posted
Interesting, It has always been a question if the Ancient peoples saw U.F.Os and recorded it.....
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good; let's now wait for a papyrus that tells us how the ancient Egyptians got helped by UFOs to build monuments and other aspects of civilization. Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well if the brothers were cattin' around in those machines what's the problem.
I have an idea here. Let's get Hawass to erase all puzzling material off the walls so no one in 2009 can say ''What's that?'' This way everyone can still trudge along comfortable in the knowledge that it ain't so. By the way we can also send Thoth, Horus, Seth, Osiris and all the others to the circular file. This way all confusion is eliminated. And we can also ponder why evolution decided to blindly throw all this stuff together just so people can sit around the campfire and talk about Gods of some kind ''knowing'' full well all this is BS. Evolution ought to be ashamed of itself. Where's an honest discipline when you need it.
Posts: 2118 | From: midwest, USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Grumman: Well if the brothers were cattin' around in those machines what's the problem.
I have an idea here. Let's get Hawass to erase all puzzling material off the walls so no one in 2009 can say ''What's that?'' This way everyone can still trudge along comfortable in the knowledge that it ain't so. By the way we can also send Thoth, Horus, Seth, Osiris and all the others to the circular file. This way all confusion is eliminated. And we can also ponder why evolution decided to blindly throw all this stuff together just so people can sit around the campfire and talk about Gods of some kind ''knowing'' full well all this is BS. Evolution ought to be ashamed of itself. Where's an honest discipline when you need it.
LOL The problem is folks like you who continue to criticize scientific finds like evolution when you don't even understand it. Whether or not UFOs exist, if there is intelligent life out there, if they could, they would laugh at how some humans question science but cling to superstition.
Posts: 26267 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I see you're struggling with my sarcastic wit against academia too. Evolution isn't the central issue in my comment twit, ''just the stuff on the wall.''
Now there may be a legitimate reason (to you) why you can't manage your comprehension but I don't want to know what it is.
''if there is intelligent life out there, if they could, they would laugh at how some humans question science but cling to superstition.''
And are you suggesting Thoth, Horus, Osiris, Seth, and all the rest are mythical... and that the ancient Egyptians didn't know their history?
Posts: 2118 | From: midwest, USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Grumman: I see you're struggling with my sarcastic wit against academia too. Evolution isn't the central issue in my comment twit, ''just the stuff on the wall.''
Now there may be a legitimate reason (to you) why you can't manage your comprehension but I don't want to know what it is.
''if there is intelligent life out there, if they could, they would laugh at how some humans question science but cling to superstition.''
And are you suggesting Thoth, Horus, Osiris, Seth, and all the rest are mythical... and that the ancient Egyptians didn't know their history?
Most people treat science as a sort of superstition and expect it to fullfill all the roles of a diety. Science is not all knowing and all powerful and never can be.
It may be the best thing going for many questions but there are still a lot of questions where the flip of a coin or a random number generator are equally likely to be right as science.
Posts: 393 | From: NW Indiana, US of A | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Grumman: Well if the brothers were cattin' around in those machines what's the problem.
I have an idea here. Let's get Hawass to erase all puzzling material off the walls so no one in 2009 can say ''What's that?'' This way everyone can still trudge along comfortable in the knowledge that it ain't so. By the way we can also send Thoth, Horus, Seth, Osiris and all the others to the circular file. This way all confusion is eliminated. And we can also ponder why evolution decided to blindly throw all this stuff together just so people can sit around the campfire and talk about Gods of some kind ''knowing'' full well all this is BS. Evolution ought to be ashamed of itself. Where's an honest discipline when you need it.
Evolution just = traits are passed down genetically. Even most people who "challenge" evolution (a theory not necissarily a discipline) still "believe" that things are passed down. For instance they believe the generations no matter the race are getting taller and taller. Ironically this has to do with food availability and possibly the facts that we're on our feet less and adults can start to shrink past a certain age.
The major reason for the beef is that some guy didn't like to think of an 'Earth' that goes back millions of years. Or that our "flesh vessels" have a common origin with those of other "creatures". Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sam p: Most people treat science as a sort of superstition and expect it to fullfill all the roles of a diety. Science is not all knowing and all powerful and never can be.
It may be the best thing going for many questions but there are still a lot of questions where the flip of a coin or a random number generator are equally likely to be right as science.
Science is not really a doctrine.
quote:
Science:
1.
The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.
Such activities restricted to a class of natural phenomena.
Such activities applied to an object of inquiry or study.
2.) Methodological activity, discipline, or study: I've got packing a suitcase down to a science.
3.) An activity that appears to require study and method: the science of purchasing.
4.) Knowledge, especially that gained through experience.
5.) Science Christian Science.
It's really a tool, a way of thinking.
There's a science to doing anything. To inferring things about man's recent past. To deciphering an ancient text.
What most people refer to when they say "science" is the science or process or way of understanding phenom that occur.
So when you talk about science being right ..... it's really just a way of developing our understanding of the world with an ever growing and changing body of information based in genisis on the fact that we truly really do not know.
It may have *looked* like the sun was angry at the end of every year (the pagan holiday "Christmas"), to the people that practised Saturnalia, but it could just be an annual occurence and not the mood of the sun which they worshipped.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
''Most people treat science as a sort of superstition and expect it to fullfill all the roles of a diety. Science is not all knowing and all powerful and never can be.''
Thank you for being so discerning.
''It may be the best thing going for many questions but there are still a lot of questions where the flip of a coin or a random number generator are equally likely to be right as science.''
Again, thank you. But some are to doctrinally persuaded to see this; does methodological naturalism come to mind.
Abstract_Faith says:
Science is not really a doctrine.''
That statement by itself is harmless; see ''doctrinally persuaded''
''Evolution just = traits are passed down genetically. Even most people who "challenge" evolution (a theory not necissarily a discipline) still "believe" that things are passed down.''
I don't believe for one minute that most people** challenge it on that particular empirical explanation; there's much more to the argument than that.
**If a fundamentalist creationist is involved then all bets are off. They won't need an explanation other than he did; that's good enough for them.
I'm puzzled by your multitude of question marks... still.
By the way I will hook up to your link later this evening. That said, I saw an abbreviated version of the same thing from you a couple of weeks ago. Other than the genetic abnormality what is it supposed to mean?
Posts: 2118 | From: midwest, USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Abstract_Faith: [QUOTE]
What most people refer to when they say "science" is the science or process or way of understanding phenom that occur.
There's also a huge tendency for many people, even scientists, to confuse technology for science. This may be especially harmful since we are so dependent on technology now days.
It's easy for those who are dependent on the results and manifestations of a process and who don't understand either to come to worship both. Despite the huge reaches of the unknown which are still wholly invisible to the scientific process many people simply assume such things as there can have been no aliens because science has found no aliens.
We managed to land a man on the moon with little more knowledge of gravity than the great pyramid builders had. It's simply not reasonable to assume that because technology is so advanced that everything must be known.
Posts: 393 | From: NW Indiana, US of A | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
''Despite the huge reaches of the unknown which are still wholly invisible to the scientific process many people simply assume such things as there can have been no aliens because science has found no aliens.''
An interesting thing to note is astronomer Seth Shostak, and I'm sure many others, sit by the ''phone'' every day in hopes of receiving a greeting message from a ''distant'' galaxy yet in the same breath will deny Airforce pilots and commercial airline pilots around the world coming across unidentified flying objects in their airspace.
And Mr. Shostak and others must be aware of the criticism they receive for clinging to a position that many educated critics and cynics say is untenable, that is extraterrestrial life; one of whom is George Basalla, history professor.
Without my knowing the full story about the ''old'' endeavor, CETI, the critics had too much sway with the government and decided to pull the purse strings, which is just as well I suppose since no results have ever been forthcoming. Yet Ohio State's 'WOW' signal in August 1977 still stands as something very unusual. Unfortunately the signal was a one shot deal, that is non-repeatable, so it remains unexplained... and unresolved.
Posts: 2118 | From: midwest, USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
''Despite the huge reaches of the unknown which are still wholly invisible to the scientific process many people simply assume such things as there can have been no aliens because science has found no aliens.''
An interesting thing to note is astronomer Seth Shostak, and I'm sure many others, sit by the ''phone'' every day in hopes of receiving a greeting message from a ''distant'' galaxy yet in the same breath will deny Airforce pilots and commercial airline pilots around the world coming across unidentified flying objects in their airspace.
Well from a scientific standpoint who's to say that the way life formed on this planet, couldn't have repeated itself on other planets, in other galaxies?
I.e, life on Earth sprang due to occurrences in outer space, which affected Earth, hence this occurrence could have naturally repeated itself somewhere else.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
''Well from a scientific standpoint who's to say that the way life formed on this planet, couldn't have repeated itself on other planets, in other galaxies?''
While it could be possible, some exobiologists may take issue simply because it can be argued a different evolutionary path will have to be taken. Meaning that conditions have to be different in another part of the galaxy or other galaxies. I don't necessarily agree with that because it seems to me the human form must have been a template from someplace else to begin with. In other words I don't see a Star Wars (original) scenario.
Posts: 2118 | From: midwest, USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Abstract_Faith: [QUOTE]
What most people refer to when they say "science" is the science or process or way of understanding phenom that occur.
There's also a huge tendency for many people, even scientists, to confuse technology for science. This may be especially harmful since we are so dependent on technology now days.
It's easy for those who are dependent on the results and manifestations of a process and who don't understand either to come to worship both. Despite the huge reaches of the unknown which are still wholly invisible to the scientific process many people simply assume such things as there can have been no aliens because science has found no aliens.
We managed to land a man on the moon with little more knowledge of gravity than the great pyramid builders had. It's simply not reasonable to assume that because technology is so advanced that everything must be known.
I understand exactly what you're saying and As far as our understanding of the world goes, as of the moment, I consider it VERrrrrrrrrrRrrrRY primitive and somewhat fragile in many respects as far as what we can and can't do, but yet in some of the things we can do somewhat advanced.
I never really jot down my thoughts so I don't remember them specifically but when you learn more about how we do things sometimes, you can instantly see where we're still really "noobs" and where things will definitely improve.
Our main specialty is in modifying. We are still lacking in our ability to create or discover new but good ways to think about things.
*
the fruits West African knowledge you might be using as you read this
(note the light speed and the uncertainty principle, particles and waves don't explain everything)
Einstein noted that we still haven't structured things right. The way it works, it doesn't really support discovery/advancement in the way the system promotes inside the box thinking. You move fast, you move straight ahead, and you modify and experiment on and work with mainly what is already known, cuz we're not wastin time or wastin money.
On the other hand older civilization like ancient Egyptian had a "fresher" way of thinking of things but very little information to work with.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Grumman: ''Well from a scientific standpoint who's to say that the way life formed on this planet, couldn't have repeated itself on other planets, in other galaxies?''
While it could be possible, some exobiologists may take issue simply because it can be argued a different evolutionary path will have to be taken. Meaning that conditions have to be different in another part of the galaxy or other galaxies. I don't necessarily agree with that because it seems to me the human form must have been a template from someplace else to begin with. In other words I don't see a Star Wars (original) scenario.
We ourselves could definitely have turned out differently, but we didn't. It's definitely possible some other similarly conscious organisms came about.
And sorry about that, lol. The wtfs were posted firstly, because I didn't know what evolution had to do with any of this and secondly because I don't get where anything was implied about Egyptian gods or their knowledge of where they came from, but you could expand on where this came from,
quote:Thoth, Horus, Osiris, Seth, and all the rest are mythical... and that the ancient Egyptians didn't know their history
Sam P I know you disagreed but I think if we delved into different kinds of math and science and only to modify a main way of doing these we'd be better off.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Abstract_Faith wrote: ''because I didn't know what evolution had to do with any of this and secondly because I don't get where anything was implied about Egyptian gods or their knowledge of where they came from, but you could expand on where this came from''
I inserted evolution and the Egyptian Gods to prove a point to Djehuti, sarcastically. When I wrote it it was geared more toward his response in regards to his idea about some people being superstitious as it regards science. Since someone said Djehuti discusses religion on another website and, to some people, to some degree, religion is myth, evolution comes in when, as a starting point for all life on this planet, my sarcasm worked it's way to the surface in terms of how could it be evolution would implant the idea of Gods of some kind in humanity considering Darwinism and religion, to a lot of people, are mutually exclusive concepts. Seen another way, from my perspective, evolution couldn't have implanted the idea of Gods since that would militate against the concept of naturalistic forces. So both can't be right in so far as each one is a standalone unit. Yet they both have to be compatible to some degree since they are here as competing ideas. This also means the concept of Gods has real meaning since all cultures at some point reference Gods of some kind.
You said I said this:
Thoth, Horus, Osiris, Seth, and all the rest are mythical... and that the ancient Egyptians didn't know their history
Abstract_Faith, when you re-post part of my comment regarding those deities you create the impression I said they weren't real. Context said I believe they are.
Here's what I said so that accuracy can be maintained, including the ''?'' at the end.
''And are you suggesting Thoth, Horus, Osiris, Seth, and all the rest are mythical... and that the ancient Egyptians didn't know their history?Posts: 2118 | From: midwest, USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes you are right , I did speak of evolution before Djehuti's post. I also spoke of the Egyptian Gods too. So for me to put my response as initially being because of Djehuti was off base; he came after the fact. However that in no way changes context before or after Djehuti.
Posts: 2118 | From: midwest, USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic