Occam. - 11 October 2011 10:38 AM

Nah, the Prime Directive would have prevented them from allowing the primitives to learn about them. 

Occam

Maybe their Picard had a reason not to obey it. 

George.  I read Von Daniken and listened to a lecture given at UCLA.  He was very convincing in his interpretation of the drawings and sculptures found on the Mayan artifacts.  He also had drawings of the ancients that could easily be interpreted as the real thing that certainly brought Aliens into the conversation. 

Stephen Hawkins mentioned in one of his latest books to keep an open mind on whether Aliens could have visited this planet.  There was some mention of Stephen Gould who had written of some proof of Alien visitations.  My family has gotten into this subject through The History Channel and my son did some model space ships for the program.  I had the complete works of many of the old sci fi writers but my ex husband’s new wife demanded that he get the books out of our house so she could read them.  A t ruck came and took all these books and stored them in a garage somewhere in Los Angeles where they were ruined in a flood.  All of Heinlein’s books were in the pile.  My girls would have loved to have read them but a shot of jealousy from wife number 3 won the battle. 

You might be interested in his web site. 

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/WonderWorks_Inc.

My son is Brick Price and has done this movie stuff for years.  My grandson is also on the site somewhere.

Sandy Price - 11 October 2011 12:54 PM

My son is Brick Price and has done this movie stuff for years.  My grandson is also on the site somewhere.

Wow!

Sandy Price - 11 October 2011 12:54 PM

George.  I read Von Daniken and listened to a lecture given at UCLA.  He was very convincing in his interpretation of the drawings and sculptures found on the Mayan artifacts.  He also had drawings of the ancients that could easily be interpreted as the real thing that certainly brought Aliens into the conversation.

Von Daniken has zero credibility. He was convicted of fraud before he published his BS. See his wiki page.

Stephen Hawkins mentioned in one of his latest books to keep an open mind on whether Aliens could have visited this planet.

Keeping an open mind is the skeptical position. Believing things because you want to is not open mindedness. For the record, the man’s last name is Hawking, not Hawkins.

There was some mention of Stephen Gould who had written of some proof of Alien visitations.

That’s a pretty vague claim. Do you have any documentation?

My family has gotten into this subject through The History Channel and my son did some model space ships for the program.

The History Channel is notorious for promoting pseudoscience.

You might be interested in his web site. 

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/WonderWorks_Inc.

My son is Brick Price and has done this movie stuff for years.  My grandson is also on the site somewhere.

Interesting stuff, but I see nothing there that offers evidence of alien visitations.

The evidence doesn’t exist, Darron. Besides the numerous and unusually detailed references and descriptions of gods and their technology in the ancient texts, I find the Nazca Lines very mysterious and simply mind-boggling. But just because we don’t have an explanation of who made them or why they were made (and no, Joe Nickel’s hypothesis is as bad as any other), it obviously doesn’t mean they are an artifact proving an alien visit.

DarronS - 11 October 2011 01:16 PM

He was convicted of fraud before he published his BS. See his wiki page

Which is obviously completely irrelevant. An A+ for a perfect example of ad hominem. 

I agree, George. Attributing mysterious lines and cryptic drawings to alien visitations is no different than the god-of-the-gaps argument.

Von Daniken’s fraud conviction is not an ad hominem attack, as it is relevant to the man’s character. He is a convicted fraud. His books are bunk. He has made a career out of separating gullible people from their money.

DarronS - 11 October 2011 01:41 PM

I agree, George. Attributing mysterious lines and cryptic drawings to alien visitations is no different than the god-of-the-gaps argument.

I don’t think I can agree here. Although we have no evidence whatsoever indicating that the Nazca Lines were made by aliens, I still find that explanation more, hmm, convincing than anything else I have ever read on their origin.

DarronS - 11 October 2011 01:41 PM

Von Daniken’s fraud conviction is not an ad hominem attack, as it is relevant to the man’s character. He is a convicted fraud. His books are bunk. He has made a career out of separating gullible people from their money.

What does the fact that he cheated on taxes have to do with aliens? I am not following you…

George - 11 October 2011 01:46 PM

Although we have no evidence whatsoever indicating that the Nazca Lines were made by aliens, I still find that explanation more, hmm, convincing than anything else I have ever read on their origin.

You must be joking.

No, I am not joking. I am obviously taking about the miles long lines with no evident or plausible purpose. Not the figures of the monkeys and spiders; their origin is quite clear.

It’s normal for archaeologists to encounter objects which they cannot identify. Those are typically termed “ritual objects”, which basically means “I haven’t got any idea what this is, so perhaps it was used in a ritual”. That sort of explanation fits the Nazca lines quite well: they were perhaps used in some sort of ritual. ANY such explanation, no matter how farfetched, is exceedingly more likely than that they were created by alien spacemen. (... for some ritual, perhaps?)

Well, you call them ritual objects, I call them a mystery. In order for them to be ritual objects one would first need to offer at least a plausible explanation how they were created and for what purpose. As far as I know we’ve got nothing.

How they were created? Presumably by dragging something on the ground to expose the different colored earth beneath the top layer. The purpose would be a ritual purpose of some kind. Many, many objects uncovered in archaeological digs are of this sort: with unclear purpose.

Calling it a mystery that can best be dealt with by theories involving spacemen is absurd.

George - 11 October 2011 02:20 PM

Well, you call them ritual objects, I call them a mystery. In order for them to be ritual objects one would first need to offer at least a plausible explanation how they were created and for what purpose. As far as I know we’ve got nothing.

So anything unexplainable, from any pre literate culture should be ascribed to aliens????   What about the Chauvet (and other) cave paintings? What about the ancient rice painting of Japan?