What If...

[Carol Nistri]

Originally Posted by Carol Nistri

Humph,a machine more intelligent than a human??? Go fix yourself Mr.Smartbass..

Oh dear,I do hope you realize Dear Antri that I was referring to them and not you when I said Mr.Smartbass.

[dr wu23]

Originally Posted by Darrell

Perhaps your dead horse requires yet another beating since you have yet again muttered the same lame accusation about discussions here being speculations without evidence.

Speculation rarely ever takes place in a vacuum. It usually arises once claims or evidence concerning claims surface. For example, let's pretend a murder has been committed, and the forensic scientists find your fingerprints at the scence of the crime. Are your fingerprints evidence? Of course! The question becomes of what? Enter the speculations.

Perhaps your fingerprints are found there because you just happen to live there. Or perhaps, they are found at the residence of a friend which you recently visited. And perhaps they are found there because it was you that did the dirty deed!

So what to make of the evidence? If you denied ever being at that location, the evidence can be used to catch you in a lie. If you committed the crime, it can be used circumstantially against you in your trial. But all it can prove is that you were once there -- not that you are the murderer.

By the same token, writings from ancient civilizations describing visits by aliens are evidence. So might be much other stuff claimed by ancient alien theory. And the same for insider reports, implants via alien abductions, etc., etc. Perhaps nothing found yet can absolutely prove that which has been speculated; but that which has been speculated is most assuredly based on evidence.

I frankly do not understand what evidence you hope to ever find that one could label "scientific evidence." About all that would meet that classification would be an actual alien or his space craft. Science tests specific theories; it doesn't play detective. To my way of thinking, ufo investigation is about playing detective -- not proving hypotheses. The ancient alien theorists have laid out a very extensive array of evidence in support of their theories. I think I speak for both they and this website's members when I state that it deserves better than to be labeled mere speculation by you or anyone else. Quite the contrary, it is a substantial body of evidence accumulated via a very comprehensive review of this planet's evidential history. IMHO one should think twice before pooh poohing a hypothesis supported by such an immense body of data and such a large body of independant witnesses across time and space.

You make some good points but it's still speculation when we get into these discussions about 'aliens' and their 'motives', etc.
It's entertaining but it isn't really getting us anywhere and we end up going in circles and maybe that in itself is telling us something.

[Darrell]

Originally Posted by dr wu23

You make some good points but it's still speculation when we get into these discussions about 'aliens' and their 'motives', etc.
It's entertaining but it isn't really getting us anywhere and we end up going in circles and maybe that in itself is telling us something.

I may be speculating here, but I'm guessing that what you are really having heartburn over is the semantics of the word "alien." Having your vast reading experience on the subject, you have come to think of our uninvited guests as entities of another realm -- at least some of the time. Right? So whenever someone here says "alien" you presume the word to mean ETs, which you find rightly to be an unverified assumption.

That being the case, let me be one of the first to agree with you that anything not of this earth (or realm) is by definition "alien." Additionally, anything not of our time is also alien, and likewise for any advanced entities sharing our planet incognito. Let's permit the word to refer to them all. Okay?

As to arriving at alien motives, I am in your camp all the way. We have no way of knowing their intentions or much about their methodology. Even when piecing together accounts by witnesses/victims, we are admittedly only guessing. That is why I treat the question of tampering with human evolution as a question to be explored, and not as an alternate explanation of human history. I only wish that persons of science would open mindedly recognize that their theories are basically questions too, and that the evidence which they cling to can also support counter theories.

[dr wu23]

Originally Posted by Darrell

I may be speculating here, but I'm guessing that what you are really having heartburn over is the semantics of the word "alien." Having your vast reading experience on the subject, you have come to think of our uninvited guests as entities of another realm -- at least some of the time. Right? So whenever someone here says "alien" you presume the word to mean ETs, which you find rightly to be an unverified assumption.

That being the case, let me be one of the first to agree with you that anything not of this earth (or realm) is by definition "alien." Additionally, anything not of our time is also alien, and likewise for any advanced entities sharing our planet incognito. Let's permit the word to refer to them all. Okay?

As to arriving at alien motives, I am in your camp all the way. We have no way of knowing their intentions or much about their methodology. Even when piecing together accounts by witnesses/victims, we are admittedly only guessing. That is why I treat the question of tampering with human evolution as a question to be explored, and not as an alternate explanation of human history. I only wish that persons of science would open mindedly recognize that their theories are basically questions too, and that the evidence which they cling to can also support counter theories.

You nailed it.
But lets say that science needs to look at this ancient alien/evolution idea;.....what exactly are they going to look at? A few glyphs and myths..? Where does one even start to find real evidence that can honestly tell us something?

[Darrell]

Originally Posted by dr wu23

You nailed it.
But lets say that science needs to look at this ancient alien/evolution idea;.....what exactly are they going to look at? A few glyphs and myths..? Where does one even start to find real evidence that can honestly tell us something?

Well, from what I understand, some engineers took a serious look at what was described in the bible related books and figured out that the device described housed in the ark of the covenent actually added up to a viable machine for manufacturing algae (which was needed for 40 years of surviving in the desert). And even NASA understands the value of algae in supporting human life for long periods of time. Given that, who knows what some may find hidden in other ancient writings which have also been dismissed as myths? Personally, as something of a weapons authority, I can easily see through some of the ancient descriptions of alien air battles to discern weapons we would today label as laser rays, submunition dispensers, nuclear warheads, guided missiles, etc. And I would contend per my flight understanding of aerodynamics that some of those trinkets which are seemingly birdlike are in fact viable airplane designs. And you don't even have to take my word on that because some engineers actually built scale models of some of those trinkets and found them to fly quite well.

Perhaps what is really needed to convince the skeptics is merely some recognition and endorsement of findings made to date for what they actually appear to be from persons of prominent scientific reputation? It would be easy for them to start by simply reviewing the AA tapes and picking projects from there to study and evaluate. For example, they could go examine ancient alleged aircraft runways and landing platforms.

Sadly, most of the professionals that could do this avoid doing it in fear of the treatment they would receive from peers and superiors. In today's world, being funded is everything. Few scientists would dare to risk the consequences. Everyone would rather play safe and leave the job to someone else. Thus we continue to wait ...

[BRB]

baked outta my miiiiiiiiiiiiiind over here!

[dr wu23]

Originally Posted by Darrell

Well, from what I understand, some engineers took a serious look at what was described in the bible related books and figured out that the device described housed in the ark of the covenent actually added up to a viable machine for manufacturing algae (which was needed for 40 years of surviving in the desert). And even NASA understands the value of algae in supporting human life for long periods of time. Given that, who knows what some may find hidden in other ancient writings which have also been dismissed as myths? Personally, as something of a weapons authority, I can easily see through some of the ancient descriptions of alien air battles to discern weapons we would today label as laser rays, submunition dispensers, nuclear warheads, guided missiles, etc. And I would contend per my flight understanding of aerodynamics that some of those trinkets which are seemingly birdlike are in fact viable airplane designs. And you don't even have to take my word on that because some engineers actually built scale models of some of those trinkets and found them to fly quite well.

Perhaps what is really needed to convince the skeptics is merely some recognition and endorsement of findings made to date for what they actually appear to be from persons of prominent scientific reputation? It would be easy for them to start by simply reviewing the AA tapes and picking projects from there to study and evaluate. For example, they could go examine ancient alleged aircraft runways and landing platforms.

Sadly, most of the professionals that could do this avoid doing it in fear of the treatment they would receive from peers and superiors. In today's world, being funded is everything. Few scientists would dare to risk the consequences. Everyone would rather play safe and leave the job to someone else. Thus we continue to wait ...

I'm not familiar with any 'algae' machine related to the Ark of the Covenant (which was how they spoke to God and also contained the tablets) that the Hebrews used in the desert but 'manna' allegedly fell from heaven....do you have a link to this algae idea?
Air battles from myths and allegories are certainly open to the interpretation one wants to use and again which trinkets mentioned in the Bible or in other myths were built by modern engineers?
I know one engineer drew a design, which ended up looking like a bizarre helicopter, from the Exekiel event that he felt was described in the Bible.
I still don't see any solid tangible evidence to explore or a good place to start.
The Nazca lines have been looked at by many and nothing has been found to indicate aliens used it as a landing site though one can interpret it that way if they like.
And that's the problem with all of the ancient alien 'evidence'. It's not evidence of aliens per se unless one wants to interpret it that way.
I honestly don't think that reexamining these myths etc will tell us anything more and will not prove ancient aliens. We need something solid for people to take it seriously.

What I did find interesting a few years back was the original work done on what was called Junk Genes found in the human genome. These genes did not seem to code for anything and it seemed like they were extra material. A Boston genetic expert who was involved with the genome project and other related work used Zipf's Law on these junk genes as well as on the regular genetic coded genes and he found that the junk genes acted as a 'language' regarding Zipfs law but not with the regular genes. Zipf's law applies to all human languages and basically states that all languages have a definte ratio showing patterns of words used most in any language. This geneticist found it interesting but not sure if it meant anything. He joked once to some friends in the field that maybe aliens had used these junk genes to hide a message to us so when we we evolved enough we could read it.
Nothing ever came of this from what I have read and not too long ago they have discovered that they aren't really junk genes and do code for certain functions in humans.
I wish I could find that article but it was several years ago and I didn't bookmark it.
Here are some links on this idea...a Google search brings up others.
background info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zipfs_law
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noncoding_DNA
http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2007...na-lingui.html
links that actually talk about alien codes:
http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2011/01...ur-genome.html
http://www.disclose.tv/forum/could-j...th-t51660.html

[Darrell]

Originally Posted by dr wu23

I'm not familiar with any 'algae' machine related to the Ark of the Covenant (which was how they spoke to God and also contained the tablets) that the Hebrews used in the desert but 'manna' allegedly fell from heaven....do you have a link to this algae idea?
Air battles from myths and allegories are certainly open to the interpretation one wants to use and again which trinkets mentioned in the Bible or in other myths were built by modern engineers?
I know one engineer drew a design, which ended up looking like a bizarre helicopter, from the Exekiel event that he felt was described in the Bible.
I still don't see any solid tangible evidence to explore or a good place to start.
The Nazca lines have been looked at by many and nothing has been found to indicate aliens used it as a landing site though one can interpret it that way if they like.
And that's the problem with all of the ancient alien 'evidence'. It's not evidence of aliens per se unless one wants to interpret it that way.
I honestly don't think that reexamining these myths etc will tell us anything more and will not prove ancient aliens. We need something solid for people to take it seriously.

What I did find interesting a few years back was the original work done on what was called Junk Genes found in the human genome. These genes did not seem to code for anything and it seemed like they were extra material. A Boston genetic expert who was involved with the genome project and other related work used Zipf's Law on these junk genes as well as on the regular genetic coded genes and he found that the junk genes acted as a 'language' regarding Zipfs law but not with the regular genes. Zipf's law applies to all human languages and basically states that all languages have a definte ratio showing patterns of words used most in any language. This geneticist found it interesting but not sure if it meant anything. He joked once to some friends in the field that maybe aliens had used these junk genes to hide a message to us so when we we evolved enough we could read it.
Nothing ever came of this from what I have read and not too long ago they have discovered that they aren't really junk genes and do code for certain functions in humans.
I wish I could find that article but it was several years ago and I didn't bookmark it.
Here are some links on this idea...a Google search brings up others.
background info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zipfs_law
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noncoding_DNA
http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2007...na-lingui.html
links that actually talk about alien codes:
http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2011/01...ur-genome.html
http://www.disclose.tv/forum/could-j...th-t51660.html

leaving junk genes for another discussion, the other stuff can be found on the AA series. (you know I can't read. HE HE HE)

[conspiracygirl]

I've never heard of the algae machine either?