i don't necessarily believe in aliens as in "green people", but to have other conscious species in some shape or form somewhere in the universe is not within the realm of impossibility. actually it's a probability. modern science supports multiverse theory... and how is that not anymore far-fetched than a possibility of extra terrestrial knowledge being present on earth. (actually as far i can understand multiverse, alien contact is a definite outcome in one of the "universes"). but anyway... that's too far beyond my comprehension. and that is what modern science seems to agree on. to me actually, more interesting is the harvesting of free energy and some of the relevant lost knowledge. sonic energy is not anything new. there are sonic weapons in existence today. so, why can't the sound wave be harvested in a positive manner i.e. levitating objects, not destroying them? as a matter of fact on a small scale acoustic levitation has already been proven. if everything does vibrate (string theory -- modern science), then surely a vibration of one object will have an affect on the vibration of another. however, we don't know of all the possibilities just yet. also, what do you mean "but after many years of looking into it I have found most "Evidence" ..." ... did you go to ancient ruins sites (especially the ones in south africa, which he refers to)... and study the rock formations and artifacts? are you an archaeologist? or you mean you watched some youtube videos?
Science in general doesn't support the multiverse theory. It's a theory that people have where they take bits n pieces of real data to back it up. Ever since that first episode of Cosmos, people have been going on n on bout the multiverse.. when it is only a theory with the same amount of evidence as the theory of god, ancient aliens, and the tooth fairy. As for going after someone because they didn't actually visit a site firsthand, that's silly. There's plenty of info on the internet to comb through, you just have to do it with an actual open mind. Most people claiming they do or telling others to open their mind usually don't. They fall into this weird category where they try forcing an open mind n end up with a closed one. There was a claim made that an old ruin had a carving of a living dinosaur, and it looked plausible.. until you looked at the site in full. The parts of the carving they ascribed to being the dinosaur were the same parts on just bout all the other carvings of other animals and plants. It was decoration and through aging looked like it could of been a dinosaur, but using common sense would tell you its not. That's the beauty (and curse) of the internet. That's all the ancient alien theories do, they pick out bit n pieces of real data that line up with their theory while ignoring (not telling you the viewer) the rest, the bigger picture. When you legitimately open you mind and take a step back to look at the big picture, you'll see the AA theories are junk. Just like many of us have done years ago. Since the theory is still around, you'll always have people like yourself who will get sucked into it on a constant basis. That's why we negate it, not for our benefit.. least not for me. 10 years from now you'll probably be on here n some youngster will be going on about ancient aliens and you'll get to respond with "I used to believe that, but if you open your mind to the bigger picture, you'd see that its junk."
well, it's not about the aliens again.. it's about things that are interesting and unknown. if you have all your answers, please move on. and i absolutely do not make any claims of having looked into the evidence for years. i posted a link to a presentation by an archaeologist. i haven't been to giza or the ruins in south africa? have you? i have seen the coral castle in FL, it does make you wonder. to say that it makes sense to claim that you've done significant research on the subject because you've read information on the internet for a long while, is silly, honestly.
Again, pointing out that a person hasn't actually been to the site is pointless. You said yourself you haven't gone, yet you're buying into this guy's theory.. Sure, he might have gone personally, but so has a ton of other people in the scientific community who post their findings just like him. The actual findings based on the scientific method don't back up his theory, at all. All he is doing is showing you the pieces that fit while leaving out the rest.
well that's exactly what i mean... i will listen to this guy because he is the one who has been there and his findings are coherently presented. why should i value somebody's opinion who watched another youtube documentary over an archaeologist who had visited the site? as to your point about other findings regarding these south african ruins, please find me another explanation to the phenomena he described and the whole mystery of the ruins and then we can have an intelligent discussion.
I knew there was something I was forgetting.. See, I did watch this video awhile back n nothing stood out as being accurate. So I did some digging then n guess what, the dude is not an archeologist. Go ahead and look him up, he is a songwriter and author. Meaning he is nothing more than an amateur archeologist at best.. That's who you're getting your info from, a songwriter. You won't find anything online about where he studied archeology professionally.. cause he never did. All he did was went off of what Sitchin said in his books and ran with it.
yes, i googled him too. thanks. seems like he spent a lot of time actually visiting the place and doing research and graduating with one degree and pursuing another career for years, is nothing new. again, do you have a better more reasonable explanation to what he has presented? if so, i'm very open minded to hear it.
Well when you can present some data from an actual archeologist, then I'll take a look at it. This guy isn't.. I've studied animals n insects my entire life, that doesn't make me a biologist. You kept bringing up that he is an archeologist as part of your point, so now I can point out that he isn't one. Like I said earlier, look at findings provided by actual archeologists and the bigger picture will become clearer. Also, he never professionally studied in archeology.. so he never received a degree in that. This guy is not an archeologist, plain and simple. It'd be like learning physics from Elton John.
no it's not the same as learning physics from elton john. (although i don't know maybe he knows a lot about physics). now you want to argue semantics? if the person spends 20-odd years doing research, visiting sites and excavations, studying materials by other researches, recording and compiling data, reviewing artifacts and making peer presentations.. then yes, i consider him to be an archaeologist (without a degree in archaeology). how does that make him any less real? just like if someone spent 20 years composing music and teaching it, but graduated with a marketing degree is not a real musician? someone who graduated with a finance degree and has worked for most of his life in real estate, is not a real estate professional anymore? why are you even arguing about this?
Dude these AA guys make claims like "theres no way X could happen" but then you read a real archaelogists findings and there are several reasonable explanations as to how and why X happened. Seriously look into anything that guy says it's all half truths and misrepresentations.
Dude he claims aliens genetically engineered us at a ruin in africa, with no evidence other than african tribes had a myth that is where humans came from. He also quoted the bible as a source for why aliens or the "gods" love gold He just cherry picks info without looking at the context of the sources of his info
He also claims to have "conclusive evidence" that the elohim in the bible are aliens. Never does he show that "conclusive evidence" just lots of speculations and assertions. The bible is not a good source for scientific inquiry. Don't you see? This guy just throws out bits and pieces hoping something will stick.
you picked "the best" pieces of course... and also took them out of context. he does not use bible as a scientific reference, he uses it to note certain patterns observed in our history. (i.e. need/love for gold).
What about south african ruins? I'm sure they exist. I just doubt there's any real evidence aliens had something to do with them
You can't seem to provide anything so what am I gonna do? Point to a single piece of evidence of aliens or magic or whatever you think this guy is proving.
Because the guy is a fraud.. there's no semantics about it. You've been duped by a shit theory from a fraud who was duped by another fraud. It's a vicious cycle that I can't break for you, you have to take the time to do it by studying real data from real professionals. Tell me, have you even taken the time to investigate his claims? If he is saying the humans were this n that, google this n that and see for yourself. I can promise you that if you took the time to do it, you'd see for yourself. I understand that its time consuming, that's why other people who've done it weigh in and tell you that its junk n to keep looking. I'm all about people knowing real facts and data, but its better for the individual to study n learn themselves. This guy, Sitchin, and pretty much all the "professionals" on Ancient Aliens don't actually have degrees in related fields. They never received legit education on it, just have had a personal interest in it. No joke, if the History Channel asked to interview you on AA, when it'd air you'd have some false title like "expert on human history" below your name. If they say humans were here X amount of years ago, look it up and see for yourself. When you're young and learning new things, your parents tell you to not touch the hot stove cause you'll get burnt. You'll either touch it to find out for yourself or say "ok" and not touch it. I'm the type of person who'd touch it, with the way you're portraying yourself here, you'd be the type to say "ok" and not. Learn for yourself.. I'm not saying to blindly believe a professional just cause they're a professional, but you can get an idea on the general consensus from multiple sources. Now if you can convince me that you've attempted to scrutinize his claims for yourself and are still stumped, ask for input.. its just a person can't be helped if they're not helping themselves. I don't believe you are.
you said there is an actual archaeological explanation. i.e. who built them? why? when? .. some theories... i didn't find any. the only reference i found was what he said in his presentation. that current theory is that these ruins were dwellings... but there are no doors nor windows... nor were there any human remains or fossils found around those areas. do you have a better suggestion? please share.
again with the aliens. if that's all you get out of this, then what's the point of the conversation. no these people don't have a degree in "alienology" ... i don't know what you are getting at. yes i did scrutinize his claims and i have no explanation for his findings.
type in michael tellinger debunked to google and you'll find a ton of reasons why his claims are BS seriously? No doors or windows means it was aliens? :lol: What evidence is there for aliens at this place? None. It's all speculation based on nothing.