Ancient aliens

Parrot

New member
It probably would be best if we turned down the snark levels just a little bit in here.

I perfectly understand and sympathize with those of you who are frustrated with Matt. I don't blame you in the slightest for feeling the urge to show your scorn.

But the fact is that it's counterproductive to a calm, rational discussion. I realize that it might seem to you like Matt's asking for it, but I would ask that you restrain yourselves at least a little.

Matt's not an idiot. In fact, he's probably the most rational believer in ancient aliens that I've yet talked to. Okay, you might fairly point out that this isn't a high standard... but he's the only one I've talked to yet who seems willing to actually revise his beliefs and stop using certain arguments.

Even if it's an uphill struggle, I'd like to pursue that. I think it would help the discussion a lot if we could limit the amount of scorn and snark in here.
 

Sharkey

Guest
Parrot, do us all a favor including yourself and read the thread.

Not only is he entirely closed to "revising his beliefs" whatever concessions he does make are cast away in the hopes that you're too lazy to check the record right here in this very thread.

Its been interesting learning some of he other posters back grounds and opinions here , but to cater to the whims of the unstable is such a waste. I apologize if this takes things further off track, but if you cared to read the thread you would realize this. There's nothing you've initiated that hasn't been tried before...Matt is far more interested in fueling the fires than extinguishing them.

He focuses on the type of history taught to grade schoolers and has zero concept of the tenants of higher education. the danger of this kind of obliviousness is its appeal to idiots and the impressionable. Have faith he says...forget what you have learned, embrace the possibilities. This is what people like Charles Manson, Jim Jones and that loon from Heavens Gate asked of people.

Screw that.

He has no way of addressing questions, if he could he would but he can't so he sulks and runs away.

Sorry but I held my tongue long enough...I friggin guarantee he can't help but comment, at least to run away again. Man-boy is full of all sorts of imaginative ideas...just none that can be corroborated.

I'm tired of his hypocrisy and this perverted dance on eggshells around his fragile psyche.

I'd wish you luck, but if you read this thread you'd know just how futile that would be.
 
Last edited:

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
Parrot said:
It probably would be best if we turned down the snark levels just a little bit in here.

I perfectly understand and sympathize with those of you who are frustrated with Matt. I don't blame you in the slightest for feeling the urge to show your scorn.

But the fact is that it's counterproductive to a calm, rational discussion. I realize that it might seem to you like Matt's asking for it, but I would ask that you restrain yourselves at least a little.

Yes. Take my quoting this as a directive from the upkeep, gang.
 
Last edited:

Parrot

New member
I've been dealing with Matt along with the rest of you, and I have read through a lot of the thread.

Like I said, I understand your frustrations. I just don't think it's necessary to give in to those frustrations.
 

Sharkey

Guest
Parrot said:
I've been dealing with Matt along with the rest of you, and I have read through a lot of the thread.

Like I said, I understand your frustrations. I just don't think it's necessary to give in to those frustrations.
You must be as crazy as he is...

In the event he's not the rest of you PM me if you want to join the pool: how long till parrot cracks. $5 a box.
 

Parrot

New member
Sharkey said:
You must be as crazy as he is...

That's a distinct possibility.

Sharkey said:
In the event he's not the rest of you PM me if you want to join the pool: how long till parrot cracks. $5 a box.

Show me what the grid looks like when you've got some names on it. I might be willing to throw a timed hissy fit if the right person offers me the right incentives ;)
 

Matt deMille

New member
Interesting. I have to say though that being compared to Manson or Heaven's Gate is pretty f'ing insulting. Um, Moderators? You gonna allow this? Being called an idiot is one thing. Being compared to real sicko's is unbecoming of any website.

Ironic, though, that I'm being compared to cults by those who seem to be more cult-like themselves. Parrot, they seem to be turning on you because you're not agreeing with them. Can we say, cult mentality there on the part of Sharky?

More for Parrot: I thank you for saying I'm the most rational AA-believer you've spoken to. To me, challenging beliefs, uphill battles, those are more important than just having someone agree. As said earlier in the thread, I was raised Christian, but broke away from that. Tough as it may have been, it was for the best, because it took a lot to do it, and now I can see that sort of mentality clearer, for what it is. Being challenged is good. It strengthens things.

So, I hope we can continue to more seriously discuss ancient alien stuff. I think we've got things going much better the last few days. Thank you, Parrot, and the others who maintain cordial discussion.
 

Parrot

New member
Matt deMille said:
Parrot, they seem to be turning on you because you're not agreeing with them. Can we say, cult mentality there on the part of Sharky?

Don't let Sharkey get to you. He's just frustrated with you. We've all at one time or another taken some online discussion a little more seriously than we probably should have.

duty_calls.png

Matt deMille said:
More for Parrot: I thank you for saying I'm the most rational AA-believer you've spoken to. To me, challenging beliefs, uphill battles, those are more important than just having someone agree. As said earlier in the thread, I was raised Christian, but broke away from that. Tough as it may have been, it was for the best, because it took a lot to do it, and now I can see that sort of mentality clearer, for what it is. Being challenged is good. It strengthens things.

So, I hope we can continue to more seriously discuss ancient alien stuff. I think we've got things going much better the last few days. Thank you, Parrot, and the others who maintain cordial discussion.

I'm looking forward to it. Let me know when you've come to some sort of conclusion about the Alexander incident.
 
Sharkey said:
I'm tired of his hypocrisy and this perverted dance on eggshells around his fragile psyche.
...on his terms: a rigged game.

Love the perpetual 60/40 ratio, interesting in terms of a "rigged game."
 

Matt deMille

New member
Parrot said:
I'm looking forward to it. Let me know when you've come to some sort of conclusion about the Alexander incident.

Will do. But that may take a long time. After all, we're talking about looking through a lot of accounts. I don't want to just take the top Google searches and be done with it. Now, maybe it was fabricated or misinterpreted in the 20th century, but whose to say where those sources got their info? This may be one of those things that takes some real digging, or simply can't be proven either way, lest we overturn every historical document, which is more than any one man can do. But I will look nonetheless. In all fairness though, I'm willing to concede the possibility that this account was twisted in our time. But coming from one who has seen things just as fantastic, I'm inclined to believe the alien theory until evidence refutes it, just as those who don't believe the alien theory are inclined to continue to disbelieve until evidence proves it. I figure that's as fair of ground as can be found while we both look into things.

Rocket Surgeon said:
...on his terms: a rigged game.

You guys should know. You're the ones who rig it. Example: "Show us evidence!" "That's not evidence, that's a hoax!" "Since it's a hoax, because I don't like the possibility, we'll write off everything as a hoax!" OR "The Egyptian authorities who stand to be out of a job if their theories are wrong say they're theories aren't wrong! So they're right and there's no possibility of anything else. And you're crazy to think otherwise!" Talk about rigged games.

Never forget that ALL great discoveries were considered crazy and impossible by the establishment. I love how the US Patent Office shut down a century ago because "There was nothing more to invent", how Star Trek was considered a bad influence for kids because those little communicators were impossible (and they were larger than today's iphones), and in the ancient world it was known to be physically impossible to climb Mt. Olympus because the gods lived in another dimension. Best of all were the "scientists" of the day who, to protect their own asses politically and economically, were not opposed to burning Galileo at the stake for heresy. Reminds me a lot of those today who call investigators of ancient aliens crazy.
 
Last edited:
Matt deMille said:
You guys should know. You're the ones who rig it.
No! YOU are!
Matt deMille said:
Example: "Show us evidence!" "That's not evidence, that's a hoax!" "Since it's a hoax, because I don't like the possibility, we'll write off everything as a hoax!"
That's special. Since you're typing out hypotheticals here's one:

Example: "This is evidence!" "Your word is impeachable...better yet gospel!" Since you tell me so, we can write off what educated men and women concur is not only possible, it's probable." "We can put forward theories that are no more plausible than talking zebra muscles and it's possible!" Prove it's not!"
Matt deMille said:
OR "The Egyptian authorities who stand to be out of a job if their theories are wrong say they're theories aren't wrong!" Talk about rigged games.
I won?t say you?re an idiot, but what is YOUR definition of ?theory??

It's amazing to me how you can chastise someone who points out your use of antiquated terms in your chosen specialized field yet you put yourself in that position regarding the terms of some other highly specialized field.

We were all mulling over how much you remind us of Galileo the other day...
 

Parrot

New member
Matt deMille said:
Will do. But that may take a long time. After all, we're talking about looking through a lot of accounts. I don't want to just take the top Google searches and be done with it. Now, maybe it was fabricated or misinterpreted in the 20th century, but whose to say where those sources got their info? This may be one of those things that takes some real digging, or simply can't be proven either way, lest we overturn every historical document, which is more than any one man can do. But I will look nonetheless. In all fairness though, I'm willing to concede the possibility that this account was twisted in our time. But coming from one who has seen things just as fantastic, I'm inclined to believe the alien theory until evidence refutes it, just as those who don't believe the alien theory are inclined to continue to disbelieve until evidence proves it. I figure that's as fair of ground as can be found while we both look into things.

Well, I don't think that anybody disputes that the first mention of this event was from Frank Edwards in 1959. And Edwards never listed his sources. My understanding is that even ancient alien theorists admit that Edwards is the first source they have on this.

As I understand it, the excuse usually given is that Edwards had some secret source that is lost to us now. Personally, I find that very hard to believe.

To me, this looks like a slam dunk case. Do you see any flaws in my reasoning?
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Rocket Surgeon said:
We were all mulling over how much you remind us of Galileo the other day...

Hey, Beelzebub!

Bohemian Rhapsody by Queen said:
Is this the real life?
Is this just fantasy?
Caught in a landslide
No escape from reality
Open your eyes
Look up to the skies and see

...

(Galileo) Galileo (Galileo) Galileo, Galileo Figaro
 

Montana Smith

Active member
David Bowie said:
There's a Starman waiting in the sky
He'd like to come and meet us
But he thinks he'd blow our minds...

Queen said:
I think Im a banana tree
Oh dear
Im going slightly mad

Just keeping this thread breathing until the return of the main event...

Queen said:
Bis[de]millah! We will not let you go
...

Beelzebub has the devil put aside for me, for me, for me!
 
Teeming with references::hat:

Originally Posted by Thin Lizzy, Shades Of A Blue Orphanage
And he might have been the clever con, the good samaritan, the rassclaut man. An' he might have been the loaded gun, the charlatan...
 

Matt deMille

New member
Well, Parrot, actually, I don't think this closes the case. Not at all. As I said, it needs time. You can't undo half a century of research in just a few days of Google. Much more due-diligence must be invested than that. Perhaps Edwards did not have a source and did make things up, but it's equally possible he DID have a source that we simply do not know about yet. And a few days of internet sleuthing is nowhere near sufficient to write off such an incredibly important possibility. If you're interested in saying "case closed" so quickly, so conveniently, I'm afraid I have to revisit earlier reservations about you, that you want to debunk rather than look at things objectively, scientifically. After all, as has been said countless times, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". And though we like to think the internet has everything uploaded to it by now, that's simply not the case. Other sources must be investigated. But I seem to be hurried along on a daily basis, demanding an answer I said may take weeks or months to find. That's not a reasonable request at all.

Now, I'm sure the Clique will say that my asking for weeks or months is another "dodge". Well, go ahead and say that guys (or gals?), after all, you're the ones who have also said that the research of things like, say, the Giza site is built upon YEARS and even CENTURIES of research. I mean, the answers to the pyramids weren't found overnight. So, if you DO say I'm "looking for a way out" or anything like it, that outright contradicts your previous arguments of supposedly sound scientific research.

So, my only question is, what's it going to be? Are you going to discredit your own previous arguments, or actually concede that this possibility of Alexander's UFOs requires more time to research and thus, it is, a possibility?
 

Parrot

New member
Actually, the statement "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" is wrong. It's something that many people misunderstand, so I'd like to set the record straight.

If, under the circumstances of your theory, you would expect certain pieces of evidence to show up and they don't, that is indeed evidence of absence.

For example, if I told you that some thieves had just ransacked my house less than an hour ago, you would expect to see my house in disarray with objects strewn all about. If you come over and everything looks normal and nothing is missing, what would you conclude?

There is an absence of evidence that any thieves broke into my house. If the story happened as I said it did, you would expect to find such evidence. Would you not conclude in this situation that the lack of any evidence of a break in was evidence that a break in never occurred?

It's certainly possible that I'm extremely quick at cleaning up, and that I had extras of what was stolen hidden away somewhere convenient in order to replace everything. You can't prove that's not what happened... but it seems unlikely, doesn't it?

Absence of evidence is evidence of absence.

The statement might be more correctly made that absence of evidence is not proof of absence. You can't prove a negative.

So it's certainly possible that Edwards did have some secret source that nobody else knew about and which is not known to anybody else in the world. That's certainly within the realm of possibility.

But nobody has yet been able to identify that source. Don't you think the absence of evidence in this case demonstrates that it's quite likely that no such evidence exists?
 
Top