To me, any legitimate ally is better than no ally - strength in numbers. Even if you say Dr Greer looks at this as a source of income, who on the Legendary Times staff does not? The fact that Greer is making money off the issue does not diminish the effect he could have. Do you discount EVD's work because he made money on all the books? Of course not. They have to make a living somehow. The point is we need as much support as we can get, and Dr. Greer's effort and the AA Theory shares a common thread that is an obstacle towards our longterm world vision.
pragmatist wrote:If the individual does not believe in UFO's, then he certainly has difficulty in accepting that the Earth was visited by extra-terrestrials in the past.
Felix wrote:Ocean's already existed on Earth 4,280,000,000 years ago, why life should take so long time to develop?
Felix wrote:I knew about that, I use to watch many of these scientific documentary, which I prefer because I can't nowaday read for too long.
Felix wrote:I have questioned about "life" in a generic way instead of "complex life".
Felix wrote:I am here to talk with other people interested in these arguments and I don't like to make assertions but I like to raise doubts, propose questions or hypotheses which are not supposed to be the absolute truth.
Felix wrote:Nice to talk with you, I noticed reading here and there you are a precise person and well documented which is a very good thing.
The origin of life is a tough one, and many (if not most) Darwinian Scientists are now banking on the theory of Panspermia (life seeded from space, of which there are some promising leads).
from Buzi-Blu's source, Opening quote from: Wheeler's Classic Delayed Choice Experiment, 03/23/03, by Ross Rhodes who wrote:
"Nonsense," said the reductionists. "Rubbish," said the materialists. "Completely absurd," said the naïve realists. "Yup," said the mathematicians.
The Origin of Species, Chapter 6 - Difficulties on Theory, by Charles Darwin who wrote:Consequently, if my theory be true, it is indisputable that before the lowest Silurian stratum was deposited, long periods elapsed, as long as, or probably far longer than, the whole interval from the Silurian age to the present day; and that during these vast, yet quite unknown, periods of time, the world swarmed with living creatures.
To the question why we do not find records of these vast primordial periods, I can give no satisfactory answer.
dreaddy wrote:Hey Guys,
I have a different take on this whole alien race thing. Let's look at the facts first. Whether it be carvings, paintings or artifacts, evidence exists that ancient Man was somehow aware of, or came into contact with what appears to be modern technology. Many seem to think the only way this can be explained is a visit from aliens who had this technology. I'm proposing a different, simpler and older explanation for these evidences.
MANKIND WAS TECHNOLOGICALLY ADVANCED BEFORE. Something happened that wiped out this entire civilization of technologically advanced people and leave but a handful of them who did not possess the know-how of how to continue building on what was acquired in terms of scientific knowledge at that time. It's nothing new. It's right in front of us. Problem is we refuse to look at it. Let me lay it out briefly and I dare you to punch holes in this explanation.
Let's for a moment suppose Mankind was created and the earth was not millions of years old. We'll also have to suppose what the bible says is true. Here's the skinny. Mankind was taller, stronger, smarter and lived longer than we do today. Look at how far we've come in terms of technology in the last 200 years from basic mechanical parts to computers and microchips that can virtually do anything. Now imagine if the people like Newton, Madame Curie, Einstein etc lived for hundreds of years instead of 70 and were still with us today. imagine how much more advanced we'd be. Such was the case in the pre-flood world. They were as advanced as we are today or even better (given there are things they did that we still cannot do today eg. moving such large stone blocks). There are so many Ooparts (out of place artifacts) buried in rocks formed as a result of the world wide flood that they are, for the most part, ignored by scientists since this technology does not fit into the "millions of years old earth" with cavemen theory being spun as fact today. The world wide flood wiped out this civilization and left but the six people on the Ark. These six people knew of the technology but could not duplicate it. They and their descendants could draw and carve it, but could not continue the technology. It's similar to if there was a world wide flood today and only the people on this forum survived. Sure we know about computers and cell phones. But would we be able to make 'em? We could draw it and carve it since we know about it. But we don't know how to make it. In effect we'd be resetting the technology clock even though we could draw and carve the technology existing today.
I dare say this explanation covers all and any of the finds without resorting to a visiting alien race. What do you think?
pragmatist wrote:If the individual does not believe in UFO's, then he certainly has difficulty in accepting that the Earth was visited by extra-terrestrials in the past. If we want to promote our cause, we must first focus on the present as a step towards making a mental bridge to the past. Ancient astronaut theory leaps over the present UFO stigma, which makes it more difficult to support the argument. Because of this, I feel it is critical that we AA Theorists join forces with Ufologists and support their cause too. One group that appears to be well organized in the cause is the Disclosure Project. I am a member of the AASRA and I will also join Dr. Greer's group in promoting ufo and ET awareness. I urge others to do the same and hope that AASRA will evventually seek a joint venture with the Disclosure Project as well.
Occam Razor wrote:Well, you need a lot of luck for that because of special relativity and how time works when approaching lightspeed. I suspect there is a visit once every 10-5000 years by chance. No, my bet would be biology. Especially genetic research and a focus on astrobiology. I have serious doubts starships are all that common. Its a very ineffective way of travelling if you compare it to distributing the genetic code with self-replicating microorganisms wich can survive the trip and colonize entire worlds (Van Neumanns, that is right - i am not that sure if we can really discern biology from technology, not even if there IS such a thing as biology in the first place). I think you only get starships if you have a hightech civilization and the sun is dying or some other world-ending cosmic disaster is forcing them to drastic action. I would suggest prioritizing in this order: astronomy(SETI, if you like), astrobiology, xenoarchaeology.
Occam Razor wrote:Detection is not the issue. There are four main reasons why visitations by starships are unlikely:
1. Kepler detected lots of terran candidates. If they got better technology, wich i would assume, then they got even more targets. Earth is one among many. That makes it not such an obvious and pristine location that the entire milkyway has to come here once they spot us. I guess they'd start with their neightbouring stars first (in our case Gliese 581), if at all.
2. Lets consider they got a few billion years headstart in evolution on us. Would they even care? When did you last try to talk to a flatworm? Have you ever tried? And thats just a few million years evolutionary gap. A chimpanse has 1% difference in DNA to a human. Try to imagine something that is 1% different from human DNA in the direction we are different from the cimpanse. We would be blathering, drooling fools to them. And now try to imagine something that has a genome that has something like ten billion years headstart on evolution. Thats the problem.
3. Special relativity teaches us that whilst you nearing lightspeed time slows down for the traveller. Whilst that allows for seamless travel, the time won't slow down at the destination. And that means: expect lengthy trips of many thousand years for even the neighbouring Stars. It simply takes that much time and there is nothing you can do about it (besides creating a wormehole and accelerating one end to near-lightspeed, creating a time machine - not a very easy exercise btw).
4. They might not use starships. Programming microscopic nanobots for genetic terraforming, replication and adaption and spreading those through the universe as an infection with your race's genetic payload among it (once a planet is developed sufficently), seems much more practical. And ironically i think this is what happens. This mystery we call life and "genesis" may very well be a galactic colonization efford by microscopic "Von Neumann" devices wich we only can't percive as advanced technology for one because we don't understand it at our current evolutionary level and secondly never dream to imagine that we might be a product of technology ourselves. "Any sufficiently high developed technology is indiscriminable from magic." To us the genesis of life or to build something wich does 1:1 copies of itself is magic. That should people give something to think about. They don't. They call them "simplest organisms" without being able to either understand, nor to recreate (even with an example present) such an approach.
Those are the main reasons why it takes so long.
Stephen Hawking argues hightech civilizations nuke each other after they discover E=MC², but i doubt it. I doubt it manily because we haven't and i don't think we are an big exception, i think civilizations like ours are the rule. So you migh add:
5. Because they can't. They havent sufficiently developed at this time.
There is a classification system. Class I is a species wich mastered its planet. Class II mastered its solar system. And class III the galaxy. We are not even a class I civilization at this time, by that standart. We are NOT EVEN PART of the classification table. I show you a class 2 civilization as an example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icibPjgZMB8
Occam Razor wrote:2. Lets consider they got a few billion years headstart in evolution on us. Would they even care? When did you last try to talk to a flatworm?
Occam Razor wrote:3. Special relativity teaches us that whilst you nearing lightspeed time slows down for the traveler. Whilst that allows for seamless travel, the time won't slow down at the destination. And that means: expect lengthy trips of many thousand years for even the neighboring Stars. It simply takes that much time and there is nothing you can do about it (besides creating a wormhole and accelerating one end to near-lightspeed, creating a time machine - not a very easy exercise btw).
Occam Razor wrote:
This mystery we call life and "genesis" may very well be a galactic colonization efford by microscopic "Von Neumann" devices wich we only can't percive as advanced technology for one because we don't understand it at our current evolutionary level and secondly never dream to imagine that we might be a product of technology ourselves.
Occam Razor wrote:Stephen Hawking argues hightech civilizations nuke each other after they discover E=MC², but i doubt it. I doubt it manily because we haven't and i don't think we are an big exception, i think civilizations like ours are the rule.
Pons Asinorum wrote:There is simply no way to conclude that all such advance species would not be interested, especially if we model it after our own behavior.
Pons Asinorum wrote:Given advanced technology, wormholes and "warp drives" are not the only way to explore the galaxy.
Pons Asinorum wrote:It seems in the first few billion years of life on Earth, "simple" single-celled organisms evolved...
Pons Asinorum wrote:I take the middle view, some do and some do not. [...] But I would not dismiss Dr. Hawking's hypothesis so easily.
Occam Razor wrote:Where on Earth is that in the fossil record? Its not there.
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/bacteria/cyanointro.htmlUniversity of California, Museum of Paleontologym, Introduction to the Cyanobacteria, by staff which wrote:
Cyanobacteria are aquatic and photosynthetic, that is, they live in the water, and can manufacture their own food. Because they are bacteria, they are quite small and usually unicellular, though they often grow in colonies large enough to see. They have the distinction of being the oldest known fossils, more than 3.5 billion years old, in fact! It may surprise you then to know that the cyanobacteria are still around; they are one of the largest and most important groups of bacteria on earth.
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/bacteria/cyanofr.htmlUniversity of California, Museum of Paleontologym, Cyanobacteria: Fossil Record, by staff which wrote:
The cyanobacteria have an extensive fossil record. The oldest known fossils, in fact, are cyanobacteria from Archaean rocks of western Australia, dated 3.5 billion years old. This may be somewhat surprising, since the oldest rocks are only a little older: 3.8 billion years old!
Cyanobacteria are among the easiest microfossils to recognize. Morphologies in the group have remained much the same for billions of years, and they may leave chemical fossils behind as well, in the form of breakdown products from pigments. Small fossilized cyanobacteria have been extracted from Precambrian rock, and studied through the use of SEM and TEM (scanning and transmission electron microscopy).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1459374/The National Academy of Sciences, The evolutionary diversification of cyanobacteria: Molecular–phylogenetic and paleontological perspectives, 2006, by Akiko Tomitani, Andrew H. Knoll, Colleen M. Cavanaugh,and Terufumi Ohno, who wrote:
The geologic record offers some clues to the reconstruction of early cyanobacterial history. 2-methylhopanoids, molecular fossils known to be sourced by cyanobacteria, have been identified in 2,700-mega-annum (Ma) shales from Australia (10), although incomplete phylogenetic sampling leaves open the possibility that other bacteria might also produce this biomarker (11). Consistent with the cyanobacterial interpretation of early 2-methylhopanoids, 2,700-Ma lacustrine stromatolites, also from Australia, display features interpreted as products of carbonate accretion by cyanobacterial mats in a setting where electron donors other than water were limited
http://ircamera.as.arizona.edu/NatSci102/NatSci102/text/extfirstlife.htmUniversity of Arizona, Cyanobacteria, by staff which wrote:
Cyanobacteria live in the water, and can manufacture their own food through "photosynthesis." Although the oldest known fossils, more than 3.5 billion years old, are cyanobacteria, they are still around in large numbers; in fact, they one of the largest and most important groups of bacteria.
Occam Razor wrote:Because single celled organisms do not come from Earth.
Occam Razor wrote:Humans are not special. If humans are not special and can avoid killing themself, i'd assume most others manage to get through it as well.
Return to The Ancient Astronaut Theory Board
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests