Jump to content

Ancient Alien Tv program


ancient_alien
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone, I am doing some research about Ancient aliens. I really love this topic. I know many of you watching this series continuesly. But i just started to watch this, but there is already 43episodes finish. I really don't have enough time to watch every episode from starting, i have few people who is watching some of the episode for me. I want someone from this forum to watch couple of the episode for me and take some notes in each episode. i will discuss about this in detail, those who really enjoy Ancient alien program or continuesly watching that, please let me know if u are interest writing few things about it, we will discuss about this in detail. looking for some people, urgent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen a few of the episodes and they can be summarized as:

"These things are incredible and I can't think of a way ancient people could have done it without advanced technology. It must have been aliens!"

 

The notes taken on this show would go something like:

 

BS, BS, BS, LOL, BS, BS, and credits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen a few of the episodes and they can be summarized as:

"These things are incredible and I can't think of a way ancient people could have done it without advanced technology. It must have been aliens!"

 

The notes taken on this show would go something like:

 

BS, BS, BS, LOL, BS, BS, and credits.

 

Yep - quite agree. One thing; can you really call them "credits" - it's more a list of the guilty parties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm happy with the program because they include a sceptic. Unlike so many of the other paranormal shows, where they aren't given quite so much freedom to rain on the premise with well deserved levity. Other than that, it gives out great ideas for fiction. I like it, though this doesn't stop me falling asleep half way through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm happy with the program because they include a sceptic. Unlike so many of the other paranormal shows, where they aren't given quite so much freedom to rain on the premise with well deserved levity. Other than that, it gives out great ideas for fiction. I like it, though this doesn't stop me falling asleep half way through.

 

 

thankx for answering my question, i am doing research about ancient alien, but now my focus is only the ancient alien program in history channel. what i want is if u are someone who watch ancient alien program and u like their ideas then i want you work for me. I am taking notes of each episode, there is already 43episode finish. it will take me so long to watch all the episodes from starting, i don't have that much free time. so i want hire some people to take notes for me. i will send u link for few episode, can u watch some of the episode and write notes about it, 1st u need to write what is main topic and sub topic they are talking about, and 2nd the proof they showing to support their view point, 3rd u need to write about what is each of their view on the specific topic.i am willing to pay u a fees that i can afford, let me know if u have interest to do this..

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen a few of the episodes and they can be summarized as:

"These things are incredible and I can't think of a way ancient people could have done it without advanced technology. It must have been aliens!"

 

The notes taken on this show would go something like:

 

BS, BS, BS, LOL, BS, BS, and credits.

 

You should also take notes where they're internally inconsistent (which is often).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

So what everyone is saying is that the ancient alien theory is garbage....? The idea that an extraterrestrial life-form landed on this planet many, many years ago is no less believable than a one god or religious theory. Yet billions of people pray, worship and give their lives over to some dude that sits on his throne in the sky....Really? That's more believable that the ancient alien theory? How can you refute and mock a theory when you have no idea of its merit....

 

Yes the show is sometimes clutching at straws and some of the claims are outlandish....but they have airtime to fill and a show to keep running. All that aside, some of the points, facts, are worth a consideration, they are worth a 'HHmmmmm'....

 

The Nazca lines for example, only make sense when seen from above....?? On the flip side of the coin, 'crop circles', in my opinion, complete nonsense....The fact that ALL gods, myths, including Jesus himself, descended and ascended from, above, from the stars....That itself is intriguing....

 

Lest ye not mock, those who know not the truth....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what everyone is saying is that the ancient alien theory is garbage....? The idea that an extraterrestrial life-form landed on this planet many, many years ago is no less believable than a one god or religious theory. Yet billions of people pray, worship and give their lives over to some dude that sits on his throne in the sky....Really? That's more believable that the ancient alien theory? How can you refute and mock a theory when you have no idea of its merit....

 

Yes the show is sometimes clutching at straws and some of the claims are outlandish....but they have airtime to fill and a show to keep running. All that aside, some of the points, facts, are worth a consideration, they are worth a 'HHmmmmm'....

 

The Nazca lines for example, only make sense when seen from above....?? On the flip side of the coin, 'crop circles', in my opinion, complete nonsense....The fact that ALL gods, myths, including Jesus himself, descended and ascended from, above, from the stars....That itself is intriguing....

 

Lest ye not mock, those who know not the truth....

 

You seem to be mistaken, the ideas posed in the show have no merit in the scientific (or historical) sense. There is no evidence to support the ideas and the entire premise is based on an argument from incredulity. It's not clutching at straws, it's creating straws to clutch. I can just as easily claim that people used to be able to fly because the Nazca lines can be seen from above, there are all sorts of drawings of people flying/with wings, there are writings of people flying/with wings, etc. Are these points worth a consideration?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what everyone is saying is that the ancient alien theory is garbage....? The idea that an extraterrestrial life-form landed on this planet many, many years ago is no less believable than a one god or religious theory.

Your mistake is assuming that all of the people who are telling you that ancient aliens are garbage will disagree with this premise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

The Nazca lines for example, only make sense when seen from above....??

...

Lest ye not mock, those who know not the truth....

The Nazca lines are visible from surrounding hills. Let they without truth throw the first mock....??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You seem to be mistaken, the ideas posed in the show have no merit in the scientific (or historical) sense. There is no evidence to support the ideas and the entire premise is based on an argument from incredulity. It's not clutching at straws, it's creating straws to clutch. I can just as easily claim that people used to be able to fly because the Nazca lines can be seen from above, there are all sorts of drawings of people flying/with wings, there are writings of people flying/with wings, etc. Are these points worth a consideration?

 

 

I sure didn't want to respond to this thread.

 

I dislike the show in the extreme and believe they have no credibility but they certainly have as much scientific evidence as Egyptology. They interpret the facts differently but it's more logical than the historical paradigm.

 

This isn't to say a second or third rate entertainment program is more accurate than current orthodox scholarship, merely that they could have as much truth. People have no concept just how little evidence actually exists and how the little that does exist has almost no meaning outside of interpretation. This stuff isn't rocket science but there's no way to say our history can't be explained by rocket science.

Edited by cladking
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the disputing aside, it doesn't matter if the evidence they have is creditable or not, clutching or creating straws, the premise is still there. It may have not happened the way the show tries to portray. But the fact remains, the if we think we are the only living organisms in this vast universe, is vain, arrogant and to completely dismiss the idea is a scathing indictment of overall intelligence.

As i said, the suggestion that there may me functioning, intelligent life out there, is no less believable than any religious 'faith'....Whether they visited earth many years ago is still extremely debatable, and 'extremely debatable', may be a generous statement....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the disputing aside, it doesn't matter if the evidence they have is creditable or not, clutching or creating straws, the premise is still there. It may have not happened the way the show tries to portray. But the fact remains, the if we think we are the only living organisms in this vast universe, is vain, arrogant and to completely dismiss the idea is a scathing indictment of overall intelligence.

As i said, the suggestion that there may me functioning, intelligent life out there, is no less believable than any religious 'faith'....Whether they visited earth many years ago is still extremely debatable, and 'extremely debatable', may be a generous statement....

 

Of course it matters if the evidence they have is credible or not, that's what defines whether the premise is at all valid.

 

Premise: The oceans are actually made of liquid jello.

Forget about evidence, the premise is what matters!

 

That doesn't work, mojo121. It's not science, it's not rational, it's not reality. The premise that show makes is bombastic and must have corroboration. Since they don't supply even an ounce of actual corroborating evidence, their premise is -- by definition -- bunk.

 

There are separate ideas at work in your claims here.

  1. That life is out there in the universe
  2. That this life is intelligent
  3. The life out there came to visit us
  4. That life out there came to visit us, built a bunch of monuments to itself, and left without any other trace.

The idea that 1 might be true doesn't make 2 and 3 true, and it definitely doesn't make 4 a valid premise; "debatable" is fine, until you realize that the debate produces absolutely no corroboration -- at this point the premise moves from being debatable to being bunk. Just like "The oceans are made of liquid Jello" is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the disputing aside, it doesn't matter if the evidence they have is creditable or not, clutching or creating straws, the premise is still there. It may have not happened the way the show tries to portray. But the fact remains, the if we think we are the only living organisms in this vast universe, is vain, arrogant and to completely dismiss the idea is a scathing indictment of overall intelligence.

As i said, the suggestion that there may me functioning, intelligent life out there, is no less believable than any religious 'faith'....Whether they visited earth many years ago is still extremely debatable, and 'extremely debatable', may be a generous statement....

 

There is as little connection between the claims made on the show and the debate of life in other places as the connection between star wars being real and there being life in other places.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

So what your saying mooeypoo, first of all that all religious belief is bunk? Because there is no evidence of a any kind of god, it's for simpletons. All things without corroborating factual evidence are just bunk and easily dismissed, as bunk.

 

There may not be factual evidence, but there is speculative evidence, pictures, drawings, ancient texts about visitors from the sky, from most ancient civilizations, the Maharataba for one, is a compelling read. Speculative evidence, or could I say "Theory"....? And who is to say this evidence is not factual? You? You going to tell me that the ancient peoples were idiots, simpletons, or just storytellers? Now they may have been all that, but again, they may have been describing visitations from alien life forms....Do you know for sure which it is....?

So all the show is putting this 'evidence' out there, but your saying it's not 'rational' to create 'theories' on speculative evidence....Science is full of 'theories'....

 

The four bullets that you described....yes if no. 1 is true that doesn't make 2 & 3 true, sure, but on the other side of the coin, it could....the theory IS debatable, the corroborating evidence is mentioned above, ie. texts, drawings, descriptions of what they witnessed, etc.

 

Also, I don't think I've ever heard that the aliens built monuments to themselves, It's a general 'theory' that the peoples of earth built the monuments to them, in anticipation of they're triumphant return....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There may not be factual evidence, but there is speculative evidence, pictures, drawings, ancient texts about visitors from the sky, from most ancient civilizations, the Maharataba for one, is a compelling read. Speculative evidence, or could I say "Theory"....? And who is to say this evidence is not factual? ...

The problem, mojo, is where does it end?

 

I can write, draw, and create 'ancient texts' that provide plenty of speculation that I have an invisible dinosaur the lives in my backyard, I've created a cold fusion reactor from used kitty litter in my basement, and transmuted clay into platinum via the power of wishing. And then I can go all accusatory -- just like you did -- and ask who are you not to think that it's factual?

 

This farcical example aside, the point is that what you have written could possibly be true, but given the evidence we have to date, you really can't call it the most likely. Science takes observations and predictions and goes with the ones that match the best, objectively, repeatably, and significantly. Interpreting these text as aliens is a possibility. But, it isn't the most probable. More probably is that many of the stories are allegorical in nature, and meant to convey a message in the context of their times.

 

For example, the Bible hints that Methuselah was over 700 years old at the time of his death. Is that possible? Well, sure, I'd agree that its probability isn't exactly zero. But you must concede it is incredibly improbable. And the more probable interpretation of that very advanced age is that for the writers of the Biblical stories, age was directly correlated to wisdom, and vice versa. And as Methuselah was considered very wise, he must therefore have been very old.

 

Bigger point: in science, it is not enough for an idea to just be possible to be considered equal. Science is not a pure democracy in which every idea is equal just because it exists. Science is a meritocracy, in which only the ideas that make the best predictions that agree the most with all the evidence (not just a few pieces) are considered the best. So if you really want to support the idea of aliens visiting the ancient peoples, then you need to demonstrate a great deal more of the evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be willing to discuss this speculatively but not as serious science. I think a case can be made that at least some religions could be based on alien/human interactions it's an interesting topic but it's just spinning "ifs" "maybes" "could haves" with no real substance...

 

The idea that our ancestors couldn't have done the things they did is bit insulting and not necessary to the idea of alien contact..

Edited by Moontanman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no science in Egyptology!

 

Yes, they are experts and yes, they have a great deal of factual information about ancient Egypt. But the fact is that they have made 4 key assumptions that are simply wrong. It's ironic that the History Channel has just released a new version of how the great pyramids were built featuring Egyptologists instead of weird hair guy. It'slike they were doing pennance for Ancient Aliens. Incredibly the version with Egyptologists sounds mystical instead of merely speculative. Egytologists base their understanding of the ancients and base their perspective on their interpretation of a book of incantation!!! Think about this a moment. What could possibly be more superstitious than understanding anything based on a book of incantation? They actually believe they understand much of it which gives them mysticism.

 

We believe in Egyptology because we just assume that it must have a scientific basis but this isn't the reality. The reality is they have never done basic science to determine the nature of the pyramid! In 1986 they did a gravimetric scan that showed their assumptions are wrong and they haven't done basic science since that time. Egyptological beliefs are founded on interpretation of a book of magic and assumptions that aren't borne out in the evidence and which aren't supported by their ability to make accurate prediction. They have created a teflon paradigm.

 

There is evidence for aliens and there is evidence for almost everything else as well. Some of the evidence is high quality and some is very poor. There's better evidence for aliens than current assumptions and one of the current assumptions is illogical on its face; that the great pyramid builders were like Egyptians from a thousand years later. This assumption results from interpretation of a book of magic and incantation. It is a non sequitur because the incantation isn't understood. But the ancients are seen from this perspective making current belief to be mystical.

 

It is not logical to believe ancient people were superstitious. I'd grant it isn't impossible but the fact is that superstitious peopl would always be at a strong competitive and evolutionary disadvantage to those who were not. Are we to believe that humans are so strongly predisposed to being superstitious that evolutionary forces would take a backseat? Are we to believe nonsense and beliefs are better tuned to success in the world than intelligence and cunning? It is modern people who misapprend, misinterpret, and misunderstand the reality of living in a world without modern conveniences and knowledge.

 

It makes no sense to understand anything in terms of a book of magic. We're supposed to be scientists here and we're supposed to require evidence and not interpretation and assumption. It's not so much Egyptologists who are so badly confused as it is all of us. Egyptology can't show the pyramids were tombs with any direct evidence whatsoever. The word "ramp" is unattested from the great pyramid building age. It is illogical to assume that anything can be learned from a book of magic and it is illegitimate to claim that things from later times can be extrapolated to the great pyramid builders.

 

Egyptological bedrock is sand and the gravimetric scan proves it.

 

http://hdbui.blogspot.com/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can write, draw, and create 'ancient texts' that provide plenty of speculation that I have an invisible dinosaur the lives in my backyard, I've created a cold fusion reactor from used kitty litter in my basement, and transmuted clay into platinum via the power of wishing. And then I can go all accusatory -- just like you did -- and ask who are you not to think that it's factual?

 

This can easily be proved as non factual and your right, a farcical couple of sentences....as you would need to prove your claims.

 

I am not a champion for the show 'Ancient Aliens'....and I agree that a vast amount of the claims are, to quote someone else....'bunk'. I am also willing to admit there is no real scientific evidence for an ancient alien theory. Through all these posts I have never claimed that. I think people just see someone giving the premise some merit and, without really reading between the lines, jump on the condemnation bandwagon.

 

Just remember what part of the forum we are in here folks....'Speculation', I mean that should tell you something right there.

 

There is no right and wrong here, there is no definitive answers, it cant be proven one way or the other, yes not exactly science but I give the show a thumbs up for putting the speculative evidence out there, for asking the questions, for making it available to a wider audience....because unfortunately most people veg by their TV's than read or would not otherwise come into contact with this theory, and of course this whole subject has been poo-pooed by mainstream science for years, why would they change now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.