possibility of alien contact in our past is very probable.

Personally I have travelled to Chichen Itza. I have spent time with the descendants of the Mayan people and listened intently to their legends and oral history. They explained to me how Kukulkan was described as a tall white man with blue eyes who did not resemble the people he ruled over. Which caused great descent amongst his people and even a failed assassination attempt. Kukulkan was said to have knowledge of things that the locals did not, mathematics and astronomy to name a few. The legends described to me in my time there leaves open the possibility, at least to me, that alien contact and possibly even influence took place in certain corners of the world in the distant past. Unless you have been there and talked to their descendants then you cannot dismiss the notion completely.

So your notions of "straw man" arguments and such only make you look like petulant children who want everyone to think they are right and everyone else is wrong.





new topics
top topics
 
2
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join