Talk:Paleocontact theory
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Untitled
editExplanation: Ancient Astronaut Theory is a term that came into usage to describe the theories of Erich von Däniken et al.; Paleocontact theory on the other hand is a term that is used more to describe the more general and basic hypothesis that intelligent extra-terrestrial beings have visited earth in the past---a hypothesis that has been and is considered by some scientists. I'm not creating usage. This is the usage, though the term 'Paleocontact theory' can also be interchangeable with 'Ancient Astronaut Theory'. 007 03:12, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
- Agreed :) The pointer outer 21:15, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Oberth has went on record stating his belief in paleo-contact. On one occasion, he stated: "I believe extraterrestrial intelligenes are watching the earth and have been visiting us for millenia in their flying saucers". I'm surprised that he went on record saying that, but he did. Will clarify exactly when & where. 007 23:26, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
External Links?
editI don't know enough to flush out this article. I looked around for other sites that may give me an unbiased exegesis of the suggested evidence for this theory (hypothesis?), but most of what I find is ranting and/or sensationalism. Can someone suggest links and/or is someone planning on flushing out this page? Amid all that garbage there really does seem to be some compelling evidence.
I am tempted to add what I know from reading the Book of Exodus, but don't know if it's really appropriate to just start spouting my opinions on the theory. However, when I look at how God is portrayed there, I see something much closer to a spaceship than a divine entity. That God is physically present with Moses, speaking with the voice of a trumpet either from his column of metal-above and smoke-below or from the ark of the covenant (also having trouble finding credible sources about the ark acting as a current conductor and/or capacitor, but do know that people died if they touched it). That God is there, raining fire on Moses' enemies and otherwise stopping in from time to time. He's not just some spiritual concept like today.
But again, I have no idea how to write up such a thing for wikipedia, nor if it is really appropriate for this article. So has someone already done a better job? Thanks!
P.S. I'm also quite intrigued by the Urim and Thummim. Currently, wikipedia states: "According to the teachings of Judaism, a small parchment with God's holy name, the Tetragrammaton, inscribed on it was slipped into an opening under the Urim and Thummim on the high priest's breast plate, which caused the breastplate to "glow" and thereby "transmit messages" from God to the Children of Israel. Some scholars have suggested "the" Urim and Thummim consists of two crystals; however, the precise nature of the medium is unknown to most secular scholars. According to the Hebrew Bible, stones used for "an" Urim and Thummim were kept in the breastplate of Aaron, the brother of Moses." Epastore
- It is always a bad idea to discuss personal research in an article or present a very personal slant on previous research. Such things should be done on User Pages or Talk Pages, not in articles. This article will focus on the more scientific manifestations of Paleocontact theory: the history of the idea among actual scientists, and what scientists have written of the theory; preferably, qualified scientists. Alexander 007 03:32, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- Are you suggesting I'm not a qualified scientist?!?! Oh... wait... I'm not. OK, fine. But my initial question stands... I'd love to see some external links, or the fleshing-out you describe. There are clearly some scientifically intriguing bits of evidence and speculation about paleocontact, but they are drops swimming in an ocean of good ol' conspiracy theory and other ranting. Web searching has for me revealed nothing but the latter, so I'd love to see some legitimate research. Thanks! Epastore 17:01, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
- No, I wasn't suggesting that at all. I was referring to "scientists" such as Matest M. Agrest who went off the deep-end and speculated outside of his field. Alexander 007 09:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
- There are a number of good books that deal with the history of the idea within science, but I forget the titles. Can find out though. Alexander 007 10:03, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
- If you can find a source or two, that'd be great. I'd love to flush out this article. Thanks. Epastore 02:54, 8 February 2006 (UTC)