It is currently Tue Jan 16, 2018 11:25 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




 Page 8 of 10 [ 147 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2006 9:52 pm 

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 9:35 pm
Posts: 165
Location: Georgia
OUTCAST: Looney hasn't changed a bit, has he? :)


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2006 4:31 am 

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:52 am
Posts: 65
Location: Portugal
Quote:
Quote: from Lune on 9:29 pm on May 17, 2006
You guys are amazing - you have a Sitchin forum but seem to be unwilling to discuss his theory. Of course that might be because you don't like all the questions I ask - it makes you feel uncomfortable doesn't it? Your beliefs being questioned....so much better not to think about or actually debate the theory - just plan unquestioning belief is better, easier too.

Sorry gentlemen but the way you are acting is a classic example of "closed-minded thinking", you appear to have made yourself a little box and now inhabit it. This is probably why this is such a deadboard, discussion is not allowed, only agreement. The AA question is very interesting one and one that I think MAY have occurred but it is always difficult to discuss it with people, mainstream or fringe.

Well thanks, it is always interesting to talk to believers and to try and understand their mind set.


yada, yada, yada.

nope, its not that we're "unwilling to discuss his theory", its just that we're unwilling to discuss his theory with you particularly. i've discussed mine and Sitchin's ideas with other skeptics before. i've kept records of most of those conversations because they were valid and interesting and helped me to get a better understanding of several subjects. i know of few subjects as encompassing as the AAT. but discussions with you just go round and round and round. even when you're mistaken you're "not mistaken".

you're not trying to have a conversation with people who have a different view point, who arrived at different conclusions through different paths, you're trying to wage a war. sorry, it is not my obligation to engage you in your personal fight nor anyone else's obligation.

besides, there are no "believers" in here, at least i do not consider myself one (i cannot speak for the others). the only "believer" i see here is yourself, you truly believe that the generalities and rethoric you present are dead right arguments for which there are no possible counterarguments, that is why you cannot accept anything else and no other possible interpretation for what you consider the only "truth". you're a true believer in the infallibleness of your own opinions and arguments and yet you have the nerve of going around accusing others of being mindless proselytes of the intangibility of the "fringe".

"The AA question is very interesting one and one that I think MAY have occurred"

whaat? that one is a riot. if you really thought that AAT could have occurred we wouldnt be having this conversation but others much more interesting. you see, Sitchin did make mistakes, he got things wrong and misunderstood a great deal of evidence, i've never met a "sitchinite" who didnt agree on this.

even so, the basic premise is there and Sitchin opened the way for an understanding of the ancient past, he gave us a path to undestanding things that, allthough considered to be true for millenia, were somehow converted into "mythology" by modern Western men, by our "modern" paradigms.

you see, i also think AA may have occurred, to me its just a possibility one that opens an entire world of possibilites. i have no certainties, i realize that there are what i would call "continuity" problems and the question remains as evasive as ever.

true, i have no real explanation for those beings motives but how could i have one? how can anyone explain the mind set of alien beings even if we share the same DNA? does a baboon understand their human neighbours motives and actions? i dont think so, and i believe we're at the same distance away of understanding them.

so, if you care to explain why you think AAT may have occurred that should be interesting. different view points are allways wellcomed. but if you want to continue with the usual "style" then forget it, i wont play that game.

(Edited by outcast at 1:48 am on May 18, 2006)


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2006 8:32 am 

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 9:35 pm
Posts: 165
Location: Georgia
OUTCAST: I like your analogy that humans can understand alien motives as well as baboons can understand human motives!!!

When we ask "why" the aliens did this or that, we can only assign them exponential quantities of human motives - ego, greed, power, etc. This "human bias" causes us to "read between the lines" as if they were merely technologically-advanced humans. This must also influence our translations of the pre-ancient sources. Actually, we're clueless when it comes to their motives and philosophies - and values, for that matter.

We might speculate that they developed a guilt complex as they wrapped up their mission on Earth, and therefore wiped out all traces of their having been here. Or to wipe out all evidence that might be used in a "Universal Nurenberg trial". Or to intentionally keep us in the dark and dependent upon inherited superstitions such that we would offer no resistance should they ever choose to return, a second coming.

See? Nothing but human-biased, unscientific, wild-assed speculations as to their motives.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2006 2:21 pm 

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:52 am
Posts: 65
Location: Portugal
Quote:
Quote: from Wallis on 4:28 am on May 18, 2006
Well, Lune, I'll have this to say (write):

1. You either have no English concept of the ramifications and meanings of your on-line signature; or

2. You chose an on-line signature very aptly.

Now that you have again called me a liar, I thought your credibility could sink no longer than 0! Go back to the Anomalies Forum and check out what I wrote, my research, etc. Then if you want to call me a liar again, you are without a doubt the most ignorant person on the face of this planet or the most obstinant!

I sincerely hope that you can read and understand the above paragraphs. If not, I strongly suggest you start taking English classes!


its funny you said that Wallis, without wanting to take any sides, i have to say that i find it funny that "Lune" would copy paste titles from scientific papers dealing with orbital mechanics, planetary motions and general theories about the solar system formation when he has in fact shown several times that he cannot understand simple english sentences. how on earth can he understand such papers which use complicated technical terms and have complex and dificult to understand texts even to those fluent in english?? either he is a liar or a genius.

by the way, can you provide a link to the discussion in question? i havent visited anomalies in a while so i have no idea of what you're talking about.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2006 2:41 pm 

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:52 am
Posts: 65
Location: Portugal
Quote:
Quote: from MrPP on 5:32 am on May 18, 2006
Or to intentionally keep us in the dark and dependent upon inherited superstitions such that we would offer no resistance should they ever choose to return, a second coming.

See? Nothing but human-biased, unscientific, wild-assed speculations as to their motives.


true regarding speculations about their motives. but i like the idea of them intentionally keeping us in the dark. they certainly knew that if humans were more or less left alone we would sooner or later dig into our own past.

it seems that this ambiguous situation works in their favour. if we look at the world today its simple to realize that there is a huge ammount of people who are deep in the mindset of religious dependency. lots of people are still waiting for a god or a messiah to lead the way. its seems its part of our programming, so absolute proof regarding the true nature of the "gods" would ruin the party if they ever chose to return. we would know that the genocides that happened in the distant past were real, we would be certain of their intentions and wouldnt be fooled again (an assumption on my part, of course).


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2006 8:45 pm 

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 9:35 pm
Posts: 165
Location: Georgia
OUTCAST: I beg to disagree with two of your assumptions.

I think that Niburu was ejected from the Solar System on their last loop around the sun and that it is impossible for them to return.

But were they to return, I disagree that we wouldn't be fooled again. In the first place, I think we're STILL fooled, with our ongoing worship of now-unseeable gods. Also, just look at all the superstitious saps and the sacrosanct suckers - Hell'sbells'ncockleshells, they'd believe anything any arriving alien told them, take it on faith if told to.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2006 5:31 am 

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:52 am
Posts: 65
Location: Portugal
Quote:
Quote: from MrPP on 5:45 pm on May 18, 2006
OUTCAST: I beg to disagree with two of your assumptions.

I think that Niburu was ejected from the Solar System on their last loop around the sun and that it is impossible for them to return.


im of the opinion that Sitchin's Nibiru scenario is pretty much impossible. unless Nibiru is a very very small planet, because if it is a Jupiter sized planet, as Sitchin described, and has or had a 3600 year orbit then its movement across the solar system would be clear from the effects on the other planets and the asteroid belt.

in this sense i follow Andy Loyd's Dark Star theory, it makes a whole lot more sense, fits the evidence and the possibility is actually being followed by some mainstream astronomers who believe that the orbits of the Kuiper Belt objects indicate the presence of a very large body out there. i think the "gods" are still out there also.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2006 10:17 pm 

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 9:35 pm
Posts: 165
Location: Georgia
OUTCAST: All of the existing "perterbations" of minor bodies and the dampened absence of such on major bodies are explainable by thelong ago, last - and since we can't observe it any more, final - orbit of Niburu around our Sun. That it has obviously left the Solar System and cannot - as far as we know - return, what type of body it was and/or is - is moot. Follow who and think what you wish. Based upon the available evidence and in the absence of wishful thinking, I disagree and conclude that they are long and permanently gone. So we can stop worshipping them in whatever inherited form and stop fearing or hoping for their imminent return. This might put a lot of clericals of every stripe out of work and put a lot of choice properties on the real estate market, but both consequences would permit us to learn more in more learning centers - sans superstitions, self-humbling rituals, and being dogged by dogma. Your acceptance of "still out there" helps keep all of Mankind stagnated. It is becoming progressively more difficult for me to continue to respect the opinions of anyone who "follows" any single fringe theorist while ignoring or discounting evidence from all sources and theorists. "Apostle of Lloyd"? Haven't we been there, done that? Did it work???


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2006 12:21 am 
Outcast,

Instead of taking you directly back to the Anomalies forum, I'll copy my response in that forum and then try to fix my references. This post was made on Dec 13, 2005:

I have a problem with the 450,000 year figure myself. But then most scientists have trouble just trying to figure out the Earth's history for the last 6-8,000 years. But there is evidence that mining has been going on in Africa for at least 50,000 years and more.

iron mines http://www.sntc.org.sz/cultural/ironmine.html

One of the greatest obstacles in finding a definitive answer thus far is a very simple fact: the climate of the Earth has changed drastically over just the last 12,000 years. The Sahara, for example, is a relatively new desert. Palestine was a swamp. But as desertification began, so Palestine became inhabitable. Thus, any archaeological record has yet to be dug up, besides that which has already been found: a scant record at best.

With statements like this: The Archaean Period (3500-2500 million years ago). Greenstone Belts: The Greenstone Belts get their name from the presence of green minerals such as the chromium muscovite “fuchsite”, green chlorite, actinolite, serpentine, epidote and amphiboles. The rocks occur as belts of deformed volcanic and sedimentary strata. They include the areas near to Barberton, with its gold and asbestos deposits. These ancient rocks are among the oldest in South Africa with the Barberton Greenstone belt being almost 3500 million years old. Geology: The Barberton Mountain Land is a rugged tract of country which straddles the border between the Mpumalanga Province and Swaziland. The rocks of the Barberton greenstone belt are assigned to the Barberton sequence and comprise a variety of early Archaean volcanic, igneous and sedimentary lithologies. These are surrounded and intruded by younger granitic plutons of varying compositions and age. This complex and ancient geological terrain has been subject to extensive geological research. In general, the overall stratigraphy consists of the basal Onverwacht group which is an ultramafic and mafic volcanic sequence which is considered to be the source of gold in the region. Komatiites, which are magnesium rich ultramafic and mafic lavas, were discovered and first described from this area. The upper portions of the Onverwacht Group are more felsic and also contain volcano-sedimentary strata. The overlying Fig Tree group consists of fine-grained sedimentary sequences (greywacke, shale, chert, and balanced iron-formation) and minor interbedded lava and tuff. The uppermost Moodies Group is a coarser sequence of conglomerate, quartzite and shale together with minor volcanic horizons, jaspilite and banded iron-formation. This entire sequence has been complexly deformed, producing a number of tight, steeply dipping synclinal folds, in places overturned, and with fold limbs separated by major strike faults. The oldest rocks in the Onverwacht succession are approximately 3490 million years old. Mineralisation is notably less abundant in the central regions of the Mountain Land and this is due to two main reasons: There is a general absence of Onverwacht Group rocks at the surface in this region and these are considered to be the primary source of the gold and sulphide mineralisation and the effect of intrusive granites i.e., thermal mechanical conditions which remobilised the gold, is most prominent along the exposed margins of the greenstone belt. geologic formations

it is not difficult to extrapolate that humans have been picking up gold and such ever since they saw that pretty things.

Scattered round Zimbabwe are hundreds of ancient stone ruins. No cement or mortar was used in their construction, so the granite bricks had to be carefully shaped and trimmed so as to fit together like a jigsaw puzzle. Some walls were ten metres high; many incorporated chevron, herringbone or chequered patterns. The largest complex (which may have been a temple) is known as ‘Great Zimbabwe’. A set of steps leading into it constitutes a true work of art: each course curves out of the flanking walls into the entrance, with the penetration of the curves increasing as the steps are ascended.

Many theories have been proposed for the origin of those buildings - including some rather unlikely and exotic ones. Most contemporary historians believe that they were constructed by ancestors of the Shona (who form the majority tribe in modern-day Zimbabwe). It is indeed likely that at least some of the original Zimbabwean inhabitants were absorbed by Shona-speaking Bantu, particularly by their Makaranga branch (which occupies the area around ‘Great Zimbabwe’).
Ancient Zimbawe http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/melwood/368/zimsciam.html

It is total arrogance on modern humans' part to assume that a city arises in a central location, dies, and is forgotten. We have evidence all over the globe that cities were built on top of the ruins of other cities. Why? The answer in its simplest form is that the location was perfect.

We also know that natural and man-made disasters have virtually wiped out whole millenia of history. What we are left is with some "modern" remnants that were built over or near settlements that are very likely lost to us for all time.

Another "arrogance" is taking only the facts that we want to take. When gold was discovered in California in 1949, there were stories of people just walking along and picking up the gold that lay on the surface. Where is the proof? We have only the stories. What we do have is ample evidence of placer mining, which so far has not been changed. California has sort of enshrined the destruction of the Earth as a kind of reminder of how people should not treat the Earth.

Colonial history books have totally ignored the enormous heritage of African mining. Contrary to the assertions of the so-called "discoverers" of Africa, mining has been an important economic activity in Southern Africa for thousands of years. For instance, The Ngwenya Mine in Swaziland is one of the oldest in the region and ochres were mined there over 40,000 years ago.

Apart from iron-ore mining across the subcontinent, there are over four thousand ancient gold mines recorded on the greenstone belts of the Transvaal, Zimbabwe, Botswana and Mozambique. The latter formed part of the Empire of Monomotapa which included the northern Transvaal. Base minerals, such as copper workings at Phalaborwa, have been dated as early as the eighth century.
Ancient Mines http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/history/mandela/1993/sp931129.html

The 8th century is an end-date.

We moderns also have a myopic view of mining. It has now been suggested that gold may have been extremely plentiful on or near the surface in really ancient times: Witwatersrand basin [url=http://www.bullion.org.za/MiningEducation/PDF%20and%20Word%20Docs/How%20Gold%20is%]http://www.bullion.org.za/MiningE....d%20is%[/url]

I have just touched the surface.


  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 22, 2006 9:03 am 

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 9:35 pm
Posts: 165
Location: Georgia
WALLIS: Thanks for that, again. "...there are over four thousand ancient gold mines recorded..." Now, if we only had the author's definition of "ancient" - 8 AD back to 40,000 years ago or earlier??? S. would have Enki and the Anunnaki miners down in the Abzu doing underground gold mining long before 300,000 years ago, before their first creation of humans to do the mining for them.

The many "overturns" and other kinds of disruptions indicate that the area of S.Africa has had several very deep and powerful upheavals which have left the near-surface geology weirdly patterned with materials of different ages and formations from early-Earth history. I suspect that two "rearrangements" may have occurred as recently as 3,500 years ago. If so, verification would prominent amounts of pure sulfur and/or sulfur compounds of metals and and minerals.

The undateable, pre-ancient city with extremely complex design and stonework was very likely there long before the local Adam & Eve started producing slave miners.

I don't recall the California gold rush, so I guess it happened in 1849 - rather when I was 12. :)


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 22, 2006 5:49 pm 

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:52 am
Posts: 65
Location: Portugal
Quote:
Quote: from MrPP on 7:17 pm on May 19, 2006
OUTCAST: All of the existing "perterbations" of minor bodies and the dampened absence of such on major bodies are explainable by thelong ago, last - and since we can't observe it any more, final - orbit of Niburu around our Sun. That it has obviously left the Solar System and cannot - as far as we know - return, what type of body it was and/or is - is moot.


why is it obvious that it left the Solar System if it was never obvious that it has been in the SS in the first place?? do you realize that the 3600 year figure estimated by Sitchin would mean more than 1 bilion passes through the inner Solar System since the formative stages of Earth (a time when suposedly the Enuma Elish recounts an ecounter with Nibiru)? for such a large planet to pass within the Solar System so many times there would be undeniable evidence for its orbit. but there is none, besides the asteroid belt, some catastrophy theories which purport a collision with Earth and flimsy stories.

"Follow who and think what you wish. Based upon the available evidence and in the absence of wishful thinking, I disagree and conclude that they are long and permanently gone. "

i follow noone (for a second there i thought i was speaking with JW, a.k.a Loony).

i whole heartedly disagree that they are gone. first because i cannot conceive that a space faring civilization would accept the fate of being plunged into outer space without a escape plan. and second because there is recent evidence of contact with unknown beings which could very well be "anunnaki" or whatever they call themselfs. (Fatima 1913, the "apparition" is strangely akin to ancient descriptions of Inanna/Ishtar)

" Your acceptance of "still out there" helps keep all of Mankind stagnated. It is becoming progressively more difficult for me to continue to respect the opinions of anyone who "follows" any single fringe theorist while ignoring or discounting evidence from all sources and theorists. "Apostle of Lloyd"? Haven't we been there, done that? Did it work???"

"Apostle of Lloyd", where the hell did that one come from? have you ever talked to the man? i have. he is a very nice guy with no preconceived ideas about what should and should not be true. his quest for answers is the same as mine and yours and is guided by no dogmas. you talk about discounting and ignoring evidence, but have you heard what the man has to say?

besides i've never seen any evidence that Nibiru left the Solar System, instead there is plenty of evidence that Earth is victim of periodic catastrophic events. maybe its the influence of Nibiru, maybe not. i certainly dont know, and i certainly wouldnt say "Nibiru is gone, case closed".


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 22, 2006 8:43 pm 

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 9:35 pm
Posts: 165
Location: Georgia
OUTCAST: Think, believe whatever and follow whom (per your post) you wish. Just don't expect any longer that I will bother to respond. Your last post has major errors in data references, logic, and conclusions. And, if your mind is already made up on several variables, you needn't respond to any of my posts, either.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 23, 2006 6:22 pm 

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:52 am
Posts: 65
Location: Portugal
Quote:
Quote: from MrPP on 5:43 pm on May 22, 2006
OUTCAST: Think, believe whatever and follow whom (per your post) you wish. Just don't expect any longer that I will bother to respond. Your last post has major errors in data references, logic, and conclusions. And, if your mind is already made up on several variables, you needn't respond to any of my posts, either.


if there are such major errors in my last post you're free to correct them anytime you want. but please, no generalizations and do not question my intelligence like you did before. my thoughts or beliefs or whatever you want to call them are my own, they were born from my own research into the original texts and available evidence, i do not rely on anyone's opinion to get at my conclusions. accusing me of "following" any particular individual or "fringe theory" just pisses me off.

if you want to discuss details then fine, i'll present the evidence that i find the most compelling. if not then have it your way. i dont think that anyone is or will ever be 100% correct regarding this subject and that is all i have to say.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 23, 2006 9:55 pm 

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 9:35 pm
Posts: 165
Location: Georgia
"in this sense i follow Andy Loyd's Dark Star theory, it makes a whole lot more sense, fits the evidence and the possibility is actually being followed by some mainstream astronomers who believe that the orbits of the Kuiper Belt objects indicate the presence of a very large body out there." That "it" WAS ONCE out there and the effects upon the Kupier Belt are still observable (however dampened over time and whatever the size of the "it") does NOT mean that "it" is STILL out there. There are NO NEW signs of it's presence, and we've been completely unable to SEE it OR find any new sign - simply because it is GONE, and Them that ain't deceased, with "it". Your doubtless intelligence is biased by preconceived notions which bias it against today's reality and facts. The perturbations by the last passage of Nib are a product of it's size, proximity of passing, and dampening over time. No one (including S. and me, know the magnitude of any of those variables. So, the fact that there are still observable perturbations says nothing about the cause of those perturbations STILL being in orbit around our Sun. Ask Andy when the "dark star"/Niburu are/is scheduled to break the plane of the planets. Then ask him why we yet haven't seen it/them.

You may safely assume that I'm wrong 15% of the time. But this isn't one of them.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 24, 2006 6:16 pm 

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:52 am
Posts: 65
Location: Portugal
"in this sense i follow Andy Loyd's Dark Star theory, it makes a whole lot more sense"

i wrote that i follow Loyd's theories in the sense that im interested in the path that his research is taking, i thought that was clear.

"Then ask him why we yet haven't seen it/them."

actualy he has delt with this issue in his book. his idea is that Nibiru is a sub brown dwarf that is a binary companion to our Sun with a very extended orbit in the 10.000 years figure or more (which paralels Zoroastrianism). much in the same way that the majority of Solar Systems found out there are binary systems so also is ours. there are several reasons as to why it hasnt been spoted yet and i can present them later (in the weekend if i find the time), some of his answers to that problem are in his website also.

" No one (including S. and me, know the magnitude of any of those variables. So, the fact that there are still observable perturbations says nothing about the cause of those perturbations STILL being in orbit around our Sun."

youre 100% right. noone knows what those variables are and if they represent an existent or long gone object. but there is one thing that i forcefully have to keep in mind, no modern astronomer (except Harrington who is now deceased) will recognize the feasibility of Sitchin's Nibiru orbit. so, if Nibiru is following the proposed orbit and is now gone i supose that the effects of its passage would still be very clear. unless it was very small, has been ejected a very long time ago or is something completely different and not a planet (in the normal sense of the word) at all. im not an astronomer but i supose that what i said is not far from the truth. so, when do you reckon that Nibiru left the Solar System?


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 8 of 10 [ 147 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

cron