As Aron Ra said, if you see something brown laying on the sidewalk with flies on it, do you pick it up to see what it is? "Read the book" is a dialog killing statement. It says, "I can't explain the basic principles, but I believe them." You presented terrible examples from someone who is claiming expertise in a field. There are thousands of others in that field, his work has been available for decades, yet, none of it has been confirmed, in fact it continues to be a joke to most. You know, the Bible has lots of universal values and stories that explain how to be moral. It's basically a guide for how to create a peaceful society. Read it. If you can't regurgitate his work, that's fine. I can file this under "thing that I haven't read the book about" and continue to use my general knowledge to determine the probability of it being wrong. But if you want to argue, "read the book" is not an argument.NO. "read the book" is a discussion starter. You however did not even read it. You heard that he wrote about something you disagree with, and that was enough for you to shelf it as "something brown laying on the sidewalk with flies on it". That book sold 7 millions copies. I wish I could be as good. And I know many secretly do too. And outrageous labeling such as that are Discussion KILLERS. There is nothing that needs explaining in that book as it is very easy to read as well as COMPREHEND. I related what's on it since you seem to be unware of it's content. As far as the bible. I've read it several times and I still read it to this day. if that is worthy book for you to read, then why do you dismiss it's content? that is rather very hypocritical and dishonest. BTW, I still have the book, I want to give me the page # and chapter where Erich "claim expertise in anything". I want to go back and read it as I don't recall having come across any such passage. thank you.
Lausten,
I find your attitude towards me very patronizing and even disgusting. You got nothing to say to what the guy found out, so your resort to such low pitiful behavior to make yourself feel good about your apparent ignorance. And that is what needs to be addressed here.
ETA:
Speaking of the bible, this is what it says about mankind including you. You brought it up, I didn’t not.
“All of us have become like one who is unclean,
and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags;
we all shrivel up like a leaf,
and like the wind our sins sweep us away.”
ISAIAH 64:6
NO. "read the book" is a discussion starter. You however did not even read it. You heard that he wrote about something you disagree with, and that was enough for you to shelf it as "something brown laying on the sidewalk with flies on it". That book sold 7 millions copies. I wish I could be as good. And I know many secretly do too. And outrageous labeling such as that are Discussion KILLERS. There is nothing that needs explaining in that book as it is very easy to read as well as COMPREHEND. I related what's on it since you seem to be unware of it's content. As far as the bible. I've read it several times and I still read it to this day. if that is worthy book for you to read, then why do you dismiss it's content? that is rather very hypocritical and dishonest. BTW, I still have the book, I want to give me the page # and chapter where Erich "claim expertise in anything". I want to go back and read it as I don't recall having come across any such passage. thank you.Sorry you don't understand my epistemology. I think I'm pretty consistent about what convinces me something is true, and selling a book is not one of them. People believe all sorts of stuff. You presented evidence, evidence that is easily available for free, and it was unconvincing. If it's so easy to comprehend, it should be easy to relate. I don't just "disagree" with it, I have a lifetime of experiences and none of them give me any indication that aliens came here, did a bunch of things and the only trace of them is rock carvings. Think about all the things that would have to change for that to be true. Think of all the questions that you have make ad-hoc answers to for that to be true. When I say he "claimed" something, I just mean he spoke about something as if he had some level expertise. Looking at ancient carvings requires some context, some training. By writing about it and making conclusions, he's "claiming" he can do it. I don't know what you expected when you came here. You don't even need to leave the CFI web page and you'll find plenty of discussion that agrees with me. You're welcome to stay, but expect more of the same.
@ InBetween, Have you watched the presentation by Robert Hazen? If not, watch it!! He is a real scientist.I just did. Couldn't get through the q & a section as the utube kept on flipping out (nothing to do with the internet traffic). Thought the claim that there is no life anywhere else but here on this tiny rock is as dogmatic as the Mormon doctrine is. Here we have fish on seas and lakes, and 100's of kinds. Insects and 1000's of kinds, animals, 1000's of kinds, humans, how many species we have? the blacks, the Asians, the whites, the red, the Nordics, the browns, etc. As far as animals we are still discovering new ones every now and then, the birds, we have 100's of kinds. Aaaaaaalll of this on a single tiny dot called earth, but out there where there are 1000's of planets that are just as livable? NOTHING!!! Very credible. How do you know that? have you been "out there"? And obviously you either did not listen or you did not understand. Robert Hazen clearly states that in his opinion the probability of life on other planets somewhere in the universe has a very high probability. Does you conclusion of NOTHING!!! rest on our knowledge of the Moon or Mars?
And obviously you either did not listen or you did not understand. Robert Hazen clearly states that in his opinion the probability of life on other planets somewhere in the universe has a very high probability.The question of there being life elsewhere is very different than the one of this planet being visited by that life. The odds of there being life on other planets has proven difficult to calculate, but I think there is general agreement that the probability is high. It's one of the missions of NASA. It's related to figuring out how we got here. But as Fermi once asked, "where are all the aliens"? If you take the higher end of the predictions of intelligent life, then start calculating how long it should take them to start colonizing planets, we should see a lot more evidence of them. I mean beacons and space junk, not inconsistent rock carvings. There are several theories for why we don't see them. My favorite is that they don't want to be seen. They know what happens when two alien cultures meet, and they don't want that.
And obviously you either did not listen or you did not understand. Robert Hazen clearly states that in his opinion the probability of life on other planets somewhere in the universe has a very high probability.The question of there being life elsewhere is very different than the one of this planet being visited by that life. The odds of there being life on other planets has proven difficult to calculate, but I think there is general agreement that the probability is high. It's one of the missions of NASA. It's related to figuring out how we got here. But as Fermi once asked, "where are all the aliens"? If you take the higher end of the predictions of intelligent life, then start calculating how long it should take them to start colonizing planets, we should see a lot more evidence of them. I mean beacons and space junk, not inconsistent rock carvings. There are several theories for why we don't see them. My favorite is that they don't want to be seen. They know what happens when two alien cultures meet, and they don't want that. Suppose an advanced alien race is travelling the universe. It may take a million years for them to reach just one star with habitable planets. Why should we be the first? Our Sun is in the boonies of the universe. Look at us. we are an advanced race conducting space exploration. We haven't even explored our solar system yet, let alone our galaxy, and we expect to have been visited by aliens? Do people have any idea of the enormity of the Universe? There are trillions of stars. The hubris is astounding! Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
A little math always helps.Let’s say 1/10 of 1% of the galaxies in the universe have life capable of interstellar travel. I’m just going to ignore intergalactic travel for this calculation. The number of planets that could have had an existing space travel culture that lasted for thousands of years could be quite large, but we’re only concerned with the current cultures. If you pick a small number, like 3 per galaxy, that’s still 6 billion planets with flying saucers and warp drive and who knows what.
Now, start looking at how long it would take us to get a tiny probe to the nearest star and how much of the local galaxy we’ve actually seen, let alone visited. Then tell me again how it’s hubris to say we are unlikely to make contact with aliens any time soon.
The hubris is in saying we are in a galaxy with an above average number of intelligent life forms, and in a part of that galaxy that is densely populated with them, and that we are worthy of their attention.
There is nothing that pertain to him 'imagining' stuff up in his book.I get the feeling that I must be coming off much more dismissive than I intend. It's a fascinating idea, I totally agree with that. I was fascinated by it myself in the 70's. "What if some of the gods and legendary characters from mythology were real people? What if they came here from other planets?" That's an absolutely astounding idea! The trouble is that when you dig deep, that's all it turns out to be, a game of "What if...?" It's an amazing avenue for speculation, but there's nothing that you'd really call evidence.
And the guy was not wearing a kilt. I know what a kilt looks like. It's a Scottish skirt for men. And it was not it.Can we at least agree that whatever he's wearing, it's not a spacesuit? :)
Sorry you don't understand my epistemology. .....I do understand what "something brown that has flies around it" means. I also know it has no place where you put it. I can safely conclude that I put you in really smelly place when it comes to your own prejudices and underlying mentality.. ....
There is nothing that pertain to him 'imagining' stuff up in his book.I get the feeling that I must be coming off much more dismissive than I intend. It's a fascinating idea, I totally agree with that. I was fascinated by it myself in the 70's. "What if some of the gods and legendary characters from mythology were real people? What if they came here from other planets?" That's an absolutely astounding idea! The trouble is that when you dig deep, that's all it turns out to be, a game of "What if...?" It's an amazing avenue for speculation, but there's nothing that you'd really call evidence. .... He does not refer to space aliens as "gods", he does not. You guys need to drop that false accusation. IN fact he gets annoyed at those who, refer to beings who happen to simply be more evolved than we are, as "Gods". One can clearly sense that as they read the book. did you know that Phil Schneider, an American Geologist, Structural Engineer and Explosives Expert, came face to face with 2 Alien Grays, when he was working with the US Government back in 73, as they were digging underground tunnels to connect various Deep Underground military Bases?!?!? I believe this guy. According to him, they have been living under earth for last 4 to 500 years. And who knows how they got here?! You can suppress this all you want, people are going to find out the truth. BTW, Phil Schneider was strangled to dearth in 96. But not b4 he gave no less than 30 lectures about this. So the Word about this is most definitely Out!
He does not refer to space aliens as "gods", he does not.Maybe he should have given the book a different title? ! Anyway, glad you didn't run away IB. Always good to stretch one's logic muscles. Being open minded, I'll just ask an open ended question. Why do you believe Phil Schneider? There are no credentials in the universe that I would accept for an "alien spotter". Claims like that require a couple more witnesses and some additional evidence. Barring that, some things would need to be explained; why didn't he go back with a camera? Where did this happen? If they were there for 400 years, you'd think there'd be some evidence, like living quarters or some garbage. Or, if you want to pursue a different angle, how am I suppressing this?
How do you know that? have you been "out there"?I return the question to you as this is a 2 way street exchange. you all think you know it all and no one should dare to contest your view because you have a background in 'science' if at all. That's pointless. Unless you think science is your god. then it's your problem not mine. Common sense dictates that if there are that many creatures here, there should be just as much out there. If you cannot see a germ unless you use a microscope, then the same process should be used in reverses outward. Now I can tell you there are no germs or micro organisms, it's all in your head. but I know better. I am going my way and let you go yours. The day someone convinces me of something, I concede. Til then I am moving on.
In your travels on forums, you may come across the phrase, burden of proof
He does not refer to space aliens as "gods", he does not. You guys need to drop that false accusation. IN fact he gets annoyed at those who, refer to beings who happen to simply be more evolved than we are, as "Gods".I used a lower-case "g", meaning that I was referring to a character from folklore. Are you saying that he doesn't claim that, for example, Quetzalcoatl was a space alien? Quetzalcoatl was a god. I don't know how else to say it.
did you know that Phil Schneider, an American Geologist, Structural Engineer and Explosives Expert, came face to face with 2 Alien Grays, when he was working with the US Government back in 73, as they were digging underground tunnels to connect various Deep Underground military Bases?!?!? I believe this guy.That's fine. Believe it if that's what your judgment tells you. My judgment tells me that an engineer who was supposedly working on what was a Secret project in the first place would have been put in prison if he disclosed that information to the public. Therefore the government must not have believed his story about aliens either.
According to him, they have been living under earth for last 4 to 500 years. And who knows how they got here?!Yes, who knows?
BTW, Phil Schneider was strangled to dearth in 96. But not b4 he gave no less than 30 lectures about this.Thirty lectures? I found some of them on YouTube, so we have to figure millions have seen them by now. And the government obviously doesn't think they're serious enough to have taken them off the Internet?
He does not refer to space aliens as "gods", he does not.Maybe he should have given the book a different title? ! He is not the one who chose it, his publisher pressured him to use it as I said in one of the above posts. At least that's what he claim in the beginning of the book. And he is not the first I read who had such problem with publishers. Publishers probably recommend key words in the title that they think will be good magnets for readers to generate the most sales. And I don't blame them for that. As far as I am concerned, it was not misleading at all.
Anyway, glad you didn't run away IB. Always good to stretch one's logic muscles.Well, that's very nice of you to say that. Believe it or not, I LOVE Atheists, they are the ones who taught me to think outside the box....I mean a little bit, I still have ways to go. You should see me defending them on generally theistic websites. I beat the dung out of those who attack 'em. MERCILESSLY! And how do you suppose I do that?!?!? by citing bible verses as there are so many that vouch on their behalf if one can discern, and from a totally unexpected angles. Amazing. To this day I still, deep in my heart, I believe they are the most honest category of all as far as Doing and not just lip servicing. When Jesus said something along the lines "you will do greater things than the ones I did." In John 14:12 I think, I believe he meant that mankind will attain them through Science Because spiritually, we are Xtremely corrupt beings.
Being open minded, I'll just ask an open ended question. Why do you believe Phil Schneider? There are no credentials in the universe that I would accept for an "alien spotter". Claims like that require a couple more witnesses and some additional evidence. Barring that, some things would need to be explained; why didn't he go back with a camera? Where did this happen? If they were there for 400 years, you'd think there'd be some evidence, like living quarters or some garbage. Or, if you want to pursue a different angle, how am I suppressing this?Well, he is dead. Murdered (that's evidence # 1!). They tried to kill him at least 16 times b4 that. They killed him shortly after they killed a close colleague of his who also went public about this by writing a book. They probably never thought he would leave. He said he didn't even pick up his last pay check!!! He showed his audience small blocks of special metal, metal they used to make Stealth fighters. According to him Aliens are the ones who let them in on this metal's special make as it can withstand temperatures that range in the 10's of 1000!!! He just blew the lid off the top when it comes to black budget, Mach 2 speed train that can go from east to west underground in 30 mns. He never got on it but his friend has. His Ex wife said all the physical evidence has been removed when he has been found dead. He is all over UTube, even though they sanitized lot of what he said.
If there were a designer god he woukd have died laughing by now. Not even a god could survive laughing as hard as he would have laughed at the antics of humans. He woukd have had to say, “What horror have I wrought!"
You started with Daniken and that was for me all I needed to know…
I will put it this way. I was born in Czechoslovakia during rule of communism. I happened to never adopt any religious belief, nor even be considered “cultural christian”. That does not mean I dont like art, or that I dont appreciate beauty of cathedrals or churches, regardless that many of communists were also cultural barbarians.
When there was first approach of christianity to me i already had plenty of books with faerie tales. Faerie tales from Germany, Czech and Slovak republic and everything in the Central European region are … little bit tough. They usually give sort of moral story, such as “dont trust strangers” or “you should bake the grandma in the oven”. So approach of christianity to me was through books, with christmas tales.
My reaction was like “ok, there is some moral in the story in the book, but why it should imply something more?”. Aswers like “its different” were not enough for me as a 10 year child, because there was followup question “how different?”.
Historians use scientific approach. Which means looking up in the archives. Journalists have to base their articles on facts, which can be proven and documented. This is how I perceive non-fiction literature. I did not read much of Daniken, but he took some fact and make huge exxageration on that base. In case of Bible, or Old and New Testament i percieve the whole as a subjective interpretation of events. Claim itself does not provide proof and thats why starting to argue with books is simply wrong. You have to first convince me that its objective non-fiction.
If there were a designer god he woukd have died laughing by now. Not even a god could survive laughing as hard as he would have laughed at the antics of humans. He woukd have had to say, “What horror have I wrought!"Speaking of which, right now one or maybe more than one of your own brain cells are laughing at what you uttered, they know you exist but here you are insinuating you don't. Diiing! That's basically what you are saying. ....Because if you Know for Sure, so do they....
You started with Daniken and that was for me all I needed to know... I will put it this way. I was born in Czechoslovakia during rule of communism. I happened to never adopt any religious belief, nor even be considered "cultural christian". That does not mean I dont like art, or that I dont appreciate beauty of cathedrals or churches, regardless that many of communists were also cultural barbarians. When there was first approach of christianity to me i already had plenty of books with faerie tales. Faerie tales from Germany, Czech and Slovak republic and everything in the Central European region are ... little bit tough. They usually give sort of moral story, such as "dont trust strangers" or "you should bake the grandma in the oven". So approach of christianity to me was through books, with christmas tales. My reaction was like "ok, there is some moral in the story in the book, but why it should imply something more?". Aswers like "its different" were not enough for me as a 10 year child, because there was followup question "how different?". Historians use scientific approach. Which means looking up in the archives. Journalists have to base their articles on facts, which can be proven and documented. This is how I perceive non-fiction literature. I did not read much of Daniken, but he took some fact and make huge exxageration on that base. In case of Bible, or Old and New Testament i percieve the whole as a subjective interpretation of events. Claim itself does not provide proof and thats why starting to argue with books is simply wrong. You have to first convince me that its objective non-fiction.I don't need to convince you of anything as I love Atheists just the way they are. If they were just like me, I would not have had the privilege to learn from them in the past the way I have. The book is full of evidence. Of course one has to go out and double check everything that is cited on there. Or at least some of it. And that in and of itself requires some effort. I brought him up because I thought he might have the answer to how the God Idea came about. That's it.
Offler said, I brought him up because I thought he might have the answer to how the God Idea came about. That’s it.You'll need to go back much, much further in time. We can go back in time by observing the behavior of our distant cousin, the chimpanzee. I saw a recorded NOVA presentation of a family of common Chimpanzees during a monsoon storm. While the entire family sought shelter as best they could, the Alpha male exercised his duty as protector of his family. At one point he began to run around in a clearing, beating the ground and brush with a stick, to show his power to scare off out this "unseen enemy" who was making loud noises, and threw bright lights and water at him and his family. The end of the clip showed him standing in the middle of the clearing shaking his stick to the air above him, because he realized this threat came form "above". He had no idea this was a natural phenomenon, but assumed it was an "intentional assault" by an "unseen enemy" on his troupe. He had seen plenty of birds living in the sky, so he was familiar with the concept that living beings could and did live in the sky above, but he knew this was not an ordinary bird, but something much more powerful, even as it was invisible. IMO, this was the first rudimentary assumption of a intentional but unseen being which lived in the sky. Later in the evolution of the homo sapiens' brain, these unexplainable phenomena were given names such as the god of rain, the god of thunder, the god of lightning and still later in our evolution of the brain, eventually these gods were identified by proper names, such as Thor and a host of other "named" gods. And along with these "angry gods", other named gods were invented, each ruling there own domain and occasionally making war on each other.
Throughout history, humans have ascribed various powers to supernatural beings. Chief among this world of spirits and powers are the immortal gods and goddesses. Some are given credit for the creation of the world and mankind, or food, warfare, love, and all the other good and bad elements of life. In pagan societies, people turned to specific gods for specific needs: seeking favor for good harvests, success in war, fertility in the home, and more.https://www.thoughtco.com/gods-goddesses-of-world-mythology-120541 IMO, the concept of a god (an immortal, powerful, but unseen being or spirit) started with the first hominids, and to me this sounds like a very reasonable argument and also explains the persistence of belief in gods and other spiritual beings as being causal to unexplained natural phenomena, which to the ignorant must have appeared as "miracles". I believe this reasoning of the evolution of the god concept meets Occam Razor in explaining the origin of the concept itself. Much later in the evolution of man, these concepts were not discarded, but refined and monotheism was born. But a variety of gods still exist in many cultures. But as science is able to explain the natural physics of naturally occurring phenomena, the concept of god or gods is steadily declining.