Ancient Extraterrestrials

reply to post by Skyfloating


can people please READ what has already been put on the thread before attempting to 'debunk' this.

it is frustrating to see that people aren't actually following the links.

for more information about shlomo sand, cited in my previous post, i had opened a thread about it (big flop though) :

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Skyfloating


Great subject, I've enjoyed reading most of the information. I begin to wonder that if this is a definant theory that alot of evidence had to be destroyed; It would just seem like if these things were really here there would have been many many many many references. So in short this all seems completely plausable: Men of power will always destroy what/whoever stands in their way. I believe the Roman Catholic Church is participating in smear campaigns against other religions for that exact purpose and it seems nothing is more powerful then the MSM(But thats another subject). I look forward to the further evidence, also I remember another pyramid that had square holes that had doors with copper handles on them; these holes ran from a central room all the way out of the pyramid, spirit holes or something. I think thats just a further adaptation of all of this.

reply to post by Lokey13


Yes, a lot of evidence has been destroyed, hidden, horded, robbed, desintegrated, gone lost, been buried, etc.

By who? By those in power at the time. There's no denying that the Catholic church burned millions of scrolls and books in their time.

What was contained in those scrolls and books that is so dangerous?

But even the evidence we do have is being ignored. This thread is a good example for that.

reply to post by Skyfloating


I'd love to see whats hidden in the Vatican archives.

Would be like a kid with the keys to the candy shop.

sadly, the OP didn´t provide us with any real proof till now.(other than he stated).
in not a single case on page 1, 2 for example, there is valuable data, just snippets and other people´s opinions. vague hints, posteted photos, links..
nothing.sorry .
then his insulting people. not a strong position.

and still no aliens in sight


think for yourself, people.

bye.

reply to post by anti72


An what is your purpose to this thread to contribute and discuss or to be biased and have a preconceived position before you got here? I saw plenty of proof in pages 1,2 he quoted actually historians, which are more credible then lets say; what is your profession? and who are you to judge?

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Yes, a lot of evidence has been destroyed, hidden, horded, robbed, desintegrated, gone lost, been buried, etc.

You are taking an absence of evidence, twisting it into evidence. It is rather circular reasoning; the powers-that-be are covering-up the evidence, and there is no evidence of this because the powers-that-be are covering it up.

Has knowledge been lost, damaged and destroyed on purpose in the past? For certain. But in this case, you may be taking an absence of evidence, twisting it into evidence. It is rather circular reasoning; the powers-that-be are covering-up the evidence, and there is no evidence of this because the powers-that-be are covering it up.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
But even the evidence we do have is being ignored. This thread is a good example for that.

You are twisting a disagreement over the evidence as a disregarding of the evidence. There is a vast difference.

And the same charge could be made of you.

Originally posted by anti72
sadly, the OP didn´t provide us with any real proof till now.(other than he stated).
in not a single case on page 1, 2 for example, there is valuable data, just snippets and other people´s opinions. vague hints, posteted photos, links..
nothing.sorry .
then his insulting people. not a strong position.

and still no aliens in sight

think for yourself, people.

bye.

Yes, people please think for yourselves.

and still no aliens in sight

What would you accept as proof? We post videos and you will not even consider the decent thing, AND WATCH THEM! Again, Ancient Astronauts were real, and real now...
Care to discuss this?


For more information please review this thread
www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 5-12-2008 by All Seeing Eye]

Evidence for ancient technology and/or ETs and Essay I posted thus far (not to mention all the stuff others have posted!)

Page 1:

* Questionable Tactics against Ancient Astronaut Theory
* Signs of Ancient Genetic Engineering
* Reports of Ancient Space Flight
* Reports of Ancient Time Dilitation
* Similarities in Global Mythology
* Mythology turning out to be scientifically verified
* Cargo-Cults

Page 3:

* Odd Skulls
* African Mythology confirming how the Gods "descended from the Sky" to interact with humans
* Exodus 19: "God" appearing with smoke and lightning, on "the wings of an eagle" and wanting people not to see his aircraft
* More Biblical passages indicating the association with flying craft connected to smoke and fire.


Page 4

* Abydos Helicopter
* Winged Discs

Page 7-15

* The Mystery of Magwangdui
* The Validity of AAT as a Theory
* Ancient Astronauts: Picture Gallery (including the ancient drilled hole)
* Elohim: A Plural
* The Mimicry Theory
* Nazca Lines Part 1 - The Official Versions
* Book Burnings: A Cause of lost Wisdom?


[edit on 5-12-2008 by Skyfloating]

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
You are taking an absence of evidence, twisting it into evidence.

This is a conspiracy-site. Conspiracy-Theory presupposes that the "dead body" was thrown into the river so that the police couldnt find it.

The police officer wont say: "There's no evidence of a dead body so I wont go look". He'll look.

I bet those books burned by the church were really interesting. Otherwise, why burn them?

Feel free to address some of the evidence actually posted and more to come.

Circular Reasoning is when science says:: "There was no technology back then, therefore this crystal skull has to be from an earlier date".

[edit on 5-12-2008 by Skyfloating]

reply to post by All Seeing Eye


Thanks for re-posting. So much stuff gone unaddressed in this thread.

[edit on 5-12-2008 by Skyfloating]

Originally posted by Alter-Ego

Originally posted by dariousg


This is what kills me. We, being so egocentric as we are, must believe that in order for a civilazation to be technically advanced that they must have used the same tools and methods that we use today. That they must have smelted iron and steel and used nuts and bolts and so on.

Our history that has been taught in schools has dictated this to us. Our fossil records and records of past civilizations show this. We have proof of the melting of metals and fashioning of tools of bronze and iron and stone. We do NOT have proof of advance "natural" technologies that supersede our current level. Romantic theory, but baseless and unsubstantiated.




It's not being "egocentric" deducting form evidence gathered that we have not obtained a level of advancement greater than we have to date... its what we would call scientific evidence. Unfortunately, what I find as "egocentric" is offering anecdotal evidence as a "working theory" when you have nothing to substantiate it.




What we "cannot fall into a trap" of, is wild speculative "opinions" as to "what could have been" with out one iota of verifiable proof. All we have is fossil records and history (stories) to compare our world and ancient civilizations. The way I currently see it.. we have a record of them smelting iron and steel . We have in various museums artifacts or evidence that this was the technological progression to our current stage.

If there is evidence to the contrary that you have concerning past advanced civilizations, on Earth using "other methods" I would be more than interested in reading it. I merely offer opinions and try to evolve my theories as 'evidence' presents its self unlike a "psudeo-skeptic" who believes in only a hard lined conclusion which is usually agenda based.

No. Not romantic OR baseless. Why? Take for instance if we, as a past civilization, had been able to utilize natural substance for structures. Not necessarily stone and such. More like 'living skins' and such. If that unit gets killed or old it will be absorbed back into the earth. Not so far fetched.

IF, and that is a big if, you think outside of the very small box we have been educated into.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by All Seeing Eye

 

Thanks for re-posting. So much stuff gone unaddressed in this thread.

[edit on 5-12-2008 by Skyfloating]

Some of the skeptics that have attempted to attack this thread display traits of secret society members, so they will never be able to address the issue honestly. In my opinion, they have sold their very souls to the forces we attempt to expose. They will fight to the very end to protect their overlords and masters from the light. If one looks closely at the provided video, one will see that their "Masters" are meeting their match on the battlefield of space. If I were one of those secret society members, I would be looking to get my soul, back, before its too late.....

reply to post by dariousg


Not only what you say, but even the highly mechanised society we have now, if left untendered, would completely dissapear without a trace after a few eons. Even metal rusts away into nothingness over time, so what is needed is a some sort of fossilized artifact.

Again, Micheal Cremo has a few examples, but those thinking they are going to digup prehistoric volkswagens could perhaps move on a bit to some more realistic expectation.

There is only so much that can be proven and sometimes the traces of what has happened are just too subtle. A good cat burgler knows this, so should a good historical philosopher

Originally posted by unknown known
What about the fact that although the Egyptians kept very careful records about everything they ever did; every king they had, every war they fought, and every structure they built, there were no records of them ever having built the pyramids?

You must be talking about some other Egyptians.

The Egyptians from planet Earth certainly did not do this.

Originally posted by unknown knownDid you know that the height of the pyramid (481 feet) is almost exactly 1/1,000,000,000 of the distance from the earth to the sun (480.6 billion feet)?

It's closer to 490 billion feet actually more than 490 billion), and no, neither number is "almost exactly." On top of that the distance you quoted is the average. The Earth's distance to the Sun varies over the year because all orbits are elliptical.

Harte

Originally posted by Skyfloating
This is a conspiracy-site. Conspiracy-Theory presupposes that the "dead body" was thrown into the river so that the police couldnt find it.

Be that as it may, the idea here is to get to the truth, whatever it may be. Presupposing an absence of evidence to be in-and-of-itself is a very perilious path. Nor does it help your case if you fill in the gaps of evidence

Originally posted by Skyfloating
I bet those books burned by the church were really interesting. Otherwise, why burn them?

From a standpoint of pure historical interest, probably. But for your intentions, probably not. Doubtful you would find some esoteric truth or some Earth-shattering revelation; these books were not burned to cover-up anything dangerous to the Church. Rather, they were burned as a form of societal control. You control a peoples' past, you control their future. Rhetoric of eradicating paganism was an after-the-fact justification for oppressing conquered people.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Circular Reasoning is when science says:: "There was no technology back then, therefore this crystal skull has to be from an earlier date".

I think you mean "later date." That is not circular reasoning at all; it is very sound logic. If I found a TV remote at an archaeological site, knowing the capabilities of the people at the time, it would not be circular logic to think that it was developed at a much later date.

Originally posted by anti72
[

again nonsense, sorry.

- you dont know anything PROOFABLE about ANCIENT or NOWADAYS ALIEN (astronaut or not ) to be able to include this in a theory.

- why are AAT- believers not satisfied with the normal archeological facts ?
because they are boring/ not SCI-FI/ entertainment enough?

-´gods from above´ refer to higher spiritual beings, why not?
are you 100% sure they were so dumb to have no higher religious and spiritual knowledge? all nonsense?


no aliens in sight.



I could IMAGINE whole worlds..but

It's obvious that you HAVE NOT read this thread. They are NOT talking about spiritual beings. That has been made very clear. They state in their texts that they are referring to 'LIVING BEINGS'. I understand that you probably don't want to read what has been posted because it is a lot of information. You would rather keep everything nice and neat within your own little box which is not bad.

Again, I'm not saying that the AAT is true or false. I'm not advocating for or against. I try to present options that could point to it. When someone comes in and simply says, "again, nonsense" it just does nothing to further the discussion.

Your intent is clear. I just wish you would understand that people are presenting theories here. Valid ones. A typical 'nonsense' answer is the same exact answer given to the Wright brothers. They were told that manned flight was virtually impossible and that if it were it was roughly 10,000 years off. This from the leading 'experts' in science at the time.

So, NONSENSE is a very strong word that only those that are afraid to expand their sense of reality use.

reply to post by Skyfloating


Outstanding post, Skyfloating! I just read Graham Hancock's "Fingerprints of the Gods", and he does not go into the Ancient Astronaut theory, but states that there was a much older super civilization that was destroyed over 12,000 years ago.
I also agree that Von Daniken does have some great ideas, but his early errors have over shadowed them. It is sad that the scholars have not looked at the actual theory put forth.
I do believe we have been visited in the past many times. I don't know how involved they were, or if they were just observers. It could be that our ancestors had contact with aliens, and they are still observing us to see if we are ready for contact again.
Another good author is Colin Wilson, who states that our new technology is too materialistic, and our ancestors were more spiritually based (no iPods, but math, science and arts were very strong).

Originally posted by kidflash2008
Another good author is Colin Wilson, who states that our new technology is too materialistic, and our ancestors were more spiritually based (no iPods, but math, science and arts were very strong).

While I cant quite prove it yet, I sense that our pre-10 000 B.C. ancestors were not all brutal savages and drooling idiots as displayed in countless books, movies, educational material, documentaries but did have spiritual, intellectual and aesthetic values we know nothing of.