Ancient Aliens Debunked?

reply to post by NephraTari

you just chose bits and scoffed at it without presenting any alternative evidence.

Alternative evidence? What in the hell are you talking about? The burden of proof is on those making the positive claim, not on those unconvinced or disbelieving. It is up to the AAH proponents to prove their claim, but in the end they just make some arguments from ignorance by pointing out a few ancient mysteries and filling in their question marks with aliens. Quite simply I don't need any evidence to show that they're full of it.

I chose the main arguments being made in the episode, no real evidence was presented by the proponents of AAH, just existing things that they somehow claim add up to alien visitation. This conclusion is unfortunately based in logically broken reasoning and speculative selective reinterpretation of some religious myths, monuments, artifacts and works of art. Tell me, what did I skip over that you are unsatisfied about?

and he talked about the planes among other things and how they have been reproduced and were the engines were and that they worked when reproduced.

I've seen videos of such "reproductions". Simply because if you add modern day machinery to a scaled-up representation of an ancient model doesn't mean the ancients had or saw airplanes and if they did have airplanes how would that suggest aliens - simple answer, it wouldn't.


reply to post by grimjimslim96


I've actually read the Book of Enoch though it was years ago. I don't remember exactly what information is passed to Enoch but the book does detail what information the fallen angels give to human beings. It includes only things that the ancients already knew how to do, metallurgy, jewelry making, astrology (strange for knowledgeable aliens to be indoctrinating humans into bogus things like astrology), etc. Quite simply the claim that these accounts describe aliens is a baseless assertion with no facts behind it.

Last Nights Coast To Coast Show .. had guest speakers on the Roswell UFO crash with real audio from witness's .. here are the links to that show

Coast to Coast
www.coasttocoastam.com...

www.coasttocoastam.com...
www.coasttocoastam.com...
www.coasttocoastam.com...

Rob Simone

robsimone.com...
Roswell Investigator
www.roswellinvestigator.com...

IMO
I really think there is much more to this than just the hiding of Roswell .. actually a more deeper thing may have been going on with the Alien thing.. I really believe this is what stirred the NASA program to come into the picture .. it had a lot to do with the fact that our Gov,, discovered we are not alone. So then it was lets hurry up we need to get to the moon ..

I for one enjoyed the Ancient Aliens episodes.Some topics I laughed at,others I thought was right on the mark.The shows definatly made me think. I beleive either we was visited or there was a race far more advanced here on earth and have long since departed.

reply to post by NorthStargal52


Would you care to provide evidence of these giants? So far every time I have seen this claim made all of the evidence provided was originally produced for a Photoshop competition.

reply to post by NorthStargal52


If the reason NASA exists is due to Roswell why did they wait until 11 years after Roswell to create it? The more likely explanation for NASA's existence is the obvious one. The Soviet's launched Sputnik on October 4, 1957. On January 12, 1958 NACA began discussing what steps would need to be taken to establish a civil space agency. On July 29, 1958 the National Aeronautics and Space Act was signed establishing NASA. So, what is a more likely cause for NASA being created, a possible non-event that occurred 11 years prior that most people had forgotten about; or an event that was seen as a major threat to national security that occurred less than a year prior?

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by NorthStargal52

 

If the reason NASA exists is due to Roswell why did they wait until 11 years after Roswell to create it? The more likely explanation for NASA's existence is the obvious one. The Soviet's launched Sputnik on October 4, 1957. On January 12, 1958 NACA began discussing what steps would need to be taken to establish a civil space agency. On July 29, 1958 the National Aeronautics and Space Act was signed establishing NASA. So, what is a more likely cause for NASA being created, a possible non-event that occurred 11 years prior that most people had forgotten about; or an event that was seen as a major threat to national security that occurred less than a year prior?

I remember the launch of Sputnik. That was a really big deal.

I'd say it scared Americans into action.

reply to post by Annee


I believe that through certain Scientists or who ever has studied the origin of ancient Aliens was on to something be it the Russians or the US or who ever they were Assigned to this for years and years .. Trying to see if in fact there was life beyond trying to connect the dots to this whole puzzle ..

Back then this was a hot pursuit and only those certain chosen ones that worked on top secret events knew what was happening .. Yet at the same time they never wanted the public to know and we still don’t know ..

Well after listening to the show the other night made just as much sense .. Roswell happened in 1947 ..then after NASA was formed in the 50's, and what they were indicating was that the Russians were involved in this Alien thing also ..

I was just more or less speaking of what the guests were talking about I’m sure YouTube has the show or they did have shows posted I don’t know if they are still doing this .. you have to be a member to listen to archived shows on Coast to Coast.. Ok so they had some taped phone calls of witness that were related to top security at Area51 .. I said that it could be possible that this was also a reason for NASA to explore space keeping an open mind one would kind of wonder ... I also said that I think there is much more to this than we know of ..

Of course the Russians were in a hurry to get to the moon or do space exploration and they also may have had their hands in many other things .. this was all top secret and what the guest speakers were saying is that people were actually threatened if they talked of anything to do with the Roswell incident.. Call it what you like but someone was conspiring to do something .. why then all the secrecy at Area 51????

They were said to have had a lab there working on Aliens ??? Now do I believe they did such things .. absolutely ..
Every one wants proof .. the proof is there behind locked minds and doors so if anyone can unlock that information we all would know.. Now wouldn’t we ?? I can at least keep an open mind and if they went to federal court and had real testimony on such things NASA was involved in then I guess it isn’t all just hot air..

Originally posted by suomichris

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

The Hakatha (Laws of the Babylonians) states quite unambiguously: "The privilege of operating a flying machine is great. The knowledge of flight is among the most ancient of our inheritances. A gift from 'those from upon high'. We received it from them as a means of saving many lives."

As far as I can determine, this is completely made up, and a near-perfect example of why you shouldn't just repeat things you heard somewhere unless you can actually confirm them in some way.

I could have sworn that I had addressed this quote before but I don't see it now using the search function.

This Hakatha thing - supposedly Babylonian but written in Sanskrit (Hakatha is a Hindu word - can't remember exactly what it refers to though - definitely not referring to Babylon, I can tell you that) always crops up in a blurb right below or above this gem:

In the Sanskrit Samarangana Sutradhara, it is written:

"Strong and durable must the body of the Vimana be made, like a great flying bird of light material. Inside one must put the mercury engine with its iron heating apparatus underneath. By means of the power latent in the mecrcury which sets the driving whirlwind in motion, a man sitting inside may travel a great distance in the sky. The movements of the Vimana are such that it can vertically ascend, vertically descend, move slanting forwards and backwards. With the help of the machines human beings can fly in the air and heavenly beings can come down to earth."

Source:"World Mysteries" Website It's in the third article on that page. Right after the unbearable Mr. Icke.

Someone named John Burrows wrote that (or claimed to.) This appears to be his only "contribution," such as it is, to the world.
The usual quote about "Hakatha" appears right there next to it, as expected.
Both this Hakatha (assuming that's not just a complete fabrication) and the Samarangana Sutradhara have been abused by fringers with nothing better to do with their time than lie to people that have no reason to know any different.

Note this on the Samarangana Sutradhara:

A manuscript, composed in Sanskrit by King Bhoja in the 11th Century A.D., deals with techniques of warfare, and in particular with certain types of war machines. The work is called Samarangana Sutradhara, or "Battlefield Commander"(sometimes abbreviated "the Samar"), and the whole of chapter XXXI is devoted to the construction and operation of several kinds of aircraft having various methods of propulsion.

Source: Atlantisquest Website

The above ridiculosity was penned by R. Cedric Leonard, a mildly-known pseudo writer and prevaricator extraordinaire.

Problem? The words "Samarangana Sutradhara" translate as "an Architect of human dwellings" It is primarily a work about town planning and building construction, although there are five verses in it about vimanas.

At any rate, it doesn't mean "Battlefield Commander."

These are the kinds of things one runs into when undertaking to investigate fringe claims on ancient Hindu civilizations. Very difficult unless you can read Sanskrit but fairly obvious that these fringers are not above baldfaced lies concerning these works.

Harte

When anyone mentions this old chestnut, namely "ancient astronauts", they always mention Von Daniken yet it was not he who first came up with theory. As I see it, George Hunt Williamson, was the first to theorise that the Nazca lines were made by visiting ancient aliens! He also said the Jomon Dogu figures were actually men in spacesuits..! He also was first to talk about the NWO and how a cabal of bankers really controlled the world long before David Icke decided they were all reptilian shapeshifters.Mind you, he also said that dinosaurs would be found flourishing at two remote areas on earth! Oh dear!

Originally posted by TheLordVeack
When anyone mentions this old chestnut, namely "ancient astronauts", they always mention Von Daniken yet it was not he who first came up with theory. As I see it, George Hunt Williamson, was the first to theorise that the Nazca lines were made by visiting ancient aliens! He also said the Jomon Dogu figures were actually men in spacesuits..! He also was first to talk about the NWO and how a cabal of bankers really controlled the world long before David Icke decided they were all reptilian shapeshifters.Mind you, he also said that dinosaurs would be found flourishing at two remote areas on earth! Oh dear!

Oldest "Ancient Astronaut theorist?"

That would be H. P. Lovecraft.

Read about it here.

Harte

try genesis

It has been said that Christians are "pretty narrow minded" to limit the population of the universe to merely GOD, ANGELS, AND MAN. After all, there are "billions and billions" of stars which perhaps have planets, which perhaps have civilizations etc. However, within the classification of angels [non- human or "alien" intelligent beings] exist diverse myriads. The concept of an ANGEL comes from the Greek aggelos from the Hebrew ago meaning "one going forth" or "one leading"; messenger. Not all angels are "good". Not all angels continue to do God's will, although all angels were originally created by God to convey His message. Some angels rebelled against God's plan. Some angels go forth to give their own message; some angels go forth to lead mankind AWAY from the truth. But all angels are more intelligent and powerful beings than mere humans, it is easy to see how the rebellious angels could have been worshipped as gods, when they descended to the Earth before the Flood, and deceived humans (Genesis 6).

The angels are represented throughout the Bible as a body of spiritual beings who intermediate between God and men: "You have made him (man) a little less than the angels" (Psalm 8:6). Angels, just as mankind, are created beings; "praise ye Him, all His angels: praise ye Him, all His hosts ... for He spoke and they were made. He commanded and they were created" (Psalm 148:2, 5: Colossians 1:16, 17). Contrary to popular belief, the Bible does not say that the only intelligent beings populating the universe are humans, in fact God created countless "non- human intelligent beings" before mankind. God is known throughout the Bible as the LORD OF HOSTS: Rule and fear are with Him, He makes peace in His high places. Is there any number to His armies? Job 25:2

www.mt.net...

reply to post by Harte


"I stand corrected."

Thanks for the link...

reply to post by Harte


Ah yes, the old ones, I'm surprised more AAH proponents aren't searching for the sunken city R'lyeh


Daniken often receives the credit for popularizing the idea though before his book was even published noted thinker Carl Sagan had suggested the possibility of alien contact in the ancient past. Ironically Sagan went on to be a skeptic of such ideas in the end. I am honestly surprised that more proponents of ancient aliens do not use Sagan as an appeal to authority as he is one of the few legitimate scientists to ever lend any credence to the idea, instead they rely on non-scholars like Sitchin and Daniken.

Greetings to all ! This is my first post on this seemingly interesting site ! Poking around, I saw this thread. I checked out alot of cool links many have posted containing info i've never heard about. Some posts were thought provoking. For example, one member posted ( not verbatim ) about the fact of while the USA has the tech we do, there are still places in the world where people with bones in their noses, use spears for hunting, and cover their genitals with animal skin.This, I imagined was to promote the idea that while some places are far behind, advanced tech can still exist during a time frame. Which would give probability to our ancestors having the ability greater than what we give them credit for. A wise man is able to entertain an idea without accepting it so, AAT is still fun for me.

I found the Ancient Aliens series very entertaining but, as with some here, far fetched with some explanations. I won't go into all things discussed here as too many topics have been touched. One of the biggest things to me that leads to AAT plausibility are the creation of certain cities and monuments. I'm not sure what technology humans had back then however, it sure is amazing that all of those things were created ( pyramids, tiwanaku etc ) without the invention of the wheel. Not to say that it was needed but, it seems such a creation would be primitive compared to what they built. If you cut down a tree, it rolls when you chop off all the branches. Figuring out ways to cut into some of the hardest rocks on earth and sculpt impressive works of art seems secondary. Eh, maybe it's just me.

OP, no disrespect to your extensive post but, it does seem like " Debunked " is a word less desired for the topic title. I know it's been stated enough but, just wanted to give you a p.o.v. from someone that doesn't portray themselves as a " know it all ". Although, I guess that could be the point of the " ? " after debunked in the title. AAT has yet to be proven ( hence the T for theory ) so, anything about it are just opinions as to why it makes sense or doesn't. For what it's worth, I agree and disagree with various parts of your post.

The phrase " you don't know where you're going if you don't know where you've been " ( or something of the like ) I think, is being taken too literal these days. It's cool that we have scientists and all of these great people trying to figure out our origin but, I think our future is much more important. In my opinion, If we spent half as much time trying to figure out if/how aliens got HERE as we do with trying to figure out how to get THERE, we'd probably be there already. I am by no means an expert on anything except being a regular person so please, do not take my post as such.

www.abovetopsecret.com... @H1ght3chHippie +1000

www.abovetopsecret.com... @ButterCookie +1, same here. Excluding the Bible doesn't seem right when you take into account how ancients described unexpalainable events. I got EXACTLY through the same process - from pure religion belief, through current ignorant science (denying UFOs), through believeing in UFOs, excluding Bible completely, through including the Bible stories again as misinterpreted sightings.

OP: You failed at debunking. Basically anyone can take something and say it is wrong. All you debunkers do is just make up very weak arguments of why something is wrong, sometimes decide to call your opinion - fact while have no evidence what it is THEN. No one tells you that AAT is the absolute truth yet you claim it is absolutely false... (with no evidence or any relevant arguments) - I'm not going into details many people who disagree have said things quite well.

How could a chariot be a UFO you ask? Why do American natives call the first trains 'Iron Horses'? How many cases primitive people describe technology or too extraordinary things as gods or machines/vehicles things they know? Others named planes 'Iron Birds'? Go to New Guinea with some high tech stealth or something and they (all those tribes) may call you God. What are you bashing those who have made strong arguments about? You have so weak arguemtns of debunking that only others who are just as opinionated can agree with you.

Chinese culture, other's culture have described like 5-6 feet tall creatures, is this just a myth? Yes it is either all fake like all lights are some myth and untrue story, but if not what is your explanation Debunker? There is no doubt some of the pictures describe not necessarily UFOs but objects like comeths, meteoirtes, etc, but what are Gods? You said some are natural - yes I also say some is nature but err natural disasters talk to people? WHat's your explanation about those encounters I agree the AAT cannot be taken as a fact, nor does anyone takes it but think about it - it all matches the story.... you are anotehr one who tries to force an opinion as a fact.

Someone coming and giving an opinion, then saying: "Hey I debunked AAT, big deal that many have worked on this for years and their entire life; are academic people or a lot more into it than me, Im correct with my no-arguments", that's just ridiclous.

reply to post by Imtor

OP: You failed at debunking. Basically anyone can take something and say it is wrong. All you debunkers do is just make up very weak arguments of why something is wrong, sometimes decide to call your opinion - fact while have no evidence what it is THEN. No one tells you that AAT is the absolute truth yet you claim it is absolutely false... (with no evidence or any relevant arguments) - I'm not going into details many people who disagree have said things quite well.

The OP was aimed at debunking the episode of 'Ancient Aliens' that was posted. It then listed the claims in that episode and debunked them.

By extension, if the foundation elements of the 'ancient aliens' narrative are flimsy, the entire hypothesis is probably flimsy too. It doesn't make the UFO enigma go away, it just means that, yup, stuff like pyramids and large rocks were carved and built by humans...all by themselves. It also underlines the fact that if we can portray complex people and worlds like Avatar, Star Wars and soap operas...we can imagine God/gods and their story-lines too.

Originally posted by Kandinsky
The OP was aimed at debunking the episode of 'Ancient Aliens' that was posted. It then listed the claims in that episode and debunked them.

It was quite clear he meant the whole theory, not specifically the one on the History movie, not specifically this episode.

reply to post by Imtor


Actually he has stated a few times in this thread that he was specifically discussing just the first episode of Ancient Aliens. Someone posted it as proof in another thread and told the OP that he couldn't debunk it. This thread is the result.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
Actually he has stated a few times in this thread that he was specifically discussing just the first episode of Ancient Aliens. Someone posted it as proof in another thread and told the OP that he couldn't debunk it. This thread is the result.

Even so, what he produced was an outstanding critique of the ancient alien theory, that showed both the weakness of the theory and the weakness of the arguments of the apologists.

Originally posted by Imtor
OP: You failed at debunking.

And you fail at producing a cogent defense of your beliefs.

Originally posted by Imtor
Basically anyone can take something and say it is wrong.

The OP did no such thing. He produced facts, evidence and a cogent argument to back up his opinions. The ancient alien apologists dismiss these, needing to ignore them and not acknowledge their existence in order to protect themselves from cognitive dissonance.

Originally posted by Imtor
All you debunkers do is just make up very weak arguments of why something is wrong

Speaking of weak arguments, you have not told us where the OP is wrong. Just stating he is wrong and making weak arguments...

Originally posted by Imtor
How could a chariot be a UFO you ask?

You are assuming that ancients did not actually mean chariot.

Originally posted by Imtor
Why do American natives call the first trains 'Iron Horses'?

They didn't, at least not in the fashion thought of in popular-culture. "Iron Horse" was popular slang for any steam-driven machine in the 1800s, used by Europeans and Natives. It was not called an "Iron Horse" because uneducated savages thought they were living machines.

It seems much of the ancient astronaut theory is built on racism. Funny how few European achievements are attributed to aliens and how many non-white achievements are.

Originally posted by Imtor
How many cases primitive people describe technology or too extraordinary things as gods or machines/vehicles things they know?

How many? Please, tell us.

Originally posted by Imtor
Others named planes 'Iron Birds'?

Who did this?

Originally posted by Imtor
Go to New Guinea

That's fairly ignorant. The modern people of New Guinea are no less intelligent or worldly than you or I.

Originally posted by Imtor
Chinese culture, other's culture have described like 5-6 feet tall creatures, is this just a myth?

Why would a five-to-six foot tall creature be something extraordinary?

And by the way, the answer to your question is yes, it is a myth.

Originally posted by Imtor
Yes it is either all fake like all lights are some myth and untrue story, but if not what is your explanation Debunker?

That question makes no sense.

Originally posted by Imtor
There is no doubt some of the pictures describe not necessarily UFOs but objects like comeths, meteoirtes, etc, but what are Gods?

At least you acknowledge there is natural explanations.

Originally posted by Imtor
You said some are natural - yes I also say some is nature but err natural disasters talk to people? WHat's your explanation about those encounters

Again, your question makes no sense.

Originally posted by Imtor
I agree the AAT cannot be taken as a fact, nor does anyone takes it but think about it - it all matches the story.... you are anotehr one who tries to force an opinion as a fact.

What?

Only the weak-minded think that an opinion on an internet forum is being "forced" on them.

Originally posted by Imtor
Someone coming and giving an opinion, then saying: "Hey I debunked AAT, big deal that many have worked on this for years and their entire life; are academic people or a lot more into it than me, Im correct with my no-arguments", that's just ridiclous.

Why is it ridiculous? It does not matter how long someone has worked on something or what degrees they may hold. If they are wrong, they are wrong.