Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Ancient Astronauts Theory
75 Answers
Not a question, but I've just watched a documentary on the History channel entitled 'Ancient Aliens'. For anyone who's interested in finding out more about this theory, this is not a bad place to start. The narrator is a little sensationalist and hence, irritating, but don't let that deter you. I don't when it's on again, but it's extremely interesting and worth looking out for.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
To my mind, the evidence is compelling. Bearing in mind the great age of other areas of the universe in comparison with our solar system, there is no reason why other civilisations may not have developed millions of years before the earth even existed, and hence possess technology that is millions of years in advance of ours.
I really don't believe the gods were a figment of man's imagination, and in actual fact I think we are doing him a great disservice in assuming they were. Ancient man recorded what he saw, and he did it to the best of his ability. Yes, he thought he was seeing and conversing with supernatural gods, but that's no surprise if you consider his complete ignorance of modern technology. It was all magic to him.
As I said, the theory goes much deeper than megalithic buildings - and very many artefacts most definitely haven't been proven to be forgeries. I think it's a big mistake to dismiss this theory on the grounds that we don't think it could have happened. The truth is staring us in the face, but we won't look because in our usual arrogant manner, we think we already know - and we don't.
I really don't believe the gods were a figment of man's imagination, and in actual fact I think we are doing him a great disservice in assuming they were. Ancient man recorded what he saw, and he did it to the best of his ability. Yes, he thought he was seeing and conversing with supernatural gods, but that's no surprise if you consider his complete ignorance of modern technology. It was all magic to him.
As I said, the theory goes much deeper than megalithic buildings - and very many artefacts most definitely haven't been proven to be forgeries. I think it's a big mistake to dismiss this theory on the grounds that we don't think it could have happened. The truth is staring us in the face, but we won't look because in our usual arrogant manner, we think we already know - and we don't.
The 'Western Stone', at nearly 600 tons, is one the largest, heaviest stones known to be placed by humans without machinery. Yet it occurred at about 10 A.D. when King Herod began rebuilding the Temple on Temple Mount, Jerusalem. Well documented, the builders used techniques that had been known and developed for centuries.
More closely investigated, 'the great age of other areas of the universe' is found to be a myth as well, since all galaxies are the same age... give or take 14.5 billion years old. The implications are that the various types of galaxies (elliptical, spiral and irregular) and their various star/planetoid systems are all about the same age, considering the development of our own. For life... any life to exist, the universe had to have had massive Population III stars, of which none are confirmed to still exist, as well as fairly large numbers of Population II stars, the destruction of both were necessary to provide various elements (especially heavy metals) which are the basis for life as we know it. (Our own sun is a fairly young Population I star about midlife).
Additionally, look at all of the various published conjectures about advanced life from other galaxies... all (especially Daniken and his ilk) begin with statements of facts that are persistently, if slowly (at times) are debunked. The facts are "never" enhanced by further study or examination... always degraded to the quality of mythology... quite unlike our continuing increase of knowledge of our Universe... in my considered opinion...
More closely investigated, 'the great age of other areas of the universe' is found to be a myth as well, since all galaxies are the same age... give or take 14.5 billion years old. The implications are that the various types of galaxies (elliptical, spiral and irregular) and their various star/planetoid systems are all about the same age, considering the development of our own. For life... any life to exist, the universe had to have had massive Population III stars, of which none are confirmed to still exist, as well as fairly large numbers of Population II stars, the destruction of both were necessary to provide various elements (especially heavy metals) which are the basis for life as we know it. (Our own sun is a fairly young Population I star about midlife).
Additionally, look at all of the various published conjectures about advanced life from other galaxies... all (especially Daniken and his ilk) begin with statements of facts that are persistently, if slowly (at times) are debunked. The facts are "never" enhanced by further study or examination... always degraded to the quality of mythology... quite unlike our continuing increase of knowledge of our Universe... in my considered opinion...
Clanad, the age of the Earth is the relevant factor here, and that is some 10 billion years younger than other areas of the universe at only 4.6 billion years.
Where are the building techniques of Herod’s men well documented? As far as I’m aware, Herod carried out renovations to the existing ruins, so it may well be that the stone was already in place. However, if you know differently, I’d be very interested in seeing the documentation. Incidentally there’s a stone at Baalbek estimated to weigh twice as much - approximately 1200 tons - but its age is unknown as is the method by which it was transported and laid.
No, the facts are never enhanced by further studies, but all I can say is shame on us because in our stupidly arrogant efforts to disparage a perfectly feasible theory, we prefer to continue to believe that the Gods were ‘’supernatural” rather than seriously investigate the very real possibility that they were indeed just flesh and blood.
Where are the building techniques of Herod’s men well documented? As far as I’m aware, Herod carried out renovations to the existing ruins, so it may well be that the stone was already in place. However, if you know differently, I’d be very interested in seeing the documentation. Incidentally there’s a stone at Baalbek estimated to weigh twice as much - approximately 1200 tons - but its age is unknown as is the method by which it was transported and laid.
No, the facts are never enhanced by further studies, but all I can say is shame on us because in our stupidly arrogant efforts to disparage a perfectly feasible theory, we prefer to continue to believe that the Gods were ‘’supernatural” rather than seriously investigate the very real possibility that they were indeed just flesh and blood.
Naomi, why do you think that the Solar System / Earth formed much later than other solar systems and planets throughout the Universe? Since the physical process of planetary accretion is similar, and the age of the universe is constant, I dont quite see why you think there is likely to be such a big difference between areas within the universe when it comes to planetary formation.
So, if it is the case that all planets developed at roughly the same time, that seems to me to be a strong argument against flyby visits from immensely advanced alien societies sometime during our past.
Someone in the thread (I forget who) said something to the effect that evolution is as it is because of a contribution from an alien civilisation - but evolutionary theory requires no such kickstart ,or influence, to work as a model of development - so why posit aliens at all?
For me, I still feel that no compelling evidence of alien intervention has ever been demonstrated. Carl Sagan once said, quite rightly, that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" , and none has been presented, to my knowledge.
So, if it is the case that all planets developed at roughly the same time, that seems to me to be a strong argument against flyby visits from immensely advanced alien societies sometime during our past.
Someone in the thread (I forget who) said something to the effect that evolution is as it is because of a contribution from an alien civilisation - but evolutionary theory requires no such kickstart ,or influence, to work as a model of development - so why posit aliens at all?
For me, I still feel that no compelling evidence of alien intervention has ever been demonstrated. Carl Sagan once said, quite rightly, that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" , and none has been presented, to my knowledge.
LazyGun, I didn’t say our solar system formed much later than other solar systems and planets. I said the earth is younger than other areas of the universe - which means some areas of the universe are older than the earth. All the planets within the universe didn’t develop at roughly the same time. Planets are continually forming and dying. Nasa puts the age of the earth at 4.6 billion years and the age of the universe at approximately 14 billion years.
I don’t recall anyone here claiming that evolution is as it is because of the contribution from an alien civilisation, and I realise that evolution needed no such kick start. I do however, think it’s possible that aliens were instrumental in man’s development.
Although you hold very definite opinions on the subject, I strongly suspect you haven’t studied the information available that may well one day help to provide the extraordinary evidence Carl Sagan demands.
I don’t recall anyone here claiming that evolution is as it is because of the contribution from an alien civilisation, and I realise that evolution needed no such kick start. I do however, think it’s possible that aliens were instrumental in man’s development.
Although you hold very definite opinions on the subject, I strongly suspect you haven’t studied the information available that may well one day help to provide the extraordinary evidence Carl Sagan demands.
This is but one of a number of articles on Herod's construction, Naomi:
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Herod's_Temple
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Herod's_Temple
@Naomi. Well, the comment about evolution requiring alien input stemmed from one of Nadis's posts - " Their input into our evolution is probably the reason any of exist and keep existing." - This is just speculation, and evolutionary theory does not require the input of aliens.
As to planets forming and dying - sure, that occurs. Perhaps I misspoke. Planets that formed earlier in the recorded history of the universe lacked the heavier elements available later on after the formation and violent end of various suns. So planets formed significantly earlier than our own are likely to be hydrogen-helium giants. Unlikely I think to find any life within that environment that would have any sort of meaningful interaction with us.
However, I take your point that planets formed at different times, and that even a difference of just 1 billion years would make a lot of difference. That of itself doesnt mean a visit, unless you believe that technological advancement has no barriers or ceilings to inhibit development, and that FTL is possible.
We will just have to agree to disagree I guess. How much study I have invested into this particular area is an irrelevance, since any "extraordinary evidence" of the sort that I need would be global,front page news, would be the 8th wonder of the world, and would be the object of intense, global,scientific investigation.
Its an interesting topic for speculation, good for fiction and the imagination, but little else, in my opinion :)
As to planets forming and dying - sure, that occurs. Perhaps I misspoke. Planets that formed earlier in the recorded history of the universe lacked the heavier elements available later on after the formation and violent end of various suns. So planets formed significantly earlier than our own are likely to be hydrogen-helium giants. Unlikely I think to find any life within that environment that would have any sort of meaningful interaction with us.
However, I take your point that planets formed at different times, and that even a difference of just 1 billion years would make a lot of difference. That of itself doesnt mean a visit, unless you believe that technological advancement has no barriers or ceilings to inhibit development, and that FTL is possible.
We will just have to agree to disagree I guess. How much study I have invested into this particular area is an irrelevance, since any "extraordinary evidence" of the sort that I need would be global,front page news, would be the 8th wonder of the world, and would be the object of intense, global,scientific investigation.
Its an interesting topic for speculation, good for fiction and the imagination, but little else, in my opinion :)
Clanad, sorry, but unless I'm missing something, I can't see any 'well documented' evidence there of the techniques used to place the stone.
LazyGun, I don't believe it's entirely reasonable to make sweeping judgements on the composition of planets formed either earlier or later than the earth, or on the nature of any life that might be present. The universe is a big place, and we have as yet, made only minute and very tentative exploratory steps into its true nature and structure.
Nothing in itself means we have been visited by aliens, but the possibility exists. Whilst technological advancement may hold barriers, we have yet to discover what those barriers are - and in my opinion, we are mere infants in the field, and we have a very long way to go before we reach them.
Personally, I don't believe study is irrelevant - I actually think it's vital. I don't talk about evolution much simply because I don't know enough about it, but on other subjects, those I have studied sufficiently, I am confident. In short, I believe that if we don't know, all we can say is we don't know. In this instance I sincerely wish this subject would become an object of intense global scientific investigation because I truly believe we are overlooking vital clues to our past.
LazyGun, I don't believe it's entirely reasonable to make sweeping judgements on the composition of planets formed either earlier or later than the earth, or on the nature of any life that might be present. The universe is a big place, and we have as yet, made only minute and very tentative exploratory steps into its true nature and structure.
Nothing in itself means we have been visited by aliens, but the possibility exists. Whilst technological advancement may hold barriers, we have yet to discover what those barriers are - and in my opinion, we are mere infants in the field, and we have a very long way to go before we reach them.
Personally, I don't believe study is irrelevant - I actually think it's vital. I don't talk about evolution much simply because I don't know enough about it, but on other subjects, those I have studied sufficiently, I am confident. In short, I believe that if we don't know, all we can say is we don't know. In this instance I sincerely wish this subject would become an object of intense global scientific investigation because I truly believe we are overlooking vital clues to our past.
-- answer removed --
I find this fascinating, I did read 'Chariots of the Gods' years ago, and I have often thought that the stories from the Bible give clues to 'heavenly visitors', who perhaps established the ancients spiritual beliefs. The only problem I have now is knowing that they never came back again. Now we are left to our own devices, I will certainly look out for this programme to see if it offers any solutions.
Naomi, scroll to section 4.1 Construction and then scroll to th eparagraphe beginning with the hyperlinked "Mt. Moriah"...
Another site that contains actual building and engineering information is located here:
http://www.bibletopics.com/biblestudy/116.htm
Scroll to the last section... there are many others including purely engineering studies...
Another site that contains actual building and engineering information is located here:
http://www.bibletopics.com/biblestudy/116.htm
Scroll to the last section... there are many others including purely engineering studies...
Eddie, that is not the 'actual truth' about the ancient astronaut 'myth'. It's a derogatory critique of the author of a book and nothing more.
I don't believe our current experiences of the exploration of the universe entitle us to claim there is no possibility of life existing, or ever having existed, within 200 light years from earth. As for the time factors involved, our knowledge is in its infancy. Who can say where it will be in, say, 10,000 years - or 100,000 years? Certainly not you or me.
Clanad, yes, engineering studies tell us how it's thought this was done, but they don't give the information you claim is 'well documented'. If it were indeed, 'well documented' archaeological architects and civil engineers wouldn't need to theorise.
//Leen Ritmeyer, PhD and archaeological Architect and Max Schwartz a consulting civil engineer theorized about how the temple was built and how the stones were moved.//
Gran, I wouldn't say it offers solutions, but I thought it might be a helpful beginning for anyone who's interested in investigating this theory.
I don't believe our current experiences of the exploration of the universe entitle us to claim there is no possibility of life existing, or ever having existed, within 200 light years from earth. As for the time factors involved, our knowledge is in its infancy. Who can say where it will be in, say, 10,000 years - or 100,000 years? Certainly not you or me.
Clanad, yes, engineering studies tell us how it's thought this was done, but they don't give the information you claim is 'well documented'. If it were indeed, 'well documented' archaeological architects and civil engineers wouldn't need to theorise.
//Leen Ritmeyer, PhD and archaeological Architect and Max Schwartz a consulting civil engineer theorized about how the temple was built and how the stones were moved.//
Gran, I wouldn't say it offers solutions, but I thought it might be a helpful beginning for anyone who's interested in investigating this theory.
-- answer removed --
Eddie, there are at least 50 stars, some of which are known to have planets orbiting them, within 20 light years of earth, so speeds of 100s or 1000s of times the speed of light may prove to be a bit of an over-estimation on your part. We are still making surprising discoveries about our own solar system, so we can't possibly claim to have an in depth knowledge of every other solar system. Personally, rather than make definite pronouncements for which I can present no evidence, in this instance I prefer to concede that I don't know - because I don't. However, because we still have much to learn I do think we should consider all possibilities and keep our options open.
The difference here seems to be one of degree Naomi. You think that it is "highly feasible" that massively technologically advanced ETs found our nascent civilisation in the first place, then visited the Earth and influenced our development. I wll concede it it possible, since pretty much anything you want to speculate about is possible - but the likelihood is vanishingly small - very nearly as improbable as the likelihood that there is a God.
Heres why I have formed that opinion.
1.The "evidence" used to support the idea that human development has been influenced by aliens is poor, unsubstantiated, and speculative, by any critical, scientific or rational standards, further clouded by wild conspiracy allegations and criticisms of western science being too arrogant, or too dismissive.I know of no compelling evidence of any earth artifact or human societal development that can not be explained more easily (Occams Razor) by cheap and plentiful labour, their sweat and effort guided by human creativity and ingenuity. Indeed it is patronising of humanity to suggest that earlier versions of ourselves could not have built the pyramids, or shaped rock, or built stonehenge. They might very well have lacked our more modern knowlege, but they were just as creative and ingenious as we are now.
2. Physical limitations. -
i.Our current understanding of physics precludes FTL, which severely limits the area within which an advanced alien society could live and still have visited and effected us.
-ctd-
Heres why I have formed that opinion.
1.The "evidence" used to support the idea that human development has been influenced by aliens is poor, unsubstantiated, and speculative, by any critical, scientific or rational standards, further clouded by wild conspiracy allegations and criticisms of western science being too arrogant, or too dismissive.I know of no compelling evidence of any earth artifact or human societal development that can not be explained more easily (Occams Razor) by cheap and plentiful labour, their sweat and effort guided by human creativity and ingenuity. Indeed it is patronising of humanity to suggest that earlier versions of ourselves could not have built the pyramids, or shaped rock, or built stonehenge. They might very well have lacked our more modern knowlege, but they were just as creative and ingenious as we are now.
2. Physical limitations. -
i.Our current understanding of physics precludes FTL, which severely limits the area within which an advanced alien society could live and still have visited and effected us.
-ctd-
-ctd-
ii. Alien civilisational development. - I think its a sweeping generalisation to automatically assume that there must self evidently be older, wiser, more technologically advanced civilisations out there. And its also a stretch to conclude that such civilisations would necessarily be interested in ours. For such a society to have any interest in ours, there has to be a reason for the interest - trade, politics, food, filial affection, something - which would mean they have to be similar to us, which implies a similar planet as well as a similar evolutionary and cultural trajectory - Multiply these extremely rare factorials together and the likelihood of a reasonably close civilisation old enough and advanced enough to visit the Earth becomes smaller and smaller.
iii. Galactic Scale. How did they find us in the first place? The mind-melting enormous number of Galaxies,Stars and Planets within the Universe have made us a minute target, one effectively invisible for 99.99% of humanities existence, until around 80 years ago when we first started broadcasting radio and and then TV signals - so our "Digital Footprint" has only radiated out around 80 Light Years at best.
You could, I suppose, speculate that the alien civilisation would have no need to find us since they seeded the earth in the first place, but thats all it is - speculation, with nothing in evolutionary theory, DNA, molecular biology or the fossilb record to support it at all.
So, to conclude - yes, I believe that alien civilisations are probably out there - but even given the vastness of the universe and the even more mind boggling number of galaxies, suns and planets that are out there, I don't think it credible that they have ever visited us.
ii. Alien civilisational development. - I think its a sweeping generalisation to automatically assume that there must self evidently be older, wiser, more technologically advanced civilisations out there. And its also a stretch to conclude that such civilisations would necessarily be interested in ours. For such a society to have any interest in ours, there has to be a reason for the interest - trade, politics, food, filial affection, something - which would mean they have to be similar to us, which implies a similar planet as well as a similar evolutionary and cultural trajectory - Multiply these extremely rare factorials together and the likelihood of a reasonably close civilisation old enough and advanced enough to visit the Earth becomes smaller and smaller.
iii. Galactic Scale. How did they find us in the first place? The mind-melting enormous number of Galaxies,Stars and Planets within the Universe have made us a minute target, one effectively invisible for 99.99% of humanities existence, until around 80 years ago when we first started broadcasting radio and and then TV signals - so our "Digital Footprint" has only radiated out around 80 Light Years at best.
You could, I suppose, speculate that the alien civilisation would have no need to find us since they seeded the earth in the first place, but thats all it is - speculation, with nothing in evolutionary theory, DNA, molecular biology or the fossilb record to support it at all.
So, to conclude - yes, I believe that alien civilisations are probably out there - but even given the vastness of the universe and the even more mind boggling number of galaxies, suns and planets that are out there, I don't think it credible that they have ever visited us.
A couple of things to consider, Naomi... First, the SETI (The Search for Extra-terrestial Intelligence) project has been in operation for about 50 years now. While not a full time, all-out search for radio signals it has covered a great dela of sky with no evidence of alien signals yet. Agreed, more time may challenge that, but one would have to admit that if intelligent life existed one of the universal hallmarks of any civilization (even if it was possible that they are totally unlike us) would be the use of electromagnetic devices for short and long distance communications. No evidence supporting any such signals have been found where ubiquitousness should be the rule. It's failure, at least to this point, should be considered.
I'd be glad to produce yet more sites affirming the techniques and engineering used to build Herod's structures, but, understanding (at least a little bit) your worldview, none would constitute 'proof', no?
At any rate, you've produced an interesting question with much debate and that's a good thing... again, in my considered opinion.
I'd be glad to produce yet more sites affirming the techniques and engineering used to build Herod's structures, but, understanding (at least a little bit) your worldview, none would constitute 'proof', no?
At any rate, you've produced an interesting question with much debate and that's a good thing... again, in my considered opinion.
Latest Posts
Crosswords1 min ago
Crosswords4 mins ago
Film, Media & TV4 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles8 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.