Did Aliens Disguise Themselves as a Whale to Kidnap Jonah?

2/22/2013

Do you remember the Ancient Aliens episode about prophets and prophecy from a couple of weeks back (S05E07 from February 8)? The one where they claimed that Moses, Enoch, and Elijah were carried off by aliens for a spell and met with them in their spaceships? Good. Because you’re getting it all again. Tonight’s Ancient Aliens promises to review how and why the Hebrew Bible contains accounts of alien abductions, including the stories of all the aforementioned prophets. They aren’t even waiting a month between recycling material anymore.

But just when I thought it couldn’t get more ridiculous, Ancient Aliens is prepared to pull out a claim that surprised even me. According to the episode description for tonight’s show on alien abductions, the program will claim that Jonah (of whale fame) was abducted by aliens, with the whale (or, rather, giant fish) a mistaken interpretation of a UFO.

Now the Lord provided a huge fish to swallow Jonah, and Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights… And the Lord commanded the fish, and it vomited Jonah onto dry land. (Jonah 1:17, 2:10).

Regular readers will recall that I discussed the story of Jonah over the summer when I described the theory that the Jonah tale was created as an intentional parody of the Greek myth of Jason, who in a variant version recorded in ancient art was swallowed by the dragon just as Jonah was swallowed by the great fish.

But the Jonah story is one of a great number of stories of heroes swallowed by beasts, and certainly nothing in the story indicates a spacecraft. Consider the parallel stories. First, Heracles was swallowed by a sea monster and killed it from within in order to rescue Hesione outside the walls of Troy. Ancient art depicts this creature as a skeletal monster, possibly the fossilized remains of an Ice Age mammal, as Adrienne Mayor suggested. (See here, with correction.)

An extremely similar tale is that of Perseus and Andromeda. While the most common version of the story shows Perseus simply slaying the sea monster who threatens the maiden, Lycophron, in the Alexandra (834-42), records a variant version where Perseus is swallowed by the monster and kills it from the inside out:

And he shall visit the towers of Cepheus and the place that was kicked by the foot of Hermes Laphrios, and the two rocks on which the petrel leapt in quest of food, but carried off in his jaws, instead of a woman, the eagle son of the golden Sire – a male with winged sandals who destroyed his liver. By the harvester’s blade shall be slain the hateful whale dismembered…

Scholars for centuries have noted the clear similarities between these stories of Jonah, Jason, Perseus, and Heracles, even if, like Sir George Cox, the Victorian who believed all myths were stories of the sun, they didn’t quite understand why they were similar. A further, and more ancient, parallel involves the battle of Marduk and Tiamat. Although Marduk is not swallowed by the great primal sea monster Tiamat in the Enuma Elish (4.101-104), he does cleave open her belly, extract the organs, and dismember her from the inside out.

Marduk grasped the spear, he split up her belly,
He clave open her bowels, he pierced [her] heart,
He brought her to nought, he destroyed her life.
He cast down her carcase, he took up his stand upon it…

In none of these cases is the sea monster considered a spaceship, a flying chariot, or anything else mechanical. In fact, the story of Jonah happened at Joppa (Jaffa), the same place Perseus fought the sea monster to rescue Andromeda, and for centuries the very bones of this monster were on display. Pliny (Natural History 9.4) records that they were taken to Rome in 58 BCE, and from his description of them it is apparent that they were very likely the fossilized bones of a whale:

M. Scaurus, in his ædileship, exhibited at Rome, among other wonderful things, the bones of the monster to which Andromeda was said to have been exposed, and which he had brought from Joppa, a city of Judæa. These bones exceeded forty feet in length, and the ribs were higher than those of the Indian elephant, while the back-bone was a foot and a half in thickness.

Ancient astronaut writers constantly tell us that we need to be taking ancient myths and texts literally as true accounts of real events of the past, and yet in practice they create bizarre symbolic interpretations that bear little connection to the original texts. Given Pliny’s testimony that the land where Jonah met the whale was home to a giant fossilized whale skeleton, whose massive rib cage could easily give rise to the idea that the whale’s interior was hollow, would the “literal” interpretation of the Jonah tale be that the Biblical writer was describing an actual sea creature, not a spaceship from another world?

46 Comments

2/22/2013 03:27:07 am

I believe I've found a way to make AA watchable. If you watch from the point of view that all of the contributors are living in a communal compound for people who've had this specific type of break from reality and what you're watching is part of their taped therapy sessions it's not as infuriating.

E. Harding link

2/22/2013 08:06:04 am

Still difficult to watch even if viewed in this manner. The narration and visuals remain infuriating.

2/22/2013 12:51:42 pm

Did I not mention the drinking? You should also be drinking.

Dave

2/22/2013 07:38:25 am

"(or, rather, giant fist)"

That's a totally different story...

Jason Colavito link

2/22/2013 07:45:19 am

Sigh. Corrected.

Gary roberts

1/26/2022 04:46:27 pm

Yes it was underwater UFO no doubt how could anybody survive in whale mouth

Marco

2/22/2013 08:45:35 am

Rael's first book explains very well that the "big fish" was a kind of submarine used by the Elohim. In those times, the Elohim had some bases on Earth: in the big mountains and under the oceans.

terry the censor

2/24/2013 10:12:51 am

Alien submarines! I'd love to see that in the abduction literature.

Jake

2/22/2013 04:54:32 pm

There is a general problem that exists among all you skeptic guys. You think all the alien believers are crazy for believing in something they have no real proof of; at the same time you have no real proof that aliens don't exist and haven't visited us in the past. You're point of view lacks evidence as well, yet you still stick by it, that makes you as crazy the believers. Yet you don't see the hypocrisy there? You belittle them for having no proof meanwhile you have no proof to support your own claims.

The problem with you skeptics is that you leave no room for possibilities. Is it possible the story of Moses is simply a religious story made up to gain followers? Of course. Is it possible Moses actually spoke to God in the form of a burning bush? Absolutely. But then we ask if it's possible that Moses was speaking to aliens and suddenly that's not a possibility. We're willing to believe God took the form of a burning bush to speak to Moses but we're not willing to believe life forms from another planet (of which there are billions in our galaxy) came to Earth and spoke to him. Which seems more likely? A supernatural event to which there is zero circumstantial supporting evidence or alien contact which is highly possible given the high probability of other intelligent life in our galaxy?

In the end your biggest problem is that you insist you're correct based solely on the lack of proof to the contrary. A lack of proof is not proof. Until you can provide definitive proof that aliens didn't visit Moses or Jonah or anyone, you have to accept the possibility that they did.

2/22/2013 10:33:47 pm

I would suggest that you Google "burden of proof" and "null hypothesis" so you can understand why it is up to the advocate to prove a claim. Try this: Let's say I assert that you are actually a puppet of the aliens controlled mentally by frog people from Sirius. Prove me wrong. You have no evidence you're not, so by your logic I must be right.

2/23/2013 04:21:18 am

You have a claim to prove as well. Your claim is that these biblical events are not related to aliens. Where is your proof? It works both ways. You provide no proof that these events are not related to aliens. The way I see it, there are three possibilities. One they are stories made up to support the church, two they were actually events of devine intervention, three they were events involving alien contact. I accept that all three are possible since there is no proof available to deny or support any of them. Without proof either way you cannot say that any one scenario is false. That is your problem. You condemn ancient alien theory as false without any proof that it is. Until you have definitive proof that aliens did not visit Earth in the past you must accept that it is possible they did.

2/23/2013 04:29:40 am

I'm very sorry you feel that way, but you really need to do some research into what's called the "burden of proof." Otherwise, you'll have to "prove" to me that you're not a mind-controlled alien puppet from Sirius since I have no evidence that you're not, and it's an equally valid hypothesis.

Brooke

12/5/2015 11:45:16 pm

Look up online nephilim skeleton images.

MT Tomb

2/23/2013 04:55:25 am

Most scientists will admit that even the most fantastic things are possible yet highly improbable. Aliens being involved with human history is highly improbable. Using aliens to explain away all the mysteries left to us by history is just a fantastical cop-out, in my opinion. Just because modern researchers don't know exactly how some ancient item or structure was built doesn't mean aliens did it. Stories about ancient battles in the Indian sky didn't have to actually happen. Ancient man was just as ingenious, creative and innovative as any modern day author or inventor. These ideas that aliens are responsible for ancient man's accomplishments are just the latest trend in explaining away that which we don't understand just like in the 1800's people gave responsibility to God, angels or giants - all of which robs ancient people of their intelligence and humanity. Occam's razor states that the simplest solution is most likely the correct one. So, rather than looking for the extraordinary explanation, the ordinary explanation should be considered first. The premise of the Ancient Aliens show is to discount the obvious explanations for fantastical ones. Besides, there's no evidence of actual aliens anywhere. Show me a buried flying saucer and don't say you can't find one because they wanted to keep themselves secret from future generations. If they had no problem interacting with ancient humans and building the pyramids or whatever, they'd have no problem leaving behind some advanced, obviously and incontrovertibly alien created objects.

2/23/2013 05:04:26 am

Possible and probable are two different things. It is possible aliens exist and it is possible they have been here before. It is also possible they don't exist and have never been here. There is a bevy of historical evidence of possible alien intervention all over the world, if you're willing to accept alien theory as possible. If you're not willing to accept alien theory as possible then you will look at things like the Nazca lines, Puma Punku, and the Native American cave and see them as simply unexplained.

2/23/2013 05:15:17 am

@Jake
-If you're willing to accept "the" ancient alien theory as possible (there is no such unified theory), you will look at things like the fact the Incas didn't have chariotry, the Romans didn't have cigarettes, and the fact some Greeks speculated gods were simply deified humans as unexplained.
Also, lines in the sand, a temple, and a cave look very terrestrial to me. Monkeys, condors, and spiders are also blatantly terrestrial. Watch Ancient Aliens Debunked. Read Jason's blog more often.

2/24/2013 10:31:36 am

@Jake
> Possible and probable are two different things

...and you don't explain the difference. So what do you mean?

> There is a bevy of historical evidence of possible alien intervention all over the world, if you're willing to accept alien theory as possible.

It always boils down to this, doesn't it? In the absence of VERIFIABLE evidence, resort to rhetorical arguments. People who can't demonstrate their theories still retain their faith, therefore they are open-minded people; those who require verifiable evidence before assenting to explanations lack integrity!

Do you see how self-deluding that is?

Donald Shatner

11/26/2018 08:27:21 am

When I was 22 years old I saw a flying saucer over Lake Michigan and it flew away at a speed impossible I’m 70 now so we aren’t alone if you think there’s no aliens you’re not thinking.

2/25/2013 01:48:58 pm

First, let me begin by saying HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Seriously!? Anyway, while I can't speak for anyone else I think ancient astronaut proponents are crazy because, and listen closely, they ARE crazy. You ask anyone anywhere if they want to believe that life exists beyond our planet and you'll get a resounding yes. However, suggesting that because we don't have intimate knowledge of all ancient building practices ever it must be alien intervention, as opposed to Human ingenuity, is......wait for it....NUTS!! As is alien genetic intervention, telepathic control by aliens, underwater aliens, blad-didee-blah-blah-blah. You, like most cheerleaders of this nonsense, confuse belief and evidence. Let me clarify: evidence is REAL and belief is IN YOUR HEAD. A good example is that Human beings exist. Take a look around sometime if you ever leave your basement and observe that this is the case. Observation and documentation of things that exist, like people, count as evidence. Of Extra-terrestrials, on the other hand, there is no physical evidence of, at all, ever, anywhere. Outside of the heads of people with serious emotional and psychological problems there is no reason to believe that any such creature does or ever has existed. Now go back to the Frog people on Sirius and tell them if they want to be taken seriously they're going to have to leave behind some intergalactic McDonald's wrappers or something.

Dester

6/11/2014 04:44:26 pm

i agree with you bro!!! The possibilities of aliens meeting us from the past is 99% possible and the evidence are glaring of the trtuh of such mater. These skeptiks are just exposing their ignorance

12/5/2015 11:42:28 pm

Well said

2/23/2013 05:07:59 am

Jason - "I'm very sorry you feel that way, but you really need to do some research into what's called the "burden of proof." Otherwise, you'll have to "prove" to me that you're not a mind-controlled alien puppet from Sirius since I have no evidence that you're not, and it's an equally valid hypothesis."

As I said, the burden of proof works two ways. If you're going to make claims, you have to support them with evidence as well. If I say aliens built Puma Punku and you have no evidence to dispute my claim than you must accept it as possible that aliens did build it. Unless you have evidence to disprove a theory you have to accept it as possible, even if improbable. That is my point, you are entirely closed to any of this stuff being possible when you have no proof to dispute these theories as possible.

2/23/2013 05:20:36 am

You still don't get it, do you? Is it 'possible' you're a mind-controlled alien puppet from Sirius?

2/23/2013 05:45:54 am

Of course its possible. I can tell you I'm not but you don't have to believe me unless I can provide proof, such as my birth certificate. Until you have proof that definitively proves a theory one way or the other, you must accept that anything is possible.

2/23/2013 05:21:27 am

You really nmeed to look up what a burden of proof is. It doesn't work two ways. One side has the burden of proof, and the other has what's called "presumption." I can't really teach a seminar on this, so please do try to look it up.

2/23/2013 05:48:20 am

Actually it does work both ways. I'm making a claim that aliens built Puma Punku, you're making a claim that humans built it. I have to prove my theory with evidence. You have to prove your theory with evidence. If neither of us has evidence then we must accept that both theories are possible. This is simple logic. We're not talking about a court of law. We're talking about a logical argument. Without proof you cannot make a definitive conclusion; the absence of proof does not validate your claim.

2/24/2013 10:40:53 am

@Jake
> Actually it does work both ways.

What you say almost sounds logical, Jake, but in this case you cannot equate the AA hypothesis with the human hypothesis. You're forgetting something, Jake: the existence of humans on Earth is not in question. I think you would agree to that. But the presence of aliens on Earth has not been established to anywhere the same certainty. You want to INFER the presence of aliens and PRETEND that is <i>probabilistically</i> equivalent to he REALITY of human agency.

You have an enormously high hurdle to leap before you can equate the two theories.

2/23/2013 05:53:30 am

harding - "If you're willing to accept "the" ancient alien theory as possible (there is no such unified theory), you will look at things like the fact the Incas didn't have chariotry, the Romans didn't have cigarettes, and the fact some Greeks speculated gods were simply deified humans as unexplained.
Also, lines in the sand, a temple, and a cave look very terrestrial to me. Monkeys, condors, and spiders are also blatantly terrestrial. Watch Ancient Aliens Debunked. Read Jason's blog more often."

A demonstration in small mindedness. Of course lines in the sand are terrestrial. The question is why were they made if they are only visible from the air? Puma Punku is a terrestrial temple complex but it contains building techniques found nowhere else on Earth in antiquity. The Native American cave drawings are simply cave drawings, but they depict strange beings that don't look quite human, sometimes wearing what appear to be suits and masks. The question is not whether or not these were done by people, but why and how.

2/23/2013 01:43:44 pm

Not small mindedness, Skepticism. Are you saying Native Americans in the Andes (a rather unique place) can't come up with rather unique building techniques? Also, the Nazca animal figures can easily be seen from the surrounding mountains. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Suits and masks are indicative of shamanism, not pre-industrial industry or something even more ridiculous.

2/24/2013 10:48:33 am

@Jake

From Red Dwarf, episode "Kryten"

LISTER: Your explanation for anything slightly peculiar is aliens, isn't it? You lose your keys, it's aliens. A picture falls off the wall, it's aliens. That time we used up a whole bog roll in a day, you thought that was aliens as well.

RIMMER: Well, we didn't use it all, Lister. Who did?

Ben Mortsen

3/21/2013 07:14:59 pm

Despite the ridiculous human factor of AA - the hair, the double talk, the agenda's.... I think they have made their case for the "possibility". With some 100 billion galaxies in the observable universe and 160 billion exoplanets in just our galaxy alone...yes that is Trillions of planets (according to "science") - is there not a slim possibility of intelligent life out there? To me that is no bigger stretch in fact maybe even less than when compared to how a supposed stone age people (according to "science") carved with absolute precision and then moved - massive 50 plus ton stones, one estimated to weight 300 tons - miles from the quarry and placed them with a perfection that a piece of paper cannot fit between. Really? ...with only weak theory for an explanation of how they did this? When we can barely duplicate it all today...? I mean if it's not small mindedness it's certainly very narrow minded thinking. Having met highly credible people that have had first hand experiences, my own experiences, and all the cover ups that witnesses say were extremely high technology crafts... crop circles, airplane disappearances... etc. etc. Refusing to admit the possibility of earth being visited in the past or present... raises a lot of questions. The first as someone already said - being integrity.

3/22/2013 05:31:11 am

@Ben

You are giving in to very bad logic and rhetoric.

Numbering the galaxies and suggesting it's highly probable some have habitable planets is fine, but you do not note that every one of these hypothetically habitable planets is very very very far away. This is a fact you do not consider, despite it being obvious. Even Hynek, in the year before he died, said the distance was an insurmountable problem.

As for cutting and moving stones, Jason has posted videos in the past of people repeating these feats with simple hand tools and levers. Your incredulity is not a strong basis for a compelling argument.

L.S

6/15/2013 02:08:51 pm

Hi Jason,
I'm afraid I am duty bound to quibble about a minor point. Are you sure that you meant to say that it was Edward Tylor who regarded all such myths as myths of the sun? I have to ask because I wrote my masters dissertation on the legacy of E.B Tylor's 1871 work "Primitive Culture." I unfortunately based it exclusively on PC so if you are referring to something in "Anahuac" or "Researches into the Early History of Mankind" please tell me.

I think you perhaps meant Friedrich Max Mueller though, he's the chap who founded comparative religion and translated the Vedas. Mueller was heavily criticised by Tylor's intellectual successor James Frazer author of "The Golden Bough" for explaining all myths as solar. That said Frazer considered most myths and most cults to be agricultural so he wasn't much better.

Tylor however was the founder of Social Anthropology and introduced the theory of animism, the idea that religion originated with the notion that all phenomena were inhabited by souls. In the second later half of the second volume of PC he undertook a comparative study of the classes of deities and didn't make a big deal about the sun gods particularly. I'm sure you know all of this and considerably more but I thought I better elaborate.

Also just as a side note, I think you would be quite interested in the first part of volume 1 of PC because Tylor spent a lot of time trying to debunk what he called 'degeneration theories' which are basically the ancestors of all modern 'alternative' histories. They basically thought that human beings had started off with relatively high technology but had degenerated. These included both theological accounts based on the flood etc. and accounts of Atlantis type lost civilizations. Unfortunately at the time these were taken far more seriously than now, especially theories based on Pan-Egyptian or Pan-Babylonian diffusion.

Another element that is very familiar is that the degeneration theorists were very keen to explain away any technology, ideas or phenomenon found in a culture that they considered to be 'too high'. These were then explained away as evidence of the cultures degeneration from their ancient technologically advanced state. Tylor for all of his sins at least argued that adjusting for obvious influences, that in general the best explanation is that the culture in question had developed them independently.

Cheers, Liam

6/16/2013 12:02:37 am

Thanks, Liam, for pointing out the error. I think I actually meant to write George Cox there, referencing Aryan Mythology, though of course Muller fits, too. I'll fix the error.

flo link

6/2/2014 09:48:05 am

So basically science does a poor job of finding complete evidence as programs like Aa prove. They spend too much time gaining follow credit and little time reproducing proof. Prove it again don't just say aliens did it because your mind is just begging to convince the conclusion is real. This is why there are few jobs today because this is how scientists think. Scientists are dumb like they think they know everything. Really they are limiting other people by trying to prove something completely the wrong way. Earth is losing technology because humans won't press forward fast enough. It's all these sci fi wannabes. I could just as easily say Nazi Germany invented time travel and dressed up as aliens to change religion. All ufos are from ww2 onwards. Time is broken and we live in a alternative reality. People will never believe that either. Who cares scientists are dumb

outlaw

6/2/2014 09:50:46 am

Your so correct about the time travel part.

Thornton

6/2/2014 09:52:19 am

Hey umm just was thinking about making a religion based on time travel

adolf

6/2/2014 09:52:58 am

I'm in

Darwinfromseaquest

6/2/2014 09:53:58 am

Darwin i

quantitative reasoning

6/2/2014 09:56:26 am

Not
Feasible

JaredMithrandir link

12/11/2014 09:09:58 am

Your research here was an influence on my latest blog post.
http://mithrandironchronology.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-great-fish-that-swallowed-jonah.html

Sio

5/8/2015 05:24:44 pm

Look at the bright side...scientists now believe that the bible could be true.

Sio Makihele

5/8/2015 05:27:06 pm

Science without religion lame. Religion without science is blind.

George's Clermont

9/9/2015 06:24:45 am

ive always had a hard time accepting any religious text or thoug offered to me by a go between. I'm in the process of reading the emerald tablets of Thoth and the Sumerian tablets 100 times. The plagiarism from the great religions is astounding ...

Kerrie link

8/3/2018 05:59:45 am

I have been researching consciousness ever since I was contacted by an ‘unseen consciousness’, the closest theory I have come up with is the Trickster theory, these beings who are interacting with people all around the world are us, we have timelines we ‘hop into’ on our evolution path, the Trickster Archetype causes confusion and chaos, that is its job, this keeps us in this illusion of separation from God to ensure we maintain our much loved individuality, as soon as the balance tips to us getting close to the knowing of unity Consciousness out comes the Trickster , causing all sorts of confusion. The end justifies the means. A great conversation on YouTube is a Thinking allowed segment ....The PK Man and Mercurial Hermeneutics with Jason Reza Jorjani ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeqO7ZdH-Q0&t=1458s&app=desktop , I got sucked in big time, that is how the Trickster works, for years I had spiritual experiences, but I didn’t look too much into them, then as was predicted by an astrologer thirty years previously, they started to become more significant, so much so I could no longer ignor them, a Native American Indian Guide had me trusting him and this strange path I was on, but as is my nature I did still question it, they used people to come to me, even a little girl running up to me to give me a feather just as I was talking to someone how I get feathers in strange unusual ways, the symbol they kept showing me of the dragonfly went down as a crop circle on my birthday, three days later one of the mediums who channels my guide spoke on that particular crop circle, years of things like this made me think I should trust them, until one day I thought there were too many red flags and I have to break away, but I still have friends involved, I stay out of it, I entertain myself studying ancient civilisations, philosophy,religions etc. but as Socrates says all I have discovered is I know nothing !