Ancient aliens

[Gabeed]

I mean, I was considering posting another couple ancient Egyptian sarcophagi a couple pages ago, but I just got that feeling that he'd stubbornly maintain that the one from the Great Pyramid is "too deep and unadorned to be a sarcophagus."

 

[ResidentAlien]

I mean, I was considering posting another couple ancient Egyptian sarcophagi a couple pages ago, but I just got that feeling that he'd stubbornly maintain that the one from the Great Pyramid is "too deep and unadorned to be a sarcophagus."

It is pretty futile...

I mean the more facts we post the more we are "ignoring evidence." Seems like we're only running in circles.

 

[Stoo]

I didn't bother to say any more because you had already made your position clear -- That it was "debunked".

Another crock of sh*t. My position was not 'clear' as I never even commented on ANY paintings until today! I listed the possibilities of what Ezekiel's Wheel could have been and you went on to defend YOURSELF instead of talking about ol' Zeke.

 

[Matt deMille]

So, ResidentAlien, Stoo and Gabeed, let me get this straight: When I present evidence, I'm corrupting impressionable young minds. But when I say "here's a lead, go see for yourself and draw your own conclusions", then I am accused of not presenting evidence.

 

[ResidentAlien]

So, ResidentAlien, Stoo and Gabeed, let me get this straight: When I present evidence, I'm corrupting impressionable young minds. But when I say "here's a lead, go see for yourself and draw your own conclusions", then I am accused of not presenting evidence.

No, you really seem not to be able to grasp this simple concept.

Your evidence is wrong, flatly. It is non-evidence. It is lies and bull****, quite simply.

We demonstrate how those lies are precisely that, lies. When you post lies, that is corrupting impressionable minds.

Now, if you could provide actual, verifiable evidence, work that cannot be disproved, then we will perk up our ears and listen.

Very simple.

 

[Gabeed]

Uh, pretty much what Resident Alien said. There's a difference between presenting evidence and saying things like "this clearly isn't a sarcophagus because it's big and looks like a bathtub" or "Alexander the Great encountered UFOs during the siege of Tire in 373 BC," which to put it generously are not well thought out or researched, and no matter how you feel about about mainstream archaeology and history, we're going to call you out on such thoughtless statements.

 

[Stoo]

Stoo, Gabeed and ResidentAlien try to twist everything to support a pre-determined "conclusion". What I've said about being at the Giza site is an example of this.

Welcome to the Distinguished Gentleman's Club, Stoo!

We're hypocrites, it seems. So then let us revel in knowing that we were denounced by the greatest hypocrite of all, Mr. Matt deMille! May we all prostrate before his every word, without any sort of evidence to any of it!

And yes, a toast to Stoo, fellow hypocrite and dogmatic, immature moron.

Cheers, guys. This may get me black-balled from the 'Distinguished Gentleman's Club' but...

The FUNNIEST thing is that deMille has lumped me in with those who are blinded by dogma & conventional thinking and who don't do any research. What he doesn't realize is that I *am* interested in NASA footage of UFOs and the possibilty of life on other planets which is exactly why I'm in this thread. I worked in the aviation industry for several years and at least 2 pilots; 1 commercial, 1 military (both with a lot of flight time under their belts) have told me about things they've seen which they can't explain.

Another problem of deMille's is labeling the 'morons' as 'skeptics' yet all the while treating them as NON-BELIEVERS. Skepticism = UNCERTAINTY. I am a skeptic in the true sense of the word, not the Matt deMille-sense (which equals a non-believer). The only people deMille is willing to take seriously are believers which is clearly evident by his attitude towards Carl Sagan, etc. To him, any challenge to his skewed logic & beliefs is immediately categorized as a personal "attack". Grow up!

@Matt deMille: You can't pigeon-hole me as a 'moron' who 'doesn't like what I'm hearing' simply because I don't believe you've been inside a Giza pyramid. Your reactions clearly demonstrate your myopic tunnel-vision and paranoia.

Now, let's get back to Great Pyramids NOT being tombs...

 

[Matt deMille]

Actually, Stoo, there's a lot of posts on here that question or contest what I say and believe, and I welcome their opinions and discuss them cordially. It's when I'm flat out told I'm wrong or marginalized that I get my back up. Tunnel-vision and paranoia? Hardly. Those are the traits of posters like ResidentAlien and Gabeed. And I've lumped you in with them because you seem to willfully agree or accept everything they say. If you are so objective and scientific, when they pull their childish BS, you should say something effecting how they don't speak for you. This you have FINALLY done, but too little, too late I'm afraid. For days and many, many pages of this thread, you seem to have willfully and almost proudly lumped yourself in with them. I'm just calling it as I see it.

And if you want to tell someone to "grow up", you ought to start with ResidentAlien. Every post he makes seems like a bratty child who thinks it makes him look cool to be noisy, negative, and spit out senseless (and, I must say, very unoriginal) uses of profanity.

In closing, in regards to those other posters who like to TRY and marginalize this subject (and yet, despite all their criticisms and "debunking", people still post here asking good questions, people still show interest, and people still email me privately asking to discuss this subject further), for those noisy-negativists, I'm going to quote a film:

"I've never understood you so-called men of science. Something comes along that's exciting, and worldly important, and you turn your back on it just because it doesn't happen to fit into your little box-like view of the universe . . . You're not scientists, you're cowards".

 

[ResidentAlien]

Oh poor disenfranchised, broken and beaten Matt deMille. The underdog that keeps on fighting despite the big mean bullies ResidentAlien and Gabeed that stand in his way.

Boo-hoo.



I'm going to quote a film too...



"Was I bored? No, I wasn't ****in' bored. I'm never bored. That's the trouble with everybody - you're all so bored. You've had nature explained to you and you're bored with it, you've had the living body explained to you and you're bored with it, you've had the universe explained to you and you're bored with it, so now you want cheap thrills and, like, plenty of them, and it doesn't matter how tawdry or vacuous they are as long as it's new as long as it's new as long as it flashes and ****in' bleeps in forty ****in' different colors. So whatever else you can say about me, I'm not ****in' bored."

 

[Matt deMille]

If you want to tell someone to "grow up", you ought to start with ResidentAlien. Every post he makes seems like a bratty child who thinks it makes him look cool to be noisy, negative, and spit out senseless (and, I must say, very unoriginal) uses of profanity.

Oh poor disenfranchised, broken and beaten Matt deMille. The underdog that keeps on fighting despite the big mean bullies ResidentAlien and Gabeed that stand in his way.

Boo-hoo.

"Was I bored? No, I wasn't ****in' bored. I'm never bored. That's the trouble with everybody - you're all so bored. You've had nature explained to you and you're bored with it, you've had the living body explained to you and you're bored with it, you've had the universe explained to you and you're bored with it, so now you want cheap thrills and, like, plenty of them, and it doesn't matter how tawdry or vacuous they are as long as it's new as long as it's new as long as it flashes and ****in' bleeps in forty ****in' different colors. So whatever else you can say about me, I'm not ****in' bored."

I rest my case.

 

[ResidentAlien]

I rest my case.

What case?

How "bratty" was it that you appealed to a film quote? So I did the same-- gotta keep the playing field leveled.

I did not once swear in that message, so I don't know what you're talking about.


Oh, I see-- you edited my quote to exclude that I was quoting a film. Ah, clever. Just like all of your so-called evidence-- it's dependent upon being out of context.


You, sir, are a fraud.

 

[Gabeed]

Just like with Von Daniken, sometimes you gotta fudge a couple things to make people believe what you want them to believe.

I'm actually trying to find that Nova episode from '78 where Von Daniken admits to exhibiting fraudulent pottery.

 

[Stoo]

Actually, Stoo, there's a lot of posts on here that question or contest what I say and believe, and I welcome their opinions and discuss them cordially. It's when I'm flat out told I'm wrong or marginalized that I get my back up. Tunnel-vision and paranoia? Hardly. Those are the traits of posters like ResidentAlien and Gabeed. And I've lumped you in with them because you seem to willfully agree or accept everything they say. If you are so objective and scientific, when they pull their childish BS, you should say something effecting how they don't speak for you. This you have FINALLY done, but too little, too late I'm afraid. For days and many, many pages of this thread, you seem to have willfully and almost proudly lumped yourself in with them. I'm just calling it as I see it.

I was referring to lumping me in with your general statements such as "humans (who) like to live in a little bubble blown out of a Cross-shaped bubble-blower of BS". I agree with everything that Gabeed & Res have said (except for 1 thing* Res mentioned recently). They make sense. You, on the other hand...

*(3D perspective in art history - a minor quibble and incosequential to the larger subject.)

And if you want to tell someone to "grow up", you ought to start with ResidentAlien. Every post he makes seems like a bratty child who thinks it makes him look cool to be noisy, negative, and spit out senseless (and, I must say, very unoriginal) uses of profanity.

That may be but, in the end, Resident Alien is usually right in what he says (and not just in this thread). If one thing is for sure, he's not stupid.

...people still email me privately asking to discuss this subject further

Suuure. Why aren't these people contributing to the thread? C'mon, folks! Where are you?

I'm actually trying to find that Nova episode from '78 where Von Daniken admits to exhibiting fraudulent pottery.

Wow, that's the third flashback to 1978! That's too much of a coincidence. There must be something very special about that year.

I came across a quote where deMille's precious Hancock retracted some of his pyramid theories.

 

[Stoo]

Originally I said maybe I'd been there, maybe I hadn't. When Stoo challenged that, I said yes, I have, and I didn't wish to discuss it further. Out of charity I did. But, it's my right to be non-specific about my experiences. My experiences aren't the central issue.

No, that's not how the conversation went and you know that. Anyone else following the thread will know it, too. 'Originally', you said you had been there. Period. Matt deMille strikes again! Twisting history wherever he goes...

Besides, my having been to the Giza site or not is immaterial here. According to the skeptics, it's all about research. I wonder if ResidentAlien, Gabeed and Stoo have ALL been to the Giza site and laid eyes directly on everything that pertains to this subject. Yet they speak with authority as if they have, when I suspect their "knowledge", at best, came from books and not personal experience. Why should I be any different.

Yes, I've been inside one of the pyramids at Giza (+ the Cairo Museum and have seen the Egyptian collection at the British Museum in London on 3 separate occasions). Whether or not you've been to Giza is completely RELEVANT to the conversation since you complained that people don't get out in the field and simply repeat things others have said/written. I was SPECIFICALLY asking about your observations and data concerning the ancient alien theory. Who cares about your personal dilemmas? What have you seen at Giza with your own naked eye that support your claims? Your poor excuse of 'deliberately muddying the waters' regarding your non-visit is just plain asinine. If you had any REAL, 1st hand knowledge about Giza then you wouldn't be hiding it under some pathetic shroud of secrecy.

Allow me to reiterate the points I brought up before (which you completely ignored):

If you want to make a case that the Great Pyramids were not tombs, then don't bring up the following:
-Your implication that the interior inscriptions were faked (graffiti or not, they're genuine).
-Your assertion that the stone boxes are too deep to be sarcophagi
-Your assertion that earlier 'grave robbers' would've been unable to breach & enter a pyramid before the use of dynamite (Absolutely FALSE!)
-Your demand for practical blueprints of pyramid construction

Early on the thread, you mentioned something about copper (I think) at the end of the vents. Care to elaborate?

 

[Matt deMille]

Suuure. Why aren't these people contributing to the thread? C'mon, folks! Where are you?:

Once again, Stoo, you accuse without checking evidence. You are just assuming you are right. Shows what a fool you really are.

For your information, those who have emailed me requested I maintain their anonymity, or at least encouraged it, and I will abide by that. Unlike you three, I respect other people. Oh, I'm sure you'll use the "anonymity" part to accuse me of making this up, like being to Giza, but you know what, I really don't care what you think. Your opinions have been proven worthless. You, along with ResidentAlien and Gabeed are a perfect example of the real problem in the world. Though you may come from different backgrounds and have different methods of denial, you're all still so entrenched in your ways you refuse to accept anything other than what you've already said is "right". That you continually make snide remarks -- all the while professing to try and ask legitimate questions -- proves it. Until you can stop making assumptions and insults, your "real questions" will never be addressed nor you taken seriously.

If those who have emailed me (any of the SEVEN of them) wish to post on this thread at this point, that is their business, but I will not speak for them.

As for all your other comments, since anything I say is just going to hit a brick wall of denial, nope, sorry, you don't get any answers. Since all three of you act like spoiled children, I'm not giving you any more toys to break (oh, and lest this be used as the latest cheap-shot, breaking a toy does not mean it is poorly made or weak -- it means it was deliberately mishandled with the intention of abuse and vandalism).

 

[Gabeed]

Aww, no more answers? We don't get any more gems like the Alexander quote? Fear not, for I have worked up some other ones for you to toss around in the midst of a discussion.

Inspired by the mind who gave us . . .

Alexander's UFO encounter was in 373 BC when he was sacking the city of Tire.

"Christopher Columbus discovered Ammerika for Western Europe in 1542 AD, and found aliens there."

"In 530 BC, King Leonidas fought off a horde of angry aliens led by a Pershun king named Zerksees."

"In June of 1991, Hitler implemented Operation Barbarossa and launched a surprise offensive on the hapless Rushans, using UFOs to great effect against anti-air defenses. Anyone who doesn't believe that is an immature fool."

"The Battle of Qadesh was one of the greatest battles of the pre-classical era, and it was during the battle between the Ejiptshuns and Hittaits in 1324 BC that UFOs were sighted above the city. Trust me. I'm an authority on this subject."

"In 2009, President Eisenhower signed an act making Hawwayyee the 50th state of the Union, which is what the aliens wanted all along. You should believe what I'm telling you. I've researched this stuff for years."

 

[ResidentAlien]

It's time that I dredge up an old classic.

Some veteran participators of the earlier aliens topic may remember this gem:

 

[Matt deMille]

Funny how these noisy-negativists like to harp on a simple typo (Tire), a misspelling and nothing more (and totally ignoring the account itself, of Alexander reporting five silver shields in the sky), when the ONLY "proof" of the Great Pyramid being a tomb is one single name scrawled on a wall which is, oddly, misspelled. One would think the Egyptians who built this incredible monument, this technological wonder for their god, would actually spell his name right. But, whoops, according to The Three Stooges, a misspelling totally invalidates a claim. I guess Gabeed and co. have totally invalidated the Great Pyramid being a tomb. Sorry fellas. That's what happens when you whine long enough, when you act like children and think you're funny (which, according to others who email me, you're the only ones who believe so).

Oh, I think now I'll sit back and welcome the flood of immature, simple-minded comments that are sure to follow. Morons are very predictable. It should be entertaining to see what contradictions you guys come up with next, and what pathetic spin you attempt with them to try and make yourselves feel better.

I do have one question for the noisy-negativists however: Who do you think you're helping? Seems to me you're talking to yourselves. Oh, that's right, you've said you won't let me "get away with" "corrupting impressionable minds". So, you're defenders of the young and dumb, eh? Odd, I always thought defenders of any kind always defended, as a core to that ideal, the element of freedom. Your "defense" is actually tyranny, trying to force your views on others. Why not let other posters comment on my proposals and questions and offer their own opinions? You know, like they were doing before your "defense" of them -- like a viking raid defending a village -- turned them from the forum and into my mailbox. Oh, that's right, you're only defending yourselves and your narrow-minded, lousy views. My bad.

Well, like it or not, the discussion continues without you. I've had quite a nice exchange with others in email where your biased, childish antics can't touch or taint the topic. And it's been going on for a while. All you've been doing here is continually making fools of yourselves. You guys think you're funny, but really, the joke is on you. Thought you might like to know.

 

[ResidentAlien]

As to the misspelling:

http://www.philipcoppens.com/nap_art9.html



Ah, more falsified evidence? It would appear that way...

 

[Matt deMille]

As to the misspelling:

http://www.philipcoppens.com/nap_art9.html



Ah, more falsified evidence? It would appear that way...

Actually, I found this link to be very welcome. It seems to support my case more than yours.

Although, your little red-headed doll clearly suggests you're trying to win a debate with volume and antics rather than evidence. While I suspected such foolishness from you, I must say I'm surprised that you just handed over an article that backs me and denounces yourself. That is surprising indeed.

Backs me? Yes. The only things in that article which appear to go against me is saying that guys like Hancock have "given up". Quite the contrary. Hancock simply investigates more monuments and doesn't dwell exclusively on Egypt. He wrote his book on Giza, made his argument, and let it stand. Something a mature, respectable researcher would do. He doesn't have the egomaniacal need to continually pound his chest and proclaim himself right, trying to win with volume rather than reason, like you guys do.