Uh . . . nope. Well . . . it does have something to do with genetics . . . but not from space aliens.
Fortunately, we have something called . . . science . . . to help us understand what may have been going on with Akhenaten (and other members of the 18th dynasty).
An interesting 2009 technical article from the professional medical journal, Annals of Internal Medicine, addresses Akhenaten and others in his lineage. You can beam it up here.
What proof is available to support the claim that Moses was Akhenaten? Claim made by Laurence Gardener, and Michael Tsarion.
None; Zero. Gardiner and Tsarion wouldn’t know ancient text analysis, archaeology, or ancient Egyptian (or Israelite) religion if they collectively bit them on their a**. Chronology is wrong, religion is wrong, no textual support, no archaeological evidence that makes the chronology possible, etc. Other than that they’re on to something.
I wouldn’t say Akhenaten’s unusual physique is proof of alien DNA. I’m not sure if anyone is calling it absolute proof. It can viewed as evidence at best. Just as the linked PDF cannot be called proof that Egypt’s 18th Dynasty did in fact suffer from disorders such as gynecomastia or aromatase excess syndrome. The paper merely provides evidence. So either way, speculation should be welcome in this case, not ridiculed.
Upon looking at several images of people suffering from the aforementioned disorders, I don’t see a resemblance to the features portrayed in reliefs and statues of the 18 Dynasty Egyptians in question. The disorders seem to produce a sickly, or somewhat goofy look (aesthetically speaking) which would unlikely invoke leadership over a large population. The features portrayed in imagery of Akhenaten, Nefertiti, et al look much more elegant, proportional, and functional. This could have been the result of the artist taking certain liberties, but I just don’t see enough resemblance to persuade me.
These are my opinions and I’m not convinced either way on this issue. But I lean toward this still being a mystery.
Also, it would be prudent for the author of this website to present material like this with a little less condescension and hubris. It doesn’t help his argument. For me it’s a big turn-off.
Here’s what you need for the alien speculation to *not* deserve ridicule: you need a real alien (live or dead) to have existed and be on earth — i.e., you’d need hard data that such beings exist and have come here. But what we have instead is more speculation. If science could tell us with a high degree of certitude (and actually produce the biological data for it) that aliens exist, THEN they would have to prove they could interbreed with homo sapiens — only THEN would your speculation deserve to be on the table. But right now you have a speculation bolstered by another speculation — and that does not deserve serious attention.
Based on your logic presented above, the idea of Dark Matter or Dark Energy should be off the table and thus be deserving of ridicule. But it’s not. It’s a highly respected idea in scientific circles. Also, though I do not deny the theory of evolution, apparently, it too should be cast aside and ridiculed since it cannot be observed as such on the macro level. It is only a theory constructed on evidence and speculation. But none of that evidence can be labeled ‘definitive’. Science still can’t agree on whether or not we’ve actually found the so-called ‘missing link’.
I personally don’t think anyone or anything *deserves* ridicule. Here is where you and I (and many others) part. Furthermore, who exactly determines what does and doesn’t deserve serious attention? You? National Geographic? institutional science in general? Obviously you think they DO deserve serious attention in that you’ve dedicated several websites to these issues. Or do you feel it’s your duty to ‘correct’ those who chose not to look to the almighty corporatized, mainstream scientific priesthood for definitive truths and legitimate intellectual pursuits?
I sense a certain fanaticism in your posts. You have apparently decided at some point that if someone has the proper title or credentials, and they’re affiliated with just the right institutions, then their information is trustworthy and truthful. You trust in ‘science’ like the fundamentalist Christian trusts in Jesus. As if science is infallible and without corruption or agenda outside its stated purpose. You put faith in the filtered knowledge of others to shape your view of the world and subsequently grant yourself authority to deem someone correct, incorrect, worthy of ridicule or worthy of attention.
Mainstream, corporatized science has proven time and again that it often presents skewed research and outright lies to serve (or preserve) a larger socio-economic agenda. This is not to say that all science is distorted. But I feel it’s been compromised enough to justify a search for answers outsides it’s current influence. At the end of the day, speculation is all we have. Everything else is essentially rumor. Peer-reviewed or otherwise. How can we call something absolute truth, when we haven’t personally experienced it or have at least been directly involved in it’s revelation?
I will most-likely decide to not reply or comment any further. We are coming from two very different directions in our approach to knowledge. It would be a futile attempt to try to convince you any further that what you’re promoting is essentially a form of authoritarianism. It comes in several forms: religion, government, and sadly, science. The latter could easily be corrected if we learn to make the distinction between the scientific method, which should be encouraged, practised, and respeced on all levels and institutional (authoritarian, economically-driven, conservative, status-quo maintaining) Science, which is limited to the chosen few in whom we are expected to believe without question (unless, of course, you wish to be ridiculed).
I don’t agree on the dark matter analogy. Dark matter is a working hypothesis based not on zero evidence, but very real gravitational effects on visible matter and background radiation. In other words, there is something testable here that needs an explanation. An illegitimate explanation, worthy of ridicule, might be “those gravitational effects might be caused by a passing alien mothership.” That is worthy of ridicule since there is no proof of intelligent aliens of any size, much less something that large. The theory of dark matter has a basis in that science has demonstrated as fact the idea that there can be unseen material causes for other effects. And so it becomes a hypothesis.
When it comes to Akhenaten, for the ET DNA hypothesis to not be worthy of consideration, we need to know that there are ETs. This is an entirely reasonable bar of legitimacy. If it isn’t then there are no scientific controls. Like it or not, science is important. You use it every day (frankly we all live and die by it every day, whether we think that closely about it or not). There is a difference between speculations that have scientific analogues (dark matter) and those that have no such analogues (ET DNA in an otherwise human specimen).
You have a good point, that there is no distinct proof of alien life except found on earth. However, what of the Martian Meteorite? What of the amino acids found on the Martial Lander rocks? Just because you cannot see it does not mean it does not exist. If that were the case, then Einstein’s theory of relativity is false because it cannot be actively scientifically proven, as well as many other theories that we hold as true.
Personally, I do not know if there is alien ancestry involved in Akhenaten. Until an in-depth investigation can be done on his remains, then it is a mystery. The lack of evidence does not prove a theory, all it proves is that you need more study.
The Martian meteorite (I presume you speak of the famous one, ALH840001) has not been accepted as proof of Martian life. I quote here (since I’m a bit lazy) from an article I wrote on this a while back for a chapter in a book:
“The most famous Martian meteorite, ALH84001, which received global attention in 1996 when it was put forth as containing fossilized bacterial life, is still not accepted as credible evidence for extraterrestrial life. The presumed bacteria are considered by most scientists to have been possibly formed abiotically from organic molecules. This uncertainty in how these fossils were formed means ALH840001 is not proof of extraterrestrial life. Whether the organic molecules were created by non-biological extraterrestrial processes or are the result of contamination by Antarctic ice is still hotly debated.” (Sources for this: Bada, J. L.; Glavin, D. P.; McDonald, G. D.; Becker, L. (1998). “A Search for Endogenous Amino Acids in Martian Meteorite ALH84001”. Science 279 (5349): 362–365; Becker L., Glavin D. P., Bada J. L. (1997). “Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Antarctic Martian meteorites, carbonaceous chondrites, and polar ice”. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 61: 475–481).
all of it is speculation. no one has proof. we as a race should really be well on our way to resolving any differences….political…..spiritual but we just can’t seem to get past the pettiness of human bigotry
I think a lot of people have watched too many alien sci-fi movies and would rather believe fantasy’s of aliens rather than examine evidence and actually think.
yep
Its obvious MSH poo poos anything that could be proof of ancient visitations by an advanced species by saying theres no proof!..So here Im asking MSH for some **proof***…How were the pyramids built and why have attempts to emulate failed…Does MSH KNOW that humans have existed in their present form for AT LEAST 450,000 years..yet,like conventional archeologists,he would have us believe that we sat on our ar*es for 445,000 years then woke up one day and built the pyramids…So who does MSH think was mining in africa 100,000 years ago?..and evidence of this is FACTUAL and easily seen IF you visit Africa yourself….
I guess MSH now believes that we sat on our ar*es for 350,000 years..decided to do intensive mining for minerals..then went back to sitting on our ar*es for another 345,000 years…?
okay brainiac – where’s your proof of alien life? The age of humanity is proof of aliens? Huh? Logic, please.
..We are also told by conventional archeologists..you know ,those guys that date a buildings age from a bit of pottery found in it and call everything tombs and temples,that other pyramids in Egypt ..the ones built of mud bricks and have fallen down,are the earliest attempts to build pyramids..
I have extensively visited Eqypt and I can tell you..WRONG…the mud brick ones are the LATER pyramids,and its clear to me that the eqyptians tried to emulate the Giza quality and couldnt…
If I am wrong,tell me WHERE the pyramids are that show the development from mud brick to huge stones…there are NONE…
Now the Giza pyramids and their**conventional** date of around 2,500B.C. based on Khufu..
There was a tradition of subsequent Pharoahs renovating buildings,and thats what Khufu himself said…that he renovated the pyramids of Giza..i.e. they were ALREADY there.
Here’s a good one – so give me the text where Khufu says he “renovated” the pyramids. I won’t hold my breath. This is absolute fairy tale stuff. On this blog, you have to put up the actual textual citations or get exposed. It’s simple. We’re all waiting now.
A great example of nonsense dating by conventional archeologists is the dating of TIWANAKU in Bolivia.Arthur Poznansky spent 50 YEARS of his life workng on the site and dated to ..at least ,15,000 B.C.
During that 50 years..NOBODY disputed him…
Shortly after his death,another team of archeologists visited the site,spent 6 months there and re dated to 2,500 b.c……
Is there a conspiracy theory?…YES..and that conspiracy is that man did NOTHING for 445,00 Years and then OVERNIGHT aquired the knowledge to build structures like the Giza pyramids..
In my view there have been many advanced civilisations on earth,.many cataclsyms,much has been lost,including a history of the world that was in the library of alexandria that went back hundreds of thousands of years.Solons own words,Platos description of Atlantis…ATL ANTIS..with a description that remarkably matches by Lake Titicaca..
The Aztecs own words when asked if they built Tiahuanacu …they laughed and said THE GODS BUILT THIS..WE JUST MOVED IN…
There is only one real question…did advanced knowledge live on from past civilisations and,or were we visited and **helped**by an advanced species…maybe both…
When we can put a man on the moon is it sooooo implausible to believe another species visited earth?…Of course not…the idiots are the ones that ignore this possibility.
Give me the citations for Poznansky’s work. I wonder if (a) he was an archaeologist – as opposed to some “researcher” with no credentials – never heard of him, so educate us; and (b) if any of his worked was peer-reviewed. Again, we’re all waiting with baited breath.
..And the ***evidence***?..hidden,like the numerous artifacts found in Grand Canyon caves and now languishing in the basement of the Smithsonian just because it didnt fit in with conventional archeological views..
The detailed knowledge of the stars by people like the DOGON,the almost fanatical studying of the stars by ancient peoples,the fanatical pre occupation to build HUGE structures…underground,on mountains,in jungles…why?…simple…history had been passed down to them of cataclysms..and they tried to build structures that would LAST…
and there it is — the dog ate my evidence.
Yeah, sure, you forgot to mention the troglodyte architecture, see The Dordogne troglodytic sites in France and the ones in Turkey (Cappadocia). All you are actually saying is that huge monuments and sites were built by different civilizations out of humanity’s fear of cataclysms of different sorts, and this is also your proof that alien life exists, or that they visited earth, or that they inter-breeded with us? This is the most preposterous claim I have ever heard in my live. So, it’s all built by humans to make them fare begter natural or other catastrophes, yet the same is proof that alien life exists…jeez, people, logic, pls…
So why were most of the HUGE ancient buildings pyramidal in shape?
Again,simple and easy to prove….because they are the bestt structure from a building perspective to withstand an earthquake or impact as the mass is spread most at the base…
If you dont believe me,try this experiment..build a pyramidial structure of wood..say 4ft high….then build a conventional box shaped structure ,4ft high.
Kick the box structure hard at any side and the whole thing will collapse…
Try the same excercise ,using the same force on the pyramid structure…it will NOT collapse,it may move or you may dent the side,but the whole structure will not collapse…
So lets use logic..WHY would ancient peoples focus on pyramids structures…because they were the BEST structures to with stand cataclysm…AND THE HEAVIER THE BETTER…
all these replies – hope you didn’t need to go to the bathroom. Uh, there is no need to “prove” a shape of the pyramids or anything else … you just look at it. And the answer really is simple — the gods live on mountains … they are generally conical in shape. Wow, what a mystery.
Greetings. I literally stumbled over this blog, when looking for some information about Sitchin and a different kind of view on his work. Many thanks regarding this, btw.
There are indeed publications by Posnansky, according to the spanish wiki-text.
The english one, is rather meagre.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Posnansky
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Posnansky
I must add (and would not see a conspiracy in this), that just because NO one disputed him for a long time, he really was right with his explanation. Was the other team right? – perhaps?
Til the day arrives someone can prove otherwise.
As an everyday individual who is not educated, through professors but through sites like this and books, in the subjects being addressed here like MSH and the others who have left some great comments (whether or not I agree with them entirely), I’m quite interested in all the topics that have been discussed but will note.
MSH you make excellent points, hands down, and I’m appreciative with what you have provided however as someone who is learning this in his spare time I will respectively note that some of your answers are felt with condescension. Now, it is YOUR site and you can address any issue the way you feel fit BUT if you believe you can change the minds of those who are incorrect on any subject that chance of change will lessen when (honestly) it sounds like you’re just being a ‘smarty pants’ on only some of your responses.
I’m just trying to give construction criticism because your wealth of information should be highly considered on the topics you address but we all know that sometimes people will read the blog and lose what was said in your writings because of some posts. Either way THANK YOU for your work, I might not agree with everything you say (who ever does) but knowledge is power and being ‘armed’ with what YOU provide is a wealth that can not be priced.
All the best
given I have little time to reply (and feel I should if I’m going to have a blog), that is a distinct risk. I’ll try to do better. (Though I don’t believe I serve anyone well by letting people who spout nonsense leave with the feeling that they may be on to something – shading the cold truth is not a virtue).
Hi. Firstly, I’d like to say I agree with Sk@l by saying thank you, MSH, for the information you’ve brought to my attention, but I did find your attitude condescending and a little close-minded.
My criticisms:
As you said yourself, science helps “us understand what MAY have been going on with Akhenaten [my own emphasis]”. It is still a theory. You stated that for alien speculation to not deserve ridicule “you need a real alien (live or dead)”. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with SPECULATION, whether there’s evidence or not. Many ideas begin as mere speculation until hard data is obtained to either verify or quash the idea. I thought the Dark Matter analogy was a reasonable one since, like the “real alien”, dark matter has not yet been proven to exist but speculated to exist. Also, in response to Vince’s posts (which I could only be bothered to scan-read) you left 5 posts on the same day, the last one sarcastically saying “so many replies”. You can’t really expect someone to reply on the same day. They might not even be online, let alone check your website.
But anyway, that was more long-winded than intended. I neither believe in the alien hypothesis nor see it as worthy of ridicule. When I first started looking into Dolichocpehalic skulls, I wondered why this practise of head-binding had been so common throughout the ancient world, on every continent. The current mainstream understanding of history rules out trans-cultural diffusion as an explanation, since these ancient cultures were so far apart and supposedly not in contact with eachother. The aborigines are said to have been isolated from the rest of the world for 30,000 years. Regardless of whether cultures learnt the practise from eachother or came up with the idea independently, I wonder why such a strange idea was so persistent. Then it came to my attention that certain Pharoahs had naturally dolichocephalic heads. Could it not be that head-binding has been so common because people were emulating the ruling and priestly classes, in much the same way that Africans have bleached their skin to emulate their white rulers? If this is so, then it implies that that the ruling families of the ancient world were closely related, or even a distinct race of humans now extinct (I’m not saying an alien race!). If this race had enslaved the other races it would explain why normal heads were associated with slavery in Peru and long-heads associated with freedom. If dolichocephalic heads had cropped up independently in ruling families throughout the world, you’d expect to see them cropping up more today as a result of inbreeding?
Sorry for the lengthy post. Just pondering, that’s all. Would be interested to hear your thoughts.
genetics are genetics; there’s no alien lineage here. That’s the point. People are still arguing about whether genetics explains the head deformations, but the point is that the genetics for all these individuals have been examined and there is no need (or merit) for an ET explanation.
So many replies!
These Egyptians we also prone to heart diseases ::
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-13422630
a few questions for you then MSH:
how come you didn’t refute Cooper’s claim that those diseases did not physiologically resemble what was depicted? was it because the paper you cited as a link is only six pages long, with no inclusion of medical examples of either disease to correlate with its hypothesis?
what about the Egyptian wall reliefs of planes and helicopters and the like?
or the reliefs of the lightbulbs that the Egyptians must have used to illumine the interior of the pyramids? seeing as how there is scientific evidence that sustaining a flame is impossible inside the pyramids because there is not enough oxygen, how do you refute that?
have you forgotten it was “science” that first accepted unequivocally the existence of ether, then vehemently denied it, and now allows the idea to resurface as “dark matter”? thus how can you argue the infallability of science?
btw this link doesn’t work (at the time of this posting):
http://michaelsheiser.com/PaleoBabble/2011/06/egypt-light-bulbs-and-dim-bulbs/
First, there was more than one paper about Akhenaten posted on this blog. I don’t need to re-invent the wheel that other people in the sciences have made — you don’t even cite the genetics material. That made me suspect you had not read the blog deeply at all — a suspicion confirmed by the rest of your questions. Had you done even the most modest amount of searching, you’d know that I’ve blogged on both items )and the link works – I just went to it):
The “plane and helicopter” nonsense:
http://michaelsheiser.com/PaleoBabble/2010/11/ancient-planes-rockets-and-helicopters/
The lightbulb lunacy:
http://michaelsheiser.com/PaleoBabble/2011/06/egypt-light-bulbs-and-dim-bulbs/
What are your views on the CNC machine marks found on the statues in ancient Egypt
state the issue and provide the data.
I think that we must remember that our own sciences are constantly changing. What was known to be “true” or “fact” just 100 years ago is laughed at today. With our ever rapidly advancing technologies, we are gaining information at an astonishing rate. If Ufos are real objects and not part of human psychology, then eventually we should get to see one. However, underestimating the military’s capabilities would not be wise. They have publicly shown many new weapons MTHEL and sonic weapons and also many new drone craft and aircraft. I would not doubt the whole ufo thing to be a psych-op by the Airforce (who first started the craze by stating then retracting that they had a ufo. ei Roswell) to keep secret any of the technologies they got after WWII.
Also about the head elongation of Akhenaten. It is known that many cultures around the world from the Aboriginies of Austrailia to the Chinook peoples here in the Americas performed skull modification on their young. The head is put in a device that slowly over time leads the development of the skull to the desired result. I should add this may explain why the child of Nefertiti has a modified skull as well (common picture associated with ancient aliens). I will say that it is most commonly thought that this would have been the case of the Egyptians skulls as well. In other words, it was their moms and dads who modified their heads like that because they liked it, not aliens. Peoples idea of what is beautiful shouldn’t be cast aside and the credit given to an alien. I seriously question the claim that they were trying to mimick in some way an alien they had seen. We must then assume that all of the cultures who did this were trying to look like aliens. Modification of the skull seems really crazy, but so does getting your toungue,nose, ears, genitals, or breasts, pierced or modified with plastic surgury. It was simply what people saw as beautiful or hip.
I believe that in another 2 or 300 years, the present society will look back at our notions about the origins of the universe, science and marveled at the fact that we didn’t destroy ourselves or the fact that we believed such frivolous and false contentions. So mankind has been studying the heavens for thousands of years, The Greeks; Sumerians, Babylonians, Mayans, etc. yet it has only been in the last 100 years or so that we’ve begun to grasp the inter workings of the solar system. I am always amused at how we profess to know the nature of things, and how we express our knowledge about a particular thing-usually in absolute terms. Listen as a simple person, ZI am connected to the universe, for instance, all I need is to look up at the moon, the Sun and perhaps catch a glimpse of Earth’s shadow and curve to know that the Earth is round and I am sure that folks deduced this relationship years ago. Science has become ugly and perverted it has lost its way. If you don’t’ buy into the BBT then no grant money, no funding for you. The concept of the BBT is so far out and silly. Please note every time you search for the age of something it’s always different, i.e. age of the universe, age of the solar system, age of the Earth. I am fully convinced that this is a waste of time, unless you can physically watch a thing and count the elapsed time, then finding the age is fruitless. WE are star people, we are the world, the universe, and we are all connected with it and not apart from it. Power is knowledge, I liken it to manure, it no good unless you spread it around, yet we al l know that knowledge is shared begrudgingly. Science is useful and it makes our world better, but it is not infallible and it can be wrong or the application of it can be wrong. I am disgusted with all of the BBT crap, dark matter, dark energy, and black holes. Its crap!!! Plain and simple. When the observations don’t fit, then simply make some crap up to make it fit – Same thoughts on quantum mechanics. its made up crap!!
Please also note that it is not a science that’s readily available to the masses, or should I say that it’s understanding.. Something that is controlled by the few and powerful.
In short, the evidence is so compelling that we are off in our understanding of nature that we refuse to change. Think about this, take a look at the pyramids at Giza and I want you to tell me you believe regular dudes built it with rocks, ropes and pulleys…
Well Mr Heiser!
You are arrogance personified!
You cherry pick evidence to bolster your miopic view of the universe, and, as many of these mucho-self assured- “I’ve got science to back me up champions”. You fail to consider any evidence that leads away from your “we know it al”l-because how dare any one consider that we are NOT the pinnacle of life is this vast universe and because we have not concieved nor reached a level of technological prowess to open up the boundaries of space travel therefore NO other form of life could have evolved far beyond the level to which we find ourselves.
Science has neither provided us with undoubtable evidence as to the exact evolutionay path of Homosapien nor has it been able to explain the missing link between us and our homonid ancestors. Let alone expalin how evolution let us escape predation in order to formulate non essentail thought processes such as art music and self awareness. IF all is as you so miopically put SO simple and down to earth why isn’t there an abundance of unquestionable evidence to answer all the vast anomalies that the likes have myself have been researching for the last 2 decades. Sitchin may have it Wrong but he is to commended for his efforts to ecxplore his thesis to the full. While the likes of yourself are a living joke.
I wrote apaper on the syntax anomalies of cuneiform and the dualistic nature of literal as opposed to non literal meaning to the origin of the basis of the language. If YOU did your research properly you would have discovered that Sitchin wasn’t proven wrong as you state BUT it is dependant upon wether you site the literal over the also used pseudo meaning in context of the writing as a whole.
I guess it is you who are tryi ng to baffle your audience with the little knowledge that you claim to have.
You small minded little man.
No, I just live in Realville.
Can you please cherry-pick any actual science to show us all that alien DNA exists? That would be nice, and it would show us how bright you are (not to mention making you the next Nobel Laureate).
OK so I’ve read through all the replies to this, and your replies to them, and I don’t quite get it. Opinions removed then – just going by hard fact, what is the difference between the theory of alien DNA and the theory of genetics or skull malformation? Is there hard proof for either? It would seem to me that there is simply evidence for both and your bias is prompting you to shoot down any theory other than the ones you believe – can you prove the cause/origin of the elongated skulls?
To tell if a specimen had alien DNA, you’d first need to know what alien DNA looked like in a genetic code. We don’t have any such specimen, so any discussion of alien DNA contributing to skull deformation is pointless from the outset. Why not wonder if acid blood in Akhenaten contributed to it? Blood from flying monkeys? We don’t have any such specimens there, either. Second, the DNA work done on these mummified remains has not turned up anything unexpected in terms of unknowns in the DNA sequence. It’s human DNA, through and through. Third, there are genetic explanations available for the deformations that are known from HUMAN DNA. One of those medical / genetic reasons is the answer; the discussion is “which one?” (and related to that discussion is the matter of genetic markers down through the relatives in the bloodlines).
It’s very straightforward and has nothing to do with aliens. If we could compare the DNA to alien DNA, then and only then would aliens be part of the discussion. But guess what? We have no alien DNA. What’s under the microscope is human, and no alien DNA exists anywhere else for comparison.
Hello…
Well…
Akenaton was Moises…..i think …yes!!!
this web site is very interesting…
http://ahmedosman.com/history.html
thanks
Oswaldo
I’ve already blogged about Osman and his fantasies. No, Akhenaten was not Moses (it would be nice, as that would be an external proof for Moses, but it’s bunk).
http://michaelsheiser.com/PaleoBabble/2011/01/ahmed-osman-no-stranger-to-revisionist-paleobabble/
Baited breath? Ew. My breath’s bated, not baited. Yours might be baited, but to what end? Just what are you trying to catch with your breath??
MSH,
You are always waiting with bated breadth. So are we all! So far, you have provided little evidence to support your own views but are quite happy to dismiss other views. While the real evidence may be thin at the moment but so was the case for several scientific facts of today. While it is easy to dismiss what you have not seen, can you please provide your explanations of what you do see I.e.how do you explain the pyramids and the fact they cannot be replicated even today? What happened to the advanced civilizations in Mesopotamia and Egypt and how is it that they have completely disappeared? How is it that only a handful of people have been responsible for major breakthroughs in arts, science, medicine and that they are disproportionately from a few groups? Some explanations of what you do see would be useful.
Thanks for reading into the post. I don’t have a “view” of Akhenaten’s physique, nor am I waiting with baited breath for one. There are a lot more interesting things to think about. My only “view” is that is has nothing to do with aliens. Produce evidence that there are aliens, and then produce evidence they came here, and then that can at least get a seat at the table.
About Hieroglyphics OF MODERN WAR ARTIFACTS from Abydos Temple. Prophecies from Future or just a misunderstanding? http://vimeo.com/21010883
My investigation is from 1995.
it’s a palimpset and has been known for years: http://michaelsheiser.com/PaleoBabble/tag/abydos/
As interesting as your reserch may seem the basic answer still unanswered are we alone in the universe
I dont have to go to a school to know this. we are not alone in the universe we are the most undeveloped spices in the universe
There is nothing that we humans can offer to a most advance civilization there is no reason why they should visit us.
But as soon as we can understand antimatter and make work you will see what in the heaven.
If we are alone in the universe thats alot of waste space
You mean “species” not “spices”.
None of what you note is evidence for ET life. Rather, they are things that “feel” reasonable. They are wishes. I’d like for them to be real, too, but they are not evidence of any sort.
Fact of the matter is that the Universe is always expanding, with every cluster of matter and energy, moving away from each other; space travel without wormholes would be impractical.
I’m sure someone else has probably figured this out, but what really astounds me about this ancient alien “evidence” is that they say Akhenaten “looks like an alien”. I assume that they mean that he looks like the archetypal alien from popular culture, not that they have an actual alien hidden in storage somewhere that they have compared him to. You can’t prove an argument by saying- this guy looks a bit like how we imagine aliens to look like, so therefore he must be an alien! They do this quite a lot actually- the medieval art where things “look like how we imagine alien spacecraft to look like” etc. If intelligent alien life ever turn up on this planet, I really hope they look like elephants and say- dude, you got it wrong, we actually genetically engineered the mammoths in our image and our spacecraft are all in the shape of caravans!
yep; that’s the logic!
It’s strange that so many people seem to ignore these obvious logical problems! The only thing I can think is that humans have become so used to technology that we find it difficult to think creatively about how these ancient wonders might have been built- a bit like the classic “candle problem” maybe. By the way, I found your blog through the ‘Ancient Aliens Debunked’ film- I really enjoyed your input, very interesting. The science is much more fascinating than the fantasy!
Well, truth be told, it’s not about logic. The “mystery” is so appealing that it just doesn’t get critical thought. Glad you found the blog and liked AAD.