What does /his think about the fact that history is objectively subjective?
The history channel has given its viewers autism
>>992194
>evidence of advanced technology in the past can only mean aliens
This is what I hate most about the whole Ancient Aliens thing.
Never mind that virtually every culture on Earth had legends about more advanced civilizations in the distant past that collapsed due to natural disasters or war. Never mind that there's a solid 190,000 years of human history with basically no surviving primary-source evidence. And never mind that we've seen people go from tribal savages to our modern technology level in only about 10,000 years.
No, we're not going to look into the possibility of extremely ancient human civilizations. Nope. We're going to jump to the most outrageous, click-bait style idea possible. It had to be aliens!
>>992260
It takes away the agency of our species to claim that everything we have is the product of a fucking martian
There is a coherent continuum of events for every direction of time. You cannot replace history with your mind, and it's not like the moments you've experienced are lost either. What you get out of history symbolically is a different matter entirely.
found a ancient plane guis
>>992307
Interesting. Though I do wonder how much of history is based off of falsehood and how we are forced to utilize them as primary sources because forgeries and the like provide the best completed representations of the past available to us.
>>992260
I hate how they assume humans have never been capable of achieving greatness, like constructing marvels of engineering such as the pyramids for example.
saged for not /his/
>>992260
Wouldn't there by some sort of remnants of those hypothetical ancient advanced civilizations?
>>992260
I like your ideas.
We do have a solid 190,000 years of human history with basically no surviving primary-source evidence.
And we've seen people go from tribal savages to our modern technology level in only about 10,000 years, I'll say a lot less. given the fact that most knowledge of humanity has been lost more than once.
What did those civilizations really accomplished?
Motorized transport?
Complex chemistry?
Interaction with different species of intelligent beings?
>>993389
Less than you might think. If our own technological progression is anything to go by, modern buildings don't last as well as primitive ones. Things like reinforced concrete crumble from water seeping in and rusting its internal rebar framework after only a few centuries without active maintenance, while plywood and drywalling rots away in even less time. This is doubly true if there have been people living in the same places in the intervening years who preferred scavenging for materials rather than preserving history.
Even something likely to resist deterioration or pillage like a large pyramid or monument can become indistinguishable from a hill or rock formation after tens of thousands of years of erosion and/or soil deposition (like the alleged Bosnian pyramids). The few things that have survived intact may have been built onto or occupied by later cultures and are now attributed to these squatters rather than the true builders (potentially the Sphinx, for instance).
And we might not be looking in the right places. The sea level and coastlines today differ greatly from those of pre-historic times, and we know that most major cities end up being built near the coast or in fertile river valleys. What if there was a great civilization under the sea bed in what was once Doggerland? We'd never know to look for it.
>>993908
Maybe they didn't used oil.
>>992260
>>993389
Claims require evidence.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Also, the current civilization has made a lot of changes to the planet that would show up on the geological record.
A lot of species going extinct, a dramatic change in the climate, concrete and rebar everywhere, and agricultural cultivation literally everywhere.
>>994250
elaborate
Not to bring race into this, but I feel a lot of Ancient Aliens stuff is rooted in the idea that brown people, namely the Mesoamericans and Egyptians, couldn't do any of the stuff they accomplished without outside help, coincidentally from light skinned, technologically advanced beings.
It always comes back to weird South American Megaliths and the Pyramids. Well clearly those savages couldn't have worked out how to stack rocks up real high on their own. They needed help obviously.
The only claim I've seen about any western europeans towards ancient aliens is Stonehenge.
>>994398
Chemical knowledge, imagine a civilization making chemical experiments for thousand of years,
Polymers for example, polymers are better explanation for the bigger rocks, instead of having them carving and moving those stupidly large rocks.
they may have developed more advanced kinds of concrete, even a better form of fuel.
>>994404
That's a really common part of most kinds of pseudoscience in the vein of ancient aliens. It used to be much more common and much more openly acknowledged. For example, the mound builder controversy that helped inspire Mormonism was based directly on the idea that savage American Indians couldn't make mounds, so someone else (including maybe Israelites) had to help them). Ancient Aliens continues along the same trend of thought, and if you know the history of that kind of thought, it's easy to see the connections.
It's also partially based on the fallacy that people of the past were all idiots.
>>994443
I think people typically dream of a halcyon age when everything was better. In that large gap of unrecorded time there is the desire to fill it with anything that they want, give their specific ethnic/cultutal groups a glorious past that was lost to time.
>>994443
Yeah. And a lot of the stuff from Ancient Aliens is lifted wholesale from Atlantis obsessed weirdos like Edgar Cayce. And a lot of people in those circles thought Atlanteans=aryans as well. Just New Age nonsense.
And yes, people think everyone from even 100 years ago had IQs in the 50s.
>>994438
>Polymers for example, polymers are better explanation for the bigger rocks, instead of having them carving and moving those stupidly large rocks.
Polymer is made out of oill
>they may have developed more advanced kinds of concrete, even a better form of fuel.
So they jumper right over steam, oil and atomic energy right to their magic fuel?
>>994489
Polymers don't have to be made out of oil there are also polymers made out of organic materials.
>>994489
It's not about a magic fuel, just a different kind of fuel.
There's a lot of weird chemicals alloys that we don't know about, or we know and don't find an use for it.
>>994443
>>994469
Maybe they were caucasians I'm not white enough to be worried about that.
Maybe they were a completely different kind of hominid, that we found but don't consider to be intelligent enough.
How many social models can you test in 190,000 years, a lot some of them maybe prove to be better than our current model of society.
So much better that they may have developed some sciences better than us.
>>994530
>So much better that they may have developed some sciences better than us.
And yet managed to leave no trace in the material record whatsoever. The idea of advanced civilizations existing before recorded history makes as much sense as ancient aliens.
>>994530
why is there no record in the soil of plants being domesticated before the end of the ice age? why are there only primitive tools in the archeological record and no swords, spoons or forks?why is there not more intermix between the native american population and the Old World population like we would expect if there was an advanced society that had achieved globalization or even late 1400s era ships?
>>994602
There is records, there's giant megalith structures, also the myths of a lost ancient civilization.
>>994632
12.000 years is a long time and the nature goes back to feral very fast, watch the documentary about the wolfs of chernobyl.
My best guess is that they used soft materials, figured out that it was best for the enviroment, or some of that hippie shit humanity gets behind sometimes.
>>994762
>there's giant megalith structures
I don't know if Gobekli Tepe counts as a civilisation bruh.
>My best guess is that they used soft materials, figured out that it was best for the enviroment
There's sites with degradable material like wood and leather that have been found.
Monte Verde ~16,000 years old
>The remains of local animals were found, in addition to wooden posts from approximately twelve huts. Scraps of clothing made of hide were also found
And there has been 300,000 year old wooden spears found.
>>994762
except we do have a solid record of primitive tools but nothing else. it's almost like they were only making primitive tools during this time period... I have a hard time believing they would skip ahead to advanced biodegradable stuff we don't know how to make and never make any metal tools. how do you explain all the primitive tools in the archeological record at times that you claim there were advanced civilizations?
>>994795
they were good at making rocks.
It was their primal development.
After a thousand years of vicarial learning and brain development they were the best rock makers in recorded history.
When humanity developed metallurgy, we steped in a different age.
One rock based technology.
You make evything with rocks, mix them smash them carving, you name it.
>>994762
>There is records,
No, there aren't. No material culture exists that suggests advanced civilizations during that time period.
>there's giant megalith structures
Not during the time period you're suggesting. Maybe Gobekli Tepe, but it doesn't imply the kind of thing you're suggesting.
>myths of a lost ancient civilization.
Those aren't as ubiquitous as you seem to think they are. In fact, they're not really common at all. Greeks had the gold and silver ages, but there aren't very many other prominent examples, except for fairly modern new age-type thinking. Most of the time you hear people talk about this kind of thing, they're seriously misinterpreting what the actual story is about; take Atlantis, for example.
>>994955
What in God's holy name are you blathering about?
>>994955
kek, advanced rock-based technology
>>992260
The Hyper-war is responsible for this.
>>994970
A better explaniation than aliens.
>>993908
They didn't use that much of it before either advancing to a different fuel source or dying out.
>>994970
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VurOZ7tvtvQ
Posadism is the light.
>>995719
To be honest, there's a good chance that we missed one or two civilizations.
A big chance that some civilization model are just better than ours.
A society that can use their citizens at their full potential, and achieve great advances in the manipulation of rocks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA0JnbVvHPk
>>995719
mah nigga
>>994489
sulfure, nitrogen, lots of polymers. perhaps they used charcoal, had the right mix of things, had a cylindrical exhaust shaft, and fiscovered plastic upon inspection of the deposits left upon the shaft.
>>994438
I find it pretty hard that they just skipped past oil, considering how a effective source of energy Oil actually is.
I mean, we know how to split the Atom but we are still dependable on oil which he have been for about a hundred years.
Also, shouldn't they be so advanced that they left some sort of satellites remaining till today?
>>997980
Also, very much related.
These guys should have jumped straight from using coal and relatively primitive wind works (Or maybe even from wood) straight over oil and start to use energy sources we haven't even quite grasped ourselves.
Also, suppose there should remain a lot of nuclear waste from their nuclear power usage(Unless they could jump that too)
>>998012
What about alcohol fuel?
Ethanol, Butanol or Methanol?
They definitely destiled alcohol, shit's hardwired into our genes.
Also they had acces to large mammals for animal traction.
they just needed an efficient way of smashing rocks into powder.
>>999078
I don't think any of those got the same explosive energy development as Gasoline does, which is a rather important part in making most motors work. You may know more than me on that part, so feel free to enligthen me.
Just for comparsion, burning alcohols vs burning gasoline.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gXh7WJ37sU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlMAyNOMBEg
A kit of drugs are "hardwired" into our genes and you can do well without Alcohol. A lot of drugs that we are addicted to that are directly dangerous to our bodies, like crack and Krokodil where I suppose the species should die before they can spread their addict-genes onward.
As for large mammals, India have had access to Elephants for thousands of years without doing much with them, preferring the usage of normal horses, oxes and (I suppose) donkeys. Large animals also need a lot more of food to survive, are harder to domesticate and some other size related factors.
Also, shouldn't there be any surviving satellites somewhere above the reach of the atmosphere? The things can go on pretty much forever as long as they don't slow down.
>>992194
I think Prometheus had a Godawful script but Fassbender and Rapace were good, and the effects were God-tier
>>999078
Also,
"Smashing rocks into powder"
How do you mean?
>>999133
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mt69fbNhCgs
There's a lot of alcohols to burn they are all high octane.
Chemistry isn't that rare in civilization, alchemysts did a lot of experiments with very basic tools.
>>999160
To make geopolymers instead of carving a huge block, you just smash a lot of small rocks and mix it with water, they were so good at this, that we can't distinguish them from actual rocks.
>>999256
I understand, any reason we started using oil instead of Alcohols ourselves?
And what about my other points,? Finding any fault in them?
>>999256
>they were so good at this, that we can't distinguish them from actual rocks.
Is that a joke?
I am really sorry, but it seems a bit like saying "God was so good at creating the world it just seems like it was evolution and not creation"
Excuse me, just sounds like a rather weird argument to make.
>>999294
As in, have we found any proof for that they used it? Even if they did, as long as we can't distinguish it from actual rocks it's kinda useless as we can't prove anything on it.
>>992313
All i see is a proud laughing golden pepe wearing his cape and flexing his muscles.
>>999294
Oil wasn't expensive when we started using it, and it was abundant in places with cheap labor.
It just worked well with our model of society.
>>999298
We may be able to do some reverse engineering and duplicate the method of construction but right now, we look at them and we imagine a dozen artisans carving this for endless hours, not pouring the materials in a mold.
>>994489
Hydrogen for example doesnt leave traces and is easy to produce via electrolysis.
>>999337
Well, what about that thing with satellites?
Or have you covered it earlier without me reading?
I am sorry if I am missreading you, but I do get the idea it's some rather advanced society with the ability to send things into space.
>>999385
If they developed good enough fuel, they may have attempted to launch objects in orbit, but take into consideration that a lot of time has passed an objects don't remain in orbit forever, maybe it crashed back to earth and someone find it and started to worship it.
Remember that destroying previous cultures isn't strange in human history, look at what happened to the cult of Hadad or Ba'al whose temples are being destroyed to this day.
12.000 years is a very long time and many things could have gone wrong.
To me the geopolymer theory sounds really solid, just strap a couple of this to a rotating grinder and you can make a lot of powder.
>>999294
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjFT7-Yvekg
The tracks are there, maybe they were used by degradable transports running on alcohol based fuel.
Or something even more advanced, I'm just using new age theories.
>>999491
We have an astounishing amount of monuments of Herculean proportions, that get associated with hard to prove theories like aliens and giants.
South american massive monuments or the russian megaliths, stretch our understanding of human development.
Sadly we expect that human development went in one direction, the one we took, and that's just plain dumb.
>>992260
Playing Devil's Advocate here because I think both ideas are fucking stupid, yet Ayylmao's is the least stupid one.
If there were super advanced human civilizations we should have some sort of physical evidence. Even in a nuclear war it isn't like there'd be no remnants of what was.
I'd much rather believe we may have gotten assistance of extraterrestrials and humans didn't know how to describe it because they couldn't comprehend the technology the extraterrestrials had at the time than to believe in massive modern industrial human civilizations which there is literally zero evidence of it existing.
Also, absence of evidence is not evidence so don't respond with that kind of shit.
>>994443
Lol, Ancient Alien Conspiracy theorists are no better than Mormon's.
Yes, you guys are on the same level of people who believe that Native American's are descended from Jews, human life (the Garden of Eden) was in Jackson Count, Missouri, and it came to pass that that all blacks are also Jews and being black is a curse from God because they stayed neutral in a war against his son Satan yet the Jews who fought with God had their skin turned "white and delightsome".
They also got their infamous from a man who was tried in a court of law for looking at rocks in a hat and claiming it allowed him to see where buried treasure was hidden. He started a business doing that, and when people he conned came back pissed off that they couldn't find treasure he told them that they just didn't look hard enough. Because he was a suave motherfucker he was never convicted.
His pre-existing preying on gullible people and the lack of consequence for it is honestly what probably propelled him with creating his ridiculous alien cult (and yes, it is an alien cult as God, Jesus, and Satan are actually aliens from a a planet called Kolob) as it was the same type of idea but on a much grander scale.
>>995782
Oh my god, I really hope this rock based advanced civilization conspiracy theory catches on.
Funniest thing I've read in a long time.
>>999298
Like the Den Den Mushi's from One Piece?
Sure, they just look like snails so how would we actually know they're actually organic living organisms that act as cell phones if we can't tell them apart from other snails?
>>1000593
If it was biological/chemical warfare ( which is what we would be using if we actually wanted to exterminate humans, not nukes ) , then year there wouldn't be much evidence left after several tens of thousands of years especially if they had been designed to not persist. Which they would be, because otherwise you're at even more risk of killing yourself than usual.
>>1000614
Actually, there's really not a need to compare them to Mormons to make their beliefs looks silly. Aside from there being absolutely no evidence for it, the history of the movement is ridiculous enough.
The idea originates entirely in science fiction from the late nineteenth century. From there, it remained a minor element in pulp sci-fi and horror, until some British crackpot in the 1950s took it seriously and started writing about it. From there it built steam until con Daniken (who has been convicted of fraud) and Sitchen (who has been shown to be categorically incorrect about all his claims multiple times) started writing. From there, people started taking it seriously (Raelianism started in the early 1970s) and a show ended up in the history channel.
The movement literally started when people started taking trashy sci-fi seriously. Lots of people have pointed out suspicious similarities between early ancient aliens writings and HP Lovecraft, for example. It was never meant to be taken seriously (unlike the moundbuilder stuff), but people did. And now we have threads like this, where people are claiming that ancient civilizations powered by alcohol that made everything out of powdered rock existed.
>>1000690
I love how you managed to put every theory at the same level.
What it had been said, is that this people had the means of doing advanced masonry.
These are New Age theories, and New Age theories can be as dumb as they come, but I find easier to believe that humans developed geo-polymers that they had contact with extraterrestrials.
The dating of the megalithic stones found all around the world is inconclusive.
Given the fact that, in the case of a monument of a significant size the subsequent generations will protect and reconstruct the site.
It's pretensious to believe that former homo-sapiens can't into advanced chemistry.
>>1000774
>The dating of the megalithic stones found all around the world is inconclusive.
Carbon dating is inconclusive, so you can't prove that the world isn't actually only 6000 years old as stated in Genesis.
>>1000774
I'm not saying it isn't theoretically possible that ancient ancestors may have had the potential to learn and implement those types of things, I'm just saying that there isn't any evidence that they ever did, and if they did then there would be evidence for it.
>>1000774
>I find easier to believe that humans developed geo-polymers that they had contact with extraterrestrials.
Why does either need to be an option? There's no evidence for either, they're both ridiculous, and there's no reason to seriously consider either.
So why is this even an issue? If you want to be scientific about something, think about it that way, don't dismiss one form of pseudoscience as ridiculous and then promote something equally nonscientific.
>>1000801
The rocks are there, the aztecs and the Incas made huge structures with smaller blocks.
There's no point to use retard size blocks unless it's not that hard for you to make them and move them.
If you want to make a fire have matches, if you don't it gets a lot harder.
If you don't have the technology you shouldn't be doing this monuments, even less, making them in top of mountains.
>>1000823
The blocks are huge, and are placed very far from a quarry, it makes more sense that they made the rocks powder in the quarry, and then make them on site.
Also what if we found evidence of metallurgy but it was to deteriorated, not all findings get carbon dated.
Archeology isn't the most precise of the sciences.
I believe the most problematic issue is expectations.
They are not atlantean, they didn't mastered space travel, but what about poetry or philosophy, the softer human creations, that don't really resist the test of time.
We don't find this civilization because we are not looking for it.
>>1000856
>They are not atlantean
Don't tell me you actually believe in Atlantis do you?
You do realize that Plato's original reference of "Atlantis" was an allegory, right?
>>1000879
They're descriptions of utopias, but to a foreigner all places are somehow utopic, the descriptions of Rhodas aren't less fantastic.
But you have things like the anthykera mechanism that makes you wonder how advanced can they get.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpLcnAIpVRA
>>1000922
Any sources on your geopolymer theory? I think it sounds breddy interdasting
>>1000963
http://www.megaliths.org/browse
Got it from here, she makes videos about megaliths and is very new age, but also have the most plausible theories I even heard from an ayahuasca user.
>>1000995
>>1001010
>>1001011
>>1001011
The problem i have with ancient advanced civilizations is: why do we still have so much natural resources left?
Just in the past 200 years, humans have extracted a shitton of minerals/oil/gas from the earth. How did ancient people get advanced without touching any of it?
>>999361
Hydrogen energetic ratio is shit. You need 4 energy units to produce 1 energy unit of hydrogen so it's not really viable (with our current technology at least)
>>1000621
Maybe they'll make a show out of it.
>>1001427
By harnessing rocks and momentum, limitless energy has been created allowing a rock based civilization to flourish and leave behind artifacts which on the surface appear primitive.
>>1001295
I have an answer to this, eugenics.
Mendelian genetics aren't rocket science, any one with observation skills and a 1600 cm3 brain can describe and reproduce them.
The basic principles of mendelian genetics had been used in agriculture and selective breeding of cattle since forever.
What if they used eugenics and keep the population at an stable number around 20.000 individuals for example.
Have you ever heard of such a solution for mankinds problems?
I bet you have.
A smaller population don't need to drain resources, or make significant changes in the enviroment.
And at the same time they can develop an advanced culture.
So at some point in time, they get wiped out by a massive cataclysm, the flood destroys the softer materials, and the metallurgy, everything ends at the bottom of the ocean.
Survivors roam the earth and don't mix often with the rest of the hominids, cause muh pure race and shit.
>>1002062
>By harnessing rocks and momentum
>Limitless energy
What
>>1002598
Seconding the what.
Flintstones confirmed as canon
Rock is the highest form of technology. Why else would it outlast the majority of the structures our civilizations have built?
>>1001295
When the Europeans first landed in North America they found a number of abandoned mines. The natives talked about people who came from behind the seas and paid them to toil in the mines.
Clearly something was going on there.
I'm surprised this thread is still here.
>>1008940
That's a really good example on something really big that escaped recorded history, many cultures seem to have visited the Americas, but we didn't find no written records of that.
Euro-civilization just never heard of the americas until Columbus.
>>1011193
Rock fellas, could have being more prolific than we think.
Just look at Gobleki Tepe, who is allegedly 12.000 years old.
This I find very interesting.
Sites like Felsenmeer im Odenwald in germany.
Were the rocks are so eroded that make them look like a natural formation.
>>1001408
It's a bit ridiculous to claim that some civilization would somehow develop some hyper advanced fuel without ever using something like oil or coal in the first place. You have to start somewhere, and logic would dictate that they would start with readily available fuel sources before they moved on to something else.
>>1011946
We didn't used oil until a couple of centuries ago, steam technology is also very efficient.
And they used coal there's plenty of evidence of this.
>>1011955
Steam can't do shit compared to coal. there's a reason we stopped using steamboats
>>1011967
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqzLAR3Byc8
Steam motors can do a lot, just think about how much power does a locomotive had.
>>994527
Oil is an organic material
>>1011980
You're missing the point. Compared to fossil fuels it isn't good
>>1011980
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJq2Hc_mXFI
We changed to oil for a number of reasons, the fuel efficiency wasn't the most important.
It's hard to drill for oil. and distilling alcohol was fairly common, in ancient times.
As long as they have fire the possibilities are endless.
They are were not forced to use fossils fuels, neither do us.
>>1011967
>Steam can't do shit compared to coal
Nigger, do you realize those are two cmpletely different things?
Do you also realize you have it completely fucking backwards? COAL CAN'T DO SHIT COMPARED TO STEAM
Unless it's auolic or hydro, that's how we make all the power, WITH FUCKING STEAM. You don't just stick coal in a furnace, light it and there you fucking go god damn coal power because fucking miracles. You stick a giant ass tank of water on top of the lit coals, the water heats up creating steam, the steam runs a turbine creating power.
The same basic principle is used for gas, diesel, gasoline, and nuclear power plants. Some shit heats up water, the water turns into steam and turns a turbine.
STEAM IS AWESOME AND IS PROBABLY POWERING YOUR HOUSE AND YOUR COMPUTER RIGHT NOW.
FUCK YOU.
Oil and coal is, by far, more convenient and easier to use than alcohol.
With alcohol, you have to grow something....a LOT of something. Then you've got to harvest it, mash it to convert the starches, and then ferment it before you can burn it.
Oil can simply be found, pumped out of the ground, and refined immediately.
What do you guys think about Electric Universe ad Dynamic Solar System?
The "New Age" movement is Satanic/Luciferian.
Truth is objective.
Subjectivity is a cancer that poisons and degenerates the mind.
Fuck off with your Theosophy/Gnosticism/Ecumenism/Paganism/Occultism.
Only atheists or agnostics fall for that shit since they have already disregarded Biblical Christianity (and thus are open to Satan's deceptions).
>>992313
Is there a description of this artifact from a respectable source? All I find is conspiracy sites.
>>994373
>Also, the current civilization has made a lot of changes to the planet that would show up on the geological record.
Very much this. We would know by now if there had ever been a period of civilisation before the neolithic, prehistoric humans never advanced further than hunting and /maybe/ transhumance "herding" / free-range animal husbandry.
>>993389
>We do have a solid 190,000 years of human history with basically no surviving primary-source evidence.
There is an enormous wealth of primary evidence in the form of flint tools (mostly arrowheads), middens and cave art. We know what they achieved, it was "sweet" and "bupkiss".
>>1012445
>190,000 years of human history
>190,000 years
weak bait
>>993537
>Things like reinforced concrete crumble from water seeping in and rusting its internal rebar framework after only a few centuries without active maintenance, while plywood and drywalling rots away in even less time.
I don't think this is true, but even if it where, the REMAINS of that concrete-- what you might call its "imprint"-- would stick around for probably millions of years, certainly long enough for modern archeologists to have discovered.
>The sea level and coastlines today differ greatly from those of pre-historic times, and we know that most major cities end up being built near the coast or in fertile river valleys. What if there was a great civilization under the sea bed in what was once Doggerland? We'd never know to look for it.
No, there wasn't. How do I know? Because Doggerland would have been a freezing tundra, not the kind of place civilisation is possible even today.
OTOH, it's very likely that the Sumerians originated from a culture that inhabited what is now the Persian Gulf. But the material culture of this precursor people was strictly paleolithic, no fly cars and death rays.
Unlike mainstream historians, ancient astronaut theorists suggest that the disappearance of doggerland had a startling, extraterrestrial connection.
>>1012451
I assumed he meant "history" in the sense of "the past", rather than it's more precise meaning of "the written past".
>>1012385
lmao
>>1014205
What a surprise...
>>1012423
Don't know senpai. Though ancient aliens had a hysterical episode when they tested that in a wind tunnel and found that it to be aerodynamic. Egyptians confirmed to have beat the wright brothers
>>1014790
What's it supposed to be? Who made it, and when? Seems like a hoax, like those crystal skulls Dan Akroyd wasted his Ghostbusters $$$ on.
>>1014798
Evidently it was ancient mayans. Weird ass bird if that's what it is supposed to be
>>1014798
He's gotta sling that vodka somehow.
>>992194
poor man's fingerprints of the gods.
>>1012445
It never ceases to amaze me how civilization = Industrialisation.
As I said before a culture can develop eugenics, Mendelian genetics can be developed without technology, you just need a longer life span than the samples.
Also the masonry, megaliths the older ones are just massive, there's where all the weird giant aliens theories spawn.
And we don't have a clue why or how they used such large rocks.
http://www.megaliths.org/browse/category/5/view/92
