Posted by: antyx | August 20, 2011

The extra-terrestrial intelligence hypothesis – Psedoscientific Conclusions [part 2]

Mayan depiction of a flying deity

Our history is filled with astonishing myths and legends which till today are taught from each generation to the next. From an early age, every  organized society had plenty of myths involving Gods and deities which come from the sky and the stars. On my personal search on the extra-terrestrial hypothesis i have stumbled upon numerous contradicting incredible interpretations of well known and unknown myths. Throughout time, history was mostly recorded and embedded within myths. Even today we have to admit that history is not objective and there is no perfect way of recording history. Even in the 20th century in some cases there historical events are recorded within urban myths and legends.

During my personal research i felt somehow lazy and downloaded all the episodes of the Ancient Aliens (History Channel TV Series) which consist 3 seasons till now, with numerous episodes. I admit i sometimes get put off by the Hollywood style directing of this series though i was amazed of some new historical data i was not aware of. Ofcourse as i would agree with most archaeologists the conclusions which all the “experts” which star in this series are belong to the pseudo-archaeology category. Authors and TV personas such as Erich von Däniken, Giorgio A. Tsoukalos, Graham Hancoc and many more claim that ancient civilisations had contact with extra terresrtial races using assumed historical clues which in many cases contradict themselves in order to fit everything in their abstract  teenage method of leading into plausible conclusions. Phrases like “They may as well do…” or “To my view this may serve this purpose…” show the lack of scientific method and iquiry into leading into a robust scientific  theory. Their naiveness reminds me of that many religious groups have, which in order to form their abstract worldview, they neglect basic scientific evidence which contradicts their theory. They percieve ancient societies as ultimately non-capable of percieving notions and using technology a 10year old can easily understand or use today and that their advancement can be explained only by assuming extra-terrestrials were the reason of their great accomplishments.

Nevertheless to my view the ancient astronaut theory is a modern myth to me, not because it may be 100% untrue, but because the conclusions are made with a total lack of scientific inquiry. The authors of various books which consist this theory do not use systematic scientific evidence so that the above theory accepted by the scientific community. To me the “ancient alien” theory shows how modern man, thinks that his technology and understanding is far superior to that of the ancient humans so that when a megalithic archaeological site could not have been constructed by modern technology, immediately claims that an extra-terrestrial must have built it. Even in mythological depictions of human/animal hybrids they neglect how far human imagination and art can go. It would be rather narrow minded of our descendants two thousand years from now to look out our art and theological depictions and assume that all of that must be perceived literally.

The extra-terrestrial hypothesis seems like a maze to me. A rather complex maze which requires plenty of analytic and scientific means of examining this hypothesis. By no way i am willing to use ancient alien hypothesis to build my world view. It is a hypothesis still to me and a rather plausible one indeed. Fear and ignorance may only make us inferior to any other intelligence race that may as well be out there in space or within our planet. We can mostly rely on what we can study and examine today about the UFO hypothesis. Numerous of recorded sightings cannot be treated as something fake or neglected. Something strange is out there and society frequently tends to silently deny it. With very few people around me i can hold a serious conversation about all the above and even wish someone can prove me wrong on my conclusions through robust arguments. My personal research seems sometimes to lead me to more questions and doubts which frequently happens when searching for a certain truth.

The path to understanding everything strange and new by no doubt is science. The reasoning of things around us, though a hypothesis, examination/experiment and which finally leads to a conclusion using all the scientific knowledge which is already proved through the above method. Most of the technologies we use today are a product of this scientific method we have learned to use. Hypothesis and conclusions with no scientific proof, according to what we want to believe to,  do NOT stand in the scientific field. The extra-terrestrial hypothesis today is based on numerous sightings which in most cases defy conventional physics and understanding. Relational speeds and mass show that what ever intelligence is behind has already produced technology of the theories modern cosmology struggles to prove today. Consciousness could not be left outside of all the above. We grasp to understand how consciousness works and strangely enough how our own is affected by mysterious forces around us.

In order to understand any intelligence greater than ours we ought to progress as a species. That consists of social, scientific, technological, political and conscious progress. We still live to some extent in Plato’s cave. All the sightings of strange objects are by no doubt the shadows of reality which we think we perceive to a satisfying extent. The truth is that we aren’t really aware of the true nature of reality itself. We are not able to fully understand what energy and consciousness essentially is, and how it reacts to our physical universe. Modern cosmology is the group of cutting edge scientific fields which may be able to help us start to comprehend the UFO phenomenon which by no doubt is linked to our earth itself. I have to admit that till now i have not been  witness to any single unexplained phenomenon. I cannot really doubt and believe anything till my own eyes convince me of a greater intelligence than ours existing somewhere near us.

I’ve embed a recent UFO sighting in Brazil which to my knowledge has not proven fake till now:



  1. You didn’t investigate, prove, or disprove anything. You discredited T.V personalities on baseless grounds and used poor grammar. All in all, DERP! TROLOLOLOLOLOL

  2. ^^^ yeah what a waste of time. what was your point in writing this? you didn’t provide any new insight or understanding of a topic that has been covered repeatedly in the exact same way. lololoolllzzz

  3. The terminology used on the show goes to exhaustive lengths to demonstrate their theory rather than fact. So phrases like, “To my view this may serve this purpose…” is not a lack of scientific inquiry, but rather trying to be fair in reporting something that is not fact. From there, they all give their opinion, and oftentimes that’s where they make their personal claims of proof. I wish you had someone to talk about this with too, because I think it’s a wonderful concept that has every bit of possibility to be true as anything else about our past.

    Science is constantly evolving and sometimes that means shifting what we previously understood about something. Sun going around the Earth, Earth is flat, dinosaurs didn’t have feathers, aliens didn’t visit us… The first three have been proven inaccurate and who’s to say the last one can’t be true, too? There are very compelling examples presented on this show that I can’t discount, so I have no choice but to hold it as a possibility. Also, I don’t think science needs to be brought into this anyway. Really, look at it, they’re just presenting a hypothesis (which many of them believe to be fact but still make efforts to be fair in their presentation) that relies on things seen without a whole lot of digging and probing and calculating. Clear evidence. That way it’s less convoluted. I can think of a few examples where they do use science to support their evidence (EMFs in crop circles and in the Carnac Stones) and I’m sure there are others, but those sciences are not inaccurate or pseudo, so… Think of it less as scientists with lab coats and more of lawyers presenting evidence. Evidence does not mean truth, it is merely a collection of data that supports a theory, much like a fingerprint or hair supports the guilt of a criminal but is not the final verdict, no matter how much the prosecuting lawyer believes in it. It’s up to the jury to decide.

    I think you’re turned off by the production so you were turned off from the start and watched it through a lens of skepticism right from the start. I had the opposite experience. I saw the title and thought, “Oh hell yes I’m watching this!” and approached it with enthusiasm, then became further intrigued with all the presented material that was completely foreign to me, like the Carnac Stones and Sacsayhuaman. It’s rare for a simple tv show to tell me something I don’t already know, but Ancient Aliens does it left and right with compelling evidence that stacks up with every episode.

    As far as technology, I believe it’s rather difficult to assume that ancient man could perform tasks that we can not mimic today. Yes, I’m sure they were capable of all their achievements in some way, but wouldn’t we be able to figure it out as well, or at least have machines that can help us get there? According to science, “yes.” If we are always building on what we already know, through the scientific process, we should be able to replicate any past action with modern methods, even if the past method has faded from memory. This is advancement. If we can not recreate something (whether in the original way or our new modern way) then we are not advancing, and we’ve obviously advanced beyond our ancient ancestors. The show constantly states that our ancestors were NOT dumb, they were NOT uneducated, but that they were very sophisticated and creative. So that right there, unfortunately, tosses out a good chunk of your writing, and also furthers my thought that you are watching through a filter of skepticism and not REALLY hearing what they are saying. They do not immediately claim an extraterrestrial built something that we can’t duplicate. Rather, they offer that as a piece of evidence to consider that supports their theory. I don’t know how else to put it. People who go to great lengths to find an explanation for something OTHER than their theory isn’t really jumping to conclusions. Sometimes extraterrestrial intervention is just one of the few conclusions left on the table when everything else has been tossed out (which, correct me if I’m wrong, is part of the scientific method). Perhaps the semantics of the show makes it appear that they are immediately stating that “aliens made this” but if you consider the framework of a television episode, they’re going to make state their case, present their evidence, and make their claim, in a pretty clear and quick manner, despite the countless years of research behind some of the claims.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: