Some thoughts about universes

The issue I have is most depictions of aliens are like us only with green skin and elongated skulls making them somewhat comparable to humans at first glance and they tend to have two arms and two legs too. All these human features have taken millions of years to evolve on earth under earths natural rules of evolution. It assumes a lot to begin to think aliens would be anything like us. Life as we know it requires certain elements to grow and much of space is extremely lacking in these life giving properties. I wouldn’t discount aliens altogether though because if we go down the route of different universes then the aliens big bang may have contained unknown elements not known to this universe. 

I guess it would depend on if a comet crashed onto thier planet carrying the component's of life like one seems to have done for ours?

I just hope if they are humanoid they don't go round wearing those horrible jump suits so beloved of the creators of sci-fi films, lol.

There’s other ideas that suggest we were not the first advance life form in this universe. Some ancient drawings show UFO looking objects in the sky and its been suggested the aliens may have helped humans in some way.

If you heat the rock up, put wedges in and then pour cold water over the rock, most rocks will split more evenly and in bigger pieces.

TheCatWoman said:

they used wedges too

[INFODUMP ALERT!]

I remember reading (decades ago) that a good way to split a rock is to find a small fissure, hammer in a wooden wedge, and then pour water on it. The water makes the wood swell and ... hey presto ... two rocks instead of one!

The Nile was nearer to the site of the pyramids then so they brought a lot of stuff in by barge, like many ancient peoples they were really good hydrologists, but then I suppose they had to be seeing as their whole civilisation depended on the Nile and it's anual flood.

You can cut hard stone with fairly soft metals such as bronze by adding sand and water making a flux, of course they used wedges too and most likely fire and water to exploit existing fissures and cracks in rocks.

No you are right, I think the Egyptians used very few animals to build the pyramids, maybe donkeys but that’s it. It’s still very hard to believe people had such skills without modern tools. As for Putin, he’s a nut job already without believing any further fantasy. 

Mammoths died out by the end of the ice age, along wth many other of the big cold adapted animals, such as cave bears and woolly rhinos.

A crazy in Russia who has the ear of Putin, decided that Early Russian's along with thier mammoths roamed what was the former USSR during the ice age and created the first settlements of Europe and pretty much everywhere else.

It's an absolute load of wallop, Russia would of been under an ice sheet a mile thick and by the time the ice retreated mammoths were extinct. What wasn't under ice was arctic tundra, good for grazers but not for humans.

I'm not sure if Putin believes it, who knows what he believes, if anything, but he's quite happy to use this fairytale if it helps him in his imperialist goals.

Alien0n3arth said:

While reading new testament I asked myself how us it possible, that a star flying in the sky suddenly stops and hovers above one house. There is no celestial body, that would behave like a GPS.

Did you ever look up at the stars and say to yourself, "That one's hovering over Mrs. Jones in number 6; that one's over the Smiths in number 7; ..."? Probably not. You'd need a modern telescope with very accurate positioning and direction-finding to be able to identify which exact star is overhead any point on Earth. You can't just eyeball it and say, "This house here. Not the one down the street (I hear a very naughty boy lives there)."

Planets and comets can appear to "stand still" in the sky when their orbits appear retrograde. This is just a parallax effect as they are viewed from the Earth, which is also in motion. This is why they are sometimes called "wandering stars".

Matthew, in the New Testament, doesn't cite his sources. Is it possible that the whole story is somewhat hyperbolic, perhaps even a complete fabrication? It was written perhaps 50–70 years after the event by someone who wasn't there. The only thing it is evidence of is that people were interested in the night sky back then.

You might be onto something there  

I heard Daniken admitting to some mistakes, but fakes - I've never heard. I know of him being in prispn for tax fraud, when he was young. That's bad, but I find his theory interesting, because I myself came to the conclusion, that there might have been an advanced civilisation in the past, while reading Bible. I'm not religious at all, I just started reading Bible out if pure curiosity and I approached this book like any other book. I had impression,  that there is something wrong. I remember myself being scolded and bullied in primary school for adking questions like for example, what people was Kain afraid after being banished from Eden? There was supposed to be no one out there if Adam and Eve and their offsprings were tge only people existing on this planet. 

While reading new testament I asked myself how us it possible, that a star flying in the sky suddenly stops and hovers above one house. There is no celestial body, that would behave like a GPS. There are many more stories from the Bible that made me think. And then I discovered im not the only one coming to this conclusion. I listen to various channels, to gather more information and wider perspective,  not only one Daniken.

Autismman said:

Any mention of mammoths? I’ve heard they may have used these animals to transport heavy loads

With their furry coats and working in that heat, it is no wonder they went extinct...

Any mention of mammoths? I’ve heard they may have used these animals to transport heavy loads. 

The workers who built the pyramids were very well provided for, the village/townships where they lived have been discovered and documented, there have been many TV programes and books about them. They were definately not slaves, during the annual inundation they were joined by people who would otherwise be farming, until the Nile receded and planting could begin again, these farmers were paid as labourers, rather than the full time specialists.

The pyramid is actually one of the easiest shapes to build and you can see proto-types such as the stepped pyramid. I've seen how stone can be shaped using stone and bronze tools, it's ingenious but not difficult.

I don't believe the ancient aliens theory, we might not know what the various drawings mean, but I don't believe they show aliens. Also the pyramids aren't that old, they're contemporary with Stonehenge, the youngest stone circle of it's kind. I think if we'd have had visitors from another planet there would be more evidence of them from other contemporary cultures, the Egyptians were'nt the only civilisation of the time.

Another problem I have with the Ancient Alien theory is that is does humans down, we're led to believe that humans aren't that clever and that advances can't happen quickly and lead to other devolopments over a fairly short period. 

Why do we believe this narrative?

Who came up with it and why?

Could it be the Victorians again with their ideas of progression, where they were the pinacle of civlisation? Hence the idea that it would need an outside source of intelligence and teaching for these "primitive" people to build something like a pyramid. 

The idea of progession in the Victorian sence of the idea has been totally overturned by accademics as racist, colonialist nonsense, that gave a rational to slavery, forced conversaion to Christianity and the destruction of culture and civilisations far older than that of European adventurers.

If we look back at really ancient buildings and structures such as Gobleki Tepe, Skara Brae, etc, then we see widespread ideas of building and different but related techniques, many come from carpentry, like the mortice and tenon joints at Stonehenge. I see the pyramids as just another part of this progression of archetecture and building skills as people learn to use different materials using the existing skills they have.

As to advances not happening quickly, I think we only need to look at the industral revolution to see just how fast things can change, do we really believe that this only happened once in the whole of human existance?

Daniken admitted to faking many of his discoveries, to fit in with what he thought had or even should have happened, so why do so many people who would otherwise be very keen to evidence of such things be blind to his lies?

Autismman said:

I know there’s many strong theories for how the pyramids were built but even the scientists today scratch their heads around the scale of the structures themselves.

I've read some articles from civil engineers who tried to come up with ways to create the pyramids using the technology available at the time and the results were that it was all quite do-able but required a tremendous scale of labour to do it.

What this does establish is that it required a massive scale of human cruelty to achieve the result and this seems to be something mankind has been very good at through the years.

Daniken writes not only about the Egyptian (Kemet) pyramids, but also about many other structures around the world. He does not say, that humans couldn't build it, he says that its very much possible, that it was initiated by being's from other world and maybe also planned. Not only pyramids, but also stonehenge, Newgrange, nazca lines, Palenque, Puma punku, Sacsayhuaman etc.

I also know there were found some diaries possibly of the builders of the pyramids in Gize, but also an artifact- an ostrich egg, 7000 years old, which might have a depiction of them and the nile but most archaeologists don't agree with this interpretation. 

Alien0n3arth said:

Yes, I read books of Erich von Daniken

I always feel that von Daniken, and the whole "aliens built the pyramids" thing is a bit racist. The premise is that brown people could not have been so technologically adept—that would be more of a white people thing. I don't buy it.

How were the pyramids built? Canals. We now have documentary evidence (recent; google it) that stone was carried down the Nile and then canals were used to transfer that stone to the site of the pyramids. Clever, but it didn't need alien anti-gravity.

Without photographic evidence and modern day technology that we have today all these people would have had is carvings and drawings and anything that may have been written could just be taken as ancient fantasy. I know there’s many strong theories for how the pyramids were built but even the scientists today scratch their heads around the scale of the structures themselves. There’s also the idea of the pyramids being a way to produce power by the way they are constructed inside. 

Yes, I read books of Erich von Daniken, he gives many examples of artifacts, megalithic structures and ancient texts that suggest, we might have been visited. Just theory, but to me makes sense.

Yes, I read books of Erich von Daniken, he gives many examples of artifacts, megalithic structures and ancient texts that suggest, we might have been visited. Just theory, but to me makes sense.

If you heat the rock up, put wedges in and then pour cold water over the rock, most rocks will split more evenly and in bigger pieces.

TheCatWoman said:

they used wedges too

[INFODUMP ALERT!]

I remember reading (decades ago) that a good way to split a rock is to find a small fissure, hammer in a wooden wedge, and then pour water on it. The water makes the wood swell and ... hey presto ... two rocks instead of one!

The Nile was nearer to the site of the pyramids then so they brought a lot of stuff in by barge, like many ancient peoples they were really good hydrologists, but then I suppose they had to be seeing as their whole civilisation depended on the Nile and it's anual flood.

You can cut hard stone with fairly soft metals such as bronze by adding sand and water making a flux, of course they used wedges too and most likely fire and water to exploit existing fissures and cracks in rocks.

No you are right, I think the Egyptians used very few animals to build the pyramids, maybe donkeys but that’s it. It’s still very hard to believe people had such skills without modern tools. As for Putin, he’s a nut job already without believing any further fantasy. 

Mammoths died out by the end of the ice age, along wth many other of the big cold adapted animals, such as cave bears and woolly rhinos.

A crazy in Russia who has the ear of Putin, decided that Early Russian's along with thier mammoths roamed what was the former USSR during the ice age and created the first settlements of Europe and pretty much everywhere else.

It's an absolute load of wallop, Russia would of been under an ice sheet a mile thick and by the time the ice retreated mammoths were extinct. What wasn't under ice was arctic tundra, good for grazers but not for humans.

I'm not sure if Putin believes it, who knows what he believes, if anything, but he's quite happy to use this fairytale if it helps him in his imperialist goals.

Alien0n3arth said:

While reading new testament I asked myself how us it possible, that a star flying in the sky suddenly stops and hovers above one house. There is no celestial body, that would behave like a GPS.

Did you ever look up at the stars and say to yourself, "That one's hovering over Mrs. Jones in number 6; that one's over the Smiths in number 7; ..."? Probably not. You'd need a modern telescope with very accurate positioning and direction-finding to be able to identify which exact star is overhead any point on Earth. You can't just eyeball it and say, "This house here. Not the one down the street (I hear a very naughty boy lives there)."

Planets and comets can appear to "stand still" in the sky when their orbits appear retrograde. This is just a parallax effect as they are viewed from the Earth, which is also in motion. This is why they are sometimes called "wandering stars".

Matthew, in the New Testament, doesn't cite his sources. Is it possible that the whole story is somewhat hyperbolic, perhaps even a complete fabrication? It was written perhaps 50–70 years after the event by someone who wasn't there. The only thing it is evidence of is that people were interested in the night sky back then.

You might be onto something there  

I heard Daniken admitting to some mistakes, but fakes - I've never heard. I know of him being in prispn for tax fraud, when he was young. That's bad, but I find his theory interesting, because I myself came to the conclusion, that there might have been an advanced civilisation in the past, while reading Bible. I'm not religious at all, I just started reading Bible out if pure curiosity and I approached this book like any other book. I had impression,  that there is something wrong. I remember myself being scolded and bullied in primary school for adking questions like for example, what people was Kain afraid after being banished from Eden? There was supposed to be no one out there if Adam and Eve and their offsprings were tge only people existing on this planet. 

While reading new testament I asked myself how us it possible, that a star flying in the sky suddenly stops and hovers above one house. There is no celestial body, that would behave like a GPS. There are many more stories from the Bible that made me think. And then I discovered im not the only one coming to this conclusion. I listen to various channels, to gather more information and wider perspective,  not only one Daniken.

Autismman said:

Any mention of mammoths? I’ve heard they may have used these animals to transport heavy loads

With their furry coats and working in that heat, it is no wonder they went extinct...

Any mention of mammoths? I’ve heard they may have used these animals to transport heavy loads. 

The workers who built the pyramids were very well provided for, the village/townships where they lived have been discovered and documented, there have been many TV programes and books about them. They were definately not slaves, during the annual inundation they were joined by people who would otherwise be farming, until the Nile receded and planting could begin again, these farmers were paid as labourers, rather than the full time specialists.

The pyramid is actually one of the easiest shapes to build and you can see proto-types such as the stepped pyramid. I've seen how stone can be shaped using stone and bronze tools, it's ingenious but not difficult.

I don't believe the ancient aliens theory, we might not know what the various drawings mean, but I don't believe they show aliens. Also the pyramids aren't that old, they're contemporary with Stonehenge, the youngest stone circle of it's kind. I think if we'd have had visitors from another planet there would be more evidence of them from other contemporary cultures, the Egyptians were'nt the only civilisation of the time.

Another problem I have with the Ancient Alien theory is that is does humans down, we're led to believe that humans aren't that clever and that advances can't happen quickly and lead to other devolopments over a fairly short period. 

Why do we believe this narrative?

Who came up with it and why?

Could it be the Victorians again with their ideas of progression, where they were the pinacle of civlisation? Hence the idea that it would need an outside source of intelligence and teaching for these "primitive" people to build something like a pyramid. 

The idea of progession in the Victorian sence of the idea has been totally overturned by accademics as racist, colonialist nonsense, that gave a rational to slavery, forced conversaion to Christianity and the destruction of culture and civilisations far older than that of European adventurers.

If we look back at really ancient buildings and structures such as Gobleki Tepe, Skara Brae, etc, then we see widespread ideas of building and different but related techniques, many come from carpentry, like the mortice and tenon joints at Stonehenge. I see the pyramids as just another part of this progression of archetecture and building skills as people learn to use different materials using the existing skills they have.

As to advances not happening quickly, I think we only need to look at the industral revolution to see just how fast things can change, do we really believe that this only happened once in the whole of human existance?

Daniken admitted to faking many of his discoveries, to fit in with what he thought had or even should have happened, so why do so many people who would otherwise be very keen to evidence of such things be blind to his lies?

Autismman said:

I know there’s many strong theories for how the pyramids were built but even the scientists today scratch their heads around the scale of the structures themselves.

I've read some articles from civil engineers who tried to come up with ways to create the pyramids using the technology available at the time and the results were that it was all quite do-able but required a tremendous scale of labour to do it.

What this does establish is that it required a massive scale of human cruelty to achieve the result and this seems to be something mankind has been very good at through the years.

Daniken writes not only about the Egyptian (Kemet) pyramids, but also about many other structures around the world. He does not say, that humans couldn't build it, he says that its very much possible, that it was initiated by being's from other world and maybe also planned. Not only pyramids, but also stonehenge, Newgrange, nazca lines, Palenque, Puma punku, Sacsayhuaman etc.

I also know there were found some diaries possibly of the builders of the pyramids in Gize, but also an artifact- an ostrich egg, 7000 years old, which might have a depiction of them and the nile but most archaeologists don't agree with this interpretation. 

Alien0n3arth said:

Yes, I read books of Erich von Daniken

I always feel that von Daniken, and the whole "aliens built the pyramids" thing is a bit racist. The premise is that brown people could not have been so technologically adept—that would be more of a white people thing. I don't buy it.

How were the pyramids built? Canals. We now have documentary evidence (recent; google it) that stone was carried down the Nile and then canals were used to transfer that stone to the site of the pyramids. Clever, but it didn't need alien anti-gravity.

Without photographic evidence and modern day technology that we have today all these people would have had is carvings and drawings and anything that may have been written could just be taken as ancient fantasy. I know there’s many strong theories for how the pyramids were built but even the scientists today scratch their heads around the scale of the structures themselves. There’s also the idea of the pyramids being a way to produce power by the way they are constructed inside.