Barry Downing Is Promoting Recycled Bible-UFO Claims from the 1950s

11/3/2017

I have been steadfastly ignoring the news reports promoting the Rev. Barry Downing’s new book about UFOs in the Bible, but the number of them is getting ridiculous. The capper came when Mysterious Universe’s Paul Seaburn promoted the book as though it were a fresh and exciting take on the ancient alien claim. This is silly for a number of reasons, not just because Downing appeared on Ancient Aliens years ago to deliver the same message, but because his current book is a virtual rewrite of his first book on the subject, published in 1968! The claims are mostly the same, and they weren’t original then either.

“My argument is that the Exodus UFO, the pillar of cloud and fire, which appeared cloud-like during the day and glowed in the dark, used its propulsion system to split the waters of the Red Sea and save Israel from the Egyptians,” Downing writes in Biblical UFO Revelations. "I believe the best explanation for the parting of the Red Sea is that the pillar of cloud and fire was some type of spaceship, and those in charge of the spaceship planned the parting of the sea well in advance, to save Israel from the Egyptians and to keep Israel from going back to Egypt, once the Jews discovered that the whole Exodus process was not a walk in the park."

His claims are remarkably similar to religious crank John Miller’s arguments for divine flying saucers in the “Whirling Wheels” pamphlet of 1956. “These angels or space men pilot some sort of vehicle. […] Light ‘like the sun’ came from this space-ship, and its legs, no doubt landing gear, were like ‘pillars of fire.’ The whole earth was lit up by the power of the light given off by this space-ship (Rev. 18:1).” His other major claim, that Jesus was a space alien, already appeared in the cult ravings of George Van Tassel by 1960. “He said that JESUS was born of MARY, who was a space person sent here already pregnant in order to show the earth people the proper way to live,” the FBI wrote of Van Tassel in 1960.

It’s amazing, to an extent, that the same material keeps coming back again and again.

“When I published The Bible and Flying Saucers in 1968,” Downing wrote, “I had one major concern about connecting UFOs to biblical angels. The biblical view of angels was they were eternal beings, they had eternal life. My understanding of the scientific worldview at that time was that we live in a ‘running down universe,’ meaning that at some time in the future the universe will run out of energy and die. If this were true, then no one living in this universe could be eternal.”

That was his major concern?

I’m not quite sure why anyone would take Downing seriously, much less why his recycling or recycled claims continues to be re-marketed as new and exciting 50 years after the fact, and 60 years after the claims were already popular, if silly, parts of pop culture.

89 Comments

Wim Van der Straeten

11/3/2017 10:57:00 am

I suppose the book also contains the claim that the vision of Ezechiel of the chariot of God was a UFO sighting.
I guess it's not so strange that these claims are made by authors looking for gullible readers. After all, the Bible is the most translated book in the history of mankind and you can reach a wide audience by referring to it (especially in the U.S.A.).

Shane Sullivan

11/3/2017 11:19:57 am

"My argument is that the Exodus UFO, the pillar of cloud and fire, which appeared cloud-like during the day..."

Of course, because everyone claiming to have seen a classic UFO, going back to Kenneth Arnold, always maintains that it looks exactly like a cloud.

Jim

11/3/2017 11:56:51 am

Cloaking technology wasn't nearly so advanced back then, it's not until the year 2268 that the Klingons acquired it from the Romulans.

Riley V

11/3/2017 01:32:08 pm

So if this is the deal, what was manna? Was it radioactive? Why did the angels stop banging Earth women to make Nephalim? Are the women on some other planet better looking? If so, why isn't SETI looking for that planet in particular?

Clint Knapp

11/3/2017 07:01:58 pm

Check out The Manna Machine by George Sassoon sometime. Though the crux of Sassoon's argument relies on interpreting Jewish Kabbalah texts as describing a nuclear-reactor powered machine (psst. the Ark is the reactor) that produced free algae to eat, if Ancient Aliens has taught us anything it's that all technology derives from aliens, ergo the Manna Machine was also given to Moses by the aliens who made all his "miracles" possible.

Bob Jase

11/3/2017 01:37:30 pm

Well if you can get people to believe in invisible magic giants living in the sky can it be any harder to get them to believe in little green men?

Only Me

11/3/2017 03:38:17 pm

How does one reconcile the belief in extraterrestrial life with faith?

Apparently, Downing hasn't caught up with the rest of the AAT crowd. Is he not aware we've been given claims that basically assign the powers of the gods to aliens, which has slowly turned AAT into a pseudo-religion? Why worry about immortality and the death of this universe when those claims place aliens in other dimensions beyond this one?

Alex Van Warren

11/4/2017 02:47:03 pm

When I first started talking to Alan several years ago, we discussed how the
Superman Symbol kept popping up. If I remember correctly, Alan and Mr. Christopher Knight both noticed symbol appearing within their researches. Now I see why.

Superman's birth name Kal-El/Calal(us)

The S on Superman's chest symbol was originally a snake

Superman's cape was originally covered with snakes in the form of an S. This cape was given to him by his Earth parents. This cape came from the Kent family, who were a line of snake priests.

I'm thinking a couple of dudes from New York, knew something when they created this character.

There are several other points to bolster this idea however, I'm running out of time and I don't want to ramble.

Henry

11/3/2017 04:03:24 pm

All this trivial blog does is recycle old claims made by the earliest reviews. Not a single original comment made. At least cite the people you are plagiarizing.

Only Me

11/3/2017 04:44:15 pm

You contradicted yourself. I'll leave it to you to figure out why.

BigNick

11/3/2017 05:27:32 pm

Could you point me to these earliest reviews. I would like to read them for myself. Also perhaps you should read another blog.

Americanegro

11/3/2017 07:50:03 pm

Let's look at the Hebrews's story as presented in their scriptures.

It starts with a family of incest generating a descendent in the sweet spot for senile dementia willing to murder his child.

Somehow magically, like Jack Bauer's daughter you moved from Iraq and you're enslaved in Egypt and then kidnapped to Persia Monir or Apobababylonia or somewhere. Then after asking directions for 40 years you invade a country that's literally walking distance from Egypt, and you know what connects Egypt and Israel? THE BEACH!!! Of course the first order of business was to slaughter tens of thousands of inhabitants. So it's the promised land if you murder everyone who lives there.

This is why I do not like the Bible.

Joe Scales

11/3/2017 09:37:16 pm

The sequel ain't an easy read either. You know, with God banging some married chick whose lovechild ultimately gets tortured by Romans. Then once those guys show up on the horses, all bets are off...

Americanegro

11/3/2017 09:53:16 pm

I used to hang with Methos so I'm good when the horses run free.

Riley V.

11/4/2017 11:23:01 pm

Check out the Third installment some time. Ancient Hebrews running all over America. Golden tablets from Angels. Murdered prophets.
The secret Mason symbolism and ceremonies are the best.

Americanegro

11/5/2017 01:06:05 am

In the same way that all new technology is immediately used for porn I theorize that all religions are at their beginning about a scheme to have sex with 13 year old girls. This is not an enormous leap of logic.

Al in Cranbrook

11/4/2017 01:37:34 am

Just discovered this site, caught my interest because it delves into subjects I've been reading about for some 45 years.

I, too, am a "skeptic"...primarily of conventional history with respect to civilization, and of what has increasingly taken on religious tones - science. Without going off on a tear about AGW/Climate Change, suffice to say that when so-called "scientists", and their legions of self-appointed apostles, start treating opponents to their dictums and decrees as heretics to some contrived faith, even going so far as to suggest they be tried, convicted and tossed into prisons, and do so with shameless zealotry that would impress Dominican Inquisitors of the 13th century...

Then I have a problem with the field of "science".

That said...

Why I appreciate the likes of Hancock, Von Daniken, or a series like "Ancient Aliens" is that they go places that, I'm convinced, makes a lot of scientists uncomfortable. It's no secret that people in such fields too often are intimidated by their peers into staying within the neatly, or conveniently, defined confines of the acceptable narratives of the day. In his day Galileo was deemed to be speculative, engaging in what we today would call "fringe", or "pseudo" science. He went to prison for his efforts. We're more civilized in the 21st century - we merely burn heretics on stake of public opinion in the MSM, and over the Internet.

I've yet to read or hear a more plausible explanation for the erosion found around the Sphinx than water/rainfall. It is no secret that the climate in Northern Africa circa 10,500 to 8,500 BC was entirely different than is the case today. And it's no mystery that the Sphinx was buried to its neck in sand for most of the centuries over the last 4,500 years. So what's the real history? Because all that I've seen offered by conventional science is, frankly, utterly unbelievable. Same goes for the Great Pyramid. Kufu built himself the tomb from hell, and never bothered so much as once to have his name carved into it??? Anywhere??? C'mon! Really???

Puma Punku? Carved with stone chisels? 1600 hundred ton slabs at Baalbek, neatly slid into place with precision that modern engineers would be hard pressed to match with latest and best in modern machinery?

There's one word that can be applied to modern science, and it's a GD crying shame, and a blight on the entire lot: Orthodoxy.

Plate tectonics was considered laughable...until it wasn't. Chuck Yeager wrote that half the scientists in the world considered the sound barrier impenetrable, any attempt would result in disintegration...until he did it. Remember Y2K? What a fiasco was that! Now science is pulling back on cholesterol and heart disease after five decades of pumping what ultimately amounted to crap. And the universe is riddled with solar systems, as if logic could dictate any other probability but!

Thank God for those who dare to step outside the bounds of convention, or we'd still be living in the stone age. There's real truths out there to be had; some of them threaten to upend a lot of long held and cherished belief structures.

As that famous movie line uttered by Jack Nicholson puts it: You want the truth? You can't handle the truth!

Sadly, very applicable.

Americanegro

11/4/2017 01:54:40 am

"Chuck Yeager wrote that half the scientists in the world considered the sound barrier impenetrable, any attempt would result in disintegration...until he did it."

If my buddy Chuck wrote that he was an idiot on the scale of Wolter. We already had supersonic bullets and missiles.

I don't trust your thought process.

Only Me

11/4/2017 02:07:19 am

You can't accept the explanations offered by science because science evolves with the introduction of new evidence, which allows our understanding of history to follow suit.

Instead, you prefer alternative history, which has been repeatedly debunked due to very little change in the ideas and reliance on the same dubious "evidence". Thanks to Jason's efforts, it has been shown that many of these ideas originated decades, if not centuries, before Hancock, et. al. were born.

Alternate history is the recycling of old ideas while pretending they're new. If there were any truth to them, they would not fall under the fringe, pseudoscience or alternative history labels.

BETTY

11/4/2017 08:22:22 am

“Alternate history is the recycling of old ideas while pretending they're new. If there were any truth to them, they would not fall under the fringe, pseudoscience or alternative history labels.“

Unless there are powerful vested interests that benefit from humans having a limited world view.

Only Me

11/4/2017 09:06:25 am

Then you'll have to provide a list of suspects, Betty. Vague statements about "powerful vested interests" aren't going to invalidate my point.

BETTY

11/4/2017 09:16:40 am

The most powerful vested interests are the governments and also people hiding behind governments. So called power behind the throne. People who benefit from the world power structure as it is now.

Only Me

11/4/2017 09:28:34 am

Okay, let's assume you're right. Two questions:

1) How does alternative history challenge governments, the power players behind them and the world structure that benefits them?

2) If alternative history has this power, why hasn't it produced results *if there is any truth to the ideas it represents?*

BigNick

11/4/2017 09:35:15 am

Why did they announce a possible undiscovered chamber in the Pyramid if they are hiding things. And how exactly does one benefit by hiding historical facts? If the Smithsonian receives a new artifact, they can advertise it and attract more visitors and receive more funding. new discoveries allow universities to attract more donors.

BETTY

11/4/2017 09:37:44 am

1) For example if it would become public that government has known for a long time about aliens and has even cooperated with them and has withheld this information from the public, it could make at least some people rather unhappy.
2) What do you mean by “results”? I would say it has produced plenty of results for those who have eyes to see. Of course most “results” get suppressed and ridiculed by vested interests.

Only Me

11/4/2017 09:56:22 am

"if it would become public that government has known for a long time about aliens and has even cooperated with them and has withheld this information from the public"

Since this information hasn't been made public, how can you speak with confidence this assertion is true?

"I would say it has produced plenty of results... Of course most 'results' get suppressed and ridiculed by vested interests."

Then there were no results, as nothing has changed. That means alternative history lacks the power you think these "powerful vested interests" fear.

BigNick

11/4/2017 10:01:20 am

Betty-

1.Could you tell us about some of those results since you can see them and we cannot?
2. Can you explain how Ancient Aliens is on the air? Is it a false flag operation?
3. Why don't these governments just stop giving out permits for archeological digs?
4.How would finding ancient proof of aliens prove that the government works with aliens now? That's real proof, not the BS they put on the show

BETTY @ BIGNICK

11/4/2017 10:03:31 am

I have read more than one story about the most controversial artifacts delivered to institutions like Smithsonian never to be seen again.

BETTY

11/4/2017 10:32:02 am

"Since this information hasn't been made public, how can you speak with confidence this assertion is true?"

Actually it has been made public, but again those without eyes to see just deny this. Watch this video. In this video former president of Russia tells that aliens are for real.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHCSpm2kepo

1.Could you tell us about some of those results since you can see them and we cannot?

ANSWER: Smithsonian was mentioned earlier. One such a case took place in Arizona´s Canyon de Chelly National Monument in 1999. In this incident after torrential rains a number of skeletons were exposed. One of the sceletons was seven foot hight with six fingers and six toes. Both FBI and Smithsonian were present overseeing the dig. Have you later heard about these sceletons?

2. Can you explain how Ancient Aliens is on the air? Is it a false flag operation?

ANSWER: Maybe the time to make this information public is getting nearer. Again also referring to Medvedev statement.

3. Why don't these governments just stop giving out permits for archeological digs?

ANSWER: In many cases they have done so to scientists who challenge orthodoxy.

4.How would finding ancient proof of aliens prove that the government works with aliens now? That's real proof, not the BS they put on the show.

ANSWER: If aliens were to be granted any reality in ancient times questions would immediately arise where did they go and could they even be around today.

Only Me

11/4/2017 11:37:06 am

Without evidence, I'm not predisposed to accept the claim of an alleged eyewitness or source, even a former president.

By the way, using the phrases "those who have eyes to see" and "those without eyes to see" is suggestive of religious fundamentalism. You should avoid that, as belief is a poor substitute for evidence if you're trying to prove an idea.

Bob Jase

11/4/2017 11:42:54 am

Okay, every government in the world is secretly working for aliens.

When did this begin? In the '50's? No, there were ufos long before then. Under Abe Lincoln? No, much older ufos reported. Henry the 8th? Julius Caesar? Rameses the 1st? Sargon of Akkad? The unremembered ruler of Catal Hyuk? Some Neanderthal chieftan from 175,000 years ago?

Kindly tell us AND supply evidence.

BETTY

11/4/2017 12:03:31 pm

"Without evidence, I'm not predisposed to accept the claim of an alleged eyewitness or source, even a former president."

It always seems to come down to this. Please provide the evidence and if evidence is provided then it is not strong enough. So could you please specify what evidence would be evidence to you. A dead alien body? A living alien?

It is unlikely that evidence of this kind will be available quite yet, because the phenomena of aliens is too elusive and both governments (already explained why) and positive aliens (prime directive) are not interested in their disclosure. Negative aliens have their own purpose behind remaining hidden.

"When did this begin? In the '50's? No, there were ufos long before then. Under Abe Lincoln? No, much older ufos reported. Henry the 8th? Julius Caesar? Rameses the 1st? Sargon of Akkad? The unremembered ruler of Catal Hyuk? Some Neanderthal chieftan from 175,000 years ago?

Kindly tell us AND supply evidence."

The modern UFO phenomena started with bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, because this indicated to aliens that we could destroy Earth. This is also when US government commenced project Sign (1947), Grudge (1949) and Blue Book (1952).

How far into the past it all goes? Difficult to tell, but it could be that we are ourselves are aliens to planet Earth. But I hope you do not ask in all seriousness to provide evidence to events that may have happened millions of years ago. But I would recommend Dolores Cannon`s books, maybe "Keepers of the Garden" is most relevant in this context.

Bob Jase

11/4/2017 12:36:04 pm

"The modern UFO phenomena started with bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, because this indicated to aliens that we could destroy Earth. "

So the 'mystery airships' of the 1890's weren't ufos? Neither were any other earlier ufos actually aliens?

BTW, you left out the evidence, hearsay is valueless.

BETTY

11/4/2017 12:43:57 pm

“So the 'mystery airships' of the 1890's weren't ufos? Neither were any other earlier ufos actually aliens?“

I was referring to the fact, that after Hiroshima and Nagasaki the UFO phenomena became widespread enough to be studied by the US government. Nowhere did I suggest that there were no aliens before. Quite the contrary, I suggested we could be aliens ourselves.

“BTW, you left out the evidence, hearsay is valueless.”

You neglected to specify what would be evidence for you.

Americanegro

11/4/2017 12:59:38 pm

"Unless there are powerful vested interests that benefit from humans having a limited world view."

Sorry Betty, that is itself one of the recycled old ideas. There's a difference between the Trilateral Commission or the CFR or the Rothschilds or the Atlantic Alliance running the world and the people who happen to run the world belonging to the same clubs.

It's the difference between the cart and the horse. Also, never assume competence when criminality is a sufficient explanation. We're all just living in The Carter like Pookie working for the Cash Money Brothers.

Only Me

11/4/2017 01:04:01 pm

"It always seems to come down to this. Please provide the evidence and if evidence is provided then it is not strong enough. So could you please specify what evidence would be evidence to you. A dead alien body? A living alien?"

You completely destroy this complaint with your next statement.

"It is unlikely that evidence of this kind will be available quite yet because the phenomena of aliens is too elusive..."

So why ask me to specify what evidence I would accept if it can't be provided?

"...and both governments (already explained why) and positive aliens (prime directive) are not interested in their disclosure. Negative aliens have their own purpose behind remaining hidden."

Again, why are you complaining about requests for evidence and asking for specifics concerning that evidence when you admit no evidence will be forthcoming?

If aliens are a natural phenomena, then there should be, after all this time, some verifiable or testable evidence mainstream science can accept. Since there isn't, you're operating on faith the phenomenon is real. You know what that's called? Religion.

BETTY

11/4/2017 01:11:00 pm

Has science proved beyond doubt that big bang occurred? Any explanation what existed before? Science sounds like a religion to me.

Only Me

11/4/2017 01:24:45 pm

Betty, provide an explanation that will substitute for the Big Bang Theory that is not based on a religion or creation myth. If you can't do that, or default to "I don't know", then your equating of science to religion is wrong. I suspect you already know this.

Americanegro

11/4/2017 02:10:30 pm

All science actually tells us is that the universe LOOKS AS IF the Big Bang occurred. Don't try to put words into the mouth of science, Betty.

BETTY

11/4/2017 02:47:43 pm

“Again, why are you complaining about requests for evidence and asking for specifics concerning that evidence when you admit no evidence will be forthcoming? “

I did not say that no evidence will be forthcoming. I said 2 categories of evidence will probably not forthcoming just yet. Is my conclusion correct then that ONLY EVIDENCE you are going to accept is a living or dead alien body?

“All science actually tells us is that the universe LOOKS AS IF the Big Bang occurred. Don't try to put words into the mouth of science, Betty.”

All I am saying is that life looks as if aliens exist.

Only Me

11/4/2017 03:24:22 pm

"I did not say that no evidence will be forthcoming."

That was the implication when you said:

>>both governments...and positive aliens...are not interested in their disclosure. Negative aliens have their own purpose behind remaining hidden.<<

"Is my conclusion correct then that ONLY EVIDENCE you are going to accept is a living or dead alien body?"

No. I included the following in a previous comment:

>>If aliens are a natural phenomena, then there should be, after all this time, some verifiable or testable evidence mainstream science can accept.<<

Verifiable, testable evidence includes, but is not limited to, an alien corpse or live specimen.

Americanegro

11/4/2017 04:45:18 pm

"All I am saying is that life looks as if aliens exist." What does that even mean?

Do you even language bro?

Don't put words in your own mouth, Betty. It's not a good look on you.

An Over-Educated Grunt

11/4/2017 06:44:45 pm

Betty, what exactly makes you think that aliens think even remotely like us?

BETTY

11/5/2017 02:40:19 am

“If aliens are a natural phenomena, then there should be, after all this time, some verifiable or testable evidence mainstream science can accept.”

Obviously aliens are a natural phenomena the same way humans are a natural phenomena. But equally obviously they are not a natural phenomena the way gravity or electromagnetism is a natural phenomena. Therefore phenomena as elusive as aliens is hardly provable using scientific methods and you may have to wait a very long time for that to happen. Almost until a time when existence of aliens is obvious to everybody except scientists.

That said based on my book reading the closest anyone has come to proving the existence of aliens using scientific method as a standard is Harvard psychiatrist John E. Mack. He studied the alien abduction phenomena and most oh his subjects described it happening the same way. I would recommend reading his books.

Not surprisingly he was killed in a suspicious traffic accident just when he was becoming really famous. Referring again to the world power structure wanting to keep the way things currently are.

Only Me

11/5/2017 03:43:27 am

"Obviously aliens are a natural phenomena..."
"But equally obviously they are not a natural phenomena..."

They are either one or the other, not both simultaneously. Unless you're trying to subtly suggest they are semi-divine, like the half-gods of myth, make a choice.

"Therefore phenomena as elusive as aliens is hardly provable using scientific methods..."

Then what makes them different from the gods of myth?

"Almost until a time when existence of aliens is obvious to everybody except scientists."

More religious fundamentalism. You're arguing all will be revealed to the believers, not the doubters. How convenient.

"Not surprisingly he was killed in a suspicious traffic accident just when he was becoming really famous. Referring again to the world power structure wanting to keep the way things currently are."

More irrational conspiracy nonsense. Well, I've gone down this rabbit hole as far as I'm going to go. Maybe the next advocate for this narrative will speak in less conspiratorial and religious overtones. Good day to you, Betty.

BETTY

11/5/2017 04:36:16 am

A good to you as well.

BETTY

11/5/2017 05:45:29 am

A good day that is.

Jim

11/5/2017 12:20:32 pm

Betty,
,"Obviously aliens are a natural phenomena the same way humans are a natural phenomena."

Perhaps you should tell us exactly what you think the word phenomena means.

Phenomena,,,1.,a fact, occurrence, or circumstance observed or observable:

exactly what is observable about aliens ?
To quote Americanegro, " Do you even language bro? "

Americanegro

11/5/2017 12:38:38 pm

A hobo murdered John Mack because he wanted his wife all to himself. Rigged the car and everything. So nothing to do with the powers that be or the government.

Henry

11/4/2017 08:46:47 am

Cranbrook you have come to the wrong place for any sort of reasonable discussion. You will be ridiculed and abused. This site is about hate and spreading hate by people who believe that they are the only ones who know truth.

Almahad

11/10/2017 08:57:04 am

Are you one of the Undereducated that Trump loves by chance?

An Over-Educated Grunt

11/4/2017 09:33:50 am

Galileo was put under house not for heretical ideas, but for being an ass to the pope, who had, right up into Galileo put his words in the mouth of a strawman whose name translated to "Simpleton," been supportive of his research. The entire reason Galileo had those words to put in his mouth was that Urban VIII had asked him "hey, what do you think about this?" and rather than debate politely, he put it in writing. His research didn't get Galileo arrested, his biting the hand did.

Almahad

11/10/2017 08:58:57 am

Even if he was, that doesn't change the observation that too many men who were not taken serious were indeed wrong. See Christopher Columbus.

Joe Scales

11/4/2017 10:55:02 am

"Plate tectonics was considered laughable...until it wasn't. "

And here is where you stumble upon the difference between the Fringe and actual science. True science adapts with better science. The Fringe never corrects itself in light of truth. Why, you might wonder? Because it's comprised of charlatans out to make a buck. Off of you Al. Off of you.

DPBROKAW

11/6/2017 12:28:05 am

You've already made up your mind as to what you "want" the truth to be, so please, just go back to Ancient Origins and it's followers of "the truth". I doubt you would be open enough to accept any evidence or facts from Jason or any of the regulars at this site. Your obviously more comfortable watching Ancient Aliens and wondering about what kind of hair gel Giorgio Tsoukalos uses. If you wish to read and post here however, expect to be contradicted when your wrong. We don't ban anyone here for speaking their minds, and that goes both ways. But the purpose of this site is to bring dubious claims out in the open for people to see and comment on. If it's bullshit then it's bullshit. No amount of pseudo double speak changes the truth, and we are most definitely about getting to the truth.

David Evans

11/9/2017 06:08:20 am

I was working in IT when Y2K was an issue. Let me tell you, if that was a fiasco it was because thousands of professionals worked hard on rewriting and reinstalling the software that otherwise would, definitely, have crashed on that day.
Oh, and von Daniken lied, directly or by implication, in every one of his books. Like showing a part of the Nazca lines that looked like aircraft parking bays, not showing the whole (bird) image of which it was a part.
If a few scientists get hysterical over AGW it's because they are tired of having their voices drowned out by idiots in the pay of the fossil fuel industries. The kind of idiot who thinks bringing a snowball into congress somehow disproves AGW.

Almahad

11/10/2017 08:54:27 am

>I, too, am a "skeptic"...primarily of conventional history with respect to civilization, and of what has increasingly taken on religious tones - science.

Yes, yes, the tired old "Scientists are the real fundamentalists" card trotted by Creationists and other apologists for the scribblings of ancient goat herders.

>Without going off on a tear about AGW/Climate Change

No credible source has discredited Anthrogenic Climate Change. Contrary to whatever imaginary scandal you bring up, there's no actual evidence of a vast conspiracy to push it. Meanwhile it's been well recorded that the fossil fuel industry has been not only working to cast doubt on ACC, but has shills in Washington (see also the Republican Party).

>Suffice to say that when so-called "scientists", and their legions of self-appointed apostles, start treating opponents to their dictums and decrees as heretics to some contrived faith, even going so far as to suggest they be tried, convicted and tossed into prisons, and do so with shameless zealotry that would impress Dominican Inquisitors of the 13th century...

And I doubt you can list any examples of actual, non-fringe, scientists calling for that.

>It's no secret that people in such fields too often are intimidated by their peers into staying within the neatly, or conveniently, defined confines of the acceptable narratives of the day. In his day Galileo was deemed to be speculative, engaging in what we today would call "fringe", or "pseudo" science. He went to prison for his efforts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy#Galileo_Gambit

Try again. Do they teach about fallacies in Trump U?

> I've yet to read or hear a more plausible explanation for the erosion found around the Sphinx than water/rainfall. It is no secret that the climate in Northern Africa circa 10,500 to 8,500 BC was entirely different than is the case today. And it's no mystery that the Sphinx was buried to its neck in sand for most of the centuries over the last 4,500 years. So what's the real history? Because all that I've seen offered by conventional science is, frankly, utterly unbelievable. Same goes for the Great Pyramid. Kufu built himself the tomb from hell, and never bothered so much as once to have his name carved into it??? Anywhere??? C'mon! Really???

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_pyramid_construction_techniques

You could try not being a philistine.

> Puma Punku? Carved with stone chisels? 1600 hundred ton slabs at Baalbek, neatly slid into place with precision that modern engineers would be hard pressed to match with latest and best in modern machinery?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baalbek

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumapunku

> There's one word that can be applied to modern science, and it's a GD crying shame, and a blight on the entire lot: Orthodoxy.

Okay. Start denying gravity. Jump off a nearby cliff.

>Plate tectonics was considered laughable...until it wasn't.

The man who pushed it didn't have the means to support it. So of course it was accepted once it could be supported.

>Chuck Yeager wrote that half the scientists in the world considered the sound barrier impenetrable, any attempt would result in disintegration...until he did it.

And you can't demonstrate he was telling what was objective reality instead of exaggerating.

>Remember Y2K? What a fiasco was that!

What about it? The relevant scientists worked on the problem it was taken care of.

>Now science is pulling back on cholesterol and heart disease after five decades of pumping what ultimately amounted to crap

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cholesterol#cite_ref-cmp_37-0

Cholesterol is accepted as correlated with heart disease. You might want to lay off the Alt-Right talking points for your health.

>And the universe is riddled with solar systems, as if logic could dictate any other probability but!

That's nice. Is this supposed to demonstrate something?

>Thank God for those who dare to step outside the bounds of convention, or we'd still be living in the stone age.

So you don't understand science and believe in the Great Man Theory of History (which is rejected).

>There's real truths out there to be had; some of them threaten to upend a lot of long held and cherished belief structures.

That's nice. Don't you have Noah's Ark to find?

Americanegro

11/4/2017 01:14:18 pm

"I have read more than one story about the most controversial artifacts delivered to institutions like Smithsonian never to be seen again."

I challenge you to cite even one of those stories, and it has to be in a form other people can see, not just you remember it like your story of the FBI excavating Six Fingers. And it can't be written by anyone named Wolter.

As to those who complain about hate, yes, I love to hate. I live to hate. A full head of hatesteam gets me going in the morning and keeps me moving and grooving, gambling and jumping in and out of pedicabs into the wee hours.

Al in 'Cranbrook

11/5/2017 12:35:13 pm

Interesting comments, albeit basically went after the low hanging stuff, while avoiding the tough questions.

Couple of things with which one should always temper one's beliefs:

It is a certainty that none of us were there to see what actually happened. So, all said and done, best we can do is speculate/theorize based on remaining evidence. Fact is, that's all anyone is doing, whether Gobekli Tepe was built by stone age rock chippers, or with the assistance/guidance of ETs, both are possibilities are at least open to discussion...and, IMHO, neither is no more likely nor unlikely than the other.

Human nature is part of the mix. Historically, and no more or less than in religious circles, the science community has a tendency to pile scorn and contempt upon those of their profession who dare to step outside the bounds of the orthodoxy du jour. Thus, certain avenues of exploration and/or speculation too often involves having one's reputation, even their career, put at serious risk. One need look no further than the current situation with global warming/climate change to see this sort of asinine rot at play.

The victors write the history books. But we must remember that others were always making notes, too.

The line between science and religion is, unfortunately, remarkably thin. Again, I direct one to examine the climate change "debate"...ha ha, just kidding. We all know, or least we've been told in no uncertain terms by the high priests thereof, there's nothing left to debate there.

Anyway...

We've been told for a century or more, with all manner of authority, that the first civilization was Sumer, starting circa 4,000 BC, give or take. What nobody was ever able to convincingly explain, nevertheless, is how such a remarkably accomplished civilization somehow managed to spring up virtually out of nowhere...apparently a small detail not worthy of undermining an otherwise comfy paradigm concerning the ascension of modern man.

Then Gobekli Tepe, dating 9,500 BC, some 5,500 years earlier. You'd think there'd be one massive WTF going on in the science world, and it would be in the news almost every day. No...truth is probably 95 people out of 100 in this world have never heard of the place. It's been more like, "Oh, damn! There goes the narrative! Everyone to arms until to we figure out how to straighten out this mess and brings things back into line."

Did ETs have a hand in this place? I don't know, I wasn't there! And neither were any of the rest of us! But clearly whomever built this massive complex of 20 + ton monoliths were a tad more sophisticated than humans one or two genes removed from Neanderthals!

The part that eats away at my confidence in science is this nagging sense, born of all the crap that's so far gone in this field, not to mention the rest of mankind's history, that someone out there actually knows the truth of all of this stuff.

And they're just not sharing.

...for some reason.

Only Me

11/5/2017 02:36:42 pm

Al, you already have the answer to that nagging question; you even provided the reason in the latest comment.

You acknowledge, twice, that no one of today was there to witness your historical examples. Despite this, you find the explanations provided by scientists lacking, even though they are based on evidence you yourself cannot explain.

You can't explain any of it, so all speculation is valid (it's not); at the same time, you demand an explanation that is perfect and never has to change or somehow accounts for every new discovery yet to be made. Otherwise, someone is hiding something for...reasons.

You want answers to your questions in perfect detail, while knowing why that can never be. Instead of accepting it, you blame science for what you already know you can't have.

Al in Cranbrook

11/5/2017 03:05:41 pm

Only Me...

I am not so arrogant as to presume that I know all the answers. I don't take seriously anyone does.

What explanations by scientists? They still don't know how the Great Pyramid was built. They still can't explain the incredibly complex mathematics relative to such things as global proportions demonstrated therein. The best technicians and engineers can't conceive of how the cuts of such extraordinary precision into extremely hard stone at Puma Punku were affected...and admit it would be a bitch to achieve as much with modern technology, if even possible.

There are no answers in perfect detail, that much is clear. So clear that it is therefore folly to close the doors on possible solutions, if for no more reason than it shakes the ground beneath the fragile foundations of reality.

I'm reminded of that old joke: A man was on his knees under a street lamp. A passerby asked what he was doing. He replied he was looking for something he'd dropped across the street. "Then why are you looking over here???" He replied, "Because the light is better."

Only Me

11/5/2017 03:48:20 pm

"They still don't know how the Great Pyramid was built."

Yes, they do. Every pyramid built prior to it displays an architectural evolution and maturation: in other words, each pyramid became more advanced as the techniques improved over time.

"The best technicians and engineers can't conceive of how the cuts of such extraordinary precision into extremely hard stone at Puma Punku were affected...and admit it would be a bitch to achieve as much with modern technology, if even possible."

Not true. The evidence for the process by which the stones were made still exist in the quarries surrounding the site...to include metal chisels of various shapes. These chisels were made from an alloy of copper, nickel and arsenic. The stones themselves are far from precise, which is to be expected when each one was made by hand.

Now to address a quote in your second comment:

"Secondly, Gobekli also pushes back the clock as to just exactly when did mankind begin to seriously advance in skills and knowledge. For the same question remains as it did with the Sumerians: The ability to create such complex architecture did not happen overnight!"

Remember when you said, "So, all said and done, best we can do is speculate/theorize based on remaining evidence"? No one can answer your question if there is no evidence. No one in a scientific field is saying Sumer or Göbekli Tepe occurred overnight. Current theory can only extend as far back in time as current evidence will allow.

Al in Cranbrook

11/5/2017 04:50:42 pm

Well, no they don't know. All we have is theories.

First off, let's realize what the pyramid complex looked like in its time. Not what we see today, but finished with white limestone outer layer that made the three of them, we can speculate somewhat safely, gleaming and awesomely imposing structures under the sun.

Ranking the previous Step Pyramid at Saqqara to Giza constructions is pretty much like comparing the Taj Mahal to a brick outhouse...in the sense that both have upright walls in common, but little else.

Oddly enough, pyramid construction went to hell after that period.

That said, just about every pyramid's inner sanctums were lined with the works of scribes and artists, detailing the lives of the pharaoh of the day. Not so at Giza. In fact, not so much as one mark on a wall anywhere. Right. Apparently egos hadn't been invented yet.

Then there's the math, about which books have been written...I've read several. Mind boggling stuff, in the extreme. We're talking ( theoretically ) 2500 BC here. Pythagoras was still two millennia in the offing. Then there's the alignments north/south. Not to mention the enormity of the construction in the first place.

Maybe Kufu did build it...but the case for such is, in light of ALL the facts of the place, is hardly solid. And maybe he didn't build it; it was already there, and had been since time immemorial. Along with the Sphinx, for which there is an equally good argument to the contrary.

Let me be clear: I have no axe to grind in all this, one way or the other. I'm not afraid of the truth, whatever it may be. My personal identification is not tied to, or synonymous with, any ideology or belief structure relative to the evolution of mankind and/or civilization.

What I do have is an interest in history, and finding out what the actual sequence of events were. Certainly I have come across lots of crap wannabe stuff along the way. It is one thing to say "I don't believe in this or that." It is entirely another to state categorically that something is or isn't based on no more than just because it's the accepted narrative/theory of the day...or because the alternatives are perhaps a tad scary, or threaten one's foothold on reality, be that what it may.

Evidence is only available to those who go looking for it, wherever that might lead. Finding it, and then selectively sweeping under a rug that which doesn't neatly comply to a preconception is hardly science, nor instructive, nor constructive.

Only Me

11/5/2017 05:19:51 pm

Yes, they do know, as I explained above. I'm sorry, but you're just wrong.

"Then there's the math"

Which is debunked because modern knowledge the ancients did not possess is being attributed to them. If such mathematical genius was true, we should see traces of it in everything the Egyptians built. We don't. Such knowledge is seemingly limited to only the Great Pyramid and nowhere else in their culture, according to alternative history.

"Evidence is only available to those who go looking for it, wherever that might lead. Finding it, and then selectively sweeping under a rug that which doesn't neatly comply to a preconception is hardly science, nor instructive, nor constructive."

So why did you do that very thing by denying scientists know how the Great Pyramid was built?

Al in Cranbrook

11/5/2017 05:42:18 pm

Only Me...

Because, in fact, they don't know how those pyramids were built. Theories, by definition, aren't facts.

They have a stone block very near the structure at Baalbek, estimated to weigh 1600 tons, and apparently abandoned for some unknown reason. It's only very marginally larger than the three already in place as part of the platform. Clearly, they had intentions for this one, too, meaning the means of moving it into place was already sorted out.

How??? Using the heaviest equipment available today, it would still be one ghastly complex undertaking.

Anything is possible, and perhaps it was all accomplished by simple grunt work...but, boy, it takes a bit of stretch of the imagination to conceive of such incredible feats!

Enough so that alternative ideas on the matter are at least worth a listen.

Only Me

11/5/2017 06:01:06 pm

You're still wrong. Knowledge of pyramid construction isn't based on theory. Egypt has numerous pyramids built during different time periods and comparing the earliest to the latest shows a clear progression in the techniques used. No theory is necessary when the evidence is right in front of you.

The stones at Baalbek were placed using capstans, rollers, cranes and sheer manpower. The Romans were doing similar things in other parts of the world, including the moving of 500 ton obelisks from Egypt.

Even without advanced machinery, the Thunder Stone in Russia was moved to its current location in Saint Petersburg using nothing but a metal sled, bronze spheres and manpower. That stone weighs 1250 tons.

You really don't need to stretch your imagination at all.

Joe Scales

11/6/2017 10:09:17 am

"Using the heaviest equipment available today, it would still be one ghastly complex undertaking. "

Heavy equipment today isn't designed to move megalithic hunks of rock, because that's not how modern technology constructs buildings. That these things in the past were built in such a manner actually proves their primitive provenance. You'd think if ancient aliens could fly here to help people build things, they'd have taught them how to pour cement instead.

You really need to use your head here Al and not be swayed by the sophistry of the ancient alien contingent.

Mr. Pyramid

11/6/2017 04:12:02 pm

"Ranking the previous Step Pyramid at Saqqara to Giza constructions is pretty much like comparing the Taj Mahal to a brick outhouse...in the sense that both have upright walls in common, but little else."

You are ignorant of the the context. The Step Pyramid at Saqqara was followed by two others that were very similar in construction but have not been as well preserved, then by the now-collapsed pyramid at Meidum, which seems to have begun as a stepped pyramid and then converted into the first true pyramid. It was followed by the Bent Pyramid, which was not well constructed and is unstable to this day, and then by the first solid true pyramid, the Red Pyramid. Pyramids had shrines at their feet, and stelae from the shrines of the Bent and Red Pyramids indicate that they were both built by Sneferu, father and predecessor of Khufu, to whom the Great Pyramid of Giza is attributed.

The pyramids at Giza were improvements, both in steepness and in scale, using the lessons in construction technique learned during Sneferu's reign. The shrine that stood at the foot of the Great Pyramid is destroyed, so no texts have come from it, but the marks in the relieving chambers bear Khufu's name, and now we have papyri dated to a specific year in Khufu's reign that document the shipping of supplies, including limestone, to Giza. There is no reason to doubt who built it.

Pyramids from the late Old Kingdom, after the era of the three at Giza, were built more cheaply. The late Old Kingdom saw more widespread use of writing than in earlier eras, both in accounting documents that describe the funding of pyramid temples and in pyramid burial chambers. Thus, there is absolutely no doubt that these later pyramids were built by the kings they are attributed to. Egyptian kings directed many of their resources elsewhere at this time and eventually suffered economic difficulties, which explains why they chose to cut costs on pyramid construction. The temples at their bases are still part of the same architectural tradition as those at Giza, so the evolutionary path of pyramids is still easy to follow.

Learn about the evidence that archaeologists use before claiming that they have none.

Al in Cranbrook

11/5/2017 02:50:05 pm

I should add...

The implications of Gobekli Tepe are far reaching.

The greatest argument against earlier dating of the Giza/Sphinx complex is that man had not advanced enough technologically prior to that era.

Now we know that 7,000 years earlier mankind was capable of a damn sight more than merely carving or painting images of familiar critters on cave walls.

Secondly, Gobekli also pushes back the clock as to just exactly when did mankind begin to seriously advance in skills and knowledge. For the same question remains as it did with the Sumerians: The ability to create such complex architecture did not happen overnight!

Almahad

11/10/2017 08:07:05 am

It's extraordinary if you have no grasp of how civilizations are constructed. Or a misanthrobe.

Gobekli was not built on a whim. It, like every momument was built brick by brick until it reached it's final design.

An Over-Educated Grunt

11/5/2017 03:05:05 pm

Let me get this straight.

You describe stone chipping, a known, verifiable, and documentary technology, used by humans, a species known to exist, and aliens, not currently provable to exist or have visited Earth at any point, as equally likely.

If I am reading this correctly, you have, in your first paragraph, shown that you don't deserve further consideration. If I have not, you're going to have to eat your words with Morton's fork.

Al in Cranbrook

11/5/2017 03:36:00 pm

Grunt...

What I'm saying is that either explanation demands a considerable leap of logic.

Personally, I suspect that ETs...if they exist at all...capable of traversing interstellar space probably have better things to do than build stone structures on our planet.

On the other hand, I don't rule out the possibility that someone else may have had influence on mankind's evolution, however uncomfortable such a notion might be. There are a ton of gaps in the science of evolution/anthropology that defy current attempts to fill with credible explanations/theories.

F'rinstance...

We are asked to believe that human kind, if not all creatures, evolved from some primordial pond of muck, to put it in simple terms. And did so by the random/chance coming together of amino acids and proteins.

That all goes to hell when it comes down to explaining how DNA entered into the mix.

I once read that the mathematical probability of the chance formation of DNA, with its polymer strands, is calculated to be some astronomical number in the order of 10 to the 250 something or other power, (the exact figure escapes my memory right now) which apparently is a number greater than all the atoms comprising the known universe.

I'm inclined to think that this theory ranks right up there along side virgin birth mythology.

...both of which imply acceptance as, if we're honest, a matter of faith.

An Over-Educated Grunt

11/5/2017 03:59:00 pm

So we have evidence of the existence of humans, and the existence of stone work, evolved separately on multiple continents at different times, but no evidence of the presence of aliens. These two are, to you, equally probable explanations. Everything else you said is filler.

Got it. You don't understand how probability works and are worth no further consideration.

Americanegro

11/5/2017 04:41:55 pm

Al (not your real name but who cares), are you posting from moregoddamnnonsense.com? Because you just seem to talk more and more shi... stuff.

Anytime you weren't somewhere, anything's possible. I wasn't there when a certain well known TV personality's father died. But I'm not talking about Scott Wolter, I'm talking about Colin Hanks and Tom Hanks hasn't died yet, but one thing is sure, I will not be there so it could be aliens!

If you don't know how to do something, then aliens!

Your nextdoor neighbor doesn't know about Gobekli Teppe so it's a coverup.

How were we making Damascus steel in INDIA in 500 BC? Aliens?

You don't know jack about Egypt? Then of course aliens!

Paper? Aliens!

I need you to focus on one thing: IGNORANCE IS NOT EVIDENCE.

Jim

11/5/2017 04:55:50 pm

So, it"s not possible that life on earth can evolve from a primordial pond, but we have alien life forms evolving all over the freaking universe,and sequentially popping over to the dead planet Earth, giving it life and the ability to shape rocks.
How exactly did these aliens come about ? Is it easier to form life on planets other than Earth ?

Al in Cranbrook

11/5/2017 05:05:43 pm

Actually, Al is my name. Never heard of that website, either.

I don't need you to do anything, pal...but if you want, maybe go back and read my posts as to what I really said.

I have an open mind, get to learn more that way.

You maybe should take a walk on the wild side and try it some day.

Al in Cranbrook

11/5/2017 05:15:07 pm

Jim...

Who the hell really knows! That's the ultimate question, is it not?

Now science is theorizing about "panspermia". Maybe it's as simple as that...and maybe not.

Maybe the earth is just one big storage bank of DNA brought here from only God knows where to see what comes of it in this particular (and diverse) environment.

End of the day, who the hell really knows?

Which is what makes all of this such a fascinating subject for investigation.

Whatever the case, I certainly don't lose any sleep over it!

Jim

11/5/2017 10:38:26 pm

So, you are suggesting that life on earth is a 3.8 billion year experiment by aliens ?
They sure must have a lot of patience.

Almahad

11/10/2017 08:09:50 am

>I'm inclined to think that this theory ranks right up there along side virgin birth mythology.

That's not a surprise. You're a misanthropic Creationist who's hostile to human insignificance.

Almahad

11/10/2017 07:53:18 am

You obviously have a negative view of human beings.

who would win in a fight, a fully aroused al or mister belvedere?

11/5/2017 08:48:48 pm

"Now science is theorizing about 'panspermia'."

SO IN YOUR VIEW NOW SCIENCE IS "THEORIZING" ABOUT AN IDEA THAT'S 2500 YEARS OLD, AT LEAST???

Al in Cranbrook

11/5/2017 10:27:48 pm

Henry...

Good call!

Cheers!

Zontar

11/8/2017 12:50:45 pm

Have you read Downing's new book? I would be more inclined to consider your opinion if you have actually read it. Your blog reads as if you have already made up your mind based on Downings previous work. Being skeptical about the theories and ideas put across by authors is not a bad thing. However, I don't think that you can make any educated judgements unless you have actually, and carefully, read the books.

Almahad

11/10/2017 08:11:48 am

You're outing yourself as a crackpot.

Almahad

11/10/2017 09:14:56 am

I wonder how many of the conspiracy fools here aren't Americans. Who are known for shameless anti-intellectualism.

Americanegro

11/10/2017 03:43:11 pm

Clearly the medication isn't working. What's the disease of the day?

Almahad

11/11/2017 01:20:00 am

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-intellectualism_in_American_Life

Instead of being defensive you could look that up. Or how Al Gore was framed as an egghead who didn't see the "real" world while Bush Jr. did his golly gee shucks good ol boy act. Or just watch the Donald Trump Campaign, where he has been recorded as saying he loves the undereducated and his campaign alongside the Alt-Right repeatedly framed it as a war on the ivory tower "elites." Do I need to bring up the Republican bringing a snowball indoors to show there isn't Anthrogenic Climate Change?

By the standards of other First World Countries America has a tradition of philistinism.