Could E.T. have influenced religion?

[Rhizomorph13]

Toughen up, bubele. The mods do what they think is right on Adrian's permission. They don't ask any of ours beforehand.

sorry i overreacted. i do that alot.

Yay, this is a strong indicator that you are rational. When in a discussion it is a rare quality to be able to see one's mistakes and even rarer to appologize.

[JohnDG]

[quote='lilphil1989' pid='128703' dateline='1303137570']
[quote]I don't know where you're getting the idea that I've claimed absolute certainty or impossibility of anything. It isn't from the content of my posts, that's for sure.[/quote]

You just seem a bit sketchy talking about thing's that arent really known or possible to know for sure. You seem to understand only facts, well most of the facts we know about the past are only theories and theories are constantly changing. It is not a factually known on how the pyramids were even built, but is theorized on how they did it. Do you see what I mean?(about the factual part). Nobody has a time machine so we can't know for sure, nobody knows anything exactly aslong as it's a theory. (I know the pyramids werent aimed at me but im using it anyways now )

The point im trying to make is you cannot know for sure but you seem to be talking as if you do know for sure. Untill we go back in a (time machine) we will never know so for know we only speculate.

I don't just theorize that aliens could have come help us or toyed with us. I theorize we could as very well just have been smarter in the past then know, or more simply just have known something that has been forgotten. But these are just theories nothing more.

Maybe you could help by introducing new theories instead of just says their bogus.

[Napoléon]

Toughen up, bubele. The mods do what they think is right on Adrian's permission. They don't ask any of ours beforehand.

sorry i overreacted. i do that alot.

Yay, this is a strong indicator that you are rational. When in a discussion it is a rare quality to be able to see one's mistakes and even rarer to appologize.

i try

i'm not an idiot, if someone disproves anything i'm saying i'm not just gonna cling on to an argument to make me feel better. that would make me just as bad as all the religious fundies out there!

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Toughen up, bubele. The mods do what they think is right on Adrian's permission. They don't ask any of ours beforehand.

"bubele?"


Yiddish word?? Not one of the few I know.

[lilphil1989]

You just seem a bit sketchy talking about thing's that arent really known or possible to know for sure. You seem to understand only facts, well most of the facts we know about the past are only theories and theories are constantly changing. It is not a factually known on how the pyramids were even built, but is theorized on how they did it. Do you see what I mean?(about the factual part). Nobody has a time machine so we can't know for sure, nobody knows anything exactly aslong as it's a theory. (I know the pyramids werent aimed at me but im using it anyways now )

This is exactly the same argument used by evolution-deniers, and it relies on two misconceptions.
Firstly, the colloquial definition of the word theory is not the same as the scientific definition of the word. Colloquially, it has tones of "something I thought up in the pub last night", whereas a scientific theory (in this I am including history and archaeology as they too are evidence-based pursuits) is one which agrees with current empirical data, is able to predict new data (thus making it falsifiable), and subscribes to the law of parsimony.
Actually, the latter part is quite important for our discussion here. To quote William of Occam:

Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem (A satisfactory proposition should contain no unnecessary complications)
I would posit that assuming the existence of a space-faring extraterrestrial race having visited Earth is such an unnecessary complication.


The second misconception is that an idea is not scientifically valid if it is not known to be absolutely true. Science never deals in claims of absolute truth, and if it's absolute truth you're looking for, you're going to be disappointed.

I don't just theorize that aliens could have come help us or toyed with us. I theorize we could as very well just have been smarter in the past then know, or more simply just have known something that has been forgotten. But these are just theories nothing more.

That's not a theory, it's a conjecture.

[JohnDG]

Ok well im not going to argue with you because your at a higher level education than me. But you cannot disprove ancient astronaughts anymore than anyone can prove them.

Science is absolutely true in some area's. Can you not boil water to make it safe to drink? Is that not absolutely true? Do we breath a chemical mixture of gases? Are we multicellular organism? This is absolutely and true stuff. Does the Earth rotate around the sun? Well I would hope we absolutely know this as true.

Let me get into college first then I will give you such a lashing...

[thesummerqueen]

[headdesk]

[Napoléon]

Ok well im not going to argue with you because your at a higher level education than me. But you cannot disprove ancient astronaughts anymore than anyone can prove them.

Let me get into college first then I will give you such a lashing...

DONT LET HIM GET OFF THAT EASY!

[thesummerqueen]

John DG

You just described a bunch of things that are recordable/observable.

Where are your observed/recorded aliens?

[Napoléon]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzXmsnoCgig

(aliens) have they come to us? all the evidence says yes

not bein funny, but can someone tell me why a fuckin astronaut who is far more qualified than anyone in this thread would say that? huh? anyone?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_JZ94Fdygg