In an attempt to make some progress, I made a decision to pay sixty dollars for a review of my historical astronaut web site. After all, this was to be a evaluate by skeptics; a evaluation by New Age believers can be worthless. Their blog’s description was “crucial opinions of paranormal claims on the Internet.” The intermediary granted them five days to carry out their evaluation but that has long since come and gone, and not a phrase from them. My website presents a vast amount of proof and, in fact, I could not expect anyone to produce a superb essential assessment in just five days. No one, including myself, would want to see quickly ready and frivolous arguments, else I might make them look ridiculous in my counter arguments. Moreover, some of my proof comes from Spanish-language sources and, to begin, they would wish time to confirm that none of it’s a hoax. They’re welcome to all the time they want.
What to anticipate from this blog is unsure. There are skeptics who are as narrow-minded of their pondering as their New Age counterparts, after which once more, there are skeptics, like me, who objectively consider the evidence to arrive at the truth. Was there an actual ancient astronaut? To help the skeptics reply that query, I will give them some ideas on learn how to refute my theories. Here, solely for area issues, I’ll concentrate on the archaeological evidence, leaving apart concepts on refute the cryptology and theology proof for another day.
My website reproduces engravings from the Tiwanaku civilization in Bolivia. A kind of engravings depicts the alleged historical astronaut as an aquatic with a three-pronged tail, with each of the three prongs ending in a pod. How do the skeptics refute that? Simple. They simply must display that the shape of these pods resembles some type of animal or vegetation to be present in that area. In other words, they need to discover a terrestrial supply for these engravings, otherwise my extraterrestrial arguments remain unharmed. The timing of the Tiwanaku sky-god drawings coincides with the timing of the Nazca Lines in Peru, so the traditional astronaut of both places needs to be one and the identical. For Nazca, the skeptics will discover many ready-made arguments, but I consider all of them weak. The mentality of the individuals of Nazca cannot be assumed to be distinctive in human historical past. It has to be demonstrated that people elsewhere also believed that the sun, moon, or sky-spirits had bodily eyes that would observe floor drawings. Alternatively, it must be demonstrated that the people of Nazca worshipped birds, believing them to have cognitive intelligence.
The recorded engravings on the cosmological Sun Disk, alleged alien artifact, could show to be the most important challenge for the skeptics. How are we to believe that the Andeans of the early sixteenth century a) knew that the Earth was round, b) knew that it was attainable to orbit the Earth, c) knew that daylight striking the moon might replicate again to strike a spaceship, d) knew that the darkish clouds alongside the Milky Means contained stars inside, and e) knew that water formed the basis of plant and animal evolution? Here the skeptics would need to seek out parallels within the historical past of western civilization. I sit up for their response.