quote:

ORIGINAL: Missokyst

Personally I think we have been here many times before we fuck it up and blow it all to heck leaving a handful of survivors to start over again. As far as evidence goes, we are still finding evidence that predates the stuff we found before. Leading me to believe that water, erosion, natural occurances like volcanos, earth shifts, subduction, asteroids, et al have changed our surface countless times, and we expect to find evidence as if it was all laying here in plain sight all along? Yeah.. I am surprised that people are not still holding on to the flat earth theory.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Karmastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Karmastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Karmastic
re the 5 to 10 mil, and last extinction 35 mil timeline...assuming that's true, that leaves, what, roughly a few billion more years for many other cycles to have occurred? there's no debate that we just don't know much about earth's earlier history. mea culpa and sorry, not gonna link it, call it my opinion if you wish.

re satellites finding remote spots, so what? my rebuttal stands - we're just NOW using tech to find sites that have been there waiting to be re-discovered. so the jury is most definitely NOT in, and it's not as cut and dried as you make it seem.

Yes it is that cut and dried.

These are facts, no significant land mass has been destroyed/subducted/hit by meteor during the existence of the any animals that could be remotely called human. Probably the biggest such, and the likely source of the Atlantis myth, is the Thera volcano and we know quite a lot about the town that was there..

While we may have lost small settlements and isolated structures there is absolutely no evidence to support the idea that some technologically advanced culture existed and then was wiped out/disappeared. Technology is a stepwise series of advances with each generation building on the advances and infrastructure of the previous. So a miraculous culture thousands of years in advance of its neighbors is simply unreasonable. Why would its technology not have spread? How could they develop such wthout having many settlements and many people studying the sciences and the infrastructure to support such?

Consider modern civilization. Even if every one of us died right now it would be many millions of years before all the obviously artificial causeways, canals and road cuts would erode away. And even then future archaeologists would still find unmistakable traces of our civilization. Our many dump sites would be obviously artificial and the plastic materials in them would last essentially forever.

see bolded - yes, so we agree. we're working on a time scale of BILLIONS (around 4.5?) for the age of the earth. i guess we can disagree.

So you're positing a previous advanced civilization for a previously unknow species that predates the hominids? You have no evidence and won't ever have any because that is simply impossible.

quote:

re tech building on itself - plenty of ideas were lost for hundreds of years. we have not only evidence, but proof - Babylon Battery.

Oops you believed woo.
http://www.badarchaeology.com/?page_id=208#
http://archyfantasies.wordpress.com/2012/06/22/the-10-most-not-so-puzzling-ancient-artifacts-the-baghdad-battery/

quote:

re no evidence - that's simply not true. there are reams of EVIDENCE. now, if you want to say that's not PROOF, i would agree.

present what you think is the best evidence for an advanced non hominid technological civilization.

see red color above. first you admit/realize, it's impossible to obtain "proof", let alone evidence, but then ask me for evidence :)

remember, that was the point of this thread, to speculate as well as submit "evidence". i do think there's reams of evidence for advanced cultures going back many thousands of years before, say the Egyptians. but yes, of course there wouldn't be evidence for much earlier civilizations going back millions of years. what boggles my simple mind, is why you would automatically presume there were not such civilizations, sorta like presuming the earth is flat because that's all you can see from the ground.

You're claiming such existed without evidence. That is patently absurd.

Just consider how many different tell tale marks we leave on Earth and how many millions of years it would take to wipe away all such traces.

Now look back at what fossils we have from those multiple hundreds of millions of years ago. Where are the predecessors of the intelligent species? Where are the puzzling little bits of clearly artifciial material from way back then?

As to the point of the thread, based on your op it was to insult everyone who has studied human history and to belittle anyone who doesn't believe your pet nonsense.

quote:

we can't even start to understand our own human history, because it's buried and melted in perhaps a few hundred thousand years of molten lava. it's laughable that up until just a few years ago, we believed the "first" great civilizations were only a couple thousand years old. we just learned that the Mayans were at it at least a couple more thousand years earlier (at least 4 thousand BC).
it's not hard (for me) to imagine that advanced civilizations were around hundreds of thousands of years ago, and that every trace of them was buried or sucked under (the earth's plates are always slowly moving, and sucking in and spitting out, so to speak, in a continuous cycle).

do you believe we have pretty much discovered what our human history is in regards to advanced civilizations? or do you agree, that we really don't have a clue, and probably never will. thoughts.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Let's start with your first post

quote:

we can't even start to understand our own human history, because it's buried and melted in perhaps a few hundred thousand years of molten lava. it's laughable that up until just a few years ago, we believed the "first" great civilizations were only a couple thousand years old. we just learned that the Mayans were at it at least a couple more thousand years earlier (at least 4 thousand BC).
it's not hard (for me) to imagine that advanced civilizations were around hundreds of thousands of years ago, and that every trace of them was buried or sucked under (the earth's plates are always slowly moving, and sucking in and spitting out, so to speak, in a continuous cycle).

do you believe we have pretty much discovered what our human history is in regards to advanced civilizations? or do you agree, that we really don't have a clue, and probably never will. thoughts.

Bolded sections insult anyone who has studied history, archaeology and all related sciences. You're saying their work is laughable and they cannot even begin to understand what they study.

As for the rest you think there is evidence for whatever pet theory you want to believe. Present it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Karmastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Let's start with your first post

quote:

we can't even start to understand our own human history, because it's buried and melted in perhaps a few hundred thousand years of molten lava. it's laughable that up until just a few years ago, we believed the "first" great civilizations were only a couple thousand years old. we just learned that the Mayans were at it at least a couple more thousand years earlier (at least 4 thousand BC).
it's not hard (for me) to imagine that advanced civilizations were around hundreds of thousands of years ago, and that every trace of them was buried or sucked under (the earth's plates are always slowly moving, and sucking in and spitting out, so to speak, in a continuous cycle).

do you believe we have pretty much discovered what our human history is in regards to advanced civilizations? or do you agree, that we really don't have a clue, and probably never will. thoughts.

Bolded sections insult anyone who has studied history, archaeology and all related sciences. You're saying their work is laughable and they cannot even begin to understand what they study.

As for the rest you think there is evidence for whatever pet theory you want to believe. Present it.

that's what i thought you meant, but i wanted to clarify because it's so absurd to derail an otherwise good discussion (your posts included) in some lame attempt to call me to task for thinking our understanding is "laughable", on so many levels. most of our early understandings in any scientific field were 'laughable' compared to what we know now. and in 100 years, what we know now will be laughable. how someone could take that personally, or to mean it discounts any particular person is indeed laughable.

so many levels, but one more - it's childish and absurd for you to claim i even remotely intimated that people don't understand what they're studying. i don't know what data any random scientist has or is studying. more importantly, my own arguments and words, dear sir, intimated that they don't have much evidence because it's mostly destroyed or degraded.

as for "my pet theories", i'm pretty sure i splained things fairly well, with some help from others discussing along the way. i'm chuckling now that even your last words attempted to belittle me by calling a simple discussion "my pet theories". considering our prior discussions in this thread, dear sir, i have to ask you again, what the heck is up wit you? *looks at you sideways*

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech
What I don't know is how they found beryllium bronze artifacts in some of the Egyptian tombs when we need high voltage electrolysis to make beryllium for alloying. (Cue SG1 them music)

quote:

ORIGINAL: needlesandpins

unless the spacefarers came here in the first place, and were able to maintain there ships ready for the need to bugga off again then it never happened. there is no way that there could have been ships built here on earth big enough to to take any amount of cilvilization anywhere across the stars. there would be evidence on the moon, as well as most likely on mars.

now while people could have crash landed here millions of years ago, and would maybe have to go back to being hunter gathers at the start, the crash wouldn't have made them stupid. once initial camps had been set up they would quickly have started utilising what was around them. no advanced 'person' that has enough knowledge to get here by spaceship is just going to get here and sit there going 'der, what do i do know?'

needles

quote:

ORIGINAL: needlesandpins

karmastic,

what is really rediculous is that you think that there has been enough time for evolution to produce an humanoid that was at least, if not more, advanced than we are now. that could firstly survive in an atmosphere that wasn't even the same as we have now. that this human was located in one area that contained everything they could possibly want/need. that this human existed before the dinosaurs, and didn't expand to the rest of the world. they left no cave marking. in fact they left no trace of their existence what-so-ever because some megga thing happened enough to wipe them, and all trace of them, all to dust while leaving the rest of the planet entirely intact, and carrying on as though nothing had happened. but then that we eveolved to step into their place.

i'd use a table cloth to wipe off all that bullshit dripping down your chin if i were you coz a napkin isn't up to the job.

needles

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

There are plenty of theories by rational people about civilization before ours. Mose of them have a bit of von Daniken feel to them.

James Hogan has illustrated some very plausible ideas of the possibility of a civilization in this solar system before a Velikovsky event changed the earth.

A lot of the ideas fall into a few categories:

Civilization destroyed and refugees take to the stars only to come back and colony regresses to hunter gatherer. (Atlantis often figures in this)
Inadvertent colonization by way of spacecraft crash.
Inadvertent colonization by way of multiple universe transit.
Civilization knocked back to hunter gatherer by cataclysm and clawing back up.
Alien seeding the planet

What I do know for a fact is that the oldest written records have been dated back to about 5000 b.c. in Sumeria.
What I don't know is how they found beryllium bronze artifacts in some of the Egyptian tombs when we need high voltage electrolysis to make beryllium for alloying. (Cue SG1 them music)

Good fuel for the "what if" engine.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Karmastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: needlesandpins

karmastic,

what is really rediculous is that you think that there has been enough time for evolution to produce an humanoid that was at least, if not more, advanced than we are now. that could firstly survive in an atmosphere that wasn't even the same as we have now. that this human was located in one area that contained everything they could possibly want/need. that this human existed before the dinosaurs, and didn't expand to the rest of the world. they left no cave marking. in fact they left no trace of their existence what-so-ever because some megga thing happened enough to wipe them, and all trace of them, all to dust while leaving the rest of the planet entirely intact, and carrying on as though nothing had happened. but then that we eveolved to step into their place.

i'd use a table cloth to wipe off all that bullshit dripping down your chin if i were you coz a napkin isn't up to the job.

needles

lmao at the last sentence even tho it's so dumb :)

i bolded what seems to be the crux of our disagreement...how much time. is a hundred million years enough? how about 500 million years? how about 5 thousand million years? not so ridiculous.

and you keep getting stuck on cave markings and things above ground. subduction, asteroids and meteors, and volcanoes means nothing older than a few million years is still in tact.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Karmastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: needlesandpins

karmastic,

what is really rediculous is that you think that there has been enough time for evolution to produce an humanoid that was at least, if not more, advanced than we are now. that could firstly survive in an atmosphere that wasn't even the same as we have now. that this human was located in one area that contained everything they could possibly want/need. that this human existed before the dinosaurs, and didn't expand to the rest of the world. they left no cave marking. in fact they left no trace of their existence what-so-ever because some megga thing happened enough to wipe them, and all trace of them, all to dust while leaving the rest of the planet entirely intact, and carrying on as though nothing had happened. but then that we eveolved to step into their place.

i'd use a table cloth to wipe off all that bullshit dripping down your chin if i were you coz a napkin isn't up to the job.

needles

lmao at the last sentence even tho it's so dumb :)

i bolded what seems to be the crux of our disagreement...how much time. is a hundred million years enough? how about 500 million years? how about 5 thousand million years? not so ridiculous.

and you keep getting stuck on cave markings and things above ground. subduction, asteroids and meteors, and volcanoes means nothing older than a few million years is still in tact.

Bullshit.

We have spectacularly well preserved fossil sites going back hundreds of millions of years. Blackberry Hill in Wisconsin is from around 500 milion years. It is simply impossible that a lineage could have developed intelligence and tool using but left nothing. Advanced civilizations leave too big a mark on the earth to just disappear. For instance we have never once found a potential mine that had been worked prior to man.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt
And though I agree the Egyptians and the Mayans were very impressive civilizations, they were not anywhere nearly as technologically advanced as we are.

Quite, nor as the Europeans were when they discovered the America's.

But in the evolution of populations from animal status to civilized status, I deem the increased frequency of the ethical function more important than the level of technological advancement - though I am rather convinced that both are correlated.