LH: Why? Both have a lack of evidence to support their
> origin of the cubit.
> SC: Perhaps. And that is why both are presented as an
> hypothesis. But I personaly I prefer the hypothesis that
> suggests humans were responsible rather than 'ancient aliens'.
> Of course, it is not beyond the bounds of impossibility that
> ancient aliens were involved but as you often like to say:
“In science, "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a
> degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional
> assent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow,
> but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics
> classrooms.” -Stephen Jay Gould
As usual you missed the point. Both of the "hypothesis" are equal in the fact that neither has any real evidence to support them so both are equally impossible as the floating apples when it comes to proving them true.
So your fantasy is no more likely then the other. Yours is more likely then the aliens but it matters not a bit.
It's like saying 100-100=0 is more nothing then 10-10=0.
Both just apples waiting to float up into the air by themselves.