Aliens and evolution

Jun 19, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Washington Times

DENTON, Texas, June 19, 2012 - Aliens are ingrained in our cultural psyche. They abound in books, movies, radio, and a thousand theories about the extra-terrestrial, little green men, UFO sightings, abductions, Area 51, and Roswell.

Comments
4,381 - 4,400 of 6,103 Comments Last updated May 20, 2013

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#4442 Dec 14, 2012
Phaed wrote:
<quoted text>
They built those pyramids..a feat mankind still can't duplicate and "if" they could mankind would've done it by now..the 4 faces on Mount Rushmore is kindergarten compared to The Sphinx/Pyramid!! The stones weigh 100's of tons apiece..mankind don't hv equipment capable of doing that and further pushing the envelop is how high they built these megalithic monuments
You don't know what you are talking about. It is not that difficult to move stones. And I do believe your hundreds of tons figure might be an exaggeration. As to how much one man alone could move you might want to look at the work of Wally Wallington. He is able to move ten ton blocks by himself.

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#4443 Dec 14, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps the issue is whether the term 'god' is a title, as you claim, or an attribute. if the latter, people can be mistaken in their belief that Koresh, for example, was a god. Even if nothing even actually has the attribute, it makes sense to consider the attribute in the abstract.
My view is that 'god' is an attribute and NOT a title. So Koresh was NOT a god even though his followers believed he was.
But that view negates the concept of sociology in favor of pure religion.

You are saying that we, as educated people, can not evaluate a culture or religion by looking at its components and that all religions must be held as inherently above inspection because their central figures can not be judged based on their position but rather their actual powers (of which they have none).

I think that's foolish.

That's like saying we can't discuss different sorts of government because you can't describe a king other than by his "kingliness" rather than the role he fills in that society.

It also makes comparisons between polytheistic and monotheistic societies a problem. How can their be a god of thunder if you are also evaluating INDEPENDENTLY a god of everything?
I disagree. I can talk about unicorns as being horses with a single horn on their head. Even if there are no unicorns, I can claim that a horse with a fake horn attached is a fake unicorn.
But, what you are saying is that a unicorn can't be called "a horse with a horn" because it can only be judged on it's "unicornness" and must be kept out of context of other animals.

Admitting that there are horses (or other religions) is admitting that unicorns (thor) fits into a collection of different sorts of things which can be identified by characteristics.
In the case of 'gods', one attribute is having supernatural powers. Even if nothing actually has such powers, it can make sense to *ask* if something has such powers. And people can be mistaken about whether something has such powers. So, even if there are no gods, the term 'god' is not a title, but an attribute and people can be wrong in their beliefs that something is a god.
So, if I said to you: "Can you name three Greek gods?"

You would say: "No."

??
Phaed

Carencro, LA

#4444 Dec 14, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>The Luxor is exactly the same size at the great pyramid AND has plumbing.

There's no reason to build an additional giant pile of stones someplace else. It's not that we _can't_, it's that "who gives a crap".

The Sphinx is a sculpture. There are MILLIONS of sculptures with more detail, made of harder materials, etc.

The reason the Sphinx is impressive is that it is old, not that it's hard to create.

[QUOTE]The stones weigh 100's of tons apiece..mankind don't hv equipment capable of doing that and further pushing the envelop is how high they built these megalithic monuments"

First of all, the average weight of the stones in the pyramid was 2.5 tons, not 100 tons.

Second, you RADICALLY underestimate the ability of a large number of people to get stuff done.

Third, the pyramids demonstrate a clear learning process as the first ones often contain errors that caused them to be changed halfway through building.
the mathematics/schematics are impressive for even us in the 21st Century compared to ppl tht hd tools of wood/stone! You are missing the bigger picture here..I'm a crane operator and 2.5 tons or 5000 pounds is a small load..u may wanna chck archeological accts on weight of those stones in place bcz you're waaaay off mark. Stonehenge is impressive as well..hv u looked into the symmetry involved in the Sphinx? The Egyptians "claim" the Pyramid of Giza was built in 20-maybe 25 yrs which meant human-beings would've had to measure, cut out, move and place all those stones on avg of one per 5-10 minutes..to complete on the time frame Egyptians said..still it's impossible no matter how many able bodies you engage..how did they stack stones so high w/out cranes or steel cables using a pulley system? So men drug 5000 pound stones up the side of these structures altho the stones weighed tons I repeat tons? C'mon man..don't gv man credit! Okay..who taught the Egyptians, Sumerians or Mayans to track constellations or planetary movement since those primitive men did NOT hv a space shuttle nor satellite to know such info? Somebody came frm outside this solar system and told them by leaving ancient drawings on cave walls etc..there's no way mankind knew Earth was the seventh planet as Ancient Sumerian text prove unless someone passed by the other planets to know this..it's only been a few 100 years mankind hv bn able to see out into space to spot any movement at all!! Nobody on Earth 10,000 years ago knew names of constellations until somebody arrived to tell them where this planet is located in the Milky Way..man barely knew how to make mud huts and farm land but suddenly they came up w/ math & languages..so it's obvious you believe in Darwinism claiming man derived from monkeys so why are there still monkeys today..they didn't wanna change? LOL Or did someone intervene and genetically alter it!!

“There are other issues.”

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#4445 Dec 14, 2012
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>BS. All gods are fake.
So is your personality.
Phaed

Carencro, LA

#4446 Dec 14, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>You don't know what you are talking about. It is not that difficult to move stones. And I do believe your hundreds of tons figure might be an exaggeration. As to how much one man alone could move you might want to look at the work of Wally Wallington. He is able to move ten ton blocks by himself.
moving blocks and stacking blocks 20-30 stories high is NOT the same LMAO

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#4447 Dec 14, 2012
Educated What wrote:
<quoted text>
So is your personality.
Says the creationist who has no proof of god and denies fossils.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#4448 Dec 14, 2012
EW, if you don't state your beliefs and reasons for being in this forum, they will be stated for you. There's a limit to how long you can lie about creationism to atheists.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#4449 Dec 14, 2012
Phaed wrote:
<quoted text>
the mathematics/schematics are impressive for even us in the 21st Century compared to ppl tht hd tools of wood/stone! You are missing the bigger picture here..I'm a crane operator
So what you're saying is that because you move loads the EASY way that you know more about archaeology that all of the Egyptologists who have studied ancient Egypt for decades?
Phaed wrote:
so it's obvious you believe in Darwinism claiming man derived from monkeys so why are there still monkeys today..they didn't wanna change? LOL Or did someone intervene and genetically alter it!!
Oh man, you really did it.

You used the "Why are there still monkeys" argument.

Someone get me a kitten...
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#4450 Dec 14, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
EW, if you don't state your beliefs and reasons for being in this forum, they will be stated for you. There's a limit to how long you can lie about creationism to atheists.
But apparently no limit to how long you can lie to everyone about everything.(shrug)

So have you managed to come up with a coherent argument yet?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#4451 Dec 14, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
But that view negates the concept of sociology in favor of pure religion.
No, it simply points out that they are different things.
You are saying that we, as educated people, can not evaluate a culture or religion by looking at its components and that all religions must be held as inherently above inspection because their central figures can not be judged based on their position but rather their actual powers (of which they have none).
I think that's foolish.
Why would you think I imply that? Make a distinction between what people *think* and what is the *reality*. That people *think* someone is a god doesn't make them a god. It does not give them the attribute of supernatural power. The beliefs, however,*do* convey a position in society and the powers associated with that position.
That's like saying we can't discuss different sorts of government because you can't describe a king other than by his "kingliness" rather than the role he fills in that society.
Since the *only* characteristic required to be a king is that the person hold the position in the society, that simply doesn't follow. The point is that there *are* other characteristics of gods than simply their standing in a society (whether they have supernatural powers, for example).
It also makes comparisons between polytheistic and monotheistic societies a problem. How can their be a god of thunder if you are also evaluating INDEPENDENTLY a god of everything?
Once again, make a distinction between the belief in the deity and actually being a deity.
But, what you are saying is that a unicorn can't be called "a horse with a horn" because it can only be judged on it's "unicornness" and must be kept out of context of other animals.
No, I am saying that being a unicorn is not a title, it is an attribute.
Admitting that there are horses (or other religions) is admitting that unicorns (thor) fits into a collection of different sorts of things which can be identified by characteristics.
Bad analogy. Being a unicorn is like being a god. Such entities may not actually exist, but people can still believe in them.
So, if I said to you: "Can you name three Greek gods?"
You would say: "No."
??
Since the question usually has a subcontext of 'three figures in Greek mythology that were labeled as gods', I see no issue. Yes, all the gods of Greek (and other) mythologies are fictional. But I can talk about three characters in the stories about Sherlock Holmes even if none of them exist.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#4452 Dec 14, 2012
You are insane, your syntax is evidence of this as well as your pretty outdated and childish assertions. There are groups who have replicated how both Stonehenge and the pyramids were built, successfully, using nothing but wood logs, and ropes. You need to research something just a little bit before saying "I don't know how they did it, therefore god/aliens."
Phaed wrote:
<quoted text>
the mathematics/schematics are impressive for even us in the 21st Century compared to ppl tht hd tools of wood/stone! You are missing the bigger picture here..I'm a crane operator and 2.5 tons or 5000 pounds is a small load..u may wanna chck archeological accts on weight of those stones in place bcz you're waaaay off mark. Stonehenge is impressive as well..hv u looked into the symmetry involved in the Sphinx? The Egyptians "claim" the Pyramid of Giza was built in 20-maybe 25 yrs which meant human-beings would've had to measure, cut out, move and place all those stones on avg of one per 5-10 minutes..to complete on the time frame Egyptians said..still it's impossible no matter how many able bodies you engage..how did they stack stones so high w/out cranes or steel cables using a pulley system? So men drug 5000 pound stones up the side of these structures altho the stones weighed tons I repeat tons? C'mon man..don't gv man credit! Okay..who taught the Egyptians, Sumerians or Mayans to track constellations or planetary movement since those primitive men did NOT hv a space shuttle nor satellite to know such info? Somebody came frm outside this solar system and told them by leaving ancient drawings on cave walls etc..there's no way mankind knew Earth was the seventh planet as Ancient Sumerian text prove unless someone passed by the other planets to know this..it's only been a few 100 years mankind hv bn able to see out into space to spot any movement at all!! Nobody on Earth 10,000 years ago knew names of constellations until somebody arrived to tell them where this planet is located in the Milky Way..man barely knew how to make mud huts and farm land but suddenly they came up w/ math & languages..so it's obvious you believe in Darwinism claiming man derived from monkeys so why are there still monkeys today..they didn't wanna change? LOL Or did someone intervene and genetically alter it!!
Phaed

Carencro, LA

#4453 Dec 14, 2012
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>So what you're saying is that because you move loads the EASY way that you know more about archaeology that all of the Egyptologists who have studied ancient Egypt for decades?

Phaed wrote, "
so it's obvious you believe in Darwinism claiming man derived from monkeys so why are there still monkeys today..they didn't wanna change? LOL Or did someone intervene and genetically alter it!! "

Oh man, you really did it.

You used the "Why are there still monkeys" argument.

Someone get me a kitten...
Actually I made the "monkey motive to man" as a sarcastic remark..glad u found humor but bck to reality! The theory Darwin used is actually older than he himself..LOL..the Ancient Egyptians (and other Northern African Tribes) passed on this theory called "Tamahu" or created devils..anyway!..you yourself can not make sense of why did Europeans believe the Earth was flat but Africans told them Earth is round and Africans did not have a craft to take them above to view the landscape themselves?? Hmmm SMH!! Who told them? Ancient maps "showing" land mass configures around the globe but NO craft to view it..hmmm SMH (again)..Who told them? Europeans "thought" the Earth was the center of our universe until Egypt taught them differently..again I ask, who told the Egyptians and not jus told them but left behind inscriptions/heirglyphs marking the solar system yet again w/ no means to fly!! How did they know this fact??? Quit the denial..things that mankind hv simply accepted as their own invention or accredited to mankind ingenuity was NOT theirs but given by WHO
Phaed

Carencro, LA

#4454 Dec 14, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>You are insane, your syntax is evidence of this as well as your pretty outdated and childish assertions. There are groups who have replicated how both Stonehenge and the pyramids were built, successfully, using nothing but wood logs, and ropes. You need to research something just a little bit before saying "I don't know how they did it, therefore god/aliens."
Wood logs & rope? Well I'll b damn..again you're using foolish items in comparison to stones weighing 100 tons!! That's like me saying I cn build a replica of The London Bridge all by myself using legos
Phaed

Carencro, LA

#4455 Dec 14, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>You are insane, your syntax is evidence of this as well as your pretty outdated and childish assertions. There are groups who have replicated how both Stonehenge and the pyramids were built, successfully, using nothing but wood logs, and ropes. You need to research something just a little bit before saying "I don't know how they did it, therefore god/aliens."
How did the ancient inhabitants give human history an outsider-view of our planet without ability to fly? Or rise above to look down at Earth as we do today w/ satellites..how did these human civilizations know anything about astrological studies withOUT a telescope? No it is you that's insane to NOT push your own understanding..these ppl did not possess a telescope w/ ability to see the Sirius system which our own scientist just recently were able to verify as factual and does exist!!
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#4456 Dec 14, 2012
Phaed wrote:
<quoted text>
Wood logs & rope? Well I'll b damn..again you're using foolish items in comparison to stones weighing 100 tons!!
They DIDN'T weigh 100 tons, The blocks weighed 2.5 tons, or like a large truck. Could you and a hundred friends move a large truck if you had to?
Phaed

Carencro, LA

#4457 Dec 14, 2012
I thought this thread was for the more advanced-thinkers! But so far I'm debating a wall made of paper, not bricks..does any participant on this thread care to explain how primitive cultures were able to hand down information on a topic they (humans) had NO means or way to prove themselves and we today are just grazing the surface? Anyone..it's sad to be on the inside looking out when there are civilizations that have looked from the outside inward at us!! Unbelievable
Phaed

Carencro, LA

#4458 Dec 14, 2012
The Ancient Enigma - Moving the Megaliths
by Will Hart
Generations of explorers, archaeologists, historians, engineers and tourists have puzzled over one the great mysteries of ancient prehistory. At its core this incredible anomaly is quite simple.

How did ancient cultures move 100, 200 and even 400-ton blocks of stone using primitive tools and methods?

Not only move them, but also accurately position them to tight tolerances. The question is simple; the problem is complex.

I think we need to look at the issues with a modern perspective in the context of what our heavy equipment is capable of today to really get a grip on what kind of challenge we are discussing.

Too often I read descriptions of how the Great Pyramid was built or how the ancient builders managed the megalithic stones in Peru that gloss right over the magnitude of these accomplishments. Cutting right to the chase, a modern locomotive engine weighs 200 tons.
Take that steel leviathan off the track and give a large team of men some ropes and let's see how far they can pull it or if they can lift it up at all. The average 18-wheel tractor- trailer is rated to about a 20-ton capacity. Our highways have a legal load-limit of 40 tons, anything over that has to get special permits.

I have come to realize after doing years of study of the ancient megalithic sites and modern technological capabilities that most people that write on these topics have not done their homework.

Many archaeologists and historians either skip over these problems or they dance around the real issues and simply give some unsupported scenario of how these massive blocks of stone were transported and lifted.

There is an unavoidable physical problem that engineers are very aware of and that is the density and relative compactness of stone versus the manpower needed to exert enough force to move or lift it. The two simply do not go together. Even if we scale things way down the problem does not go away.

Let's take the average 2.5-ton limestone building block that was used to construct the core of the Great Pyramid. The block would be about four-foot long, three high and three feet deep. How many men can be positioned around it?

I would say no more than eight. Unfortunately, eight men cannot lift up 4,500 lbs. Pulleys and hoists were unknown in the pyramid building era.

This poses a very simple and practical construction problem. It only grows worse as we raise the tonnage and the vertical lift.

How did the Egyptians lift 100-ton blocks up forty feet in the air to position them in the Sphinx temple? In addition, how did the Incas so carefully lift up and position their massive polygonal blocks so that they fit like a jigsaw puzzle?

There is an equally serious difficulty that precedes the transport and lifting of megaliths that takes place in the quarry. The only tools the ancient Egyptians had were very small copper chisels and rounded hammer-stones. The inflexible and insurmountable problem that the Great Pyramid presents is the fact that 43 blocks of granite weighing from 30 to 70 tons were quarried, lifted out of the bedrock, transported 500 miles and raised 150 vertical feet to the King's Chamber.
Phaed

Carencro, LA

#4459 Dec 14, 2012
Continuation-----

Several years ago Egyptologist Mark Lehner spent five hours in the Aswan quarry with a hammer-stone pounding against the granite bedrock (copper is too soft to cut granite).

He was trying to prove that the ancient tools could do the job. He managed to excavate a one-foot square hole one-inch deep for his efforts. The granite blocks in the King's Chamber were 17 feet long and the trench that had to be dug around to them was about 8 feet deep. No one has ever shown how these megaliths were undercut and lifted out of the quarry.

These were relatively small blocks compared to the great obelisks that were quarried, transported and then raised up thousands of years ago, many of which still stand. They weigh from 100 to 350 tons. There isn't an archaeologist or engineer that has the slightest idea how this was done.

Our largest modern day, heavy-duty cranes are rated from 100 to 300 tons. We have custom cranes that can lift up to 500 tons.

Anyone that believes manpower alone could have moved these monstrous blocks of stone using ropes and manpower is living in a fantasy world.
In fact, Lehner set up an experiment to see if it was possible to quarry, move and lift an obelisk weighing one-tenth of what the largest Egyptian obelisks weighed. It was filmed by NOVA and was an utter failure.

The team's master stonemason could not quarry the 35-ton obelisk so a bulldozer was called in. They could not move it, a truck was called in. These failures represent a turning a point in the long-standing debate.

Lehner actually confirmed what a Japanese team funded by Nissan had already learned in 1979, it is not possible to duplicate what the ancients did using primitive tools and methods.

Team Nissan was trying to prove something and they were very confident. But when they could not begin to excavate the blocks of stone they planned on using for their small scale-model of the Great Pyramid with ancient tools they turned to jackhammers.

When they tried to ferry the blocks they quarried across the river on a primitive barge, the stones sank. When a boat got them across the river they discovered that the sledges sank in the sand. They called trucks in to move the blocks to the site.

Once at the site they could not manipulate the blocks into place and found, to their ultimate embarrassment, that they could not bring the four walls together into an apex despite the deployment of helicopters.
This debate has matured and moved along. It is time for those that believe they have the solution and can prove that the ancients used primitive tools and methods to step up to the plate. We need to dispose of this obsolete thinking and move on to more realistic solutions!
Phaed

Carencro, LA

#4460 Dec 14, 2012
What brought me to look into this matter..I'm a certified crane operator w/ a 200 ton limit license!! So I know how heave equipment works
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#4461 Dec 14, 2012
Phaed wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually I made the "monkey motive to man" as a sarcastic remark..glad u found humor but bck to reality! The theory Darwin used is actually older than he himself..LOL..the Ancient Egyptians (and other Northern African Tribes) passed on this theory called "Tamahu" or created devils..anyway!..you yourself can not make sense of why did Europeans believe the Earth was flat but Africans told them Earth is round and Africans did not have a craft to take them above to view the landscape themselves?? Hmmm SMH!!
They used math and star observations to figure out the Earth was not flat.
Phaed wrote:
Who told them? Ancient maps "showing" land mass configures around the globe but NO craft to view it..hmmm SMH (again)..Who told them?
Sorry, I don't buy that they were accurate. Also keep in mind that humans have been across the globe for thousands of years, and back before the last ice age certain parts of the Arctic could have had less ice cover, which could explain some maps that show land masses that differ from the ice caps we see today. Also sailors figured it out as the navigated the globe and realised that the constellations gradually changed as they changed latitude. That doesn't even need complex math or astronomical observations - it's just a simple grasp that the Earth was a ball, even though they didn't know exactly how big.

It's certainly far more reasonable than alien spaceships.
Phaed wrote:
Europeans "thought" the Earth was the center of our universe until Egypt taught them differently..again I ask, who told the Egyptians and not jus told them but left behind inscriptions/heirglyphs marking the solar system yet again w/ no means to fly!! How did they know this fact???
I certainly don't recall this. Do you have a genuine pic of ancient Egyptian heiroglyphics showing an accurate solar system? Not sure what the Egyptians thought about the Earth being the center of the universe. It's quite possible they thought the sun was, since the sun was the King of the Gods, Ra.
Phaed wrote:
Quit the denial..things that mankind hv simply accepted as their own invention or accredited to mankind ingenuity was NOT theirs but given by WHO
Learning and figuring stuff out. That IS why the pyramids show a learning curve when looked at in date order. For example the one at Saqqara, then the Snofru pyramid.

The problem is you're reading too much Hancock or Von-Daniken. Entertaining they may be, but not really what you could call objective.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 6 min Thinking 226,606
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 37 min Eman 21,541
Becoming a parent changed everything. 1 hr Givemeliberty 1
Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 2 hr greymouser 5,922
It seems there are more Atheists in the Christi... (Jun '13) 2 hr Mikko 18
Atheists forgetting the meaning of freedom 2 hr Mikko 63
Our world came from nothing? 11 hr Thinking 438
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••