Were ancient civilizations visited by aliens?

Egyptian priests were very intelligent, learned men who had to align the pyramid exactly to the west so the pharaoh's spirit could be reborn. This would have been achieved using a compass (something as simple as a piece of magnetic iron dangled from a string), their extensive knowledge of astronomy, and meticulous planning in relation to existing structures

Originally posted by Nick1986 Egyptian priests were very intelligent, learned men who had to align the pyramid exactly to the west so the pharaoh's spirit could be reborn. This would have been achieved using a compass (something as simple as a piece of magnetic iron dangled from a string), their extensive knowledge of astronomy, and meticulous planning in relation to existing structures

Have you got any references to the uses of magnet? It would be interesting to see as to how they can build (well... make others build) a huge construction so precisely, these obviously needs equipment.



What do you think of this? The person (don't know who he is, didn't bother to look him up, but his reasons seems reasonable) in the video who observes certain aspects of the pyramid, it's actually quite advanced, if not, the construction is quite well done, and he doesn't seems biased in anyway. He sometimes also compare certain aspects to modern techniques.

He have a decent conclusion at the end of the video, what do you think of it? He clearly demonstrated that the original theory of the pyramid of Giza is inaccurate, and that advanced technology is required to accomplished what have been accomplished at the pyramid of Giza.

Although there are certain accomplishment of the pyramids that in modern times, might be even a bit complicated to accomplish, he did not say that the ancients must be using technology from aliens or so such. In fact, if you listen to him talk, he is very very unbiased, and his only purpose is to study the engineering, and how it could be accomplished. It's interesting to see at certain parts, it looks as if he did not believe in what he was seeing.

He have successfully shown that the Egyptians need much more advanced technology and engineering to build the pyramid of Giza, some even a bit unexplainable by modern technology, even to the extent that the entire pyramid could only be envisioned to be constructed with modern technologies, but not surpassing the original.

Unfortunately, there is no archaeological evidence of extensive technological tools, therefor we cannot assume that it was purely the Egyptians who built it. If the Egyptians are to build the pyramid by themselves, then where are the remains of high-tech tools or machinery? As without those, it would be impossible to build the pyramid of Giza.

Other speculations could include:

Queries were discovered miles away, the heavy stones were not built on site, so why would they decide to build the pyramid further away from the Queries, exactly at the center of Earth's land mass. Surely, they can't be purposely making this work harder for themselves?

 

Uhh, here we go again, "have his work gotten peer review".
You don't need peer review to see that there is no evidence to suggest that the in fact, the Egyptians built the pyramids, and the idea of ancient aliens is starting to be mainstream. The fact remains, no archaeological evidence remains to tell you that the Egyptians were able to build it themselves, in fact, only evidence of primitive tools remains, which suggest that the Egyptians were just "simple" builders of something even greater.

The original theory is flawed, most historians knows of this.
The extremely heavy stones (one of the heaviest around the world, the stones was not built on site, but was transported), the precision with the stones (some even said to be similar to the works of laser cuttings), and the engineering of it, which in the video, he gave a conclusion in the engineering of the pyramids.



http://reinep.wordpress.com/2010/11/28/egyptian-archaeologist-admits-that-pyramids-contain-ufo-technology/

You can look it up even more. You're too into the idea that all these are unconfirmed, these don't need to be confirmed, seems like an insult to their works don't you think?


Edited by AlphaS520 - 18-Jul-2012 at 03:20

As I noted you can reject the method, which includes peer review and the standards accepted, but like Dunn; you too will be rejected by mainstream......and find yourself with no recognised credibility.

Edited by Centrix Vigilis - 18-Jul-2012 at 03:35

The Moai of Easter Island
How exactly do you expect these much more primitive people (more primitive then the Egyptians) are able to build such huge statues? With decent precision in the shape of the huge rocks? The more intelligent thing to do, is to speculate. The civilization located within or around the area of the marvel, does not contain any archaeological evidence of tools that enable them to build it.
Have they really build it? There are no evidence at all? There are no evidence of human beings building it, except for the fact that the humans live around that area? 

Have you heard of the mirror writings of Leonardo Da Vinci's work? With that, certain productive people have shown that with each mirror to Leonardo's paintings, it shows another completely different thing.

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/slideshows/Leonardo-mirror.html

On this website, go through each slides. It shows that several paintings of Leonardo's, when mirrored, shows a being, which is not human.

It doesn't take a genius to know that a piece of magnetised iron points north when dangled from a string. These lodestones can be found naturally throughout the mediterranean and were known to the ancient Greeks

You only debunked one of the pictures, what about the others?

I checked both websites, and it didn't give any explanation to the flying object, can you explain this further?

Both sites clearly gave explanations. The first in dealing with explanations of arts whom others claim to have reps of ufos inclusive....which you referenced first. The other deals with the tomb and the explanation's derived by mainstream versus your poor ET picture. And failure to id other examples or report them.That you can not 'see' it... is because you are fast approaching fanaticism in your rejection of counter argumentation... your unwillingness to accept the standard academic viewpoint without offering reliable counters as judged by the standard further exemplifies this. Again you don't have to like it but it is remains the standard. And you should probably begin to understand this by examining the scientific approach and techs of people like Stan Friedman and others whose credibility far outweighs Dunn.This un-academically sound obstinance now begins to mark you as a poor researcher, analyst and objective observer of the method and interdisciplinary examination; insofar as this subject matter is concerned. Especially in the eyes of those who are academically sound. I tell you this not to attack or to injure but to persuade you to be less rigid.This rejection in clinical terms is referred to as denial syndrome. In historical analytic terms it is referred to as I indicated above: obfuscation in support of a predetermined hypothesis not subject to verification or review. That's not history or science or a proper examination of a theorem not even in a revisionist capacity.