The skeptics catch 22 when it comes to U.F.O.'s

a reply to: neutronflux

You said:

Have any proof the Sumerians weren’t taught by an actual demon?

Where do demons come from and why wouldn't they be alien?

You said:

A race of early super humans that wanted to pass their knowledge off because they knew they were dying off.

You have to provide evidence of this super human race.

You said:

Or the ruling class who generated the advances that seemed like magic to the common person were very happy to spread the propaganda they where ordained by the heavens.

Again, none of the things refute what I'm saying.

THE SUMERIANS GOT THEIR KNOWLEDGE FROM SOMEWHERE. It didn't evolve from past civilizations.

They say they learned from beings from the sky and this is in line with other civilizations.

Your post supports what I'm saying.

Thanks

a reply to: neoholographic

You

You have to provide evidence of this super human race.

Like you need to provide proof of an extraterrestrial race. And proof the technology that got then to earth exits.

You

Again, none of the things refute what I'm saying.

Yeah. This dose.

Or the ruling class who generated the advances that seemed like magic to the common person were very happy to spread the propaganda they where ordained by the heavens.

As in they were the spark of a intellectual revolution for humanity. And capitalized themselves as ordained by the heavens.

You

THE SUMERIANS GOT THEIR KNOWLEDGE FROM SOMEWHERE.

Unless they invented It for themselves out of grow and necessity. You know that does happen.

You

They say they learned from beings from the sky and this is in line with other civilizations.

And I am saying their like the thousands of rulers that falsely claimed being divine, or blessed by heaven for propaganda purposes.


You

Your post supports what I'm saying.

Uhh, no.

a reply to: neoholographic

What I am literally saying is you have myth that you constructed a narrative to suit yourself on something that might have been propaganda from a ruling class that generated some first concepts and technology for human kind to capitalize as being seen as blessed by heaven.

I believe this in my heart. But it’s really not much different telling my kid on a cold winter’s day we are blessed by God to have a warm safe home. And lucky we have the knowledge to maintain it.

There's nothing wrong with being skeptical.

In my opinion, skeptics are a necessary counter-balance.

a reply to: neutronflux

What I am literally saying is you have myth that you constructed a narrative to suit yourself on something that might have been propaganda from a ruling class that generated some first concepts and technology for human kind to capitalize as being seen as blessed by heaven.

This is no different than what the Sumerians have said. What are you debating?

You said:

Like you need to provide proof of an extraterrestrial race. And proof the technology that got then to earth exits.

You need to go back and read the thread. Your the second one to talk about "proof." I never said proof, I said I reached a conclusion based on the accumulation of evidence.

So I don't need to show how they got here and if they're extradimensional they may not need technology to get here. We're a type 0 civilization that hasn't been back to the moon in 54 years or explored planets in our own backyard like Europa and Titan, so why would I be so closed minded as to limit the technology of an advanced civilization based on our current understanding of physics?

a reply to: servovenford

Even if you don't believe in that type of occurrence doesn't mean something of some nature, not yet understood by humankind, isn't happening. Even if you don't believe in that type of occurrence doesn't mean something of some nature, not yet understood by humankind, isn't happening.

This^^^^^

I don't think you understand. There's just too much evidence that it's all been a lie. The conspiracy is not to hide the existence of extraterrestrials. It's to make people believe in it so completely that they question nothing.

Fox Mulder (X-Files) Patient 5X-13

a reply to: neoholographic

You need to go back and read the thread. Your the second one to talk about "proof." I never said proof, I said I reached a conclusion based on the accumulation of evidence.

Like you leaving this part out of my post giving context.

I believe this in my heart. But it’s really not much different telling my kid on a cold winter’s day we are blessed by God to have a warm safe home. And lucky we have the knowledge to maintain it.

Now

" I never said proof, I said I reached a conclusion based on the accumulation of evidence.

Which isn’t any more or less proof they actually developed items first seen by human kind on their own out of need, want, desire. Then the ruling class either capitalized on their subjects confusion of technology as magic from heavens. The ruling class falsely claimed bring bless to justify autocratic rule which there is a history of. Or were grateful for the knowledge and technology they developed that has to start from somewhere. Or a blend of all the above.


Your scenario relies on autocratic rulers who used the false narratives of being ordained by the heavens to justify their autocratic rule to tell the absolute truth, and not take advantage of the superstition of those they rule to maintain power.

a reply to: neoholographic

If you think about it. It’s no different then someone saying “on talent on loan from god” to justify themselves.

originally posted by: BrokenCircles
There's nothing wrong with being skeptical.

In my opinion, skeptics are a necessary counter-balance.

Yep, I debate skeptics all of the time. There's a difference between skeptics and psudoskeptics.

Truzzi attributed the following characteristics to pseudoskeptics:[5]

Denying, when only doubt has been established
Double standards in the application of criticism
The tendency to discredit rather than investigate
Presenting insufficient evidence or proof
Assuming criticism requires no burden of proof
Making unsubstantiated counter-claims
Counter-claims based on plausibility rather than empirical evidence
Suggesting that unconvincing evidence provides grounds for completely dismissing a claim

He characterized true skepticism as:[5]

Acceptance of doubt when neither assertion nor denial has been established
No burden of proof to take an agnostic position
Agreement that the corpus of established knowledge must be based on what is proved, but recognising its incompleteness
Even-handedness in requirement for proofs, whatever their implication
Accepting that a failure of a proof in itself proves nothing
Continuing examination of the results of experiments even when flaws are found

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: neoholographic

What your doing is trying to label people to belittle them for not jumping on your bandwagon of circumstantial evidence provided by artwork pushed by a ruling class to justify their positions over a superstitious uneducated lower class.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: neoholographic

What your doing is trying to label people to belittle them for not jumping on your bandwagon of circumstantial evidence provided by artwork pushed by a ruling class to justify their positions over a superstitious uneducated lower class.

What??

Did you even read what was posted?

Post the exact part that "belittle them for not jumping on the bandwagon."

I specifically said this:

This is another distinction between the skeptic and pseudoskeptic. I have debated skeptics that are okay with the fact that I have used the evidence to reach the conclusion that extraterrestrial/extradimensional visitation has occurred. They just believe their isn't enough evidence for them to reach that conclusion and I respect that.

How is respecting that they came to a different conclusion than me belittling them?

a reply to: neoholographic

You feeding your view off this guy,

Zecharia Sitchin

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Sitchin's ideas have been resoundingly rejected by scientists, academics, historians (including Sumerologists, Orientalists and Assyriologists) and anthropologists who dismiss his work as pseudoscience and pseudohistory. His work has been criticized for flawed methodology, ignoring archaeological and historical evidence, and mistranslations of ancient texts as well as for incorrect astronomical and scientific claims.[2]

a reply to: neoholographic

Why Sitchin’s Alien Ancient Astronaut Hypothesis Is Wrong

www.afrikaiswoke.com...

The Sumerian Naru Mythological literary style, the Anunnaki and History.

In my view, Sitchin may have been able to read the Ancient Astronaut Hypothesis into the Sumerian Texts by taking random separate references to the Anunnaki in the Sumerian Texts out of the context of their original narratives.

This may be important to understand how a fictional Ancient Astronaut Hypothesis was constructed once we appreciate the existence of a genre of Sumerian Literature called Naru in which anonymous authors used fictitious stories to retell significant Historical events in order to further a particular Ruler’s agenda as a form of official Sumerian Propaganda.

One of the reasons why I stopped posting here, not that I have a lot to show but I got tired of it . There's one final research I still want to post but I can't find the passion for it atm.

a reply to: neutronflux

Another strawman argument.

Show me anywhere in my post where I mentioned Zecharia Sitchin or anything about Nibiru or the 12th planet.

I'll wait..........

originally posted by: 0bserver1
One of the reasons why I stopped posting here, not that I have a lot to show but I got tired of it . There's one final research I still want to post but I can't find the passion for it atm.

It gets old. The same pseudoskeptics making the same tired arguments but it's easy to destroy their logic because they speak in absolutes. So you should post the research and ignore them.

To them, your thread is false before you even post it but there's still some really good debate on here.

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: neutronflux

Another strawman argument.

Show me anywhere in my post where I mentioned Zecharia Sitchin or anything about Nibiru or the 12th planet.

I'll wait..........

And quote where I posted claiming you did. I asked. A simple no would have sufficed.

However. Other than you “connecting” dots. Please cite the text that is conclusive proof the Sumerians didn’t developed technology and ideas on their own other than the vague “talent on loan from god”.

I’ll help you out…

Cuneiform Digital Library Interactive

cdli.ucla.edu...

And I’ll wait.

But I leave you with this little tidbit

This may be important to understand how a fictional Ancient Astronaut Hypothesis was constructed once we appreciate the existence of a genre of Sumerian Literature called Naru in which anonymous authors used fictitious stories to retell significant Historical events in order to further a particular Ruler’s agenda as a form of official Sumerian Propaganda.

www.afrikaiswoke.com...

a reply to: neutronflux

Nothing you quoted refutes anything I have said.

You're debating a strawman because you can't actually debate what I said.

It's a typical pseudoskeptic tactic. This is the title of the article you're quoting from.

Why Sitchin’s Alien Ancient Astronaut Hypothesis Is Wrong

You're debating Sitchin not me! This is because you can't refute anything that I have said.

I said there's no evidence that shows where the Sumerians knowledge to build a modern civilization came from. There's no evolution of previous modern societies to build upon like the Romans did with the Greeks or the Greeks did with the Babylonians or America did with England.

Where did this knowledge come from to go from this:




To this:






Stop debating Sitchin and try to debate me and what I actually said.

You're making me look like a psychic! You're using the typical catch 22 tactics of a pseudoskeptic. You're using Sitchen as a strawman because you can't debate or refute the things I'm saying. Where have I mentioned Sitchin or Nibiru? I'll wait.....

a reply to: neoholographic

There are strong and well studied counter arguments to what your claiming. And to question what your claiming is completely healthy and warranted.

What Archaeologists Really Think About Ancient Aliens, Lost Colonies, And Fingerprints Of The Gods

www.forbes.com... gods/amp/

Archaeologists are trained as anthropologists to recognize and celebrate the diversity of humanity, both today and in the past. Eric Cline succinctly explains this in his review, noting “pseudoarchaeologists cannot accept the fact that the mere humans might have come up with great innovations such as the domestication of plants and animals or built great architectural masterpieces such as the Sphinx all on their own; rather, they frequently seek or invoke divine, or even alien, assistance to explain how these came to be.”

You

You're debating Sitchin not me!

No. You claimed this

They say they learned from beings from the sky and this is in line with other civilizations.

So I linked to this database.

Cuneiform Digital Library Interactive

cdli.ucla.edu...

Also posted this.

However. Other than you “connecting” dots. Please cite the text that is conclusive proof the Sumerians didn’t developed technology and ideas on their own other than the vague “talent on loan from god”.



As this as context.

This may be important to understand how a fictional Ancient Astronaut Hypothesis was constructed once we appreciate the existence of a genre of Sumerian Literature called Naru in which anonymous authors used fictitious stories to retell significant Historical events in order to further a particular Ruler’s agenda as a form of official Sumerian Propaganda.

www.afrikaiswoke.com...

Since you claimed, “ They say they learned from beings from the sky and this is in line with other civilizations.” Please use the provided link to Sumerian writings to reference where they said they learned form beings from the sky, what race the Sumerians claimed they were, and what the Sumerians claimed they learned.