Ask An Atlanteologist

[Berzerker]

Try National Geographic.

You cant be serious, we have 2 NatGeo channels, one shows what its like to be in prison or logging or fishing or some other nonsense and the other is wildlife (thank god for that). Ancient Aliens is the best series on TV for people who like seeing ruins and artifacts. Nothing comes close.

 

[Borachio]

Electric lighting, yes; toasters -- no evidence.

Where's the evidence for the electric lighting?

And if a culture could invent electric lighting and not have toasters, I think that culture is... probably... toast. Just for having no imagination at all.

 

[Cheetah]

Ancient Aliens is the best series on TV for people who like seeing ruins and artifacts. Nothing comes close.

But close to every fact and interpretation on that show is false!

I have a half-finished article on human origins, for instance.

You consider the current understanding of human origins to be inaccurate?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

You cant be serious, we have 2 NatGeo channels, one shows what its like to be in prison or logging or fishing or some other nonsense and the other is wildlife (thank god for that). Ancient Aliens is the best series on TV for people who like seeing ruins and artifacts. Nothing comes close.

They do have a pretty good print magazine and website.

 

[EltonJ]

But close to every fact and interpretation on that show is false!

You consider the current understanding of human origins to be inaccurate?

Muddled. Baffling. Incomprehensible. These three words describe our understanding of our own origins. We aren't going to find out the whole truth of it all, though, as long as people hold on to their little snippets of the truth.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Ok, that's a solid verifiable claim. We can work with that.

How do you figure they had electric lighting? Since you said there's no evidence for toasters, I suspect there is evidence for electric lighting.

Edit: whoops, responded to the last post of previous page. Now I saw your comments in your last post I have really high expectations for the evidence I'm hoping you're going to share

If you're feeling generous, can you explain what you find incompehensible about our current understanding?

 

[EltonJ]

Ok, that's a solid verifiable claim. We can work with that.

How do you figure they had electric lighting? Since you said there's no evidence for toasters, I suspect there is evidence for electric lighting.

Edit: whoops, responded to the last post of previous page. Now I saw your comments in your last post I have really high expectations for the evidence I'm hoping you're going to share

If you're feeling generous, can you explain what you find incompehensible about our current understanding?

There are three major theories to human origins.

Theory 1: We evolved from the apes. I'm not against the theory of Evolution, we need a naturalistic explanation of the Origin of Life. However, there is problems with this. first of all, there is the question of Rh+ father mating with an Rh- mother. The resulting mating can result in the mother rejecting the child. This usually happens when you cross two closely related species together -- usually horses and asses. So, why is this happening to humans?

Second problem -- Our morphology is the same with the apes, but we seem to have an Aquatic phase in our evolution. Also there is a running man theory with evolution, we evolved this way because we ran on two legs. So the Savannah theory is challenged by two other alternatives.

Third problem -- Our simian "cousins" have 24 sets of chromosomes, we have 23.

Theory 2: We were created from the dust by God. Yeah, this is ex-nihlo applied to Life. The principles of Biogenesis isn't satisfied. Therefore, it's not realistic. How can people believe this theory? This theory is shared by a lot of ancient cultures, by the way.

Theory 3: Genetic Engineering was applied to the race. This is the geist of the Illuminati Creation Myth ~and~ Lloyd Pye's Intervention Theory. He points to the problems of birth defects and congenital disease as proof of his theory. Also, he says that two chromosome pairs were fused together.

Theory 4: God the Father and his wives came to Earth, turned themselves mortal, and had sex. This is the theory I prefer because I'll eventually get to do it. Make a planet, bring a wife or wives, and have sex with them after we make ourselves mortal. This satisfies the principle of biogenesis.

Theory 5: the Human Race was seeded by Extraterrestials. Yeah, this is not outside the realm of possibility, but it seems preposterous.

The Competition is between these five theories. And that is the reason why it's muddled, confusing, and incomprehensible. No one side is willing to listen to the other. No consensus as to which is right. It can be possible that all five are right, and it can be possible that all 5 are wrong. But all of them have problems. And no one who has credentials (a PhD in Biology or Paleo-Anthropology) is willing to go to the Source of all Truth to find out.

Actually, after Reading Conversations with God, thee God would not discuss human origins with Neal Donald Walsh; so I came to the conclusion that the reason why it won't be concluded so as to cause people who really want to know to go to Him and find the answers on their own. However, I'm stubborn and I'd like a definitive answer to the question that everyone will accept. However, that's seems impossible at the moment. And if anyone got THE ANSWER to the question, they are probably counseled not to publish it in order to save them from having their reputation attacked by the World.

 

[Senethro]

There are three major theories to human origins.

Theory 1: We evolved from the apes. I'm not against the theory of Evolution, we need a naturalistic explanation of the Origin of Life. However, there is problems with this. first of all, there is the question of Rh+ father mating with an Rh- mother. The resulting mating can result in the mother rejecting the child. This usually happens when you cross two closely related species together -- usually horses and asses. So, why is this happening to humans?

I don't understand this question. Its not a challenge to evolution as you've stated it.

Second problem -- Our morphology is the same with the apes, but we seem to have an Aquatic phase in our evolution. Also there is a running man theory with evolution, we evolved this way because we ran on two legs. So the Savannah theory is challenged by two other alternatives.

The Aquatic Ape theory is charming but lacks hard evidence.

Again, you've stated a thing without saying why its a challenge to our descent from apes.

Third problem -- Our simian "cousins" have 24 sets of chromosomes, we have 23.

Yet again, so what? This isn't a problem.

Theory 2: We were created from the dust by God. Yeah, this is ex-nihlo applied to Life. The principles of Biogenesis isn't satisfied. Therefore, it's not realistic. How can people believe this theory? This theory is shared by a lot of ancient cultures, by the way.

Theory 3: Genetic Engineering was applied to the race. This is the geist of the Illuminati Creation Myth ~and~ Lloyd Pye's Intervention Theory. He points to the problems of birth defects and congenital disease as proof of his theory. Also, he says that two chromosome pairs were fused together.

Why would those things be proof?

Theory 4: God the Father and his wives came to Earth, turned themselves mortal, and had sex. This is the theory I prefer because I'll eventually get to do it. Make a planet, bring a wife or wives, and have sex with them after we make ourselves mortal. This satisfies the principle of biogenesis.

*distant alarm bell begins ringing*

Theory 5: the Human Race was seeded by Extraterrestials. Yeah, this is not outside the realm of possibility, but it seems preposterous.

The Competition is between these five theories. And that is the reason why it's muddled, confusing, and incomprehensible. No one side is willing to listen to the other. No consensus as to which is right. It can be possible that all five are right, and it can be possible that all 5 are wrong. But all of them have problems. And no one who has credentials (a PhD in Biology or Paleo-Anthropology) is willing to go to the Source of all Truth to find out.

Actually, after Reading Conversations with God, thee God would not discuss human origins with Neal Donald Walsh; so I came to the conclusion that the reason why it won't be concluded so as to cause people who really want to know to go to Him and find the answers on their own. However, I'm stubborn and I'd like a definitive answer to the question that everyone will accept. However, that's seems impossible at the moment. And if anyone got THE ANSWER to the question, they are probably counseled not to publish it in order to save them from having their reputation attacked by the World.

Take your meds.

 

[Borachio]

The aquatic ape hypothesis certainly is charming.

Now where did I put my towel? Have those German monkeys nicked it again?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

There are three major theories to human origins.

Theory 1: We evolved from the apes. I'm not against the theory of Evolution, we need a naturalistic explanation of the Origin of Life. However, there is problems with this. first of all, there is the question of Rh+ father mating with an Rh- mother. The resulting mating can result in the mother rejecting the child. This usually happens when you cross two closely related species together -- usually horses and asses. So, why is this happening to humans?

Second problem -- Our morphology is the same with the apes, but we seem to have an Aquatic phase in our evolution. Also there is a running man theory with evolution, we evolved this way because we ran on two legs. So the Savannah theory is challenged by two other alternatives.

Third problem -- Our simian "cousins" have 24 sets of chromosomes, we have 23.

Theory 2: We were created from the dust by God. Yeah, this is ex-nihlo applied to Life. The principles of Biogenesis isn't satisfied. Therefore, it's not realistic. How can people believe this theory? This theory is shared by a lot of ancient cultures, by the way.

Theory 3: Genetic Engineering was applied to the race. This is the geist of the Illuminati Creation Myth ~and~ Lloyd Pye's Intervention Theory. He points to the problems of birth defects and congenital disease as proof of his theory. Also, he says that two chromosome pairs were fused together.

Theory 4: God the Father and his wives came to Earth, turned themselves mortal, and had sex. This is the theory I prefer because I'll eventually get to do it. Make a planet, bring a wife or wives, and have sex with them after we make ourselves mortal. This satisfies the principle of biogenesis.

Theory 5: the Human Race was seeded by Extraterrestials. Yeah, this is not outside the realm of possibility, but it seems preposterous.

The Competition is between these five theories. And that is the reason why it's muddled, confusing, and incomprehensible. No one side is willing to listen to the other. No consensus as to which is right. It can be possible that all five are right, and it can be possible that all 5 are wrong. But all of them have problems. And no one who has credentials (a PhD in Biology or Paleo-Anthropology) is willing to go to the Source of all Truth to find out.

Actually, after Reading Conversations with God, thee God would not discuss human origins with Neal Donald Walsh; so I came to the conclusion that the reason why it won't be concluded so as to cause people who really want to know to go to Him and find the answers on their own. However, I'm stubborn and I'd like a definitive answer to the question that everyone will accept. However, that's seems impossible at the moment. And if anyone got THE ANSWER to the question, they are probably counseled not to publish it in order to save them from having their reputation attacked by the World.

NONE of those are proper theories!

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Elton, I must say I'm a little dissapointed.

I asked how you knew about Atlanteans having electric lighting and you ignored it. It's a shame, since it's such a nice clear claim with which you could have shown what kind of evidence you deem trustworthy enough to make that claim. Instead you eagerly focussed on an aside. If I were a suspicious man ...

I do appreciate you sharing your confusion with regard to our current understanding of human's origins. I'm seeing your confusion and the missconceptions about our current understanding causing that confusion. My advice is to get better aquainted with the Theory of Evolution. That will clear up those missconceptions.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

From Mr. B's link:

Morgan has claimed the AAH was rejected for a variety of reasons unrelated to its explanatory power: old academics were protecting their careers, sexism on the part of male researchers, and her status as a non-academic intruding on academic debates.

Thus avoiding having to actually address the criticism.

The AAH uses negative arguments, pointing to the flaws and gaps in conventional theories; though the criticisms of mainstream science and theories can be legitimate, the flaws in one theory do not automatically prove a proposed alternative.

Just like Creationism.

 

[Kyriakos]

Usually if one is serious about discounting a theory, he either tries to extend the consequences of the starting premise of it (and find errors there), or examine if the underlying basis for the main premise is not sound.

At least the above are the main so-called 'dialectic' methods of going about an argument, and the first one is also known as 'reductio ad absurdum' (εις άτοπον απαγωγ&#942, famously invented (according to Aristotle) by Zeno of Elea.

*

But most debaters instead use the 'Deus ex Machina'

 

[Goodfella]

With JFK, Moon landing, and 9/11 conspiracy theorists, there are least some supporting documents or testimonies which are either taken out of context or don't have readily available explanations. Theorists use these to back themselves up. Our resident Atlantologist, Sir Elton J doesn't have any of this though.

 

[Borachio]

I'd say he's all the more convincing for that.

Conspiracy theorists can always claim there's been a huge cover-up to remove the evidence. I don't see Elton John doing this. Ergo he's got the real goods.

 

[Arakhor]

What about all the 'important' stuff that museums won't allow to be shown? Maybe that includes the alleged evidence for Atlantean electric lighting.

 

[Harv]

There are three major theories to human origins.

Theory 1: We evolved from the apes.

Theory 2: We were created from the dust by God.

Theory 3: Genetic Engineering was applied to the race.

Theory 4: God the Father and his wives came to Earth, turned themselves mortal, and had sex.

Theory 5: the Human Race was seeded by Extraterrestials.

There are three kinds of people in this world: Those who can count and those who cannot.

 

[Goodfella]

I'd say he's all the more convincing for that.

Conspiracy theorists can always claim there's been a huge cover-up to remove the evidence. I don't see Elton John doing this. Ergo he's got the real goods.

They all have cover ups, but they have some evidence to back up the possibility a cover up's even occurring. That's something this theory is lacking.

 

[EltonJ]

Elton, I must say I'm a little dissapointed.

I asked how you knew about Atlanteans having electric lighting and you ignored it. It's a shame, since it's such a nice clear claim with which you could have shown what kind of evidence you deem trustworthy enough to make that claim. Instead you eagerly focussed on an aside. If I were a suspicious man ...

I do appreciate you sharing your confusion with regard to our current understanding of human's origins. I'm seeing your confusion and the missconceptions about our current understanding causing that confusion. My advice is to get better aquainted with the Theory of Evolution. That will clear up those missconceptions.

Dendara Light bulb.

So how do I know that they had lights that don't turn off? I read a story of a group of Navy Seals that found Atlantis during the Bay of Pigs operation, and they were sent to clean up the underwater city to prevent the Russians from getting any Tech. What they picked up is stored away in a warehouse. Probably 'Warehouse 23.'

I listened to a radio show about Lights that don't turn off in New Zealand. I listened to engineers talking about the Great Pyramids how they had electric lights in them, 3000 years before they were invented.

I did not answer your question because I thought I had answered it previously.

As for the Theory of Evolution:

I watch Walking with Cavemen every once in a while.

What about all the 'important' stuff that museums won't allow to be shown? Maybe that includes the alleged evidence for Atlantean electric lighting.

It's hidden away for reasons of National Security. The Freedom of Information Act may release the goods for commercial production, but don't count on it. Our economy is a mass production economy. They produce lightbulbs that fail. A lightbulb that doesn't turn off will be devastating.

 

[EltonJ]

Take your meds.

Read Intervention Theory Essentials by Lloyd Pye.

http://dcrain.zftp.com/info/Intervention Theory.pdf