November 29th, 2006, 08:26 PM
I was watching an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation and got this idea.
Is it possible that religion is a result of our world being visited by travelers from an advanced civilization?
I don't know...use your imaginations and see where this one goes
:-D
November 30th, 2006, 04:29 AM
This is hardly a new idea. In fact there were a few TV programs (like "Chariot of the Gods" based on a book by Erich von Däniken) presenting archeological "evidence" for this theory.Originally Posted by Kosta
Many people have hypothesized that for many many years. It's possible, but not very probable.
It's difficult to see what the purpose of any such visit might have been, a refuelling stop? unlikely, mars or the asteroids would have been a better bet, seeding intelligence? - this would have been long before any conscious human history, planetary rape? - no sign of lots of big holes in the ground, holiday? - no signs of ancient hotels, that just leaves a surveying mission for a new intergalactic highway.... :wink:
Awesome. I had no idea this was a common theory.
Ha... Maybe they just wanted to see what we were like.It's difficult to see what the purpose of any such visit might have been, a refuelling stop? unlikely, mars or the asteroids would have been a better bet, seeding intelligence? - this would have been long before any conscious human history, planetary rape? - no sign of lots of big holes in the ground, holiday? - no signs of ancient hotels, that just leaves a surveying mission for a new intergalactic highway....
Why is it "not probable" ?Many people have hypothesized that for many many years. It's possible, but not very probable.
Because if an alien race is intelligent and advanced enough to traverse thousands of light years within a fairly short period of time, they wont be wasting their time with a single planet that's inhabited by morons.
Similarly, this is why alien abductions do not happen. If aliens are that advanced, they need nothing from us. Furthermore, if they did, the people abducted wouldn't know it. Hypnotism or not.
Fair enough. That is one possbility. However, if we were advanced enough to traverse the universe, I think we would be studying "morons" on other planets just for the sake of discovery, science, knowledge. We do it now with things on Earth. Why do people care about Pandas and try to breed them and study them. They offer us nothing!
The point is, lets not rule out the possibilty that Intelligent beings just wanted to know for the sake ofr knowing
:-D
I believe Aliens have left remote camera devices on our planet in the form of nanobot insects. All of the data is channelled through the main galactic information exchange, edited and re-transmitted on their comedy channels.
Ever wondered why you swat a fly and another appears within seconds?
Ha, good point. Perhaps everything around us is conjured up by aliens. Kinda like the Matrix movie. Maybe robots are harvesting our energy.
We can never know for sure
idle fantasy
While I agree with you, just for the sake of argument it's worth pointing out that people "abduct" animals from the wild, examine them, and release them back all the time for the sake of our own curiosity, even though the animals have absolutely nothing to offer us.
Right. Except, once again, if aliens did that we wouldn't know it. If they have technology to travel the galaxy and land anywhere on earth undetected, I highly doubt that they'd have much trouble making sure a human didn't remember the encounter. Hell, human technology can even do that and we can't travel the galaxy!
sufficed to say, alien abduction accounts are fairly bogus. Especially since, with hypnosis, you can remember a complete fantasy (or dream). Better yet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypnagogic_hallucination
I've experienced that myself. although it isn't an alien abduction, but I had a nice time falling to my death from my nice and comfortable bed which I was in the middle of. That would be one very short microscopic fall....Plus, many alien abduction accounts tend to be told by people who were abducted while they were sleeping or tired.
Assuming they care if we remember. Perhaps they don't see any reason to bother erasing people's memories :wink:
If that was true, people wouldn't have supposed difficulty remembering. They'd remember it perfectly as it happened, regardless of hypnotism or anything else. Furthermore, it's generally unethical to throw people back into their habitat and expect them to be able to comprehend what had just happened (assuming it did).
If these aliens are intelligent enough for space travel at the suggested amounts, then they'd certainly be intelligent enough to realize implications of their actions to a very high degree.
i think you have a fairly close-minded mind, not to offend. Maybe they didnt travel in a fairly short time? theres the theory that if you were going the speed of light that you would not age at all. of course theres also the theory that you cant go the speed of light. thats ok, 99.99% would be close enough for me i think.
also, its entirely possible that they are a form of life based on entirely different elements than humans. we are primarily carbon, but what is to stop evolution from taking different turns?
Also, just because they cant gain anything from us doesnt mean that they wouldnt interfere. The United States might send disaster relief to an African country, and what do they get out of it? maybe the aleins felt that they were "helping" or "guiding" us. either way, true or not, i believe in it, kinda. theres a post in this section about Egyptian heiroglyphs that you should look into if you're interested. good stuff.
I'm sorry, did you just confuse "closed minded" with "rationally deducting the situation?" Yes, yes you did.
Okay: Why haven't we detected these evolved life forms on the thousands of planets our technology has seen? If evolution can evolve anything anywhere, then we should be seeing stuff pop up in our own solar system.also, its entirely possible that they are a form of life based on entirely different elements than humans. we are primarily carbon, but what is to stop evolution from taking different turns?
Sufficed to say, while there are insanely large gaps in what they may be or look like, it most likely took a similar evolution start: From base chemicals to animate life.
Political standing. Makes them look less evil. And, inevitably, the africans will go "aww...thank you!" and pay them back.Also, just because they cant gain anything from us doesnt mean that they wouldnt interfere. The United States might send disaster relief to an African country, and what do they get out of it?
and as you can see, that's hardly evidence for alien interference. As my second example shows, it can be taken a billion different ways.maybe the aleins felt that they were "helping" or "guiding" us. either way, true or not, i believe in it, kinda. theres a post in this section about Egyptian heiroglyphs that you should look into if you're interested. good stuff.
I'm sorry, did you just confuse "closed minded" with "rationally deducting the situation?" Yes, yes you did.
Okay: Why haven't we detected these evolved life forms on the thousands of planets our technology has seen? If evolution can evolve anything anywhere, then we should be seeing stuff pop up in our own solar system.also, its entirely possible that they are a form of life based on entirely different elements than humans. we are primarily carbon, but what is to stop evolution from taking different turns?
Sufficed to say, while there are insanely large gaps in what they may be or look like, it most likely took a similar evolution start: From base chemicals to animate life.
Political standing. Makes them look less evil. And, inevitably, the africans will go "aww...thank you!" and pay them back.Also, just because they cant gain anything from us doesnt mean that they wouldnt interfere. The United States might send disaster relief to an African country, and what do they get out of it?
and as you can see, that's hardly evidence for alien interference. As my second example shows, it can be taken a billion different ways.maybe the aleins felt that they were "helping" or "guiding" us. either way, true or not, i believe in it, kinda. theres a post in this section about Egyptian heiroglyphs that you should look into if you're interested. good stuff.
the universe is huge-that is a fact i think we can all agree on. there are billions of solar systems and probably millions of galaxies. Just because we havent detected them within our galaxie doesnt mean they dont exist.
its not that evolution can evolve anything anywhere (infinite # of realites??) but that we dont know if we know all the elements in universe. i dont claim to have that knowledge and i dont think anyone else does either. there could be a whole lot of combinations of elements in space. i was watching one program on tv about how there was this form of carbon that is usually on found in space, but a meteor brought it to earth? anyway, point of that is that space has almost endless possibilites, and this discussion will only end in opinion. my opinion is that its more likely than not. yours is opposite. I respect your opinion as you hopefully respect mine, but i still choose to disagree.
P.S. - this doesnt mean im done ranting :wink:
Umm...duh? Just because we haven't detected god doesn't mean he doesn't exist. Or unicorns. Or Yoda. Or Roaming Gnomes, denouncers of travel myths!
That's...LIKE an argument....its not that evolution can evolve anything anywhere (infinite # of realites
...right...this is kind of like arguing against someone that says "god exists, but I don't conform to any current description or religion, instead I'll just say something very obscure." You can't. However I will say this:i dont claim to have that knowledge and i dont think anyone else does either. there could be a whole lot of combinations of elements in space. i was watching one program on tv about how there was this form of carbon that is usually on found in space, but a meteor brought it to earth? anyway, point of that is that space has almost endless possibilites, and this discussion will only end in opinion. my opinion is that its more likely than not. yours is opposite. I respect your opinion as you hopefully respect mine, but i still choose to disagree.
Stars are the fusion reactors that create most elements. In simulations, and current knowledge, we can mostly predict what elements a star of a certain mass will create. Furthermore, there are a limited amount of elements a star, regardless of mass, can produce. Black holes excluded.
However that carbon is an example. The rock that ended up bashing to earth and bringing it here was most likely created during the suns development (of the planets and such). Scientists have also ended up "developing" certain elements in chemist labs (or is it discovering?).
Either way, if an alternative evolution situation were common, we'd be seeing it a lot more.
exactly 8)Umm...duh? Just because we haven't detected god doesn't mean he doesn't exist. Or unicorns. Or Yoda. Or Roaming Gnomes, denouncers of travel myths!
im not sure what you mean by that.its not that evolution can evolve anything anywhere (infinite # of realites ??) but that we dont know if we know all the elements in universe.
That's...LIKE an argument....
exactly....right...this is kind of like arguing against someone that says "god exists, but I don't conform to any current description or religion, instead I'll just say something very obscure." You can't. However I will say this:
opinion can not be argured. ones opinion can not be wrong.
I'll be a bastard and say it: except...it can't be right either.
imo, its possible but realy unlikely.
Think about it, which religion? One religion? Which one? Why that one and not the others? maybe, All religions? Really?
Thats like human biologists going to various parts of Africa to interfere with an elaborate number of tribes of monkeys by giving an array of various social tips that monkeys can relate to ("thou shall not smell you bretheren's behind", "if a semian fellow picks your lice thou shall reciprocate").
The idea is very interesting, but even if I dont dismiss the remote possibility I would be quite surprised.
lol. you've got me there. if its not right or wrong, what is it? morals perhaps? interesting, but not the subject at hand.I'll be a bastard and say it: except...it can't be right either.
No, that is not true. Many people have difficulty remembering events that are stressful, completely foreign to their usual experience, or that involve things [objects, processes, etc.] for which they have no vocabulary. An alien abduction would qualify as all three.
Furthermore, people need to time process such events, and to find a vocabulary with which to describe them. They are unlikely to openly discuss the events before they do so, and are most likely to adopt an existing vocabulary.
Memories of events will change during this processing, especially by the adoption of a pre-existing vocabulary.
[Frankly, I haven't come across a lot of very convincing arguments against alien abductions.]
why would aliens not erase the memory of someone they abducted? if the intent was good, or bad, both cases it would be erased.
Again, the technology factor, which is what the argument was based on, decides the events.
And furthermore, trauma events are normally beyond "stressful" or foreign, or foreign objects processes, etc. If an event was to be erased from memory so well, to the extent of requiring some hypnosis, then I have to say "bullshit". Furthermore, hypnosis has been known to rarely work on "real" trauma victims. If it did, don't you think everybody would be seeing a hypnotist?
existing vocabulary can easily explain an abduction, regardless of type. Unless you care to somehow describe something that's indescribable (fallacy in it's own attempt no less!).Furthermore, people need to time process such events, and to find a vocabulary with which to describe them. They are unlikely to openly discuss the events before they do so, and are most likely to adopt an existing vocabulary.
You apparently mean "vocabulary" in the sense of mental definitions. However in those cases I highly doubt it'd be likely. Again, if a race is that technologically advanced, I highly doubt they'd be careless enough to release someone that remembers certain details.Memories of events will change during this processing, especially by the adoption of a pre-existing vocabulary.
[Frankly, I haven't come across a lot of very convincing arguments against alien abductions.]
Also, the processing of said events differs vastly among everybody. So far, every "abduction" story I've seen consists of similar descriptions, stories, etc. Not only that, but every time the personality type is similar. Somewhat paranoid, maybe obsessive in some way, a bit eccentric, etc. These people have the direct opposite of credibility.
Also, assuming it's correct because you've not heard convincing evidence against something which has no proof of existing is a logical fallacy. You might as well say "well I believe in god, since I've heard no convincing argument against god".
I think that attempting to predict the likeliness of alien contact or abductions or why aliens would do this or why that...and using that to assume something seems silly and unentitled.
What we are entitled to say from what we know is that it is possible that aliens could have or are in contact with the Earth. Whether its byt erasing memories or disguising as humans and running for President (ha) .
The point is, how can you say "its possble, but unlikely?" Is it not possible that alien could work outside the rational of you and me? YES. Therefore, most of these claims being made are only speculation and empty assumptions.
We cannot deny that it is possible aliens have been here. The likeliness of this and that is beyond any of our range of knowing.
Cheers
I am not trying to hijack this into an alien abduction thread, but your reply contains two unwarranted assumptions, and a misunderstanding.why would aliens not erase the memory of someone they abducted?...
Furthermore, hypnosis has been known to rarely work on "real" trauma victims. ...
existing vocabulary can easily explain an abduction, regardless of type. Unless you care to somehow describe something that's indescribable (fallacy in it's own attempt no less!).Furthermore, people need to time process such events, and to find a vocabulary with which to describe them. They are unlikely to openly discuss the events before they do so, and are most likely to adopt an existing vocabulary.
You apparently mean "vocabulary" in the sense of mental definitions ...Memories of events will change during this processing, especially by the adoption of a pre-existing vocabulary.
[Frankly, I haven't come across a lot of very convincing arguments against alien abductions.]
Also, assuming it's correct because you've not heard convincing evidence against something which has no proof of existing is a logical fallacy.
You assume the aliens would be capable of imposing permanent selective amnesia by some means of advanced technology. If that is possible, it would require an advanced understanding of human neurophysiology; I see no reason to assume our alien abductors would have such knowledge.
Existing vocabulary [yes, I was using the word as you said] could be used to describe an abduction, but not being examined by alien creatures by means of an unknown technology, in a vessel and with instruments of unknown technology. Therefore, people who had suffered the experience commonly ascribed to 'alien abduction' would tend to describe the experience as others before them had.
As for the type of people who claim to have been abducted: it could be argued that
1. for some reasons aliens preferentially abduct paranoid and/or obsessive people, or
2. whatever selective amnesia inducing techniques the aliens have are not sucessful on paranoid or obsessive people.
You are making a more serious unwarranted assumption, however; you are assuming that you know what I believe. You assume that I disagree with your premise because I have pointed out flaws in your argument.
In fact, although I am willing to accept just about anything as possible until I see evidence or hear a convincing argument against it, alien abductions only rate about a 2 on my personal credibility scale [that's between the Catholic Church's position on birth control and Sasquatch].
Actually they would require the following:
1. download the information of human neurology by tapping into internet sources on the planet
2. Capture humans
3. Study humans
4. Apply the knowledge
You make it out to be more "impossible" than it is.
While words that the brain is adapted to using can be somewhat limited, mental imaging and processing is not. A person could easily recall the images, sensations, etc, and draw them or something. The brain normally lists it as "unable to describe," and that is the reply that abducted would have given.Existing vocabulary [yes, I was using the word as you said] could be used to describe an abduction, but not being examined by alien creatures by means of an unknown technology, in a vessel and with instruments of unknown technology. Therefore, people who had suffered the experience commonly ascribed to 'alien abduction' would tend to describe the experience as others before them had.
I've no idea on what basis you assume the brain would lock it out simply because it receives a "can't explain verbally" problem. Many people get the exact same problem every day, yet they don't exactly block it out of their memory.
Somehow, I highly doubt that just because their bodies release more of a certain chemical that they are less likely to be susceptible to memory erasing. Furthermore, see above about a list of example steps for gathering data on the human race. Emphasis on examples.2. whatever selective amnesia inducing techniques the aliens have are not sucessful on paranoid or obsessive people.
umm...where? I'm mostly concerned with the arguments presented. Screw what you believe.You are making a more serious unwarranted assumption, however; you are assuming that you know what I believe. You assume that I disagree with your premise because I have pointed out flaws in your argument.
...aaaaannnnnd this is even relevant...how? I can't express "i don't care" clearly enough to respond to this.In fact, although I am willing to accept just about anything as possible until I see evidence or hear a convincing argument against it, alien abductions only rate about a 2 on my personal credibility scale [that's between the Catholic Church's position on birth control and Sasquatch].
I will accept that argument as soon as you show me a link on the internet how to induce permanent selective amnesia.
Steps 2 through 4 could be exactly what the aliens were doing. They may have suceeded, which could be why there are fewer stories about alien abduction. If there are fewer stories; I have to admit that I don't keep on them.
Actually, people frequently completely lose memories of even perfectly normal traumatic experiences, as well as experiences for which they have no frame of reference.While words that the brain is adapted to using can be somewhat limited, mental imaging and processing is not. A person could easily recall the images, sensations, etc, and draw them or something. The brain normally lists it as "unable to describe," and that is the reply that abducted would have given.
I've no idea on what basis you assume the brain would lock it out simply because it receives a "can't explain verbally" problem. Many people get the exact same problem every day, yet they don't exactly block it out of their memory.
Now, why? Just why? Why should you make any assumption about the efficacy of completely unknown and probably imaginary techniques of memory erasure?Somehow, I highly doubt that just because their bodies release more of a certain chemical that they are less likely to be susceptible to memory erasing. Furthermore, see above about a list of example steps for gathering data on the human race. Emphasis on examples.
Here's one possibility: the technique involves a form of hypnosis, the same techniques that help some people quit smoking. A paranoid person is highly unlikely to be able to relax and trust enough to be hypnotized.
Another possibliity: the technique involves drugs, and an imbalance in neurotransmitters render the drugs ineffective.
If you voice unwarranted assumptions about what some-else believes, they will correct you.umm...where? I'm mostly concerned with the arguments presented. Screw what you believe.
Then why did you?...aaaaannnnnd this is even relevant...how? I can't express "i don't care" clearly enough to respond to this.
Hmm I don't know
January 9th, 2007, 07:10 PM
I think it's more likely to be a case of new advanced civilization storys replacing old and out of date religious storys.Is it possible that religion is a result of our world being visited by travelers from an advanced civilization?
Same sh*t different day.
January 10th, 2007, 04:46 AM
I think if it's true then it's more like they were 'intergallactic door-to-door salesmen' - Some idiot bought one of their books, and humanity has been plagued by the repercussions of it ever since, next time - let's tell him/them/ her to just "phuck off" :wink:
January 12th, 2007, 06:34 PM
Are you seriously asking if "space aliens" visited us some 100,000 years ago when religion seems to have developed in the human race , being made possible by the development of language? Why resort to a supernatural explanation for religion! We have a rational, cause and effect explanation for it. It serves an evolutionary function!
We are hunting-gathering group social beings. We evolved that way. But we need to form bigger groups than the millions of years of evolution designed us for. So, landugage and religion enables us to bond into much larger groups we call "societies."
charles, http://humanpurpose.simplenet.com
| « Threats to Religion | Snow? » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
