Ancient Astronauts: Some Core Concepts

INTRODUCTION: If there were only one line of evidence suggestive of ‘ancient astronauts’ then it could probably be easily dismissed. But when there are a half-dozen or more independent core concepts that point in the direction that at the very least ‘ancient astronauts’ is a plausible hypothesis, that’s another can of worms entirely and that’s what we have here.

IN THEORY: We can start off with arguments from theory like the Fermi Paradox which suggests that technologically advanced aliens (an extremely logical concept given the age and vastness of the cosmos) should have noted and logged the third rock out from the Sun many times over since the time it takes to explore the Milky Way Galaxy from stem to stern, even at one to ten percent the speed of light is but a tiny fraction of the age of the galaxy. Then there’s the theoretical argument that if the modern day UFO phenomena is at last in part due to extraterrestrial intelligence, then it would be such an extraordinary coincidence that our generation should just happen to be THE generation so blessed with alien visitations. Of course if aliens were here in the distant past, then that extraordinary coincidence goes down the gurgler. https://zoomiescanada.com/

IN ART: Ancient humans could draw and sculpt as accurately as modern humans; therefore otherworldly looking images need to be taken at face value barring any evidence to the contrary.

IN ARCHITECTURE: There just would appear to be several structures that when dated are incompatible with the ancient technologies required to construct them. For example, there are ‘impossible’ architectural structures like the Temple of Jupiter at Baalbek (Lebanon); Pumapunku within the Tiahuanaco/Tiwanaku complex (Bolivia); Nan Modol (Micronesia); and those Olmec heads (Mexico) with the added oddity that they appear African. (Note: I do not include the Egyptian pyramids here. There are some things humans can do.)

IN CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY: Cultural anthropological anomalies abound, like a) why the sudden emergence of human culture around 50,000 years ago and settlements around 10,000 years ago in unconnected geographical regions; b) why did some bands of humans choose to live in environments (like the tundra) totally unsuitable to their home environment of equatorial Africa.

IN PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY: Physical anthropological anomalies also abound, like a) why did all our hominid ancestors go extinct (unless you want to count the as yet unconfirmed existence of Bigfoot, the Yeti, etc. as ancestors); b) why are humans (and their immediate ancestors) the only species to have a bipedal gait without benefit of a balancing tail; c) how can you get the ethnic or racial diversification of the human species in just 50,000 years; e) how is it that humans alone have evolved massive brain complexity, skyrocketing IQ, and the ability to have abstract thoughts and concepts; d) how is it that humans lost their natural fur only to then have to put on artificial fur (clothes). Might these all be explainable more by artificial selection (genetic engineering) than natural selection (a concept possibly reinforced today given the emphasis on genetics and breeding in UFO alien abduction cases).

IN MYTHOLOGY: When mythologies of every society and culture share common (but unworldly) concepts then one has to sit up and take some notice that something extraordinary is going on. For example: a) animal-animal and animal-human hybrids; b) sky gods; c) dragons; d) gifts, like agriculture presented to humans from the gods; e) shape-shifters and shape-shifting; f) wars in heaven; g) an extraordinary focus of just a relatively few astronomical objects like Sirius, the Pleiades, and Orion; h) gods who left promising to return one day, much like Jesus, and much like Lono, a top god of the Hawaiian Islands who descended to Earth via a rainbow, was alas another case of mistaken identity since the natives originally mistook Captain James Cook for the return of their Lono.

IN ABSTRACTIONS: Those rather strange concepts that humans have come up with like extremely long cycles of creation and destruction or for that matter the idea of creation itself which is anything but obvious from day-to-day observations and experience. Humans seem to have had ingrained some ideas that are rather unlikely to have developed naturally or which have or had no real relevance to their daily grind. For an example of the latter, the Mayans had this thing about tracking the cycle of the planet Venus from where it appeared in the sky until when it reappeared in the exact same spot. It must have been an overly academic exercise since it had no day-to-day relevance to say planting or harvesting crops. What was the real point of doing this? Well I gather it was an early form of ‘practical’ astrology, and important decisions (like going to war) were based on all of this. Reading tea leaves or chicken entrails, the throw of a dice, or even having their high priest/shaman smoke some magic mushrooms for inspiration/guidance would have been far easier, so we see the extraordinary importance here of a celestial object. In an ‘ancient astronaut’ context, why Venus? Now Venus is certainly not a planet one would associate anymore as home to intelligent life (micro-organisms in the upper atmosphere could be another story). But there was that ‘satellite’ of Venus, called Neith, noted and logged numerous times by astronomers that just disappeared! Today, Venus does not have any natural satellite(s).

IN ASTROARCHAEOLOGY (ASTROLOGY): Ancient cultures around the world engaged in astronomical observations that had no relevance to their immediate survival needs* – you don’t need a Stonehenge in order to do agriculture. Whether it is ten, eight, six, four, or even two thousand years ago, your basic priorities were food, shelter, sex, family, community and defence. The only real celestial object of any relevance to the above is the Sun – warmth, light and food (via photosynthesis, though that wouldn’t have been an obvious connection). Why the emphasis by our ancient ancestors on observational astronomy (studied today as the discipline of astroarchaeology), unless of course the sky and celestial objects therein had some extra special meaning? That’s sort of like to what we would call today astrology.