Ancient Aliens

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

  1. Alidar Jarok

    Alidar Jarok Everything in moderation but moderation Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Location:
    Norfolk, VA
    Actually, I wasn't making it about racial prejudice. My point is that the Ancient Egyptians didn't seem to make a distinction so it apparently was a non-issue. This is different from Carthage, for example, who clearly distinguished themselves from the Numidians/Libyans/etc. who surrounded them.
     
  2. Crazy Eddie

    Crazy Eddie Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Location:
    Your Mom
    I'm not an Egyptologist, and neither are you. And you insisting on "scientific proof" that the monarch of an African nation would actually LOOK like an African means I am not really inclined to take you seriously either.

    You're referring to this one, right?

    Not to me it doesn't. But I suppose "Where's your scientific proof" is logically equivalent to looking at a statue and saying "Er... looks caucusoid to me."

    Regardless to the overall point: it's a question of basic facial features an individual in a particular region is likely to have. Egypt BECAME a mixed culture later in its history after extensive contact and intermixing with the Berbers and other Mediterranean/middle eastern powers. But Khafra's reign would have been in the old Kingdom, way too early for that, and like most of the population would have had facial features more similar to those found in the southern portion of the continent than the northern/eastern regions they had yet to have any long term contact with. Even the Berbers -- the closest thing there was to a Caucusoid race in North Africa at the time -- never made it as far as the Nile Delta before the New Kindgom.

    And again, to even have to explain and defend this is almost asinine. We may not know what the first emperor of China looked like, but it's a foregone conclusion that he probably looked Chinese. The only reason -- and I do mean the ONLY reason -- this is not in dispute is because there's been no concerted effort to rewrite Chinese history to make it palatable to self-conscious westerners (Ergo, when artists do a rendering of Qin Shi Huang, they don't imagine that he looked like David Karadine.
     
  3. TIN_MAN

    TIN_MAN Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    There you go assuming again. How do you know I'm not an Egyptologist?:vulcan:

    You’re not following me, I'm not insisting on "scientific proof" that Khafra would actually LOOK African, I'm insisting that there is no scientific proof that he did. That you insist that he did is why I'm really inclined not to take your twice repeated dogmatic statement seriously, and neither should anyone else.

    Again you’re assuming. I didn't say "Er... looks Caucasoid to me", I said "and FWIW, it looks Caucasoid", I was actually referring to others opinions that it does, not my own.

    And I was in no way suggesting that this image represents "scientific proof" of any sort, just the opposite in fact, hence the "FWIW" that you conveniently ignored. Heck, personally, I doubt if it even is Khafra, but who knows? My point in mentioning it, and the sphinx likeness was (ironically) simply to show that uncertainty abounds in this sort of thing.

    Meh, If memory serves, there are life size painted wooden statues -representing Egyptians- dating from the old kingdom, that have glass (or crystal) corneas inserted in the eyes , which are blue in color, and also with light reddish-brown skin tone. So someone living as Egyptians in the old kingdom must have come -or gotten some of their genes from, some place besides central Africa.

    See previous reply. FWIW (there it is again, don't miss it this time :p) there's actually evidence that other races were mingling in ancient China too, so who knows?

    But since you consider it "asinine" to "explain and defend" why you present your personal opinions as self evident fact, there’s really no point in pursuing the subject, but it is another reason not to take your statements on the matter seriously.

    Another of your oft-quoted opinions with little evidence to support it; this sounds like you’re advocating a "conspiracy theory"? How is this any different than the beliefs of others who say there is a government conspiracy to cover up alien contact, past and present? Both positions are equally unsupported by the facts.

    Remember, your entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.
     
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2012
  4. Crazy Eddie

    Crazy Eddie Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Location:
    Your Mom
    Because if you were, you would have contributed something constructive by now on the subject other than pedantic half-objections.

    We don't even have scientific proof that he was HUMAN.

    You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

    I take it you've never seen a black man with blue eyes before?:confused:

    Self evident fact is self evident fact. Nothing personal about it.

    Because there is no evidence of the existence of aliens ever having visited Earth. There IS evidence of scientific racism having a profound influence on the way European archeologists approached (and in some cases, STILL approach) their analysis of ancient civilizations.

    Or wait, don't tell me... you need scientific evidence of the existence of racism too?
     
  5. Deckerd

    Deckerd Fleet Arse Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Location:
    the Frozen Wastes
    Is it important what the ancient Egyptians looked like? I mean aside from the umpty million drawings of them, that is.
     
  6. Lonemagpie

    Lonemagpie Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2007
    Location:
    Yorkshire
    I guess it is when some people still say (and I mean in general, answering this specific question, as I haven't followed the last couple of pages of who said what) "black primitives couldn't have built this stuff, so it must have been aliens or white Atlanteans."
     
  7. Alidar Jarok

    Alidar Jarok Everything in moderation but moderation Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Location:
    Norfolk, VA
    I'm just going to quote wikipedia here:

    That was kind of what I was saying above. The Egyptians didn't really identify themselves by race and it's quite possible they weren't one "race" in modern terms. They had a shared culture and shared gods and were ruled by a shared Pharaoh. That's what was really important to them.
     
  8. TIN_MAN

    TIN_MAN Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    Translation; I would agree with you because, of course, all modern archeologists tow the PC party line about no Europeans or middle eastern types in Egypt during the old kingdom.

    Oh, so now your conceding that he may have been and alien? ;) But at least we agree there is no proof.

    I'm pretty sure I know what it means, but just to be safe I looked it up anyway, and here is the first definition that popped up, which is typical of the others; “of, pertaining to, or of the nature of a dogma or dogmas; doctrinal. 2. asserting opinions in a doctrinaire or arrogant manner; opinionated.The bolded type was –with variations- a common theme, so I think I’m safe.

    So it seems you may be the one who doesn’t know what it means? But I guess you are referring to the strict literal definition, pertaining to religion? But it seems to me that your pretense to certainty applies to that definition as well, all of which is why I chose to use it.

    Oh come on! You’re making this way too easy. Of course I have, green & grey eyes too, and they all have European ancestry (at least the ones I’ve met), which was exactly my point.

    Now this is an asinine statement. That’s what people said about the "self evident fact" that the Sun moves around a stationary Earth, to believe otherwise is a matter of personal opinion. Things aren’t always as they "self evidently" seem.

    Sez you. :p But actually, I agree with you on the second sentence.

    You keep missing the point, nuff said.
     
  9. TIN_MAN

    TIN_MAN Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    I agree, and this is an undercurrent to my main point. Regardless of how one chooses to slice and dice the human pie, there is tons of evidence that the Egyptians were -right from the start- a combination of many cultural, ethnic, racial and other influences.

    If this is indeed true, as seems likely, then it just goes to show what can be accomplished when diversity flourishes; the result being one of the, if not the greatest civilizations the world has ever seen!

    To insist, in the face of all the evidence to the contrary, that the black race alone was responsible for the greatness that was ancient Egypt, and that it only began to decay with the late influx of (white) immigrants, is to prefer one form of racism over another.
     
  10. Crazy Eddie

    Crazy Eddie Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Location:
    Your Mom
    I get that, of course. It's not much deeper, though, than Castellan being puzzled as to why Cepheren/Khafra "looks like a black woman." Which immediately begs the question "Were you expecting him to look like a WHITE woman?"

    More significantly: "black" isn't a race. "Black" is a physical descriptor for a dark-skinned person of distantly African descent and the set of characteristics they could be expected to have. The RACIAL identities of black people is a lot more complicated, but apparently distinct enough that people familiar with them can tell them apart (e.g. the Hutus once attempted to exterminate the Watutsis from Rwanda, much to the bemusement of white people everywhere). It's a pretty broad set of characteristics one usually finds among Africans, and with only a few notable exceptions (the Berbers, for example) those characteristics were a lot more widespread in the centuries before the Macedonian and Persian empires.

    From what I know of ancient history, the old kingdom being ruled by a European family is only slightly more likely than it being ruled by aliens.

    I'm conceding that at the level of your objections he could have been a trained monkey. But that would require an explanation as to why the Egyptians would have attempted to train a monkey to rule their empire as a Pharaoh, which would be just as hard to come by as an explanation for how exactly a foreigner managed to ascend the throne of Egypt in 2400 B.C.

    Maybe it's like "Last of the Mohicans" or "The Last Samurai" or even "Avatar", one of those situations where an indigenous society thousands of years old nevertheless falls under the sway of some random white guy who just got here an hour ago?

    I'm pretty sure you think you know ALOT of things. For example:

    And SURELY you expect me to believe you've actually traced the ancestry of all of these people.:cool:

    Or the "self evident" fact that all men are created equal. In BOTH cases, it took a huge amount of research by a lot of very interested people to prove otherwise, and research in the latter case came to be known as "scientific racism."

    Just because a fact is self-evident doesn't make it wrong. It means that you had better provide some compelling arguments to prove that the most obvious explanation isn't the true one. Unfortunately, it remains the case that if you gather enough data and compile it the right way, you can prove or disprove just about anything and then slap an authoritative label on your findings.

    ETA: I had heard about this before but forgot the name of the group. I've been told that blue eyes is an unusually common trait for the Denka Bor tribe in Sudan (couple hundred miles south of Egypt). Also unable to track down the study I used to have a bookmark for that the mutation for blue eyes occurs in 5 to 12 percent of West Africans (higher or lower figures depend on whether the trait is associated with other conditions like Waardenberg Syndrome; IIRC, 6% of the time it's associated with nothing at all).
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2012
  11. TIN_MAN

    TIN_MAN Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    I thought it was the Sphinx he said looks like a black woman?

    Well, if something’s a fact then it wouldn't be wrong regardless of whether it's self evident or not, Right? It's our assumptions that something is self evident, and therefore doesn't need proof, that can be –and usually are- wrong.

    Interesting, do you remember whether in the individuals with this mutation for blue eyes, had both eyes blue, or just one eye?
     
  12. Crazy Eddie

    Crazy Eddie Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Location:
    Your Mom
    The Sphinx, which is presumed to be a likeness of Khafra. Castellan says it sort of looks like a black woman; my reply to has been, essentially, "Since Khafra himself (most likely) would have been black, why is that surprising?"

    Well, if something’s a fact then it wouldn't be wrong regardless of whether it's self evident or not, Right?[/quote]
    To the extent the validity of any fact depends on known data -- i.e. other facts -- yes. It is, for example, a FACT that I have a three year old son who is right now sleeping in his favorite Buzz Lightyear sleeping bag. This is, to me, self-evident, since I can take the most obvious evidence of what I see and what I understand about the world at face value.

    Now, on closer examination, my son could turn out to be a manifestation of an ongoing Fight Club style psychotic episode; one could make a pretty compelling argument from logic and/or supposition that this was the case, that I don't really have a family at all and just imagined the whole thing. But supposition alone isn't very convincing in the face of the obvious, and if someone was going to try to tell me that my family was imaginary, they'd have to provide some pretty convincing evidence of this for me to believe it.

    That's kind of my problem with YOUR objections. You're presupposing that there's no "scientific proof" that Khafra was black or could be identified as having phenotypically common African features. I find that a bit silly, almost on the order of someone claiming that there's no scientific evidence that I have a son. I see a statue of Khafra, I see the likeness of the Sphinx, and I see an African nation that had little or no contact with Arabs or Europeans until 2000 years after Khafra's death. So who am I supposed to believe, you or my lying eyes?
    Both eyes, usually, though different eye color in one or the other does happen to.
     
  13. Deckerd

    Deckerd Fleet Arse Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Location:
    the Frozen Wastes
    I still wonder why it's important.
     
  14. Robert Maxwell

    Robert Maxwell so far this is a dumb future Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2001
    Location:
    comments 2 my butt
    It's not.

    Folks, let's keep this thread about the original topic and stop with the weird detours into racial theories.

    Who cares whether the Egyptians who built the Pyramids and Sphinx were black or something else? Who cares what the race of the Pharaoh was? I think it's been well-established in this thread that European concepts of race are meaningless in discussions of Egyptian history.

    And regardless of the skin color of those Egyptians, what difference does it to make to whether aliens had a hand in it? None at all, from what I can see.

    Let's please circle this thread back to the original topic and save the personal barbs. Thank you.
     
  15. Redfern

    Redfern Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    Black, white, middle eastern, who cares? Nefratiti was a fox regardless. If that "bust" statue is anywhere near accurate to her actual features, forget about the straight guys; gay men and straight women would be tempted to "sleep" with her! :drool:

    Besides, you gotta' love their fashion sense! :techman:

    Sincerely,

    Bill
     
  16. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    I think What the Ancients Knew is a great show and is on the Science Channel. I think anyone who believes in Ancient Aliens should sit down and watch the show on the construction of the pyramids. :techman:
     
  17. RAMA

    RAMA Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 1999
    Location:
    NJ, USA
    Humans beings don't give human beings enough credit...we often suck but we're also pretty amazing too...our brains condition us for survival, to seek and find the negative, but as natural selection has basically disappeared, and humans have our own evolution in our hands we can certainly do something about our mistakes. Pyramids are child's play.

    RAMA
     
  18. RAMA

    RAMA Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 1999
    Location:
    NJ, USA
    White bodybuilders created us...don't you know?

    [​IMG]
     
  19. RAMA

    RAMA Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 1999
    Location:
    NJ, USA
    The human species is an evolutionary inflection point..."I think it very likely – in fact inevitable – that biological intelligence is only a transitory phenomenon, a fleeting phase in the evolution of the universe," Davies writes. "If we ever encounter extraterrestrial intelligence, I believe it is overwhelmingly likely to be post-biological in nature."

    By Paul Davies, a British-born theoretical physicist, cosmologist, astrobiologist and Director of the Beyond Center for Fundamental Concepts in Science and Co-Director of the Cosmology Initiative at Arizona State University

    Basically a book about many of the concepts and possibilities I've shared with you on this board in the recent past:

    http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblo...nt=Google+International#.UJc3MwP5xWk.facebook
     
  20. Crazy Eddie

    Crazy Eddie Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Location:
    Your Mom
    What is it about theoretical physicist/cosmologists that leads them to believe they are in any way qualified to speculate about subjects totally unrelated to their area of expertise?

    A book about theoretical evolutionary paradigms, written by a physicist. It should be about as useful as a book on high energy particle physics written by an archeologist.