> I've been surprised and disappointed by the posts and comments
> of the current author of the month. I was expecting a vigorous
> advocacy of the ancient alien hypothesis and intelligent well
> thought out responses to critical and questioning comments.
> Instead what we got was pretty close to zilch.
> I'm seriously wondering, is this all the ancient alien
> hypothesis amounts to when closely examined, i.e. pretty close
> to zilch? Or is there solid logic, evidence and reasoning in
> there somewhere?
> Could I take this opportunity to ask the current author of the
> month, who still occupies the role through 31 March, and anyone
> else here who is interested or has something useful to say on
> the subject, what in your view are your best pieces of evidence
> in support of the ancient alien hypothesis? Ideally I would
> like to see evidence that would be really hard or impossible to
> explain by any other hypothesis.
> Although I have my doubts, which have been reinforced this
> month, I remain willing and open to be convinced.
I'm not sure there IS a best piece of evidence. I've said this many times, but my biggest problem with the Ancient Aliens hypothesis is that it takes away so much from our ancestors. By engaging in chronological snobbery, they diminish our ancestors to dumb, grunting caveman status, never taking into account that they had the same intellectual capacity and curiosity we do. Human civilization didn't just appear out of nowhere--it can't have. It was a gradual process over many thousands of years, but most likely the early evidence for it is under the sea, or scoured away by the retreat and melting of the ice sheets.
There's simply no need to invent aliens here, and the AA proponents see aliens everywhere. Can't explain it yet? It was aliens.
But they never answer one crucial question: Why? Why would beings so far advanced come to Earth and build crude stone buildings? And then to leave behind what? Tools made out of stone, copper, and bronze?
It makes no sense.
The other thing I don't like about the whole thing is that there's no way to disprove it.