Ancient Aliens?

I want to know how what appears to be a geological phenomenon to laymen was formed be it through natural processes or by natives of the area. FWIW I don't believe in the Ancient Alien Hypothesis, hence the reason I want to know what the logical answer is to so called "landing strips" .

 

Are we that egocentrical as a species, that we think that we are the most advanced beings on this planet and that some species from the past could not have been more advanced than us?

 

The logic answer to landing strips is that ancient aliens had access to Brazilian wax treatments.

 

Yes.

 

Well unfortunately much of the scientific and atheist community has an outlook on life which basically states..." If there's no evidence then no need to bring it up. "

 

No what bothers people is when people claiming they have evidence of something but the only evidence they have is speculation, but still claim it to be facts. I found the AA show on the history channel to be interesting but just like all the other UFO shows its all based around speculation, and no solid empirical evidence.

 

First of all I don't believe in the AA theory, to me it smells of anti-Christian propaganda and Von Deniken is known for his venomous views on religion.

 

It could be that we'll never know the exact reason for them, which is actually kinda cool.

 

What? Is this a serious question or are you trying to be funny?

 

Im sure there a reasonable explanation for it. Whenever an ufologist/creationist/conspiracy theorist make extraordinary claims there's always a more reasonable and simpler explanation to them. Unfortunately the history channel didnt provide a rebuttal to these specific claims, and I was hoping someone on this thread may have an answer to these claims.

 

The History Channel was on fire last week - it was Armageddon Week and they dragged out every end-of-the-world kook on the planet.

I'm starting to realize that it's useless to take anything on that channel seriously.

As for rebuttals to the things in that particular ancient aliens show, I imagine that there is a great deal of information out there on the interwebs.

 

Maybe a little of both. Think about it. We have no evidence that we are the only ones yet we have no evidence that we aren't. We can only see about 5% of visible light, so what makes us think that we have it all mapped out?

I don't think that a definitive answer is out there just speculation from both sides. Sometimes one sides gets something right and then the other. So until someone can definitively say "hey I travelled the complete universe and there is no one out there!" then ancient aliens or aliens in general are completely possible, ancient or not.

 

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Carl Sagan

 

I'm glad you think this way. Because I don't have any evidence to prove you owe me $1000, but you do anyway. And now I know you don't need any evidence. So pay up.

The space aliens command it.

 

I think that it's pretty safe to say that unless Douglas Adams was right about the dolphins and the lab rats, humans are the most advanced species on the planet at the moment and probably since we started using tools and language.

Was there at one time a more advanced species here on earth? Who the ******** knows? Until there's evidence for it, I'm going with probably not.

 

I think a case could be made that it is subjective as to what defines advanced. After all as humans we require devices to communicate over great distances yet dolphins do not. This is but a simple comparision.

I am interested in how anyone can explain the markings in South America that require a high level view in order to see them, or the different aspects of the Great Pyrimad such as its location on the planet and such.

 

Because they thought their gods were in the sky looking down? A god doesn't have to be extraterrestrial to live in the sky, you know. Anyway, that's just a guess but it makes sense and it doesn't require visitors from millions of light-years away.

You're going to have to be more specific.

 

It is the Nazca lines. They also did a piece on this a ong time ago and a vehicle of any weight would have a hard time rolling down those so called runways. If you tried to use it as a runway for say a wide body jet, the landing gear would sink into the gravel. So much for a landing strip for aliens.

 

One of the supporters of the theory on HC show mentioned how the mountain top where the lines are located is flat while all none of the ones around it are. Is there something to this ?

 

And what if the mountain tops are flat? Do you think that ancient people were too stupid to remove some dirt? Even if it's a whole lotta dirt?

 

I don't think it was dirt he was talking about. Btw I'm not a supporter of this theory, just a question.

 

Okay, here's where the History Channel show really lost me:

Towards the very end one guy said, referring to various ancient civilizations, "Why were they so interested in the sky, anyway?" Implying that they wouldn't really have noticed the sky much unless there were spaceships flying around in it. And this was such a ridiculous, absurd thing for that guy to say that I wanted to slap somebody. Preferably someone at the History Channel who gave that asshat air time.

 

Best counter argument I heard was when the archeologist asked why an ultra advanced civilization would build stone monuments instead of towering skyscrapers. Promoters of the theory would of course respond by saying that maybe the 'Gods' only gave them certain knowledge.