Jump to content
Universal Psychic Guild Forum
light.

Who taught us to eat meat ... tie in to veggie topic

Recommended Posts

Me and Armadodecadron used to do this back two yearz ago or so all the time lol...

 

 

He would make a thread I would read it and make a spin off lol...

 

 

 

Read it all it wont bore you it is worth you time.... I promise...

 

 

 

 

 

I have been doing some reading and in ancient timez it was said that certain fallen angelz taught human kind certain thingz...

 

You all know were I am going with already lol...

 

Basically I can understand that theze beings did not teach man to kill animals because animalz probably taught man how to kill another animal from watching them do a auto matic natural animalistic DNA trait mechanism.

 

But who taught man to cook animalz hmmmmm.... and why?

 

Most likely man was taught to cook meat from these beings as well....

 

I had also read from another source that in ancient time the forest would grant man a animal to eat periodically by producing a older animal to leave the forest and lay to rest infront of humankind to eat.... But once the taste of flesh was know man began to think of how to get more and more of the addiction.

 

Because originally I believe man was not a meat eater because if you look at the animal kingdom the larges animals are not meat eaterz they are plant eaterz only.

 

Such as the Rhino and the Elephant or the Gorilla

 

They are more of a thinking class animal

 

I believe that we as humans are possibly remembering that we cannot evolve into the being we need to be with out removal of eating period as well as breathing.

 

Because those are dependent elements of the planet to survive in this atmosphere... and possibly it has to start with giving up meat eating then possibly the body will evolve over generations towards not eating much at all then not eating at all.

 

Next the body learns to recieve energies from light itself... it starts to receive microwaves from the sun.

 

 

Is it possible that we were receiving energy from the sun only originally then we some how were tricked into eating of flesh and shown how to lower our density... because we all know that it does lower our density it makes us heavy. Then we made a chemistry set we call our belly to dissolve all of the meat into a energy form that the sun naturally gives us....

 

 

See we are taking food and making it into what the sun naturally gives us. Could this possibly be due to the ice ages when there was no sun... were we ethereal beings during that time and were forced into eating meat by not having our food source the sun? Could it be that we are just evolving back into what we were originally....???? Iz that what some beings are trying to stop us from doing evolving back into what we were originally....???

I have heard many stories about the great fall of angels into this density. One story stuck out it stated that human kind was the Angel race and we were free to travel all universes freely but we were tricked into coming here to evolve our being but through lower density, we fell into a trap because they knew there was no way in hell we would come here on our own... And it specifically said that some of us fell harder than otherz basically some stayed in some what ethrical form while others fell all the way into half animal creatures such as the spinx and other half animal beings in Greek myth and Nordic legend with the fall into the animal kingdom we lost higher thinking abilities in other wordz angelic or etheric being thoughts and capabilities.

The otherz that did not fall as far into density wanted to help those that fell into the animal kingdom or half way there. But then there were otherz that knew these fallen half beings produced tremendous amounts of etherial energy so they wanted to enslave them and that might be the state that we are in now. Think about so many people say they are starting remember past lives and such and otherz speak of abilities they did not have before. Is it that we are coming out of the low density and something is trying to put back into it as animalz by destroying the entire economies of the world forcing man to be animalistic towards each other and and so forth? There is a lot more but I know your getting tired of reading so I will cut off there for now.

 

 

 

 

I know I asked a lot of deep thought questionz there but that is what contemplatorz do so feel free to contemplate on here and speculate and add whatever you like...

 

Much love and light...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The earliest legend I know of regarding man being brought fire was from greek mythology; the half-titan Prometheus, out of pity for man's wretched state, brings the fire of the gods to man. Prometheus, as a result, is strongly associated in ancient legend with the spark of innovation. As punishment for his transgression, Zeus bound him and set an eagle to eat his liver, which for some reason regenerates perpetually. As far as I know, the use of fire long predates this particular story, so take it with an air of bemused interest.

 

As for taught- why would man need to be taught to use fire at all? It is a naturally occurring phenomenon. One lightning strike in a cold, dry forest and suddenly a whole tribe of humans have interest in it. That doesn't mean they immediately had the means to produce it themselves, but over the millions and millions of years life has been developing here there is a -lot- of time for discoveries. As to how the act of putting meat in fire came about, that's difficult to know. It may be that the preparation of meat predates the use of fire - early man no doubt had to constantly struggle to keep kills in an edible state for as long as possible. Early man probably noticed that wet foods go bad faster than dry ones, and he probably learned early on to cut meat into thin strips to cure and harden in the sun. From there it is not difficult to imagine that when fire began to see use for warmth and protection, the idea that fire might help prolong meat's edibility like curing in the sun came shortly thereafter. And anyway, there are purely instinctive reasons to heat meat, instincts that are still with us today - a hot meal is something that provides psychological satisfaction because it emulates the warmth of a fresh kill. That instinct is ironically the reason that hot vegetable dishes carry the same kind of psychological satisfaction.

 

Innovation sometimes seems to come suddenly, but there is always something behind it; a need or another idea. It is a progression of ideas, you see, a great chain of them. Some are so far in our past that we have forgotten the precise events that led to their founding ideas, but they are always there.

 

Saying what I have about the origins of man, I find that the evidence is overwhelming that we have been omnivores for most of our evolution. Our closest genetic relative, the chimpanzee, is omnivorous. They are a fine example of a successful omnivore - their diet is primarily fruit matter, but they are accomplished predators in their ecosystem and will eat raw flesh when they can kill it. We are far closer to chimpanzees in genes and evolution than gorillas and certainly elephants, although how we began to diverge from the apes is an altogether more intimidating question.

 

To the mystical applications of this topic. You seem to be implying that we became creatures of flesh from eating flesh. Why are we eating at all if we are ethereal beings? We would have no need for vegetables, either. Your statement is true, in a way. If you want to become an ethereal being, stop eating and stop breathing. That makes a great deal of sense to me. But I just don't associate dietary habits with spirituality beyond decisions of personal morality, which can certainly have spiritual or worldly motivations behind them.

 

But this angel business; ah; for a class of spiritual beings supposedly having a hand in the entirety of man's history, they certainly have changed a lot over the millenia. I personally consider the majority of, er, "lore" regarding these beings a recent development, deviations from thousands and thousands of years of murky legend. Oh, the legends are there, but even a few short thousand years ago in the teachings of ancient Judaism some of them hardly fit the new age descriptions so beloved of them now. Some of them were outright dickheads. I'll wager that the farther back you go the less distinguishable they are from demons. The farther back you go the more capricious and strange the spirits seem to get. For this rich history and the general lack of consensus even among the participants of the agreeable new age movement I tend to take these apocryphal tales both old and new with a great deal of mistrust. What is the consensus? Angels are nice guys and they're here to help out. That's about the extent of it. Whence they come and where they're going - unknown. What our overall relationship is to them - unknown. Why they seem to lack material influence when they are reputedly beings of great power - unknown, and unnerving. How many of our legends regarding them are contaminated by our sourced specifically from possible extraterrestrial contact? Also unknown, and also unnerving.

 

Frankly, if you take any of those stories for granted, I think you're making a foolish mistake! There are too many gaping unknowns glossed over nervously by too many people. Ah, this really deserves a spin-off thread.

 

Back to food. I am fascinated by the idea that it is possible to utilize spiritual force as a source of material energy. Your stories regarding the fall of angels and of man are very silly. But this is surely something else. What sort of relationship between dimensions would allow for such a ... Violation ... Of this universe's fundamental laws as we know them? Or is it truly a violation at all? I can think of a poorly understood but entirely common relationship between the world of spirits and the world of man - every human being is such a walking miracle, and likely all life is somehow a part of this process. It an interesting and inevitable conclusion to those with the sight for these things that the human being is in some subtle ways a manifestation of spiritual structures, that is, the nervous system has developed to meet the need of interfacing with the spiritual machinery that comprises our ethereal aspect. It is also clear that the development is imperfect; incomplete. Your idea would not be possible without a vast expansion of throughput between the nervous system and the gossamer threads that our souls so delicately and so invisibly snake through us our brains and nerves, which tug at us this way as that, often without our knowledge as human beings (for the moment).

 

Do you have an idea as to how this relationship of worlds might be improved in a way that gives us more control over our presence here, and further unifies the two disparate forces that make us what we are?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Read it all it wont bore you it is worth you time.... I promise...

 

 

 

I know I asked a lot of deep thought questionz there but that is what contemplatorz do so feel free to contemplate on here and speculate and add whatever you like...

 

Much love and light...

 

I did enjoy that light.

 

Since I read your post I have been thinking a lot about the ideas that you offer and the questions that you ask.

 

Some of those questions have been on my mind for a long time. I still don't know the whole answer but I believe it was our own doing that we began to eat meat. Perhaps by foraging at first, or by intention. I don't know, but I will continue to peruse the notions until I feel comfortable with an option. :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think humans first began to eat meat because it was inherent in us, like it is in animals - part of the whole food chain. We learnt to cook it with the invent of fire, because its our natural instict to explore new things...ideas, tastes etc... However as we have progressed we have learned to make educated choices (sometimes dumb choices due to over consumption of meat) about whats right for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of what I promote in this post is just questions.

 

Considering no one knowz exactly what happen I do not believe in any of it I just question.

 

How do you believe with no type of proof??????????

 

Some say faith...... others say speculation....

 

I go with both

 

Because every thing has a bit of truth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't of had just been someone accidentally dropped meat into a fire pit and after they were able to either get the fire out or were able to handle the meat, we humans realized after we ate it, the food tasted better and then realized it would last longer, so one could keep it and travel with it and not be eaten by other wild animals, because of the raw meat smell? :woofpup:

 

Personally, I do not have faith and do not think for a second little beings from space came down to teach us how to cook our food. As with most other things, it was more likely accidental knowledge. As like what Armadodecadron hinted at, our closet relative is the Bonobo, or common Chimp, man observed them, saw they ate meat from time to time, saw they used tools, but because of our human digestive systems being so different, we were unable to process the raw meat and thought, hmmm, what would happen if I put this leg from a Antelope on this fire, what would it do.

 

Just simple curiousness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not say we are related to the chimp ... the human fruit fly has just as long as a chromosome chain as the human does. It is dangerous to relate animals to us.

 

For example most of the time that a chimp eats meat is when it killz a baby chimp while the mother is not watching...

 

So I would not elevate the thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not say we are related to the chimp ... the human fruit fly has just as long as a chromosome chain as the human does. It is dangerous to relate animals to us.

 

For example most of the time that a chimp eats meat is when it killz a baby chimp while the mother is not watching...

 

So I would not elevate the thought.

Well I guess you can stay with not elevate the thought, but it is fact, we humans are primates and our closest relative is the Chimp, HUMANS’ CLOSEST RELATIVE some now say it is the Orangutan.

Orangutans May Be Closest Human Relatives, Not Chimps

 

I also had a bit of a HUH, with you implying, chimps only take the young of other chimps when their mother isn't around or isn't looking. Chimps, especially the Bonobo, don't just take baby chimps when their moms aren't looking, it has been shown and proven that chimps hold what is known as warfare tactics and will go into other chimp clans and kill off them chimps because of territory or plain dislike.

 

It is more dangerous to only look at non-human animals as not connected to us, I know it helps with many so they do not feel as guilty when a non-human animal is killed or mistreated, but those of us who study this or keep up with the real science know better to think that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a very controversial area; I do not believe that our direct relative is the chimp, I have many reason for this but in whole look what we are doing first it is the chimp know we are jumping to the orangutans, next it will be walking water lizards " I want to be kin to them because they are kool...lol".

 

But any way we just dont know, our system is balanced with metals but we dont say that our closes relative is the earth.

 

I think that we were made and dna was taken from many things to make us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that we were made and dna was taken from many things to make us.

 

An outlandish preposition if ever I heard one. It would explain a great deal, though, wouldn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we're looking for "fallen angels" the Anunnaki might fit the bill, though they were no angels. From what I can gather from reading they were emotionally unstable and self-indulgent. Check the writings of Zechariah Sitchin, who is a scholar of dead languages.

 

Now if memory serves, the "Elohim" were the cadre of the Anunnaki and the rank and file were the "Nephilim". They crossed their genes with those of a Terrestrial "wild man" to produce our ancestors. It's all there on those old Sumerian and Babylonian clay tablets that Sitchin translated. Just that nobody else dared to do it before him.

 

And the "wild man" still exists, at least in rumors. There was an incident in the Caucasus in 1941 where the Red Army captured one.

 

African legend speaks of the place where "Heaven" mated with "Mother Earth". There is a definite location for this, search the name Michael Tellinger. Is in South Africa. See also Credo Mutwa, who will speak about the "Chitaouli" or "People of the Python". Relate this to certain artifacts found by Klaus Dona, where the faces of certain humanoid carvings appear to have scales.

 

Surviving fragments of the Popol Vuh from Central America speak of at least one additional attempt to create a slave race, so no wonder the Spanish tried to burn all that stuff. It seems the first "slave" race created by the Anunnaki may have been too intelligent, and went their own way.

 

As mentioned, check out the discoveries of Klaus Dona. Physical evidence of at least one other race living on Earth in ancient times. In fact probably more than one. And some examples of a written language judged to be the oldest so far discovered, older than Sanskrit.

 

As for eating meat, hard to say. Maybe it began when times were really bad climatically, and there was no choice. Or maybe we inherited the tendency from the Anunnaki.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of the folklore revolving around the Anunnaki - Do you believe the entirety of those decidedly recent interpretations of babylonian mythology? I've spent some time reading about it and I've come out very uncertain as to where my opinion should lie. It's a very interesting story, and at the same time most of the recent literature on it stinks of the same kind of new age perversity that turned the remarkably ambiguous tortugeuro monument 6 into the intellectual train wreck of grape-vine retelling that is the 2012 prophecy.

 

I'm terribly wary - although I am in a position that makes it very, very easy to believe in extraterrestrial life. I'll google Zach's stuff.

 

Edit: Oh - this is the "Earth was split in half and used to be called Planet Tiamat" guy. On second thought, I'll just pass. He's completely bananas. Even if everything he wrote was a direct and faithful translation of his source material the only thing that would prove was that the ancient babylonian peoples were either notorious liars or, in turn, completely bananas themselves. There are way too many glaringly obvious problems with his version of our solar system's history. Anyone who can that badly mangle a fairly well established and understood solar cosmology and walk away from it with a straight face isn't someone with a trustworthy intellect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's getting a ways off the original question of having meat in the diet, BUT...

The asteroid belt came from someplace. And I suppose Velikovsky is as equally loony as Sitchin because he believes Venus was once a moon or part of Jupiter? At least Sitchin had actual writings to translate.

Check out the slide presentation by Klaus Dona interviewed by Bill Ryan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I went through time-consuming lengths to describe why a planet could not have a 3000+ year elliptical solar orbit, be large enough to possess moons which would have enough mass to split a planet in half on impact, and still support life out in distances away from our sun that would make things as cold and radioactive as deep space conditions, would you listen? For an object that large to maintain an orbit that outlandish over the billions of years necessary for the event to occur and for life to begin on earth stretches my imagination in uncomfortable ways. What if I drew charts? What if I told you this solar system's main asteroid belt's combined mass equals less than a single percent of earth's current total mass? Would this mean anything to you or would it just annoy you? We could just not have this discussion, if you prefer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't think anyone (aliens or angels) showed us how to do anything. Life is a string of coincidences.

 

I've heard that the appendix was used as an assistant to digest large amounts of leafy greens. Also, we used to have sharper teeth - if you look at someone who still has incredibly sharp canines, sometimes they have to have them sanded down because of damage to the tongue. In times of cavemen, they used both the ability to eat leafy greens and to eat meat because they could to survive. It was probably also a way to protect themselves against predators, and since they've seen other predators do it, they would repeat what they did. Also, I agree with the fact that we are naturally curious beings (think about yourself now - we're exploring the possibility of life after death, which to this date, cannot be proven for a fact though it can be studied and there's research existing on it...) So the curiosity of approaching a fire and putting things in it might have been how that chain of cooking the meat began.

 

It wasn't until recently that we over-consume meat. Until consumerism began, we would have meat occasionally and substitute the rest with vegetables and fruits. In many countries meat is not the staple food for dinner - it's the vegetables.

 

But it's all open for opinion. I enjoyed your topic!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest charless

If I went through time-consuming lengths to describe why a planet could not have a 3000+ year elliptical solar orbit, be large enough to possess moons which would have enough mass to split a planet in half on impact, and still support life out in distances away from our sun that would make things as cold and radioactive as deep space conditions, would you listen? For an object that large to maintain an orbit that outlandish over the billions of years necessary for the event to occur and for life to begin on earth stretches my imagination in uncomfortable ways. What if I drew charts? What if I told you this solar system's main asteroid belt's combined mass equals less than a single percent of earth's current total mass? Would this mean anything to you or would it just annoy you? We could just not have this discussion, if you prefer.

 

It sounds like you have really researched all this. But you haven't have you? It's empty rhetoric. What function does all this fulmination have for you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, Lavender. The rarity of meat is an excellent point. I didn't even think of it in the grand scheme of this discussion. It's pretty obvious that we're configured for maximum digestion (and maximum craving) of meat, which does indeed suggest an evolutionary adaptation to scarcity. Vegetables, on the other hand, we tend to pick vital nutrients from and discard the rest, particularly cellulose and dense fibers, which evolutionary herbivores such as cows have the ability to digest. Huh. You can learn a lot about a form of life by examining its poop. I wonder how this influences our moral imperatives as concerned individuals?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huh. You can learn a lot about a form of life by examining its poop.
:lol:

 

The concept that aliens taught humanity it's great technologies, that aliens taught fire, or we reverse engineered computers from UFOs, or they built the pyramids (well maybe that one :P), that just shortchanges humanity's creativity. Are we really so bad? Couldn't we have done it?

 

we are naturally curious beings
In Geneva they are trying to create black holes just because we are curious beings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I went through time-consuming lengths to describe why a planet could not have a 3000+ year elliptical solar orbit, be large enough to possess moons which would have enough mass to split a planet in half on impact, and still support life out in distances away from our sun that would make things as cold and radioactive as deep space conditions, would you listen? For an object that large to maintain an orbit that outlandish over the billions of years necessary for the event to occur and for life to begin on earth stretches my imagination in uncomfortable ways. What if I drew charts? What if I told you this solar system's main asteroid belt's combined mass equals less than a single percent of earth's current total mass? Would this mean anything to you or would it just annoy you? We could just not have this discussion, if you prefer.

 

Doesn't annoy me at all. But if you take a look, I didn't mention the Tiamat-water-giant-planet theory in the first place. I was thinking of the "fallen angels" theme, and what truth might lie behind that. Asteriod mass, unlikely elliptical orbit, what of it? That was a long time ago. In that era, myths and remnants is all we're ever likely to get.

 

If you haven't encountered him already, Graham Hancock by his own admission prefers to avoid the inclusion of extraterrestrials most of the time. I think you'd like that.

 

On the subject of meat eating, I suppose the extreme example would be cannibalism. Apparently, many cannibals preferred to terrify their victims before killing and eating them. They believed it tasted better that way. Almost seems to be an element of addiction in that. One wonders anew where the idea came from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we're looking for "fallen angels" the Anunnaki might fit the bill, though they were no angels. From what I can gather from reading they were emotionally unstable and self-indulgent. Check the writings of Zechariah Sitchin, who is a scholar of dead languages.

 

Now if memory serves, the "Elohim" were the cadre of the Anunnaki and the rank and file were the "Nephilim". They crossed their genes with those of a Terrestrial "wild man" to produce our ancestors. It's all there on those old Sumerian and Babylonian clay tablets that Sitchin translated. Just that nobody else dared to do it before him.

 

And the "wild man" still exists, at least in rumors. There was an incident in the Caucasus in 1941 where the Red Army captured one.

 

African legend speaks of the place where "Heaven" mated with "Mother Earth". There is a definite location for this, search the name Michael Tellinger. Is in South Africa. See also Credo Mutwa, who will speak about the "Chitaouli" or "People of the Python". Relate this to certain artifacts found by Klaus Dona, where the faces of certain humanoid carvings appear to have scales.

 

Surviving fragments of the Popol Vuh from Central America speak of at least one additional attempt to create a slave race, so no wonder the Spanish tried to burn all that stuff. It seems the first "slave" race created by the Anunnaki may have been too intelligent, and went their own way.

 

As mentioned, check out the discoveries of Klaus Dona. Physical evidence of at least one other race living on Earth in ancient times. In fact probably more than one. And some examples of a written language judged to be the oldest so far discovered, older than Sanskrit.

 

As for eating meat, hard to say. Maybe it began when times were really bad climatically, and there was no choice. Or maybe we inherited the tendency from the Anunnaki.

 

 

 

 

 

I read most of his books and from what I seen and found out it seems that it is likely a lot of truth to some of this stuff. It may not all be right but there are some things that stick out.

 

For example the Atlantic Ocean just happens to be called such. On top of it the tectonic plates are shifting it is possible that land sunk and other land moved up. Also the Hawaiian island people are different just as the Australian native people, and all their legends speak of people coming from the sky. On the walls of Egypt are pictures of technology. They have found jars and coins that are over millions of years old, plus they have found vehicle parts over millions of years old, most religions speak of mystic things that would fit right in with the information. And there are ancient skullz that are elongated heads even in ancient Egyptian stone carvings the heads of Pharaohs were elongated and the hats they wore were to cover the elongated heads.

 

There is to much evidence to just blow it off.

 

I mean thousands believe in a book that has no proof in the past called the bible.

 

But here there is proof on recorded sand stone and corresponding information through almost all cultures written on the walls and carved and written on metal and paper.

 

And if that is banana's or crazy then we are all monkeys.

 

There is a lot of proof and all other cultures do not deny alien activity; video comes from Latin America, Russia,and Asia. And we all know that America denies every thing, so when they say "no" it really means "maybe".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Light,

Sitchin perhaps will be looked back on as a pioneer, the same way Von Daniken was. But, his theories are a different thing from just raw translation. For example, I think if a water giant planet did disintegrate in our solar system, sure, some of the ice could have been drawn to Earth but also to Mars. There isn't much of that on the Red Planet.

 

Maybe you've seen pics of those elongated heads, if not, check out Klaus Dona interviewed by Bill Ryan. It's a slide presentaion so you'll want audio-visual.

 

Did I mention Michael Tellinger? More ancient history stuff on a vast scale.

I suppose I should sign off since I'm way off topic.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest charless
The concept that aliens taught humanity it's great technologies, that aliens taught fire, or we reverse engineered computers from UFOs, or they built the pyramids (well maybe that one ), that just shortchanges humanity's creativity. Are we really so bad? Couldn't we have done it?

 

Possibly we did do it all. Possibly history is just the way we tell it. But how did those big stones get all the way to the top of the mountain to build Machu Picchu? I've been there by bus and that's hard enough. Why are there pyramids outside Mexico City, Teotihuacán, that are pretty much the same as the Egyptian pyramids when there appears to have been no contact between the two civilisations?

 

I don't know, but perhaps what we were taught at school is true. I doubt it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this isn't exactly on subject but:

Why are there pyramids outside Mexico City, Teotihuacán, that are pretty much the same as the Egyptian pyramids when there appears to have been no contact between the two civilisations?
They are both "pyramids" but they are very different. You can look at photos to see the physical differences. They also have very different mythologies associated with them, and come from very different cultures with different art work and rituals.

But even if they were exactly the same, it would be just as reasonable to say "great minds think alike" then to say aliens tasks the project. That both cultures had access to some kind of spiritual information about the purpose of pyramids. Saying that aliens built it or made them build it is equally lacking in evidence.

 

how did those big stones get all the way to the top of the mountain to build Machu Picchu?
I'm not really sure, also in many of these monuments, absurdly large stones were used, and there is just no reason to use such absurdly large stones when one could easily cut them to a more manageable size. So maybe it was aliens, but just because that is the only suggestion on the table doesn't make it the answer.

 

I don't know, but perhaps what we were taught at school is true. I doubt it.
I doubt it too, and I hate scientific dogma, how they discard these ideas without any consideration. I've learned about the ancient aliens idea too, and I'm not saying it's wrong, it could be right. I am just trying to keep an open mind, we just don't have enough information I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest charless
They are both "pyramids" but they are very different. You can look at photos to see the physical differences. They also have very different mythologies associated with them, and come from very different cultures with different art work and rituals.

 

This is true, and an identikit version would be even wierder, but I find the common shape interesting because both cultures sacrificed enormous numbers of lives and resources to create them.

 

I doubt it too, and I hate scientific dogma, how they discard these ideas without any consideration. I've learned about the ancient aliens idea too, and I'm not saying it's wrong, it could be right. I am just trying to keep an open mind, we just don't have enough information I think.

 

I agree - I don't think it was all down to aliens, I just think history leaves lot out and makes huge assumptions based often on almost nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×