|
Post by Sigmaleph on Jan 27, 2011 17:54:51 GMT -5
MaybeNeverI understand that Ancient Astronaut theory could be used in that manner, grasping at straws, and that it's still subject to skepticism. However, unlike Satan hiding dinosaur bones, this is a rational possibility. You don't know what that word means. Please refrain from using it. Lithp already covered the Baghdad Battery, it looks exactly like something that could be built with the technology available at the time and nothing like a modern battery, let alone one built by a culture with interstellar travel. They wouldn't have known the basic principles behind it, but you don't need to understand chemical reactions to start a fire, either. Nazca lines. You know how long it took me to find a reference to someone reproducing the figures with technology available at the time? One minute, most of it because of my slow internet connection. It's in the wiki article, for Ra's sake. Look, you can't just find something you don't understand, think about it for a few seconds, and when you don't find an explanation, give up and say aliens. It makes just as much sense as ascribing it to gods, magic, or the Illuminati.
|
|
|
Post by Mira on Jan 27, 2011 18:44:50 GMT -5
Now to ruins in Bolivia. Huge, several ton stones, carved with fitting grooves, all done by people without the technology of writing. How could illiterate people do something that is the envy of modern engineers? That's a good question, but to come to the conclusion of "aliens did it" requires some shitty logic. This sort of stuff reminds me of the god of the gaps concept. Until we find out exactly how ancient peoples did certain things, people will continue to attribute aliens.
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon the Clown on Jan 27, 2011 20:11:46 GMT -5
A group of really bored people made it? Too implausible! Must have been a race of aliens with the resources and inclination to travel dozens, maybe even tens of thousands of light-years just so they could poke a primitive species with a stick a few times then leave behind behind something that looks funny but serves zero purpose.
Oh yeah, that's totally plausible.
|
|
|
Post by big_electron on Jan 28, 2011 1:20:37 GMT -5
@napoleon: Space travel is a bitch with the magic we know. ET's might know some much more advanced magic. By magic, I mean the Arthur C. Clarke definition of magic.
|
|
|
Post by big_electron on Jan 28, 2011 1:31:43 GMT -5
MaybeNeverI understand that Ancient Astronaut theory could be used in that manner, grasping at straws, and that it's still subject to skepticism. However, unlike Satan hiding dinosaur bones, this is a rational possibility. You don't know what that word means. Please refrain from using it. I am so sorry... (blushes) First, admit that what everyone else, including yourself, is exactly as much grasping at straws as anything I am proposing. Second, convince me that your straws are better than my straws.
|
|
|
Post by sugarfreejazz on Jan 28, 2011 2:12:40 GMT -5
I understand that Ancient Astronaut theory could be used in that manner, grasping at straws, and that it's still subject to skepticism. However, unlike Satan hiding dinosaur bones, this is a rational possibility. This is a false dichotomy and the Ancient Astronaut idea lacks enough evidence to currently make it plausible. While some/few astrophysicists think extraterrestrial contact may have occurred, they recognize these beliefs are speculative and unproven. As there is no hard evidence, the Ancient Astronaut is no more believable (currently or otherwise), than Gods, Fairies or Ghosts.
|
|
|
Post by big_electron on Jan 28, 2011 2:20:09 GMT -5
I understand that Ancient Astronaut theory could be used in that manner, grasping at straws, and that it's still subject to skepticism. However, unlike Satan hiding dinosaur bones, this is a rational possibility. This is a false dichotomy and the Ancient Astronaut idea lacks enough evidence to currently make it plausible. While some/few astrophysicists think extraterrestrial contact may have occurred, they recognize these beliefs are speculative and unproven. As there is no hard evidence, the Ancient Astronaut is no more believable (currently or otherwise), than Gods, Fairies or Ghosts. Ultimately, I don't know, and neither does anyone else. See my last post for the same essence.
|
|
|
Post by sugarfreejazz on Jan 28, 2011 2:29:46 GMT -5
A replacement theory isn't required to disprove your premise though (in reference to the straws debate). There simply is no evidence for it. If "we don't know" is the current truth, then that in no way validates the Ancient Astronaut. And science cannot prove a negative so I'm not going to go there.
Ugh, it's late/early and I can't tell if I'm being clear.
|
|
|
Post by big_electron on Jan 28, 2011 13:41:05 GMT -5
The scientists in the DVD series frequently talk about the Biblical prophet Ezekiel. Rather than an epiphany, they think it was a close encounter, gyroscopic devices, winged creatures. Show that to people today, amazement. Show that to people thousands of years ago -- CARGO CULT.
|
|
|
Post by big_electron on Jan 28, 2011 14:27:01 GMT -5
A group of really bored people made it? Too implausible! Monkeys with typewriters! And 10 ton legos.
|
|
|
Post by big_electron on Jan 28, 2011 14:39:56 GMT -5
That's the place in Bolivia I was talking about. If bored, illiterate tribals can build Puma Punku, then I can build the Pyramids by myself.
|
|
|
Post by Hades on Jan 28, 2011 15:58:58 GMT -5
That's the place in Bolivia I was talking about. If bored, illiterate tribals can build Puma Punku, then I can build the Pyramids by myself. Instead of just looking for examples that confirm your position, it would do you some good to look for examples that discredit your position as well. "Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries" by Kenneth L Feder, is a book that tackles "ancient alien" theories, among many other pseudoscience claims. I know Wiki isn't a great source, but on the Wiki page for this book it says that it's required reading for some archeology courses. I cannot find a source that confirms that diorite can only be cut with diamond that isn't in some way related to "ancient aliens". In fact, it seems that diorite can be cut with bronze tools. www.theglobaleducationproject.org/egypt/articles/petrie.phpRead through that site a bit, it explains some ancient techniques for working with stone, including tube drilling. The rest of this video is basically a huge argument from ignorance. That's why we have people who invoke god as the "cause" of the big bang, because we have yet to confirm how it happened. "I can't think of a way this could have happened, therefore X"
|
|
|
Post by Sigmaleph on Jan 28, 2011 19:57:35 GMT -5
You don't know what that word means. Please refrain from using it. I am so sorry... (blushes) First, admit that what everyone else, including yourself, is exactly as much grasping at straws as anything I am proposing. Second, convince me that your straws are better than my straws. Consider the fact that you are invoking violations of special relativity to explain drawings in the ground. Consider that we have not observed life outside the planet in any form, let alone sentient life, let alone more advanced than human life. Consider you have no particular reason for the aliens to travel here and leave only minor ambiguous traces of their presence. Your "explanation" requires the conjunction of new laws of physics, advanced extraterrestrial intelligence, and aliens having motive to build something like Nazca but not leave clear signals of their involvement here. Each one of those is wildly unlikely. The conjunction is, by necessity, less likely than any of them. And consider you are invoking this astronomically unlikely hypothesis to explain drawings in the ground that can be created using technology known to be available at the time. Do you not see something wrong with this picture? "I don't know and neither do you, so you can't say I'm wrong" is the battlecry of those that want to hang on to a belief for reasons unrelated to its truth. If you had started out by looking for the most likely explanation, you wouldn't have even considered aliens until after you had exhausted any explanations that fit within current physics and required only human involvement. Evidence points towards you not doing that. If you understood what the word "rational" means, you wouldn't have used it to describe any aspect of that mess you chose to believe.
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon the Clown on Jan 29, 2011 0:30:57 GMT -5
@napoleon: Space travel is a bitch with the magic we know. ET's might know some much more advanced magic. By magic, I mean the Arthur C. Clarke definition of magic. So when it comes to being between human ingenuity and Magical Aliens, the Magical Aliens are more likely?
|
|
|
Post by big_electron on Jan 29, 2011 1:25:37 GMT -5
@napoleon: Space travel is a bitch with the magic we know. ET's might know some much more advanced magic. By magic, I mean the Arthur C. Clarke definition of magic. So when it comes to being between human ingenuity and Magical Aliens, the Magical Aliens are more likely? Let me refresh your memory: "magic" = any sufficiently advanced technology.
|
|