PROOF Aliens Were Involved In Our Past

Originally posted by KingJames1337
reply to post by SecretKnowledge

 

The first definition is sufficient evidence to produce belief in it's truth. The OP is enough for me to believe the idea aliens were present in our past is true.

sufficent evidence in your opinion. evidence does not equal proof. they are not the same thing. i understand that you believe the evidence you have provided is enough to produce belief, but still this is not proof. and putting the word proof in capitals in your headline is not helping your case at all.

Machines of war do not constitute an advanced civilization.

I have a feeling ancient Greeks were far happier than modern Greeks,
Same with Egyptians.

It is logical that if an ET came to earth 5000 years ago, that civilization was more advanced then, compared to our modern one, as current man does not have star travel technology.

The issue is IF an ET came. How to prove it?

How do you get historical 'facts'?
old books, fossils, artifacts, myths

Yes myths - these are stories preserved in public memory. Stories may be correct or incorrect, but they do play a role in man's understanding of events.

Even artifacts may be incorrect. An inscription on stone can as well be a work of fiction. If a man today can write imaginative books, why not an ancient man.

So when we talk about history, myths do play a role.

reply to post by vedatruth


Man refuses to believe even when evidence is monumental. One such thing is pyramids.

The volume of stone used, accuracy of construction, the distance over which stone was hauled, and the way it was quarried, all points to technology available with ancient egyptians that was similar to modern construction technology - that is electric drills, cranes, electric cutting and polishing tools etc. The stone blocks (weighing 2-3 tonnes) are interlocking, which is an engineering feat. Some of the granite blocks are more than 50 tonnes, and placed quite high in the pyramid structure. The granite is polished to a mirror finish. How can you acieve all this with primitive hand tools.

[

Good post but no proof.

You have as much proof as the history channel.

It is all speculation.

reply to post by SecretKnowledge


As with evidence itself, the criteria for sufficiency of evidence are also strongly area-dependent, usually with no absolute threshold of sufficiency at which evidence becomes proof.[12][13][14] The same evidence that may convince one jury may not persuade another. Formal proof provides the main exception, where the criteria for proofhood are ironclad and it is impermissible to defend any step in the reasoning as "obvious";[15] for a well-formed formula to qualify as part of a formal proof, it must be the result of applying a rule of the deductive apparatus

So what is proof to me might not be proof to you or others. Instead of looking into whether what I said constitutes as proof in terms of the definition why don't we look at whether what I'am saying with respect to the images and how they can be explained?

reply to post by reficul


Thank you for the response, we do tend to take things out of context and change things over time.

Originally posted by lonegurkha
I was with ya right up to the apes in the Amazon statement. There are no apes in the Americas just monkeys . Do you know the difference between new and old world primates? There is a major difference ,check it out you may find it interesting.

My bad, I was hoping that was a correct statement but I wasn't sure, the point I was trying to make is how many times apes probably actually encountered manmade machines is probably low.

Originally posted by DrHammondStoat
reply to post by KingJames1337

 

But that is not proof

Proof and evidence are definitely two different things. Also evidence can be sorted into different levels of reliability.

It seems that again you are expressing your opinion in that you think the evidence you've seen is utterly compelling, others will disagree with you as this is always a matter of opinion. Real proof would not not rely on opinion.

What is real proof? If someone cooks a steak and says it is medium rare but another says it is not then who are we too believe? The exact definition of medium rare varies from person to person. A house that someone sees as big might be small to another, there is a lack of real proof in almost any field. What could constitute as real proof is that we are homo sapiens, some of us are male and female, the places we live in are actual places, the earth is round. Even a case as in murder is something that can't be subject to apparent real proof unless there is dna evidence connected to the murderer, even that isn't real proof to the alleged murderer's defense because the dna might have gotten there accidentally, but that combined with eyewitness testimony can be evidence that beyond a reasonable doubt a person is guilty of murder even though it might not be proof to some.

Originally posted by ShadowMonk

Originally posted by KingJames1337
I realize you are probably not reading this any longer and have went to google 'Scarlett Johannson Naked Pictures' for this I cannot blame you. However for the people who have already seen the pictures I will continue

edit on 23-9-2011 by KingJames1337 because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-9-2011 by KingJames1337 because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-9-2011 by KingJames1337 because: (no reason given)

HOW DID YOU KNOW!?!?

Because I'm #ING Nostradamus....and it's the exact same thing I would have done even if I had seen the pictures. And for those people looking deeply into my words, please don't try to disprove my claim, I know he's dead. And also for the people who are trying to disprove the other claim I might have made with those first four words you took my claim out of context.

I do find it interesting that two of the images you chose have a very similar symbol/craft in them. I wonder what the "X" in the first image was supposed to represent.

Originally posted by KingJames1337 First I would like to address the 'Ancient Aliens of The Gaps' defense, some use it correctly as in the idea that we believe we couldn't have built the pyramids so it must have been aliens but to those who believe everything is subject to the 'aliens of the gaps theory' please tell me if you walk into every house in a neighborhood and most houses contain pictures of a certain person around it you are going to think that person is pretty important why else would they put pictures of them in THEIR house.

These are two different arguments. I'll address the "recurring images" argument in a minute- the 'aliens of the gaps' idea is that any time you find a gap or something unexplained in archaeology, Ancient Aliens theorists will attribute this to aliens for no reason other than that it is currently unexplained. You could just as reasonably attribute all these unexplained things in archaeology as "bigfoot did it." There's no evidence one way or another.

Just because we can't imagine how the ancients built the pyramids doesn't mean they couldn't possibly have done it without alien intervention. It just shows how limited our imaginations are, or how much architectural knowledge we have lost since then.

If you really think the pyramids are inexplicable and therefore there must have been aliens involved, why are you so quick to jump to aliens when it could have been time travellers? Or a lost, advanced civilization like atlantis? Or the work of some other, more advanced sentient species that has since gone to live underground or on mars or something? Or maybe ghosts did it? Or maybe God just reached down and made them himself?

Of course, the most reasonable explanation is that the Egyptians built them, since the pyramids use materials that we know the Egyptians used, and the Egyptians describe building other pyramids, and the only missing piece is the exact details of their methods and technology. Several very reasonable theories have been proposed to date.

Sense we see many pictures of disks and objects in the sky in various places around the world so what gives. ...
Gods do not all come from the sky so why depict them as coming from the sky,

Obviously, not all depictions of Gods are sky gods. Try searching yourself for earth gods, sea gods, etc. Or do you claim that the only images of Gods are those of sky gods? Such a claim is clearly false.

Gods can be land borne so why depict them as coming from the sky, angels have wings why?

Think about what the world must have looked like to primitive humanity- an unchanging, unexplained "dome" of sky overhead contrasting with the messy activity of humans and animals below... Clearly, if the Gods were going to live somewhere where we couldn't get at them, obviously they'd have to live in the sky. And of course, not all ancient peoples thought the Gods lived in the sky. The Greeks placed them on Mount Olympus, for example. And before polytheism/monotheism, we believed the Gods inhabited the earth along with us as spirits, or alongside us in other dimensions.

Also for people saying why don't we have evidence of Alien equipment or vehicles, for one every piece of alien technology is probably going to be covered up by the government

Why? This is just a slapdash excuse for their being no evidence. I might as well claim that any evidence that "Batman" was real and based on a true story is being covered up by the government. I could claim that Willy Wonka's everlasting gobstopper is real and exists, but we'd never know it because the government covers it up.

All these images include a disk, and some incorporate a star, and all have tails or an array of lines that seem to represent some kind of luminous appendage.  What kind of heavenly body can appear as a bright star or shining disk and has a tail? 

A comet, for one. And the sun is a disk, and so is the moon. Are you shocked that ancient people would depict disks in the sky? And the circle is one of the most universal symbols you could find; it's basic geometry; it isn't surprising that it should show up in any human civilization.

Originally posted by vedatruth
reply to post by Klassified

 

Necessary characterstics of an advanced civilization:

a. No poverty
b. No disease
c. Uniform application of law to all citizens, quick and efficient justice
d. Simple laws and justice system
e. Low taxes (or absence of taxes altogether, if it is a system based on State owned business)
f. Strong family values
g. Stong social bonds
h. Strong morality and fear of God
i. Absence of crime (or very low crime)

All opinion of course.

Originally posted by vedatruth
reply to post by Klassified

 

Necessary characterstics of an advanced civilization:

a. No poverty
b. No disease
c. Uniform application of law to all citizens, quick and efficient justice
d. Simple laws and justice system
e. Low taxes (or absence of taxes altogether, if it is a system based on State owned business)
f. Strong family values
g. Stong social bonds
h. Strong morality and fear of God
i. Absence of crime (or very low crime)

I disagree as people have a habit of equating Alien morals and concerns as they view and understand there own Human ones. E.T. may want for little if anything other than information....but they neither think as we do nor rationalize or have any equivelent of Human ideals of Morality. Split Infinity

Originally posted by KingJames1337

What is real proof? If someone cooks a steak and says it is medium rare but another says it is not then who are we too believe? The exact definition of medium rare varies from person to person. A house that someone sees as big might be small to another, there is a lack of real proof in almost any field.

These are examples of subjective statements for which there can't be proof one way or another. On the other hand, instead of saying the house is big I could say the house is exactly 30 meters tall- and if you disagree, you could get a ruler and measure it. That's an example of an objective statement, and it is subject to proof and evidence, and it can either be right or wrong.

What could constitute as real proof is that we are homo sapiens, some of us are male and female, the places we live in are actual places, the earth is round.

Well, I wouldn't call these statements proof- what are they proof of? - but I would call them true statements, to the best of my knowledge.

Even a case as in murder is something that can't be subject to apparent real proof unless there is dna evidence connected to the murderer, even that isn't real proof to the alleged murderer's defense because the dna might have gotten there accidentally, but that combined with eyewitness testimony can be evidence that beyond a reasonable doubt a person is guilty of murder even though it might not be proof to some.

You're right- we can't really prove a murder case, we can only pile up the evidence until it becomes overwhelming.

Some evidence, such as DNA evidence, is better than others, because it'd be harder for the murderer's blood to get to the scene of the crime if he was uninvolved than if he actually was the murderer and was wounded during the murder.

Furthermore, if we have DNA evidence that places him at the scene of the crime, and several eyewitnesses that say they saw him do it, then we've pretty reasonably established that he is our man.

Of course, they could be lying and the DNA could be there accidentally or coincidentally or the tests could be wrong. We can't prove it for sure. But everyday in all our lives we rely on assumptions just as solid as this one- you assume that when you step on the brakes in your car that they'll work, that the mechanic who fixed your brakes last time did a good job; you assume that the lady at the checkout is actually a human lady and not a cabbage in disguise; you assume that when you wake up you'll be roughly in the same spot where you went to sleep, etc.

My point is that we can rely on assumptions and things even if they aren't 100%.


Now, given what we've discussed as evidence in this post, I would say that the evidence for ancient aliens is slim to none. People hold up images of disks and gods and claim that they represent aliens- but they're better evidence for the claim of mainstream archaeologists, who claim that the ancients weren't depicting aliens but were depicting what they thought their gods looked like.

Likewise, the existence of the pyramids, by itself, is not "proof" or even evidence of aliens. Like I pointed out in my post above, not knowing how the pyramids got there, they could be seen as evidence of any number of outlandish claims. I could personally take the unexplained existence of the pyramids as evidence for my claim that human beings once were five times as tall as they are today, and lifting and placing those stones was as easy to them as a child playing in a sandbox.

Originally posted by vedatruth
reply to post by Klassified

 

Necessary characterstics of an advanced civilization:

a. No poverty
b. No disease
c. Uniform application of law to all citizens, quick and efficient justice
d. Simple laws and justice system
e. Low taxes (or absence of taxes altogether, if it is a system based on State owned business)
f. Strong family values
g. Stong social bonds
h. Strong morality and fear of God
i. Absence of crime (or very low crime)

Hey cool, you've taken your personal opinion of what Utopia is, and extrapolated it as the standard by which all "advanced civilizations" must appear.

"Low taxes"? Don't you think there's some possibility that an "advanced civilization," whatever that is, might have moved beyond the use of money?

"Fear of God?" Sounds like an awfully Christian "advanced civilization" you've got there. Surely you realize that Christianity is not universal...?

reply to post by KingJames1337


we can't give merit to religious text christian or non christian. so NO

Originally posted by SplitInfinity

Originally posted by vedatruth
reply to post by Klassified

 

Necessary characterstics of an advanced civilization:

a. No poverty
b. No disease
c. Uniform application of law to all citizens, quick and efficient justice
d. Simple laws and justice system
e. Low taxes (or absence of taxes altogether, if it is a system based on State owned business)
f. Strong family values
g. Stong social bonds
h. Strong morality and fear of God
i. Absence of crime (or very low crime)

I disagree as people have a habit of equating Alien morals and concerns as they view and understand there own Human ones. E.T. may want for little if anything other than information....but they neither think as we do nor rationalize or have any equivelent of Human ideals of Morality. Split Infinity

It may be that TPTB make you believe ETs to be what they want you to believe.
How do you know about ETs.

If somebody can travel lightyears in very hazardous conditions, that person is very likely to have mastered not only technology but also social systems.

Veda preaches exactly the kind of social system I have written here. Utopian. Perhaps. Possible. Definitely.

Originally posted by vedatruth

Originally posted by SplitInfinity

Originally posted by vedatruth
reply to post by Klassified

 

Necessary characterstics of an advanced civilization:

a. No poverty
b. No disease
c. Uniform application of law to all citizens, quick and efficient justice
d. Simple laws and justice system
e. Low taxes (or absence of taxes altogether, if it is a system based on State owned business)
f. Strong family values
g. Stong social bonds
h. Strong morality and fear of God
i. Absence of crime (or very low crime)

I disagree as people have a habit of equating Alien morals and concerns as they view and understand there own Human ones. E.T. may want for little if anything other than information....but they neither think as we do nor rationalize or have any equivelent of Human ideals of Morality. Split Infinity

It may be that TPTB make you believe ETs to be what they want you to believe.
How do you know about ETs.

If somebody can travel lightyears in very hazardous conditions, that person is very likely to have mastered not only technology but also social systems.

Veda preaches exactly the kind of social system I have written here. Utopian. Perhaps. Possible. Definitely.

Again...you logic is flawed as you are using concepts of HUMAN SOCIAL SYSTEMS...whether real or desired. Creatures that are of the Earth such as ourselves...have very different social systems....take an ANT...or a WOLF...or just about any non-primate lifeform.

Now...how can you POSSIBLE relate these to any system used by E.T.? Split Infinity

"Fear of God?" Sounds like an awfully Christian "advanced civilization" you've got there. Surely you realize that Christianity is not universal...?

'God' is universal. I have no idea about 'Christianity'.

I support the OP that you cannot discard the myths when talking about history.
There are stories preseved in public memory, told and retold over generations.
These stories may be true, or false, but do tell us about the ancient people, their lifestyle, their fears etc.