Ancient Aliens

Discussion in 'Science and Technology' started by BillJ, Jun 19, 2012.

  1. Reverend

    Reverend Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2002
    Location:
    UK
    Wasn't "A Canticle For Leibowitz" also based around a similar premise? A post apocalyptic monastic order blindly copying ancient texts and circuit diagrams into illuminated scripture without the slightest clue what they are, but all too willing to attribute a divine or mystical meaning.

    Never mind modern archaeology, it makes one wonder how many ancient scriptures are based of something far more mundane than their authors might claim. I know it makes me wonder about that ancient Egyptian carving that looks suspiciously like a lightbulb...

    But yeah, anyone who watches 'Time Team' knows all about how little archaeologists really understand. I recall Robinson calling bullshit on them a few times when they try to pass something off that can't immediately explain as having "ceremonial significance." I really wish they'd treat their own scientific discipline with a little respect and be upfront about the unknowns. Making such broad assumptions with so little data can easily lead to or indeed compound misconceptions.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2012
  2. Lonemagpie

    Lonemagpie Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2007
    Location:
    Yorkshire
    It's even an acknowledged joke in the archaeological profession and community that "ritual purposes" is archaeologist-speak for "we have no fucking idea". It's never been a secret.
     
  3. The Castellan

    The Castellan Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 2, 2004
    Location:
    The Plains of Cydonia
    Was talking to a friend via chat and we had and he posted this, here's what he said:



    Seems to me that the mainstream scientific community is as dogmatic as some religious communities....both of which thinking that we know it all, and that if someone else points out something, he or she is wrong, wrong, wrong......I mean look at the Sphinx, there's water erosion on the Sphinx, as well as it's enclosure, and the last time Eygpt had any sigificant rainfall was like 10,000 years, so that tells me the Sphix is at least twice as old as mainstream says it is, not to mention the fact that I see a black woman's face on it, as oppossed to Chephren. Yet mainstream folks like Zahi Hawass keeps saying it's Chephren and the Sphinx is 5,000 years old. Personally, I think he's blinded by politics, since politics often does get in the way of advacement. And that's just one example of closed mindedness happening. I've done comparisons to a statue of Chephren, the one in Boston, and of the Sphinx, the proportions are way off. I remember on Mystery of the Sphinx, there was a police sketch artist who uses facial proportions and what not to make of both Chephren and the Sphinx, proportions were completely different, especially the protrusion of the jaw, angles from the nose and eyes, etc. And the verdict was the face of the Sphinx is not the same person as represented in the statue of the Pharoh Chephren.....he did not have the Sphinx done....the most he did was repair it during his lifetime, and that's it. Yet mainstream keeps insisting it is Chephren, and won't even consider any alternative ideas...(hell, crazy old Zahi threated a few certain folks suggested altnervies with chopping off their heads should they ever come to Eygpt....and this guy's supposed to be respected?), which makes no sense, expect the same dogma going around. And this is just the Sphinx, same thing goes for the ancient aliens theory.

    And one thing the megolithich structures have over modern stuff like sky scrappers are that they last......sky scrappers, bridges, etc need to be maintained and worked on....metal oxidizes, plastics disolve, glass is brittle (unless made in a perfect vaccum, than it would be better than steel).....the Pyramids, both in Egypt and South America and Mexico, they are still there and looking good.
     
  4. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    You're entirely wrong with respect to that.
     
  5. sojourner

    sojourner Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Location:
    A Long Time Ago...

    But those megalithic structures are just lumps of stone. And do you somehow think if we constructed solid simple geometric shapes of stone today that they wouldn't last as long?

    A parking garage is not a pyramid. Each one has it's own uses, upkeep, and construction.

    What about all the ancient wonders that haven't survived? For every pyramid of Giza there are 5 that have withered away in the sands.Were the aliens contracted to build them doing shoddy work?

    Science doesn't work like you think it does. Mainly because you haven't tried to actually apply scientific, critical thinking. Science doesn't just take things on faith and "seems to me" guesses like you apparently favor. It tests the validity of those ideas. The ideas that hold up to scrutiny get accepted. The ones that don't get dropped. People that cling to ideas that hve no scientific merit just reveal their own stupidity.
     
  6. Deckerd

    Deckerd Fleet Arse Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Location:
    the Frozen Wastes
    Well he hasn't been trained in any discipline as far as I can see. It's the same as "I haven't seen the film but I know it sucks". To dismiss the entire archeological discipline, never mind the achievement of the sciences, is too silly to even be risible.
     
  7. Gov Kodos

    Gov Kodos Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2004
    Location:
    Gov Kodos on Mohammed's Radio, WZVN Boston
    But, training can lead to dogmatism and missing new possibilities for the safety of accepted practice and conventions. If Einstein had accepted the conventions of the past he'd been happy with what he'd learned in school and stayed an obscure patent clerk. Bring on the theories and race for the future.
     
  8. Deckerd

    Deckerd Fleet Arse Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Location:
    the Frozen Wastes
    But why are those damned archaeologists constantly revising their opinions about stuff? I've just been reading Ewan Campbell's theories on the fact that Dal Riada was not an influx of Irish to Scotland but a separate group who established the area independently. Sweeping away 2000 years of folklore, by just digging around in the dirt. Ridiculous.
     
  9. Gov Kodos

    Gov Kodos Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2004
    Location:
    Gov Kodos on Mohammed's Radio, WZVN Boston
    Since no one wants to look into the Picts and their mysterious origins, Atlantis perhaps, why not throw out Dal Riada along with Arthur and pre-Anglo-Saxon Britain.
     
  10. Deckerd

    Deckerd Fleet Arse Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Location:
    the Frozen Wastes
    Arthur's real. There's loads of evidence.
     
  11. Crazy Eddie

    Crazy Eddie Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Location:
    I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
    The difference between scientists and clerics is that scientists spend millions of dollars and dozens of years researching the subject before they come to a conclusion, whereas clercis spend hundreds of dollars and dozens of years reinforcing conclusions that were made before they were ever born. "Dogma" is something you believe because you've been taught to believe it, which is not what scientists do.

    I'd grant that paradigm shifts in science can shake up the conventional wisdom and sometimes a new theory comes along that blows everyone else's theories out of the water and forces everyone to look at the data again. That is a COMPLETELY different thing from "refusal to look at alternate possibilities." Science is about DATA, not speculation.

    The water erosion on the Sphinx is consistent with the average rainfall in the Giza region over the past 6,000 years (which is noticeably less than it is today). More importantly, most of that erosion on the Sphinx is wind/dust erosion, not water erosion.

    I repeat: you do know Cephren was black, right?

    That's a dubious conclusion if I ever saw one, considering the people who sculpted the Sphinx were almost certainly not the same people who sculpted the statue.

    Or else they fall into disrepair and begin to show signs of decay and erosion over the millennia. Not totally unlike the pyramids, come to think of it.

    OTOH, there's something to be said for the longevity of stone over metal. In which case, there's no doubt in my mind that 3000 years from now someone is going to propose an ancient aliens theory to explain the geopolitical dominance of the United States and use Mount Rushmore as proof of it (George Washington's eroded and cracked face on the mountain doesn't look anything like the statue in the ruins of the smithsonian).

    Having actually BEEN to Chichen Itza and seen the condition of those cities and the pyramids there, I can tell you "looking good" is not the way I would have put it. The people who discovered the city had to clear about a thousand years worth of brush from the ruins just to make it accessible, and in the intervening years both the ancient city and the pyramid have been subject to careful restoration to keep them from crumbling to the elements. The pyramids, too, are showing extreme signs of wear as the outermost stones have all decayed away and blown into dust (it was built with smooth sides originally, remember?).
     
  12. Crazy Eddie

    Crazy Eddie Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Location:
    I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
    That reminds me of a scene from the Boondocks.

     
  13. BillJ

    BillJ Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    alt.nerd.obsessive.pic
    Still waiting for the smallest piece of tangible evidence to back up your claims.
     
  14. TIN_MAN

    TIN_MAN Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    Curious, Is there scientific proof for this twice-repeated dogmatic statement?
     
  15. Crazy Eddie

    Crazy Eddie Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Location:
    I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
    Because Cephren -- better known by his actual name Khafra -- reigned some time during the 4th dynasty, between about 2400 and 2700 BC. Not only would this put it about 5000 years prior to significant Arab colonization of the region, it's also about a thousand years before Egypt had any significant cultural, economic or military exchanges with European or middle eastern cultures (e.g. the Macedonians, the Persians, the Ptolemics, etc). Their closest neighbors and primary trading partners were the Nubians and the Ethiopians and to a lesser extent the Sudanese. The reason Egypt is predominantly Arab NOW is because the Arabs spent a thousand years doing in Egypt what they've only recently begun doing in Sudan. Or, at the risk of oversimplification, they raped all the women and raised the children themselves (a similar thing happened in the Arab conquest of Spain). Prior to at least the Macedonian conquest -- if not slightly earlier -- the Nile Delta civilization wasn't genetically all that different from any other African nation; their CURRENT racial identity is a kind of genetic trailmix with contributions of everyone who ever conquered the place, and that's a VERY long list.

    What are you asking for, though? A genetic study proving that Khafra was actually black? You might as well ask for scientific evidence that Caesar was white.
     
  16. Maurice

    Maurice Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Location:
    Walking distance from Starfleet HQ
  17. Crazy Eddie

    Crazy Eddie Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Location:
    I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
    Only in the context of old Judeo-Christian views of race, extruded through three hundred years of hardcore eurocentrism. Two practices which 1) glossed over dozens of distinct sub-groups and language families in favor of the theory that Africans in general were part of a single, inferior race and 2) considered Arab culture to be at least redeemable, if only it could be sufficiently "civilized". The desire to imagine the ancient Egyptians as having ALWAYS been closely related to Arabs is taken as proof that semitic peoples have always been capable of wonderful things and could be so again with the right leadership; they couldn't have been black, of course, because if any of the negroid races were capable of anything like that, maybe they still ARE? The first point is now outmoded, since there is no coherent political reason to affirm the god-given subservient nature of black people. The second, however, soldiers on, having evolved from the need to "Christianize" the heathen Arabs into the 21st century imperative to "Spread freedom and democracy" in the Muslim lands (spreading freedom and democracy in Africa is on the bottom of most people's priority list because... well, it's Africa, who the hell cares?).

    Let's be perfectly clear about this: to the extent that any distinct "race" of human beings could be identified at all, there are phenotypical traits associated with specific regions on the planet, sub-groups that have more in common with one another than they do with anyone else (or did, originally, before historical forces tossed the genetic salad that is human biodiversity). I'm not saying that Cephren was a Bantu-speaking Zulu warlord or something, I'm saying it's safe to assume that an individual living in Pre-conquest Egypt would probably have physical features similar to other ethic groups in the same contiguous region.

    That I should even have to SAY this a bit silly. It's like someone asking me to prove that Qin Shi Huang wasn't a Mongolian.

    ETA: of course, this IS an "Ancient Aliens" thread, so it's a lot more likely that someone's going to suggest that Shi Huang was an alien.
     
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2012
  18. TIN_MAN

    TIN_MAN Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    I take that as a no, you don't have any evidence to back up your dogmatic statement. But it would be nice to at least have a mummy to test, but then we don’t have "Ra Khaf's" mummy do we?

    It's never safe to assume, especially in regards to a discipline that wants to be taken seriously as scientific, as Egyptology does, or for that matter, by any individual who wants what they say to be taken seriously.

    Anyhow, there's plenty of evidence that the ancient "Khemitians" were a mixed people from the very beginning, (i.e. all those mummies we do have, among other things) to "assume" that they must have been black is to trade the current political correctness for the old Eurocentric PC, both are equally suspect. And all this speculation still doesn't get us any closer to a "scientific" answer; it's all pretty much guesswork.

    But more to the point, there is a diorite statue, said by Egyptologists to be of Khafra, but the provenance is suspect, (i.e. his name isn’t written on it) so there is no certainty on the matter, and FWIW, it looks Caucasoid.

    Then there's the Sphinx, said by Egyptologists to be carved in the likeness of Khafra, but again, there’s no certainty in the matter, and as pointed out already, it does look Negroid, and so these two supposed likenesses of Khafra don't even look like each other, and are clearly different people.

    Bottom line is; nobody knows what Khafra looked like or what his ancestry was.
     
  19. Alidar Jarok

    Alidar Jarok Everything in moderation but moderation Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Location:
    Norfolk, VA
    While Egypt had ties to Nubia, they also had ties to the Levant even before the New Kingdom (they also had ties to Yemen and Ethiopia, so things are all muddled). I've also heard a good argument that Upper Egypt was "Black" while Lower Egypt was "Middle Eastern." There's no real indication that Egyptians viewed race in a modern context.

    I think it's quite possible that the Old Kingdom Egyptians were "black," but it also doesn't make a damned bit of difference so I don't think about it much.
     
  20. TIN_MAN

    TIN_MAN Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    Let's not go there. Don't make this an issue about racial prejudice, the point is whether newtype_alpha's opinion that "Khafra was black" -stated (twice) as if were a self evident fact for all the world to see- is indeed, a fact. It is not.

    But your point about Lower Egypt is well taken, we're not talking central Africa, or for that matter, central Asia or central Europe here. Lower Egypt is one of many "border regions" around the world where people from many racial and ethnic groups have always mingled, and so one would expect a more diverse population than one would find in the more central continental areas.

    So whether Qin Shi Huang was or wasn't a Mongolian is beside the point.
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2012

Share This Page