141 réponses à ce sujet

[Fiery Phoenix]

This is a brand new documentary from History Channel. It is generally similar to what you might have seen before, but I think it demonstrates ideas and theories in a much more understandable way. It was the perfect thing to watch over my lunch break.

Part #1:


Part #2:


Part #3:


Of course, it's all speculation full of ifs and buts, so don't lose a nerve now.

Enjoy!

[Morbo]

Ah yes, the "History" channel...where history is either WW2, or all sorts of pseudoscientific nonsense.

I'm not watching these vids, as it's only going to be the same old stuff again. People seeing/reading whatever they want to see/hear in some ancient text or image, usually something paranormal or alien, instead of way more obvious things, and people discounting simple human ingenuity in cases such as the pyramids or stonehenge, because *obviously* people back then were stupid and could not possibly have built things like that on their own.
*sigh*

Now to await Swordfishtrombone for a much needed dose of common sense.

[Fiery Phoenix]

It's more or less the same stuff, but I usually enjoy listening to speculation like this. I think it's fun nonetheless.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

@Morbo; **** science , you don't know anything about ancient history, especially before 600 BC. I saw a program few month prior and it shows how a civilization can hides and destroys in the nature in 1000 years. Human Science is nothing comparable with mathematics and experimental science, so trying to explain human matters with physics and mathematics is foolishness. History and Archaeology have to be rewritten in order to reveal the secrets and true facts.

[badbunnybadhoney]

I watched an episode of Ancient Aliens last night where they discovered an underground city in Turkey. They said it was 13 stories deep and was big enough to house 20,000 people. No one knows why, who they were, or how they did it. I found it very interesting.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

I suppose there had been older civilizations before and after the Ice Age ... those Anatolian structures have 8~9 thousands of years old!

Modifié par Garbage Master, 03 décembre 2010 - 02:22 .

[Captain Crash]

The idea is you draw your own conclusions from what is presented. Everything is always going to be inheritantly biased with this type of thing as most of it is speculation and opinion. Critically analyse opinion from fact and see what comes from it.



Having said that no I havent watched it yet, but the title alone suggests that a lot of things will fustrate me. Presenting a title 'alien technology' dampens the inginuity of humans centuries ago.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Captain Crash wrote...

Having said that no I havent watched it yet, but the title alone suggests that a lot of things will fustrate me. Presenting a title 'alien technology' dampens the inginuity of humans centuries ago.

Which is why I put the word alien inside quotation marks, Crash.

[Captain Crash]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Captain Crash wrote...

Having said that no I havent watched it yet, but the title alone suggests that a lot of things will fustrate me. Presenting a title 'alien technology' dampens the inginuity of humans centuries ago.

Which is why I put the word alien inside quotation marks, Crash.

Dont worry, I know you did in your title Fiery, your smart enough to take things like this with a grain of salt. :happy:   I was regarding the show itself which has created a title to attract an audience.  Which isntantly shows its flaws.

[AshedMan]

If I see that nutcase with the big poofy hair then I know whatever they are showing is complete BS.

[Crippledcarny]

Morbo wrote...

Ah yes, the "History" channel...where history is either WW2, or all sorts of pseudoscientific nonsense.

Sorry, but WW2 is no longer part of History. Unless WW2 happened in the back of a truck driving over ice. Then it happens about 8 times a day.

[Ecaiki]

Well either you accept the alien notion, or the far more disturbing one that we had (in some cases) extremely advanced technology and lost it.



There's one place, but the name and location escape me, where the stone work is so perfect that it could have only been machined. A stone mason they interviewed said you couldn't pay him enough to try and recreate it, as it would be a lifetime project with modern tools.

[ModerateOsprey]

Ecaiki wrote...

Well either you accept the alien notion, or the far more disturbing one that we had (in some cases) extremely advanced technology and lost it.

There's one place, but the name and location escape me, where the stone work is so perfect that it could have only been machined. A stone mason they interviewed said you couldn't pay him enough to try and recreate it, as it would be a lifetime project with modern tools.

I have recollection of encountering that information some time in the distant past. I think it was in Eric von Daniken's book - Chariots of the Gods, which has now been widely discredited. Many of these types of documentaries/books seem to have the same tone as this book to my mind. Though I continue to believe there is much mystery in the world and no area of human endeavour is even close to a proper answer as yet.

[Dark Lilith]

saw this morning on the news that aliens live on earth.Its a microbe with arsenic as a building block...we are not alone!

[Fiery Phoenix]

Ecaiki wrote...

Well either you accept the alien notion, or the far more disturbing one that we had (in some cases) extremely advanced technology and lost it.

There's one place, but the name and location escape me, where the stone work is so perfect that it could have only been machined. A stone mason they interviewed said you couldn't pay him enough to try and recreate it, as it would be a lifetime project with modern tools.

In the case that we had extraordinarily advanced technology way back then, there is the question of how our ancestors came up with that technology in the first place. We like to assume that what we know today was inconceivable to our ancestors, therefore completely disregarding the thought of an "advanced past" - whereas in fact it seems to be inconceivable for us to imagine our ancestors with such technology. It's quite the dilemma, if you think about it.

Modifié par FieryPhoenix7, 03 décembre 2010 - 04:40 .

[Ecaiki]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

In the case that we had
extraordinarily advanced technology way back then, there is the question
of how our ancestors came up with that technology in the first place.
We like to assume that what we know today was inconceivable to our
ancestors, therefore completely disregarding the thought of an "advanced
past" - whereas in fact it seems to be inconceivable for us to imagine our ancestors with such technology. It's quite the dilemma, if you think about it.

So true. I wonder how many people know that we were half a discovery away from the industrial revolution 2,000 years ago.

Sadly it's arrogance that blinds our society to the idea that we could be the primitive ones, and we're only really playing catch-up to our ancestors.

Modifié par Ecaiki, 03 décembre 2010 - 04:48 .

[Swordfishtrombone]

Morbo wrote...

Ah yes, the "History" channel...where history is either WW2, or all sorts of pseudoscientific nonsense.

I'm not watching these vids, as it's only going to be the same old stuff again. People seeing/reading whatever they want to see/hear in some ancient text or image, usually something paranormal or alien, instead of way more obvious things, and people discounting simple human ingenuity in cases such as the pyramids or stonehenge, because *obviously* people back then were stupid and could not possibly have built things like that on their own.
*sigh*

Now to await Swordfishtrombone for a much needed dose of common sense.

I think you summed it up quite well!

What this "alien archeology" is based on is basically anomaly hunting, and unrestricted, wild force-fitting evidence into preconceived "theories" that make better stories than the "boring" regular, rigorous historical research. ANY idea can be given a superficial air of plausibility, if one is not restricted to using reasonable reseach criteria, and proper standards of evidence. If you are free to cherry pick whatever seems to fit your ideas, and disregard the rest, then using that methodology, you can make black seem white. Yet with these sort of methodology-free scavenger hunts for whatever seems to fit what you'd like to be true, any position whatsoever can be made to soud convincing.

It is only when you look at the totality of the evidence, stop cherry picking, and put the cherry picked parts back into their context, that the ludicrous nature of the claims of alien archeology become apparent.

I've posted this before, but it is something I think everyone that is enticed by the frequently peddled notions that some ancient structure "could not have been built" by the ancient without alien assistance should watch this. It's quite a fascinating demonstration of how using simple leverage and human ingenuity it is possible to achieve incredible things:



The ancients weren't stupid, and as surely as you get smart individuals today, coming up with stuff you wouldn't have thought possible, you surely did back in those days too.

The alien archeology claims are often - peraphs even most of the time - founded on a logical fallacy: "I can't explain how that could possibly have been done without advanced technology, therefore they must have received help from an advanced alien culture". This is of course the argument from personal incredulity, and is clearly false - your capability to imagine things does not limit what is possible.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Ecaiki wrote...

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

In the case that we had
extraordinarily advanced technology way back then, there is the question
of how our ancestors came up with that technology in the first place.
We like to assume that what we know today was inconceivable to our
ancestors, therefore completely disregarding the thought of an "advanced
past" - whereas in fact it seems to be inconceivable for us to imagine our ancestors with such technology. It's quite the dilemma, if you think about it.

So true. I wonder how many people know that we were half a discovery away from the industrial revolution 2,000 years ago.

Sadly it's arrogance that blinds our society to the idea that we could be the primitive ones, and we're only really playing catch-up to our ancestors.

We're not talking about 2000 years but 4~5 thousand years and more. However the works of 2000 years ago Romans, Greeks, Indians and Chinese were better than 16/17th century structure and technologies.
Odd things and structures with details which need high technology to be made is our interest.

[krimesh]

Well, there was one scientific comment in the whole of part 1 and 2 (didn't watch part 3) and that was that we have no way to rule out or "rule in" any alien involvement.

One thing is for certain though: if I would want people NOT to believe something, I'd ask those guys to make a movie about it xD

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

@Swordfishtrombone
Good, lets build some 300m monuments in your backyard!
OK, you admitted that our ancestors had higher (lost) technics that we hadn't had until 19th century.

Modifié par Garbage Master, 03 décembre 2010 - 05:04 .

[slimgrin]

Entertaining, but pure bollocks.

[Swordfishtrombone]

^ History hasn't been a steady progression towards greater technology - after the fall of rome, culture and technology took a great leap backwards. Much was lost, and it took a long time to get back on track.



Again, as I mentioned above, this type of argumentation is simply the fallacy of personal incredulity - it has no foundation in solid evidence. Your inability to imagine how someone in some ancient age could have mastered a craft that is dead today, or could have figured out simple mechanisms which aren't obvious.



Would you think that a single person, alone, using simple equipment that would not have been out of place in the world of the ancients, could build a stonehedge replica? I certainly wouldn't have thought such a thing to be possible, yet if you look at the video I posted above, it shows one man doing just that.



It is easy to exaggerate some architectural feature, and from our distant arm-chair perspective, declare that THAT would surely have required advanced technology, yet that is simply selling human ingenuity short.



If aliens did visit, and "help out" then why all the stone structures? Why not anything WAY beyond the capability of even modern day humans? Surely aliens with the technology to cross between stars would have no difficulty in doing that. Their equivalent of trash would even, when found, stand out as beyond even the modern day materials technology. Yet the things pointed to as "evidence" for alien visitation are "merely" pieces of exquisite craftmanship.



The rest is pretty much fluff and wishful thinking.

[Ecaiki]

Well Swordfish, since you're so clever perhaps you could explain Puma Punku to the rest of us.

(I found the name of the ruins I was talking about before.)

Modifié par Ecaiki, 03 décembre 2010 - 05:12 .

[Swordfishtrombone]

Garbage Master wrote...

@Swordfishtrombone
Good, lets build some 300m monuments in your backyard!
OK, you admitted that our ancestors had higher (lost) technics that we hadn't had until 19th century.

What on Earth are you talking about? Didn't you understand the concepts I was explaining? The fallacy of declaring something "impossible" with technology available to the ancients, based on your own inability to imagine how they could have done what they did? That is a fallacy, not evidence of anything. Something you cannot reasonably found a case for "alien archelogy" on.

If you watched the video I posted, it showed a simple proof of concept - of how you can move massive objects using leverage and ingenuity - both of which were quite available to the ancients.

I don't care to start investigating every monument and how it was built - there are archeologists that do that for a living, and I'm not an archeologist. But those archeologists - the vast, vast majority of them, sigh in despair at the naive notions of archeology, and fallacies of the alien archeology enthusiasts.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

@Swordfishtrombone, you are right.

[Hypothesis] but I don't think a 50000 years old Prothean monument can exist in Earth, because Earth's Nature spoils and absorbs it even if it had firm substances and materials. Everything is going to absorb in earth after thousands of years ...