SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (93515)1/13/2005 10:25:30 AM
From: epicure  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 108807
 
Except that one theory is religious, and one isn't.

So you leap from a fossil and a few anomalies to intelligent design and creation theory? Evolutionary biologists have millions of fossils- when you have millions of anomalies, THEN you can have creation science- but until then, no.



To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (93515)1/13/2005 10:32:42 AM
From: epicure  Respond to of 108807
 
You need to read up on the mammals preceded dinosaurs vibe you have going on- in terms of your perception of what scientists thought. As far as I know, everyone pretty much believe they were living concurrently- but it was thought the mammals were small (mouse sized, because those are the fossils that were found).

"It overturns the entire paradigm that dinosaurs preceded mammals in evolution." ????

life.umd.edu

Adaptive radiations and waves of extinctions
Breakup of Pangaea and continental drift (Fig. 4.11)(200-65 mya)
Extinction of dinosaurs (66 mya)
Modern species are ca. 2 my old

Mammals evolved from reptiles about 200-250 mya (in the Mesozoic era)

At the same time- approx 250 mya- dinosaurs were evolving from reptiles...

you can see the mammals were living concurrently with the dinosaurs and this is commonly accepted.



To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (93515)1/13/2005 11:14:12 AM
From: average joe  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 108807
 
The Gnostic Theory of Alien Intrusion

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dateline: Monday, January 10, 2005

By: JOHN LASH
By: Author of Metahistory.org

Since the explosion of the ET/UFO phenomena in 1947, speculation about alien intrusion on planet Earth has been rampant. Half a dozen theories dominate the debate, but there is one theory that has yet to be examined. It did not emerge after 1947, but approximately 1600 years earlier. To be precise, the evidence of this theory came to light through a discovery in Egypt in December, 1945, although the significance of the find was not realized until — guess when? 1947.

In that year, French scholar Jean Doresse identified the Egyptian find at Nag Hammadi as a cache of rare Gnostic texts. "Gnosticism" is the label scholars use for a body of teachings derived from the Mystery Schools of pre-Christian antiquity. Gnostics who protested against Christian doctrines such as divine retribution and Christ’s resurrection found themselves targeted as heretics and were brutally suppressed by early converts to the One True Faith. This is the untold story of how the Mysteries ended. Since that signal year, 1947, some of the lost Mystery School knowledge has been recovered.

Gnosis (“inner knowing”) was a path of experimental mysticism in which the initiates of the Mystery Schools explored the psyche and the cosmos at large. Using psychoactive plants, yoga, and sex magic, these ancient seers experienced altered states and developed siddhis, occult skills such as clairaudience and remote viewing. Gnosis was a kind of yogic noetic science melded with parapsychology. In heightened perception, Gnostics developed a vast cosmological vision centered in a female deity, the Divine Sophia. The Gnostic creation myth is unique in that it includes a full-blown explanation of how inorganic alien beings came to be present in our solar system.

The Nag Hammadi material contains reports of visionary experiences of the initiates, including first-hand encounters with inorganic beings called Archons. Gnostic teaching explains that these entities arose in the early stage of formation of the solar system, before the Earth was formed. Archons inhabit the solar system, the extraterrestrial realm as such, but they can intrude on Earth. Interestingly, this Gnostic insight accords closely with the view of Jacques Vallee, who maintains that ET/cyborgs probably belong to the local planetary realm. Vallee also proposes that the ET/UFO enigma is a “spiritual control system,” a phenomenon that “behaves like a conditioning process.” (Messengers of Deception). This is exactly what Gnostics said about the Archons: they can affect our minds by subliminal conditioning techniques. Their main tactics are mental error (intellectual virus, or false ideology, especially religious doctrines) and simulation. Archons are predatory, unlike a wide range of non-human and other-dimensional beings also know to the Gnostics, beings who are benevolent or neutral toward humanity.

Physical descriptions of Archons occur in several Gnostic codices. Two types are clearly identified: a neonate or embryonic type, and a draconic or reptilian type. Obviously, these descriptions fit the Greys and Reptilians of contemporary reports to a T. Or I should say, to an ET.

Delving into the Gnostic materials, it is quite a shock to discover that ancient seers detected and investigated the problem of alien intrusion during the first century CE, and certainly well before. (The Mysteries date from many centuries before the Christian Era.) What is amazing about the Gnostic theory of the Archons is not only the cosmological background (explaining the origin of these entities and the reason for their enmeshment with humanity), but the specificity of information on the alien m.o., describing how they operate and what they want from us. For one thing, Gnostics taught that these entities envy us and feed on our fear. Above all, they attempt to keep us from claiming and evolving our “inner light,” the gift of divine intelligence within. While I would not claim that Gnostic teachings on the Archons, or what remains of such teachings, have all the answers to the ET/UFO enigma, one thing is clear: they present a coherent and comprehensive analysis of alien intrusion, as well as specific practices for resisting it. They are far more complete and sophisticated than any theory in discussion today.

In short, the ancient seers of the Mysteries in Europe and the Levant seem to have accomplished 2000 years ago what many of us have been attempting to do since 1947: figure out who the ETs are, where they originate, how they relate to us, and most important of all, how we ought to relate to them.

As far as I know, apart from myself only one writer on the ET/UFO issue has directly identified the Gnostic Archons with contemporary ETs. This is Nigel Kerner, whose book, The Song of the Greys, is a strange, singular and little-known contribution to the debate. Kerner cites the Nag Hammadi texts just in passing, and does not elaborate on Gnostic teachings about the Archons. He makes a strong case for alien interference with the human genome, but this claim does not stand up against Gnostic analysis. Gnostic texts use mythological language to describe actual events in prehistory as well as long-term developments in the human psyche. According to the ancient seers, Archons cannot access our genetic makeup but they can fake an intervention. Considering the confusion of humanity in modern times, a faked intervention would be as good as real. This typifies the Archon tactic of getting us to imagine and believe things that are not true, and to accept simulation for reality. In this way, Gnostics taught, these alien cousins can deviate the human species from its true and proper course of evolution.

The unique emphasis on the Goddess Sophia is the high inspirational message of Gnosis. The ancient seers taught that, through a special link to the Goddess, our species can overcome the Archons and secure a human, and humane, future for the Earth.

For more on the Gnostic theory of alien intrusion, see Metahistory.org and click on “ET/Archon Theory” in the left-hand margin of the home page or click here.

phenomenamagazine.com



To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (93515)1/13/2005 11:53:03 AM
From: Oeconomicus  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 108807
 
"To take a giant leap from this one discovery, I think creationism should be taught alongside evolution in our schools."

JC, I'd have to fight that one. Had you said "intelligent design", I'd be more open to it - assuming what was being taught had some kind of theoretical basis that made some sense. But to suggest that a story about God plopping a naked man down in a garden, taking his rib to make a naked woman companion, and then kicking them out into the world, where they must wear clothes, for eating an apple should be taught "along side" the science of evolution is just ridiculous.

Why do people insist on taking a good story, a parable intended to teach a lesson, and treating it as some kind of literal, factual history of human creation?

Now, if you want to introduce a "comparative religions" or "history of philosophy" requirement in our high schools, I actually think that would be a good idea, but creationism might then amount to half a period's lecture/discussion.

Finally, since, AFAIK, no one has really come up with truly scientific evidence for Intelligent Design, that really belongs in the philosophy curriculum, too, not "along side" scientific theories.

JMO, of course.



To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (93515)1/13/2005 3:32:38 PM
From: redfish  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 108807
 
Even if the theory of evolution turns out to be dead wrong, what would be the point of teaching creationism?

We know that the biblical account of creation is a crock ... what is the point of teaching something we know to be false?



To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (93515)1/13/2005 11:38:54 PM
From: Grainne  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 108807
 
This is a VERY brief layman's description of Clovis. I am really in a hurry right now and cannot check my statements, but I believe this is the bare bones of it.

The Clovis controversy is about when man first came to the Americas. Clovis points, or spear heads, were for a long time believed to be only 11,000 years old or less. There was a whole body of archaeologists who supported that, and it was very reassuring. But other archaeologists across the Americas kept digging and finding older artifacts. The original group would convolute reasons that the carbon dating could not be accurate, to the point of absurdity.

Finally spear points were found in Monte Verde, a dig in South America, that seemed to be 35,000 year old. And they were extremely similar to a tribe of Europeans who lived in Spain at that time. A more radical group of archaeologists supported the findings at Monte Verde, and a lot of research has been done about how early man had ocean-worthy vessels and could have arrived in the Americas then. And of course the land bridge theory from Asia later works as well. So the radical group argues that America could have been populated very early, and from several different directions. The discovery of Kennewick man in Washington state, who does not have the features typical of Native Americans, also supports this theory.

My point about Clovis is that in order to get your digs funded and keep your professorial status, there is a huge pressure to conform. Of course, as time goes on and there are more pre-Clovis finds, the radical group looks more correct. The verdict is still out on this one, but I find it fascinating.