Originally Posted by Dust McAlan
People, I think, will discuss it, but should you bring it up in any "serious" scientific conversation, it'll be laughed at and dismissed.
Of course. It's one of those things that will never be taken even remotely seriously until some shred of undeniable evidence is discovered. There really is no point in teaching something that’s most likely an elaborate hoax birthed by hucksters. Ancient Astronaut theorist like to boast claims of sufficient evidence, but they seem to be the only ones that believe so. It’s like this one theory that the pyramids are far older then Khufu and subsequently they were built before his reign. Their “sufficient evidence” was that the rock on the great Giza pyramid was dated to far earlier and thus is must have be of extraterrestrial origin. Well there is a blatant hole in that theory right there and anyone with common sense should abruptly see it. The dating on the rock proves how old the rock used in the pyramid is…not how old the pyramid is itself. Yet these people run with these illogical and extravagant theories simply to make money off of the gullible. It will always be astonishing to me as to how people will actually believe this kind of thing over cold hard scientific fact. I will never understand that mindset. People believe in this sort of thing merely because they want to. It’s really that simple. They don’t especially care if there is or isn’t evidence, they enjoy this because it’s far more dramatic then the reality of it. The truth is that it’s fantasy, but don‘t tell them that. As for me, I’m much quicker to take the word of the scientific and archeological community. I only see that as being logical. Believing preposterous theories proposed by the likes of Eric Von Daniken would be like taking the national inquirer as fact…and dismissing the New York Times and rubbish. Obviously that’s mixed up. Ancient Astronaut theories will be dismissed as insane or con artists by the educated community (most likely) forever…