From Bad Archeology News Article
"I find it incredible and frightening that a worldwide distributed television channel that bills itself as ‘The History Channel’ can broadcast such rubbish as Ancient Aliens....it is the implied authority of the channel (‘The History Channel’, not just any old ‘History Channel’) that makes the broadcast of this series so potentially damaging.... A channel that is making claims for its authoritative status, which offers educational resources, has a responsibility not to mislead its viewers (no doubt its executives think of them as ‘customers’). That responsibility is one that all makers and broadcasters of supposedly factual television have, but one that few of them take seriously: the responsibility to check facts."
We don't know where to begin with this because we're way more open minded than this anonymous blogger at Bad Archeology.
They are not just lamenting the fact that the History Channel even exists, he/she is very upset at The Ancient Astronaut Theory itself and all of the "customers" that watch the show "Ancient Aliens."
Let's begin.
The History Channel is a Television Network not an accredited course in history. It is there first and foremost to make money for the network and it's investors. So...what do you really expect? It's a money making enterprise not a teaching course.
On this note, we have news for this person. The Learning Channel doesn't teach anything either nor does The Discovery Channel actually discover things or even showcase things that have been discovered. MTV doesn't play music and Bravo! has nothing to do with theater or the stage of any kind.
Moving on to the Ancient Astronaut Theory (AA).
As far as we are concerned, this theory is a valid one for a number of reasons not the least of which is this: the Earth's age. By conventional standards, our planet is at least 4 billion years old. That is long enough to have had numerous visitations by other planetary life forms over and over again long before homo sapiens became a blip on its radar and long afterwards, too.
The main reason this AA theory pisses off so many accredited archaeologists is 1) there aren't any alien skeletons or advanced technology laying around as smoking guns 2) it irks them to no end that the world's monuments are supposedly alien made instead of designed and built by plain old human ingenuity.
This second reasoning is a main misconception by mostly everyone and the ultimate reason that mainstream society and science dismisses the AA theory. No one really wants to believe that these engineering miracles and genius monuments aren't man made.
The sad fact is though, and we'd argue to the author of the BA report, is that the evidence of ancient alien visitation is all over the world, right in front of your eyes. It's truly a case of not being able to see the forest for the trees.
AND, we might add, it's an insult to every culture and every civilization on the planet to summarily dismiss the written words, star traditions and oral legacies left by our ancestors.
For the main streamers, even the Bible implicitly states that life here began out there. God himself, is not an Earthling. He is an Extra terrestrial.
Most religions, and by most we mean EVERY SINGLE ONE ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH, state that everything we are, everything we have and all of our cultural laws and society were given to us by the gods. Gods not from Earth but from the heavens.
We are not going to ignore all of this because today's society poo-poos it and we are not going to cave in to ignorance and arrogance because most people cannot fathom these facts.
The author of the BA report cannot distinguish fact from stereotypical AA reporting. They dismiss all of it because in their mind, there is no smoking AA gun nor is there any refutable proof that monuments such as the Great Pyramid were built by anyone other than humans.
However, the facts are this:
* There are monolithic structures throughout the planet that defy our modern day engineering skills.
* Cultures and religions every where on Earth, to this day, outright worship Gods in "Heaven", the sky, the stars and other planets.
* "Smoking Gun" advanced technology in antiquity DOES exist, if you can open your eyes and see it for what it is. "Ancient Aliens" is merely showcasing these examples and asking questions. Cases in point:
- The Antikythera Mechanism
Wiki Article on Antikythera Mechanism
- The relief at Abydos depicting submarine and helicopter in ancient Egypt. These are written off by the main stream. They've "debunked" it by saying that some of the original carvings have fallen away leaving what looks to be a helicopter, a submarine and a blimp, etc...True, it looks as if some of the wall is chipping but come on! It chipped in such a precise way to expose these things in exact detail. It boggles the mind.
Even when its right in front of their eyes they refuse to see it for what it is.
Wiki Article on Abydos
* There is even evidence of ancient nuclear warfare in Libya, North America, The Sinai Peninsula, India and Scotland. This evidence includes, written legends, vitrified glass and high radioactive signatures not to mention abandoned cities thousands of years old.
The author of the article gives 6 examples of archaeological sites and why he's upset with the "Ancient Aliens" show's portrayal of them.
Let's discuss the first one.
Here is the quote:
"The Nazca Lines are one of von Däniken’s favourite bits of evidence, so it’s little wonder they show up here. Situated in southern Perú, they consist of lines, geometric shapes and animal representations etched into the surface of the desert by the simple expedient of removing the oxidised pebbles on its surface to reveal the contrasting colour of the sand beneath. The designs are thus shallow, on average only 0.15 m (5.9 inches) deep. The History Channel’s website repeats the claim first put forward by Erich von Däniken that “the lines served as runways” for the gods’ spaceships; this conveniently ignores the fact that anything with any weight, such as a spaceship, landing on the plain would disturb the pebble surface and reveal the lighter sand underneath, thus creating new lines and effacing any designs it might pass over. This has clearly not happened. The lines – whatever their origin – can never have been used as runways."
The mysteries of the Nazca plain extend far beyond the lines there. But we'll start with the lines themselves. Van Daniken actually raises the question of them being runways. He does not definitively say they were runways. They are described as runway-esque so to speak.
Basically, the archaeologist is right in this case. The weight of alien spacecraft, not to mention any exhaust or engine output, would have destroyed these carefully scraped artworks and comprised the plains themselves.
HOWEVER, one of the most intriguing mysteries of Nazca plain are not the lines but the very mountains themselves. Van Daniken, as far as we know, was the first person to point out that some of these mountains surrounding the plain have been leveled from the very top. We mean completely sheared off.
You can see in the picture, that the mountain in the forefront is completely leveled and smoothed out. There isn't any rubble at the base of the mountain either.
Also, you can clearly see that is NOT a natural formation. Every other mountain is peaked or sloping...like normal. And in the distance you can see other sheared off mountains, particularly a very long narrow one.
How and why this was done remains a mystery. Yet the guys and gals at Bad Archeology will laugh you off if you suggest it was made by aliens or even an ancient unknown human civilization.
Why such a vehement response? They weren't the ones that sheared it off. Why so defensive? Ok. We know that one. It's the very same reason we are writing this in defense...It's our passion and belief.
We truly do not believe we are alone or ever were. We feel it deep inside our hearts and minds that - to quote Hamlet - "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." And to quote Hamlet again "To thine own selves be true." We just feel it.
The show "Ancient Aliens" does a fantastic job of showcasing archaeological sites and is a great History Channel show because of this alone. They are presenting alternative theories that are welcome to the open minded and obviously irritating to anyone else.
Kudos to Eric Van Daniken, Giorgio A. Tsoukalos, Phillip Coppens, the GREAT David Hatcher Childress, Robert Bauval, Graham Hancock, George Noory, John Anthony West, William Bramley and all the pioneers in this field, as well as The History Channel for airing it.
Someday History will prove you all right.
AA site at History Channel.com
"I find it incredible and frightening that a worldwide distributed television channel that bills itself as ‘The History Channel’ can broadcast such rubbish as Ancient Aliens....it is the implied authority of the channel (‘The History Channel’, not just any old ‘History Channel’) that makes the broadcast of this series so potentially damaging.... A channel that is making claims for its authoritative status, which offers educational resources, has a responsibility not to mislead its viewers (no doubt its executives think of them as ‘customers’). That responsibility is one that all makers and broadcasters of supposedly factual television have, but one that few of them take seriously: the responsibility to check facts."
We don't know where to begin with this because we're way more open minded than this anonymous blogger at Bad Archeology.
They are not just lamenting the fact that the History Channel even exists, he/she is very upset at The Ancient Astronaut Theory itself and all of the "customers" that watch the show "Ancient Aliens."
Let's begin.
The History Channel is a Television Network not an accredited course in history. It is there first and foremost to make money for the network and it's investors. So...what do you really expect? It's a money making enterprise not a teaching course.
On this note, we have news for this person. The Learning Channel doesn't teach anything either nor does The Discovery Channel actually discover things or even showcase things that have been discovered. MTV doesn't play music and Bravo! has nothing to do with theater or the stage of any kind.
Moving on to the Ancient Astronaut Theory (AA).
As far as we are concerned, this theory is a valid one for a number of reasons not the least of which is this: the Earth's age. By conventional standards, our planet is at least 4 billion years old. That is long enough to have had numerous visitations by other planetary life forms over and over again long before homo sapiens became a blip on its radar and long afterwards, too.
The main reason this AA theory pisses off so many accredited archaeologists is 1) there aren't any alien skeletons or advanced technology laying around as smoking guns 2) it irks them to no end that the world's monuments are supposedly alien made instead of designed and built by plain old human ingenuity.
This second reasoning is a main misconception by mostly everyone and the ultimate reason that mainstream society and science dismisses the AA theory. No one really wants to believe that these engineering miracles and genius monuments aren't man made.
The sad fact is though, and we'd argue to the author of the BA report, is that the evidence of ancient alien visitation is all over the world, right in front of your eyes. It's truly a case of not being able to see the forest for the trees.
AND, we might add, it's an insult to every culture and every civilization on the planet to summarily dismiss the written words, star traditions and oral legacies left by our ancestors.
For the main streamers, even the Bible implicitly states that life here began out there. God himself, is not an Earthling. He is an Extra terrestrial.
Most religions, and by most we mean EVERY SINGLE ONE ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH, state that everything we are, everything we have and all of our cultural laws and society were given to us by the gods. Gods not from Earth but from the heavens.
We are not going to ignore all of this because today's society poo-poos it and we are not going to cave in to ignorance and arrogance because most people cannot fathom these facts.
The author of the BA report cannot distinguish fact from stereotypical AA reporting. They dismiss all of it because in their mind, there is no smoking AA gun nor is there any refutable proof that monuments such as the Great Pyramid were built by anyone other than humans.
However, the facts are this:
* There are monolithic structures throughout the planet that defy our modern day engineering skills.
* Cultures and religions every where on Earth, to this day, outright worship Gods in "Heaven", the sky, the stars and other planets.
* "Smoking Gun" advanced technology in antiquity DOES exist, if you can open your eyes and see it for what it is. "Ancient Aliens" is merely showcasing these examples and asking questions. Cases in point:
- The Antikythera Mechanism
This was raised from the seas of Greece in 1901
It's an ancient "computer"
Wiki Article on Antikythera Mechanism
- The relief at Abydos depicting submarine and helicopter in ancient Egypt. These are written off by the main stream. They've "debunked" it by saying that some of the original carvings have fallen away leaving what looks to be a helicopter, a submarine and a blimp, etc...True, it looks as if some of the wall is chipping but come on! It chipped in such a precise way to expose these things in exact detail. It boggles the mind.
Even when its right in front of their eyes they refuse to see it for what it is.
How much advanced technology do you see in this one 5,000 year old carving?
Wiki Article on Abydos
* There is even evidence of ancient nuclear warfare in Libya, North America, The Sinai Peninsula, India and Scotland. This evidence includes, written legends, vitrified glass and high radioactive signatures not to mention abandoned cities thousands of years old.
Vitrified remains of ancient ruin in Death Valley, CA
The author of the article gives 6 examples of archaeological sites and why he's upset with the "Ancient Aliens" show's portrayal of them.
Let's discuss the first one.
Here is the quote:
"The Nazca Lines are one of von Däniken’s favourite bits of evidence, so it’s little wonder they show up here. Situated in southern Perú, they consist of lines, geometric shapes and animal representations etched into the surface of the desert by the simple expedient of removing the oxidised pebbles on its surface to reveal the contrasting colour of the sand beneath. The designs are thus shallow, on average only 0.15 m (5.9 inches) deep. The History Channel’s website repeats the claim first put forward by Erich von Däniken that “the lines served as runways” for the gods’ spaceships; this conveniently ignores the fact that anything with any weight, such as a spaceship, landing on the plain would disturb the pebble surface and reveal the lighter sand underneath, thus creating new lines and effacing any designs it might pass over. This has clearly not happened. The lines – whatever their origin – can never have been used as runways."
The mysteries of the Nazca plain extend far beyond the lines there. But we'll start with the lines themselves. Van Daniken actually raises the question of them being runways. He does not definitively say they were runways. They are described as runway-esque so to speak.
Basically, the archaeologist is right in this case. The weight of alien spacecraft, not to mention any exhaust or engine output, would have destroyed these carefully scraped artworks and comprised the plains themselves.
HOWEVER, one of the most intriguing mysteries of Nazca plain are not the lines but the very mountains themselves. Van Daniken, as far as we know, was the first person to point out that some of these mountains surrounding the plain have been leveled from the very top. We mean completely sheared off.
You can see in the picture, that the mountain in the forefront is completely leveled and smoothed out. There isn't any rubble at the base of the mountain either.
Also, you can clearly see that is NOT a natural formation. Every other mountain is peaked or sloping...like normal. And in the distance you can see other sheared off mountains, particularly a very long narrow one.
How and why this was done remains a mystery. Yet the guys and gals at Bad Archeology will laugh you off if you suggest it was made by aliens or even an ancient unknown human civilization.
Why such a vehement response? They weren't the ones that sheared it off. Why so defensive? Ok. We know that one. It's the very same reason we are writing this in defense...It's our passion and belief.
We truly do not believe we are alone or ever were. We feel it deep inside our hearts and minds that - to quote Hamlet - "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." And to quote Hamlet again "To thine own selves be true." We just feel it.
The show "Ancient Aliens" does a fantastic job of showcasing archaeological sites and is a great History Channel show because of this alone. They are presenting alternative theories that are welcome to the open minded and obviously irritating to anyone else.
Kudos to Eric Van Daniken, Giorgio A. Tsoukalos, Phillip Coppens, the GREAT David Hatcher Childress, Robert Bauval, Graham Hancock, George Noory, John Anthony West, William Bramley and all the pioneers in this field, as well as The History Channel for airing it.
Someday History will prove you all right.
AA site at History Channel.com
