Over the past year, I have been closely assisting a colleague in writing a series of ten articles covering various aspects of his ancient astronaut theory. Those ten articles were widely circulated around the world and seeing counters on multiple sites indicated an abundant number of readers, but the response from me or anywhere from them was very low. No criticism or praise from anyone. Just silence. I began to think that no one in the world should take ancient astronauts seriously.
In an effort to make some progress, I decided to pay sixty dollars to review my oldest astronaut website. In fact, it should be reviewed by skeptics; Reviews of New Age believers are useless. Description of his blog "Critical Review of Paranormal Claims on the Internet". The mediator gave him five days to do his review, but it came after a long time, and not a single word came from him. My website provides a huge amount of evidence and honestly, I can not expect anyone to get a proper critical review in just five days. No one, including myself, likes to see hasty and frivolous arguments, otherwise I would make them ridiculous in my counter-argument. Furthermore, some of my testimonies come from Spanish language sources and to begin with, they need time to verify that none of them are fake. They are welcomed whenever needed.
Not sure what to expect from this blog. Like their New Age opponents there are narrow-minded skeptics in their thinking, and then, there are skeptics like me who objectively evaluate the evidence to reach the truth. Is there an original ancient astronaut? To help skeptics answer that question, I will give them some ideas on how to reject my theories. Here, only for the sake of space-related observations, I will focus on archaeological evidence, leaving another day of ideas that reject cryptography and theological evidence.
My website reproduces engravings from the Tiwana civilization in Bolivia. One of the engravings depicts the alleged ancient astronaut with an aquatic tail with a three-pointed tail, each of which ends with a three-pointed pod. How can skeptics condemn this? Easily. They must demonstrate that the shape of the pods resembles the life of an animal or plant found in the area. In other words, they need to find a geographical source for that engraving, otherwise my alien reasoning would not be affected.
The sky-god painting time for Tiwana is the same as the Nazca Line time in Peru, so the ancient astronauts in both places must be the same. As for Nazca, skeptics find a lot of ready-made arguments, but I think they are weak. The mentality of the Nazca people is not considered unique in human history. People in other regions also had to prove that they believed that the sun, moon, or sky-spirits had physical eyes that could see ground images. Alternatively, the Nazca people worship birds, believing that they have a cognitive intellect.
The engravings on the cosmological sun disk, the alleged alien artifacts, may prove to be the biggest challenge for skeptics. The Andeans of the early sixteenth century knew that a) the earth was round, b) that it was possible to orbit the earth, and c) how could they believe that the sunlight that touched the moon did not touch the spacecraft? d) Did you know that there are stars in the dark clouds of the Milky Way, and e) Did you know that water is the basis for the growth of plants and animals? Here skeptics have to find parallels in the history of Western civilization. Looking forward to their response.
You must be logged in to post a comment.