> Well not exactly, there is also the argument of
> nature's catastrophic events obliterating any
> evidence of ancient civilizations.
Which is never talked about in a coherent and/or specific manner by the most vocal of the proponents here of the antediluvian LC, often left as whatever nebulous "catastrophes" one might imagine. The crux of Graham's latest book is regarding a cometary impact that heralded the end of the Younger Dryas c. 11,000yrs ago. The eruption of Mt Toba c. 70,000yrs ago has interesting implications. If one believes in the ALC then why is not an effort made to incorporate these things into the narrative?
> There are also
> the myths from around the world that tell of old
Which none of the ALC proponents here, except yourself on occasion, talk about either, which is weird to me, though I assume this is because some believe these people are so far removed from the ALC that "how could they know". Which if the ALC was in fact tens of thousands of years old then this likely makes sense. I even encouraged Origyptian to look at the AE prehistoric king list as a guide to give his ideas at least some credence but he does not care.
> But there are the exceptions, and it's the
> exceptions that throw monkey wrenches into
> conventional explanations.
No doubt, but just because conventional explanations do not apply then this means anything goes? I'm just not wired that way I guess.
> I understand what you're saying, at least I think
> I do. I just don't agree and my viewpoint is quite
> a bit different than yours.
Which is a-ok. Photons be free!
> If mollusks can do it, it's possible.
...? What do mollusks do exactly?
> It's been my experience that most people are not
> quite convinced by mainstream's evolution or the
> bible's creation and have little questions that
> pop up from time to time.
I get it, which the fact there are questions at all is good enough.
> But not many are cursed
> with an obsession to know what's happened in 4.5
> bill yrs on this planet.
Honestly, it does feel like a curse. Like a memory just out of reach that is always on my mind. I hope there is a point to it all.
> I used to have this argument with my ex who was
> content with the illusion that we (modern man)
> have explored every inch of the planet. Not saying
> you present the same argument, you don't, but you
> present the same conclusion.
Only because we have found enough I have a hard time seeing something that will completely change it. As amazing as Gobekli Tepe is it is expected. But the fact it is there also is proof of something even older to be yet found.
> As many people like
> to say..... "if there was a lost civilization we
> would have found it by now".
I don't buy that argument either, but it's the level of advancement, like one that could build the pyramids of Egypt, that I just can't get there now. If so, an alien origin is what I would expect.
> As soon as the
> bottoms of every ocean have been explored, every
> mountain in the himalayas examined, every rain
> forest raked and every sand dune sifted then we
> can say "there is no evidence".
Very true. But the fact they have not does not mean it is there.
> Meanwhile we have
> not reached the pinnacle of evolution no matter
> what the industrialized nations wish to think. The
> future is science fiction, a story that may have
> happened many times before in the last 4.5 bill
Is the universe itself artificial? A computer simulation? Not as much science fiction as some may believe:
Is Our Universe Fake?
I understand where you are coming from, I really do, and honestly I hope you are right.
> There is a difference between 'believing' in lost
> cities and 'questioning' the possibility.
Indeed there is.
> As I see
> it, it's not a matter of 'belief', it's a matter
> of unanswered questions and the reality of
> questions being answered incorrectly.
A good place to be.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 18-Apr-16 03:23 by Thanos5150.