Throughout the previous year, I firmly helped a partner recorded as a hard copy a progression of ten articles covering different parts of my old space traveler hypothesis. Each of the ten of those articles circled generally all over the planet and view counters on many destinations demonstrated copious readership, yet criticism to me, or to her, from anyplace, was non-existent. There was neither analysis nor approval from anybody. Simply quiet. I was beginning to believe that maybe nobody in the world needs to truly take antiquated space travelers.
While trying to gain some headway, I chose to pay sixty bucks for a survey of my old space explorer site. Obviously, this was to be a survey by cynics; an audit by New Age devotees would be useless. Their blog's depiction was "basic surveys of paranormal cases on the Internet." The mediator conceded them five days to play out their audit that has since a long time ago come and gone, and nothing but silence from them. My site presents a tremendous measure of proof and, in truth, I was unable to anticipate that anybody should create a decent basic survey in only five days. Nobody, including myself, would need to see immediately ready and negligible contentions, else I would make them look ludicrous in my counter contentions. Besides, a portion of my proof comes from Spanish-language sources and, to begin, they would require time to confirm that none of it is a scam. They are welcome to constantly they need.
What's in store from this blog is unsure. There are doubters who are as extremist in their reasoning as their New Age partners, and afterward once more, there are cynics, similar to me, who equitably assess the proof to show up at reality. Was there a genuine old space explorer? To assist the doubters with responding to that inquiry, I will give them a few thoughts on the most proficient method to discredit my speculations. Here, exclusively for space contemplation, I will focus on the archeological proof, passing on aside thoughts on the best way to discredit the cryptology and religious philosophy proof for one more day.
My site recreates etchings from the tiwanaku progress in Bolivia. One of those etchings portrays the supposed old space explorer as an oceanic with a three-pronged tail, with every one of the three prongs finishing in a unit. How do the cynics invalidate that? Simple. They essentially have to exhibit that the state of those cases looks like a type of creature or vegetation to be tracked down around there. All in all, they need to find an earthbound hotspot for those etchings, generally my extraterrestrial contentions stay safe.
The planning of the tiwanaku sky-god drawings harmonizes with the planning of the Nazca Lines in Peru, so the antiquated space traveler of the two spots must be very much the same. For Nazca, the cynics will track down many instant contentions, however I think about every one of them feeble. The mindset of individuals of Nazca can't be thought to be remarkable in mankind's set of experiences. It must be exhibited that individuals somewhere else likewise trusted that the sun, moon, or sky-spirits had actual eyes that could notice ground drawings. On the other hand, it must be exhibited that individuals of Nazca loved birds, trusting them to have mental insight.
The recorded inscriptions on the cosmological Sun Disk, asserted outsider antiquity, may end up being the greatest test for the cynics. How are we to accept that the Andeans of the mid sixteenth century a) realize that the Earth was round, b) realize that it was feasible to circle the Earth, c) realize that daylight striking the moon could reflect back to strike a spaceship, d) knew that the foreboding shadows along the Milky Way held stars inside, and e) realize that water shaped the premise of plant and creature advancement? Here the cynics would have to track down matches throughout the entire existence of western progress. I anticipate their reaction.
You must be logged in to post a comment.