Ancient astronaut theory looks highly promising now

In this space age, with it’s remarkable technological advances, it is becoming increasingly clear that the "miracles", and other seemingly supernatural events reported in ancient texts, the megalithic constructions, the enigmatic lines and artwork over the Earth and the astonishing artwork on Mars resulted from an advanced technology which was incomprehensible and indescribable by the ancient human observers.

On these pages we take the position that there is a reasonable explanation, within natural law, for these mysteries.

Even Richard Dawkins now admits that there may have been biogenetic manipulations that created humans.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sitchin/esp_sitchin_1a.htm

http://www.world-mysteries.com/aa.htm

http://www.crystalinks.com/ancientastronauts.html

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topi...hat-ancient-astronaut-theory-is-a-possibility

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The only part that has any merit to these "ancient astronauts" is the claim of genetic manipulations, where is proof of these "manipulations"? Miller-Urey experiment clearly showed that the widely accepted origin of life through their experiment of ancient atmosphere gases (H2O, CH2, NH3, H2, CO) with electrical discharges creating the amino acids that are precursors of life. If such genetic manipulations did occur how would one track the human genome for these modifications? I would imagine the same way scientists test GMO vs. non-GMO foods for compliance.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Oops! You accidently posted this in the science section. See you in the pseudoscience area shortly.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

We can't track the human genome for these modifications. That is because we don't have the ancient aliens' DNA anymore. Also besides these events happened before recorded history.

 

The Dawkins quote is out of context. As is typical of claims like this. But even if it was exactly what he meant, even he would agree that argument by authority doesn't mean a whole lot.

But he didn't mean it that way.

 

Art on Mars?

 

I sure hope it's something beyond the old face. And not pixellated.

 

Wasn't this just made into a new movie called Prometheus?

 

Didn't read the links. Why did it have to be aliens, assuming the super advanced technology. The likeliness of a alien mind to match mine is slim to nil. What are the odds that the intelligence to harness fire evolved twice?

 

I would agree with that.

it would be hard to figure out just how the author really meant it.
So yes you have a point.

What art? I want to know too.

I sure hope it is not... As well, and there is something neat.

 

Well... what we have here...
Numerous websites renowned for unfactual, misleading information.
Two of them use Sitchen as an authority. WOW.
http://www.crystalinks.com/sitchin.html

Here's Sitchen explained:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zecharia_Sitchin

Oh Noes!
http://www.sitchiniswrong.com/

A gamer forum... used an excerpt from Ben Steins very dishonest and manipulative, quote mangling and mining film, "Expelled; No Intelligence Allowed." This piece of work uses dishonesty to try to undermine Evolution and promote Intelligent design.
Those interviewed were led by a false premise on what the interview was for and about and were shocked when they learned they had been deceived.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expell...laims_that_film_producers_misled_interviewees

http://www.expelledexposed.com/
No reliable sources given to support the "Compelling evidence" of course.
Why is that not a surprise?

Ancient Martians sculpted a Face on Mars. Sorry. It's just the way it is. Yep it's the old face.
See?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Clearly, this is the Martian Jesus.

Although, there are other possibilities...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Here's the same face from another angle...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Ummm... uh oh. Ok, maybe it's not a face, after-all.
Try here:
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/object/index.cfm?fobjectid=40010

 

Pseudoscience? Heh!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

This junk doesn't even deserve THAT high a rating!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Don't know if you are aware of it but the H2 (History 2) channel has a regular series on this topic. I've watched it several times (when there was *nothing* else on worth watching) just so I could sit back, watch and laugh as the idiots rave about their nonsense.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

It's really highly amusing. And I bet that most of the uneducated viewers that watch/believe the garbage presented don't even realize that most of the so-called "experts" on the show are doing little beside pitching their own fantasy books they've written.

 

Neverfly, I wonder why we Earthlings haven't sent a rover for a closer look. Even if it turns out to be nothing.

 

Cydonia- the short answer is, it's not worth the money. There are far more interesting places on Mars. Cydonia's interest is in the Face and Hoaglands pyramids but see here's the thing: The guys at NASA are well aware of what pareidolia is. They can't send a rover to every martian Bigfoot. They have better things to do- and to spend $ on.

Of course, the CT's claim this to be proof positive they are hiding something. Sure, NASA puts out the very images showing the things they are supposedly hiding and this proves they are hiding things. Riiiiight.

 

in the last photo what was the angle ? and what were the wind conditions ?

 

Aww, get over it, River. It's soundly demonstrated Pareidolia. You ignored all other refutations and focused in on whatever you think has half a chance of being whatever you want it to be. Google up the image on NASA and look at ALL the images and analysis instead of focusing on just one image and trying to manipulate it into being something it isn't using deceptive mental tricks.

 

Neverfly I have learned that trickery is why I ask the question

 

The angle was different enough from the sun to prevent shadows from suggesting features that aren't there. The resolution is far, far greater than original Viking photos. The combination shows the terrain for what it really is. As for the wind, given the resolution and there's no sign of major dust, probably not a huge amount. What are you suggesting, River?

And a late response to R1D2: Aside from giving us a ground perspective of something we already have a good picture of, is there anything special geologically about Cydonia that would warrant a visit? One reason why Curiosity's landing site was picked is that there's a lot going on there geologically speaking, not just one feature, so a lot can be learned for the cost.

 

Yes, because NASA is engaging in "trickery?"

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

The angle is very easy to figure - it's about 135 degrees right-rotation from the original.