UFO'S: A possible explanation

[realpaladin]

I'm guessing you never smoked peyote

I did Mescaline, but I like LSD a bit better for my 'groovy, I have tentacles' moments...

It is somehow less...rough.

 

[King of the Americas]

At this point you have left me dazed and confused, muddled in paths of logic, trying to see how to jump from one stone to the next without snagging on reality. You had stated your opinion, that the Hopi did not identify God, instead worshipping the sun. Because they thought the sun was god, they were worshipping an unidentified flying object. And there is where your logic begins to break down. I agree completely that the Hopi mislabelled the Sun as God. However, this does not mean they were worshipping something unidentified. They had identified the sun as God, perhaps incorrectly identifying the sun as god, but identifying the sun all the same.

The didn't 'identify' the "Sun"... They looked up, saw the bright object that provided warmth, gave forth light, and made stuff grow. They then concluded, "THAT is God- Taiowa", then they endowed it with supernatural qualities. I hold that this happened with most if not all of the ancients.

Secondly you have said that ALL the ancients have mislabelled God. I would quite dearly like to see some proof. What was Zeus to the Greeks? What was Jupiter to the Romans? Osiris to the Egyptians? They were the God of gods to their respective pantheons, and I fail to see how this would not translate to God, the same Christian God, the Muslim's Allah,the Hindu's atman/Brahman/Krishna. I suggest you start researching right now if you wish to support your statement still.You have a lot of proving to do.

Wait. Has God been 'proven' to exist and 'measured', by ANY of those religions? I'd sincerely LOVE to see that proof as well as the measurements. So, you want me to 'prove' that ALL of the ancients mis-labeled God. Okay, I'll get to work on that. Show me the ONE example of an accurate portrayal of God, and I'll prove it's wrong.

You talk about factual reality and beliefs within the context of religion.This puts you in dangerous waters indeed. I would carefully word my replies if I were you.

Beliefs start somewhere, oftentimes WITH an actual reality. The problem is that with time, the reality is replaced by the myth. What I'm trying to do is re-find, the actual truth.

Lastly, you say that the Hopi didn't know much about the sun. I wish to ask you, how well do you know your own God?

I 'know' nothing of God/god(s), other than they exist.

 

[King of the Americas]

need I remind you then that we are discussing the Hopi so you could prove your point that someone can understand their culture better than they can without studying it. so far on that = EPIC FAIL

It is to the Hopi

no, its totally accurate, the Hopi do believe that

are you saying that religious beliefs are founded upon scientific truths.
laughable

To the crack heads across the street, my pineapple is "Laroo", the mushroom spitting sin forgiver. Are you suggested that it IS, just because these guys 'believe' it is???

No, I am NOT saying religious beliefs are founded upon scientific truth. THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID! IF the Hopi HAD 'known' the Sun was just a big burning ball of gas, that DIDN'T shape shift, I think it unlikely they'd have worshiped it.

 

[realpaladin]

Beliefs start somewhere, oftentimes WITH an actual reality. The problem is that with time, the reality is replaced by the myth. What I'm trying to do is re-find, the actual truth.

There is nothing to 're-find'.

The actual reality that you refer to is often a natural phenomenon that could not (yet) be explained. And so someone gave it a name.
And to make his/her name stick more than the other guys inventions, he/she endowed it with more powers and or gave it more depth.

I 'know' nothing of God/god(s), other than they exist.

I know everything of God(s) because they do not exist.

 

[realpaladin]

To the crack heads across the street, my pineapple is "Laroo", the mushroom spitting sin forgiver. Are you suggested that it IS, just because these guys 'believe' it is???

To them it is. You just said so.

No, I am NOT saying religious beliefs are founded upon scientific truth. THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID! IF the Hopi HAD 'known' the Sun was just a big burning ball of gas, that DIDN'T shape shift, I think it unlikely they'd have worshiped it.

But they did not, so they did.

 

[King of the Americas]

There is nothing to 're-find'.

The actual reality that you refer to is often a natural phenomenon that could not (yet) be explained. And so someone gave it a name.
And to make his/her name stick more than the other guys inventions, he/she endowed it with more powers and or gave it more depth.

Maybe...

I know everything of God(s) because they do not exist.

I've empirical evidence to the contrary.

 

[Marduk]

To the crack heads across the street, my pineapple is "Laroo", the mushroom spitting sin forgiver. Are you suggested that it IS, just because these guys 'believe' it is???

clearly as you are actually lying about laroo and the crackheads it serves no purpose but to further your lack of veracity

No, I am NOT saying religious beliefs are founded upon scientific truth. THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID!

I have not said that at any point

IF the Hopi HAD 'known' the Sun was just a big burning ball of gas, that DIDN'T shape shift, I think it unlikely they'd have worshiped it.

why, people today know what the sun is and they still worship it

can I ask you, do you have anything other than your misunderstanding of documented beliefs to offer this discussion ?

 

[Marduk]

I've empirical evidence to the contrary.

you claimed this before,
I'm still waiting to see it,

 

[King of the Americas]

To them it is. You just said so.


But they did not, so they did.

But it isn't, even if they DO think so.

It is JUST a pineapple. It doesn't fly, give forth shrooms, or forgive sins.

 

[King of the Americas]

you claimed this before,
I'm still waiting to see it,

The evidence in question is me or rather my statement. No pics or videos, sorry.

 

[realpaladin]

I've empirical evidence to the contrary.

Mine is contrary to yours.

 

[leafman91]

The didn't 'identify' the "Sun"... They looked up, saw the bright object that provided warmth, gave forth light, and made stuff grow. They then concluded, "THAT is God- Taiowa", then they endowed it with supernatural qualities. I hold that this happened with most if not all of the ancients.

This would be the 'identifying the sun as a God' thing I was talking about. Note, that it is identifying the sun as God.

Wait. Has God been 'proven' to exist and 'measured', by ANY of those religions? I'd sincerely LOVE to see that proof as well as the measurements. So, you want me to 'prove' that ALL of the ancients mis-labeled God. Okay, I'll get to work on that. Show me the ONE example of an accurate portrayal of God, and I'll prove it's wrong.

I will take a page from Ashles' book and remind you that the burden of proof is upon you here. You, I take it, wish to prove to me, that your statement is correct. I do not have any motivation towards proving your statement, rightly so, as I think you are wrong. To change my opinion, you will need to as I have requested. You may think this is a rather large task. This is most likely linked to the fact that it is my opinion you have made a rather large blunder. I am arguing that Zeus, or Jupiter, or Osiris is as accurate a portrayal of God as any other. I am arguing that of the many ancient pantheons of gods once believed in, most of them could probably be seen as an accurate portrayal of God. This is a direct challenge to your statement. You have the task of proving me wrong. I am not going to do any of it for you.

Beliefs start somewhere, oftentimes WITH an actual reality. The problem is that with time, the reality is replaced by the myth. What I'm trying to do is re-find, the actual truth.

Good luck with that. I've already started. Do you know what I'm doing in my quest for the actual truth? I am reading the Bible.Then the Quran.Then the Grunth(I think that is the spelling). Then the works of Buddha. My quest for truth is going to take me a long time, and I appreciate this. I seek comfort in the fact that I know at least I am taking a step in the right direction.

I 'know' nothing of God/god(s), other than they exist.

Then what proof do you have for their existence?

 

[realpaladin]

But it isn't, even if they DO think so.

It is JUST a pineapple. It doesn't fly, give forth shrooms, or forgive sins.

And it isn't a UFO even if you DO think so.

But to you it is. To them it is.

 

[King of the Americas]

clearly as you are actually lying about laroo and the crackheads it serves no purpose but to further your lack of veracity

I have not said that at any point

why, people today know what the sun is and they still worship it
[qimg]http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/april2008/druids_stonehenge.jpg[/qimg]
can I ask you, do you have anything other than your misunderstanding of documented beliefs to offer this discussion ?

Druids aren't Sun worshipers.

You said the Hopi KNEW what the Sun was.

You're right there's no "Laroo" or crackheads, but I think that just because someone believes something, that doesn't make it true.

 

[Ashles]

The evidence in question is me or rather my statement. No pics or videos, sorry.

Or to put it another way, anecdotal evidence without any weight.

Evidence that is indistinguishable in any way from someone
A) Lying
B) Misremembering
C) Misperceiving
D) Suffering from delusions

Thus of no practical use.

 

[King of the Americas]

Or to put it another way, anecdotal evidence without any weight.

Evidence that is indistinguishable in any way from someone
A) Lying
B) Misremembering
C) Misperceiving
D) Suffering from delusions

Thus of no practical use.

Agreed. The evidence I have is only good to/for 'me'. It has no external value.

 

[realpaladin]

You're right there's no "Laroo" or crackheads, but I think that just because someone believes something, that doesn't make it true.

Exactamundo.

And that is why it needs more than conjecture and circumstantial evidence to call those images something else than what the original painters thought them to be.

Don't you find it strange that, much in line with the pareidolia phenomenon, we began to see UFO's in those paintings AFTER we imagined what they would be like?

Here's a thought experiment for you:

How about if Hollywood had made them cubes like the Borg cubes? How much evidence would you find then in old paintings? My guess is quite a lot.

Or how about if we had used fully enclosed vehicles like in '2001' to roam through space and rove across the moon? What evidence would you find then?

Or how about we would have gone into space the way Rutan/Virgin Galactic is doing? How many people would have pointed to the 'sound of a 1000 waterfalls' mentioned in the bible then?

 

[Ashles]

Agreed. The evidence I have is only good to/for 'me'. It has no external value.

Fair enough.

 

[Marduk]

The evidence in question is me or rather my statement. No pics or videos, sorry.

what statement is that, the one where you claimed there is evidence of ufos throughout history and were proved wrong or the one where you claimed you knew more about different cultures than the cultures themselves did which has also been proved wrong

or did you mean your opinion. That is not evidence when its never been proven valid either

 

[King of the Americas]

This would be the 'identifying the sun as a God' thing I was talking about. Note, that it is identifying the sun as God.



I will take a page from Ashles' book and remind you that the burden of proof is upon you here. You, I take it, wish to prove to me, that your statement is correct. I do not have any motivation towards proving your statement, rightly so, as I think you are wrong. To change my opinion, you will need to as I have requested. You may think this is a rather large task. This is most likely linked to the fact that it is my opinion you have made a rather large blunder. I am arguing that Zeus, or Jupiter, or Osiris is as accurate a portrayal of God as any other. I am arguing that of the many ancient pantheons of gods once believed in, most of them could probably be seen as an accurate portrayal of God. This is a direct challenge to your statement. You have the task of proving me wrong. I am not going to do any of it for you.
Good luck with that. I've already started. Do you know what I'm doing in my quest for the actual truth? I am reading the Bible.Then the Quran.Then the Grunth(I think that is the spelling). Then the works of Buddha. My quest for truth is going to take me a long time, and I appreciate this. I seek comfort in the fact that I know at least I am taking a step in the right direction.

Then what proof do you have for their existence?

You want me to prove something 'false', that has never been proven true/accurate? I said IF you show me ONE accurate depiction of God that I could prove it was inaccurate. I am still not sure how I'd do that, but I am reasonably confident I won't have to, given that no one is going to be able to get God to show up, so we can verify a depiction of him. Until something IS prove true, is it really on someone else to prove it's false?

I don't have 'proof' of anything regarding God/god(s), but I DO have a butt load of 'weak' evidence.