Proof of Where GOD Came From

[ganja man23]

You and I both know that our sun has planets, but when was that the topic? As for planets around stars 300+ light-years away, what relevance might they have?
You have consistently ignored the main thrust of my end of this dialogue, and seem to be engaging in a campaign of attrition.
I do not see you as being forthright. You cannot deny that you are simply disregarding whenever I show you flaws in your proposals. This is not a seeker's attitude, but a priest's. I have little use for priests of any doctrine.

As for evidence ... misdirection. I have concentrated not on providing evidence, but on finding (and presenting) the flaws in the Orion theory in the hope that you might address them. I see no need to sully the field with evidence of my until we've come to a conclusion regarding yours. You're refusing to play fair. cn

that's exactly my point, if you're looking to disprove the theory then all articles you will read are automatically bias. you're not understanding me. in order for a fair and ACCURATE measurement of solar systems far away from us we need the following:

mass of our solar system
mass of all 3 solar systems of orion's belt
their coordinates relative to earth
their vector direction (which direction each individual solar system is moving towards)
their vector speed (the rate of distance vs time at which each solar system is moving)
our solar system's magnitude and direction

Find me proof of all these things taken into consideration. I am somewhat familiar with starmapping and basically i can tell you before hand they did nothing of this sort, they merely used a 2 dimensional projection.

you just blatantly stated your star tracing is accurate and let me tell you it's not. i will discuss 3 dimensional vectors all day but i refuse to reply unless you provide me with evidence of this star tracking being accurate i will tell you now that it's not because we have not been filming the sky long enough to even measure a difference between these three solar systems.

and the relevance between planets is that they add a substantial amount of mass to the solar system. we are just discovering new planets so i highly doubt we took into account the mass of the solar systems, basically we guessed the distance each planet should be based on their size and nothing more.

 

[guy incognito]

that's exactly my point, if you're looking to disprove the theory then all articles you will read are automatically bias. you're not understanding me. in order for a fair and ACCURATE measurement of solar systems far away from us we need the following:

mass of our solar system
mass of all 3 solar systems of orion's belt
their coordinates relative to earth
their vector direction (which direction each individual solar system is moving towards)
their vector speed (the rate of distance vs time at which each solar system is moving)
our solar system's magnitude and direction

Find me proof of all these things taken into consideration. I am somewhat familiar with starmapping and basically i can tell you before hand they did nothing of this sort, they merely used a 2 dimensional projection.

you just blatantly stated your star tracing is accurate and let me tell you it's not. i will discuss 3 dimensional vectors all day but i refuse to reply unless you provide me with evidence of this star tracking being accurate i will tell you now that it's not because we have not been filming the sky long enough to even measure a difference between these three solar systems.

and the relevance between planets is that they add a substantial amount of mass to the solar system. we are just discovering new planets so i highly doubt we took into account the mass of the solar systems, basically we guessed the distance each planet should be based on their size and nothing more.

No they don't. Close to 100% of the mass of our solar system is concentrated in the sun. The same is true for other solar systems. Planets are dwarfed by their stars.

 

[guy incognito]

At least there's some activity going on in their heads. They're asking questions. Thinking! If you understood how complex the pyramids truly were in their design you would question how such primitive people built such advanced structures with so many different properties. Did you know there has been traces of acidic and basic compounds found in two tunnels leading into one chamber. This suggests they were essentially a giant power plant due to the release of H2 during an acid base reaction between the two compounds.

Did you know the three pyramids were lined up with orion's belt perfectly? Did you know that the other structures around Giza are lined up with the orion constellation as well? Did you know that if you trace back the position of the stars it suggest that the pyramids must have been built over 10,000 years ago? Did you know the egyptians never said they built them, we can merely trace that they once inhabited the land about 5000 year ago? Did you know that the number pi and the golden ratio constant are incorporated in dimension ratios in most if not all chambers and also the outer pyramid? I bet you didn't because most people simply know what they've been taught, whether right or wrong.

My next point: we are trained. We're trained to think bullshit when we hear the word 'alien'. That word is so controversial people almost lose their shit over it as easy as they do about god and jesus. You want my opinion; I don't think it was aliens but I sure as fuck know it wasn't them egyptians.

I like that you assume I never thought about this. I just intuitively knew from birth that the Egyptians did it.

I did question it. The pyramids are mind boggling. They would require fantastic amounts of engineering, and hard labor, and time - exactly what the egyptians had. They did not pop up over night, they were incredible feats that required thousands and thousands of slave laborers over the course of a multiple human life times. When you realize the time it took, and the slave labor they had at their disposal, it makes a bit more sense.

I was not "trained" to think bullshit when I hear the word alien. I have been conditioned to because every single time, without exception (ever), I have heard anything about aliens there has not been one shred of evidence. Not a single conclusive piece of evidence anywhere in the world at any time. Not a single piece, EVER. So far you have not provided any evidence either. For some reason you cannot accept that the egyptians were able to build the pyramids, but you are willing to accept that an even more primitive society was able to build them 5,000 years earlier? Or that it was aliens? Come on man, get a grip.

 

[cannabineer]

that's exactly my point, if you're looking to disprove the theory then all articles you will read are automatically bias. you're not understanding me. in order for a fair and ACCURATE measurement of solar systems far away from us we need the following:

mass of our solar system
mass of all 3 solar systems of orion's belt
their coordinates relative to earth
their vector direction (which direction each individual solar system is moving towards)
their vector speed (the rate of distance vs time at which each solar system is moving)
our solar system's magnitude and direction

Find me proof of all these things taken into consideration. I am somewhat familiar with starmapping and basically i can tell you before hand they did nothing of this sort, they merely used a 2 dimensional projection.

you just blatantly stated your star tracing is accurate and let me tell you it's not. i will discuss 3 dimensional vectors all day but i refuse to reply unless you provide me with evidence of this star tracking being accurate i will tell you now that it's not because we have not been filming the sky long enough to even measure a difference between these three solar systems.

and the relevance between planets is that they add a substantial amount of mass to the solar system. we are just discovering new planets so i highly doubt we took into account the mass of the solar systems, basically we guessed the distance each planet should be based on their size and nothing more.

What I get from this is the the theories that appeal to you get a light treatment, but the ones that don't, the ones that I as an opponent in debate am presenting, get held to this plainly inaccessible standard of rigor. You cannot pretend to be serious while so openly parading a double standard.

As for star tracking and astrometry, look up "proper motion", "radial velocity", and their rates of change. If you apply these to the three stars of the Belt, you'll find that the speedster of the bunch, Alnitak, has a proper motion of about an arcminute (the extreme low limit of human visual resolution assisted by nonmagnifying optics) in eighteen thousand years. cn

 

[tyler.durden]

that's exactly my point, if you're looking to disprove the theory then all articles you will read are automatically bias...

This is classic conspiracy theorist circle-jerk reasoning: Any evidence presented against the theory is turned into evidence for the theory via the conspiracy. That's boring...

 

[mindphuk]

The stupidity is oozing in this thread. Of course, I mean active denial. Any and every piece of evidence against the fantasies of these people is automatically biased....lol
Regardless of the methods and materials, the careful study of hieroglyphs and detailed measurements, and general scientific work, are part of the vast conspiracy of close minded researchers. Anyone that dares claim these people are spreading disinformation acts as if these 'theories' haven't been thoroughly discredited -- treated as if no one has ever investigated these claims, many of which are just laughably wrong -- 'the Egyptians didn't claim to build them? Incorrect claims about the measurements wrt Orion? Seriously, if the astronomer's models of stellar motion within the last 10,000 years are off, who is the one that is claiming it matches a pattern from 10,,000 years? Why is their data not suspect? We have very good evidence that tells us which king, when and how many structures were built. They look at any gaps in our knowledge as an opportunity to act as if nothing is known. We have papyrus that with math problems related to angles and sizes and other things that demonstrate knowledge of pyramid architecture.

Considering how creative their explanations become, their lack of imagination and creative thought given to understanding how things like pi and phi can be found in a structure when it wasn't done on purpose, i.e, using rolling logs to measure long straight sides, if it's done x number of rotations, pi will automatically work out. Previously I linked to a math article that comes up with many solutions that are not so mysterious, including the prejudice implying that their math wasn't advanced enough to recognize things like phi. I'll have to find that link. However, here's another -- www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/who-built-the-pyramids.html

NOVA: In your extensive work and research at Giza have you ever once questioned whether humans built the Pyramids?

Mark Lehner: No. But have I ever questioned whether they had divine or super-intelligent inspiration? I first went to Egypt in 1972 and ended up living there 13 years. I was imbued with ideas of Atlantis and Edgar Cayce and so on. So I went over, starting from that point of view, but everything I saw told me, day by day, year by year, that they were very human and the marks of humanity are everywhere on them.

And you see there's this curious reversal where sometimes New Age theorists say that Egyptologists and archeologists are denigrating the ancient culture. They sometimes put up a scarecrow argument that we say they were primitive. And the New Agers sometimes want to say these were very technologically sophisticated people who built these things; they were not primitive. Well, actually there's a certain irony here, because they say they were very sophisticated technological civilizations and societies that built the Pyramids and the Sphinx, and yet they weren't the ones that we find. So to me, it's these suggestions that are really denigrating the people whose names, bodies, family relationships, tools, and bakeries we actually find.

and how about... http://www.eloquentpeasant.com/2007/08/24/why-the-aliens-did-not-build-the-pyramids/

When I tell people that I’m studying Egyptology, people always assume that this means pyramids and mummies, the only things they know about Egypt. In fact these areas are so popular that they are overrun by untrained theorists and most Egyptologists shun them rather than tackling all of the misinformation. Sometimes I can hardly blame them—even as a lowly student, I was once approached at a conference by a man who wanted to show me the home experiments that he’d carried out, pulling miniature pyramid blocks in his backyard! The sad thing though is that many people prefer madcap theories to the truth, especially when genuine research is presented in dry academic speak rather than the exciting Indiana Jones-style of tv.
Once I was actually asked in all seriousness for my professional opinion on whether alien build the pyramids. The man said: ‘There’s so much discussion of the alien theory that there must be something to it, right?’. Well, my short answer would be, ‘No. There isn’t anything to it at all.’ My longer answer will follow, with a thorough dissection of the central arguments of the alien theory and why they are wrong. I think the main reason the theory is so popular is that people like to believe in things, things that are much bigger than themselves, whether it’s god or aliens. But often people also want proof and they seek to find it in the pyramids and other ancient monuments. It’s no wonder that the pyramids are incredible enough that they inspire people to believe the unbelievable. I myself don’t think there’s anything wrong with postulating that there might be other life out there in the universe, but I also don’t believe in robbing humanity of pride in its achievements.

We saw CWE play the game, when he was confronted with evidence against specific claims, he never addressed those and instead shifted focus to other problems. He attempts to overwhelm with new challenges but got mad at me when I wouldn't play his game and address the new claims while perpetually ignoring any response to a critical examination, and destruction of his claim. I then throw a bone and address other claims, even so far as to putting up a public Google map, that demonstrates another piece of misinformation, he again is silent on a response. I guess I found another credulous child that will have to ignore any evidence against his fringe beliefs. One of these links was in post #63 and has been conveniently not mentioned. If he was truly honest with himself he would have to admit that he believes these fringe ideas because they propose some cool shit and wants to believe that this cool shit with some spirituality and not because he rigorously followed the evidence. It's clear he doesn't even know what actual scholars think based on some of his posts. Clearly spending more time reading about the fringe, ultra-minority beliefs is going introduce the bias that he blithely claims in present in mainstream scholarly research.

 

[Heisenberg]

that's exactly my point, if you're looking to disprove the theory then all articles you will read are automatically bias. you're not understanding me.

If you are not looking to disprove theory, then it isn't a theory, it is a favored explanation. The idea that anyone looking to disprove a theory is biased is counter to the entire reason we call it a theory to begin with. The best way to prove yourself right is to fail at proving yourself wrong. This is elementary science methodology, anything else is automatically pseudoscience.

Once again you devalue science in the areas of quality control, yet embrace it when you perceive it backs you up. That is a true example of bias.

 

[Heisenberg]

that doesnt even explain how Coral Castle was made.

"We don't know whether Ed Leedskalnin used the same techniques as Wally Wallington, but we clearly have to acknowledge that there are ways to do it without machinery. When asked how he built his castle, Ed would answer "It's not difficult if you know how," and according to Coral Castle's web site, he said he was able to move the heavy blocks because he "understood the laws of weight and leverage well." Sounds to me like he figured things out the same way Wallington did."


"There are photographs of Ed at work on his castle, lifting his blocks with a large tripod made of telephone poles perhaps 25 feet tall, using chains and a block and tackle system. When he once disassembled and relocated Rock Gate Park a few miles from Florida City to Homestead to escape an encroaching subdivision, the blocks were moved on a flatbed trailer towed behind a rented tractor. But his use of tripod cranes and tractors don't seem to fit in very well with the magnetic energy vortex theories, and so you won't find references to these pictures on most Coral Castle web sites."


"Using a block and tackle in this manner is called mechanical advantage, and it's what allowed Archimedes to once lift an entire warship full of men using only a block and tackle and his own strength."


"Before Ed moved from Latvia at age 26, he grew up in a family of stone masons. Very little is known about what type of stone mason work he did in Latvia, but it probably explains his interest and knowledge of quarrying, cutting, and carving stone. He then lived in Canada and worked as a lumberjack, work which is largely about moving felled trees. A tree the weight of Ed's largest coral block, 30 tons, is not at all uncommon — some trees can weigh hundreds of tons. Before Ed ever started work on Coral Castle, he had a wealth of work experience that gave him all the knowledge he'd ever need to build his creation. It's simply not necessary to invoke made-up mystical powers, aliens, or magnetic vortex energy to explain Coral Castle."

**Chief chooses not to respond ^^

You dont know how they did it as well and you only side with the more simple explanation because we have fancy toys that we think are advanced.

Following the simplest explanation of evidence is called parsimony. Can you name any phenomena in which the explanation which made unjust assumptions turned out to be correct?

**Chief chooses not to respond ^^

Its also kinda funny how many people are against the idea of ancient advanced knowledge when its clear that those structures could not be made with ropes, human labor, or soft metals, yet they still side with the simple explanation that doesnt make them question existence because that option makes them more comfortable.

"Many stones have grooves several centimeters in width and depth on two adjacent faces for holding ropes. They even had special places cut into the stones that Pumapunku scholars call “hoisting grips.” These are all very strange things to do if they could simply levitate these blocks."

Chief responds with...

I like soup.

 

[mindphuk]

**Chief chooses not to respond ^^

**Chief chooses not to respond ^^

Chief responds with...

Par for the course with CWE. He obviously supports otherwordly explanations for things because it fits with his overall world view and not because of adherence to critical thought and thorough examination of the data. He is no different than creationists that dogmatically adhere to their claims while attacking science and findings that support natural explanations. At least the creationists are often honest enough to admit they believe that the bible is infallible and any idea that contradicts it becomes automatically suspect. ganja man and CWE's sources are just as spurious as the bible but more disturbing is the constant lack of acknowledgement of evidence that contradicts their position. I got tired of responding to people like CWE, finshaggy and others that will ultimately just ignore posts that I take time and effort to produce.

 

[Chief Walkin Eagle]

LOL I love that I am always on every ones mind. The bitter taste in your mouths because of the increased spirituality in SS&P also makes me happy

 

[Padawanbater2]

So you finally defined 'spirituality'!

Spirituality = Bullshit claims that can't be verified!

Thanks, bud!

 

[Chief Walkin Eagle]

The hard-atheist comes out again! lol

 

[Heisenberg]

LOL I love that I am always on every ones mind. The bitter taste in your mouths because of the increased spirituality in SS&P also makes me happy

Chief chooses another non-response borrowed from the school-yard. I think we can call this thread another defeat for the aliens. Reason and rationality continues with it's flawless record.

 

[Chief Walkin Eagle]

And the true mentality of Heis also comes out again, I dont even need to try! lol If only you guys knew you have no voice when trying to 'reason' with believers. Just sitting there aggressively blabbering to yourselves for recognition from your group of people.

 

[Chief Walkin Eagle]

Shit, I blow-hard response must be in the making.

 

[Heisenberg]

And the true mentality of Heis also comes out again, I dont even need to try! lol If only you guys knew you have no voice when trying to 'reason' with believers. Just sitting there aggressively blabbering to yourselves for recognition from your group of people.

You are the one grouping people by labels. Who are believers? What do old aliens have to do with spirituality? Who are my 'group of people'? Your theory is demonstrably erroneous but rather than address that you attempt to blame it on some trumped-up division of politics. Typical dodge move in your song and dance, which I long ago named The Batshit Boogie.

Ancient aliens theory falls by the side when you apply the slightest of scrutiny. When pointed out to certain people, they choose to attack reason and sophistication rather than defend or abandon the theory. I did not choose who those people are, nor do I equate them with 'believers' in paranormal or religious ideas.

 

[Heisenberg]

The hard-atheist comes out again! lol

And the true mentality of Heis also comes out again, I dont even need to try! lol If only you guys knew you have no voice when trying to 'reason' with believers. Just sitting there aggressively blabbering to yourselves for recognition from your group of people.

Shit, I blow-hard response must be in the making.

So Chief has now apparently abandoned aliens all together. Can we assume this is because he has no idea what to say to counter-evidence? This is now somehow about atheism and spirituality? It's about believers vs those who disagree. One wonders if this was ever truly about evidence or probability of aliens or just another chance for Chief to feel special.

When his tired, well refuted, well discredited evidence goes unanswered, Chief mistakes apathy for victory and responds with,

*Cough* o.o

to point this out. When we do take the time to address his evidence, he then says we are simply responding for the benefit of impressing ourselves, we are just being loyal to the non-ideology of atheism, and begins his subtle suggestions that we should be quiet. He is unable to intelligently defend his claims and is left with belittling individual responses and people as his only recourse for avoiding acknowledging falsification.

 

[cannabineer]

LOL I love that I am always on every ones mind. The bitter taste in your mouths because of the increased spirituality in SS&P also makes me happy

 

[Chief Walkin Eagle]

Yes, avoid what I was trying to say and resort back to the argument where you want to come out on top, tis the 'Song that never ends'. Believers in the things that you THINK are above nature, is what I meant by 'believers'. Those who militantly yet pointlessly oppose those believers is what i meant by 'Your group of people'. Its pointless because you have no audience on the other side of the argument, no matter what the subject, yet you continue to blabber like you are making an impact on their minds, but Im sure you know you are only doing this for self benefit.

You avoid the things I brought up that have no 'natural' explanation, because one will probably never be found. Even the explanations you provide are iffy and hard to take seriously. Massive stones were rolled on trees across great distances, elevations and harsh terrain? Ed Leedskalnin did his work using only leverage? Hmmm, that it explains why its still an unknown secret, since he had so many people watching him lift trees when he was a lumber jack. Perhaps he was behind a giant curtain when he was lifting these massive trees, thats why no one seen him and found out his simple secrets that can be reproduced . Indeed, that tripod was a key instrument in his work. But he used that tripod and pully in tight spaces and did seemingly impossible maneuvers to get these stones in the right places? Have you seen pictures of Coral Castle? That tripod is not what you think it is, and it has never been seen since Ed's death.

Damnit... There I go again... Giving thise egomaniac more reason to continue 'The song that never ends'. But without people like me, you would lose a big sense of purpose in life, so I guess I am doing a good deed .

 

[Chief Walkin Eagle]

So Chief has now apparently abandoned aliens all together. Can we assume this is because he has no idea what to say to counter-evidence? This is now somehow about atheism and spirituality? It's about believers vs those who disagree. One wonders if this was ever truly about evidence or probability of aliens or just another chance for Chief to feel special.

When his tired, well refuted, well discredited evidence goes unanswered, Chief mistakes apathy for victory and responds with,



to point this out. When we do take the time to address his evidence, he then says we are simply responding for the benefit of impressing ourselves, we are just being loyal to the non-ideology of atheism, and begins his subtle suggestions that we should be quiet. He is unable to intelligently defend his claims and is left with belittling individual responses and people as his only recourse for avoiding acknowledging falsification.

LOL you are only proving my point even more. Look at how you are talking. You are up on a stool preaching to your people like you are trying to organize a Witch Hunt. This is too funny.