Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is also a sign of "higher intelligence" when one can question why they feel something is "outrageous". Much like theism, the belief of something being "outrageous" is brainwashed into us.
Wildly baseless claims when there are many other factual, logical and much better answers to a question = outrageous.
The above is just a small sample of the amount of info available on this controversial topic. After looking over much of this research, I am almost convinced that we have non-Earth extraterrestrial ancestors (that we mistook as "Gods" and "angels"). It just makes too much sense (even more sense than evolution).
FWIW, I had long believed that Darwinism was the most logical explanation. Understand that you are not talking to a "cultist" or a "theist". I just want to know the truth. Darwinism made sense at one point (when I was 12 years old LOL!). However, ancient aliens just seems to be closer to the truth. Ancient aliens are the only explanation that explains both the origins of humans and religion without making a "myth" out of one or the other. In other words, both pieces of the "puzzle" fit together when ancient aliens are brought up. This to me is a sign that we might have found the truth.
Last edited by urbancharlotte; 10-22-2010 at 01:11 PM..
...you're going to have to give us some legitimate corroboration, and not just tinfoil hat sites and hearsay.
what constitutes legitimate corroboration? Eye witnesses are not good enough for you - whatever their position or standing. Government scientists are not good enough.
I told you before, scientists are hardly likely to publish papers on "evidence that aliens are on Earth' are they? Their peers would laugh at them and they would not get any funding for their research.
I agree that Youtube is not a good place to find 'evidence' just like I think that tabloid newspapers are not a good place either. What kind of site is legitimate for you? Better news sites? The Times of London? The Guardian?
If the official mission photographs are good enough for our scientists to study, why are they not good enough proof for others to point to and say "that is a ....". They certainly do that with rilles and other features which do not occur on earth.
I was looking into more of the 'NASA faked the weather' argument. I really don't want to spend a lot of time trying to persuade people that adding doubtful UFO evidence to even more doubtful religious myth added to the Abiogenesis question does NOT give evidence of alien scientists any more than it gives evidence of Goddunnit.
From what I read it seems to be a sort of game - find something to prove that NASA is faking everything - except, of course, those mars photos that look a bit like artificial objects. There was one interesting photo which seemed to show that a moon photo had been altered. This was 'explained' as a misprinting of the strip or something - I couldn't quite understand it and I don't doubt that 'explanation' would be rejected as a cover - up. But I don't see the point. Why alter a photo of ordinary craters? Now I seem to be able to browse vids I'll have a look but I haven't been persuaded so far. The arguments are so very reminiscent of Theist apologetics.
what constitutes legitimate corroboration? Eye witnesses are not good enough for you -
It's a well-documented fact that eyewitness testimony is among the weakest and most inaccurate. I would consider any evidence that has the legs to stand up to peer-reviewed independent scientific scrutiny.
what constitutes legitimate corroboration? Eye witnesses are not good enough for you - whatever their position or standing. Government scientists are not good enough.
NO, proven time and time again in court, in experiments, etc. that eyewitness testimony is in most not only worthless but wrong.
Very interesting video, pay close attention at just past the 7 minute mark, about a air disaster that happened in England and witnessed by 100,000 people
.
ocpaul20: Since when are rilles on the Moon a sign of aliens? The Earth and Moon are two very different places.
The point I was making is that scientists use photographs to identify features on the Moon and Mars, so if these photoagraphs are good enough to identify and catalogue these things, then why are they not good enough to identify and catalogue alien or anomalous things too? It seems like a case of good enough for one thing (scientists) but not good enough for another (anomaly-hunters).
Yes there have been plenty of rilles identified and catalogued so now they are an accepted fact, but no-one except for astronauts have been to the moon so the photographic evidence is all that we have. THAT is the point I am making. If you read my post carefully, I never said that rilles were a sign of aliens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercury Cougar
I would consider any evidence that has the legs to stand up to peer-reviewed independent scientific scrutiny.
So in other words you are not prepared to consider anything about aliens. It will be along time before you see any peer-reviewed papers on this subject. Any scientist who is on the cutting edge of science - particularly planetary science will have a hard time getting his ideas accepted. Look how many scientists pointed to water on the Moon as early as 1999 but the scientific community did not accept it until the Indians forced NASA's hand and came out with their water findings from their spacecraft.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
