Forbidden Egyptology

reply to post by FatherLukeDuke


Thanks for your answers FatherLukeDuke, I really appreciate it.

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
Tales of alien visitors are a fairly new phenomena - only really decades old.

Well, in my opinion is the alien visitor phenomena really older then some decades, and there are clear indications to proof that fact.

www.ufoartwork.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.bibleufo.com...

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
Of course some of these could be true, but there are certainly no indisputable cases, as they are based on eye-witness accounts which are by their nature very fallible

Don’t underestimate the importants of eye-witness accounts, because the Bible itself is only based on written eye-witness accounts and despite that accepted and believed by millions.

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
Find me an artefact or material that could not possibly be terrestrial and I will go for it.

That is the question I see again and again, but if you really studied the available information about this phenomena, you understand that that is out of the question because those artefacts or material lying on the black shells of the so called black ops, you know that.

But take if you want a look at this site from Dr. Roger Leir.

www.alienscalpel.com...

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
Personally I would love for alien contact to happen in my life time - I'm a big sci-fi fan and it would realise a lot of dreams. Though it is of course as scary prospect as it is exciting.

Alien contact already happened with the US government, denied of course, but it will happen worldwide in your lifetime, no doubt about that.
I agree absolute with your last remark.

I can recommend you these magnificent posts of IsaacKoi.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...



[edit on 20/4/08 by spacevisitor]

Hmmmm Skyfloating do I observe a contradiction in your thinking.

1. You seem to be claiming that the Turkish ruins at Kepi are evidence of an earlier civilization and that this civilization dates back to 9500 BCE.

2. You have previously claimed (repeatedly) that the vast conspiracy prevents/suppresses any knowledge of earlier civilizations.

3. So why is there evidence for Kepi being presented in the MSM? A flow of information has been coming from that site since the mid 90's why isn't the conspiracy working?

So

Either your claim for a vast conspiracy is incorrect or your claim that Kepi is a civilization is incorrect........so which is it?

reply to post by Hanslune


Should a conspiracy to slow-down discovery exist, this wouldnt contradict it.

It has been said many times throughout this thread that "conspiracy" is not the only explanation. Others are amnesia, psychological filtering, plain stupidity and non-disclosure agreements as defined by other forces (among many others).

Harte tells me that the temples in turkey are the product of an uncivilized people. Do you agree?

reply to post by Skyfloating


" Parts of the Vedas have been dated to be up to 8000 years old. "

Were those estimates by the same scientists that tell us the world is billions of years old?

And I suppose that I like Mr Mullins because we both have a tendency to rub people the wrong way. I must admit, I was disturbed by a comment I heard him make about the jews that didn't seem right but the moderator never asked him to clarify what he meant, so that I still don't know what he meant exactly. But his books on the federal reserve and the one world order were spot on, so I'd rather not throw the baby out with the bathwater [ even tho that baby is 86 ] i suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Cheers!

[edit on 20-4-2008 by toasted]

Should a conspiracy to slow-down discovery exist, this wouldnt contradict it.

So now there is a different flavor of the conspiracy huh, isn't imagination amazing.. so we'll take that as, "what I've been saying for weeks is wrong, I've been caught up but my ego prevents my dealing with it so I'll make up another version of the conspiracy to cover up my error" ..that's okay Skyfloating we understand...the vast conspiracy is both supressing all knowledge of ancient civilizations - but allowing evidence out for this one.

Kinda of a catch 49b don't you think?

It has been said many times throughout this thread that "conspiracy" is not the only explanation. Others are amnesia, psychological filtering, plain stupidity and non-disclosure agreements as defined by other forces (among many others).

Non-disclosure agreements ??? Amnesia - mass or just selective? How about lack of evidence?

Harte tells me that the temples in turkey are the product of an uncivilized people. Do you agree?

Depends on your criteria for telling the difference between a cvililzation vs a [x] culture. Based on classical descriptions of "civilizations" it could not be described as one. However the site is only partially un covered, give it another 10 years - they will discover more.

What does the main discover call it? A culture or a civilization? I'd go with what the man on the ground says.

reply to post by Hanslune


not worth commenting on

(this is not a one-line-post)

The truth hurts, but we have made progress. The evil vast conspiracy-a monolith of efficiency isn't so efficient any more.

Skyfloating has now, offically stated that they are doing a slow down or leaking evidence out. Ah so why is that?

Now back to the Vedas - so Skyfloating, keeping your mind open, what effect does that poor science shown in the Vedas have on your opinion of there usefulness?

Again which Vedas are you using, the real ones or the fake ones?

[edit on 20/4/08 by Hanslune]

Getting back to subjects I recently posted:

1. Are we to believe that the ancient egyptian story "The shipwrecked sailors" resemblance to the biblical garden of Eden story is a mere "coincidence"?

2. Are we to believe that the temple in turkey is made by an uncivilized people? (see link)

3. Are we to believe that all the australian-egyptian-artifacts recently shown are hoaxes?

4. Are we to believe that precision-drilling could be done without electricity?

5. Are we to believe that James Wellard, who in his 1960s book "The Great Sahara" claims that thousands of miles of tunnels have been found under the deserts of Algeria and Libya, to be "just another liar"?

6. Are we to believe that in billions of years of earth history, we´ve only been civilized the last few thousand years?

7. Are we to believe that ancient scriptures indicators that the Gods wanted to forbid and hide technology would leave an evidence-trail behind?


Are we to believe all this (not to mention the mountains of data gathered on other threads, in other books, on other websites)?

reply to post by Hanslune


You´ll gain a better understanding of mankinds history by reading the Vedas than by digging up bones from the ground.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by Hanslune

 

You´ll gain a better understanding of mankinds history by reading the Vedas than by digging up bones from the ground.

Hilarious....how about using reality and common sense, read the Vedas' and believe those parts which can be supported by other evidence?

What is wrong with taking that track instead of ignorning science and believing myths are facts??

So why is Vedas science so....wrong? Why can't you explain it as part of the conspiracy? LOL

What was post that covered this claim of yours about the gods hiding things.

1. Are we to believe that the ancient egyptian story "The shipwrecked sailors" resemblance to the biblical garden of Eden story is a mere "coincidence"?

Sure why not

2. Are we to believe that the temple in turkey is made by an uncivilized people? (see link)

Use of the term "uncivilized" is not appropriate. It is not the opposite of "civilized" in this case. They were a culture and by the old definition of civilization they aren't. Let hit you with an old definition problem - are Egyptians Black or White?

3. Are we to believe that all the australian-egyptian-artifacts recently shown are hoaxes?

Yes, unless you evidence to the contrary

4. Are we to believe that precision-drilling could be done without electricity?

Yes it was called a drill tube

5. Are we to believe that James Wellard, who in his 1960s book "The Great Sahara" claims that thousands of miles of tunnels have been found under the deserts of Algeria and Libya, to be "just another liar"?

If he was talking about Qanat he might be right - as for the other stuff do you have any evidence of these tunnels?

6. Are we to believe that in billions of years of earth history, we´ve only been civilized the last few thousand years?

That is what the evidence shows - whatcuo got that shows that to be wrong, not your opinion but hard evidence?

reply to post by Hanslune


Why should I trust some modern day scholar over what happened back then over the vedas which actually originate from a time much closer to the events in question?

That makes no sense.

Why should I trust your statement of "lack of evidence" when the gods themselves ordered for evidence to be hidden, forbidden and destroyed (as in "Thou shall not make pictures of me!")?

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by Hanslune

 

Why should I trust some modern day scholar over what happened back then over the vedas which actually originate from a time much closer to the events in question?

That makes no sense.

Why should I trust your statement of "lack of evidence" when the gods themselves ordered for evidence to be hidden, forbidden and destroyed (as in "Thou shall not make pictures of me!")?

So you are suffering from the "golden age" intoxication huh? That is what happens when people think that ancient writing is somehow better than todays or that humans were more intelligent or more honest in the "golden days".

They weren't, the evidence is the question not what is written. Again why is the Vedas' science so bad? Do you believe it? If you don't believe it, good, but then why do you believe everything that is written there when no evidence supports it?

What is the link to your claim on the gods ordered to destroy stuff?

If you're talking idols that is a religious thing

reply to post by Hanslune


What skyfloating means is, there have been less links in the chain. The oldest myths are the most important, because they are closest to what the actual case may have been.

Less corruption in the story because of fewer mouths to have told it, Chinese whispers style.

We don't know anything about religions 2500 years ago, really. What were the Orphic/Mithraeic et all mysteries about? We don't know. It's all been lost. That's our problem - everything has been bloody well lost!

I can't remember the names, but some geeky jewish-american mathematician was on a fibonacci sequence hunt, and it lead him to the priests of this African tribe. They wouldn't reveal the "priestly" mysteries of divination to him, but eventually he persuaded them that he was a mathematician and it was okay (hey, I don't know how he did it). But apparently they got excited about it, and then showed him....a random number generator, that worked by drawing lines and dots in the sand in rows, and then adding up line line = line, dot dot = dot, etc. I can't remember exactly how it worked, but all it was was a random number generator.

But to a tribesman, it was the gods-given method of divining the future. This is what religion is.

reply to post by Hanslune


Nice how you try to brush it all off. But quite unconvincing.

Its reasonable to assume that people closer to an event would know more about it. This has nothing to do with "golden age intoxication".

Next you deny that the Gods themselves ordered evidence removed, forbidden and hidden, although anyone even remotely familiar with ancient text knows this. As Ive already referenced examples on this page, the last page, other parts of this thread and other threads, Im not doing it again.

Serioulsy though...just what are you trying to prove here? That the knowledge you worked so hard to attain is accurate?

Well...it is accurate...within the limited context of the last few thousand years.

But once you start thinking "big picture" which includes the cosmology of the entire galaxy (if not entire universe) and a history of civilization that spans several billion years, things are put into a different perspective.

You professing to know that there was no intelligent civilzation here prior to the last few thousand years reflects not reality but only what you believe.

Yes it may have closer to the "event" but it doesn't mean it's anymore truer.

We find in the modern world that the first reports are usually wrong.

When you get into religion and spirituality you get into man's imagination and all measures of accuracy cease.

Do you think Gods were taking human form and spearing Greeks and Trojans during the battle of Troy? Or that in Shintoism a Goddess formed Japan by dipping a giant spear into the sea? That animals talk?

Myth should be treated as myth not fact.

Originally posted by Hanslune
Yes it may have closer to the "event" but it doesn't mean it's anymore truer.

We find in the modern world that the first reports are usually wrong.

Double standards. At the end of the day, some modern and some ancient thought are accurate.

But just because there are some thoughts you have personally subscribed to, doesnt make them true.

Just because a mass of people would agree with you, doesnt make them true.

Masses of people have agreed to many things throughout history that were proven to be untrue. MAJORITIES.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Getting back to subjects I recently posted:

1. Are we to believe that the ancient egyptian story "The shipwrecked sailors" resemblance to the biblical garden of Eden story is a mere "coincidence"?

Yeah, they don't seem that similar to me and they were both written by humans - therefore share common traits.

2. Are we to believe that the temple in turkey is made by an uncivilized people? (see link)

As has been pointed out "uncivilised" has negative connotations that are not appropriate. The concept of "civilisation" is a 18th century French one and biased in itself. However going by that concept the culture that produced those temples was not a civilisation.

3. Are we to believe that all the australian-egyptian-artifacts recently shown are hoaxes?

With a cursory glance at the site some of them are clearly laughable - which ones do you want us to debate?

4. Are we to believe that precision-drilling could be done without electricity?

Yes. Are we to believe in electricity without wires or power stations?

5. Are we to believe that James Wellard, who in his 1960s book "The Great Sahara" claims that thousands of miles of tunnels have been found under the deserts of Algeria and Libya, to be "just another liar"?

No idea.

6. Are we to believe that in billions of years of earth history, we´ve only been civilized the last few thousand years?

Are we to believe that in 200,000 years of being human civilisation as only been around for a few thousand? Yes - that's what the evidence says.

7. Are we to believe that ancient scriptures indicators that the Gods wanted to forbid and hide technology would leave an evidence-trail behind?

??

You professing to know that there was no intelligent civilzation here prior to the last few thousand years reflects not reality but only what you believe.

NO SKYFLOATING I DID NOT SAY THAT.

Why do you constantly misrepresent peoples positions?

Are you a deliberate liar or are you just forgetful?

So let me make it absolutely clear to you (again)

THERE IS NO PRESENT EVIDENCE OF AN EARLIER "INTELLIGENT" CIVILIZATION, WE MAY HOWEVER FIND EVIDENCE IN THE FUTURE FOR SUCH A CIVILIZATION.

IS THIS CLEAR TO YO?

DO YOU UNDERSTAND? IN NO WAY, SHAPE OR FORM AM I STATING THAT I "know" THAT THERE ARE NO EARLIER CIVILIZATIONS.

IS THIS CLEAR TO YOU?

Ya got it now Skyfloating?


[edit on 20/4/08 by Hanslune]

reply to post by Hanslune


Considering that thats the position you really seem to have been arguing in 300+posts Ive read by you its odd that you deny it.

Btw: Using ALL CAPS is like shouting. Its impolite.