UFOs - The Disclosure Project:Sirius

[RichLB]

What on earth (or space) is your source for that claim? The only time I recall reading anything claiming that was when Erich von Daniken's books were popular - right up until he was forced to admit he had not been to any of these places himself and had simply made it all up.

I know one ancient text that never made such a claim - perhaps the most widely accepted ancient text of all - the Bible. What ancient texts did reference alien visitations?

Even if that is precisely what ancients believed, are you suggesting that the aliens landed, taught them whatever they taught them, then left never to land again and communicate directly with us earthlings?

First off, Van Daniken never said that he had not visited some of the sites he wrote about. Nor did he ever capitulate and say he made it all up. The data he presents is there for anyone to see - it is his interpretation which some have questioned, not the data itself.
Then you asked for a source to the claim that ancient writings referenced extra terestials. You might want to check out http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/viman ... anas_3.htm which lists several such texts.
You then go on to claim the Bible makes no such references. In fact it does. You might read the book of Ezekial which describes the saucer like craft that hovered over the people. I am tempted to suggest that the "angels" that visited Job, the voice and tablets presented to Moses, and several other stories are as likely aliens than they are ethereal visitors from heaven.
You then ask if I believe that aliens came down from above, taught us some good stuff, and then disappeared never to be seen or heard from again. I think the whole point of this thread is to support the notion that they, in fact, never left and they are here in numbers at the present time.

[Gaybutton]

First off, Van Daniken never said that he had not visited some of the sites he wrote about.

Yes he did. Why do you think he lost his credibility all of a sudden. He was a con man from the word go. Read it for yourself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_von_D%C3%A4niken

Quoting articles written by people who have the same agenda you have is not exactly convincing. Even if something that can be interpreted as references to space craft actually can be gleaned from ancient texts, that doesn't mean what they saw were really space vehicles. I would think just as many crackpots existed then as exist now.

When modern scientists such as Alex Filippenko or Michio Kaku or Stephen Hawking start saying earth has been visited and/or is being visited now by aliens, you'll have a much better chance of grabbing my attention.

[RichLB]

First off, Van Daniken never said that he had not visited some of the sites he wrote about.

Yes he did. Why do you think he lost his credibility all of a sudden. He was a con man from the word go. Read it for yourself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_von_D%C3%A4niken

Quoting articles written by people who have the same agenda you have is not exactly convincing. Even if something that can be interpreted as references to space craft actually can be gleaned from ancient texts, that doesn't mean what they saw was actually space vehicles. I would think just as many crackpots existed then as exist now.

First off, let me correct myself. Above I referred to angels visiting Job. My mistake, that was Lot.
Now to the rest of your response. Truthfully I was not aware of Von Daniken's history and his being so soundly debunked. I confess the Wikilink's article makes me glad I did not use him as support for my argument.
As to the references to ancient texts claiming alien visitations, I've not read anywhere an argument suggesting they do not do so. This, of course, does not mean they are correct, but you asked for a source to my claim that such treatises exist. They do, and we are both free to believe or not believe what we wish but we are not free to deny their existence.

[Gaybutton]

Above I referred to angels visiting Job. My mistake, that was Lot.

Ach soooooo. Until now I never knew Lot visited Job . . .

As to the references to ancient texts claiming alien visitations, I've not read anywhere an argument suggesting they do not do so.

Huh? What kind of an argument is that? I've never read an argument suggesting Liberace was not secretly in love with Calvin Coolidge. Does the fact there is no article suggesting he was not somehow mean that he was?

"You'll have to do better than that."
- Nicol Williamson (Merlin), 'Excalibur'

[RichLB]

As to the references to ancient texts claiming alien visitations, I've not read anywhere an argument suggesting they do not do so.

Huh? What kind of an argument is that? I've never read an argument suggesting Liberace was not secretly in love with Calvin Coolidge. Does the fact there is no article suggesting he was not somehow mean that he was?

I must not have made myself clear. I provided you with a mini compendium itemizing several ancient texts which refer to UFOs in the pre history past. By "an argument they do not exist" is in reference to the texts themselves, not to UFOs. You had asked for support to my statement that ancient writings describing UFOs existed and my provided reference was to present them.

[Gaybutton]

I must not have made myself clear.

Bad news - you're still not clear . . .

[Bob]

I provided you with a mini compendium itemizing several ancient texts which refer to UFOs in the pre history past.

Now I'm getting confused. A "compendium" is an oxymoron in the first place - a concise yet extensive listing of a larger body of work. So, what's a "mini compendium?" Sounds somewhat like a short long list (or, perhaps, a long short list?). And "pre history past?" What about pre history future? Gotta be broad-minded, ya know.

The fact that somebody (or lots of somebodys) claim they saw something does not equal a fact that anybody saw aliens; but, for some, if you can't explain something puzzling (whether the "sighting" sounds silly or not), it's the boogey man, ET, or whatever. There are "maxi compendiums" of the ancients talking about Zeus, Thor, and hundreds of other "gods" (beings or whatever), all of whom were "seen" by hundreds/thousands of people. We (well, most of us anyway) know that these visitations and sightings were, for lack of a better term, pure fantasy and/or baloney. If human past history (versus future history?) teaches us anything, don't trust what a human being claims he/she saw.

After all this conjuring and wishing for the exotic, there remains no scientific proof that even a single alien life form has ever visited planet Earth. Excepting for Michael Jackson and Bubbles, of course.

[RichLB]

I provided you with a mini compendium itemizing several ancient texts which refer to UFOs in the pre history past.

After all this conjuring and wishing for the exotic, there remains no scientific proof that even a single alien life form has ever visited planet Earth. Excepting for Michael Jackson and Bubbles, of course.

I had hoped that the term "mini compendium" would clarify the distinction from a real compendium. And, isn't "pre history" an accepted term to describe that time period before Western recorded history? Anyway, apologies for the liberal use of the language.
Now let me present the same challenge to Bob that I gave, without result, to GB. What evidence would you accept as scientific proof? It seems to me we have more verifiable data about the existence of UFOs than we have for atoms, black holes, photons, intelligence (no sarcasm meant, it has never been defined), or even what constitutues life, itself. Science accepts these as "fact", yet reject UFOs. So, let me ask again. What would provide proof to you?

[Bob]

What evidence would you accept as scientific proof?

Hmmmm.....well, Rich, I'd recommend that you start with something "scientific." That odd concept seems to be lacking with all the "I saw an extra-terrestrial" folk.

Look, there have been thousands of sightings of beings from elsewhere (zeus, etc.) and we know that's baloney (or do we?). And there has been thousands (millions) of UFO sightings over the years and I'm really wondering if you want us to take your leap of faith (versus fact) to conclude (1) 90% of those reports actually involve alien beings, (2) 50% of those reports involve alien beings, (3) 10% of those reports involve alien beings, or (4) 0% of those reports involve alien beings. Please educate us as to what percentage you think it might be (being mindful that believing anything less than 100% somewhat confirms your belief as to the credibility of some reports/sightings).

I believe option #4 and will continue to do so until either a significant group of credible scientists say otherwise or, perhaps, I see it with my own eyes. Since you can't obviously control what I personally see, the answer is you can't find anything I would accept (any more than I can prove a negative and the error of your ways).

Although slightly off tangent (actually, not all that off tangent), Rich, do you agree that a fair number of Thais have seen or heard of ghosts? Do you believe in ghosts?

[Gaybutton]

Do you believe in ghosts?

Three guesses . . .