Ancient Astronauts Evidence

Everytime I look at ATS I see new "Evolution vs. Creationism" discussions going on. The reason for this is that neither are entirely true and are missing a vital link: The Ancient Astronaut Theory or the Paleocontact Theory or the Starseed Theory. This is the theory able to combine, synthesize and merge the religion vs. science debate in a coherent way. Otherwise the discussion that has been raging since hundreds of years will be raging for another hundred years.

Ancient Astronaut theory shows that both evolution and creation are true and not opposites as proclaimed by society.

What you you guys think?

[edit on 30-11-2007 by Skyfloating]

i don't believe macro evolution is possible, anyway. micro yes, macro, no.
so i have less problems with the AAT than evolution theory, and i am inclined to think the AAT wasn't evidence of our creation but evidence of other creations besides us.

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Still cant be sure if that one huge overwhelming flood did in fact happen or not. Some of us "need" it to have happened because it would explain a lot of things.

It did happen, it just was not a world wide flood that covered all the Earth. Some new research.

www.sciencedaily

The flood believed to be behind the Noah's Ark myth kick-started European agriculture, according to new research by the Universities of Exeter, UK and Wollongong, Australia. New research assesses the impact of the collapse of the North American (Laurentide) Ice Sheet, 8000 years ago. The results indicate a catastrophic rise in global sea level led to the flooding of the Black Sea and drove dramatic social change across Europe.

This event is now widely believed to be behind the various folk myths that led to the biblical Noah's Ark story. Archaeological records show that around this time there was a sudden expansion of farming and pottery production across Europe, marking the end of the Mesolithic hunter-gatherer era and the start of the Neolithic.

"People living in what is now southeast Europe must have felt as though the whole world had flooded. This could well have been the origin of the Noah's Ark story. Entire coastal communities must have been displaced, forcing people to migrate in their thousands. As these agricultural communities moved west, they would have taken farming with them across Europe. It was a revolutionary time."

reply to post by mojo4sale


Good find mojo.

Which reminds me: Noahs Ark story can also be found on even older babylonian tablets and in much more detail than the biblical story. Which either means we have an additional source of the story or the biblical one is only a copy of the older one.

reply to post by Skyfloating


The bible is a hybridization of older religions.

reply to post by mojo4sale


Yes, Im somewhat aware of that. The question is which of the flood myths the noah story was taken from.

Hi Skyfloating, perhaps this may help you out.

en.wikipedia.org...

Lets continue with the evidence











Its best for me not to say too much about this pictures.

Ive already posted pictures pointing out the obvious. Be clear that anything anyone says about the pictures previously posted, and these, is their INTERPRETATION of it. When a debunker says "This is a religious context" thats his interpretation. When I say "these are aircraft" thats my interpretation.

Also expect someone to provide a link "proving" that these images are "a hoax". I am not sure about the second one, but I am quite certain that the first one was proven to be genuine.

Howdy Undo

This is what you wrote

to this day, we still believe they built only mudbrick ziggurats with simple interiors, during sumer, when it was obvious from their own texts (found some 4700 years later), that at least Enki and Enlil had temples composed entirely of metal, and in the case of Enki's temple, it could float on the water, hover, give advice, had a door that could snatch a man, roared, shone so brightly it lit up the area, had an interior that was a tangled thread beyond understanding, and so forth)

You seem to think it is real, I challenged you for the source, you posted a quote and I put up the entire text up.

From that text it is clear it is mythical, there were no* floating metal temples in Sumeria - except in mythical text. Which was my point.

Clear?

Not real, mythical

*as far as any evidence shows today!

Originally posted by Hanslune


From that text it is clear it is mythical, there were no* floating metal temples in Sumeria - except in mythical text. Which was my point.

Clear?

Not real, mythical

Ah....welcome back Hans Lune. As the heat in Saudi Arabia may be getting to you a bit, lets go far up to the freezing north...to the Eskimos to be exact...who´s legends also speak of flying and floating metal houses.

Its ALL "mythical" isnt it?

Imagine people digging up remains of our civilzation in 10 000 years (not much will be left of it) and seeing reports about planes and then saying "ah, its only mythical. They were too stupid to know what flying is about". That would be the union of arrogance and ignorance, wouldnt it.

Ah Skyfloating

Imagine people digging up remains of our civilzation in 10 000 years (not much will be left of it)

Hans: Actually a great deal will - we've been over that before, remember, that and the geosynch satellites and the remains on the Moon.

and seeing reports about planes and then saying "ah, its only mythical.

Hans: Nope they'd find all kinds of high tech remains, even airfields in drier parts of the world - not to mention all the toys. Why is that so hard for you to accept - still demonstrating your closed mind?

How much high tech has been found supporting these myths of flying temples? How much hard evidence, any at all? So let me repeat my question, if Sumerian mythology is actually real stuff - give me an example of actual mythology? I mean they must have had some.

Originally posted by Hanslune
Nope they'd find all kinds of high tech remains, even airfields in drier parts of the world - not to mention all the toys. Why is that so hard for you to accept - still demonstrating your closed mind?

After 10 000 years? You gotta be kidding. Where are the remains of the World Trade Center? Where is the evidence it ever existed? Alright, after 6 years you might still find some rubble and a piece of molten plane, but after 100 years? Doubtful. After 1000 years? I dont know. After 10 000 years? No way.

if Sumerian mythology is actually real stuff - give me an example of actual mythology? I mean they must have had some.

Theres fiction writing and non-fiction writing and even the mix of two. But even the fictitious writing is always based on something known. "Mythology" is often a label given to stories that dont match what the "primitive ancients" were supposed to have been.

They started out by saying that ancient men before 2000 B.C. were a bunch of gibbering idiots who couldnt even recognize the sky. But that date is being pushed further back more and more and the recognition of ancient man knowing a bit more than first proposed should be becoming evident even to you.

Our age is not the highest level of advancement there has ever been. There have been civilizations here and elsewhere in the universe since billions of years.

To believe that "we are the only ones" and "at the highest stage" I find pretty dumb. Sorry.

skyfloating
you have still not posted a shred of evidence that supports your personal; belief
you have turned down the opportunity to debate your personal belief

all of your arguments are based on straw man principles

you have speculated and made statements that clearly show you don't understand the first thing about ancient history and yet pretend that you think you know what went on then

Your claim that anyone ever said that ancient men before 2000 B.C. were a bunch of gibbering idiots who couldnt even recognize the sky is completely unsupported and the evidence (which you aren' aware of) clearly proves otherwise.

Theres only one person characterised in this thread as being a gibbering idiot and we don't need to go very far to see who that is.

you have no evidence for your personal belief.

all of your responses to evidence that shows you the truth have been ad hominem

Tell me did you used to believe in God and all his little angels and since realising you were conned now have a large power vacuum in your head that you desperately need to fill with anything you can get to fit.

at some point are you going to research this subject yourself or are you going to continue relying on Daniken, Sitchin, Childress and people who believe in little green men and who are making money from their believers gullibility to spoon feed you erroneous information because you're incapable of feeding yourself

this thread is going nowhere fast
its in the wrong forum
its all information you have posted before and seen debunked
you have an agenda and you are trying to push it on people who know more about this entire field than you do
you lost all your credibility before you started it when your previous thread was closed by the mods because you were clearly trolling
you're still trolling
and not doing a particularly good job of it



now we gave you a few days to yourself to see if you were going to make a valid contribution to this thread and you completely failed to post anything at all.
that more than anything else shows your modus operandi

get a life

reply to post by kerkinana walsky


Waging this personal attack on me does not change the fact that you have failed to answer several rebuttals and questions directed toward you in posts on previous pages.

nice try.

then you are delusional
you have not asked me any question that I haven't answered. Refusing to accept answers does not mean that I havent answered them

see once again thats another ad hominem straw man argument

reply to post by kerkinana walsky


page 10 contains (among many, many others and other threads) questions posed to you that were conviniently left unanswered by you.

Ive had it with your insults now though.

your inability to deduce that I have already answered your relevant questions is very telling. your lack of any credible evidence is an insult to anyone with a brain who you expect to take a thing you say seriously.
do you get used to people getting bored of listening to your ravings ?

Originally posted by kerkinana walsky
you have still not posted a shred of evidence that supports your personal; belief

I have posted hundreds of indicators supporting my view of the times when the Gods roamed the earth and will continue to do so.

you have turned down the opportunity to debate your personal belief

Again, I am willing to debate it, no matter how often you claim that I am not. What do you think Ive been doing in this thread?

all of your arguments are based on straw man principles
you have speculated and made statements that clearly show you don't understand the first thing about ancient history and yet pretend that you think you know what went on then

so as my view differs from yours, you respond with "you dont understand the first thing!". As usual, a great contribution to the thread.

Theres only one person characterised in this thread as being a gibbering idiot and we don't need to go very far to see who that is.

calling me a gibbering idiot is only the hundredth insult I have heard from you. Apart from the fact that this is against the terms and conditions of ATS and will get you banned, it is also a sign of insecurity and not knowing how to debate with civility and grace.

you have no evidence for your personal belief.

Evidence provided throughout this thread. Apart from that, its not really my "belief" but a possibility I consider...an option.

Tell me did you used to believe in God and all his little angels and since realising you were conned now have a large power vacuum in your head that you desperately need to fill with anything you can get to fit.

More insult. Any MODS out there reading this?

at some point are you going to research this subject yourself or are you going to continue relying on Daniken, Sitchin, Childress and people who believe in little green men and who are making money from their believers gullibility to spoon feed you erroneous information because you're incapable of feeding yourself.

You have repeatedly stated that you think people who believe in extraterrestrials are either stupid, childish or frauds. Interestingly though, you willingly and knowingly socialize with them by visiting ATS.

this thread is going nowhere fast
its in the wrong forum

The Forums name is "Ancient and Lost Civilizations" which is exactly the topic I am referring to. Just not the way you would like to police and dictate it. Your jumping from thread to thread debunking ANY alternative claim made shows that you are not in it for discussion or learning but only to re-affirm your fixed worldview.

its all information you have posted before and seen debunked

Wrong. Most of the stuff I wrote in this thread I never wrote before in ANY other thread. Knowingly making false statements (as you have done continually throughout this thread), is also against the T & C.

you have an agenda and you are trying to push it on people who know more about this entire field than you do

I am asking questions about our past and inviting discussion on it. Obviously to your dismay.

you lost all your credibility before you started it

More insult (yawns)

when your previous thread was closed by the mods because you were clearly trolling
you're still trolling
and not doing a particularly good job of it

get a life

Since when is presenting questions and indicators of alternative history "trolling"? And how does this relate to "getting a life"?

Originally posted by kerkinana walsky
your inability to deduce that I have already answered your relevant questions is very telling. your lack of any credible evidence is an insult to anyone with a brain who you expect to take a thing you say seriously.
do you get used to people getting bored of listening to your ravings ?

Oh yeah? Why not show me exactly where you answered the questions I posed to you on page 10?

We can find camp fire sites from 1.5 million years ago...you're trying to tell me that a civilization more technologically advanced than our own would leave no traces?