Look at this evidence for ancient astronauts.

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by garbonzo, Jun 10, 2013.

  1. garbonzo Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    790
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Lakon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,117
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    It's really there, but it was put there during reconstruction work in 1992.

    Translated from the Portuguese from http://www.portaldoastronomo.org/cronica.php?id=67

    http://www.snopes.com/photos/architecture/salamanca.asp

    It wasn't really hard to find. You should stop being so gullible, Beans.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. garbonzo Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    790
    I think you are the gullible one. It's like you read the thread, search for the first debunking link you can find, copy and paste, and don't do ANY critical thinking of YOUR OWN. Think about it for a second. You literally just took someone else's word for it without thinking yourself. You are no better than religious fundies.

    You didn't even bother to read my description, or look at the photograph. Ugh.
     
  8. Janus58 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,734
    If you apply critical thinking, AlexG's explanation is the far more likely one. The figure looks too much like a stereotypical spacesuit. Particularly, just like our modern notion of what a spacesuit looks like (right down to the boot tread pattern). The idea that a race that has reached the level of technology capable of crossing interstellar distances would use spacesuits that look identical to the type we use now is a bit farfetched.

    Even if you were to assume that similar purpose lead to similar design, the space ship shown is one designed for the vacuum of space. Why would any Alien visiting the surface of the Earth be seen wearing such a heavy and bulky get up? You would assume they would be visiting a world at least somewhat similar to to their own and any protective gear they might wear would be designed differently. And if you assume that they actually needed the level of protection such as the shown design, this means that they evolved in a vastly different environment, and the idea that they would look so human takes a pretty large stretch of the imagination. (for that matter even the idea the an environment just like Earth would evolve something that resembles humans so closely is taking a huge leap.)

    So actual critical thinking take us further from accepting this as valid evidence not closer.
     
  9. Buddha12 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,862
    Actually YOU are the gullible one because YOU did not verify the picture before You posted it as YOU should have done. Instead YOU have shown YOUR own foolishness by posting this picture that is not what you say it is at all. Now YOU look foolish by saying others are wrong because they verified your picture as something other than what YOU said it was which YOU were told to believe.
     
  10. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    Well let's see, there snopes, there's the original Portuguese article, the name of the workman who put it there is given, in fact, there's a whole bunch of corroborating information.

    You post a picture and say 'Look, Aliens'.

    So what thinking, critical or otherwise did you do?
     
  11. kwhilborn Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,088
    I cannot see any reasons to dismiss the ideas of ancient technologies, although if real evidence did exist we would likely only find it on the moon as anything man made would not last a million years.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    There is a lot of legitimate ancient Astronaut portrayals, but they could just be Science Fiction from their age.

    The Sumerians seemed to be very advanced and they are one of the oldest known civilizations. Their math and Abacus style calculators, and literature is truly astounding. I am not saying they had access to space, but they told tales of people who could access space, and their knowledge of astronomy was replete with accurate descriptions of planets.

    Here is some Mayan Jewels.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    These are allegedly bugs.... Yet no bug in existence has rear stabilizers?

    How could their Sci Fi be so realistic?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    and if you still are not convinced.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Here is absolute proof.

    The Wheel, The Sail, The Plow. These are all invented by the Sumerians or they at least used them.

    They had justice and art and Poetry and heavy literature.

    Even Astrology although it is deemed ridiculous was in full practice at the time.


    Their Unified theory was based on Sound, and if we were to believe Nikola Teslas friend Walter Russell the Universe is indeed built on Octaves.

    http://www.walter-russell.de/en/Diagramme.php?_id=368&_edit=

    Now this Unified theory has fans, but it is not popular.

    I am just saying that 6000 years ago the Sumerians had a similar Unified Theory. I am not saying they were right.

    Now the Sumerians taught their children that Earth had at one time been split in half by another planet called Nibiru. They spoke of aliens as if they were factual.

    Nobody knows what could have existed before.

    It is certainly a fun idea.

    Anyone interested in ancient technology should look at this Series of videos. The machining evidence is clear in many places, but is ignored by mainstream science.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Pf76422Pbk

    it is One and a half hours though so you would need a real interest.

    This actually solves the pyramid riddle.... believe it or not.... lol
     
  12. Lakon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,117
  13. garbonzo Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    790
    Thanks to both of you! It is always reassuring to see members of a scientific community like this with an open mind (but not to open that your brain falls out, blah blah blah) and willing to look at all varieties of research.

    I'm looking at all of your links now currently.

    Notice that none of the regular members on this forum have replied to you guys after showing this evidence.

    If a unified theory involving sound ever goes mainstream, it is even more of a proof that the Sumerians had extra-special knowledge we haven't even learned yet.

    I also agree that it may not be ET, but a long lost "Atlantis" highly advanced civilization. When you think about it, over millions of years of evolution and only in a couple thousand years did we develop most of our technology and science. Humans were obviously around much longer than what mainstream science says, and this is proven through a lot of evidence. Even if there was a civilization that could develop alongside other civilizations that led to the historical civs we know about for 2000 years, they could have went from one discovery to the next, just like our last 2000 years, discovering flight and space travel. The ETs mentioned in the Sumerian text could be US humans, just a different civilization of humans far more advanced than them.

    Now, all you have to do is look at some native tribes anywhere in the world, africa, south america, central america, australia, etc. to see evidence of this. I'm sure there are tribes living today that know NOTHING of OUR civilization's existence. All of the technology that exists! It's mind boggling to think about. They are sharing our planet Earth with us, but they are not apart of our civilization. This is what I'm talking about.

    It's definitely possible, as is ET.
     
  14. garbonzo Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    790
    But my picture is a debunking of the debunking. It's obviously before the restoration. Show me how it's photoshopped or explain why it's damaged.
     
  15. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    The restoration took place 20 years ago. That's when the figure was put there. You don't think there could be weathering or damage in the interim?

    Here's the picture from the article, dated 2006, showing the same damage. In fact, it's probably where your picture was taken from. Did you bother to read the article, or the snopes piece, or do you just want to believe so badly that you ignore anything which doesn't support your delusion?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  16. Lakon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,117
    Don't be so presuptuous. The fact that other members have not posted does not predicate your silly insinuation.

    And I for one (you referenced my post) provided evidence of NOTHING. merely items for discussion.

    .. and talk about anything you like, by all means, but don't read more than what was intended in other members posts to embelish your imaginative ideas.
     
  17. garbonzo Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    790
    Why are you so condescending when talking about this stuff? It shows that you are not willing to consider it *at all* and meet any and all of these theories with contempt. That is not a scientific mind. This is not intelligent discussion. Stop being so hostile. I do not have a "delusion". I presented evidence to discuss, expecting of course for debunkings to be part of that discussion to be scientific, but not hostility, which is not scientific.

    Anyway, you say that picture was taken in 2006, and yes it shows some damage on the head, but not on the arm. Again, this just shows that you didn't bother to compare the two at all; this is clearly evidence. Now who is ignoring anything that doesn't support their delusions again? Let's stop the ad hominem (joking around, is okay, I am not so thin-skinned, but just drop the hostility in your comments please) so we can discuss things intelligently. The whole god damn arm is missing for Jack's sake. Even if you WERE to say that my picture was taken in 2006, I can debunk that also. This picture was taken evidently by a tourist in 2009:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dschwabe/4572584045/

    So unless there has been another unrecorded restoration, you are wrong. The arm is clearly in tact. Now this might not invalidate your whole argument for saying my picture was taken after the restoration, but we can conclude that we'd have to look for something after 2009. You need to present evidence of the damage shown in my picture recently. Maybe take a trip there yourself my friend.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Otherwise, my picture still has foundations to be claimed as evidence.

    Also, of course I read the articles you referenced; I am not like a certain someone I know that doesn't look at and compare critically pieces of information and research about a topic I am engaged in.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    They have not debunked my debunking of the common debunking. (so meta)
     
  18. garbonzo Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    790
    If evidence is gone unbelied, then the evidence is still...evidence. Due to the nature of this "theory" (to use the term most commonly used for better comprehension), it can't truly be entirely predicated, and neither do I claim this, so this is a strawman. :facepalm:

    You can call it whatever you like, but I am the one claiming it to be evidence. And again, without a belie, it's still evidence. The only refutation I can think of would be to claim those don't look like spaceships; they could be something else. But without saying what they think it could be, or what it looks like instead, it still may not be a full refutation, but nevertheless, since we can't go back in time and ask them, that matter will go unresolved. But since it does indeed look like flying machines, I would claim it to be evidence. Thanks again for it, and I agree it can be items for discussion. :cheers:

    Hmm, I'm not sure I'm reading more into anything, but you fine people's, research, shall we say, does indeed embellish my ideas whether you say so or not; it adds to the evidence. So thanks.

    This theory is no more or less imaginative than any other someone dreams up, which could be right or wrong.

    Thank you again for the links, I sincerely enjoyed reading through them. :worship:

    EDIT:

    Found another one related to your links:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    This is the best evidence in these glyphs for me. It looks perfectly like a helicopter, and I doubt there is anything else that can quite fit the bill. But of course, it's open to discussion.

    Next:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Could be a submarine, but perhaps less convincing.

    Note that these are all on the same wall as your links. Not only do these resemble modern marvels, but they are also all together. In other words, if you accept one, such as the helicopter, resembling it's modern counterpart, then it adds much more weight to these others being their counterparts (modern or future) as well.

    Now I know that it may seem odd that ETs would be using modern technology such as the helicopter. If our science fiction is to be believed, you would think in even 100 years we would have better flying machines, like true anti-gravity or something, I dunno, but there is just no room to doubt that these look like their counterparts, you know? We can't even rule out time travel. I know mainstream science currently shows no evidence of even theoretically going back in time, but perhaps it is possible, perhaps some random person got thrown back to this time and decided to draw what he could remember of his time, who knows. This is, of course, while speculation. We have evidence of these things happening, being drawn, or made, but we can't truly have a theory to piece them together that is any better than the rest.

    Oh, there was one thing I was reading that was pretty convincing, but I forget what it was to look up, but I believe it was Indian culture that had a drawing that looked oddly similar to a modern design for a sort of energy plant I think it was. Obviously, I'm not trying to add any evidence here, but asking if maybe anyone has come across something like that and knows what I mean.
     
  19. gmilam Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,613
    Would 2010 work?

    http://www.spain-holiday.com/blog/road-trip-around-spain-part-4-salamanca.php
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2013
  20. Lakon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,117
    Garbonzo, let me make it clear. The silly insinuation which I referred to was your ..

    Notice that none of the regular members on this forum have replied to you guys after showing this evidence.

    This is a spurious presumption.

    Yes, the pics of the ancient Indian flying machines are interesting. But IMO, you fly off into the fantastic rather quickly .. ET's, lost city of Atlanis ..

    I simply think that if there is anything to them, it's evidence of mankinds achievments in the distant past, which we know little or nothing about.

    Edit, 14/6; 1st line .. 'our' to 'your' - which was what was originally intended.
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2013
  21. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    Because it's nonsense. The presence of the astronaut figure on the cathedral has been explained in a number of different places, right down to the name of the workman who put it there.

    It's not an issue which is in contention, except by you.
     
  22. garbonzo Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    790
  23. garbonzo Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    790
    You failed to debunk the picture however. I don't know why you are on SciForums when you can't even practice science correctly. Gmilam had to come and debunk it for you. All you did was speculate and claiming that your speculation was enough. It was not. Gmilam came in and provided actual evidence of your speculation, while you could not. While Gmilam validated your speculation and you can feel like you can be condescending because you think it validated it being "nonsense", it doesn't change the fact that you weren't scientific at all and were claiming things without evidence.

    I was claiming things with evidence, which is now debunked. You can't/shouldn't claim things without even backing up your claims.
     

Share This Page