The stones on Easter Island were positioned on hillsides and were oriented to look out to sea. The belief was that these statues, which originally had white-ish stones for their huge eyes, would scare away any potential invaders or settlers.

"Aliens built the Pyramids! You can't prove they didn't!" --> Not a stalemate. The positive assertion must present suitable and testable evidence.

ex.
Positive Assertion: You can't prove that there is not a teapot in orbit between Earth and Mars.

Negative Assertion: There is no teapot in orbit between Earth and Mars.

Who must prove their point? Or at least demonstrate a substantive *physical* plausibility?

Hypotheses should be explored, but when no evidence or contradictory evidence is available, these hypotheses must be modified or relegated to the shelf of our own imagination. Sadly, some still claim the Earth is flat.

Sadly, some still claim the Earth is flat.

With respect to quantum physics, on the small scale the Earth is flat, on the large scale the Earth is round.

"Aliens built the Pyramids! You can't prove they didn't!"

But until one proves they did then one can say they did not. Because the one who says they did not said so because the one who said they did did so without any verifiable evidence contrary to the one who said they did not.

With respect to quantum physics, on the small scale the Earth is flat, on the large scale the Earth is round.

The effect you mention has more to do with how we approach limit problems in calculus, geometry, and everyday life. At small enough intervals we tend to linearize complex problems for simplicity. This doesn't mean that in real life that curvature doesn't exist any any infinitesimal point. Intuition is quite often dead wrong. Anyone who claims the Earth is flat is closing their eyes to a mountain of evidence and choosing the losing side in a ideological battle that has likely raged since before the beginning of human civilization. Remember, the biggest argument against a more spherical earth (it is an oblate spheroid) was that the people on the bottom might fall off. This was a difficult argument to counter, although it never actually addressed what evidence there was for a rounder earth. However, with the laws of Kelper and the theory of universal gravitation from Newton, we could demonstrate clearly that people would not fall off of a large enough sphere.

However, quantum mechanics is not fully understood. For that matter, neither is relativity. These are ongoing areas of research. Why do neutrinos appear to travel faster than light? How do they do it? Is there a predictable theory of quantum gravity?

To personal observation other than the confirmation we have from space, there are indeed effects derived from the curvature of the Earth - notably the apparent behavior of the horizon, as well as phenomena such as those observed by Eratosthenes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes#Eratosthenes.27_measurement_of_the_Earth.27s_circumference. However, none of this has anything to do with ancient astronauts.

But until one proves they did then one can say they did not. Because the one who says they did not said so because the one who said they did did so without any verifiable evidence contrary to the one who said they did not.

While the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, neither is it confirmation of existence. In the scientific method http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method#Elements_of_scientific_method, you see the proposal of affirmative hypotheses. The quest is then to investigate these hypotheses. The key is to determine testable means of figuring out the truth of nature, or developing some sort of guideline that offers testable predictions (ex. Newton's laws). If it so happens that little evidence is found to support a hypothesis, the investigator must analyze why. If no affirmative evidence can be found, the hypothesis must be rejected or altered.

Unfortunately for you guys here, the ancient astronaut concept is an idea that long ago was found to have little evidence that could only be explained by aliens. All proponents of ancient astronauts describe their hypothesis in terms of could have been, without any actual evidence. All proposed evidence for ancient astronauts is easily countered by explanation and investigation into the actual practices and beliefs of ancient societies. Even if such a conclusion cannot be reached for every claim - due to the lack of preservation of historical records, etc. - the mere fact that in other more documented civilizations we have found no evidence of such interaction (egyptian hieroglyphs clearly indicate a very human source for the building of their wonders, we even know the names of some of the engineers!), indicates that there is no reason to cling to the affirmative about ancient astronauts.

Earth's shadow across the moon shows Earth's round.

There is no concrete proof either way Sten, I only wish there was. I know what I believe but others think differently. I do think there is some cause for believing that they may have used technology which wouldn't have been expected in their time, but there you are.

The Nazca plain is even more fascinating ....

That's the big question Chris, if they visited this planet why is there no concrete evidence to prove this. There's always the possibility that they did drop by but it was just a fleeting visit. This being the reason we have these vague images of possible aliens found on cave walls.

I continue to see that the "evidence" for aliens consists of interpretations of mythological content. So they painted eyes. So their myths say that magicians commanded the statues to walk. What of it? No mythological claim has yet proven true. You cannot hope to demonstrate your point if you rest on the claims of mythology.

Perhaps you should re-watch this part of Carl Sagan's Cosmos.

The larger issue is that it is not intellectually responsible to immediately explain away some unknown or apparently incomprehensible event merely by claiming aliens did it (reference image I first posted). As scientists we must search for and find the truth of nature - be it the cosmos, the earth, or ourselves.

I continue to see that the "evidence" for aliens consists of interpretations of mythological content. So they painted eyes. So their myths say that magicians commanded the statues to walk. What of it? No mythological claim has yet proven true. You cannot hope to demonstrate your point if you rest on the claims of mythology.

Perhaps you should re-watch this part of Carl Sagan's Cosmos.

The larger issue is that it is not intellectually responsible to immediately explain away some unknown or apparently incomprehensible event merely by claiming aliens did it (reference image I first posted). As scientists we must search for and find the truth of nature - be it the cosmos, the earth, or ourselves.

Kev, that's pure human nature in action here. Even the greatest scientist's are driven by belief in something way before they discover the evidence to support this belief. To some having a belief is the driving force behind finding the evidence so just how many of our eminent scientists have been driven this way.
Yes, some people are too quick to ascribe a cause to an event without sufficient evidence to support this cause. I think here that this comes from working with second hand information and really not knowing what is fact and what is fiction when something gets presented to you. To this end you fail to sort the wheat from the chaff because you assume all that you get given in support of your belief, because it supports your belief, must then all be factual.

To this end you fail to sort the wheat from the chaff because you assume all that you get given in support of your belief, because it supports your belief, must then all be factual.

It is also common for supporters of fringe ideas to accuse others of confirmation bias as the reason for rejecting their ideas.

For that purpose, let's consider the original post from September 30. The OP described an alleged alignment of pyramid shafts with stars and constellations. It makes perfect sense that an ancient alien aficionado would immediately assume that aliens, having of course designed the pyramids, would have arranged for such an alignment, and that vast quantities of unavailable resources should be spent investigating.

However, not even once is considered the fact that the position of the constellations in the sky is non-constant. We know that the ecliptic (the plane formed by the Earth's orbit around the sun) oscillates over time (period depends on your reference point, either 70,000 or 100,000 years) - not to mention the much faster precession and nutation of the equinoxes. This means that an incredibly advanced civilization would have, at best, left an unreliable map, built with the technology of man rather than their own. Considering the level of technology necessary for interstellar travel, they must have known - if they exist/existed - how the Earth moved, and likely how to replicate parts of their own technology on Earth. Why is none of this apparent - if it is aliens who designed the pyramids?

We may all believe what we wish to believe, but nature exists regardless of our convictions. All I ask is that you be honest about the evidence - the wheat and the chaff, as you say. Every time an ancient astronaut support speaks/writes, it's pretty much old Giorgio and his aliens again.

lets also not forget that nasty Galactic drift that moves stars around. After 5000 years nothing really lines up like it should

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

To this end you fail to sort the wheat from the chaff because you assume all that you get given in support of your belief, because it supports your belief, must then all be factual.

It is also common for supporters of fringe ideas to accuse others of confirmation bias as the reason for rejecting their ideas.

For that purpose, let's consider the original post from September 30. The OP described an alleged alignment of pyramid shafts with stars and constellations. It makes perfect sense that an ancient alien aficionado would immediately assume that aliens, having of course designed the pyramids, would have arranged for such an alignment, and that vast quantities of unavailable resources should be spent investigating.

However, not even once is considered the fact that the position of the constellations in the sky is non-constant. We know that the ecliptic (the plane formed by the Earth's orbit around the sun) oscillates over time (period depends on your reference point, either 70,000 or 100,000 years) - not to mention the much faster precession and nutation of the equinoxes. This means that an incredibly advanced civilization would have, at best, left an unreliable map, built with the technology of man rather than their own. Considering the level of technology necessary for interstellar travel, they must have known - if they exist/existed - how the Earth moved, and likely how to replicate parts of their own technology on Earth. Why is none of this apparent - if it is aliens who designed the pyramids?

We may all believe what we wish to believe, but nature exists regardless of our convictions. All I ask is that you be honest about the evidence - the wheat and the chaff, as you say. Every time an ancient astronaut support speaks/writes, it's pretty much old Giorgio and his aliens again.

I understand exactly what your saying and your stand-point here. I too find it quite frustrating how people try to ascribe things as proof of alien visitations
when what they have as evidence is no real evidence at all. Personally I don't believe we have been visited by aliens and to this I will also add that I think we are the only intelligent (human type life) in our universe. So like you I keep searching though via Seti for I could be wrong.

lets also not forget that nasty Galactic drift that moves stars around. After 5000 years nothing really lines up like it should

Skild', I remember watching a documentary about some of the pyramids lining up in such a way that they focused on Orion. They achieved this in this documentary by winding the celestial clock back several thousand years. To me all it proved was that the Egyptians found Orion important enough to focus upon. But as I have said on these threads quite recently the Egyptians like all of us past and present find/found the skies at night an area and topic of great fascination.

lets also not forget that nasty Galactic drift that moves stars around. After 5000 years nothing really lines up like it should

Skild', I remember watching a documentary about some of the pyramids lining up in such a way that they focused on Orion. They achieved this in this documentary by winding the celestial clock back several thousand years. To me all it proved was that the Egyptians found Orion important enough to focus upon. But as I have said on these threads quite recently the Egyptians like all of us past and present find/found the skies at night an area and topic of great fascination.

not only were they aligned to Orion, the sizes correspond to the size of the stars on Orions belt

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

not only were they aligned to Orion, the sizes correspond to the size of the stars on Orions belt

Focused upon Orion may be because it was so prominent in the night sky, that would be one logical reason for their interest in it. Shall go youtube hunting for info on the Egyptians and their relationship with Orion.

The ancient Egyptians and other ancient civilizations looked at celestial objects such as Sun, planets, and other stars as deities, things that helped guide their daily lives. Sad to see that there are television shows that try to emphasize that the monuments that Egyptians, Incas, Astecs, Sumarians, built were built by aliens. I wonder where these so called experts got their degrees, they got it from school of bad astronomy.

"Aliens built the Pyramids! You can't prove they didn't!" --> Not a stalemate. The positive assertion must present suitable and testable evidence.

ex.
Positive Assertion: You can't prove that there is not a teapot in orbit between Earth and Mars.

Negative Assertion: There is no teapot in orbit between Earth and Mars.

Who must prove their point? Or at least demonstrate a substantive *physical* plausibility?

Hypotheses should be explored, but when no evidence or contradictory evidence is available, these hypotheses must be modified or relegated to the shelf of our own imagination. Sadly, some still claim the Earth is flat.



What if Giorgios hairdo where done by aliens.
There are no hairdresser in this world who can do such work.
To me that's a proof that aliens exists on the earth, even today.

Focused upon Orion may be because it was so prominent in the night sky, that would be one logical reason for their interest in it. Shall go youtube hunting for info on the Egyptians and their relationship with Orion.

Loads of goodly stuff to see on Youtube. One programme hosted by Charlton Heston reckons that the Earth's outer solid plate shifted around by 2000 miles thousands of years ago. Putting the lost civilisation of Atlanta plum where Antarctica sits today. Quite clearly one international scientific body needs to be formed here and do unified research regarding all aspects of our planet in hopes that we can un-muddy the waters here regarding what is fact and what is fiction. I wounder if we are heading into what will be known as the "Dark ages of Science" where no valuable discoveries ever get accepted, attributed or correctly classified as to what it is, where it came from and what it's telling us/showing us.

I always thought the hieroglyphics image below was rather interesting. It looks like there is a sub, plane and a helicopter.

---

http://www.AI4FR.com

I always thought the hieroglyphics image below was rather interesting. It looks like there is a sub, plane and a helicopter.

yes thats a nice pic of what is already know to be a wind scoured hieroglyph.

It has been presented by a few here that think it is some sort of sign that the Egyptians were able to fly or had knowledge of flight. Unfortunately, this is the only glyph with those symbols ever found and lets not forget that they are deteriorated from their original state.

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

I always thought the hieroglyphics image below was rather interesting. It looks like there is a sub, plane and a helicopter.

This plaque would have formed just a part of a much larger wall of inscriptions that would have needed to be read so to understand what was being portrayed overall. Also was this plaque scribed during a period when the Faeroe was the leading influence at this time or was it the religious leaders in control.
During periods when the Faeroe's controlled everything self enlightenment was the fore and self induced trances, usually via drugs concocted from the lotus plants and others, was undertaken on a regular basis and these plaque images may have come from one of these trances. Supposedly some Egyptologist's favour that these trances enabled the Egyptians to involves ways of constructing the pyramids to the standards of precision that they achieved? Still, did these images from that plaque evolve from a similar trance experienced at one time. We would need to see the whole of the walled inscription area and look to see if someone is holding a lotus up to their face. If the whole frescos do not include the blue lotus then the mystery images have not been generated whilst under a trance. If this whole fresco comes from the reign of Sethi Ist/Ramses IInd (father and son) then there's a much more logical explanation as to how these images became formed over time.

I don't believe aliens have visited this planet, yet my mind is very open to the contrary.