Ancient Extraterrestrials

Originally posted by Nohup
That being said, the thing about this topic I don't understand is how, specifically, are the things being discussed here proven to be "extraterrestrial," rather than, say evidence of time travel?

The so-called "Mimicry-Hypothesis" I posted about earlier prefers the explanation of the intervening-beings told of in the ancient texts being time-travellers rather than extraterrestrials.

As far as Im concerned, the "interveners" could be ETs, or Time-Travellers, or Interdimensional Beings, or all of the above. But before going there, the public would have to start considering the notion that some sort of intervention has indeed happened.

And if you can't positively dismiss either one of those options, then you really haven't proven anything, and are really stuck with "We don't know what these things are."

I dont know what they are and neither have we proven anything. But given the overall evidence I think its safe to say that something is amiss with the schoolbook-version of events.

So what do we have that definitively proves beyond any doubt that such and such an artifact or piece of artwork has to do with an extraterrestrial civilization? And not time travelers?

The concept of ETs as opposed to time-travellers comes from the ancient myth of "Gods" that dont look entirely human and claim to come from the sky and the heavens. But the idea of time-travellers cant be dismissed of course.

reply to post by Nohup

But to claim that this data is evidence of "extraterrestrials," is just plain facetious.

I’ll agree with you there.

I do however enjoy speculating. I guess within our current society it comes down to what you believe in, but belief does not constitute truth, and that unfortunately is often mistaken.

UFO NEWS 2008

plenty.

It has to be REAL.

We need to start getting more serious on this thread and put our minds together, I swear, the answers are right at our fingertips, Something about zero-point technology? Aren't all the groundbreaking alien/breaking the laws of physics, "about", an unknown that is right in front of us as we type?

Originally posted by Nohup
..
Unfortunately, this tends to lead to the problem of trying to use one unexplained thing to prove another unexplained thing. Similarities of descriptions are the weakest kind of link, since we are all human beings and all think like human beings in the same kind of images and symbols -- Jungian archetypes.

"For instance, in ancient times, people all over the world looked at the Sun and the Moon zooming across the sky, and the thought that came to their heads, whether they were in America or China or Europe or Sumeria, was that it was a vehicle -- a boat, chariot, horse, etc. -- driven by somebody. And they drew pictures of who they thought was driving the thing. It's not that there actually was a driver, but because we're human and think in the same way, that's how the images turned out. As another example, nearly all mythologies have chimeras, half-human, half-animal creatures. Are/were they real because everybody described them? Or maybe that's a common thing for people to imagine."

yes, I think that cultures´religious consciousness changes within thousands of years.
sumerians DID think, pray and live socially different that modern men.
same with egypt, early christian, roman, medieval, baroque or modern mankind.

religios thinkin´ was much more part of every day live. in fact, modern scientific thinking was developing from this. and modern state forms.

..
Again, if we can't nail it down specifically between ET's, time travelers, demons, angels, tulpas, or whatever, we haven't proven anything. And what that does is just add a lot of data to a big pile of data we already have that we have no explanation for. But to claim that this data is evidence of "extraterrestrials," is just plain facetious. "

and in detail thats a hard job to distinguish between these entities, and
I guess not possible any more, because of what I just wrote .

the hierarchy of spiritual beeings bound with planet earth, higher spirits, archangels, angels, demons etc play all a role in our evolution.

furthermore, there could be extraterrestial beeings, but..

you know, thats a reason to prove this findings. many of them are done, ´debunked´whatever. and thats good, because the interesting cases remain, it there are some.







[edit on 10-12-2008 by anti72]

It would be much more easy if we had this ´time machine´ from our black project Lockheed shadow gov´t NWO ´friends´.

When searching for answers from those in authority, whether its crop circles ,ufo,s or the many unexplained. When there is a report in the press that x occurred why is it that those in authority are the FIRST on site to get all the info? they want to speak to those who witnessed x, get evidence, if the info returned to the interested public is poor excuses or lies as to what was seen ,heard or experienced, then why are the officials sooooo eager to get there first?

*DELETE POST*

Just seen Anti72 is dekooning...



[edit on 10-12-2008 by SKUNK2]

More on the Baigong pipes!!! That was some interesting stuff. Very cool. It reminds me of the supposed granite rocks being discovered/used to support the Nazca water irrigation system. Anyone got any info on this? I'll spend the afternoon hunting down some information but I read this stuff in an old 1970's book so it might have been debunked by now... hope you guys can help, it might put your mind off all those trolls....here's hoping

Originally posted by TheGreensGoblin
More on the Baigong pipes!!! That was some interesting stuff. Very cool. It reminds me of the supposed granite rocks being discovered/used to support the Nazca water irrigation system. Anyone got any info on this? I'll spend the afternoon hunting down some information but I read this stuff in an old 1970's book so it might have been debunked by now... hope you guys can help, it might put your mind off all those trolls....here's hoping

If you find any more let us know.

And by the way: Saying "That is Debunked" is not the same as showing that it is Debunked, Why it is Debunked, Who Debunked it and Who Confirmed the Debunk.

reply to post by Skyfloating


ah I get you. Yea i'm struggling to find much! I was basically trying to explain that the book I read was called 'the nazca lines' or something along those (excuse the pun) lines. It was written probably in the early 70's so i'd be hard pressed to find either the book title or the text that I'm describing.

Basically it was explained that the water irrigation system underneath the Nazca lines is JUST as interesting as the lines themselves, it was mentioned in this book that there were columns of different rock supporting the water system which differed from the available rocks in the area. Any information regarding this?

reply to post by TheGreensGoblin


I have no info on subterranean Nazca at this time, but thanks for the lead.

(I did post that they measured strong anomalies beneath Nazca though, earlier. Thats the only thing I know)

reply to post by Skyfloating




That is amazing are there any doubts to its authenticity. If not then that is fascinating that is definetely a helicopter and tank clear as day.

Originally posted by Lokey13
I would propose to anyone who is here that is actually trying to obtain information on this subject that you ignore both anti annd harte; it will make your viewing experience of this data much more enjoyable: two more people to IGNORE!!!!

Sure, everyone should ignore established fact.

Otherwise, how could you believe any of this?

Here's what I said in the post Lokey reccomends you "ignore":

Originally posted by Harte

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.

Here a poster has declared that the Egyptians kept rigorous and meticulous records of every structure they ever built (among other things.)

That is not so.

According to Lokey, you should ignore the fact that the Egyptians didn't do this because if you don't ignore it, it doesn't seem all that strange that there are no Egyptian records regarding the construction of (I guess) the Great Pyramid.

If Lokey wishes to maintian that it is true, why doesn't he provide us with the detailed construction plans and records for, say, the Funerary Temple of Ramses at Medinet Habu?

Or, how about the Temple of Hathor in Dendera? Now, I mean the Egyptian one, not the Ptolemaic and Roman add-ons that came later.

Or how about records documenting the Temple of Karnak at Luxor? How about the Sphinx Temple? What about the Temple of Ptah in Memphis?

I'd dearly love to see the construction plans and details for these structures. Surely Lokey, or Unknowknown will provide us with access to the Egyptian's documentation for the construction of these fabulous temples. After all, everyone here is commanded to ignore my claim that they don't exist. That can only mean that Lokey knows that they do.

I'll check back later to get my hands on this previously unknown Ancient Egyptian documentation.

Also in that post (which you are to ignore) is:

Originally posted by Harte

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.

Look it up. The Earth is (on average) more than 490 billion feet from the Sun.

Also, all orbits anyone has ever calculated, all of them, are elliptical, not circular, meaning that the Earth's distance from the Sun gets greater and smaller over the course of a year (one orbit.)

Lokey insists you ignore this fact as well, because if you don't, you will be unable to pretend that the height of the Great Pyramid (which is today missing the capstone anyway so what are we talking about here) is "almost exactly 1/1,000,000,000 of the distance from the earth to the sun."

Let me ask, what if this were true? It's not, but what if it were?

Why would anyone, aliens included, need to so closely model the Earth's average distance to the Sun anyway?

What possible significance could this figure (if it were true, and it's not) have?

Harte

Originally posted by Harte

Sure, everyone should ignore established fact.


Harte

Like you ignore page 21 post 14? Like the rest of the debunkers ignore the list of evidence? (which is about 1% of all the evidence availible btw)

[edit on 10-12-2008 by Skyfloating]

reply to post by Skyfloating


Ok, so this is what I've gleamed from the web...

The site, known by local people as "the ET relics", is on Mount Baigong about 40 kilometers to the southwest of Delingha City. On the north of the mountain are twin lakes dubbed as the "lover Lakes", one with fresh water and the other with salty water. The so-called ET relics structure is located on the south bank of the salty lake. It looks like a pyramid and is between 50 to 60meters high.

Mt. Baigong is noted for a "pyramid" standing on its summit.[...]general appearance is one of natural forces at work and not man-made. It is irregular and exhibits no stonework or tool marks[...]A small cave within the pyramid reveals dozens of the pipes embedded in the floor and angling out of the walls. They range in size from 10 centimeters up to 40 centimeters. They are reddish-brown and closely resemble the color of the surrounding rocks. On the shore of Lake Toson, additional cylinders are found, some as small as a toothpick. None of the cylinders are filled with debris or hardened sediments despite being reported as very old.

This is the same story that is circulated on most sites


This is a picture of the area and the lake:

A lake in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. It is a inland salt water lake lies outside the city of Delingha. Not far away there is another fresh water lake Keluke Lake, people had dubbed these two 'lovers' lake.

Dongi Tsona Lake

This is a picture of the entrance:




This is a little picture of the actual 'Pipes':

According to Qin Jianwen, head of the publicity department of the Delingha government, the scraps were once taken to a local smeltery for analysis. The result shows that they are made up of 30 percent ferric oxide with a large amount of silicon dioxide and calcium oxide. Eight percent of the content could not be identified. 　　

"The large content of silicon dioxide and calcium oxide is a result of long interaction between iron and sandstone, which meansthe pipes must be very old," said Liu Shaolin, the engineer who did the analysis.

Xihua net Original Story

China is not the only place where such rusted iron cylinders are located. There are "Louisiana cylinders" from an area near a gigantic salt dome just south of New Orleans and "Navajo pipes" from the same region in Utah as sandstone "Moqui marbles." Could the cylinders be the stems on which the "stone grapes" grew?

Ahh...so they exist in other locations perhaps? Sounds like there's a chance it could be a natural formation (the truth is so often cold)

Now I am no geologist, but it does strike me as rather odd that you have one of the largest salt water lakes nearby, and some unique rock/metal formations.

As expected after adding 'electricity' to the search I stumble upon a site which comes up with some rather interesting explanations for what caused these formations, now the explanation sounded pretty cool/good to me. At least someone has a theory that is 'of this earth', have a look at this site and the theories being explained, it also perhaps may link to the 'ancient african ball' that is ALWAYS brought up when people discuss ancient hidden archeological finds.




How do these pipes form naturally?

So, have a read through the above site, see if it makes sense to any of you and we can go from there.

Also noticed this has been on ATS before.

reply to post by TheGreensGoblin


Thanks for the research and also for the skeptical eye. This is the way I was hoping for skepticism to be practiced when I joined ATS. Star to you.

Rational Evaluation and consideration of all sides is something entirely different than the rabid denial and ridicule of the mysterious that passes as "Debunking" here.

[edit on 10-12-2008 by Skyfloating]

reply to post by Skyfloating


is there any point in updating the page 21 number 14 post? Has anyone tackled any of the other topics?

Originally posted by TheGreensGoblin
reply to post by Skyfloating

 

is there any point in updating the page 21 number 14 post? Has anyone tackled any of the other topics?

In the next update I will mark it as A = addressed.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
continued from opening posts

The Abydos Helicopter, Tank,

In my older thread Forbidden Egyptology and in 100+ other threads on ATS, this ancient egyptian inscription is the cause of much controversy:

Take a very close look at this picture. It is self-explanatory. Egyptologists have tried to pass this helicopter, tank, submarine and airplane as “hieroglyphs” but up to now they have failed to point out where else these writings can be seen other than in the ancient Egyptian Sethos Temple in Abydos. They have also failed to translate this supposed “language”.

What a load.

A valid translation for this was provided right here at ATS by our own Anthropologist, Byrd, who happens to be able to read Hieroglyphics.

An actual (partial) translation is also provided on the page that many here usually link straight to when the want to show this pic. It's one of the pages at Larry Orcutt's most excellent Catchpenny Mysteries of Ancient Egypt:

The text is part of the titulary of Ramesses II and can be translated as "The one of the Two Ladies, who suppresses the nine foreign countries." This replaces the royal titulary of Seti I that was originally carved into the stone. More technically, the actual "helicopter" seems to be a portion of the psd.t sign and the X3s.t sign on top of each other, with portions missing. An apparent change in scale also mucks things up.

It's part of what's known as the "Two Ladies" titulary (aka the Nebty name)for Ramsses II.

Egyptian kings had an entire litany of titles, the Nebty name being just a part of it.

Go to the linked Catchpenny site scroll down and you'll see what's labeled "the glyphs in context."

Now, click on this Wikipedia pageto see an explanation of the titulary of Egyptian kings and to view the five-fold titular example for Senusret (pic near the bottom of that page.

Note the Sedge, the duck and the bee in the "amazing helicopter" pic.

See them in Senusret's titulary?

The Wiki page explains what they mean, sort of.

So let's not pretend nobody knows what these things say. The reason the Nebty name portion looks weird is because it is a palimpsest. Seti's son, Ramesses II, came through and plastered over his old man's name and put up his own. Some of the plaster has since fallen out, as is explained at Mr. Orcutt's website.

The Nebty name should include the vulture and cobra shown at the wiki page, they should be on the right of the "helicopter" portion of the titulary, but they are not, are they?

However, you can see where that portion of the titulary has broken off and fallen to the floor, if you look closely. If you look more closely, you can see the two baskets, one for the vulture, one for the cobra, that the Nebty name utilizes. You can then discern parts of the bodies of the vulture and the cobra.

By the way, who is "Sethos" and where is his temple in Abydos?

This pic comes from the Temple of Osiris in Abydos.

Harte

reply to post by Harte


This was marked as "addressed" (A) on page 21. catchpenny was also linked several times.

I still dont buy the explanation "This is a language", because this supposed language is not found ANYWHERE ELSE.

But its been addressed from both the skeptics viewpoint and from ours.