... on Diverse Sections of Ancient Aliens Debunked

Video commented on:

VerseByVerseBT : Ancient Aliens Debunked - (full movie) HD
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9w-i5oZqaQ

jaybone23

I don't know about extraterrestrials, but I do think there was a worldwide maritime civilization in existence pre-Sumerian, pre-Egyptian, etc. Most evidence of this civilization didn't survive the ages, but the similarities found in different civilizations all over the world suggest that there was probably some contact between them all.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Thor Heyerdahl has shown they can very well be connected in post-Sumerian times.

jaybone23

Yes, Thor Heyerdahl proved that it was possible for early civilizations to explore long distances via the oceans.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

And therefore also for traits to spread across oceans.

jaybone23

Indeed. Quite so. While we can set aside the notion of extraterrestrial intervention, we can't yet say with appropriate certainty over what time frame human civilization developed. The recent discoveries of homo erectus skulls at Dmanisi, in southern Georgia (the country) have raised many questions about human evolution, and therefore also civilization. We are always discovering and learning new things.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I would not bet my soul on the age of the skull at Dmanasi, nor whether it is to be classified erectus, habilis, ergaster or georgicus (all of above have as far as I know been suggested).

If we do want to know the origin of human civilisation, it is accessible and has been so since the times of Moses. I am speaking of certain early chapters of Genesis.

Part commented on:

Baalbek AA Debunked- (fixed audio)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ya4taJTbY2A

Hans-Georg Lundahl (comment on main video rather than part video)

Michael Heiser is wrong about methodology.

If Gilgamesh epic had mentioned astronauts anywhere, and in the general region way west of Uruk, towards Baalbek, that would have been something to check up on.

I am more confident about the lexicon. Still, in another context, Behemoth may well have been a Brontosaur despite some Hebrew scholars explaining it as an Elephant and others as a Hippo.

Part commented on:

Chris White : Easter Island - AA Debunked
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0QcDpmcpmo

Hans-Georg Lundahl (comment on main video)

Moai on Easter Island ... you can go to Thor Heyerdahl's work Aku Aku.

Nothing left for Ancient Alien Astronauts to explain.*

The fact that moai were so much larger than men may be accurately explained by experience of giants. But none such needed to make and lift the moai.

*OK, either Nephelim or Ancient Alien Astronauts would explain the fad that Easter Islanders had for sculpting gigantic clumsy faces larger than men.

I am in that case for the Nephelim view.

Part commented on:

UFO's in Art - AA Debunked
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUUzQINoark

Hans-Georg Lundahl (in a footnote to an essay)

The section UFOs in Ancient art starts off as saying that supposed "space ships" in a Crucifixion scene are actually Sun and Moon shown with human traits throughout Crucifixion scenes of Byzantine Tradition. This totally agrees - not with Ancient Alien Austronauts indeed - but with what I believe: that Sun and Moon are either bodies of or more likely jewels held by angels. And of course that of the Sun did not only watch the Crucifixion, but also chose to go dark when watching it. Something God accorded him (unlike the usual rule for him of shining on both good and bad).

Part commented on:

Ancient Nuclear Warfare - AA Debunked
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9ed_hWZnl8

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Section about hair and nails chewed off by rats at night comes after one about an iron bolt being ground to powder and threwn into the sea.

sacred-texts . com/hin/m16/m16001 . htm

What if the "iron" in that bolt was uranium?

"Ye wicked and cruel ones, intoxicated with pride, through that iron bolt ye will become the exterminators of your race with the exception of Rama and Janarddana."

What a threat, but what is done about it?

"When the next day came, Samva ... brought forth an iron bolt through which all ... the race of the Vrishnis and the Andhakas became consumed into ashes. Indeed, for the destruction of the Vrishnis and the Andhakas, Samva brought forth ... a fierce iron bolt that looked like a gigantic messenger of death. The fact was duly reported to the king. In great distress of mind, the king ... caused that iron bolt to be reduced into fine powder. Men were employed ... to cast that powder into the sea."

It is after that that rats come up in manifold numbers and are presumed to gnaw hair and nails out of people.

This can be a very naive interpretation of rats fleeing from a nuclear contaminated sea already with radiation on themselves and this radiation bringing about fall out of hair and nails.

If real date for Mahabharata is just pre-flood this fits very well with "all flesh was corrupt".

Part commented on:

Anunnaki - AA Debunked (fixed audio)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbBvYxx1ODc

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Anunnaki = offspring of Anu and Ki (of heaven-god and earth-goddess)?

Or

Coming from Anu and Ki ?

If you notice the imagery in the word "descendant" there may be a real ambiguity. Sitchin could have a point.

But supposing the Sumerian term has no such double meaning as "descend" (from a place or in a family tree) - I do clearly not have any credentials in Sumerian - the meaning "offspring of sky and earth" if not very supportive to Sitchin is supportive to the view they are some kind of reflex of the Biblical Nephelim (on the angel view, not the Setite view).

Part commented on:

Nephilim - AA Debunked (fixed audio)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44WCpGvz6ck

Hans-Georg Lundahl

The idea of Nephelim being made through artificial insemination may come from St Augustine via St THomas Aquinas AND a rejection of St Augustine's view.

St Augustine as you know proposed the Setite view (sons of God=Setite tribe believers, daughters of man=Cainite tribe unbelievers or scoffers or secularists ...) and I think also denied angels could procreate on the basis that God had not created them for procreation (based on "[angels] do not marry").

St Thomas accepts this view, both on angels and on Genesis 6, but he also seems to accept some kind of rumours that children had been produced by angelic or diabolic acts. Romulus, Hercules, Merlin come to my mind.

His explanation to such things is that demon first acts as "succuba" to get semen from a man and then as "incubus" to insert that semen into a woman.

Basically what has later been done when it comes to inseminations from sperm banks. (Video showed in vitro, which is another thing).

And von Däniken rejects the Setite view but accepts the insemination view ... but that does not excuse his dishonesty about the text of course!

If we descend from Battenosh, if that was the name of Noah's mother, then von Däniken has deeply insulted all mankind (post-Flood).