Ancient Astronauts Evidence

I have followed this thread, and others like it, without commenting until now.
Whilst I could never be described by any stretch of imagination as an expert on this subject, I first became aware of this subject when I first read some of the now, somewhat discredited, Von Daniken's books nearly 25 years ago.

I do not subscribe outright to the belief that we have been visited in the past by "spacemen" or "astronauts" or whatever.
I treat any such claim with an inbred scepticism.

However, I accept that there is some compelling evidence in the myths, legends, and to a lesser extent art, of numerous cultures throughout the world to suggest that it is indeed a distinct possibility.

Yes, there has been some utter nonsense written on the subject and some of the claims only help to discredit the theory, but there is also some pretty hard to argue with evidence, especially when interpreting writings from a modern day perspective.

The point I am trying to make, eventually, is that the complete lack of objectivity displayed by some astounds me.
It seems that some people, from both sides of the arguement, absolutely refuse to even consider the opposing viewpoint despite some compelling supportive evidence.

I suspect that there are personal agenda's being persued rather than attempting to enter into a reasoned debate with an open mind.

If I had to get off the pot and give a personal opinion, something I'm not usually reluctant to do , I would suggest that the similarities in numerous culture's myth's and the abundance of them, suggests that it is very possible that we were visited by someone / thing in the distant past and that they inter-acted with earth's inhabitants of the day.
I also think that some of the more detailed elaborations on this are simply the result of over active imaginations. Others, complete and utter nonsense whose only redeeming features are their comedy value.

[edit on 15-1-2008 by Freeborn]

[edit on 15-1-2008 by Freeborn]

Originally posted by cormac mac airt

"such and such civilization just seems to have happened overnight", that tells me and others that that person really has no understanding of the culture that lived there nor its predecessors. Their "research" was extremely lacking, to say the least. You want answers, fine, we all do. Also, many of us "non-believers" have been researching this stuff for years, sometimes decades. Our understanding of events has changed as well, just not to the point where we will believe anything without proof.

Yes, it has been suggested that we believe what we believe because we lack expertise, education, intelligence and so forth.

Some of us on this side do hold a degree in various related subject matters though. And some of us have been researching it since decades, not only by books but also by travel.

I was on Mount Sinai last week where Moses was said to have been given the Ten Commandments by a "burning bush".

reply to post by Freeborn


At last a balanced viewpoint on this thread. A breathe of fresh air by a free born.

To Skyfloating,

Yes, it has been suggested that we believe what we believe because we lack expertise, education, intelligence and so forth.

No, to paraphrase what I said before, "You believe what is convenient to your own personal worldview, REGARDLESS OF FACTS, because it makes you feel better about your place in the scheme of things". Emphasis Mine!!

Then again, what you said is also possible.

Some of us on this side do hold a degree in various related subject matters though. And some of us have been researching it since decades, not only by books but also by travel.

Good for you. Now show us some verifiable, substantiated evidence or proof that we can sink our teeth into. No "might have beens", no "in my opinions". If you are going to present something as fact, then as the saying goes, "Put up or .....", well, you know the rest.

I was on Mount Sinai last week where Moses was said to have been given the Ten Commandments by a "burning bush".

Good for you. Did a burning bush talk to you too?

Originally posted by cormac mac airt


Good for you. Did a burning bush talk to you too?

When someone without technical vocabulary sees an aircraft he cant help but to resort to vocabulary that is familiar to him.

Originally posted by cormac mac airt

Good for you. Now show us some verifiable, substantiated evidence or proof that we can sink our teeth into. No "might have beens", no "in my opinions". If you are going to present something as fact, then as the saying goes, "Put up or .....", well, you know the rest.

I will not be showing this board anything anymore since its proven to be a waste of time and resources rather than a synergetic sharing of ideas.

Be well

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by cormac mac airt


Good for you. Did a burning bush talk to you too?

When someone without technical vocabulary sees an aircraft he cant help but to resort to vocabulary that is familiar to him.

So, you're saying that a talking, burning bush is something that Moses was more familiar with than a talking aircraft?

Harte

reply to post by Harte


I am saying that lack of vocabulary to describe certain events leads to the choosing of vocabulary that are familiar.

Its not that difficult to understand.

reply to post by Skyfloating


So, why an aircraft?

Why not a robot, a fairy, a ghost?

Or (God forbid!) why not Yahweh himself?

Harte


[edit on 1/16/2008 by Harte]

Originally posted by Harte

So, why an aircraft?

Why not a robot, a fairy, a ghost?

Or (God forbid!) why not Yahweh himself?

well maybe, yes. The basic assertion is that some of the "miracles" experienced by ancients may have been something other than their vocabulary was able to describe.

I tend to think that this may have been technology mistaken for magic, but it could be anything else as well....of course.

reply to post by Skyfloating

I will not be showing this board anything anymore since its proven to be a waste of time and resources rather than a synergetic sharing of ideas.

That is unfortunate. I am also getting fed up with this as well and resulted in an outburst of sorts. I also agree with what you said earlier on about how quick others refuse to second guess anything and simply reply with a no.

And as for what someone else said earlier about there being 2 sides to the argument and one side not looking at the others point of view, i have given both sides equal attention and consideration. One side dictates the truth and says its word is absolute yet leaves so many unanswered questions that noone who preaches this word attempts to answer. The other side says we don't yet know everything and that there are many possibilities and here are a few possibilities, let's share ideas, let's find out the truth.

Let's face it, even if i believed history as it is recorded to be 100% factual, i still would not want to be any kind of scholar or archeologist or anything of the sort as any new discovery that goes against what we believe now will be met with ridicule.

The history books are ruled with an iron fist.

I'd like to support the thesis by my own strife for evidence.

Point 1)

Sentient life (as difficult as defining this therm is) in space is a fact.
The dircet proof of that would be... you. (rudely lables the reader as evidenc A)

You may object that is not extraterrestrial life, but that does not really matter. Its not only possible, it has happened one time for sure. Here.

Some may argue that this is very uncommon. At what basis?
That the enviromental parameters are rare?
Does life need the same enviromental parameters?

Take a look at this:
planetquest.jpl.nasa.gov...
from the NASA site

Currently scientists belive there is a high probability for life elsewhere in this solar system. The focus of the attention is Jupiter's moon Europa. Whilst too far from the sun to have an ecosystem based on sunlight or its heat, gravitional forces from orbiting Jupiter keep the core molten-hot-liquid. And this particular moon has a ice crust, suggesting vast liquid undermountain water supplies. Kinda a subterrain sea. (compare to hydrothermal vent communities, methane ice worms from the link above)

So we have one planet where life is present (Earth), one wich can be made habitable in theory (Mars) and another one wich maybe already supports own eco systems (Europa).

Do you still think its unlikely with already three candidates in our solar system?

The conclusion is highly questionable if this is a rare occurence and it seems life is not quite as dependant on certain enviromental factors as people think. The main factor seems ongoing energy transfers, the enviroment seems to play a neglectable role.

I think that evidence for life (hopefully we will find it on Mars or elsewhere) isn't an indicator of aliens visiting earth.

Are things in the sky and magical happenings aliens or religious events?

One must ponder.

Originally posted by Hanslune
I think that evidence for life (hopefully we will find it on Mars or elsewhere) isn't an indicator of aliens visiting earth.

Are things in the sky and magical happenings aliens or religious events?

One must ponder.

This is like asking "are they higher-level events or higher-level events?" Right now it doesnt matter. What does matter is that we acknowledge the possibility of events beyond earth.

Why is that important?

If we believe there are other civilizatons out there (I believe there might be) this has little or no effect on us.

If we believe there are no other civilizations out there, this again has little or no effect on us or the subject I think this thread was on.

If we were visited 750,000 years ago by a non-biological probe - so what?

Again we come back to the central issue are myths myths or real?

The easiest way is to determine they are real if other evidence supports there being real.