It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Was there an atomic war roughly 10,000 years ago?
page: 13share:
according to alternative theories the pyramids and other ancient technologies functioned based on resonance, suction and induction and other tropes
based on "subtle energies". if an ancient nuclear war or interplanetary war did take place the means methods and delivery systems would all be alien
to a modern man except by means of an interpreter who would then describe with the best of his faculties his illumination to some listener. if the
evidence in written form leads to the conclusion that there was a "nuclear war" some 10k+ years ago then nomans folly or intellect can say "that
did not happen, because i comprehend the modi of what you are telling me and i have a check and balance on my nuclear armaments/technology etc. that
would cause such an event." but in truth the truth is in the very word conveyed to interpret exactly what a listener/reader/observer is intended to
perceive. in other words by using reason it is impossible to discount there having been an "atomic" war 10k years ago.
the evidence that is available, also within reason; promotes the idea that there are ancient expressions of man that are as lively in the past as they are in mans present. this same evidence irregardless of how circumstantial or mundane also validates a theory that an established medium of information that is regarded as truth has flaws in the modern sense. this exasperation on established knowledge unveils many aspects of time notation based on artifacts that can only refute the modern mans acceptence of where his "now" is in relation to where his past days were in relation to an artifact itself.
the very question of if there was an atomic war 10k yrs ago becomes a paradox in light of the evidences for and against such a potentiality.for example: the evidences for the OP prose is from the vedic culture and is believed to be verbally transpassed by proponents of this culture who study it in great detail in order to understand the various expressions therein. if i had to give someone a verbal history lesson where should i start? pre colombian, articles of confederation, ww1 etc. irregardless of where i begin the content will be shared, yet an observers perspective of events will be chronological to myself and not the sharing of a story.
the evidence that is available, also within reason; promotes the idea that there are ancient expressions of man that are as lively in the past as they are in mans present. this same evidence irregardless of how circumstantial or mundane also validates a theory that an established medium of information that is regarded as truth has flaws in the modern sense. this exasperation on established knowledge unveils many aspects of time notation based on artifacts that can only refute the modern mans acceptence of where his "now" is in relation to where his past days were in relation to an artifact itself.
the very question of if there was an atomic war 10k yrs ago becomes a paradox in light of the evidences for and against such a potentiality.for example: the evidences for the OP prose is from the vedic culture and is believed to be verbally transpassed by proponents of this culture who study it in great detail in order to understand the various expressions therein. if i had to give someone a verbal history lesson where should i start? pre colombian, articles of confederation, ww1 etc. irregardless of where i begin the content will be shared, yet an observers perspective of events will be chronological to myself and not the sharing of a story.
reply to post by InsideYourMind
Sorry, the person that repeatedly makes personal attacks and repeatedly deflects (e.g. caps lock, learn English, etc.) is suddenly interested in civility? How quaint. Maybe you shoulda thought of that about four insults ago...
As for no one claiming anything is a fact, you're wrong. I and others, the rational minded folks on this thread, HAVE claimed that what we're saying is NOT a theory, but instead, a fact.
FACTS:
- No evidence of ancient nuclear war
- No evidence of ancient radiation at the site
- The main source for these claims is a hoax
- There's no other viable "theories" as there's no contradictory evidence
If you want to apologise for your childish behavior, then we can have a civil chat. But even in that circumstance I'm not going to suddenly say, "hey, you seem nice, therefore I'll pretend it's ok to believe a bunch of crap".
Not my style.
Deny Ignorance and all of that.
Sorry, the person that repeatedly makes personal attacks and repeatedly deflects (e.g. caps lock, learn English, etc.) is suddenly interested in civility? How quaint. Maybe you shoulda thought of that about four insults ago...
As for no one claiming anything is a fact, you're wrong. I and others, the rational minded folks on this thread, HAVE claimed that what we're saying is NOT a theory, but instead, a fact.
FACTS:
- No evidence of ancient nuclear war
- No evidence of ancient radiation at the site
- The main source for these claims is a hoax
- There's no other viable "theories" as there's no contradictory evidence
If you want to apologise for your childish behavior, then we can have a civil chat. But even in that circumstance I'm not going to suddenly say, "hey, you seem nice, therefore I'll pretend it's ok to believe a bunch of crap".
Not my style.
Deny Ignorance and all of that.
Originally posted by zorgon
Originally posted by steveknows
Von Daniken books sit next to Lord of the rings on my book shelf. God was not an astronaut. He wrote books so that people who won't research and like to guess would buy them. JRR Tolkien wrote The Lord of the rings for the same reason. To entertain. At least JRR Tolkien states that his books are fiction so by definition he as more credibility than Von Daniken.
God is just as much a fiction story as Lord of the Rings. Do you keep your bible on that sci fi shelf as well? And the Ezekial spacecraft really does show He drives a flying saucer, even proved by a NASA scientist who set out to disprove it
As to von Daniken... when I first saw him it was on a debate with an Archaeologist. Erik maintained calmly all throughout that this was his THEORY and challenged everyone else to make up there own mind, something he still says today. In the debate the archaeologist couldn't offer a counter explanation for the items presented, so resorted to the same tactic most skeptics here at ATS use... attack the person and his credibility, rather than the issue. At the end Pierre Burton said that while he disagreed with Erik, he declared him the winner of the debate, because he stayed calm and stuck to his case, while the archaeologist got angry and abusive on a personal level.
You say you have his books... you say you find them entertaining at least, yet you and others like you seem to feel the need to enter every thread like this and knock down others who enjoy the entertainment and discussion of alternative theories
Besides I seem to recall a thread about you leaving? Or was that just another rant to get attention? Doesn't matter really, but I find it curious this pathological need psuedo debunkers have to attack anything and everything they don't agree with. Why even come to a site famous for alternative thinking and nutty posts? Do you think you can sway people? Wake up... not going to happen.
OH and BTW goodbye rant posts are against the T&C
India has nukes now. But not before the 20th century.
Well Hitler spent a lot of time and money searching for those old weapons of the gods... so perhaps YOU don't know everything
Aliens would be real. But they're to far away to even know we're here. Yes the universe is actually that big.
Again this is merely your uninformed opinion...
Read real science books. They're actually more interesting then "The day the earth stood still"
Boring as hell and even Isaac Asimov wrote Fact and Fiction... and I can point out many science papers that were just WRONG And those 'scientists' that are so uber smart just did THIS
Man-Made "Super Flu" Could Kill Half Of Humanity
So pardon me if science is on my crap list
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Well this thing isn't posting properly but my repsonse and the truth is below this line.
I did not mention God as in from a religious aspect at all in any way and I did not mention the bible as I believe in neither, Your lack of general knowledge is showing. You say you know Von Daniken so well but you failed to recognise that when I said "God was not an astrounaut" I was refering to VonDanikens "Was God an Astronaut?".
So of course then you go off on a rant about the bible and myself
If you Know VonDanikens work so well you'd have picked up on that right away instead of accusing me of being religious. Von Daniken says God was an asrtonaut I was saying that VonDaniken is wrong. I was not refering to "the" so called God at all and you don't need to be a deep thinker to see that.
And the rest of your thread seems to say "How dare you for disagreeing".
Also it's none of your business what I do. It's not my fault that I have an ability to see the truth easier than you. I'm sorry if that threatens you.
Also the brighter of the ATS members sent me emails asking me stick around and explained reasons that would be beyond your understanding.
Thank you for your none constructive response. I understand that it was due to your lack of any real scientific knowledge. And thank you for valiidating the people who actually understand things.
Now please stay on post.
Mods. Did you notice this unprovoked personal attack by one of the people you've told the rest of us to take it easy on?
edit on 30-11-2011 by
steveknows because: typo
i can only say that if there was any type of advanced ancient technology we would have found some...
so i believe that what we found is what they had...pottery, coins, jewels etc
no computers, no chips, no capacitors, no technology
so i believe that what we found is what they had...pottery, coins, jewels etc
no computers, no chips, no capacitors, no technology
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
Just stop wasting my time with these replies... if you are going to reply read the post first.
I said, nobody has claimed the OP's thread as fact... not even the OP themselves, it was not even a statement... the thread title contains "was" as in possibility (add that word to your vocabulary already). You are the one being insulting by not reading any of the posts you are replying to.
How to i add someone to ignore on here when they reply to me with idiotic comments?
Just stop wasting my time with these replies... if you are going to reply read the post first.
I said, nobody has claimed the OP's thread as fact... not even the OP themselves, it was not even a statement... the thread title contains "was" as in possibility (add that word to your vocabulary already). You are the one being insulting by not reading any of the posts you are replying to.
How to i add someone to ignore on here when they reply to me with idiotic comments?
reply to post by InsideYourMind
You have to be the rudest person I've met on ATS.
I honestly think, honestly, that you've painted yourself into a corner and are lashing out to try and deflect from your mistakes.
Should I again go back and point all the ridiculous stuff you've said on this thread, like that there's evidence of nuclear war in India, in this thread.
Here's some highlights of the ridiculous stuff you've said:
'There is more evidence in this thread than your so-called "Counter Evidence" '
'Theres no point going into denial about something we all know nothing about. '
'None of us were alive during that time so no-one really knows.... everything we know about history could all be a lie for all we know. '
'I really do not understand what is with this mindless debunking '
'the only way to know the truth is to SEE it'
'Unless you have personally visited this site and documented your findings 'yourself' along with being around during that era in time'
'If you were told the earth was flat, and almost everyone else agreed. You would believe the earth was flat, without having the need to 'prove' it for yourself.'
'there is no need to provide solid hard evidence, because it cannot be done'
'Its not about proving or disproving anything... it is about looking at what could have happened and coming up with a theory'
'There is never "one" single answer.'
'The whole point of a theory is that it does not require evidence'
All of this is PROVABLE BS ^^^
A list of the insults:
"your tiny mind"
'have you ever used your brain'
'Or do you defame and debunk everything in existence 'because you can' and your textbook told you it is wrong, so it must be wrong!'
'Fix your caps lock, and then ask yourself why did you make an account to post on a forum which the main topic is conspiracy theories.'
'Seriously... you are either here for the sake of trolling... or you have nothing else to do it seems'
Finally, and hilariously, you say:
"nobody has claimed the OP's thread as fact"
Here's a lists of the posts in this thread that do indeed claim the OP is fact:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
There's just a taste... there's plenty more...
Oh and one more thing... you repeatedly talk about science and theories, but you seem to have no idea what a scientific theory is. In fact you say you don't need evidence to have a theory... that that is somehow "the point"...
Let's clear that up:
"In scientific usage, the term "theory" is reserved for explanations of phenomena which meet basic requirements about the kinds of empirical observations made...
en.wikipedia.org..."
Let's look at that...
A THEORY is RESERVED for EXPLANATIONS of PHENOMENA which meet basic requirements about the kinds of EMPIRICAL OBSERVATIONS made...
You CAN NOT have a THEORY without EMPIRICAL OBSERVATIONS.
I have bolded all the important words, for emphasis.
The "observations" made about these sites have been HOAXED. As they do NOT exist there can be NO theory.
Basic logic.
You have to be the rudest person I've met on ATS.
I honestly think, honestly, that you've painted yourself into a corner and are lashing out to try and deflect from your mistakes.
Should I again go back and point all the ridiculous stuff you've said on this thread, like that there's evidence of nuclear war in India, in this thread.
Here's some highlights of the ridiculous stuff you've said:
'There is more evidence in this thread than your so-called "Counter Evidence" '
'Theres no point going into denial about something we all know nothing about. '
'None of us were alive during that time so no-one really knows.... everything we know about history could all be a lie for all we know. '
'I really do not understand what is with this mindless debunking '
'the only way to know the truth is to SEE it'
'Unless you have personally visited this site and documented your findings 'yourself' along with being around during that era in time'
'If you were told the earth was flat, and almost everyone else agreed. You would believe the earth was flat, without having the need to 'prove' it for yourself.'
'there is no need to provide solid hard evidence, because it cannot be done'
'Its not about proving or disproving anything... it is about looking at what could have happened and coming up with a theory'
'There is never "one" single answer.'
'The whole point of a theory is that it does not require evidence'
All of this is PROVABLE BS ^^^
A list of the insults:
"your tiny mind"
'have you ever used your brain'
'Or do you defame and debunk everything in existence 'because you can' and your textbook told you it is wrong, so it must be wrong!'
'Fix your caps lock, and then ask yourself why did you make an account to post on a forum which the main topic is conspiracy theories.'
'Seriously... you are either here for the sake of trolling... or you have nothing else to do it seems'
Finally, and hilariously, you say:
"nobody has claimed the OP's thread as fact"
Here's a lists of the posts in this thread that do indeed claim the OP is fact:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
There's just a taste... there's plenty more...
Oh and one more thing... you repeatedly talk about science and theories, but you seem to have no idea what a scientific theory is. In fact you say you don't need evidence to have a theory... that that is somehow "the point"...
Let's clear that up:
"In scientific usage, the term "theory" is reserved for explanations of phenomena which meet basic requirements about the kinds of empirical observations made...
en.wikipedia.org..."
Let's look at that...
A THEORY is RESERVED for EXPLANATIONS of PHENOMENA which meet basic requirements about the kinds of EMPIRICAL OBSERVATIONS made...
You CAN NOT have a THEORY without EMPIRICAL OBSERVATIONS.
I have bolded all the important words, for emphasis.
The "observations" made about these sites have been HOAXED. As they do NOT exist there can be NO theory.
Basic logic.
reply to post by Ph0en1x
THIS TEXT DESCRIBE'S THE BATTLE FOUGHT AT KURUKSHETRA IN THE STATE OF HARYANA IN NORTHERN INDIA BETWEEN THE PANDAVA'S AND KAURAVA'S. IT IS DOCUMENTED IN THE INDIAN EPIC THE MAHABHARATA. PROBABLE DATE BEING 6000BCE - 500BCE. IT WAS FOUGHT FOR 18 DAYS AND HISTORIANS CLAIM IT WAS ONE OF THE BLOODIEST WARS IN HUMAN HISTORY.
There are many evidences that in Kurukshetra nuclear weapons were used but certainly not of the type known to us today. Certainly no physical bombs were dropped on the armies.
Still some kind of nuclear weapons were used, as we can read in the Mahabharata. Through the uttering of mantras some exceptionally qualified warriors were capable to obtain the same result scientist today achieve by nuclear fission. The difference is that mantra evoked weapons can be controlled while physical bombs just destroy without discrimination.
In the Srimad-Bhagavatam (or Bhagavata Purana) this principles is also explained in the story of Asvatthama trying to destroy the last representative of the Pandavana dynasty through the atomic weapon called brahmastra.
Also, the area's around kurukshetra are highly radioactive.
Much more could be said.
It is a fascinating subject matter.
THIS TEXT DESCRIBE'S THE BATTLE FOUGHT AT KURUKSHETRA IN THE STATE OF HARYANA IN NORTHERN INDIA BETWEEN THE PANDAVA'S AND KAURAVA'S. IT IS DOCUMENTED IN THE INDIAN EPIC THE MAHABHARATA. PROBABLE DATE BEING 6000BCE - 500BCE. IT WAS FOUGHT FOR 18 DAYS AND HISTORIANS CLAIM IT WAS ONE OF THE BLOODIEST WARS IN HUMAN HISTORY.
There are many evidences that in Kurukshetra nuclear weapons were used but certainly not of the type known to us today. Certainly no physical bombs were dropped on the armies.
Still some kind of nuclear weapons were used, as we can read in the Mahabharata. Through the uttering of mantras some exceptionally qualified warriors were capable to obtain the same result scientist today achieve by nuclear fission. The difference is that mantra evoked weapons can be controlled while physical bombs just destroy without discrimination.
In the Srimad-Bhagavatam (or Bhagavata Purana) this principles is also explained in the story of Asvatthama trying to destroy the last representative of the Pandavana dynasty through the atomic weapon called brahmastra.
Also, the area's around kurukshetra are highly radioactive.
Much more could be said.
It is a fascinating subject matter.
The history of this HOAX - this link explains that the OPs quote is NOT in the Mahabharata as claimed.
www.jasoncolavito.com...
The ACTUAL passages, from which the HOAX was derived (to sell book, btw):
and
Is should be noted that these two passages takes place THREE DECADES apart.
The final lines are from here:
This whole thread now needs to be moved to HOAX.
www.jasoncolavito.com...
The ACTUAL passages, from which the HOAX was derived (to sell book, btw):
When the next day came, Camva actually brought forth an iron bolt through which all the individuals in the race of the Vrishnis and the Andhakas became consumed into ashes. Indeed, for the destruction of the Vrishnis and the Andhakas, Camva brought forth, through that curse, a fierce iron bolt that looked like a gigantic messenger of death. The fact was duly reported to the king. In great distress of mind, the king (Ugrasena) caused that iron bolt to be reduced into fine powder. (Mausala Parva, sec. 1)
and
Day by day strong winds blew, and many were the evil omens that arose, awful and foreboding the destruction of the Vrishnis and the Andhakas. The streets swarmed with rats and mice. Earthen pots showed cracks or broken from no apparent cause. At night, the rats and mice ate away the hair and nails of slumbering men. […] That chastiser of foes commanded the Vrishnis to make a pilgrimage to some sacred water. The messengers forthwith proclaimed at the command of Kecava that the Vrishnis should make a journey to the sea-coast for bathing in the sacred waters of the ocean. (Mausala Parva, sec. 2)
Is should be noted that these two passages takes place THREE DECADES apart.
The final lines are from here:
While the worlds were thus afflicted, Sakra, surrounded by the Maruts, battled against the three cities by hurling his thunder upon them from every side. When, however, Purandra failed to pierce those cities made impenetrable, O king, by the Creator with his boons, the chief of celestials, filled with fear, and leaving those cities, repaired with those very gods to that chastiser of foes, viz., the Grandsire, for representing unto him the oppressions committed by the Asuras. […] (Section 33)
Thus equipped, that car shone brilliantly like a blazing fire in the midst of the priests officiating at a sacrifice. Beholding that car properly equipped, the gods became filled with wonder. Seeing the energies of the entire universe united together in one place, O sire, the gods wondered, and at last represented unto that illustrious Deity that the car was ready. […] Then He called Nila Rohita (Blue and Red or smoke)--that terrible deity robed in skins,--looking like 10,000 Suns, and shrouded by the fire of superabundant Energy, blazed up with splendour. […] The triple city then appeared immediately before that god of unbearable energy [Maheswara, or Siva], that Deity of fierce and indescribable form, that warrior who was desirous of slaying the Asuras. The illustrious deity, that Lord of the universe, then drawing that celestial bow, sped that shaft which represented the might of the whole universe, at the triple city. Upon that foremost of shafts, O thou of great good fortune, being shot, loud wails of woe were heard from those cities as they began to fall down towards the Earth. Burning those Asuras, he threw them down into the Western ocean. (Sec. 34)
This whole thread now needs to be moved to HOAX.
Here's an entire free 25 page eBook, debunking this whole thing:
www.jasoncolavito.com...
Direct link:
www.jasoncolavito.com...
www.jasoncolavito.com...
Direct link:
www.jasoncolavito.com...
I'm probably one of the few on ATS who have actually read all 18 books of Mahabharata - in English I hasten to add. It was quite a few years ago, but
I do remember the many hours of sheer boredom with the Indian poetry style, which quite frankly is very far from what I normally read. And the English
translation from Sanskrit couldn't have made it better.
One thing I do remember tis that the part quoted by OP is by no means the only very interesting part.
If I recall correctly the major parts of Mahabharata was produced around 3-400 AD.
The parts about the Vimanas was particularly interesting for UFO-people. I'm usually one of the debunkers of shoddy video of balloons and birds, but Mahabharata is hard to debunk - PROVIDED that the texts actually are that old and not a much later fake. And I haven't found much to prove that theory.
One thing I do remember tis that the part quoted by OP is by no means the only very interesting part.
If I recall correctly the major parts of Mahabharata was produced around 3-400 AD.
The parts about the Vimanas was particularly interesting for UFO-people. I'm usually one of the debunkers of shoddy video of balloons and birds, but Mahabharata is hard to debunk - PROVIDED that the texts actually are that old and not a much later fake. And I haven't found much to prove that theory.
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
It doesn't appear to me as if you are reading the same thread as me?
The title of the thread is "Was there an atomic war roughly 10,000 years ago?"
That appears to me to be a 'QUESTION' that has been thrown into the arena for debate,
NO MENTION OF FACT THERE !!!
The list of posts that you highlighted on this thread
# 1. HiddenTime......makes an assertion that has probability or validity to it....[definitation
of validity = sound, just, or well founded] NO MENTION OF FACT THERE
# 2. Freenrgyz........don't see any mention of FACT IN THAT POST
# 3. itsthetooth........reply to the OP states "it's right and accurate in line with their beliefs
[their OWN beliefs not FACT! ]
# 4. Unknown Soldier...is in agreement with above poster.[agrees with no mention of FACTS]
# 5 P-M-H........makes comments on something 'supposedly' - and the physical proof seems
to join with ancient stories of nuclear war...........'supposedly' 'seems' ? NO FACTS THERE
# 6 BO XIAN.........comments on changes to minerals which indicate atomic reactions
[things that i and many many others have read about on the internet or elsewhere]
'comments' NO FACTS MENTIONED!
# 7 animatz........i can only see comments and a link about what they have read.
NO mention of FACT there!
# 8 Mark Scheppy.....reply to OP made comments with NO mention of FACT
Because an 'observation' does not agree with your views, does not make it a 'hoax' it is
only an observation [the act of noting and recording something]
FYI these sites 'exist' 'they are' so there by they cannot be hoaxed - and there is room
for many observations and theories for what happened to them!
It doesn't appear to me as if you are reading the same thread as me?
The title of the thread is "Was there an atomic war roughly 10,000 years ago?"
That appears to me to be a 'QUESTION' that has been thrown into the arena for debate,
NO MENTION OF FACT THERE !!!
The list of posts that you highlighted on this thread
# 1. HiddenTime......makes an assertion that has probability or validity to it....[definitation
of validity = sound, just, or well founded] NO MENTION OF FACT THERE
# 2. Freenrgyz........don't see any mention of FACT IN THAT POST
# 3. itsthetooth........reply to the OP states "it's right and accurate in line with their beliefs
[their OWN beliefs not FACT! ]
# 4. Unknown Soldier...is in agreement with above poster.[agrees with no mention of FACTS]
# 5 P-M-H........makes comments on something 'supposedly' - and the physical proof seems
to join with ancient stories of nuclear war...........'supposedly' 'seems' ? NO FACTS THERE
# 6 BO XIAN.........comments on changes to minerals which indicate atomic reactions
[things that i and many many others have read about on the internet or elsewhere]
'comments' NO FACTS MENTIONED!
# 7 animatz........i can only see comments and a link about what they have read.
NO mention of FACT there!
# 8 Mark Scheppy.....reply to OP made comments with NO mention of FACT
Because an 'observation' does not agree with your views, does not make it a 'hoax' it is
only an observation [the act of noting and recording something]
FYI these sites 'exist' 'they are' so there by they cannot be hoaxed - and there is room
for many observations and theories for what happened to them!
Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by HolgerTheDane
The text in the OP is NOT in the Mahabharata.
I know - it's a very "free" and elaborated translation at best.
reply to post by EspyderMan
I found this while perusing the interweb a little while back. Certainly made me think. See what you think.
nuclearpyramid.com...
I found this while perusing the interweb a little while back. Certainly made me think. See what you think.
nuclearpyramid.com...
An intriguing thought, but I strongly believe that a nuclear winter would show itself in earth's strata, animal fossils, ancient ice/trees etc... I
don't think it would be hard for geologists and archaeologists to recognize it.
Further there would be a bottle neck in the DNA of most species, including our own, at the same time. Such bottlenecks did exist for humans 140,000 and 60,000 years ago, but were more likely due to volcanic winter and other natural phenomena.
Further there would be a bottle neck in the DNA of most species, including our own, at the same time. Such bottlenecks did exist for humans 140,000 and 60,000 years ago, but were more likely due to volcanic winter and other natural phenomena.
edit on 30-11-2011 by Frostmore because: (no reason given)
There was a russian study done on the similar topic.
study
This is actually quite a good read, and makes you think about some things from a different point of view. Anyhow
Firstly, as the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster, now in animals and humans is a mutation leading to tsiklopizmu (in Cyclopes one eye is over the bridge). And we all know the legends of many peoples of the existence of the Cyclops, that people had to fight. The second area of radioactive mutagenesis - it poliplodiya - doubling the chromosome set, which leads to gigantism and the doubling of some bodies, two hearts or two rows of teeth. Remains of giant skeletons with a double row of teeth from time to time on the ground, as reported by Michael Persinger. The third area of radioactive mutagenesis - a Mongoloid. Currently, the Mongoloid race is most common in the world. It includes the Chinese, Mongols, Eskimos, Ural, South Siberia nationalities and peoples of the Americas.
study
This is actually quite a good read, and makes you think about some things from a different point of view. Anyhow
reply to post by silencee
Bravo! Great! you really shut up some big dirty VIP mouth here on ats , who make great noise all the time , that somebody new come with an interesting point of view , that is opposite to the ruling party !
Bravo! Great! you really shut up some big dirty VIP mouth here on ats , who make great noise all the time , that somebody new come with an interesting point of view , that is opposite to the ruling party !
reply to post by eletheia
more insanity:
1. Valid = Actually supporting the intended point or claim; acceptable as cogent: "a valid criticism".
So valid = accurate or true
3. So they believe it to be true. =! no one claims it to be true
4. Agreement with poster can only mean believes it to be true... you'd have us believe the poster meant "I agree with 'Was there an atomic war roughly 10,000 years ago?' = which obv makes no sense. And guess what their "beleief" is... their belief is that it's true. duh.
5 same as three and four
6. believes it's true... or at least says they think it's supposedly true... which certainly denotes believe in it being true...
As far as the rest of your nonsense.. no one is denying the sites exist. Go read the thread... the OPs verses are a hoax. There's NO evidence at the sites of to require a theory to explain... it's not an opinion... there's no radiation, nop blast damage, the facts claimed by the people spreading this hoax are untrue.
There's a lot of people on ATS that seem to think any belief is valid, even if it's completely contradicted by all no reality... flat-earthers and the like. It's not clever, it's just depressing.
more insanity:
1. Valid = Actually supporting the intended point or claim; acceptable as cogent: "a valid criticism".
So valid = accurate or true
3. So they believe it to be true. =! no one claims it to be true
4. Agreement with poster can only mean believes it to be true... you'd have us believe the poster meant "I agree with 'Was there an atomic war roughly 10,000 years ago?' = which obv makes no sense. And guess what their "beleief" is... their belief is that it's true. duh.
5 same as three and four
6. believes it's true... or at least says they think it's supposedly true... which certainly denotes believe in it being true...
As far as the rest of your nonsense.. no one is denying the sites exist. Go read the thread... the OPs verses are a hoax. There's NO evidence at the sites of to require a theory to explain... it's not an opinion... there's no radiation, nop blast damage, the facts claimed by the people spreading this hoax are untrue.
There's a lot of people on ATS that seem to think any belief is valid, even if it's completely contradicted by all no reality... flat-earthers and the like. It's not clever, it's just depressing.
reply to post by HolgerTheDane
elaborated is a very nice way to say hoaxed...
I'll elaborate John 3:16: "For God hated the world so much he sent one of his kids to destroy it, if you believe in him, he'll destroy you."
This is the kind of BS we're talking about here...
Another example...
Let's look at a movie... Who's seen Die Hard?
I'll do to Die Hard what these jokes did to this Indian epic.
Tom McClaine went to a building and took a bunch of hostage. While barefoot he went to NYC with Cuba Gooding Jr and stopped a computer virus from blowing up the White House.
That's the story of Die Hard.
Do we all agree that's a totally valid claim? That's a fine telling of Die Hard?
No?
The names are wrong, that's actual multiple movies, I've changed the plot all around and it no longer bears any resemblance to Die Hard?
No #.
This is EXACTLY the kind of butchering and make believe some of you are defending.
elaborated is a very nice way to say hoaxed...
I'll elaborate John 3:16: "For God hated the world so much he sent one of his kids to destroy it, if you believe in him, he'll destroy you."
This is the kind of BS we're talking about here...
Another example...
Let's look at a movie... Who's seen Die Hard?
I'll do to Die Hard what these jokes did to this Indian epic.
Tom McClaine went to a building and took a bunch of hostage. While barefoot he went to NYC with Cuba Gooding Jr and stopped a computer virus from blowing up the White House.
That's the story of Die Hard.
Do we all agree that's a totally valid claim? That's a fine telling of Die Hard?
No?
The names are wrong, that's actual multiple movies, I've changed the plot all around and it no longer bears any resemblance to Die Hard?
No #.
This is EXACTLY the kind of butchering and make believe some of you are defending.
edit on 30-11-2011 by captainnotsoobvious because: (no reason given)