Asgard at our doorstep: NASA Astronaut claims aliens are real

[Flyboy]

I know I'm not the brightest light in the harbor. My degree is from the graduate school of public and international affairs at the university of pittsburgh. Still I have a mind which must have specific questions answered before I accept a premise as fact. If you can't answer the questions of inanimate matter becoming animate matter. Or a definition of evolution to include the link questions, I cannot accept it as factual. They are interesting theories, but only theories.

~Dave

Ok. Simple simple.

I do some Youth Leading when I can. Now I'm not a short guy, in fact I was always pretty tall for my age. I'm still taller than most thirty year old and onward blokes. I'm fairly tall amongst my colleagues. BUT at this damn youth organisation I help at, half the 15 year olds are taller than me. And I'm in my 20s. Why?! Because people are getting taller. The new generation are increasing in height. They're gonna end up taller than me, just like I'm taller than most 30 year olds.

Now trace that backwards through the generations and look at the differences characterisatically, look how the organism changes, getting shorter, having more hair perhaps, getting more stooped, a more protruding jaw, furrowed brow, etc.... Would you look at that... you get primates. It's a gradual process, the links are all there. Just dead. Just as the Chimps and Orangutangs have links, but they're dead. BUT we DID NOT come from Chimps or Orangutangs.

[~Dave]

A mind-set is almost impossible to break. But you should try. And with this, I will leave the discussion.

~Dave

[Flyboy]

I....

*jaw drops*


*headdesk*


You asked me to explain and I WAS!!


*breaks down in tears*

[jenks]

I know I'm not the brightest light in the harbor. My degree is from the graduate school of public and international affairs at the university of pittsburgh. Still I have a mind which must have specific questions answered before I accept a premise as fact.

It's not a premise though, we know though the fossil record that evolution did occur, but better yet we know through our understanding of biology that evolution can't not occur.

If you can't answer the questions of inanimate matter becoming animate matter.

That's a different question all together. Evolution theory doesn't answer that, nor does it pretend to.

Or a definition of evolution to include the link questions, I cannot accept it as factual.

Link questions?

They are interesting theories, but only theories.

~Dave

In a scientific sense? Yes. In general? No. It's fact.

[kymeric]

<<<<Terran primate

[Womble]

Trace our lineage backwards and youll find ApeLIKE creatures, but not apes, they bred, and bred, and produced us.

For fun's sake, a thought experiment.

Suppose a man is born with a particularly long nose. He is mated to a girl with a long nose, resulting in long-nosed children. They are mated to the longest-nosed individuals around, resulting in even longer-nosed children. That's all fine. But each generation will essentially be humans, just with longer noses than usual; DNA-wise, you won't see the difference. At what point do we stop talking about them as humans and start talking about a new species, homo pinocchius?

[Flyboy]

I suppose when homo-pinnochions decide that the difference in dna is sufficient to warrant it...


In the manner that our DNA is near identical to chimps, and only slightly less so to fish...

[NoobTau'ri]

The Universe is infinite, but matter in it is not.

No, it isn't. The Universe is finite, although it is expanding due to the Big Bang. "Space" is a dimension that is created by matter itself.

If we ever meet any aliens, they would have to be very far above or beneath us in development for conflict to be avoided. If our civilizations happen to be even remotely comparable, there will be a war. If they are carbon-based life-forms, there will definitely be a war of extermination.

You present no evidence whatsoever for this conjecture. If their brains evolved by some form of natural selection like ours, they will likely fear being annihilated and will likely avoid warfare with us if we are equally powerful. In fact, the opposite of what you claim is more likely true: it is more likely that they will destroy us if they are far superior because we won't be able to retaliate.

[DuncTK421]

So...how bout those aliens?

I think this guy being a NASA astronaut lends him a bit more credibility than some Joe off the street. It's certainly possible aliens have been here, and might even have shared some technology.

[kymeric]

Maybe its pr spin? Theyre using increasingly credible fact statments over a period of decades to EASE the public into acceptance. If they land a flying saucer on the white house lawn and the president does a Q & A with ET people will freak. If they cover it up for 50 years, then spend the next 50 years gradually leaking it from exponentially more credible public figures, then itll be old hat in 100 years when aliens do land. They gvmt would be all, 'aliens exist' and john q public will be all 'yawn, no duh.'

/tinfoilhat

[Oka]

For fun's sake, a thought experiment.

Suppose a man is born with a particularly long nose. He is mated to a girl with a long nose, resulting in long-nosed children. They are mated to the longest-nosed individuals around, resulting in even longer-nosed children. That's all fine. But each generation will essentially be humans, just with longer noses than usual; DNA-wise, you won't see the difference. At what point do we stop talking about them as humans and start talking about a new species, homo pinocchius?

Never. since they could still interbreed with normal humans. Dogs come in all shapes and sizes and they're still regarded as one species. The Domestic Dog separated from the Wolf (its genetical parent) thousands of years ago yet dogs and wolves and produce fertile offspring.

[Ikaros]

I don't think Ancient scripture is a reliable source. There's no way I'd read anything written down 100's of years ago by someone who likely had no idea what they were talking about and just accept it as fact without any other evidence to back it up.

So anything written more than 100 years before is what? nunsense?
So Pythagoras and Archimedes where what if not the fathers of Mathematics?
Explain how those "having no idea of what they where talking" guys could put on maps all the stars of the Galaxy, except one, without having our "modern" technologies and "superb" knowledge?
Evidence is a police word.In science, any kind of science, you can only have hinds. You can have sourses and you can compine them.
When too many things lead to the same asumption(correct my spelling), then you can say that you are close to a truth.
Maybe it's because i spend too much time reading history that i 've come to appreciate the past more than our present. Imho it's the only way to save our children's future.
Since you are a sceptic(i love that) read, or just watch the web, about the Anunaki(who claimed that came from the red star nibiru),Pythagoras (who ascended as it is mentioned from many sourses),the Summerians (who claimed that they where the mix of humans and some reptilians). I can go on and on.
I can even tell you personal experiences, about things that where found at my presence in Greece.Things so advanced that modern science cannot recreate them today.Sory, i hate that to.
I didn't mean religius scriptures in any way. Religions have nothing to do with science, evolution or human accomplishments of any kind ,imho

[jenks]

So anything written more than 100 years before is what? nunsense?
So Pythagoras and Archimedes where what if not the fathers of Mathematics?

Did I say that?

Explain how those "having no idea of what they where talking" guys could put on maps all the stars of the Galaxy, except one, without having our "modern" technologies and "superb" knowledge?

I'm not familiar with that, though I never made reference to whoever did that either.

Evidence is a police word.In science, any kind of science, you can only have hinds. You can have sourses and you can compine them.
When too many things lead to the same asumption(correct my spelling), then you can say that you are close to a truth.

Rubbish, science doesn't work like that at all. Science is about using evidence to develop a hypothesis, then testing it. If you can't test the truth of ancient scripture then there's no way you can conclude that it's fact.

Maybe it's because i spend too much time reading history that i 've come to appreciate the past more than our present. Imho it's the only way to save our children's future.

Reading history? But what do you mean by that, verified accounts of what took place in the past or unsubstantiated wittings? Lots of ancient texts contradict each other, how do you choose which ones to believe?

Since you are a sceptic(i love that) read, or just watch the web, about the Anunaki(who claimed that came from the red star nibiru),Pythagoras (who ascended as it is mentioned from many sourses),the Summerians (who claimed that they where the mix of humans and some reptilians).

The Anunaki were mythical deities, Pythagoras was a mathematician and the Sumerians were an ancient civilization. What are your sources for your other assertions?

I can go on and on.
I can even tell you personal experiences, about things that where found at my presence in Greece.Things so advanced that modern science cannot recreate them today.Sory, i hate that to.

I'm sure you can, but why would I believe you?

I didn't mean religius scriptures in any way. Religions have nothing to do with science, evolution or human accomplishments of any kind ,imho

Ancient scripture has nothing to do with science full stop.

[Ikaros]

Did I say that?
it's a logical asumption



I'm not familiar with that, though I never made reference to whoever did that either.
I am , and i am not the only one.It's also a logical asumption.



Rubbish, science doesn't work like that at all. Science is about using evidence to develop a hypothesis, then testing it. If you can't test the truth of ancient scripture then there's no way you can conclude that it's fact.
Prove gravity... What is evidence to you may be ....rubbish to me


Reading history? But what do you mean by that, verified accounts of what took place in the past or unsubstantiated wittings? Lots of ancient texts contradict each other, how do you choose which ones to believe?
You can compine information and even better compine sciences(f.e in archaeology you can use geology,anthropology, medicine and more sciences to come to a conclusion).



The Anunaki were mythical deities, Pythagoras was a mathematician and the Sumerians were an ancient civilization. What are your sources for your other assertions?
Not the bible for sure.You can start with national geographic
Anunaki where Sumerian deities, but they are so similar with other nations discription's of reptile creatures that mixed with humans (Chine,arabia etc).Compination again.


I'm sure you can, but why would I believe you?
You dont have to.I told you i hate to mention it.
But the Pyramids alone should have convised you that we are not the smartest ones.



Ancient scripture has nothing to do with science full stop.

Yes full stop, we live in different worlds.

[Ikaros]

Yes full stop, we live in different worlds.

oooh what a mess i made