AgnosticWeb.com

Back to the forum index

Linear

David, I just watched this show last night - Ancient Aliens: The Creation of Man. If you haven't watched this particular show before (or even if you have), if you could find the time to watch this on Youtube and let me know what you think, I'd appreciate it. I know a lot of these shows do some stretching to get their questions, but this show brought up a number of questions I have myself that I thought you might could either, fill in the blanks to redirect my thinking about the Ancient Alien theory, or admit that the Ancient Alien intervention theory is just as plausible as the God intervention theory. [open for anyone's comments] -http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5jjeYoQUJA

1092 views

I can't watch that particular video (because my boat bandwidth is terrible), but I am familiar with the series. They do make some good points, at times, but you are correct in pointing out that some of their stuff is a stretch. In the end, to me the problem I have with it boils down to one thing: the show presupposes that ancient civilizations could not have possessed high technology without alien intervention. I think a much more plausible explanation is simply that there have been highly advanced human civilizations in the past that achieved that level of tech on their own. After all, if humanity has been around for a few million years, and we have achieved our current level of tech in only a few thousand, who's to say it didn't happen before. It would only take a few centuries for all evidence of our existence except for special cases to be completely eradicated. -Put another way, according to science humanity had from 12:00:01am to 11:59:59pm to get to about the age where fully formed civilizations sprang up around the globe at roughly the same time between 6-8k years ago. The time since then, that 1 second, is how long it took us to get from there to where we are today. However, according to science, the first 23:59:59 hrs of humans were complete retards that didn't know their butt from a hole in the dirt.

--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.

1098 views

I can't watch that particular video (because my boat bandwidth is terrible), but I am familiar with the series. They do make some good points, at times, but you are correct in pointing out that some of their stuff is a stretch. In the end, to me the problem I have with it boils down to one thing: the show presupposes that ancient civilizations could not have possessed high technology without alien intervention. I think a much more plausible explanation is simply that there have been highly advanced human civilizations in the past that achieved that level of tech on their own. After all, if humanity has been around for a few million years, and we have achieved our current level of tech in only a few thousand, who's to say it didn't happen before. It would only take a few centuries for all evidence of our existence except for special cases to be completely eradicated. 
> -I completely agree with your assessment above, Tony. But I also would ask, who's to say there aren't other life forms much older than earth's life forms, that has intervened off and on throughout our history to which many of our ancient literature attest to?

1100 views

To me, it is not a question of whether or not that they could exist. It is certainly a possibility. The question is whether or not they could have traveled here from wherever they are from. As David pointed out, it is a very, very long way to travel, even to our nearest neighbor. All science fiction aside, we have not witnessed anything outside of quantum mechanics that moves faster than light.

--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.

1098 views

Tony: the show presupposes that ancient civilizations could not have possessed high technology without alien intervention. I think a much more plausible explanation is simply that there have been highly advanced human civilizations in the past that achieved that level of tech on their own. After all, if humanity has been around for a few million years, and we have achieved our current level of tech in only a few thousand, who's to say it didn't happen before. It would only take a few centuries for all evidence of our existence except for special cases to be completely eradicated.->BB: I completely agree with your assessment above, Tony. But I also would ask, who's to say there aren't other life forms much older than earth's life forms, that has intervened off and on throughout our history to which many of our ancient literature attest to?-
>Tony:To me, it is not a question of whether or not that they could exist. It is certainly a possibility. The question is whether or not they could have traveled here from wherever they are from. As David pointed out, it is a very, very long way to travel, even to our nearest neighbor. All science fiction aside, we have not witnessed anything outside of quantum mechanics that moves faster than light.-Again, I agree, Tony. "We" haven't witnessed anything outside of quantum mechanics that moves faster than light. Unless you count the hundreds of thousands if not more (undocumented) UfO sightings that we have no idea what they are or where they came from that appear to blink in and out of existence right before our eyes and move a warp speeds that seem impossible to anything we civilians know anything about. Many have been accounted for, but there are those that have not, and just like with NDE's and psychic phenomenon, etc,there are many things that the human eye hasn't witnessed, or has witnessed that science cannot or has not explained. -As I said, I don't know. But I keep my mind open to any possibility. But I wouldn't say just because science says somethings not possible then it's not possible. There is the possibility these sightings and so forth could be from something here on earth, or another dimension, or from other planet systems. Who is to say what technology older civilizations may have developed, or even something right here under our nose for which we (the mainstream) are completely unaware.

1104 views

Tony:To me, it is not a question of whether or not that they could exist. It is certainly a possibility. The question is whether or not they could have traveled here from wherever they are from. As David pointed out, it is a very, very long way to travel, even to our nearest neighbor. All science fiction aside, we have not witnessed anything outside of quantum mechanics that moves faster than light.
> 
> Bella: Again, I agree, Tony. "We" haven't witnessed anything outside of quantum mechanics that moves faster than light. Unless you count the hundreds of thousands if not more (undocumented) UfO sightings that we have no idea what they are or where they came from that appear to blink in and out of existence right before our eyes and move a warp speeds that seem impossible to anything we civilians know anything about. Many have been accounted for, but there are those that have not, and just like with NDE's and psychic phenomenon, etc,there are many things that the human eye hasn't witnessed, or has witnessed that science cannot or has not explained. 
> 
> As I said, I don't know. But I keep my mind open to any possibility. But I wouldn't say just because science says somethings not possible then it's not possible. There is the possibility these sightings and so forth could be from something here on earth, or another dimension, or from other planet systems. Who is to say what technology older civilizations may have developed, or even something right here under our nose for which we (the mainstream) are completely unaware.--As I said, I do not discount the possibility entirely, but I put it way way down on the scale of probability for a number of reasons.

--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.

1091 views

Bbella: I thought you might could either, fill in the blanks to redirect my thinking about the Ancient Alien theory, or admit that the Ancient Alien intervention theory is just as plausible as the God intervention theory. [open for anyone's comments] 
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5jjeYoQUJA-I've seen all of it. It uses Ian Tattersal, a highly respected paleontologist to set a respectable stage. It shows that the appearance of H. sapiens is due to a set of miraculous events: 1) creation of a universe; 2) origin of life; 3)evolution of a sentient biped from a mass of monkeys. Review: 1) is recently re-established forcefully by Vilenkin's math. 2) has a pan-spermia discussion, but it is used to raise the possibilty of alien astro-life elsewhere. The 2011 claim for bacteria in asteroids has been refuted, even though this 2012 You tube seems unaware of that. SETI has not gotten signals but that only covers 50 light years.-Conclusion: The universe was a creation, from or by? The origin of life appears to be miraculous. Inorganic matter to living matter is a giant step. Sentience is an unexpected outcome from chance mutation evolution.-Therefore, there are three possibilities: Agency as from God or alien intervention, or finally chance. I throw out chance completely, a defying logic. -As for aliens the group behind the You tube presentation don't appear very knowledgable: They state H. sapiens is only 50,000 years old. not true: more like 200,000 years. They recognize a flock of hominids, but don't discuss that that were four Homo species, with us surviving. That makes our evolution very special, and their monkey impregnation theory is either very shotgun or not as guided as they present. There are other errors not worth pursuing. -They don't recognize the scientifically indisputable points of the limitiations of space travel. The closest star is 4 light-years away. The closest big galaxy (Andromeda) is 2 billion light years away. Pretty solid theory states that life has to be only in big galaxies like ours. So we are limited to looking for alien life only in our galaxy. Arrivals are limited by the time necessary to get here. Travel at the speed of light involves only photons, not living matter. -To me the whole idea is fun to imagine, but pie in the sky or pie in your face. What kind of income do these folks make by inventing these theories?

1129 views

More fun ideas:-http://news.discovery.com/space/are-we-living-in-a-computer-simulation-2-121216.html

1106 views

More fun ideas:
> 
> http://news.discovery.com/space/are-we-living-in-a-computer-simulation-2-121216.html-When I was much younger and smoked marijuana, on an infrequent basis mind you, this was one of the creations my own brain thought up and would retread. During those highly thought filled moments, I could so easily see how this theory could be fact. Which says more about the ability of the brain to imagine than What Is real. Yet, here is the theory, in a scientific article no less. But like so many thoughts and wormholes my mind has wondered up and traveled down, on and off marijuana, I later found the same thoughts written in books or watched them play out in movies or explained in scientific articles as possible facts. That this is so does make the quantum field theory seem much more real, or the human conscious all connected on some level...or both.

1106 views

Here is a refutation of the Alien theory in a You tube movie. In the first several minutes a huge lie about granite is found. The Alien theory is a fraud!!!-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9w-i5oZqaQ

1114 views

Here is a refutation of the Alien theory in a You tube movie. In the first several minutes a huge lie about granite is found. The Alien theory is a fraud!!!
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9w-i5oZqaQ-I have seen this youtube before and have watched a lot of Mike Heiser's programs where he debunks the Ancient Alien theory. But, like with science and/or religion, there is a lot of beiefs and pursuits of ideas that surround a speck of truth that may not be true on closer investigations from other scientist, etc. To me, what you say above, that because they debunked this or that makes the whole idea a fraud, would be like saying all of science is bull malarkey based on erroneous findings or beliefs. As I have said before, I know the ancient alien theorist do a lot of stretching to support their beliefs (I do not believe they are lying but truly are asking if their ideas might be possibilities), but I believe that is true for many who narrowly choose to believe what they believe just because they believe it is true and they live to seek for evidence of their belief. But at least, in the AA shows, after every sentence they end it with a question and not a period, which for me, leaves room for theory and not religious or dogmatic ideas.

1105 views

bbella: As I have said before, I know the ancient alien theorist do a lot of stretching to support their beliefs (I do not believe they are lying but truly are asking if their ideas might be possibilities), but I believe that is true for many who narrowly choose to believe what they believe just because they believe it is true and they live to seek for evidence of their belief. But at least, in the AA shows, after every sentence they end it with a question and not a period, which for me, leaves room for theory and not religious or dogmatic ideas.-bbella, either granite is granite or it isn't. It is apparently well known that the carvings are sandstone. This is a gross scientific error. I see no intellectual honesty here. Facts should be facts not twisted to make a theory sound better. -More to the point: How did the aliens get here despite the speed of light problem? And why should they bother to fool with us and not simply stay where they are? Why were they attracted here? To what advantage for them?

1097 views

bbella: As I have said before, I know the ancient alien theorist do a lot of stretching to support their beliefs (I do not believe they are lying but truly are asking if their ideas might be possibilities), but I believe that is true for many who narrowly choose to believe what they believe just because they believe it is true and they live to seek for evidence of their belief. But at least, in the AA shows, after every sentence they end it with a question and not a period, which for me, leaves room for theory and not religious or dogmatic ideas.
> 
> bbella, either granite is granite or it isn't. It is apparently well known that the carvings are sandstone. This is a gross scientific error. I see no intellectual honesty here. Facts should be facts not twisted to make a theory sound better.-I completely agree! But I am not stating that I believe these sandstone monuments are granite or that aliens built these artifacts. For me, it's not about this program or their questions on ancient artifacts. It was about the particular program on the question of the creation of man. 
 
> More to the point: How did the aliens get here despite the speed of light problem? And why should they bother to fool with us and not simply stay where they are? Why were they attracted here? To what advantage for them?-I do not know the answers, I can only guess. But many different stories have been written (thru the ages) about why they (gods) came here and why they created humans. Many ask similar questions about God. The reasons for how we came to be or why has not been answered to my own satisfaction as of yet, outside of me that is. But I keep my mind open to all possibilities.

1092 views

Bbella: I thought you might could either, fill in the blanks to redirect my thinking about the Ancient Alien theory, or admit that the Ancient Alien intervention theory is just as plausible as the God intervention theory. [open for anyone's comments] 
> > 
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5jjeYoQUJA
> 
> I've seen all of it. It uses Ian Tattersal, a highly respected paleontologist to set a respectable stage. It shows that the appearance of H. sapiens is due to a set of miraculous events: 1) creation of a universe; 2) origin of life; 3)evolution of a sentient biped from a mass of monkeys. Review: 1) is recently re-established forcefully by Vilenkin's math. 2) has a pan-spermia discussion, but it is used to raise the possibilty of alien astro-life elsewhere. The 2011 claim for bacteria in asteroids has been refuted, even though this 2012 You tube seems unaware of that. SETI has not gotten signals but that only covers 50 light years.
> 
> Conclusion: The universe was a creation, from or by? The origin of life appears to be miraculous. Inorganic matter to living matter is a giant step. Sentience is an unexpected outcome from chance mutation evolution.
> 
> Therefore, there are three possibilities: Agency as from God or alien intervention, or finally chance. I throw out chance completely, a defying logic. 
> 
> As for aliens the group behind the You tube presentation don't appear very knowledgable: They state H. sapiens is only 50,000 years old. not true: more like 200,000 years. They recognize a flock of hominids, but don't discuss that that were four Homo species, with us surviving. That makes our evolution very special, and their monkey impregnation theory is either very shotgun or not as guided as they present. There are other errors not worth pursuing. -Even though the group behind the Youtube presentation do not appear very knowledgeable and state some wrong facts, still the alien intervention theory remains possible? 
 
> They don't recognize the scientifically indisputable points of the limitiations of space travel. The closest star is 4 light-years away. The closest big galaxy (Andromeda) is 2 billion light years away. Pretty solid theory states that life has to be only in big galaxies like ours. So we are limited to looking for alien life only in our galaxy. Arrivals are limited by the time necessary to get here. Travel at the speed of light involves only photons, not living matter. -I'm sure you have heard this before, but if beings from other planets are much older than the humans on this planet, why is it not possible they have developed time/space travel through wormholes or dimensional portals, etc? We have even imagined and created movies of it ourselves and we are a very young species when it comes to technology. There's not a lot of things we have imagined we haven't at some point created so I can only imagine where we would be given another few centuries or less. 
 
> To me the whole idea is fun to imagine, but pie in the sky or pie in your face. What kind of income do these folks make by inventing these theories?-As you well know, a person looks for evidence of their own belief. In my mind, there is just as much evidence for this possibility than any other given that science and the ancient alien theory both agree that man (as he is today) popping up when he did, was nearly a miraculous event in time. No doubt ancient alien theorist may search for evidence for their belief in many places, including the wrong places at times, just as scientist and theists and deists, etc do as well. -But, you haven't answered, to my mind, how the idea that a God intervened or created mankind is that much different than an older alien species doing the same thing? It still seems to me, the evidence lies more on the side of an older species doing the intervening rather than a god, since the sudden appearance of the humanoid seems highly suspect. If we could just as easily connect the dots of evolution for man as we could for animals we wouldn't even be having this conversation...and there probably wouldn't even be religions or a question of a god either.

1105 views


> bbella: But, you haven't answered, to my mind, how the idea that a God intervened or created mankind is that much different than an older alien species doing the same thing? It still seems to me, the evidence lies more on the side of an older species doing the intervening rather than a god, since the sudden appearance of the humanoid seems highly suspect. If we could just as easily connect the dots of evolution for man as we could for animals we wouldn't even be having this conversation...and there probably wouldn't even be religions or a question of a god either.-God and aliens are both equally possible, if you start with the conclusion that the origin of the universe, the origin of life, and the origin of the human brain are all miracle requiring the intervention of some mighty power. EXCEPT: aliens couldn't have started the universe. Nor could they have started life. The only alien theory point is that they stepped in and helped create humans. So how do we answer the first two miracles? Not with aliens.

1100 views


> > bbella: But, you haven't answered, to my mind, how the idea that a God intervened or created mankind is that much different than an older alien species doing the same thing? It still seems to me, the evidence lies more on the side of an older species doing the intervening rather than a god, since the sudden appearance of the humanoid seems highly suspect. If we could just as easily connect the dots of evolution for man as we could for animals we wouldn't even be having this conversation...and there probably wouldn't even be religions or a question of a god either.
> 
> God and aliens are both equally possible, if you start with the conclusion that the origin of the universe, the origin of life, and the origin of the human brain are all miracle requiring the intervention of some mighty power. EXCEPT: aliens couldn't have started the universe. -I agree.->Nor could they have started life. -I agree.->The only alien theory point is that they stepped in and helped create humans. -I agree. And it remains a possibility in my own mind for these reasons: The point of fact is that humans suddenly appeared from what seemed like out of nowhere with qualities not found before they arrived. If humans evolved like all other things on this planet, there would not be a question about why the sudden arrival. But because we didn't evolve like everything else here, there had to be intervention, there had to be something or someone who intervened. Not to say other things or beings on our planet couldn't arrived the same way. But we are speaking of humans here.->So how do we answer the first two miracles? Not with aliens.-Again, I agree. The miraculous events of the universe evolving into being and life evolving into being is very hard to comprehend or explain, but it is what it is and we all know they both happened. But it does not discount the possibility that different kinds of beings may have evolved before we came to be somewhere else (or maybe even here, but they are either no long here, or have moved on - for the most part). -If humans didn't suddenly appeared, and we did not have the multitude of stories handed down and books written from most every civilization on every continent about Gods coming down from the stars/heavens, we would not even be having this conversation, most likely. And like with NDE's, millions of people have reported seeing and communicating with beings that are not from here (many are awake and not asleep). This may not be concrete evidence to your mind, but as I've written in the post on Afterlife, just because we haven't experienced it ourselves does not mean it hasn't been experienced by millions, if not billions of others. So I remain open to the possibility not because I believe it or have experienced anything to prove it to myself. But because I do not want to close my mind to anything that so many people have claimed they have experienced just because I do not have proof it is true myself.

1103 views


> >DT:The only alien theory point is that they stepped in and helped create humans. 
> 
> bbella:I agree. And it remains a possibility in my own mind for these reasons: The point of fact is that humans suddenly appeared from what seemed like out of nowhere with qualities not found before they arrived. If humans evolved like all other things on this planet, there would not be a question about why the sudden arrival. But because we didn't evolve like everything else here, there had to be intervention, there had to be something or someone who intervened.-Sudden human appearance is the key to my thinking also. If you accept evolution, and you seem to, the 'intervention' (without saying who or what intervened) is in several areas. About 20 million years ago changes in vertebrae in the lumbar region of a monkey began to assume changes for upright posture.Bipedal walking preceded brain growth. It freed hands to develop more dexterity. It is not clear whether brain plasticity then pushed growth of the brain as hominids learned new skills with their better bodies and hands, but that seems a likely theory. -Would aliens work first with the monkeys? Bring their own monkeys for mating? The evolution story without aliens looks logical. And then your approach has the problem of DNA. We can trace homologous DNA and make DNA trees and time tables. they fit a non-alien pattern. There are four known Homo tribes with some cross mating. All the DNA fits, nothing alien.-I am left with intervention by a universal consciousness, most likely with pre-planning in early genome development back at the single cell stage. I think a UI is a necessary being, who wanted to develop consciousness at our level. -And for consideration of Heaven and what it might be like, in death it is just a joining of our indiviudal consciousness with the UI. I cannot imagine that entails beautifl clouds and vistas.

1096 views


> > >DT:The only alien theory point is that they stepped in and helped create humans. 
> > 
> > bbella:I agree. And it remains a possibility in my own mind for these reasons: The point of fact is that humans suddenly appeared from what seemed like out of nowhere with qualities not found before they arrived. If humans evolved like all other things on this planet, there would not be a question about why the sudden arrival. But because we didn't evolve like everything else here, there had to be intervention, there had to be something or someone who intervened.
> 
> Sudden human appearance is the key to my thinking also. If you accept evolution, and you seem to, the 'intervention' (without saying who or what intervened) is in several areas. About 20 million years ago changes in vertebrae in the lumbar region of a monkey began to assume changes for upright posture.Bipedal walking preceded brain growth. It freed hands to develop more dexterity. It is not clear whether brain plasticity then pushed growth of the brain as hominids learned new skills with their better bodies and hands, but that seems a likely theory. 
> 
> Would aliens work first with the monkeys? Bring their own monkeys for mating? The evolution story without aliens looks logical. And then your approach has the problem of DNA. We can trace homologous DNA and make DNA trees and time tables. they fit a non-alien pattern. There are four known Homo tribes with some cross mating. All the DNA fits, nothing alien.
> 
> I am left with intervention by a universal consciousness, most likely with pre-planning in early genome development back at the single cell stage. I think a UI is a necessary being, who wanted to develop consciousness at our level. 
> -I know you know so much more than I do on this subject (and many more subjects as well), which is one reason I am questioning you with what comes to mind when I read your response. I know you say there is no need for an alien intervention, and that the human (as we are now) arrived just as planned by the UI. -But,just out of curiosity, could you suspend your logical mind for a moment and imagine this unlikely (in your mind) scenario, that say, in 5 or 10 years, give or take, scientist discover and prove that humans are a hybrid form of Hominids with an alien life form that has also been discovered (or arrived, or somehow became known). Could you look back thru time and see signs along the way of how this could be true with just what you know now? Of course, if this unlikely scenario did happen, it's still would not prove there is no UI, or that this too wasn't planned from the beginning. But, it is still a question in my mind that I would like to have erased if there truly was absolutely no possibility.

1100 views


> bbela: But,just out of curiosity, could you suspend your logical mind for a moment and imagine this unlikely (in your mind) scenario, that say, in 5 or 10 years, give or take, scientist discover and prove that humans are a hybrid form of Hominids with an alien life form that has also been discovered (or arrived, or somehow became known). Could you look back thru time and see signs along the way of how this could be true with just what you know now? Of course, if this unlikely scenario did happen, it's still would not prove there is no UI, or that this too wasn't planned from the beginning. But, it is still a question in my mind that I would like to have erased if there truly was absolutely no possibility.-We have now reached the point where DNA can be studied from everything. It is the same code in all living matter, all organisms. As you know I believe in theistic evolution as a marvelous master coding system. It is so exact that we know of a race of humans, the Denesovans from the DNA taken from one finger bone! In other words, the comparisons between life forms, different species are very careful and tightly determined. We can tell for example that Neanderthals and H. sapiens interbred to some degree. We can trace the changes as we branched off from the common ancestor with the chimps. There is even a method to set up a past time table for approximate times when the splits happened. I know of no evidence of alien DNA appearing anywhere. And the major reason is, if God made life everywhere, it will have the same DNA. All the DNA on Earth is accounted for from the forms alive here. -The way an alien DNA could possibly look different is in base sequence totally out of line with what has been found. None so far, and I don't think it will be found.-I find the alien theories lots of fun, but a bit like Harry Potter, making lots of money for the authors. Jo Rawlings is a great author and honest, but the alien folks I view as frauds, certainly rich frauds at that.

1110 views


> >I know of no evidence of alien DNA appearing anywhere. And the major reason is, if God made life everywhere, it will have the same DNA. All the DNA on Earth is accounted for from the forms alive here.-So you are saying "if" there is life elsewhere, their DNA would be the same as ours because they would have evolved just as we have, even if they are millions of years ahead of us?
 
> The way an alien DNA could possibly look different is in base sequence totally out of line with what has been found. None so far, and I don't think it will be found.-What does "base sequence" mean, in laymans terms?

1103 views


> bbella: So you are saying "if" there is life elsewhere, their DNA would be the same as ours because they would have evolved just as we have, even if they are millions of years ahead of us? -If the aliens are humans their DNA will be like ours. If they are the weird creatures, as in the drawn depictions, it will be different and very obvious in DNA studies. The latter is not found so far. 
> 
> > David: The way an alien DNA could possibly look different is in base sequence totally out of line with what has been found. None so far, and I don't think it will be found.
> 
> bbella: What does "base sequence" mean, in laymans terms?-If you look at DNA code it is made up of an amino acid at each tip of a code point, attached to a sugar. This is a base. Adenine (A), guanine(G), cytosine (C), and thymine (T) are the DNA amino acids. On RNA uracil (U) is used for thymine. Three bases in a row give a code for which amino acid to make: The DNA code for Asparagine is AAC, the stuff that gives the odor to asparagus. DNA makes 20 amino acids from this code. They are referred to as the 20 'essential amino acids' for life. They have to be made by DNA to create the proteins of life. Only eight have been found in meteors to seed the Earth. They are not natural on inorganic Earth. Amino acids and all proteins are 3-dimensional in space, and either right or left handed, determined by how solutions of them bend polarlized light. All amino acids are left-handed and the DNA (or RNA) sugars are right-handed. In the lab if one cooks up amino acids or anything else, the resulting molecules will be 50/50% right and left. Life has specific handedness. There is no obvious theoretical reason for this. It just is.

1074 views

RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum