Ok, Aiden,

I give up.  You are right.  I am totally wrong.  Please send this my message to your friends and get your 10 more points of karma.  Sumerians knew of DNA, made cloning, had been visited by aliens, etc.  Good for you.  

Good night.

P.S.: actually, I might be wrong about the topology of DNA and sumerian snakes.  You couldn't figure it out anyway.  

Of course Obama is an alien.  He is black, so he is from Africa, the human life was started in Africa, so there must be something that caused this beginning of human life.   No doubt, it's aliens. Please disprove my truth.  Oh, you can't?  Do you believe that Obama is an alien?

FUCK do you not read, I NEVER ONCE CLAIMED OR SAID Obama was an alien. NOR DID THE VIDEO. And you talk about me being ignorant. Your just as dense. You think that I am going to concede to your way of thinking simply because you write stuff in these posts that MAY OR MAY NOT be true. How do I know for a fact what your saying is real researched information? Because you said it? YOu have not proven your side either, all you have done is prove that someone on your side thinks differently from the people I have read stuff from. THATS IT. I actually linked stuff that proves my point, which is not that this stuff is fact, but that it is possible. Everything is just conjecture and you all trying to make either other say, " look at this guy, he actually believes this stuff". Like I care how you feel, bring me the facts in dispute of something I have said, without quoting a debunker or someone that works for a skeptical site.

Aiden

Once again Aden you fail to recognize sarcasm with the Obama comment.

You might as well be a "birther", is what the poster was saying about Obama  because of the claim you came to this site with. If you don't know what a "birther" is it is someone who hates the fact Obama won so much that they want so badly for him to have been born in another country, just like you want so badly for our species to be planted her by little green men.

Both you/they want something to be true so badly you will look for anything to justify your position. That was the point of the sarcasm. The "birthers" merely have a different form of conspiracy on a different topic that they want to believe.

DARKNESS IMPRISONING ME

ALL THAT I SEE

ABSOLUTE HORROR

Where have all the children gone?

Every Malcolm X needs a Martin Luther King. Every Dirty Harry needs a Clolumbo.

I'm being compared to Malcolm X now...

I guess one thing atheists can't realize, and I am starting to wonder this about myself, is that not everyone is gonna believe in the same thing. While your points on religion and AAT are very informative, like you, there is always someone on the other side that can explain it in a different way. And this is proven by history. We have been fighting and killing in the same of our different beliefs for centuries. You have to realize something about me, if I would have been born in the 70's I would have been a hippie, I would have been out there protesting and getting high, fighting the power of the government. The Vietnam War created dissention in our country, it made people disbelieve what the country was telling us. This still goes on today, whether you want to believe it or not. And we are close to re-living the past. We have been at war for 10 years now, economy sucks, and News stations lie to us all the time. We never get the truth, so why is it so different to believe that our scientists and archeologists and Nasa wouldn't lie to us as well. Don't you think that is possible too? I do. 

On a side note, because I didn't mention it before now, but did you know that Buzz Aldren says he witnessed a UFO while up in space, and advocates for AAT? Now here is someone I would tend to believe, would be a credible source. Maybe he is lying to make money who knows, but I would like to hear what you have to say about it.

Aiden

Aiden,

Please stop jumping from one claim to another one.  Let's look at your claims one-by-one. 

I am still waiting on your extra information about the claimed link between the alley of dead and our solar system.   Please show me the "correct" diagram or admit that there are no facts that would justify your claims.

100%

Aden, there are 6 billion people on this planet, so to say that people will disagree is not a shocker.

What you don't get is that there IS a universal tool to settle disagreements. Scientific method. It is the only tool that has gotten Muslims/Jews/ Hindus/Christians ect ect ect ect, to have the ability to KNOW what DNA is or mitosis.

What you don't want to face and we have seen this from others prior to your visit here, is the mundane human behavior of wanting something to be true so badly that people will look for ways to justify a claim. Looking for justification is not valid. TESTING something based on prior data is what is needed. "Justifying" is not the same as kicking the tires. You are nothing but an apologist with a different claim.

You fall in the same boat as believers of gods in that you make the mistake of "If it sounds good, it must be true".

Humans are notorious in allowing themselves to fall for woo because they like the claim they make. The only way to filter out bias is to TEST it and then put it out there for others to knock the claim around. We apply this standard to ALL CLAIMS, not just your claim here in this thread, on this board.

If someone came to you and claimed unicorns existed, because they were mentioned in the bible, and since the bible was based on the Sumerians, what would stop me from saying that Unicorn aliens planted us here?

Your mistake is dwelling in the past. But Christians and Muslims do it too. They also try to incorporate modern science to prop up their claims. Saying "The Sumerians were first" doesn't make your claims valid. It merely means that you picked an arbitrary point to start your proposition from. But ALL these claims, theirs and yours, don't start with OUR modern knowledge. The logic you and they use falsely works backwards.

GOOD LOGIC GOES LIKE THIS

Tested universal Data>claim=formula=projected outcome

Bad logic

Claim<data<desired outcome.

The problem I have with your claim is the same I have with Scientology and Muslims and ghost hunters. It starts without established independent data, and then works to retrofit current knowledge to prop up a naked assertion.

A history of making claims is not the same as having a history of establishing credibility of a claim.

I do not have any knowledge regarding the sumerians because i havent read much about it.  But i guess i can post a thing or two. the sumerians have something in common in my point of interest; chinese history. regarding this image;

I was reading a book on Chinese Mythology and there if i recall said that the Gods came out of the belly of flying Dragons. It implies that dragons are some form of flying vehicle or spacecraft not some typical image of a fire breathing creature. I have always thought that the beginnings were more advanced than the later periods.

I think there is some kind of de-evolution going on. a clear example of which is how the ancient Greeks knew the earth was round wheras middle age doctrine said the earth is flat.

back to the chinese Of course everything involving space-travel is considered mythical by modern scholars. The Yellow Emperor or Huang Di, is considered to be the first emperor of China and the ancestor of all Chinese. there are debates as to whether huang di is mythical or real. I would like to suggest that the solution may lie somewhere in between: He was real but not human. lol but anyway as for the source, yes it is just a mythical book. but it always give me chance to be skeptical about the real beginnings of life that is. i still prefer evolution tho'.

Nope, cant do it. I wouldn't do it for anyone.

What modern science says about the likelihood of life existing elsewhere is not myth based. You failed as soon as you mentioned ancient myth. I treat you no differently than people with other claims of other labels.

The ancients, from all these cultures and even prior to the Sumerians built whatever objects, not because of little green men, but because they thought god/s were looking down on them. The size of the object wouldn't change that.

Flood stories, for example in all of myth exist, not because of gods or little green men or gods.T hey exist because the people who write them mistook their limited view of a local flood at the time as being the world. No different to me than humans in the past mistaking volcanos as being gods.

Are volcanos gods because humans have taken note of them?

The mistake is much the same as the eye being fooled by flawed perception. Ever see the video of the guy in the hallway that seems big, then he walks to the back of the set and the hallway shrinks? Our emotions can cause us to falsely fill in the gaps much the same way our eyes can bee fooled by false perception.

What does make sense to me is that humans can and still do, take bad information and look for something to be there and falsely fill in a gap because the answer they make up sounds good. Making it elaborate doesn't make it testable or credible.

The only thing remotely that I can agree on regarding "aliens" has nothing to do with ancient myth or area 51 claims. I can only say that from a statistical numbers perspective it should not shock us to find some sort of biological life IF we could go to every planet in the universe. But that is not based on any myth. That is based on the fact that we know atoms exist and amino acids exist. That is as close to "aliens" as I will get with our current knowledge.

The problems of distance and speed would be a problem for all life, even if we confirmed it's existence.

I wouldn't say, "We are not alone"

I would say, "It shouldn't shock us if we find out we are not alone"

I would not however, base that statement on claims that are not confirmed by the scientific community.

When Christians or Muslims try to prop up their claims with science, even without claims of little green men, I treat them the same.

Logic doesn't work backwards. You don't pick a naked assertion from an arbitrary point and then take lagit science  and twist it to prop up something that was claimed during a non-modern era.

ANOTHER EXAMPLE: Not even talking about you here.

I got into a debate with a guy who claimed that the god of Jesus was the one true god. I asked him why. He said Aquinas was a smart man and knew about quantum mechanics. I asked him for proof of Aquinas's knowledge of modern quantum mechanics. All I got from him was an ambiguous quote . He merely took that quote and read into it what he wanted to read. Nothing he said had to do with formulas or science. He just kept claiming Aquinas was smart.

Look at the following example strictly from a semantic view. What do the actual words say?

"The sky is blue"

In a literal sense it only says what I am observing.

It says nothing about my knowledge of the science WHY we observe the sky as being blue.

What theism does is this:

"The sky is blue because Allah made it blue<=<insert pseudo science here"

I am sure that the Sumerians "observed" and took notation of the stars. So did many cultures throughout history. But if your best evidence is that they built really big objects and took notes on the stars. Is really weak.

We have pointed out that their "observations" were flawed. We have pointed out that their calender was flawed. And we have also pointed out that building objects back then were not for the benefit of "visitors" but for the god/s they believed in. Which ALL cultures did. How you conflate "size" to "visitors" is absurd, when the obvious explanation would be that they built those objects for their mythological gods.

It is not a shock to me that people back then wanted to build things to gods so big as to curry favor to them.

My bluntness and criticism is aimed at HOW you use logic to come to the conclusions you make. Popularity of belief ANY BELIEF does not constitute a history of credibility, otherwise the earth would be flat because a majority of humans once held that popular belief.

If your claims were credible the scientific community wouldn't have passed the originators of your myth by and it would be widely accepted.

You are being poo poo'ed by me for the same reason I once poo poo'ed a Muslim who quoted the Koran "mountains moving" proved that Mohammad knew about plate tectonics. Lots of cultures throughout history talk of "mountains moving" because they "observe" earthquake. But that doesn't mean they knew what caused an earthquake.

I hope that gives you insight as to the approach we take here and it seriously has nothing to do with any individual, but the claims they make. We really don't treat you any differently than anyone else.

Way to play martyr just like a Muslim or Christian.

Adien

No one is telling you to go away. If Sapient or any of the members here were "closed minded" this site would preclude anyone but atheists from posting here in the first place. But complaining about something you chose to do is irritating.

If you are going to post here, expect your claims to be knocked around. That is what atheists do. For someone who just said in a post to me, they aren't taking it personally, you certainly defy yourself with your communication with Sapient, the website owner.

If I am a boxer and chose to get in the ring with Evander Holyfield why would I complain about getting hit? Don't torture yourself if this is not your thing. But do not falsely call us closed minded because you are insecure about your own claims.

That would be like knowing you have motion sickness and then trying to sue a roller coaster owner for getting sick.

It is OK to be sensitive and it is normal to have a comfort level you don't want to go beyond. It is NOT ok to project your comfort level on others. I have the same beef with atheists who do this too.

Stay or go, that is your choice. But if you continue to post please stop complaining about how your claims get treated.

Aiden,

If you understand that 1.59 is not equal to 2.06, then you know all you need to know to understand "math" that I am talking about.  Take a ruler, any one, find an image of the avenue of dead (you can use google maps for example, search for Teotihuacan there), then find the pyramids which represent the objects in our solar system and measure the distances between them.  If your claim that those pyramids represent our solar system is correct, then the distances between the pyramids measured in WHATEVER units you prefer to use should match more or less accurately the distances between the planets as we know them now (you can google "solar system" or simply use the numbers from my post.  In my post, the numbers are in astronomical units.)  I would agree with you that the relative distances between the pyramids should not be a necessary factor that would solely determine their relationship to our solar system, but then there MUST be something else that would support your claim.  So far, we have seen no evidence that would even remotely support your claim.

I am not going to switch to anything else before we resolve this claim.  Even if we find a spaceship full of green guys under Stonehedge, this will tell us absolutely NOTHING about Teotihuacan.

100%

P.S.: Also, as to your multiple reference to me as to a "[something] jerk", I would like to ask you to exercise a better control of your written words.