You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > 'Christianity' vs 'Islam'
October 31 2024 11.27pm

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

'Christianity' vs 'Islam'

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 23 of 31 < 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 >

  

jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 03 Jul 17 5.49pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Yes I get that, but they literally sliced the tops off of mountains. That's a lot more impressive than scraping some lines in the ground. It would take us decades with earth moving equipment and explosives.

If people of the past were capable of such feats then it casts serious doubt on our interpretation of history. It doesn't need to involve aliens to make this a big story.

Depends on how long it took them to do it. If they did it quickly, sure, its impressive. If it took them say 150 years less so.

People dragged stone from wales to build Stonehenge, because it was 'important enough' to not use local stone.

The mountain isn't exactly as flat as many of the 'Alien' theorists suggest either, rather they rely on a selection of photographs that support their argument, rather than more detailed and close up photographs (apparently).

It also could certainly be the case that its an old delta or river basin, prior to seismic activity that created it and the mountains around it - as a result of which when the mountains formed, it would be 'flat topped', and debris spread. Certainly, geologists seem to think there is evidence that of old tributary flows, and rivers on the flattened top.

Which is seen in a number of mountain ranges elsewhere, all across the world.

Of course to the Nazca, it probably looked amazing, this flattened mountain top, which they'd never seen and became a sacred site. Evidence of their gods etc.

But its probably just an example of a particular kind of mountain formation process, that occurred ages before they even existed.

The mistake is we assume mountains are all peaked, because we, as the general public, don't know much about mountains, and how they're formed. We assume they're peaked because most of the ones we've heard of are peaked.

But actually there are plenty of flattened mountainous plateaus across the globe. Thing is, we think mountains, we think mountaineering - but mountaineers only go for the peaked mountains - the challenging ones.

Turns out flattened top mountains exist in most mountain ranges.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 03 Jul 17 7.05pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

Depends on how long it took them to do it. If they did it quickly, sure, its impressive. If it took them say 150 years less so.

People dragged stone from wales to build Stonehenge, because it was 'important enough' to not use local stone.

The mountain isn't exactly as flat as many of the 'Alien' theorists suggest either, rather they rely on a selection of photographs that support their argument, rather than more detailed and close up photographs (apparently).

It also could certainly be the case that its an old delta or river basin, prior to seismic activity that created it and the mountains around it - as a result of which when the mountains formed, it would be 'flat topped', and debris spread. Certainly, geologists seem to think there is evidence that of old tributary flows, and rivers on the flattened top.

Which is seen in a number of mountain ranges elsewhere, all across the world.

Of course to the Nazca, it probably looked amazing, this flattened mountain top, which they'd never seen and became a sacred site. Evidence of their gods etc.

But its probably just an example of a particular kind of mountain formation process, that occurred ages before they even existed.

The mistake is we assume mountains are all peaked, because we, as the general public, don't know much about mountains, and how they're formed. We assume they're peaked because most of the ones we've heard of are peaked.

But actually there are plenty of flattened mountainous plateaus across the globe. Thing is, we think mountains, we think mountaineering - but mountaineers only go for the peaked mountains - the challenging ones.

Turns out flattened top mountains exist in most mountain ranges.

That would be a good explanation if it can be show to be true. It would require conclusive evidence of course like any other theory.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 03 Jul 17 8.50pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Of course the trouble with the whole alien subject is that people are not generally neutral about it. You have the 'I want to believe camp' who are more likely to see any ambiguous evidence as positive and you have the smug camp who scoff at every bit of evidence because it does not fit with their belief system of what is real.
To make matters worse you also have the debunkers, the hoaxers and the plain bonkers.

I think the ancient alien theory is flimsy to say the least but it does throw up questions about man's history and our grasp of it. With UFO's and aliens in general I think it helps if you have had some personal experience.

For me, genuine UFOs can only be alien, from the future or military misdirection.
One trouble with the latter is that some of these sightings involve 'craft' that performed maneuvers that no conventional aircraft can get anywhere near doing.

The people that know don't talk and don't care what we believe. There have been some deathbed confessions but skeptics would have to meet an alien before they believed and some not even then.

If we have technology that can stop and make turns of 90 degrees going at enormous speed then that is a huge story in itself. It also begs the question as to what else we have.


Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (03 Jul 2017 8.52pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Lyons550 Flag Shirley 04 Jul 17 9.45am Send a Private Message to Lyons550 Add Lyons550 as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Of course the trouble with the whole alien subject is that people are not generally neutral about it. You have the 'I want to believe camp' who are more likely to see any ambiguous evidence as positive and you have the smug camp who scoff at every bit of evidence because it does not fit with their belief system of what is real.
To make matters worse you also have the debunkers, the hoaxers and the plain bonkers.

I think the ancient alien theory is flimsy to say the least but it does throw up questions about man's history and our grasp of it. With UFO's and aliens in general I think it helps if you have had some personal experience.

For me, genuine UFOs can only be alien, from the future or military misdirection.
One trouble with the latter is that some of these sightings involve 'craft' that performed maneuvers that no conventional aircraft can get anywhere near doing.

The people that know don't talk and don't care what we believe. There have been some deathbed confessions but skeptics would have to meet an alien before they believed and some not even then.

If we have technology that can stop and make turns of 90 degrees going at enormous speed then that is a huge story in itself. It also begs the question as to what else we have.


Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (03 Jul 2017 8.52pm)


As you and Jamie say unless there's evidence to the contrary then it's impossible to prove...and even then as you point out there'll be debunkers that will do anything to derail something that undermines their own belief.

The one thing I would say is that there's a film recently released called "Unacknowledged" which contains people who worked in the military etc who are now coming out about what they've seen and the cover ups they've (allegedly) been involved with...its certainly an interesting watch..nothing more than a documentary type affair which poses some interesting questions.

[Link]

 


The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 04 Jul 17 10.27am

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

That would be a good explanation if it can be show to be true. It would require conclusive evidence of course like any other theory.

I'm not sure if its conclusive to that specific incident, but its a common enough phenomena in geology that there are 'plateau topped' mountains, and that geological research typically points to these being river basins etc prior to tectonic shifts. The Nasca mountains do lie on a tectonic line as well.

The evidence doesn't have to be conclusive though, it really only has to be more plausible than the alternatives and fit into commonly held knowledge of geological formations.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 04 Jul 17 10.36am

Originally posted by Lyons550


As you and Jamie say unless there's evidence to the contrary then it's impossible to prove...and even then as you point out there'll be debunkers that will do anything to derail something that undermines their own belief.

The one thing I would say is that there's a film recently released called "Unacknowledged" which contains people who worked in the military etc who are now coming out about what they've seen and the cover ups they've (allegedly) been involved with...its certainly an interesting watch..nothing more than a documentary type affair which poses some interesting questions.

[Link]

Thing is books about alien coverups and alien interaction in the past sell much better, and have a much wider audience that books of geological formations of non-peaked mountains - and most people writing about alien theories don't have an interest in complex geology (or even know where to look) and those that do, aren't selling books anyhow.

I read a bit of Timothy Good back in the 90s, and afterwards I read a lot of the Psychological phenomena involved in the 'supernatural' and its just more reasonable, plausible and scientifically backed up - and that's what makes it more plausible.

I don't disbelieve in Aliens. Just that maybe they're not travelling across the gulf of space to just abduct one or two people of no consequence and instead that those people, fit into a more plausible explanation that needs to be disproven first.

Likewise, people coming forward. You need to vet them thoroughly as eye witnesses, and be able to demonstate some real evidence that lends to their credibility. Anyone who's ex-Service could claim to be part of the conspiracy, and cash in on that market.

Problem tends to be the research of 'paranormal investigators' and their methodology is piss poor at best, they don't seem to understand hypothesis testing and immediately make the jump that a question in an answer is the same as proving their end hypothesis.

We studied this kind of thing quite a lot when I was studying psychology (I even did a two week unit on parapsychology).


Edited by jamiemartin721 (04 Jul 2017 10.38am)

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 04 Jul 17 11.54am Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

Thing is books about alien coverups and alien interaction in the past sell much better, and have a much wider audience that books of geological formations of non-peaked mountains - and most people writing about alien theories don't have an interest in complex geology (or even know where to look) and those that do, aren't selling books anyhow.

I read a bit of Timothy Good back in the 90s, and afterwards I read a lot of the Psychological phenomena involved in the 'supernatural' and its just more reasonable, plausible and scientifically backed up - and that's what makes it more plausible.

I don't disbelieve in Aliens. Just that maybe they're not travelling across the gulf of space to just abduct one or two people of no consequence and instead that those people, fit into a more plausible explanation that needs to be disproven first.

Likewise, people coming forward. You need to vet them thoroughly as eye witnesses, and be able to demonstate some real evidence that lends to their credibility. Anyone who's ex-Service could claim to be part of the conspiracy, and cash in on that market.

Problem tends to be the research of 'paranormal investigators' and their methodology is piss poor at best, they don't seem to understand hypothesis testing and immediately make the jump that a question in an answer is the same as proving their end hypothesis.

We studied this kind of thing quite a lot when I was studying psychology (I even did a two week unit on parapsychology).


Edited by jamiemartin721 (04 Jul 2017 10.38am)

But cutting through all the if's, what's, and maybe's around peoples motivations and limitations, what are people seeing in the skies? They aren't figments of imagination and they can do things that conventional aircraft can't.
Why are the military so keen to keep it all quiet if it is not vastly advanced technology or alien technology or both?
I don't think a psychological explanation is sufficient. It is also impossible to speculate about the nature or motivations of aliens if they really have visited here. We just can't use human 21st century logic to dismiss it as unlikely.

Clearly there is money to be made from the UFO phenomenon but are we really saying that it is all nonsense? Because only one event has to be real and there are people who have been in high places who seem convinced.
Are they risking their reputations for dollar?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 04 Jul 17 12.03pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

I'm not sure if its conclusive to that specific incident, but its a common enough phenomena in geology that there are 'plateau topped' mountains, and that geological research typically points to these being river basins etc prior to tectonic shifts. The Nasca mountains do lie on a tectonic line as well.

The evidence doesn't have to be conclusive though, it really only has to be more plausible than the alternatives and fit into commonly held knowledge of geological formations.


If it is the correct explanation then it could easily be proved. My reservation on all these alien related topics is that if real on any level there will be people place in the media and scientific community to debunk any good evidence. That makes it deliberately difficult to pursue the truth without appearing paranoid and irrational because any one who applies objective reasoning to such claims would conclude exactly that.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Lyons550 Flag Shirley 04 Jul 17 12.08pm Send a Private Message to Lyons550 Add Lyons550 as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

But cutting through all the if's, what's, and maybe's around peoples motivations and limitations, what are people seeing in the skies? They aren't figments of imagination and they can do things that conventional aircraft can't.
Why are the military so keen to keep it all quiet if it is not vastly advanced technology or alien technology or both?
I don't think a psychological explanation is sufficient. It is also impossible to speculate about the nature or motivations of aliens if they really have visited here. We just can't use human 21st century logic to dismiss it as unlikely.

Clearly there is money to be made from the UFO phenomenon but are we really saying that it is all nonsense? Because only one event has to be real and there are people who have been in high places who seem convinced.
Are they risking their reputations for dollar?


That's where there seems to be a definite step change in the area..not the usual kooks (although admittedly there are still many around) but instead, generally normal and more recently professional individuals(can you get more professional than a Minister For Defence?) that are now speaking out.

You're both right about evidence (or the lack of it) and that its convenient for us all to wait for irrefutable proof that there's something else at play.

As Humans we dont like change, we like to feel secure...which is one of the premises in the Documentary.

Challenging theories is healthy though...we should never be complacent about the normal state of things, otherwise we'll never evolve as a species....you never know that piece of evidence could be just around the corner waiting to be found...

 


The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 04 Jul 17 12.57pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by Lyons550


That's where there seems to be a definite step change in the area..not the usual kooks (although admittedly there are still many around) but instead, generally normal and more recently professional individuals(can you get more professional than a Minister For Defence?) that are now speaking out.

You're both right about evidence (or the lack of it) and that its convenient for us all to wait for irrefutable proof that there's something else at play.

As Humans we dont like change, we like to feel secure...which is one of the premises in the Documentary.

Challenging theories is healthy though...we should never be complacent about the normal state of things, otherwise we'll never evolve as a species....you never know that piece of evidence could be just around the corner waiting to be found...

I just watched 'Unacknowledged'. It was interesting but mainly covered stuff that is already out there. Of course without 'official' conformation or a piece of the Roswell space craft, it remains unconfirmed as far as the public is concerned.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Lyons550 Flag Shirley 04 Jul 17 1.06pm Send a Private Message to Lyons550 Add Lyons550 as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

I just watched 'Unacknowledged'. It was interesting but mainly covered stuff that is already out there. Of course without 'official' conformation or a piece of the Roswell space craft, it remains unconfirmed as far as the public is concerned.


I found the bits about the energy patents particularly interesting...and plausable

 


The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 04 Jul 17 1.16pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by Lyons550


I found the bits about the energy patents particularly interesting...and plausable

Yes it's disturbing.

The whole idea that there are debunkers placed in the media and scientific community seems totally plausible as well. You only have to create an environment where people are considered cranks for pursuing the subject and then let it proliferate.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

  

Page 23 of 31 < 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > 'Christianity' vs 'Islam'