Were Humans Created by Reptilians?

reply to post by autowrench


What about this...?

After dinosaurs were wiped out...Early humans and animals arose and/or were created and lived peacefully on the planet.

After many idyllic years of peace another species (Anunaki -Draco Reptilians, whatever) came here and began not only digging for gold to save their planet...but manipulating the DNA of the early humans, creating slaves, warriors and in general disrupting the peace. This may have culminated in what we know as "original sin" and the garden incident.

Now...these interlopers (lets call them angels) may ALSO be creations of the same entity that brought about the earth and mammals.
They may look upon us as lesser (handicapped) brothers (since we cannot astrally project or move among dimensions etc.) and there may be some rivalry between the species.

This entity - maker/creator/God (if you will) may have intended and even demanded a separation of HIS creations or species, (human and angel or reptile) and forbid them to mix.

But the angels saw the daughters of men were fair and took them as wives.

As much as I am tempted by this thread to assume I am praying to no one or to a reptilian I know in my heart there is a good force above all of this which remains hidden or concealed from view (unless you look for the good in everything).

Not of HIS own accord but because HIS creation (the bad angels-reptilians) are masking HIS very existence and trying to claim our souls as their own.
They may get to keep as many souls as they persuade to go along with their evil agenda.

SOMEBODY answers my prayers IF my heart is in the right place and my intentions are unselfish and either ignores them or makes them backfire when they are not. This is no bad guy. This is not evil. It is a reminder and gentle push to stay above the fray.

Had I not been taught this by constant repetition I would tend to think EVIL is in control. I know it is not.
It may have the upper hand right now. It may be doing a great job deceiving us...but it is not... the end all... be all.

if mankind is created by extraterrestrials, then so are the animals which live on our planet. in the end, we don't know. but we can ask ourselves...

first of all, if the whole universe is existing within a little globe in a huge hall with other globes, in control of unknown entities from a very other place. that would mean, all life in the universe is created by another lifeform. compared to the universe, we anyway are small, but that would make us even smaller.

second of all, many different species in the universe creating other species, just as they have been created, just as we are creating.

since the universe has always existed and has been rebooted again and again (as i believe), we cant tell for sure, if we have always been here in this form of life or not, or if this is just one of many planets that mankind lives on in the same form.

anyway, the universe is full of life, like a field full of flowers, grass, insects and other natural living things. it's a neverending question for us to ask, if we are somewhere in the middle of creation or at the end. if a higher spirit created us or if we got created by another lifeform which has been created by the higher spirit. it's brainknoting to think about it...

one thing i believe in, is that extraterrestrials are creating hybrids of their kind and mankind. after i've read so many books about abductions, this is something that stands out the most, in my opinion.

i think there is a spirit unleashing all kinds of lives within the universe, which is all there is, created by nothing, just existing. i don't believe in a big bang... i think the universe has always and will always be there. but it's always changing. some kind of a calming thought, thinking about we aren't as huge as an ant compared to the universe. that's why i always feel bad when i accidentaly step on an ant... thinking, it could have been me, walking, looking for food, because we are actually the same size.

peace !

reply to post by ucalien


To be honest i agree with you more than i agree with the others. Its just that i see this from a different angel.

I mentioned something about: If you mix religion and facts. You end up with a great mystery. That is the same as saying: People have a lot of knowledge about a few facts.

Knowledge and facts are not the same thing. Knowledge comes from our interpretation of "facts". And that becomes our knowledge. But what if the scholars interpreted just a fraction of this myth (images and Carvings) wrong?

Then we suddenly have more knowledge then facts.

As you can tell the reptile myth is a alliterative to the religion we preach to day. Because people interpret facts differently. As you can see.





[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

reply to post by rusethorcain


ruse, i tend to feel the same way about the world we live in myself.. fortunately for me I can now say that I truely am starting to awaken; after a very long boring time of being unemployed, stuck at home living in my parents basement (ironic, isn't it), and YEARS of doing my own personal research... things are finally starting to "click".

I personally can not wait until 2012 - no matter what happens, I know a LOT of things are going to change (no, it won't be the end of the world).

Originally posted by spy66
reply to post by ucalien

 

To be honest i agree with you more than i agree with the others. Its just that i see this from a different angel.

I mentioned something about: If you mix religion and facts. You end up with a great mystery. That is the same as saying: People have a lot of knowledge about a few facts.

Knowledge and facts are not the same thing. Knowledge comes from our interpretation of "facts". And that becomes our knowledge. But what if the scholars interpreted just a fraction of this myth (images and Carvings) wrong?

Then we suddenly have more knowledge then facts.

Facts are what you know in your heart to be true.

reply to post by mblahnikluver


Two theories backing credible evidence doesn't mean both have to be accepted; rather neither should be.

we were made in their image... I dont look repilian do you...?
2nd line

reply to post by JoeGroomlake


Joe I agree with what you're saying.. no matter how much research I do, or how much I try to understand things - there's no way my "simple human mind" can truely understand immortality... the best I've been able to do with thinking about it came to me just recently when I was thinking about the idea of there being an infinite amount of dimensions - who's to say when we "die" we're not simply leaving one dimension and entering a new one? Problem is, it's kind of a Paradox i guess.. i mean if you "die" in one dimension and are "born" in another dimension, how will you ever know? Everything happens for a reason.

reply to post by rusethorcain


No, "fact" means:

a statement or assertion of verified information about something that is the case or has happened

Not

Whatever the hell you want

reply to post by davesidious

"fact" - a statement or assertion of verified information about something that is the case or has happened.

-- verified by who, God???
-- if "it" happened hundreds / thousands / a very long time ago how do we really KNOW it happened?? where you there when it happened or are you just believing what somebody else tells you happened?

Originally posted by rusethorcain

Originally posted by spy66
reply to post by ucalien

 

To be honest i agree with you more than i agree with the others. Its just that i see this from a different angel.

I mentioned something about: If you mix religion and facts. You end up with a great mystery. That is the same as saying: People have a lot of knowledge about a few facts.

Knowledge and facts are not the same thing. Knowledge comes from our interpretation of "facts". And that becomes our knowledge. But what if the scholars interpreted just a fraction of this myth (images and Carvings) wrong?

Then we suddenly have more knowledge then facts.

Facts are what you know in your heart to be true.

I agree... Its your hart and mind that decides your whew of what you observe. But that becomes a problem when you have hundreds of different literature that tells a different story. That means your hart and mind would have to decide between what is logic.

Logic is not a standard to anyone unless they have observed the truth.

repost of mine from another thread:

the difference between what Sitchin says about our "creation as slaves to mine gold" in the sumerian texts, and what the Sumerian texts actually say about our "creation as slaves": (get ready. might want to get a sandwich or something first lol)

There's no time line given (so the 100,000 years ago thing is Sitchin guessing).

HOWEVER, it is there in black and white in the sumerian texts, that the lesser gods were tired of doing the work which wasn't mining but canal digging, went on strike and protested to Enki. Enki came up with a solution. He then created the workers with the 7 birth goddesses and his sister Ninmah.

you can read it here:
Enki and Ninmah
www-etcsl.orient.ox.ac.uk...

Sitchin claims that the stories from which he derived his version of the creation of man, are on tablets that are not released to the public but are in the big archive of cylinder seal tablets in some museum. He says he taught himself how to translate the cuneiform and spent a very long time, translating the tablets. So far, Oxford University has a list of translated tablets which you can see here: www-etcsl.orient.ox.ac.uk...

however, those tablets cover sumerian, akkadian and babylonian references. it's a misnomer to say they are all sumerian. sitchin has a tendency to call them all sumerian texs. that's not the best way to approach the data because the timeline is so crucial for cross referencing. so if the data crosses the sumerian timeline to another timeline, i will reference it with a dash, thusly: sumerian-akkadian or sumerian-babylonian.

For example, a flood tablet would be AFTER sumer, which was wiped out by the black sea flood. sumer was found thousands of years later, under 8 ft. of flood silt. the sumerian kings list is really not a sumerian text, even though it references sumerian kings, but was written AFTER sumer. also, the enuma elish would NOT be a sumerian text. it may cover sumerian events but it isn't written in the sumerian time line. that's important to know, ESPECIALLY with the enuma elish. i'll explain why, shortly.

next up is david icke's reptilian data. i have reason to believe he is correct but to what degree is the real question. for example, in the sumerian-akkadian text ENKI AND THE WORLD ORDER (no kidding, that's the name of it), we find a reference to ENKI as "great dragon who stands in Eridug"
(eridug is eridu)

and in the sumerian-akkadian text, ENLIL IN THE E-KUR, we see this reference to Enlil: " He alone is the prince of heaven, the dragon of the earth"

What could they have possibly meant by "dragon", thousands of years before the concept of "dragons" as four legged, scaley beasts with firey eyes, gaping jaws with rows of pointy teeth and firey breath, was popularized in europe? Well, I think I may be able to explain.

In IRAQI's museum gallery, I found this photograph of a statue which is circa 4000 BC, and was the only statue excavated from Enki's city of Eridu available for viewing:

front
oi.uchicago.edu...
source
oi.uchicago.edu...
side
oi.uchicago.edu...
source
oi.uchicago.edu...

Soon I noticed there were many such statues. In fact, hundreds of such statues from all over Iraq, males and females, and all of them depicting reptilian-mammalian or amphibian-mammalian features. That in itself was no real shocker, till I realized that there were literally, no human statues before 4000 BC. they were all these odd hybrids.

It was then the idea dawned on me that perhaps these were an angelic race of some kind, a creation prior to humans, which actually fits the biblical and pseudopigraphical texts quite well. Angels were created before humans. The "serpent" (read seraph, plural seraphim, a race of angels) was in the
"garden" before we were, then.

This idea fit in very well with my previous readings in a book called GOD'S PLAN FOR MAN, written by Finis Dake, at least a decade before the Roswell incident. He was a fundie christian, btw. In it, he describes the earth as belonging to the angels before humans ever arrived. That it was the testing phase for their race, and that they had advanced technologically, gone out into the solar system and colonized other planets and moons, and ended up in a war with God, at which point the planet earth was turned into a frozen chunk of ice.

I theorized from Dake's material, then, that Genesis was meant to deal primarily with the topic of the arrival of humans on the planet and only gave rare hints as to the planet's sentient lifeforms, prior to our arrival. In short, the "serpents" were a race otherwise known as "dragons, " and not only that, but the texts had been inappropriately translated in such a way that the evidence of these serpents had been isolated to apply to only one of them, when in fact, it was ALL OF THEM -- an entire race of these serpentine angels.

To verify the data, I went repeatedly to scripture and other ancient texts, just in case i had missed some little nuance that changed the picture but found that it was most likely true that the "dragons" were in fact reptilian-mammalian AND amphibian-mammalian hybrids, who flew thru the sky in flying devices.

As you can well imagine, that lead me to the book of Revelation 12, where it mentions the following:

12: 3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.
12: 4And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.
[...]
12: 7And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
12: 8And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
12: 9And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

At first glance those passages sound as if they are only explaining events happening in the time of Christ. however, revelation is a many layered affair, as you will soon see:

David Flynn (bible researcher) discovered the constellation Draco the Dragon plays a very important role in the data. You can see it here.



In addition, I believe this also has a layer I call the "alien invasion" layer. I believe the tail of the dragon throwing the angels down to the earth is clearly not talking about actual stars. can you imagine 1/3 rd of the stars pummeling earth? Nope. But if those stars are not stars in the literal sense but "seraphim" or "serpents" falling to the earth? now we have ourselves an alien invasion. I say alien but really this was originally their planet. However, I think many of them were forced to leave the earth during the flood and haven't been back enmasse since then. However, that doesn't mean they aren't here now.

i try to avoid mainstream babylonian texts because their data is compromised by the hatchet job we all know as the enuma elish. that text took advantage of the fact that most of the evidence of what had transpired in sumer, prior to the flood, was buried under tons of flood silt.

it's only now in retrospect, following many years of archaeological excavations and after the excavation of sumer, that we are able to look back at the data seen in the mainstream texts of babylon and realize the extent of the changes.

for example, the enuma elish approaches the data as if what were once inanimate objects or physical locations were suddenly deified gods and goddesses. an example is the deification of abzu, who was originally not an entity but a thing. and tiamat, who was originally not a deity but a thing.

The biblical God is both Enlil and Enki (Ea).
Sitchin was trying to promote the idea that Enlil was the mean guy, who he said was YEHOVAH. so whenever the text referred to God doing something that seemed cruel or harsh, it was clearly Enlil. And if it was nice and friendly, it was Enki, or YAHWEH.

Wrong.

in an excerpt from ENMERKAR AND THE LORD OF ARRATA, an akkadian text, we see a portion come to be known as THE NAMSHUB OF ENKI. In it, Enki is seen changing the speech of man, putting contention into it. This is the same reference as the biblical account of God confusing the language at the building of the Tower of Babel. in fact, enmerkar and the lord of arrata is the akkadian text describing the activities of nimrod (enmerkar). Sitchin doesn't tell you that God in the biblical account in the related passage, is translated from YEHOVAH. not Yahweh, and is Enki not Enlil, because he wants you to think that it's only Enki when it's nice and only Enlil when it's not nice.

Enki, the lord of abundance, whose commands are trustworthy, The lord of wisdom, who scans the land, The leader of the gods, The lord of Eridu, endowed with wisdom, Changed the speech in their mouths, put contention into it, Into the speech of man that had been one.

THE NAMSHUB OF ENKI (excerpted from ENMERKAR AND THE LORD OF ARRATA)
deoxy.org...

For example (the numbers are strongs numbers for reference to original words in the original language of the text)

Gen 11:9 Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD 3068 did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD 3068 scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

Strongs Number 3068
www.blueletterbible.org...

Verse listing (see first verse at top of page) with Strongs numbers inset
www.blueletterbible.org...


[edit on 1-3-2010 by undo]

Originally posted by sum1one
reply to post by JoeGroomlake

 

Joe I agree with what you're saying.. no matter how much research I do, or how much I try to understand things - there's no way my "simple human mind" can truely understand immortality... the best I've been able to do with thinking about it came to me just recently when I was thinking about the idea of there being an infinite amount of dimensions - who's to say when we "die" we're not simply leaving one dimension and entering a new one? Problem is, it's kind of a Paradox i guess.. i mean if you "die" in one dimension and are "born" in another dimension, how will you ever know? Everything happens for a reason.

I believe you should keep on pondering that thought. Because i believe you are onto something.

I tried to figure out what God is. To do that i had to look into Infinite and finite energies. I had to study science.

Science actually define what God is without even knowing it. And i think its odd that all the bright people on ATS don't see it. Because they know the definition very well and use it all the time.

Originally posted by ChemBreather
S&F , and I toss this 2 hour lecture in for you...
He talks about the Reptilians and the first 'adam's and Eve's . Aka Humans Ver.1 thru Ver.4 (us ) ..

The Destruction of Atlantis . M.Tsarion ..

Google Video Link

[edit on 28/2/2010 by ChemBreather]

Thanks for the video, schmuck! I went to bed last night after watching it all sorts of freaked out. heh

Star 4 u from the horrors you fed my mind.

reply to post by sum1one


Verified by people. That's how the word works. If it's verifiable by God, and God alone, then it's nothing more than a myth.

If something happens a long time ago, it's still possible to know it happened by studying records from the time, or any effects it might have had on things we can measure. That's how science works. If you find that stupid, may I suggest stop being hypocritical and turning off your computer?

Maybe the reptillians did not create man but created a bloodline to fit in and have dominion over us through the ages of Empires?

Yeh cliche but the film Avatar, they had to create a way for the humans to fit in with the Aliens to not be so threatening.

Maybe its the same thing here, some guardians of the Draco that got changed to Human form to fit in and not be so threatening in Appearence?

Possible and another way to look at it.

According to these texts, the fallen angels who begat the Nephilim were cast into Tartarus/Gehenna, a place of 'total darkness'. However, Jubilees also states that God granted ten percent of the disembodied spirits of the Nephilim to remain after the flood, as demons, to try to lead the human race astray (through idolatry, the occult, etc.) until the final Judgment

[edit on 1-3-2010 by Sparkey76]

reply to post by davesidious


I respectfully disagree.

Just because something does not have a verifiable human scientific study attached to it does not make it any less of a fact.

Originally posted by sum1one
reply to post by JoeGroomlake

 

Joe I agree with what you're saying.. no matter how much research I do, or how much I try to understand things - there's no way my "simple human mind" can truely understand immortality... the best I've been able to do with thinking about it came to me just recently when I was thinking about the idea of there being an infinite amount of dimensions - who's to say when we "die" we're not simply leaving one dimension and entering a new one? Problem is, it's kind of a Paradox i guess.. i mean if you "die" in one dimension and are "born" in another dimension, how will you ever know? Everything happens for a reason.

SHORT OFF-TOPIC, sorry !

interesting. frankly, i haven't thought about it that exact way before. maybe, after each 'death', we climb one dimension higher, or lower, determined by our spiritual knowledge. i think if the spirit would be bound to the body, we wouldn't be able to dream or to have OBEs, therefore the soul travels. and it's just too dark to imagine, that after death, there will be nothing but nothingness. i rather believe in eternity all my life and get dissapointed in the end then living the whole life in depression and get suprised in the end. there are so many wonders happening every second, i wouldnt be surprised flying over my city after my death, becoming and changing to something more extended, or maybe less. and i believe those many (not all of them) near death experiences of people, which have, let's say, been clinically dead for 20 minutes and came back to life to tell a story that is just wonderful. i want to believe. there is so much beauty in the universe, i would be pissed if i would die without seeing it. i want to travel the universe... one day. and i don't really wanna know what's gonna be when i die... i don't wanna miss that flashy stoned surprise moment of walking into a light, or maybe just nothing at all, which i wouldn't experience anymore, because there would be literally nothing at all. we will see...

[edit on 1-3-2010 by JoeGroomlake]

[edit on 1-3-2010 by JoeGroomlake]

reply to post by Sparkey76


The biology of mankind is well understood. We know where we came from, and the answer isn't "reptilian overlords".

If you want to develop your idea further, some evidence would be a fantastic start, otherwise you'll just be arguing your opinion.

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by sum1one

 

Verified by people. That's how the word works. If it's verifiable by God, and God alone, then it's nothing more than a myth.

If something happens a long time ago, it's still possible to know it happened by studying records from the time, or any effects it might have had on things we can measure. That's how science works. If you find that stupid, may I suggest stop being hypocritical and turning off your computer?

If something is actually verifiable by God

1. Show it to me
2. I will believe it
3. Then it would no longer be considered a myth.