Alternative Theories about Human Development

[Sionnach Glic]

I'm sure it has.
I'm also sure it was laughed at.

[Mikey]

Back once more into the fray...

OK. Most flood/destruction myths talk about the near-total decimation of the local human populace, not about a different race or group. There is a Greek myth that posits the four ages of human-like creatures, but I've seen no analog.

And on megaliths - if somebody other than the ancient Celts constructed the great megaliths at Caerlon (sp?), Stonehenge, etc., than why do (1) they exhibit the same decoration patterns and design (including astronomical) features as human, Celtic tombs and edifices; and (2) do those structures have such a place in the folklore of those people? Yes, I know you're going to tell me about the similarity between northern European neolithic stone circles and paleolithic circles from North America; however, it only stands to reason that the design that worked in one place is the same design that worked in another. There's only one shape that is a circle, after all. And the diversity in the other types of megaliths in northern Europe is not duplicated elsewhere.

[Granitehewer]

i don't want to wade in with my two penneth about this debate, as am passionate about history, and the natural sciences, so will get a little hysterical, but i would like to say, that i'm proud of most of the posters here, for respecting or at least tolerating the views of others,and responding adequately with counter points etc, its really refreshing

[Monroe]

That's becuase there is nothing written about them, or by them.
I wonder why that is...

There's plenty written about them. Just not of them. I would point to the burning of the Library of Alexandria as the likely reason.

Pyramids =/= skyscrapers.

I never said they had skyscrapers or cars or airplanes or space ships. I said they were equal to us in some reguards such as building and mathematics. You're assuming they had other things like us.

They didn't just pull this all out of nowhere. They worked on exiting knowledge of other civilisations.

So who was around before the Sumerians that had advanced knowledge of mathematics and sciences? Sumerians claim that the Neflim taught them as the 12th planet states.

Then it shouldn't have been able to wipe out a civilisation which you claimed was equal to us.

Equal to us in some reguards such as building. Thing about Atlantis is that the story keeps getting more and more advanced as humans become more and more advanced. Rome was equal to us in concrete saying that doesn't mean that they had space ships.

So what?
My point, if you missed it, is that similar stories invariably crop up among various civilisations. I could go and look at 5,000 BCE and probably find groups of civilisations who had similar myths. This proves nothing.

Its like having independent eyewitneses in a court of law.

Maybe where you come from, but over here it is worth something.

History degrees mean you had some classes in history you teach what was taught to you. Now maybe if it was Palentology or Archeology that would mean more. But unless you do research in this kind of field it doesn't mean much.

On matters of history, yes they do know what they're talking about.
And its quite clear that this guy hasn't a clue.

That's really funny cause it was a history teacher that got me involved in this way back when

Than why did this wipe out a civilisation which you claimed was equal to us?

Here's what I said:
"Mankind developed into a technological Empire with building technology surpassing the ancient Romans, and with some technology surpassing what we have today."
I didn't mention space ships, jet planes or any of that crap. In posts later on I clarify what I meant.

So? While this would acount for the loss of a primitive civilisation, it would not kill off a civilisation which was equal to us.

I didn't say they were equal. I said they had amazing building and mathematics..

The Victorian Period was the 19th century give or take correct? The New England style was the 19th century correct? OKay now.

Isn't New England a place?

Its a building style in this context.

1) You could find plenty of such monuments that weren't built around that time.
2) The human race progressed, and moved past such things some time after that era.
3) Why would an advanced civilisation waste time teaching primatives to build impressive tombs?

The knowledge of how to build was something that the survivors had. Over the generations the knowledge was slowly lost. Think of it this way, your Federation vessel crash lands on a unexplored planet. All your technology is lost. First generation will know how to do some things that every one knows how to do, build irrigation that kind of stuff. Second generation will learn only the important things to survive. Third generation will not have the same teachings. By the 4th generation you're basically back to a stone age culture. This would explain the more primitive the monuments get the further forward in time. Why the Great Pyramids are older than the tiny ones spread throughout Egypt yet vastly better built.

1) So? It did belong to him.
2) And I'm talking about most pyramids, not one in particular.

I'm only meaning the Great Pyramids of Giza.
My house belongs to me but I didn't build it. Wouldn't something as vast as the Pyramids be talked about while being built? Talk about a propaganda tool.

So? Someone goofed up with the spelling. I've done that plenty of times.

Different society but as growing up learning how to be a scribe would you misspell your god-on-earth's name? Especially since its only like 3 or 4 Egyptian 'letters' long. Seems unlikely.

Source?

Its been on a lot of history channel documentries.
You could really do a lot of these google searches: http://jcolavito.tripod.com/lostcivilizations/id10.html
http://www.rickrichards.com/egypt/Egypt6.htm
http://www.kitombo.com/e/sue/0325.html
and so on.

The walls of houses weren't covered in heiroglyphics. There's no reason a tomb should be, either. It's not a noticeboard.

There's no reason to correct. But look at the inside of the tombs of the other dynasties and other Kings of Egypt.
http://www.edina.k12.mn.us/cornelia/cla ... tstomb.jpg
They tell the story of the King's life, where he's going to go in the afterlife, his servants that were killed with him, things like that.

It dosen't count, becuase the guy is either a complete liar, or has no idea what he's talking about.
So, no he dosen't count.

Because he doesn't agree with you? Several of these sources have spent a life time researching this topic but because they disagree with your job you learned at a university with their job they learned from real world research they're wrong no questions asked? Not even a little bit of a possibity that they could be correct?

You mean the civilisation which you claimed was equal to us?

No, the one you claimed was.

No, Troy is real becuase it exists. Atlantis has never been proved to exit at all.

Up until that Arthur guy discovered it nearly all historians agreed it wasn't real.

Define 'ancient', and how deep down they were.

Read the Forbidden Archelogy book. Or simply go to Barns and Noble and flip open to the back its got a timeline. I don't have the book anymore so I can't quote specific parts. But it is a good book.

1) The sun isn't a planet, so they did get that wrong.
2) I have no idea about what you mean when you say 'gravity unknown', so I'll leave that to someone else.
3) So they made a good guess. I could find plenty more civilisation who guessed wrongly.

Their word for Planet and Heavenly Body were the same.
And you're right you can find plenty more civilizations that guessed wrong. Most did. Which is the point of the argument... Nearly all said 5 planets, or seven if you use the translation Heavenly Bodies.

Exactly, so they probably took a good guess, and got lucky.

Yep, and these Africans: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogon#Controversy guessed lucky too.

I'm almost certain that humans were the first race he made.
Though my knowledge on the Bible is low, and mostly consists of what I remember from when I was young.

Its in like the first one or two pages of Genesis.. if someone has a bible, I sure don't.

Which is incredibly stupid if you want to keep a hold on the race.

Its what parents do.

So, they waited millions of years for humans to develop to the point where we would be a threat? That's incredibly stupid.
And I wonder why they don't return our calls, or probes...

12th Planet theory was 250k years. They have longer life spans. We'll find out in our life time what that gravity distortion is.

Why 2012? What's so special about then?

Common end of the age period for many ancient cultures. December 21st to be more exact. Many people think of this as the end of the world, its really suppose to just be the end of an age.

The History Chanel tends not to show conspiracy documentaries on a regular basis.

Reason I put the alien stuff in the far out there catagory. But there is math involved. Its kind of neat.

Why should I? You are the one making these claims, so you must back them up. I'm not about to research your own arguments for you.

I cited my material. As a reader of my argument its up to you to look up the books. If I only had internet sources that'd be very suspicious wouldn't it? All good papers rely heavily on books so I posted books.

So there are some odd facts. Whoop-de-doo.

That don't fit at all with the current theory. Some don't fit with any theory actually but they do lean more towards the Atlantis theories.

Provide evidence. And 'go read this book' isn't evidence.

I cited the book, if you want me to cite something else than sorry
http://www.forbiddenarcheology.com/
Oh I found the spheres I was talking about earlier:
http://www.forbiddenarcheology.com/groovy.jpg

No, I don't know about them. As I said, my knowledge of geology and geography is low.

http://www.forbiddenarcheology.com/anomalous.htm
Ok makes sense why I didnt find it on google I was way off. 2.8 billion years not 3.8 billion years.

And who runs that contest? And is it one of those rigged ones, like that guy who claimed he would give a million dollers to someone who could prove evolution, but was completely dishonest about the whole thing?

Beats me but the letters 600 million years old are really cool.

[Monroe]

Back once more into the fray...

OK. Most flood/destruction myths talk about the near-total decimation of the local human populace, not about a different race or group. There is a Greek myth that posits the four ages of human-like creatures, but I've seen no analog.

And on megaliths - if somebody other than the ancient Celts constructed the great megaliths at Caerlon (sp?), Stonehenge, etc., than why do (1) they exhibit the same decoration patterns and design (including astronomical) features as human, Celtic tombs and edifices; and (2) do those structures have such a place in the folklore of those people? Yes, I know you're going to tell me about the similarity between northern European neolithic stone circles and paleolithic circles from North America; however, it only stands to reason that the design that worked in one place is the same design that worked in another. There's only one shape that is a circle, after all. And the diversity in the other types of megaliths in northern Europe is not duplicated elsewhere.

Best I could come up with that was they were either built beforehand and the primitive humans thought they were magical which is why festivals were around them or they were built by Atlantean survivors which eventually were assimilated into the local culture, taught them farming that kind of thing. Or the current theory. I personally don't hold Stonehenge in teh same reguard as the tropical monuments. Sure their an amazing accomplishment or early man but they lack all the awesome mathematical equations built into the Pyramids, Indus River Valley civilization, South American ruins and so on. They also don't use the same massonary techniques such as motor and finely crafted huge stones.

[Monroe]

Neat video that talks about the equal in some reguards between today and yesterday:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRDy31O9czs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZqDaaOq ... ed&search=

Do that with modern technology in building.

[Mikey]

Best I could come up with that was they were either built beforehand and the primitive humans thought they were magical which is why festivals were around them or they were built by Atlantean survivors which eventually were assimilated into the local culture, taught them farming that kind of thing. Or the current theory. I personally don't hold Stonehenge in teh same reguard as the tropical monuments. Sure their an amazing accomplishment or early man but they lack all the awesome mathematical equations built into the Pyramids, Indus River Valley civilization, South American ruins and so on. They also don't use the same massonary techniques such as motor and finely crafted huge stones.

Those megaliths - Caerleon (sp.?) et. al. - are of the same age or younger than the tombs and homes built with similar design features. And their accuracy in astronomical predictions is phenomenal - especially the tomb in Ireland which Rochey had mentioned, and I have yet to see but have read about. Saying that they don't have the same level of mathematics is incorrect - the mathematics is simply directed in a different direction, and is a testament to those peoples' religious devotion.

And if by Indus River civilization you mean Harappan - and by S. American you mean Inca - you have incorrect info on building techniques. The Harappans used mortarless mud brick, and the Incans used mortarless masonry... impressive, yes, but mortarless. And why, to use this last example, must we attribute some outside nebulous entity with "helping" when we see those impressive feats of architecture or mathematics?

[Monroe]

Those megaliths - Caerleon (sp.?) et. al. - are of the same age or younger than the tombs and homes built with similar design features. And their accuracy in astronomical predictions is phenomenal - especially the tomb in Ireland which Rochey had mentioned, and I have yet to see but have read about. Saying that they don't have the same level of mathematics is incorrect - the mathematics is simply directed in a different direction, and is a testament to those peoples' religious devotion.

Yeah I don't know much about the Celtic ruins. For some reason they never really stood out to me.

And if by Indus River civilization you mean Harappan - and by S. American you mean Inca - you have incorrect info on building techniques. The Harappans used mortarless mud brick, and the Incans used mortarless masonry... impressive, yes, but mortarless. And why, to use this last example, must we attribute some outside nebulous entity with "helping" when we see those impressive feats of architecture or mathematics?

Yeah mortar was the wrong word. They used metal smelted together and reformed between bricks. That's what I meant. Not sure what the Indus' name is. I've just always heard it called the Indus River Valley civilization in books since its a really ancient civilization but not much is known about them.

[Sionnach Glic]

There's plenty written about them. Just not of them.

No, there are plenty of myths about an advanced culture. Nearly every mythology has that, whether they were created ten thousand years ago, or ten years ago. It's a common and simple story, and in no way does it prove the existance of this race.
I could find many mythologies that feature talking snakes. Does this mean that snakes actualy talk? Nope.

I would point to the burning of the Library of Alexandria as the likely reason.

Oh, so everything ever written by them just happened to be there?
While possible, its a huge stretch.

I never said they had skyscrapers or cars or airplanes or space ships. I said they were equal to us in some reguards such as building and mathematics. You're assuming they had other things like us.

You said, in your very first post, that they had technology equal to us.
Are you conceeding this?

Its like having independent eyewitneses in a court of law.

No, its more like having a dozen different eye witnesses who are all saying something different.
And again, the fact remains that I could go and look at 5,000 BCE and probably find groups of civilisations who had similar myths.

History degrees mean *snip*

Our of curiosity, what country are you from?

I said they had amazing building and mathematics..

Well whoop-de-doo for them.
We know they were good builders, we know they had advanced maths. So what?

The knowledge of how to build was something that the survivors had.
*snip*

While this answered number 2, it dosen't adress number one or three.

I'm only meaning the Great Pyramids of Giza.

There's the problem. You are fixating on one thing which is slightly different from the others. This means nothing, when the fact remains that, as a whole, my point stands.

My house belongs to me but I didn't build it. Wouldn't something as vast as the Pyramids be talked about while being built?

1) Neither did he.
2) They were talked about when they were being built. This dosen't mean they have to plaster writing all over it.

Different society but as growing up learning how to be a scribe would you misspell your god-on-earth's name?

As I said, its possible he just goofed up. There are probably plenty of instances in that tomb where the name was spelled fine.

There's no reason to correct. But look at the inside of the tombs of the other dynasties and other Kings of Egypt.

Again, so what? What does this prove?

Because he doesn't agree with you?

No, becuase he blatantly lied about pyramids not containing heiroglyphics.
This shows he is dishonest, and I have no reason to accept what he says as truth.

Up until that Arthur guy discovered it nearly all historians agreed it wasn't real.

And for a good reason. There was no evidence of it existing. Then they found evidence.
Atlantis has no evidence of existing, bar various myths relating to an advanced civilisation. Which could be anything.

Read the Forbidden Archelogy book. Or simply go to Barns and Noble and flip open to the back its got a timeline.

No. I am not about to do your research for you, nor am I about to go traipsing round every bookshop in Dublin looking for a book I have never heard of and have no interest in reading.

And you're right you can find plenty more civilizations that guessed wrong. Most did. Which is the point of the argument... Nearly all said 5 planets, or seven if you use the translation Heavenly Bodies.

So, becuase one civilisation guessed right, this must naturaly point to an advanced alien race out there?

Yep, and these Africans: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogon#Controversy guessed lucky too.

Whoop-de-doo for them.

Its what parents do.

1) I don't know about you, but my parents didn't try to keep me in line with religion.
2) Keeping one child in line =/= keeping an entire species in line. The fact remains that it was an incredibly stupid way of doing things.

12th Planet theory was 250k years. They have longer life spans. We'll find out in our life time what that gravity distortion is.

How does this refute any of my points?
I point out that they were incredibly stupid in letting humans develop to the point where we could be a threat to them. Which is true.
I also pointed out that none of our probes ever noticed them, nor did we ever pick up any transmisions from there.

Also, it is irrelevant if they have longer life spans. Can they really live for longer than 250K years? That would be virtualy impossible. And 250K years is still 250K years, they will still notice the time passing.

I cited my material. As a reader of my argument its up to you to look up the books.

Wrong. You are making the claims, ergo you must back them up. Saying 'go read this book' isn't backing it up, if you want to back them up using the book, then post excerpts of it.

[Mikey]

They used metal smelted together and reformed between bricks.

Who did that? Not the Inca, not the Harappans... in fact, nobody that I recall.

[Monroe]

Oh, so everything ever written by them just happened to be there?
While possible, its a huge stretch.

It was the largest cache of ancient lterature in the world.

You said, in your very first post, that they had technology equal to us.
Are you conceeding this?

Some technology...

No, its more like having a dozen different eye witnesses who are all saying something different.
And again, the fact remains that I could go and look at 5,000 BCE and probably find groups of civilisations who had similar myths.

That's kind of the point you could go back to 5k BCE and have similiar points. And above you just said they were saying the same thing. There are slight differences in them as thousands of years will do that. Its like you want it both ways. Dozens of myths saying the same thing doesn't prove anything because there's no documented findings of anyone saying anything?

Our of curiosity, what country are you from?

Doesn't matter too much but I'm from the US.

While this answered number 2, it dosen't adress number one or three.

Well #1 isn't a question or really anything that I can respond to. You said something obvious that the Atlantean theory agrees with and I said how they would be related if the survivors slowly lost their expertise as time went on. And #3 was made kind of irrelavent because I said that they were assimilated into the culture..

There's the problem. You are fixating on one thing which is slightly different from the others. This means nothing, when the fact remains that, as a whole, my point stands.

There's a reason why I'm focusing on the Giza Complex. Its cause in this theory the Egyptians didn't build that. Hell there is water erosion on the Great Spynx, when could the Egyptians have been in an environment that had water erosion.

1) Neither did he.
2) They were talked about when they were being built. This dosen't mean they have to plaster writing all over it.

The other Kings who built Pyramids in the later dynasties said they built them for their tombs. Khufu never said that.
Funny for #2 cause building of the pyramid would be a good story to line some of the walls of the Pyramid with.

As I said, its possible he just goofed up. There are probably plenty of instances in that tomb where the name was spelled fine.

Source?

"There's no reason to correct. But look at the inside of the tombs of the other dynasties and other Kings of Egypt."

Again, so what? What does this prove?

You serously missed the point? o.o
All the tombs we know the Egyptians made are coverd in hieroglyphs but the Great Pyramids aren't. Hmm..

No, becuase he blatantly lied about pyramids not containing heiroglyphics.
This shows he is dishonest, and I have no reason to accept what he says as truth.

Okay since you were there and all post some pictures of the Hieroglpyic covered walls of the Great Pyramid.

And for a good reason. There was no evidence of it existing. Then they found evidence.
Atlantis has no evidence of existing, bar various myths relating to an advanced civilisation. Which could be anything.

Okay so we're in agreement. Atlantis has not been found yet with certainty so no one should say with certainty that it existed. Its a good thing the guys who discovered Troy weren't so close minded.

No. I am not about to do your research for you, nor am I about to go traipsing round every bookshop in Dublin looking for a book I have never heard of and have no interest in reading.

Don't question my sources if you're unable to look them up.

So, becuase one civilisation guessed right, this must naturaly point to an advanced alien race out there?

How does a race know about all the planets out there and their orbits without having some technology that they 'shouldn't' have? We know from the way they built their monuments they didn't guess they had scientific and mathematical reasons for everything, why would they guess on something as important as their pantheon?

Yep, and these Africans: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogon#Controversy guessed lucky too.

Whoop-de-doo for them.

Yes, ignore what you can't answer intelligently to.

1) I don't know about you, but my parents didn't try to keep me in line with religion.
2) Keeping one child in line =/= keeping an entire species in line. The fact remains that it was an incredibly stupid way of doing things.

Hey I'm just telling you what that theory says.
And it kind of makes sense if you make a race to mine and use as sexual toys then your civilization has a major war and the new power decides its inhumane to do that. You slacken your power over the subject race to allow them to evolve some on their own where eventually they can be like brothers.

Personally I think the best possibilty of alien involvement would have to have come from Sirius and the 12th planet is just a dead planet or brown dwarf.

Also, it is irrelevant if they have longer life spans. Can they really live for longer than 250K years? That would be virtualy impossible. And 250K years is still 250K years, they will still notice the time passing.

That point was to show that they would be very far thinking. We're close to immortality with today's technology of gene manipulation. I for one hope one day we'll be able to have virtual immortality.

Wrong. You are making the claims, ergo you must back them up. Saying 'go read this book' isn't backing it up, if you want to back them up using the book, then post excerpts of it.

That you may have to wait on. I did post plenty of links to the author's site that you didn't even try to explain. I'm currious about how you think a 200,000 year old coin landed in north america or you simply going to write off the amazing relics found?

[Monroe]

They used metal smelted together and reformed between bricks.

Who did that? Not the Inca, not the Harappans... in fact, nobody that I recall.

It was the race that lived around Lake Titicaca that the Inca Empire eventually assimilated.

[Mikey]

It was the race that lived around Lake Titicaca that the Inca Empire eventually assimilated.

So one extraordiarily small and isolated instance relates to a worldwide super-power how, exactly?

[Monroe]

Egyptians too. Sorry getting ready for work, need to jet for 9 hours. I didn't have time to read this article but it said on the search engine someting about metal staples in Egypt and Tiahuanaco. I'll post a better source or two when I get back.

http://www.viewzone.com/tia.html

[Aaron]

There's a reason why I'm focusing on the Giza Complex. Its cause in this theory the Egyptians didn't build that. Hell there is water erosion on the Great Spynx, when could the Egyptians have been in an environment that had water erosion.

You do know that it does actually rain in Egypt right? They even have a wet season. Being in a desert does not equal no rainfall.