Merged Skeptics vs. Knowers/Believers

There might be something wrong with your testing process for that "fact". Put 1000 male cats in a room and you get no kittens. Put 1000 female cats in a separate room and you get no kittens.
 
King of the Americas said:
How can you so easily believe something there's no evidence for?
Click to expand...

How can your body withstand being the channel for so much raw irony?

There's plenty of evidence for it being of human origin. You ignoring it doesn't make it go away.

Empirical data meaning 'practical experience'...
Click to expand...

...meaning "anecdotes" meaning "not acceptable scientific evidence".
 
Pure_Argent said:
How can your body withstand being the channel for so much raw irony?

There's plenty of evidence for it being of human origin. You ignoring it doesn't make it go away.

...meaning "anecdotes" meaning "not acceptable scientific evidence".
Click to expand...

The irony was purposeful... What's good for the goose.

---

Can you provide the "evidence" you believe "proves" who built it?

While you're at it, could you provide the date (rough estimation) that it was constructed?

P.S. It's okay to say you don't know.
 
Last edited:
King of the Americas said:
Can you provide the "evidence" you believe "proves" who built it?
Click to expand...

I have. It doesn't "prove" that it was built by the Incans, but it does make it overwhelmingly likely that it was so. Much more likely than it being built by a race of aliens.
Have you ever heard of the term Occam's Razor? You are adding needless complexity to a situation that already has an answer. This is a structure which shows every sign of being built by human hands using known construction methods. Instead of accepting that it was built by humans - because it has not been 100% proven, just 99% - you are creating a race of beings who are much more advanced than humans, who have dwelled on this planet beside us for millenia and who have left no proof of their existence. While it is technically possible for your explanation to be correct, it is so astronomically unlikely that we can pretty much rule it out on the spot.

While you're at it, could you provide the date (rough estimation) that it was constructed?
Click to expand...

Currently, Puma Punku is believed to have begun construction in roughly 200 BC.

Puma Punku on Wiki

There are also links there to other articles on Puma Punku if you require additional information.

P.S. It's okay to say you don't know.
Click to expand...

I might add to this the fact that it's okay to say that you were wrong. Doing so does not destroy your theory about an alien civilization here on Earth. It has no basis in logic, so why look for logical, realistic proofs for it?
 
Pure_Argent said:
I have. It doesn't "prove" that it was built by the Incans, but it does make it overwhelmingly likely that it was so. Much more likely than it being built by a race of aliens.
Have you ever heard of the term Occam's Razor? You are adding needless complexity to a situation that already has an answer. This is a structure which shows every sign of being built by human hands using known construction methods. Instead of accepting that it was built by humans - because it has not been 100% proven, just 99% - you are creating a race of beings who are much more advanced than humans, who have dwelled on this planet beside us for millenia and who have left no proof of their existence. While it is technically possible for your explanation to be correct, it is so astronomically unlikely that we can pretty much rule it out on the spot.



Currently, Puma Punku is believed to have begun construction in roughly 200 BC.
Click to expand...

You should read ALL of a link before you post it in support of your claim...

"However, as noted by Kolata[4] subsequent archaeological research[6][7], has found a complete lack of any physical evidence, including prehistoric tools and dated midden deposits, for any occupation of the Tiwanaku site as old as argued by Posnansky and the German astronomers either at the Tiwanaku Site, near it, or in direct association with the Pumapunku complex despite decades of intensive excavation and research."

And if you can't PROVE the Inca built it, you should stop saying they did so...
 
Last edited:
King of the Americas said:
You should read ALL of a link before you post it in support of your claim...

"However, as noted by Kolata[4] subsequent archaeological research[6][7], has found a complete lack of any physical evidence, including prehistoric tools and dated midden deposits, for any occupation of the Tiwanaku site as old as argued by Posnansky and the German astronomers either at the Tiwanaku Site, near it, or in direct association with the Pumapunku complex despite decades of intensive excavation and research."
Click to expand...

Yes. So the tools were not left around, and there was no crap in the temple. Big flippin' whoop.

And if you can't PROVE the Inca built it, you should stop saying so...
Click to expand...

You know what? I'm done. I'm officially done. You are so unwilling to even listen to my arguments, to even ATTEMPT to understand them, that there isn't any point in continuing this discussion. My point is not that you it can be PROVEN that the Incas built it. My point is that it is HIGHLY LIKELY that they did. But you won't accept that that's what I mean. So I'm done here. Goodbye. Have fun with your delusional, underground-alien fantasy world.
 
Pure_Argent said:
Yes. So the tools were not left around, and there was no crap in the temple. Big flippin' whoop.
Click to expand...

So you're okay with a date arrived at with "a complete lack of any physical evidence"...

Pure_Argent said:
You know what? I'm done. I'm officially done. You are so unwilling to even listen to my arguments, to even ATTEMPT to understand them, that there isn't any point in continuing this discussion. My point is not that you it can be PROVEN that the Incas built it. My point is that it is HIGHLY LIKELY that they did. But you won't accept that that's what I mean. So I'm done here. Goodbye. Have fun with your delusional, underground-alien fantasy world.
Click to expand...

Again, without ACTUAL evidence, how can you arrive at highly like, somewhat likely, or unlikely...?

What DOES "a complete lack of any physical evidence" mean to you???

I'd be done if I were you too...
 
Last edited:
What DOES "a complete lack of any physical evidence" mean to you???
Click to expand...
I know what it doesn't mean, it doesn't mean that your super civilization sentient beings, or whatever you want to call them, were involved in the construction. Who knows, they might must uncover some evidence that shows how they were built, but of course the original builders would never think some people in the 21st Century would think super fantastic beings constructed the buildings, so they'd bother to leave anything substantial, such as building plans and tools to satisfy you. Perhaps you should take a trip down there and talk to the archaeologists working on the place and tell them how you think they were built, I'd love to see the look on their faces.
 
Last edited:
Yeah_Right said:
I know what it doesn't mean, it doesn't mean that your super civilization sentient beings, or whatever you want to call them, were involved in the construction. Who knows, they might must uncover some evidence that proves that they were built by humans. Perhaps you should take a trip down there and talk to the archaeologists working on the place and tell them how you think they were built, I'd love to see the look on their faces.
Click to expand...

And who knows they might just uncover some evidence that proves that they were built by someone OTHER than humans.

"A complete lack of any physical evidence" ACTUALLY means nothing, zero, zip, zilch...

Without evidence you don't/can't know who built it.

You understand how evidence works, right?
 
Yes, I know how evidence works, probably better than you, but anyway, I am saying the might find something in the future, get it? That's what I was getting at. And really you are sort of arguing against yourself, if there is no evidence of how they were built, then there is no evidence that they were built by aliens.
But having said that, it is more likely that they were build by humans, using Occams Razor there, going to the simplest explanation.
 
Last edited:
King of the Americas said:
(Enter non-sense here)
Click to expand...

I say that quote for the fact that anything you say going along with aliens and human's inability to make 90 degree angles....is non-sense.

Where is the evidence to show that YOUR THEORIES are true.

.........

Nevermind, I'll speed it along. Just like how we can't prove 4000 year old tools, you can't prove 4001 year old beings. Fail :rolleyes:.

We're at a deadlock here xD.
 
Last edited:
Kurse said:
King of the Americas said:
(Enter non-sense here)
I say that quote for the fact that anything you say going along with aliens and human's inability to make 90 degree angles....is non-sense.

Where is the evidence to show that YOUR THEORIES are true.

.........

Nevermind, I'll speed it along. Just like how we can't prove 4000 year old tools, you can't prove 4001 year old beings. Fail :rolleyes:.

We're at a deadlock here xD.
Click to expand...

Deadlock is pretty apt. I think KoTA is no different than a fundamentalist Christian, no rational argument will sway him from his belief system.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Kurse said:
King of the Americas said:
(Enter non-sense here)
Click to expand...

I say that quote for the fact that anything you say going along with aliens and human's inability to make 90 degree angles....is non-sense.

Where is the evidence to show that YOUR THEORIES are true.

.........

Nevermind, I'll speed it along. Just like how we can't prove 4000 year old tools, you can't prove 4001 year old beings. Fail :rolleyes:.

We're at a deadlock here xD.
Click to expand...

^-This-^
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom