Ancient Aliens Debunked

[widows son]

Well put brent

 

[jvarnell]

Ok you guys you are looking at my finger again and not what I am pointing at.

Nothing is 100%. When ever someone wants to sell you something they will point out the parts of the other product that they can find to "Debunk" what you have said. even though neather are 100% right. (This is peer review for sales)

An example theroy (Standard transmissions are beter because they have no slip to waste energy) but the other side of it is (Automatic transmissions have less loses due to friction that waste energy) which is right. Both of these statments made me look at the data and evdince. I came out of this as they both can still say what they were saying and be right or wrong, but it made me learn about slip and friction.

For history we can not be definitive we can look at stuff and come up with theroies we can publish those theroies and people can do there peer review of them but if people are only looking at what we first published it will be debuncked. That is why a scientific process is called a process as it is debuncked you have to futher your research to fix the problem your peer's have found.

This so-called debucking is changing a multi-pass process in to a once through and then stop thinking.


When this type of thing is done I always wonder people try to shutdown a learning process. I think Chris White and Dr. Michael Hesier should be saying what about this in stade of calling it a debuncking as a way to stop the TV show.

 

[widows son]

Your comparing apple and oranges my friend. What about that movie is wrong? For most of the " ancient astronaut theories" they have been disproven. I think the learning process is shutdown when you agree with people like those on AA. THEY HAVE NO CREDENTIALS AND THEIR THEORIES FALL THROUGH THE CRACKS. So my question to you Mr. Varnell is what specifically in the debunking video isn't true? Or what don't you agree with?

 

[JJones]

This is another thing are you looking at the external or the internal. I know I look goofie but I do that to be deferent and not the same as all you there ya'whos out there. I agree about the MSM coments because it is there internal view point I disagree with.

I guess you got me there. The guy could be a scientist for all I know, I just thought it was funny.

Take, for instance, Stonehenge, they say repeatedly that there was no possible way they could have built it. I mean huge multi-ton stones sitting on top of others? You need a crane yet some farmer in Minnesota or Michigan can do it by himself in his back yard without a crane.

This is true. It doesn't explain the pyramids though. For example, to build something the size of the Great Pyramid in the timespan it was supposed to have been built it would have required a stone to have been placed every second...and just cutting, squaring, and moving the stones would have taken a labor force greater than all the slaves in Egypt. At least that's what I think I read somewhere.

Also, a mummy has never been found in a pyramid, so what were they built for?

Not saying aliens had to be involved but there must have been some building technique that we aren't aware of today that was somewhat common knowledge on a worldwide scale at one point because there are huge megalithic structures we can't explain all around the world.

Also too long, didn't watch the video.

 

[JJones]

THEY HAVE NO CREDENTIALS AND THEIR THEORIES FALL THROUGH THE CRACKS.

Do you have to have credentials for your theory to be right?

In addition, what kind of credentials would make someone an 'expert' on the subject?

You realize that any respectable scientist or historian that starts going on about ancient aliens will loose all his/her credibility in the scientific community? That'd be like me, as a biologist, telling people all about bigfoot and the chupocabra on television. (I'd be glad to tell you all about bigfoot via PM though. )

 

[widows son]

Mr. Jones. While you are right that we still don't know the pyramids were built, we have a lot of evidence to propose some good theories on how they were. In the documentary a French architect explains his theory using counter weights to lift the giant blocks, and is why he thinks the grand gallery is there. But ill leave those details for the documentary. As far as the reason for the pyramid, who knows. Not only was there no mummy but no inscription other than graffiti supposedly from the builders and from the many eras of conquest and travel in Egyptian history. I personally believe it was a initiation chamber for the mysteries of egypt, in which a neophyte is figuratively reborn in thr kings chamber, and emerges at the top as the capstone. But then again I could be wrong. One thing we need to remember is that these people who lived in that era were, smart, sophisticated, religious, superstitious and scientific at the same time and had nothing but time and man power, especially when we know that these people were constantly at war and could rely on war booty and slaves. Their building techniques were meticulously perfected over generations and was ancient to them. The fossil record can prove that. Also there are many examples of people in modern times recreating methods possibly used to created these monuments with surprising accuracy. Bro. Jones I am not a scientist, nor have I ever claimed to be. These are not my theories either, nor I have I ever claimed them to be. But it doesn't take a scientist to see through the thin veil nonsense. The many people in the fields of astronomy, rocket science, ancient languages, architecture, biology, chemistry, physics, metallurgy, geology, mathematics, physics, and nuclear sciences would constitute experts. These people devote their lives to careful examination and observation of these fields. Not one person on AA is in any of those fields or can be considered an expert. My question is what makes them experts? I don't believe that studying these myths to see if there is any truth in them is wrong, but do so with the facts that we already know. All I'm saying is see what This documentary had to say.

 

[CajunTinMan]

“The Scientific Method is a wonderful tool as long as you don't care which way the outcome turns; however, this process fails the second one's perception interferes with the interpretation of data. This is why I don’t take anything in life as an absolute…even if someone can “prove” it “scientifically.”
― Cristina Marrero

Out of all the arguements. I believe that this one is most correct. Everything else is just speculation.

 

[widows son]

Very true. I don't necessarily believe that with all things but you have to open to change of It comes, other wise the world will continue on with or without you

 

[widows son]

But all I say I watch the movie and then formulate an opinion so as to have unbiased points of reference

 

[CajunTinMan]

Those big-head guys scare me. I wouldn't want to bump into one. I hear they perform anal probes. How primitive is that technology? "We came 6 trillion miles to study your ass. We're proctologists from space."

What planet are you from?

 

[jvarnell]

But all I say I watch the movie and then formulate an opinion so as to have unbiased points of reference

I watched before my first post on this and to me it is still just pointing to we need to look at all the claims. And no I am just compairing fruit. This is because I try to look at the big picture before getting down to the details is it a Apple or Orange.

Ithe inside conners of those stones in the first section are the part that intreg me. I bought a Mill and decide to build a falling block rifle action with it. In the end I still did not have square inside conners and this debunck movie still did not use how to do that. One of the ways to do it is with a lazer. Rounded conners are better for stingth I have learned but I still don't see how they made those inside conners.

This is the type of things that go through my mind when I watch this show. There is a lot of good info in these show look for it.

 

[widows son]

Well bro. Varnell, the facts have been put forth. If you still believe the show then that's your choice. Not sure what you mean by a falling block rife action, but what specifically don't you agree with?

 

[widows son]

I think the theories put forth in the documentary make more sense and are a bit more logical than the "ancient astronaut theories"

 

[RHS]

There was a south park episode that poked fun at this with saying that the first thanksgiving was actually an alien encounter... its on netflix. I really don't know how they can call themselves history either. More like fiction based on history

 

[jvarnell]

Well bro. Varnell, the facts have been put forth. If you still believe the show then that's your choice. Not sure what you mean by a falling block rife action, but what specifically don't you agree with?

The series and the debunck both have facts and both have to be analized and I beleive parts of both. I am trying to get you to think about something without just saying it. but here I go....The anti-masons use the same types of facts you are for this argument. They find some some truths and exploit them but don't look at the truths from the other side. I beleive a lot of things and they don't always go togther in neat little boxes. Some things that AA shows are fact and some things that the debunck are fact we as humans need to look at them and put them togther in our own minds to come up with a new hypothis to test and refine. If we as humans had stoped investagating things when we found something we believed. This is what the anti-masons have done is stoped thinking when they something to latch on to.

I think the theories put forth in the documentary make more sense and are a bit more logical than the "ancient astronaut theories"

I like to look at all theroies and and not make a judgment utill I am forced to. The AA is just the SAOTU to the guys on this show. so they could be a Mason.

 

[widows son]

Bro. Varnell, while you are right on some points you have mentioned, keep in mind that nothing in ancient aliens is proven to be fact. Now it is hard to determine if aliens have visited us in the past or in the present, but what we do know is that the ancients we extremely smart and sophisticated, their building techniques are only now being discovered. I think the movie says it all, and i believe the show ancient aliens to be completely based on speculation and pseudo science. The " scientists" in the show aren't scientists. They think they are because the have wrote a book or two. I do not think like the anti mason at all bro. Varnell. When I get a piece of information i look at it with skeptical mind. I look at it at all angles and try to get both sides, so as to be unbiased. I am perfectly fine with accepting conclusions, even if they go against my beliefs. Truth and fact are two different things. Facts are concrete, and don't change, whereas truths can differentiate between different people. What one person believes to be truth another might think otherwise

 

[jvarnell]

Bro. Varnell, while you are right on some points you have mentioned, keep in mind that nothing in ancient aliens is proven to be fact. Now it is hard to determine if aliens have visited us in the past or in the present, but what we do know is that the ancients we extremely smart and sophisticated, their building techniques are only now being discovered. I think the movie says it all, and i believe the show ancient aliens to be completely based on speculation and pseudo science. The " scientists" in the show aren't scientists. They think they are because the have wrote a book or two. I do not think like the anti mason at all bro. Varnell. When I get a piece of information i look at it with skeptical mind. I look at it at all angles and try to get both sides, so as to be unbiased. I am perfectly fine with accepting conclusions, even if they go against my beliefs. Truth and fact are two different things. Facts are concrete, and don't change, whereas truths can differentiate between different people. What one person believes to be truth another might think otherwise

There is also nothing in the debunking video that can be proved as fact. These are agnostic statments and you can not prove faith but it is just as real as anything else to the beholder and someone else can tell me what I have faith in. As a Mason you have to beleive in a SAOTU and it is only your faith that proves that to you. I am not saying you have to beleive these guys but the data that they persent and the faith they have in that data proves it to them. You have to beleive in what ever you beleive in but I beleive this thread is saying that there beleifs are not vaild because you say they have no proff but do they have faith.

I just like the show because it show me more evedince of what formed us to research even if Ailains did or did not do it.

That show is their dogma, the bible is my dogma and the Quran is your's so I would not just dismiss everything in that show because it is not with in your belif system.

 

[Brent Heilman]

I still say it all comes down to Occam's Razor. Which seems the more likely of the two. Did the ancient people of Earth have an ingenuity and problem solving set that we know nothing of and were capable of achieving great feats and may have not been recorded or written down as to how they did it, or did little grey or green men travel across the universe and do it for them? I know which sounds more plausible to me. There are great many things that the AA theorists don't account for either. Like one being that if someone came here from another planet why just show up build some buildings and then leave? If they were so advanced that they could circumvent physics as we know it it seems more likely that instead of building some stuff they would more than likely enslave. Just like today with all the UFO sightings, it is like you travelling to Hawaii by a boat and just sail on by and never stopping. Would take the time and energy to make a trip like that? I just don't see it happening.

 

[widows son]

Bro. Varnell I dont believe in the Quran first off. Second, you can believe or have faith in whatever you want, it does not effect me one bit. But what specifically is wrong in the movie? Your statement was general and didn't really answer the question. I don't believe that ancient aliens is any kind of religious show, in fact it's saying that all the gods in ancient times were aliens. The main stream theory say that gods were abstract ideas relating to creation, morality, politics and day today life; for example mercury was the god of commerce and prosperity, and even the statue of
Liberty is a goddess. Believing in the GAOTU and AA are two different things, although I believe that the GAOTU is their creator as well, so I don't have faith in AA, I have faith the GATOU that is it, nothing else. But that is another topic. These men who find the data in the debunking movie don't have faith in their data, the believe it to be fact, through scientific method, and don't apply religious aspects to their work. Faith is not proof of anything, and is not valid when trying to prove something.

 

[jvarnell]

Religion is what someone maks it. look at this and see where they say finding your religion.

http://www.popisms.com/TelevisionCommercial/60042/Expedia-Commercial-2012.aspx

faith is enough proof, it is just a defined verable that can be solved for with philosophy and reasion. You seam to think if you make a statement that is is it proof "Believing in the GAOTU and AA are two different things" why and who said. It is obveous to me the AA guy don't think that because that is the primus of the show.

In my world no `one` is right execpt in their own mind, we just surround our selfs with otheres that beleive at least 90% the way we do.