Ancient aliens

FedoraHead

New member
When it comes to them building things, I don't think they were as lazy as most are today. I mean they had days, years to do it. Nothing else to do. No TV, no net, no Indiana Jones movies, so to them working 7 days a week and all day wasn't the different or hard I bet.
 

Sarika

New member
This is my kind of topic..

Anyone else here read the book "Dead Man's Secrets" by Jonothan Gray?

It's a fabulous book, with amazing information about a super human race that preceded ours, that had the same and more technology than what we have simply re-discovered in our times.
I believe we didn't decsend from stone age man..
We decsended from a greater race.
The Stone age has been mistakenly termed, but what it really was, was a Stone Culture, rather.
 

time-raider

Member
while this idea is an interesting one(Ive thought about it once or twice), it would have required either:
1. the human race to deevolve, both physically and mentally. Or,

2. evolve along side of a cousin race of homo-sapien. (this one isn't so far-fetched. Seeing as we're doing that right now with monkeys and apes). Or,

3. that both races never had any physical contact at all and then all of the re-knowledge, if you will, would have been genetic memory or based on our own ingenuity.

Im sure there are other permutations that could come out of this train of thought but the main thing is you will never know. And anyone who says they do better have an "ark" full of evidence just to prove it, because other wise no one will believe, or at least the people they want to believe them wont. But its still a lovely idea that ive toyed with my self and its a perfect backdrop for scifi books and movies.;)
 

Perhilion

New member
Sarika said:
This is my kind of topic..

Anyone else here read the book "Dead Man's Secrets" by Jonothan Gray?

It's a fabulous book, with amazing information about a super human race that preceded ours, that had the same and more technology than what we have simply re-discovered in our times.
I believe we didn't decsend from stone age man..
We decsended from a greater race.
The Stone age has been mistakenly termed, but what it really was, was a Stone Culture, rather.
I subscribe to this, rather than to the alien theory. While I don't rule out the idea that our ancestors were contacted by something, I think the simpler explanation is that they were a lot more intelligent than we give them credit for. And if you need proof, just look at the famous ancient monuments. There are things nearly impossible for us to do today that they did thousands of years ago, and we're supposed to believe they did it all by banging rocks on things? That's taking evidence and twisting it to your own preconceived notions. There was a series on History that was about the ancient alien theory, and one whole episode was devoted to "The Evidence". If you can find it on TV or Youtube, watch it.
 

Matt deMille

New member
Restarting a thread that went in unusual directions (http://raven.theraider.net/showthread.php?t=14138&page=12)

Basically, I'm supporting the "ancient alien" theory. I've spent over twenty years researching it, and I've seen some pretty hardcore stuff myself. I used to be a Christian, long ago, but the facts about the alien presence on earth shattered that world view and forced a different one upon me. I think that's one of the main reasons UFO information is suppressed -- fear of the status quo being disrupted doesn't begin to describe it. It's scary, and unwelcome, given our culture context. There's no real precedent for it so it's difficult to accept.

That said, I hope we can keep to facts (not what the mainstream accepts, as that's a rigged game, but rather, "facts" being what others can check out for themselves and so form their own opinion).

I'd like to start the ball rolling with the work of Graham Hancock and his colleagues. In particular, the true age of the Giza site. Weather-based erosion of the rocks geologically redate the Sphinx and great pyramids to 12,000 BC. This doesn't necessarily mean aliens built them, though it does prove that conventional Egyptology is wholly wrong about their premiere monuments. It shows that the true story is unknown, which leaves the door open for alien intervention in the past.

Thoughts?
 

Matt deMille

New member
No, those who sound like quacks are those like you who seem to be entrenched in their dogma. Let me site a few examples from history:

The Komodo dragon, the elephant, and the panda were all said to be myths and that anybody who claimed they were real needed to be locked up in a mental institution.

Mathematics "proved" that the locomotive would kill its passengers as the human body would suffocate if it traveled over 35mph.

Going to the moon was pure science-fiction.

Need I go on?

I will.

There is overwhelming evidence of the alien presence all over the world. Society generally takes a very narrow view of it, because it's more comfortable to say "see a psychiatrist" than to dare to look at things that challenge the orthodox views of a culture that is progressively degenerating. Progress is made by thinking outside the box. You don't "build a better mousetrap". You think in entirely new directions that others scoff and laugh at. So, go ahead and laugh. I'm sure people laughed at Newton, too.
 

Matt deMille

New member
And a challenge to ResidentAlien: You say we all came out sounding like quacks. In whose estimation? Yours? Based on what? What are YOUR facts? Here's my challenge: Disprove with a reasonable argument of your own any one of the following three:

1) How is the Great Sphinx eroded by rainfall if it was built in 2500BC as mainstream science claims, mainstream science which also holds that rainfall has not occurred on the Giza plateau for over 8000 years?

2) How did Turkish admiral Peri Rais map the Antarctic coastline in 1513 (and how did the sourcemaps he used chart it even earlier get made) if humans came into being well after the ice covered the continent as mainstream dogma holds?

3) Why do UFOs appear in ancient artwork from cave paintings to medieval church frescoes if they're just an invention of 20th century science-fiction?

Okay. I'm waiting for a reasoned argument. If I just get "see a psychiatrist" or some similarly dismissive (and issue-dodging) attempt at an insult, then I think we'll know your opinion means diddly-squat and we can wait for rational, level-headed people to comment on this forum.
 
Last edited:
I've already done all this. As I said, rather than do the typical n00b thing and create a new thread to bring attention to the fact that you're a n00b, go back and read the old thread.

I will not waste my time on this again.
 

Matt deMille

New member
To quote (abridged) Legendary Times from an earlier thread (I believe his encapsulation of viewpoints sets a good tone for this new thread):

". . . The smoking gun is everywhere - just because some people do not have an open mind to recognize a valid idea does not necessarily mean that it is wrong.

For as many people as there are out there today screaming bloody murder against the Ancient Astronaut Theory, there are as many agreeing with the concept. That includes university professors, medical doctors, airline pilots, etc.

The fact that some people on here propose (in all seriousness!) that ALL these people are crazy is the height of human arrogance. Such an over-generalization is so close-minded, so stale, so ignorant, that it evokes nothing but deep sadness within me.

I'm always amazed that whenever the Ancient Astronaut Theory is mentioned the only book that people talk about is EvD's Chariots of the Gods. A book that's 40 years old.

How ignorant do you have to be to base and judge one entire field of study on one book!? To judge it on a book that's 40 years old!? It would be the same as if someone wrote a dissertation on Beethoven's 5th after only hearing the first 8 notes, and then not listening to the rest of the piece!

Anyone with even half a brain will agree that such an argumentation is ludicrous. What about the other, thousands (!) of books that have been written on the topic since by numerous experts, including (!) university professors and doctors? What about the other 36 books EvD has written since Chariots in 1968? Oh, yeah, let's not mention those!

Calling me (and others) "certifiable" etc. and other colorful terms only exposes the people who write such things as imbeciles and arrogant buffoons. Instead of embracing the ideas of others, they are so stuck in their own world view that they start shaking in their boots when something (or someone) comes along that contradicts their frail, core belief system.

This is completely normal and an expected defense mechanism because the idea that extraterrestrials have been an integral part of our human history, is indeed a hard pill to swallow. I'm aware of that. Such an idea frightens them to death and rattles them to the core. To cope, some of them resort to ridiculing an insulting others. And that's ok. I don't blame them. They're not at fault. To some, it's the only way they can clutch onto their world view - and their utter desperation shines through by their questionable actions and insulting ways.

PS: Watch, inevitably, someone will launch an insult at me for having written what I've posted above - which would only reinforce my point. Watch."

ResidentAlien said:
I've already done all this. As I said, rather than do the typical n00b thing and create a new thread to bring attention to the fact that you're a n00b, go back and read the old thread.

I will not waste my time on this again.

I did (read the old forum).

By the way, when you were a noob (we all were at some point), were your opinions invalid? I'm sure you were rather upset when people challenged or contradicted your views then, just as you are now. But back then, as now, you "knew" you were right? Right? But somehow being on a forum longer makes you right?

That's your argument? Sheesh. I'm glad you're "not doing this again". I hope this forum goes into more interesting directions than that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"Height of human arrogance."

As opposed to the height of human self-effacement in assuming we're incapable and incompetent and therefore unable to have carved our own path through history.

When you go digging for something with the dogmatic persistence one such as Legendary Times had you're going to eventually find things that can be warped to fit that dogma. But seeing what you want to see isn't the same as it really existing.

Poor Occam...


That's all I have to say. I'll leave you to your delusion.
 

Indy's brother

New member
"Conventional Wisdom" and all the stubborn self-righteous narrow-minded baggage that's attached to it is one of the banes of my existence. While ancient alien theorists would do well not to accept every crackpot theory that comes their way, almost all of it is more believable than the biblical explanation of earth's origin and history. Puma Punku alone is fascinating and gives one pause. And forget the geoglyphs in Peru, how about that mountain that had it's peak completely removed there? There are more questions than answers in this realm of study. The stance of finding ways to explain it all away and forcing these mysterious bits of evidence into the accepted (alien-free) construct is maddening to me.
 

Matt deMille

New member
Thank you, Indy's Brother. I thought about bringing up Tiwanaku. That whole mountaintop fascinates me. You've got 400-ton blocks with some sort of metal linking system. 400-ton blocks . . . moved into position by men hauling ropes? At an altitude where the air is so thin you can't grow enough crops to feed even a small town much less a huge labor force?

As Graham Hancock says, "Whether we like it or not, we're looking at the evidence of a technology, and one that we don't understand".

And right you are on not accepting every crackpot theory. I certainly don't. Ufology, like any other field, has its share of kooks and lunatics, for certain. But then, does every religion and scientific field.

One last thing: Can you tell me about the mountain that had its peak completely removed? I've not heard about that one.
 

Indy's brother

New member
Matt deMille said:
One last thing: Can you tell me about the mountain that had its peak completely removed? I've not heard about that one.

Nzc0001.jpg


Located on the Nazca Plateau, here's a link that's got a little info on it. The silly theory is that it was cleared away as a landing strip for UFOs. That's assuming of course that ufos are built like our airplanes are, which shows that even proponents of the ancient alien theory are themselves mired in the constructs of our own limited experience. I doubt that an airstrip would be needed, and even it it were, why go to such extreme lengths for one? I believe that without question there is an unknown history to the human race. I also think that it's possible, even probable, that there have been instances of alien influence on mankind and on our landscape.
 

Matt deMille

New member
Ahhh, that one. Very interesting.

Yes, while I do insist that aliens have been here before, I think the "landing strips" idea at Nazca is flawed. Alien ships would almost certainly use VTOL and anti-gravity. Still, one has to wonder -- If not an airstrip, what then?

Or maybe there have been many ancient (human) civilizations in the past who did build up their technology to the point of needing airstrips?

On a similar note (I was going to post this anyway), here's the Graham Hancock research about the Giza site, in accordance with rewriting conventional history, in a nutshell.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WZ6Qw3xg7E

I want to remind everyone that the Cayce-mentioned chamber was indeed opened, but its contents never disclosed by the Egyptian government, and when pressed about the details, they basically played dumb cop and said "Nothing to see here . . ." Which begs the question: If there's nothing to hide, nothing important, why not let us take a look? I can only surmise that it would challenge the established orthodox view, and so it's suppressed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Gabeed

New member
You know, the pro-ancient astronaut people seem so surprised when we "don't see the smoking gun" right before our eyes, yet the archaeological field has been bombarded by fakes and falsities for hundreds of years. Our skepticism has been tempered by centuries of fantastic claims and crude forgeries. Any "evidence" that does come up is vague at best, or can be easily dismissed by scientists who have spent their entire careers focusing on their region/field of study. How irksome it must be for geologists who have been spending their entire careers studying the Pacific coast of South America to have some fool stop by briefly and immediately conclude that a "flattened mountaintop" is an ancient landing strip when anyone who isn't a layman can come up with a geomorphological rationale for such a thing in a couple seconds.
 

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
Gabeed said:
You know, the pro-ancient astronaut people seem so surprised when we "don't see the smoking gun" right before our eyes, yet the archaeological field has been bombarded by fakes and falsities for hundreds of years. Our skepticism has been tempered by centuries of fantastic claims and crude forgeries. Any "evidence" that does come up is vague at best, or can be easily dismissed by scientists who have spent their entire careers focusing on their region/field of study. How irksome it must be for geologists who have been spending their entire careers studying the Pacific coast of South America to have some fool stop by briefly and immediately conclude that a "flattened mountaintop" is an ancient landing strip when anyone who isn't a layman can come up with a geomorphological rationale for such a thing in a couple seconds.

Yes. Very good point. Of course, that's coupled with the recognition that, I suppose, any evidence of extraterrestrials would be hard to read, but that doesn't automatically discount simpler explanations. Not by a long shot.
 

Meerkat

New member
Ancient aliens are certainly plausible, but I guess I'm not fully ready to believe in them yet. (Strange, this is coming from the girl who thinks Indy and Irina make a good match. xP) But there are some pieces of evidence that really creep me out?
 

time-raider

Member
I don't know what to believe exactly, but i do know that unless someone presents some definitively hardcore proof that the argument could go on for millions of years. Now Im not talking about pictures on some wall or in some painting, that kind of evidence is relative. Im talking more like a rosetta stone saying here we are...or at least something along those lines. I mean think about it. The rosetta stone changed history not because it helped decode hieroglyphics, that would have happened eventually, but because it was physical evidence stared us in the face saying here I am, now do something. All the evidence that we have now for the AAT or AH is insubstantial. It wouldn't even hold up in a court of law. So...where is the "HERE I AM" evidence?:confused:
 

Matt deMille

New member
time-raider said:
I don't know what to believe exactly, but i do know that unless someone presents some definitively hardcore proof that the argument could go on for millions of years. Now Im not talking about pictures on some wall or in some painting, that kind of evidence is relative. Im talking more like a rosetta stone saying here we are...or at least something along those lines. I mean think about it. The rosetta stone changed history not because it helped decode hieroglyphics, that would have happened eventually, but because it was physical evidence stared us in the face saying here I am, now do something. All the evidence that we have now for the AAT or AH is insubstantial. It wouldn't even hold up in a court of law. So...where is the "HERE I AM" evidence?:confused:

Time-Raider, you make a good point. I understand your hesitation. But actually, there's a ton of "Here I am" evidence. And, oddly, a comparison ufologists often use (and I believe justly so) is that the evidence would convict anyone of any crime. As food for thought, here's just a few of the better facts for UFOs:

1) Consistency among reports throughout all religions and cultures. UFO commonalities -- such as flying vehicles -- are described in the Bible, ancient Hindu texts, Greek war accounts, Egyptian mythology, native American legends, Mayan legends, and on and on and on. That there is a consistency between reports amongst widespread cultures over thousands of years, despite changing religious views and technological understanding, can only indicate that these are reports of an objective reality, rather than the product of any cultural interpretation or invention.

2) Crop circles. Not the hoaxed ones. I'm talking those that are hundreds of yards of complex patterns which mutate the plants (they have indeed been studied at a cellular level), create electric disturbances inside the patterns, have no footprints in them, the stalks are bent rather than broken (continuing to grow sideways), and animals won't go inside them. Those details have been found altogether not here or there one at a time, but ALL details in single formations . . . hundreds of times. And complex patterns like this
http://www.facebook.com/MattDeMille#!/photo.php?pid=2349144&id=717759425
are not by a few drunk hoaxters in the middle of the night!

3) Ancient art. UFOs appear in ancient art throughout the world. I'm not talking vague circles, I'm talking clearly metallic vehicles with jet-thrusts escaping them and occupants clearly riding in them.

4) How did ancient man know things about the stars we are only (re)discovering today? Such as native Americans knowing about the Pleiades hundreds of years ago? Or Pluto? Celestial bodies invisible to the naked eye? The pyramid structures outside Mexico City recreate a map of our solar system, including planets that were not (re)discovered until the 20th century, centuries after those pyramids were built.

5) Radar tracking. Belgium was the first, but other nations have also released radar and infra-red tracking of UFOs whose maneuvers simply defy (by a large margin) anything conventional aircraft can do, such as dropping thousands of feet in a second, making acute angled turns, etc.

6) Cattle mutilations. These animals decompose at an accelerated rate, there's never any blood or shred (teeth) marks around the wounds, the wounds are made with surgical lasers, animals (including predators) won't go near the carcasses, their bones are broken as if dropped from a great height, and in thousands of cases over decades nobody has ever been caught or even seen in the act.

7) The endless testimony of government officials -- high ranking officials -- saying this is real. Why is it when high ranking (or even low ranking) officials say it's bunk, then testimony is valid, but as soon as anyone says it's real, testimony is somehow invalid? And I mean TOP . . . MEN. UFO witnesses include Presidents Regan, Carter and Ford, British Lord of the Fleet Norton, along with countless US military officers including the ranks of Colonel and Sgt. Major. If their testimony is not worthy, why the hell are they in charge of our nukes?

8) And speaking of nuclear weapons, UFOs have a long history of disabling nuclear weapons facilities by altering codes when doing fly-by's. The data for this is available by FOIA documents. The UFOs are in the reports as well as the confirmation of code change. How the hell can that happen if done by a terrestrial force? Short answer? It can't.

9) Why DO all ancient monuments form a perfect worldwide grid in perfect proportional measurement to one another?

10) There are countless pieces of UFO debris (metal and other artifacts) held in private hands who are only too eager to let scientists study them, but scientists just snicker, giggle and laugh it away without putting any of it under the microscope.

That's just a few. I could go on. Point is, the evidence is there if anyone cares to look. We're not dealing with a lack of evidence. We're dealing with a lack of open-mindedness. We're dealing with the unwillingness of people to look objectively at the evidence that is there. To quote Dr. Steven Greer: "In no other area of scientific endeavor do you need proof before you actively investigate something. This is a hypocritical standard that scientists have held up. If there is only a 10% chance that all the evidence we have indicates that we are being visited by an intelligent life-form, this is one of the most significant things in human history and we (ufologists) do not have to trot out a dead alien corpse before people in the scientific community should seriously begin to look at it".
 
Top