Robert, Merrell did try to discuss your claims, right from the outset, by challenging the validity of some of your evidence. After all, the value of your speculations cannot be assessed until the evidence on which they're founded is assessed. But instead of defending your position and your claims, you simply handwaved the challenging evidence away. And then complained that nobody wanted to discuss your claims.
Merrell posted a number of articles that questions the supporting evidence I presented – evidence that claims some of the artefacts I listed are hundreds of millions of years old. And yes it is true that I am reluctant to discuss these challenges. The reason being, I have spent countless hours on this forum debating the ages of these OOP’s and I have found this issue is impossible to resolve. As mentioned to Merrell, short of jumping into a time machine, the age issue cannot be resolved.
However, sites like the unfinished obelisk (and the Great Pyramid) provide ample evidence of advanced technology that could not have existed at the time of their construction. It has always been my hope, futile hope it seems, that by presenting such evidence that even the most obstinate protagonist will come to the realisation that the current mainstream view of our past is wrong.
Robert Jameson Wrote:
Yes my claims are provocative. Claims I would be very happy to defend but it seems no one wants to discuss them.
Martin Stower quoting Rebecca Bradley:
I've glanced through the whole thread with interest. In fact, Robert, Merrell did try to discuss your claims, right from the outset.
Martin Stower wrote:
Exactly so—and I followed Merrell’s lead here—and Robert discovered that he’d rather talk instead about the unfinished obelisk.
The claim I am very happy to defend, that no one wants to discuss, and the reason I am on this forum, is my claim that life on earth (and our human consciousness) is part of the reproductive system of an external, cosmological creator species. I know my concept is somewhat ‘out there’ but wouldn’t it be a good idea for critics to address that claim – and not be trying to establish that ever single OOP, that has ever been found, is a hoax?
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12-Feb-20 06:36 by Robert Jameson.