Aliens, Gods and Heroes (11/16/2011)

[Moon]

Episode 15 seems to be another speculative episode. I do like the subject matter (myths), but hope they look for some physical evidence instead of stating "If they recorded it in the past, it MUST of happened." The same can be argued for Harry Potter in a future time.

[celestine]

I would like to add to this episode Joseph Campbell’s book “The Hero with a Thousand Faces” if all cultures are intrigued with the heroes story is it because we must all go through our own hero’s journey and evolve to a higher DNA capability by overcoming our lower evolution and accept our true potential?

Similar to Jesus’ journey or Neo waking- up out of his old matrix limitation to accepting his full capabilities? Are the ET’s that are over seeing our planet waiting for us to wake up to our higher DNA code to rise to our fully potential of what they have evolved to? And are the static remains of the archeological past the blueprint of our future and we are living in the past observing the future because we are living in cyclical time?”

[Moon]

While I am interested in myths, stories and legends, this episode sums up all that is wrong with the ancient alien theory. Giorgio himself states the story of the invisible ring could be just a story or it could mean extraterrestrials visited us. While it is interesting to speculate they did visit us in the past, the objective should be to look for the physical evidence to support this.

The pictures of what appeared to be jets or airplanes did keep me interested, however the stories of the weapons or other items being technology of ET has been done before many times over.

I felt like I was watching a rerun.

The finale next week looks to be a better episode. I certainly hope so as they need a really good one to close out what has been a mediocre season.

I also merged your topic with the ongoing one about this episode.

[gina kircher]

Sorry to see I missed the latest episode. Why did the History Channel miss a week ? ( Or was it two ). I never watch unless AA is on. I agree that speculation gets frustrating but we need to accept that there may be reasons there is not always physical evidence. Maybe the ancients felt they were leaving messages that anyone could figure out but we see and hear these " speculations " and think they're too farfetched. If I told you I saw a Bigfoot about 10 years ago would you believe me ? If I drew a picture of me seeing it on the wall of my house would you believe me ? If you found that picture 7000 years later would you believe me ? Or would you go on TV and speculate that a crazy lady must have lived in that house? Or you could speculate that I really did see a Bigfoot. I wouldn't be able to leave you any evidence that I did see a Bigfoot. See how it happens ?

[Moon]

Sorry to see I missed the latest episode. Why did the History Channel miss a week ? ( Or was it two ). I never watch unless AA is on. I agree that speculation gets frustrating but we need to accept that there may be reasons there is not always physical evidence. Maybe the ancients felt they were leaving messages that anyone could figure out but we see and hear these " speculations " and think they're too farfetched. If I told you I saw a Bigfoot about 10 years ago would you believe me ? If I drew a picture of me seeing it on the wall of my house would you believe me ? If you found that picture 7000 years later would you believe me ? Or would you go on TV and speculate that a crazy lady must have lived in that house? Or you could speculate that I really did see a Bigfoot. I wouldn't be able to leave you any evidence that I did see a Bigfoot. See how it happens ?

One reason they have breaks between episodes is to fan out the season. 16 episodes were made and they wanted to keep a few for sweeps month (November).

I understand what you are saying about speculation, but the reality is there is much physical evidence out there to support the theory which needs to be gone over. Also, there are many researchers who could show the evidence out there to support these ideas.

I am not totally against speculation, but it seems much of this season has only dealt with the speculative side of things. There are many great ancient monuments out there which could take a full hour to explain the mysteries surrounding them.

Also, we can find physical evidence if you did see Bigfoot with footprint casts and possible DNA.

[Sunrisepony]

Here's a thought,

With the Telekeneas at least. What, if since they were able to survive under water for indefinite periods of time, could they have been an Aquatic Humanoid Species? maybe it wasn't technology at all, but their own natural ability to breath both air and water. I've read a alot about Aquatic Species in the past, and that just kind of was something I was thinking about when I watched this episode.

Btw, for those who missed it, this is a link to the full episode.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNrbCbYULWk

[Slapfish]

Several of the episodes this season have seemed rushed and less cohesive and complete than the first two seasons. They seem to jump around a lot more and leave a lot of loose ends. I've been very disappointed in several of this years episodes. (didn't keep me from watching multiple times though) However despite some other comments about this episode I really liked this one. I think it went into a lol more detail about some of the points made in earlier episodes when it spoke of the possibility that the mythical weapons of the Gods were actually technological weapons. In this episode it wasn't weapons, but technology that might have been used defensively.

I found it interesting because for many years I've read Sitchin and VonDaniken and I just knew these stories had to be describing some kind of advanced technology that we had not yet discovered. The idea that we are on the verge of creating some of these technologies is exciting. It gets us one step closer to understanding the reality behind these ancient stories. I really liked that they used examples of technologies that are being developed today to show that what was once thought to be merely a fantasy might be possible. Solid examples are one of the things I've missed this season so I was glad to see that back.

[Dr Z.]

Several of the episodes this season have seemed rushed and less cohesive and complete than the first two seasons. They seem to jump around a lot more and leave a lot of loose ends. I've been very disappointed in several of this years episodes. (didn't keep me from watching multiple times though) However despite some other comments about this episode I really liked this one. I think it went into a lol more detail about some of the points made in earlier episodes when it spoke of the possibility that the mythical weapons of the Gods were actually technological weapons. In this episode it wasn't weapons, but technology that might have been used defensively.

I found it interesting because for many years I've read Sitchin and VonDaniken and I just knew these stories had to be describing some kind of advanced technology that we had not yet discovered. The idea that we are on the verge of creating some of these technologies is exciting. It gets us one step closer to understanding the reality behind these ancient stories. I really liked that they used examples of technologies that are being developed today to show that what was once thought to be merely a fantasy might be possible. Solid examples are one of the things I've missed this season so I was glad to see that back.

Season three has been a mixed bag, and you're right some of them seemed rushed and poorly edited. That said the Ancient Engineering episode in season three in my opinion was the very best of the entire series! I will watch the Aliens, Gods, and Heroes later on this weekend.

[Moon]

Very good review, Slapfish. I do think the shows are all entertaining, but when I critique each episode for this forum, I look for what has been learned and shown as evidence to support the idea of ancient astronauts visiting us. This episode didn't make the cut, although there was a small part which did show a few decent images of what appeared to be ancient planes.

Speculation about the possible ancient gods using modern technology can be fun, however it does not make the cut when it comes to showing the AAT as a plausible alternative to other theories out there.

If some people watched this episode and were intrigued by it enough to look into the theory, more power to it. However, it doesn't cut it with those of us who do think the theory has merit but want to see the physical evidence to help support these ideas. I hope season 4 (if there is one) will be the college level discussion as opposed to the high school level this season felt like.

They really need to take this show to the next level and with all the talent involved it should be very interesting.

[Slapfish]

Very good review, Slapfish. I do think the shows are all entertaining, but when I critique each episode for this forum, I look for what has been learned and shown as evidence to support the idea of ancient astronauts visiting us. This episode didn't make the cut, although there was a small part which did show a few decent images of what appeared to be ancient planes.

Speculation about the possible ancient gods using modern technology can be fun, however it does not make the cut when it comes to showing the AAT as a plausible alternative to other theories out there.

If some people watched this episode and were intrigued by it enough to look into the theory, more power to it. However, it doesn't cut it with those of us who do think the theory has merit but want to see the physical evidence to help support these ideas. I hope season 4 (if there is one) will be the college level discussion as opposed to the high school level this season felt like.

They really need to take this show to the next level and with all the talent involved it should be very interesting.

I understand what you're saying and agree to some point. If you want to convince someone new to the theory, this wouldn't be the episode to have them watch. However I still liked it and thought it made some good points. A show like this is going into a little more detail about specific points rather than discussing the overall theory as a whole. We don't have any of the ancient weapons, at least none have been found that we know of (who knows they could be hidden deep in the bowels of some museum somewhere) so the best we can do it to look at stories and descriptions. It might have been helpful if the show gave us more examples of more stories with similar descriptions to show how pervasive these stories are across the globe in all cultures. I that's always one of the things that is convincing to me.

I have found this season to be a bit frustrating. With SOOOOO much ground to cover it's irritating to see some things completely glossed over or given a very weak analysis. For example in the episode that discussed the world grid they kept showing the grid bouncing all over the globe and they showed a few areas where sites lined up, but I've always wondered if all of the earths major megalithic sites would all fall on a grid of some kind. I would have liked to have seen an analysis of this type. Maybe they did it and they didn't line up so they only showed the places in a smaller area that DID line up because is supported the theory.

[Nikola]

Huge disappointment. Looking for aliens in biblical texts and ancient mythology just indicates how poorly educated one is.
Everyone knows that Zeus is actually the planet Jupiter and Cronus is Saturn. And the titans are the planets + the sun. Apollo is the sun, Heracle/Hercule/Mythra/Jesus is the sun etc. How come that they don't know that?
Jacob's ladder? Seriously? It's the 72 dodecans of the zodiacal circle which the "angels"(read planets) are climbing/descending on; and the 72 years that it takes for the ecliptic to turn 1 degree in precession. Should I mention that the 72 virgins in islam aren't actually a 72 female aliens lol!

The whole 3rd season is an epic fail, begging to be debunked with ease. There are so solid and serious topics about aliens and it's amazing how they couldn't touch neither one of them.
I really hope that there won't be fourth.

[Moon]

I am really hoping someone higher up at the History Channel will help fund the Starchild Skull genome project along with the Elongated Skulls of Peru. They would have exclusive rights to the story and it would be a killer in the ratings (plus be a top selling DVD). This would also be the smoking gun proof of extraterrestrial visitation everyone is looking for.

[Nikola]

I am really hoping someone higher up at the History Channel will help fund the Starchild Skull genome project along with the Elongated Skulls of Peru. They would have exclusive rights to the story and it would be a killer in the ratings (plus be a top selling DVD). This would also be the smoking gun proof of extraterrestrial visitation everyone is looking for.

Check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uor4bLnGwrU

This is fresh. The results show that neither the starchild's skull nor the paracas' elongated skulls DNA conform to "common" humanity.

[Moon]

The latest DNA tests are very compelling indeed and the full genome would be something the skeptics and debunkers could not deny.

[Slapfish]

Huge disappointment. Looking for aliens in biblical texts and ancient mythology just indicates how poorly educated one is.
Everyone knows that Zeus is actually the planet Jupiter and Cronus is Saturn. And the titans are the planets + the sun. Apollo is the sun, Heracle/Hercule/Mythra/Jesus is the sun etc. How come that they don't know that?
Jacob's ladder? Seriously? It's the 72 dodecans of the zodiacal circle which the "angels"(read planets) are climbing/descending on; and the 72 years that it takes for the ecliptic to turn 1 degree in precession. Should I mention that the 72 virgins in islam aren't actually a 72 female aliens lol!

The whole 3rd season is an epic fail, begging to be debunked with ease. There are so solid and serious topics about aliens and it's amazing how they couldn't touch neither one of them.
I really hope that there won't be fourth.

No, everyone doesn't know these things. What you are describing is one possible interpretation of ancient texts. I believe Jacobs ladder IS a stairway or ladder leading into a spaceship. The concept of a stairway or ladder leading into heaven is an old one. There are also many old stories which describe humans being "taken up" into heaven. Much in the same way that modern abductees describe being pulled up by a tractor beam of some kind.

Zeus was not thought to be the planet Jupiter by the Greeks. The Greeks believed he was an actual being that appeared and interacted with humans in the flesh. The planet was named for him, but they did not believe the planet was him.

[Moon]

I agree with what Nikola is saying about this season. While it is true the Greeks, Romans, Egyptians etc all thought of their deities as flesh and blood beings, it does not prove they were aliens either. Even the episode brought up the idea of Superman and other modern day superheroes to compare them to the ancient stories.

If someone were digging up a site 5,000 years or so from now and saw some drawings of a man wearing an outfit who had god-like powers who also came from another world, would they think it was a myth or even an alien visiting us?

I do not rule out the possibility the gods could of been aliens. But the evidence given to support this is speculative at best. In order to stand the test of science, there has to be more evidence to support this claim of visitation. Starting with the artifacts and artistic renderings of what appear to be astronauts is a start and looking for actual pieces of such ship or astronaut suit would be the clincher.

[Nikola]

No, everyone doesn't know these things. What you are describing is one possible interpretation of ancient texts. I believe Jacobs ladder IS a stairway or ladder leading into a spaceship. The concept of a stairway or ladder leading into heaven is an old one. There are also many old stories which describe humans being "taken up" into heaven. Much in the same way that modern abductees describe being pulled up by a tractor beam of some kind.

Zeus was not thought to be the planet Jupiter by the Greeks. The Greeks believed he was an actual being that appeared and interacted with humans in the flesh. The planet was named for him, but they did not believe the planet was him.

Well, there is difference between "possible interpretation" and something that has got a solid logical support. And a "possible interpretation" is exactly what AA series - especially season 2/3 - has put forward. And this interpretation sucks very badly.
You may believe that Jacob's ladder is a ufo tech thing but it's not what we believe that matters at the end. Believing is nothing but a wishful thinking just more profoundly fashioned. Knowing it, on the other hand, is what counts for me.
The ancients inherited an amazing knowledge of the stars and planets from their predecessors - the ones who had built the pyramids thousands of years prior. And they needed a cultural and philosophical framework to put all this knowledge into. So they created stories and myths about heroes, gods and creatures. That's how the religion started by the way. The evidence is overwhelming - every great story and myth is based on a natural and celestial phenomenons. From Osiris in Egypt, through Dagon in Mesopotamia all the way down to Jesus in the middle east. All of them, and I repeat ALL OF THEM were created after stars, constellations, and planets. It's too easy to be proven. Let me give you a good example: why do you think Zeus was called "the god of thunder"? You probably think because it was some alien with super powers, based on the AA series gibberish. Well, it's not. Zeus is a anthropomorphized character created after the biggest gas giant in our solar system. The planet is an enormous orb continuously being thorn by storms and lightnings, hence the Zeus was called the god of thunder/the thunder-bearer etc. What about Zeus who at one point turned himself into a swan only to seduce Leda? Spaceship? Once again - it's not. Not even close. Actually the answer is the planet Jupiter "passing" through the constellation of Signus(the swan). See how simple actually it is? Because that's how mythology worked in the ancient times - based on celestial objects and their periodical motion in the sky. I can give you tons of examples. So my advice to you is - stop believing, get to KNOWING it!
Cheers!

[Moon]

Well put, Nikola. There is plenty of physical evidence and artifacts out there that were given a small amount of airtime. They should devote a whole hour to some of these artifacts, monuments and locations showing the strong evidence of possible extraterrestrial involvement.

The stories are nice and help to get people thinking, but they are just stories until the physical evidence is found showing it to be the truth.

[Slapfish]

No, everyone doesn't know these things. What you are describing is one possible interpretation of ancient texts. I believe Jacobs ladder IS a stairway or ladder leading into a spaceship. The concept of a stairway or ladder leading into heaven is an old one. There are also many old stories which describe humans being "taken up" into heaven. Much in the same way that modern abductees describe being pulled up by a tractor beam of some kind.

Zeus was not thought to be the planet Jupiter by the Greeks. The Greeks believed he was an actual being that appeared and interacted with humans in the flesh. The planet was named for him, but they did not believe the planet was him.

Well, there is difference between "possible interpretation" and something that has got a solid logical support. And a "possible interpretation" is exactly what AA series - especially season 2/3 - has put forward. And this interpretation sucks very badly.
You may believe that Jacob's ladder is a ufo tech thing but it's not what we believe that matters at the end. Believing is nothing but a wishful thinking just more profoundly fashioned. Knowing it, on the other hand, is what counts for me.
The ancients inherited an amazing knowledge of the stars and planets from their predecessors - the ones who had built the pyramids thousands of years prior. And they needed a cultural and philosophical framework to put all this knowledge into. So they created stories and myths about heroes, gods and creatures. That's how the religion started by the way. The evidence is overwhelming - every great story and myth is based on a natural and celestial phenomenons. From Osiris in Egypt, through Dagon in Mesopotamia all the way down to Jesus in the middle east. All of them, and I repeat ALL OF THEM were created after stars, constellations, and planets. It's too easy to be proven. Let me give you a good example: why do you think Zeus was called "the god of thunder"? You probably think because it was some alien with super powers, based on the AA series gibberish. Well, it's not. Zeus is a anthropomorphized character created after the biggest gas giant in our solar system. The planet is an enormous orb continuously being thorn by storms and lightnings, hence the Zeus was called the god of thunder/the thunder-bearer etc. What about Zeus who at one point turned himself into a swan only to seduce Leda? Spaceship? Once again - it's not. Not even close. Actually the answer is the planet Jupiter "passing" through the constellation of Signus(the swan). See how simple actually it is? Because that's how mythology worked in the ancient times - based on celestial objects and their periodical motion in the sky. I can give you tons of examples. So my advice to you is - stop believing, get to KNOWING it!
Cheers!

I do know it. The difference is when I express what I believe is fact I do so with the humility of someone who is searching for the truth, not the arrogance of someone who thinks he already knows it. I leave room for others to believe or interpret differently and keep my mind open to alternatives. You apparently think your belief or interpretation is FACT. There is no more factual proof that the entity Zeus was really a gas giant in our solar system than there is that myths and stories of stairways and ladders are actually based on visits from spacecraft. Theories are nothing more than "beliefs" and from time to time, theories are proven or shattered.

[Freyja]

No, everyone doesn't know these things. What you are describing is one possible interpretation of ancient texts. I believe Jacobs ladder IS a stairway or ladder leading into a spaceship. The concept of a stairway or ladder leading into heaven is an old one. There are also many old stories which describe humans being "taken up" into heaven. Much in the same way that modern abductees describe being pulled up by a tractor beam of some kind.

Zeus was not thought to be the planet Jupiter by the Greeks. The Greeks believed he was an actual being that appeared and interacted with humans in the flesh. The planet was named for him, but they did not believe the planet was him.

Well, there is difference between "possible interpretation" and something that has got a solid logical support. And a "possible interpretation" is exactly what AA series - especially season 2/3 - has put forward. And this interpretation sucks very badly.
You may believe that Jacob's ladder is a ufo tech thing but it's not what we believe that matters at the end. Believing is nothing but a wishful thinking just more profoundly fashioned. Knowing it, on the other hand, is what counts for me.
The ancients inherited an amazing knowledge of the stars and planets from their predecessors - the ones who had built the pyramids thousands of years prior. And they needed a cultural and philosophical framework to put all this knowledge into. So they created stories and myths about heroes, gods and creatures. That's how the religion started by the way. The evidence is overwhelming - every great story and myth is based on a natural and celestial phenomenons. From Osiris in Egypt, through Dagon in Mesopotamia all the way down to Jesus in the middle east. All of them, and I repeat ALL OF THEM were created after stars, constellations, and planets. It's too easy to be proven. Let me give you a good example: why do you think Zeus was called "the god of thunder"? You probably think because it was some alien with super powers, based on the AA series gibberish. Well, it's not. Zeus is a anthropomorphized character created after the biggest gas giant in our solar system. The planet is an enormous orb continuously being thorn by storms and lightnings, hence the Zeus was called the god of thunder/the thunder-bearer etc. What about Zeus who at one point turned himself into a swan only to seduce Leda? Spaceship? Once again - it's not. Not even close. Actually the answer is the planet Jupiter "passing" through the constellation of Signus(the swan). See how simple actually it is? Because that's how mythology worked in the ancient times - based on celestial objects and their periodical motion in the sky. I can give you tons of examples. So my advice to you is - stop believing, get to KNOWING it!
Cheers!

I do know it. The difference is when I express what I believe is fact I do so with the humility of someone who is searching for the truth, not the arrogance of someone who thinks he already knows it. I leave room for others to believe or interpret differently and keep my mind open to alternatives. You apparently think your belief or interpretation is FACT. There is no more factual proof that the entity Zeus was really a gas giant in our solar system than there is that myths and stories of stairways and ladders are actually based on visits from spacecraft. Theories are nothing more than "beliefs" and from time to time, theories are proven or shattered.

I 100% agree with you. I have studied ancient religion (professionallY) since 2002, and I can say that the Zeus theory presented by Nikola is a bit flawed, and seems to be based moreso on opinion. Classics, and religious studies, are highly speculative. We have wonderful postulations as to why things 'line up' as they do, but we can't 100% prove them.

Look at the death of Emperor Tiberius: some say Caligula murdered him, others say he died of a heart attack, or unknown illness. Who do you believe? When reviewing ancient accounts, we have to be careful because the ancients did not always record hostory in the same objective way that we do now. For instance, when looking at Caligula, the story of him murdering Tiberius came from an account made by Suetonius, based on popular opinion. It was not uncommon in the ancient world, if a historical writer hated you, to trash you, and put in 'rumours' to make you look bad. I won't even get started on Tacitus and Domitian. However, when you look at the life of Caligula, and try to peel back the speculation, and rumour, you find some things that he did that were actually quite 'modern'. For instance, did you know that he tried to create equal rights for slaves? Yeah, he did. THAT certainly didn't get much attention, though!

The same can be said with the records that we have of religious accounts. Based on my review, I agree with Giorgio that the ancients recorded their 'opinion' on what they thought that they were seeing (just like they did with all of their history). The only thing that we have to be careful of, though, is being aware that how the hostorical record was recorded was different. Rumours were recorded as 'fact' (relgious and otherwise - don't get me started on the miracles attributed to Jesus).

Also, for Zeus, I would like to point out that Zeus and Jupiter are NOT equivalent. They are the Greek and Roman interpretations of a more ancient god. Furthermore, Zeus has over 100 epithets (one of which was 'lightning god'). How then, using the 'logic' presented do we account for the other epithets, and their origins? To assume that Zeus was simply known as a lightning god is completely false.

I can say that the position presented by Nikola, based on my own research in religious scholarship is unique. I have never come across that 'concrete' argument before, and would recommend that if anyone is interested in studying the arguments presented, here, further that they check out the following book:

'Religion in the Ancient Greek City' by Louise Bruit Zaidman and Pauline Schmidt Pantel.

This book is fabulous and outlines several Zeus origins. I'm certainly not saying that Nikola is 100% wrong, as to say that would be silly! I just have not seen what was presented by them as being 100% true, or 'proven' as it were in scholarship.

[Nikola]

I do know it. The difference is when I express what I believe is fact I do so with the humility of someone who is searching for the truth, not the arrogance of someone who thinks he already knows it. I leave room for others to believe or interpret differently and keep my mind open to alternatives. You apparently think your belief or interpretation is FACT. There is no more factual proof that the entity Zeus was really a gas giant in our solar system than there is that myths and stories of stairways and ladders are actually based on visits from spacecraft. Theories are nothing more than "beliefs" and from time to time, theories are proven or shattered.

Come on, it's not 'humility', it's a 'I have only one source and I believe in it'. And since when knowing something is arrogant? Where did I actually say that it was my belief? Why are you putting your own words in my mouth? Are you really not capable of understanding the difference between belief and knowledge?! You keep saying "I believe". Well, I believe you are an alien from the Pleiades and your mission is to blow our planet away, because that's what a crappy documentary said about you. Now, how credible is that, huh?

At least I'm giving a solid logical evidence here. And if you don't have your own counter-argument against it, please stop the insults. Just stop believing for a second and start thinking - what is more reliable. Believing is for the religious nutheads.

Here are the facts:

"Jupiter is the fifth planet from the Sun and the largest planet within the Solar System. It is a gas giant with mass one-thousandth that of the Sun but is two and a half times the mass of all the other planets in our Solar System combined. Jupiter is classified as a gas giant along with Saturn, Uranus and Neptune."

Jupiter is perpetually covered with clouds composed of ammonia crystals and possibly ammonium hydrosulfide. The clouds are located in the tropopause and are arranged into bands of different latitudes, known as tropical regions. These are sub-divided into lighter-hued zones and darker belts. The interactions of these conflicting circulation patterns cause storms and turbulence. Wind speeds of 100 m/s (360 km/h) are common in zonal jets. The zones have been observed to vary in width, color and intensity from year to year, but they have remained sufficiently stable for astronomers to give them identifying designations.
The cloud layer is only about 50 km deep, and consists of at least two decks of clouds: a thick lower deck and a thin clearer region. There may also be a thin layer of water clouds underlying the ammonia layer, as evidenced by flashes of lightning detected in the atmosphere of Jupiter. This is caused by water's polarity, which makes it capable of creating the charge separation needed to produce lightning. These electrical discharges can be up to a thousand times as powerful as lightning on the Earth. The water clouds can form thunderstorms driven by the heat rising from the interior.

In ancient mythology:

To the Babylonians, this object represented their god Marduk. They used the roughly 12-year orbit of this planet along the ecliptic to define the constellations of their zodiac.
The Romans named it after Jupiter (Latin: Iuppiter, Iūpiter) (also called Jove), the principal god of Roman mythology, whose name comes from the Proto-Indo-European vocative compound *Dyēu-pəter (nominative: *Dyēus-pətēr, meaning "O Father Sky-God", or "O Father Day-God").

The astronomical symbol for the planet, ♃, is a stylized representation of the god's lightning bolt. The original Greek deity, Zeus, adopted by Romans, supplies the root zeno-, used to form some Jupiter-related words, such as zenographic.

Do you see that underlined sentence in red? Here is your factual proof.

[Inquiring Mind]

I wished at times that the narrator and guests would of delved a little deeper into the astrotheological meanings behind alot of these deities. Overall though, I liked this episode. I learned a few new things to.

"The greatest myth is that myths are only myths"--Michael Tsarion

[Moon]

This is all a question of what came first: The planets named after the gods, or the gods named after the planets.

Unless we build a time machine and see this prehistory it is difficult to know any answers. Many of the gods are derived from other names and traditions far older than the Greek or Roman myths.

[Slapfish]

I do know it. The difference is when I express what I believe is fact I do so with the humility of someone who is searching for the truth, not the arrogance of someone who thinks he already knows it. I leave room for others to believe or interpret differently and keep my mind open to alternatives. You apparently think your belief or interpretation is FACT. There is no more factual proof that the entity Zeus was really a gas giant in our solar system than there is that myths and stories of stairways and ladders are actually based on visits from spacecraft. Theories are nothing more than "beliefs" and from time to time, theories are proven or shattered.[/quote]

I 100% agree with you. I have studied ancient religion (professionallY) since 2002, and I can say that the Zeus theory presented by Nikola is a bit flawed, and seems to be based moreso on opinion. Classics, and religious studies, are highly speculative. We have wonderful postulations as to why things 'line up' as they do, but we can't 100% prove them.

Look at the death of Emperor Tiberius: some say Caligula murdered him, others say he died of a heart attack, or unknown illness. Who do you believe? When reviewing ancient accounts, we have to be careful because the ancients did not always record hostory in the same objective way that we do now. For instance, when looking at Caligula, the story of him murdering Tiberius came from an account made by Suetonius, based on popular opinion. It was not uncommon in the ancient world, if a historical writer hated you, to trash you, and put in 'rumours' to make you look bad. I won't even get started on Tacitus and Domitian. However, when you look at the life of Caligula, and try to peel back the speculation, and rumour, you find some things that he did that were actually quite 'modern'. For instance, did you know that he tried to create equal rights for slaves? Yeah, he did. THAT certainly didn't get much attention, though!

The same can be said with the records that we have of religious accounts. Based on my review, I agree with Giorgio that the ancients recorded their 'opinion' on what they thought that they were seeing (just like they did with all of their history). The only thing that we have to be careful of, though, is being aware that how the hostorical record was recorded was different. Rumours were recorded as 'fact' (relgious and otherwise - don't get me started on the miracles attributed to Jesus).

Also, for Zeus, I would like to point out that Zeus and Jupiter are NOT equivalent. They are the Greek and Roman interpretations of a more ancient god. Furthermore, Zeus has over 100 epithets (one of which was 'lightning god'). How then, using the 'logic' presented do we account for the other epithets, and their origins? To assume that Zeus was simply known as a lightning god is completely false.

I can say that the position presented by Nikola, based on my own research in religious scholarship is unique. I have never come across that 'concrete' argument before, and would recommend that if anyone is interested in studying the arguments presented, here, further that they check out the following book:

'Religion in the Ancient Greek City' by Louise Bruit Zaidman and Pauline Schmidt Pantel.

This book is fabulous and outlines several Zeus origins. I'm certainly not saying that Nikola is 100% wrong, as to say that would be silly! I just have not seen what was presented by them as being 100% true, or 'proven' as it were in scholarship. [/quote]

I agree with you completely except when you said that ancients did not record history objectively as we do now. Any look at a newspaper today will show that history is STILL recorded with the bias of the writer. That alone should tell us that if we can't even know what the absolute truth is regarding events happening today, how can we possibly assume to know the absolute truth of events that occurred thousands of years ago. Our knowledge of history is built on inference, theory and supposition and sometimes pure wild ass conjecture! Things that were considered to be absolute truth change when new information is discovered. Were we not taught in grade school that Columbus discovered the New World?

I just watched a documentary about the discovery of Machu Pichu. Apparently when it was discovered, it was assumed to be a legendary city (can't remember the name) and bodies discovered there were thought to be the bodies of the virgin servants of the king. A fanciful tale of the discovery was published in National Geographic. Years later it was found that the bodies thought to be women were not all women. The mistake was in assuming the bones belonged to women because of their small size. When scientists years later took a closer look they found the bones were not all those of women as previously assumed.

New information and new science changes what we thought we knew. We have to be willing to discard old "facts" when they no longer fit the new information. To cling to an old paradigm just because it's comfortable is just arrogance.

[Moon]

Well said, Slapfish.

I am building a library of books dealing with all kinds of subjects including the myths of antiquity. It is interesting how old some of the gods/goddesses are and how many names they have gone through. I do think the planets were named after the gods/goddesses and not the other way around.

The finding of a Mother Goddess carving over 200,000 years old shows this to be the case.

[Nikola]

Also, for Zeus, I would like to point out that Zeus and Jupiter are NOT equivalent. They are the Greek and Roman interpretations of a more ancient god. Furthermore, Zeus has over 100 epithets (one of which was 'lightning god'). How then, using the 'logic' presented do we account for the other epithets, and their origins? To assume that Zeus was simply known as a lightning god is completely false.

Here it is for you too:

To the Babylonians, this object represented their god Marduk. They used the roughly 12-year orbit of this planet along the ecliptic to define the constellations of their zodiac.
The Romans named it after Jupiter (Latin: Iuppiter, Iūpiter) (also called Jove), the principal god of Roman mythology, whose name comes from the Proto-Indo-European vocative compound *Dyēu-pəter (nominative: *Dyēus-pətēr, meaning "O Father Sky-God", or "O Father Day-God").

The astronomical symbol for the planet, ♃, is a stylized representation of the god's lightning bolt. The original Greek deity, Zeus, adopted by Romans, supplies the root zeno-, used to form some Jupiter-related words, such as zenographic.

Of course "adopted" is not accurate, because every one knows that the Romans actually enforced their pagan deities upon Greeks, just like they did with christianity later on - with violence.

combined threads per forum rules-MM

This is all a question of what came first: The planets named after the gods, or the gods named after the planets.

Unless we build a time machine and see this prehistory it is difficult to know any answers. Many of the gods are derived from other names and traditions far older than the Greek or Roman myths.

That's actually very easy to answer. One must only ask the proper question - which one them is real: gods or planets?
About the second statement - I could not agree more.

[Moon]

That's actually very easy to answer. One must only ask the proper question - which one them is real: gods or planets?

While it is true the planets have been there for billions of years, the gods and goddesses came first for the earliest humans out there. (If you can find a depiction of the planets over 200,000 years old like the Mother Goddess carving, that could prove your point.)

The goddesses and gods were assigned planets and stars in the fairly recent historic eras (20,000 or so years ago). They did not worship the planets, but the gods and goddesses themselves.

When I meditate to Isis, I am not meditating to the planet Venus or the star Sirius which are both associated with Her but with Deity in the form of Isis She sometimes takes.

[Slapfish]

The astronomical symbol for the planet, ♃, is a stylized representation of the god's lightning bolt. The original Greek deity, Zeus, adopted by Romans, supplies the root zeno-, used to form some Jupiter-related words, such as zenographic.

Do you see that underlined sentence in red? Here is your factual proof.[/quote]

Correlation is not causation. This is not proof, only an interpretation. Jesus was symbolized by a fish. I supposed turning water into wine and raising Lazarus are all explanations of the constellation Pisces?

[Nikola]

Do you see that underlined sentence in red? Here is your factual proof.

Correlation is not causation. This is not proof, only an interpretation. Jesus was symbolized by a fish. I supposed turning water into wine and raising Lazarus are all explanations of the constellation Pisces?

It is proof. It proves that Zeus is a anthropomorphic character. You have the key features of the planet directly morphed into skills of a mythological figure. You van verify it yourself. But you'll never find any solid evidence which could connect Zeus with an alien. We even do not know how aliens look like, let alone speculating that they might have lightning guns or magical hammers. This is so humanly ridiculous.
---

About Jesus. Jesus still symbolizes the age of Pisces, just because we're still in it. On the vernal equinox(March 21) the sun is rising with the constellation of Pisces behind it - that's how it marks the age as Piscean age. The two fishes and the two fishermen are also symbols of the constellation of Pisces. Just like "the man wearing a pitcher of water" is Aquarius - marking the next precessional age.
Turning water into wine is a metaphor. It's the Sun going through watery spring season, making grape grow and have it fermented into wine in autumn.

[Slapfish]

It is proof. It proves that Zeus is a anthropomorphic character. You have the key features of the planet directly morphed into skills of a mythological figure. You van verify it yourself. But you'll never find any solid evidence which could connect Zeus with an alien. We even do not know how aliens look like, let alone speculating that they might have lightning guns or magical hammers. This is so humanly ridiculous.
---

About Jesus. Jesus still symbolizes the age of Pisces, just because we're still in it. On the vernal equinox(March 21) the sun is rising with the constellation of Pisces behind it - that's how it marks the age as Piscean age. The two fishes and the two fishermen are also symbols of the constellation of Pisces. Just like "the man wearing a pitcher of water" is Aquarius - marking the next precessional age.
Turning water into wine is a metaphor. It's the Sun going through watery spring season, making grape grow and have it fermented into wine in autumn.

Ummmm OK, if you say so. I can see this is important to you so I'll let you have it.

[Freyja]

@Slapfish (since the quote thing won't work, I'll have to reply to you this way).

What I meant about my statement of how history was recorded in the ancient world was that the journalists, etc., today who write opinion pieces, would have been considered actual historians in the ancient world.

I know from my own studies in hostory that while your thesis is a topic in which you're PERSONALLY interested, you can't write the whole thing based on personal opinion, and rumour. There has to be FACT to support your argument, etc.

In the ancient world, that didn't happen. Opinion, and rumour were considered fact. Tacitus was one of the first historians who tried to remove bias (and that didn't work - look at his views on Domitian, for example), but he totally gets an A+ for effort.

Just imagine picking up an issue of the national enquirer and accepting it as fact (that would be the equivalent of reading Suetonius).

[Slapfish]

@Slapfish (since the quote thing won't work, I'll have to reply to you this way).

What I meant about my statement of how history was recorded in the ancient world was that the journalists, etc., today who write opinion pieces, would have been considered actual historians in the ancient world.

I know from my own studies in hostory that while your thesis is a topic in which you're PERSONALLY interested, you can't write the whole thing based on personal opinion, and rumour. There has to be FACT to support your argument, etc.

In the ancient world, that didn't happen. Opinion, and rumour were considered fact. Tacitus was one of the first historians who tried to remove bias (and that didn't work - look at his views on Domitian, for example), but he totally gets an A+ for effort.

Just imagine picking up an issue of the national enquirer and accepting it as fact (that would be the equivalent of reading Suetonius).

I know what you meant. My response was somewhat tongue in cheek. So much of what we read today is written through bias, I'm not sure if we've really come very far. The real bias I see today with historians and archeologists is that all information and artifacts are interpreted through an assumption that humans had to be the origin of everything. There is no consideration whatsoever of any other alternative no matter how bizarre and outlandish the story has to be to support that assumption. This is bad science. The concept of theory is to find the answer that best fits the known facts, NOT to find convoluted explanations to make facts fit the accepted theory.

[Scottos Maximos]

Episode 15 seems to be another speculative episode. I do like the subject matter (myths), but hope they look for some physical evidence instead of stating "If they recorded it in the past, it MUST of happened." The same can be argued for Harry Potter in a future time.

I actually thought this was a really good speculative episode, one of my favourites. The only thing that annoyed me was the repetition during the episode was extreme.
Too many recaps. The episode isn't long. My attention span lasts throughout it all!!!

combined posts per forum rules-MM

I understand what you're saying and agree to some point. If you want to convince someone new to the theory, this wouldn't be the episode to have them watch.

I thought this was actually a good 'convincer' episode as it made you rethink the 'myths' and recognise that they could definitly be ancient mans interpretation of modern technology, they even gave modern examples of the technology in progress. However they stretched this episode to buggery.