|
|
Post by Blarney Rubble on Dec 2, 2013 4:43:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by raybar on Dec 2, 2013 9:59:43 GMT -5
"[1] The two circles near the center of the artifact appear to be earth." Or just two circles
"[2] This appears to be a spacecraft of some type." Or maybe a hat.
Interpreting 1300 year old artifacts OUT OF HISTORICAL CONTEXT is a sure way to be wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blarney Rubble on Dec 2, 2013 19:14:32 GMT -5
Why would you assume that these are 1,300 year-old artifacts?
|
|
|
|
Post by raybar on Dec 2, 2013 20:22:24 GMT -5
Why would you assume that these are 1,300 year-old artifacts? That is what the article said, and I didn't challenge it here. But whether these artifacts are authentic or fake, and whether the article is real or a hoax, interpreting old art without knowing what you're looking at is a good way to lead yourself astray. |
|
|
|
Post by Blarney Rubble on Dec 7, 2013 18:51:52 GMT -5
I agree that these drawings probably don't depict alien spaceships.
However, I also think there is a small possibility that they do, and that we should keep our minds open to that possibility, and maybe investigate a little further. If it turned out, for example, that contemporaneous accounts of "visitors from the sky" existed, then that would put a different complexion on matters.
One of the things that has always bothered me about the "skeptical" stance is the tendency to "throw out the baby with the bathwater" - ie, to dismiss things because they can be explained (or, more often, partially explained) by accepted facts or theories. Near-death experiences - discussed on another thread - is another example of this. I've heard at least a dozen psychologists (on TV programmes etc) dismissing this phenomenon in terms of oxygen deprivation to the brain, as if this was the established explanation, and as if it explained every aspect of the phenomenon (it doesn't).
The drawings in the video above are very unlikely to be depictions of visitors from other planets, or other solar systems - but what if the are? The universe is almost certainly teeming with life. Most scientists and astronomers believe that the distances involved in interstellar travel are so great as to debar alien visitations. But what do they know? Practically nothing. Human science is still in its infancy. And it is only a few hundred years since Europeans believed that the oceans were too vast to traverse. And now you can fly anywhere in the world in a matter of hours.
|
|
|
|
Post by raybar on Dec 8, 2013 1:13:56 GMT -5
When interpreting art, it's helpful to know the language. Here's a ten minute video explaining the symbolism in medieval painting that has been wrongly claimed to represent UFOs. I've seen similar material about Mayan art, which does not depict aliens either. ancientaliensdebunked.com/references-and-transcripts/ufos-in-ancient-art/Could aliens have visited earth? Can't disprove it. Is there any evidence that they actually have? No. |
|
|
|
Post by raybar on Dec 8, 2013 11:21:26 GMT -5
Zak -
"The universe is almost certainly teeming with life."
Ray -
Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. We don't (yet) know. But even if it is, I think it reasonable to suspect that ---
- while there are many planets
- only some of them are "suitable for life"
- and only some of those actually have life
- and only some of those have evolved complex life
- and only some of those creatures are "intelligent"
- and some of them have invented technology
- and only some of which are advanced enough to reach space
- and only some of them are capable of interstellar travel
Space-faring life may be rare even if the universe is "teeming with life."
Zak -
"Most scientists and astronomers believe that the distances involved in interstellar travel are so great as to debar alien visitations."
Ray -
If relativity holds, and no way can be found "get around" it, then interstellar travel will always remain extremely difficult. Science fiction offer various ideas about exceeding the speed of light (time warp, subspace, hyperspace, etc.) or generating the energy needed to approach the speed of light in normal space (matter-antimatter engines, collecting hydrogen from space as you go, etc.), but writers of fiction don't have to build any of the technology they use in their stories. Such devices may or may not be possible.
Zak-
"Human science is still in its infancy."
Ray -
Maybe so. Or maybe it's in it's teen years, or middle age. Certainly there is much to learn, but where we stand on the learning curve is unknown.
|
|
joan
Member
Posts: 1,407
|
Post by joan on Dec 8, 2013 14:57:46 GMT -5
When interpreting art, it's helpful to know the language. Here's a ten minute video explaining the symbolism in medieval painting that has been wrongly claimed to represent UFOs. I've seen similar material about Mayan art, which does not depict aliens either. ancientaliensdebunked.com/references-and-transcripts/ufos-in-ancient-art/Could aliens have visited earth? Can't disprove it. Is there any evidence that they actually have? No. I thoroughly enjoyed watching this, raybar, I can't thank you enough. I was a Medievalist in college & to hear this mini lecture brought back great sights & memories. |
|
|
|
Post by raybar on Dec 8, 2013 22:43:37 GMT -5
I thoroughly enjoyed watching this, raybar, I can't thank you enough. I was a Medievalist in college & to hear this mini lecture brought back great sights & memories. You're welcome. I wish I could find the piece about Mayan art. |
|
|
|
Post by Blarney Rubble on Dec 9, 2013 17:53:27 GMT -5
According to National Association of Science, one in every five planets orbiting a star similar in size to our sun is capable of sustaining life, based on data from NASA's Keplar space telescope. If only one in a million of these "life friendly" planets actually has life, it would mean that there are billions of planets with life in the known universe.
And of course interstellar/superluminal travel is possible. Even now, humans with their puny brains are figuring out possible ways that this could be done. Just think how easy this would be for civilizations a thousands years more advanced than we are. Or a million years more advanced. Or a billion years. A blink of an eye in cosmological terms.
All of which reminded me of a discussion I had here years ago with one of the resident FACTS "skeptics", who, when I said I believes water would be found on Mars, told me I was an idiot for even suggesting such a thing, and posted a barrage of "established facts" about Mars, "proving" that it was a waterless planet.
|
|
