-
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
aliens or not.
- Thread starter tyder001
- Start date
Free episodes:
stonehart
Paranormal Adept
I don't know much about this one but I am looking forward to seeing what they have to say. Buh the bye if someobody hijacks this thread and starts a Jesus proof/bashing discussion I'm gonna have Angel kick yer azzez.
hahahaha not in here we have a thread going for that tyder
interesting video
V
Voyager
Guest
Clearly people have observed strange things in the sky throughout recorded history. The Ancient Aliens series is careful to emphasize they are talking about, "Ancient Aliens." Ancient aliens having visited the earth in the distant past is presented as being plausible; whereas the idea that they could be visiting the earth now is not even touched on. That is verboten! Puma Punku certainly is an interesting archeological site. There is no evidence that aliens constructed the site. What can you expect from the mainstream media? I wonder how long the unidentified aerial phenomenon presently being observed in the sky has been here? Fifty years, 100 years, a thousand years? Are they the same beings that visited the earth in the distant past, or have they recently arrived here on earth within the last 100 years? Or have they always been here? Ancient Aliens is an entertaining show but I am interested in what is happening here on earth now.
V
Voyager
Guest
That is tough nut to crack! Granite, diorite, cannot be machined with primitive stone age tools. A lost civilization, or ET?
Angel of Ioren
Friendly Skeptic
He's probably my favourite meme.
trainedobserver
Paranormally Disenchanted
The Ancient Humans theory seems more probable to me. Civilizations seem to have risen and fallen innumerable times on this planet. Incredible natural and perhaps artificial disasters contributing to their destruction or regression.
We could have left the planet already only to loose it all. Their technologies and ideologies no doubt would seem alien to us if we were to encounter them if managed to remain intact in some way. Are there pockets of ancient humans or whatever they were (or their machines) still existing in remote, deep, or off-planet areas that could account for the UFO phenomena? It's just a speculative question mind you.
The Ancient Humans or Ancient Terrestrials (as they may not have technically modern humans) theory requires fewer assumptions and presents fewer logistical problems as well.
Eric von Däniken is a proven fraud you know. People seem to forget that. The Ancient Aliens show has featured Phil Imbrogno on numerous episodes along with fact that the whole series is based on Von Daniken's work.
We could have left the planet already only to loose it all. Their technologies and ideologies no doubt would seem alien to us if we were to encounter them if managed to remain intact in some way. Are there pockets of ancient humans or whatever they were (or their machines) still existing in remote, deep, or off-planet areas that could account for the UFO phenomena? It's just a speculative question mind you.
The Ancient Humans or Ancient Terrestrials (as they may not have technically modern humans) theory requires fewer assumptions and presents fewer logistical problems as well.
Eric von Däniken is a proven fraud you know. People seem to forget that. The Ancient Aliens show has featured Phil Imbrogno on numerous episodes along with fact that the whole series is based on Von Daniken's work.
trainedobserver
Paranormally Disenchanted
It is hard to tell. You need to realize though how precarious technology actually is. All you need to do is loose a generation or two of engineers. Then you start over.
tyder001
Paranormal Adept
I do agree that Von Daniken is more than likely wrong. I do have a couple of his old books that I am intending to read. But, it's more for fun that any belief in them on my part. But, I think of fraud as somebody who is an unrepentant liar. I think Eric actually believes his stories.
trainedobserver
Paranormally Disenchanted
Did you read the article? He is an admitted fraud Stevo.
"Where is the proof for von Däniken's claims? Some of it was fraudulent. For example, he produced photographs of pottery that he claimed had been found in an archaeological dig. The pottery depicts flying saucers and was said to have been dated from Biblical times. However, investigators from Nova (the fine public-television science program) found the potter who had made the allegedly ancient pots. They confronted von Däniken with evidence of his fraud. His reply was that his deception was justified because some people would only believe if they saw proof ("The Case of the Ancient Astronauts," first aired 3/8/78, done in conjunction with BBC's Horizon and Peter Spry-Leverton)"
Kim323
Paranormal Maven
Tyder, Tyder, I know you read my post to you about your disenchantment with the UFO stuff, and you were encouraged to delve deeper into the rabbit hole by others, but I pleaded with you to hang tight to your very accurate appraisal of your fatigue on the subject. 
I just want to encourage you to have fun down there with Alice and the Mad Hatter, but I must appeal to that rationality I know you have and which is admirably reflected in your posts on this thread. Keep a very good grip on that malaise and weariness, and harken, Tdyer, to its small voice.
Now, of course, von Daniken was more than a bit off his rocker. So was Sitchin and others of his ilk in that ancient astronaut genre, and likewise is this Tsoukalos fellow. For entertainment, yes, but as bad apples infecting the whole barrel of reasoned thought, they should be discarded promptly. As an aside, I can barely stomach these TV shows that push all this stuff. There's the ominous music where needed, the lightening fast cuts, the cut and paste, faster and faster these frothing and foaming experts try to drag you deeper. For me, a good book by a reputable scientist, philosopher, theologian, etc., and there are mixtures of these things in many, many reputable scientists with hard credentials, is far more enlightening and far, far more truthful. I mean, at some point, an educated person has to come to some conclusions.
Great clip, Tyder, and I enjoyed watching it, by the way.
I see you have subscribed to the ancient humans explanation for these phenomena others attribute to ancient aliens. You are very correct.
However, don't let yourself be dragged deeper in that hole, Tyder, and it appears you are holding fast, by such statements as:
"The Ancient Human theory seems more probable to me." You and I agree, I think, Tyder with this statement. However:
Civilizations SEEM to have risen and fallen innumerable times on this planet." Capitals mine. Well, civilizations, kingdoms, societies, groups, dukedoms, republics, principalities, etc., etc. certainly have risen and then ended. But, it seems we're going deeper into that hole with "incredible natural and perhaps artificial disasters contributing to their destruction or regression." I beg for more specificity here, in terms of which civilizations have done so in which specific natural and artificial disasters.
The above request may be able to be answered somewhat, but I fear it will be a round peg in a square hole to meet the full request about which civilizations and which disasters specifically.
And then, there seems to be further subterranean progress down that hole with more statements of, well, what? "We could have left the planet already only to lose it all." I ask for specifics indeed.
And then, "Are there pockets of ancient humans or whatever they were (or their machines) still existing in remote, deep, or off-planet areas that could account for the UFO phenomena?" I cry, beg, plead, scream, whine, and, very curiously, too, ask for specifics, specifics, and more specifics.
"We could have left the planet already only to lose it all." Don't get this one at all.
And, "You need to realize how precarious technology actually is. All you need to do is loose (sic) a generation or two of engineers then you start over."
This happened? When? How? Where? Specifics needed desperately.
And all this "Ancient Human theory," all this speculation, "requires fewer assumptions and presents fewer logistical problems." The premise itself, based on high tech, machines, and still surviving in niches somewhere on this planet or off, need specifics and more specifics, and then that premise furthermore is easier to swallow because it requires fewer assumptions and fewer LOGISTICAL problems? Capitals mine, and provide those assumptions and logistics.
Now, all this Ancient Human theory is buttressed not with specifics as to who, what, when, where, and how, but is laid out quite matter of factly in a way that causes me to ask, in great curiosity, for those specifics. But it is then seemingly disqualified with "it's just a speculative question, mind you." No, no, not fair.
Are my seven years of college, and thirty five years of teaching history, all for naught because I cannot find these ancient humans who rose and fell due to natural and artificial disasters and perhaps are hidden off-planet or in pockets, well, I can be forgiven to ask again for specifics for these civilizations. Kim
I just want to encourage you to have fun down there with Alice and the Mad Hatter, but I must appeal to that rationality I know you have and which is admirably reflected in your posts on this thread. Keep a very good grip on that malaise and weariness, and harken, Tdyer, to its small voice.Now, of course, von Daniken was more than a bit off his rocker. So was Sitchin and others of his ilk in that ancient astronaut genre, and likewise is this Tsoukalos fellow. For entertainment, yes, but as bad apples infecting the whole barrel of reasoned thought, they should be discarded promptly. As an aside, I can barely stomach these TV shows that push all this stuff. There's the ominous music where needed, the lightening fast cuts, the cut and paste, faster and faster these frothing and foaming experts try to drag you deeper. For me, a good book by a reputable scientist, philosopher, theologian, etc., and there are mixtures of these things in many, many reputable scientists with hard credentials, is far more enlightening and far, far more truthful. I mean, at some point, an educated person has to come to some conclusions.
Great clip, Tyder, and I enjoyed watching it, by the way.
I see you have subscribed to the ancient humans explanation for these phenomena others attribute to ancient aliens. You are very correct.
However, don't let yourself be dragged deeper in that hole, Tyder, and it appears you are holding fast, by such statements as:
"The Ancient Human theory seems more probable to me." You and I agree, I think, Tyder with this statement. However:
Civilizations SEEM to have risen and fallen innumerable times on this planet." Capitals mine. Well, civilizations, kingdoms, societies, groups, dukedoms, republics, principalities, etc., etc. certainly have risen and then ended. But, it seems we're going deeper into that hole with "incredible natural and perhaps artificial disasters contributing to their destruction or regression." I beg for more specificity here, in terms of which civilizations have done so in which specific natural and artificial disasters.
The above request may be able to be answered somewhat, but I fear it will be a round peg in a square hole to meet the full request about which civilizations and which disasters specifically.
And then, there seems to be further subterranean progress down that hole with more statements of, well, what? "We could have left the planet already only to lose it all." I ask for specifics indeed.
And then, "Are there pockets of ancient humans or whatever they were (or their machines) still existing in remote, deep, or off-planet areas that could account for the UFO phenomena?" I cry, beg, plead, scream, whine, and, very curiously, too, ask for specifics, specifics, and more specifics.
"We could have left the planet already only to lose it all." Don't get this one at all.
And, "You need to realize how precarious technology actually is. All you need to do is loose (sic) a generation or two of engineers then you start over."
This happened? When? How? Where? Specifics needed desperately.
And all this "Ancient Human theory," all this speculation, "requires fewer assumptions and presents fewer logistical problems." The premise itself, based on high tech, machines, and still surviving in niches somewhere on this planet or off, need specifics and more specifics, and then that premise furthermore is easier to swallow because it requires fewer assumptions and fewer LOGISTICAL problems? Capitals mine, and provide those assumptions and logistics.
Now, all this Ancient Human theory is buttressed not with specifics as to who, what, when, where, and how, but is laid out quite matter of factly in a way that causes me to ask, in great curiosity, for those specifics. But it is then seemingly disqualified with "it's just a speculative question, mind you." No, no, not fair.
Are my seven years of college, and thirty five years of teaching history, all for naught because I cannot find these ancient humans who rose and fell due to natural and artificial disasters and perhaps are hidden off-planet or in pockets, well, I can be forgiven to ask again for specifics for these civilizations. Kim
trainedobserver
Paranormally Disenchanted
Rising and falling ...I'm talking about accounting for the great monolithic structures around the world. Viewers of the Ancient Aliens series should be pretty aware of them. That is just one theory that gets batted around about these things. Did the folks who figured out how to build these things, and had some reason to, die out? Where did all the knowledge go? It wasn't passed on.
I'll admit, and I've discussed elsewhere, that the fact that the litter of a prior industrial age or ages isn't present is a major argument against past technological ages. I'm just saying that ancient humans having progressed to higher levels of civilization might explain some of these things the ancient aliens theory attributes to extra-terrestrials. It might not.
By logistically I'm just alluding to the fact that humans wouldn't have to deal with traveling here from another solar system. They would already be here.
It's been a while since I read the article that discussed this, but it talked about the idea that it wouldn't take that much to be thrown back into a stone age. A remarkably small amount of time has to pass where education is nonexistent before major technological backsliding occurs. Has this occurred in the past?
Humans or some other intelligent animal could have left this planet once already. Time is all you need and the planet has been around quite a while. All I'm trying to say is that human or some other ancient terrestrial life is practically interchangeable with anything that is attributed to ancient aliens. I'm not claiming that these things have actually happened.
On pockets of ancient humans ...You want more specifics on that question? It's pretty straightforward. Are there? I don't know, I'm not saying one way or another, however as I've pointed out above, human or terrestrial origins for alleged structures on the moon, mars, and elsewhere make more sense to me at least, than aliens.
If you find speculation about these subjects unfair Kim I think you're in the wrong place. Anyone making absolute statements about the sorts of things that get brought up in the Ancient Alien or Ancient Astronaut theory (and by association, The Ancient Human theory as I've alluded to it) would really be foolish.
I'll admit, and I've discussed elsewhere, that the fact that the litter of a prior industrial age or ages isn't present is a major argument against past technological ages. I'm just saying that ancient humans having progressed to higher levels of civilization might explain some of these things the ancient aliens theory attributes to extra-terrestrials. It might not.
By logistically I'm just alluding to the fact that humans wouldn't have to deal with traveling here from another solar system. They would already be here.
It's been a while since I read the article that discussed this, but it talked about the idea that it wouldn't take that much to be thrown back into a stone age. A remarkably small amount of time has to pass where education is nonexistent before major technological backsliding occurs. Has this occurred in the past?
Humans or some other intelligent animal could have left this planet once already. Time is all you need and the planet has been around quite a while. All I'm trying to say is that human or some other ancient terrestrial life is practically interchangeable with anything that is attributed to ancient aliens. I'm not claiming that these things have actually happened.
On pockets of ancient humans ...You want more specifics on that question? It's pretty straightforward. Are there? I don't know, I'm not saying one way or another, however as I've pointed out above, human or terrestrial origins for alleged structures on the moon, mars, and elsewhere make more sense to me at least, than aliens.
If you find speculation about these subjects unfair Kim I think you're in the wrong place. Anyone making absolute statements about the sorts of things that get brought up in the Ancient Alien or Ancient Astronaut theory (and by association, The Ancient Human theory as I've alluded to it) would really be foolish.
stonehart
Paranormal Adept
I am all for the age of civilization being much older than the main stream would like to think it is and slowly we are seeing the dates pushed back.
But as for Aliens?
I cannot rule it out but I think it very unlikely for there is no reason that humans could not have invented the technology required to build the monuments shown on the program series. As for some of the so called underwater structures I am not so sure that they are in fact man made at all.
But as for Aliens?
I cannot rule it out but I think it very unlikely for there is no reason that humans could not have invented the technology required to build the monuments shown on the program series. As for some of the so called underwater structures I am not so sure that they are in fact man made at all.
trainedobserver
Paranormally Disenchanted
I just went into the study and found one of the books that no doubt feeds my imagination about this sort thing. Cataclysms of the Earth, by Hugh Auchincloss Brown. I'm sure Velikovsky's largely discredited Worlds in Collision does also to some extent. The idea the Earth undergoes periodic resets isn't exclusive to fringe or pseudo-scientific theorists either and the idea of catastrophic climate change is pretty much a matter of record.
I am not trying to make a case for any aspect of the Ancient Human theory as I alluded to it in the previous post. I've just been sitting here thinking about where all that comes from in my imagination and thought I'd share Hugh Auchincoloss Brown for the sake of the name alone.
I am not trying to make a case for any aspect of the Ancient Human theory as I alluded to it in the previous post. I've just been sitting here thinking about where all that comes from in my imagination and thought I'd share Hugh Auchincoloss Brown for the sake of the name alone.
stonehart
Paranormal Adept
I will add to this about sunken cites.
There are three that are used these days to back up the extreme age of civilization, and even though I tend to agree with them being very old just how old are they really.
Places like Dawarka and Kombat may in fact not be as old as Graham Hancock and others like him would like us to think they are (I have left out the ones they would like to think are cites but are in fact just rock formations).
It is true in the case of the two mentioned cites in the Mahabalipuram region that they have had little tectonic movement in the past five thousand years and it is also true that the rise in sea level at the end of the past ice age could in fact be the main cause of the flooding of these places.
But! and here is the truth of the matter. Graham Hancock an his ilk would have you believe that these places were fully developed urban civilizations right at the end of the last ice age and were consumed in a relatively quick time scale. This is in fact not so at all.
For the city of Dawarka "predictions from a computer model of this process suggests that the area where the structures exist would have been submerged around six thousand years ago." (B.K. Parthasarathy:City Under the Sea | Hare Krishna Community)
Not as fast as Hancock and his like would have you believe, and such can also be said for the other 300 or so sunken sites around the world, which I might just add only 50 of which date to around 6000 years ago.
Food for thought people..
There are three that are used these days to back up the extreme age of civilization, and even though I tend to agree with them being very old just how old are they really.
Places like Dawarka and Kombat may in fact not be as old as Graham Hancock and others like him would like us to think they are (I have left out the ones they would like to think are cites but are in fact just rock formations).
It is true in the case of the two mentioned cites in the Mahabalipuram region that they have had little tectonic movement in the past five thousand years and it is also true that the rise in sea level at the end of the past ice age could in fact be the main cause of the flooding of these places.
But! and here is the truth of the matter. Graham Hancock an his ilk would have you believe that these places were fully developed urban civilizations right at the end of the last ice age and were consumed in a relatively quick time scale. This is in fact not so at all.
For the city of Dawarka "predictions from a computer model of this process suggests that the area where the structures exist would have been submerged around six thousand years ago." (B.K. Parthasarathy:City Under the Sea | Hare Krishna Community)
Not as fast as Hancock and his like would have you believe, and such can also be said for the other 300 or so sunken sites around the world, which I might just add only 50 of which date to around 6000 years ago.
Food for thought people..
Kim323
Paranormal Maven
What "great monolithic structures around the world"? Specifically.
What, specifically, are the civilizations "that progressed to higher levels"? I don't get it. Past the coulda, woulda, and speculative you seem to stress, but on the other hand, in my opinion from reading what you have been writing, SEEM to give credence to, what ARE the specific "things the ancient aliens theory attributes to extra-terrestrials" that ancient humans needing the high tech you postulate made or built? What THINGS? I don't mean the Nazca lines, or a picture of a supposed astronaut in a space craft. Or, are those the things indeed? If so, what others?
Two questions above. What civilizations? What things? What, specifically, DO CONSTITUTE the structures, things, that some, ahem, less than rational writers in the ancient aliens genre attribute to aliens, and which you counter with the Ancient Human Theory?
And that AHT (!) which is larded with high tech, off planet, hiding in niches, possibly responsible for UFOs, were wiped out by natural/artificial disasters, HUMANS, in what way is it to be considered, in scientific terms, a THEORY, anyway?
Another poster above seems to catch the tech stuff inherent in your AHT by saying "I don't think they had super tech skills and then lost them. I think people have been pretty industrious when they have to be." I agree, and furthermore, I THINK he is staying within recorded history, and that's really part of what I've been asking for:
In MY OPINION, your theory, the theory, is postulating some vast, vast, and more vast time period far, far, far preceding what scientists and historians have determined is the history of the evolution of man, and then the period of recorded history. You seem to say there are "monolithic structures" that exist today that are evidence of this theory so long ago, and well, gosh, it just doesn't hold together at all. Hence my specific questions above.
I think I am indeed in the right place, figuratively, intellectually, literally, spatially, rationally, and on and on regarding the Ancient Human Theory which hypothesizes very high levels of technology.
That's enough, but one last one: What are the "alleged structures on the moon, mars, and elsewhere"?
Sorry, another: I don't understand the humans "would already be here." Kim
What, specifically, are the civilizations "that progressed to higher levels"? I don't get it. Past the coulda, woulda, and speculative you seem to stress, but on the other hand, in my opinion from reading what you have been writing, SEEM to give credence to, what ARE the specific "things the ancient aliens theory attributes to extra-terrestrials" that ancient humans needing the high tech you postulate made or built? What THINGS? I don't mean the Nazca lines, or a picture of a supposed astronaut in a space craft. Or, are those the things indeed? If so, what others?
Two questions above. What civilizations? What things? What, specifically, DO CONSTITUTE the structures, things, that some, ahem, less than rational writers in the ancient aliens genre attribute to aliens, and which you counter with the Ancient Human Theory?
And that AHT (!) which is larded with high tech, off planet, hiding in niches, possibly responsible for UFOs, were wiped out by natural/artificial disasters, HUMANS, in what way is it to be considered, in scientific terms, a THEORY, anyway?
Another poster above seems to catch the tech stuff inherent in your AHT by saying "I don't think they had super tech skills and then lost them. I think people have been pretty industrious when they have to be." I agree, and furthermore, I THINK he is staying within recorded history, and that's really part of what I've been asking for:
In MY OPINION, your theory, the theory, is postulating some vast, vast, and more vast time period far, far, far preceding what scientists and historians have determined is the history of the evolution of man, and then the period of recorded history. You seem to say there are "monolithic structures" that exist today that are evidence of this theory so long ago, and well, gosh, it just doesn't hold together at all. Hence my specific questions above.
I think I am indeed in the right place, figuratively, intellectually, literally, spatially, rationally, and on and on regarding the Ancient Human Theory which hypothesizes very high levels of technology.
That's enough, but one last one: What are the "alleged structures on the moon, mars, and elsewhere"?
Sorry, another: I don't understand the humans "would already be here." Kim
stonehart
Paranormal Adept
I know this is from the wiki but I have just woken up so my brain is not all that sharp right yet.
Yonaguni
Natural formation
Some of those who have studied the formation, such as geologist Robert Schoch of Boston University, state that it is most likely a natural formation, possibly used and modified by humans in the past. Schoch observes that the sandstones that make up the Yonaguni formation "contain numerous well-defined, parallel bedding planes along which the layers easily separate. The rocks of this group are also criss-crossed by numerous sets of parallel and vertical (relative to the horizontal bedding planes of the rocks) joints and fractures. Yonaguni lies in an earthquake-prone region; such earthquakes tend to fracture the rocks in a regular manner."[1][14] He also observes that on the northeast coast of Yonaguni there are regular formations similar to those seen at the Monument.[1][15] Schoch also believes that the "drawings" identified by Kimura are natural scratches on the rocks.[14] This is also the view of John Anthony West.[3]
Patrick D. Nunn, Professor of Oceanic Geoscience at the University of the South Pacific, has studied these structures extensively and notes that the structures below the water continue in the Sanninudai slate cliffs above, which have "been fashioned solely by natural processes" and concludes in regard to the underwater structures that "there seems no reason to suppose that they are artificial."[16]
Other examples of natural formations with flat faces and sharp straight edges are the basalt columns of the Giant's Causeway and the natural staircase formation on Old Rag Mountain.[17]
What we need to do is look at what the ancient aliens theorist use to back up their claims and either prove that it (a) can not be as old as they say (b) that it is obviously man made (c) it is obviously natural etc. The list could be quite long.
The thing is the more you look at what they say then find out about the places and artifacts you end up finding out what they are not telling.
This is the main thing it is what they do not say that gets them caught out here and there. There is one other trap that these people full into far to often and that is seeing an ancient object through the eyes of a modern human.. that can be fatal for objectivity. for example is it a space man with a helmet on? or a ritual object with a headdress on?
Which is more likely?
Yonaguni
Natural formation
Some of those who have studied the formation, such as geologist Robert Schoch of Boston University, state that it is most likely a natural formation, possibly used and modified by humans in the past. Schoch observes that the sandstones that make up the Yonaguni formation "contain numerous well-defined, parallel bedding planes along which the layers easily separate. The rocks of this group are also criss-crossed by numerous sets of parallel and vertical (relative to the horizontal bedding planes of the rocks) joints and fractures. Yonaguni lies in an earthquake-prone region; such earthquakes tend to fracture the rocks in a regular manner."[1][14] He also observes that on the northeast coast of Yonaguni there are regular formations similar to those seen at the Monument.[1][15] Schoch also believes that the "drawings" identified by Kimura are natural scratches on the rocks.[14] This is also the view of John Anthony West.[3]
Patrick D. Nunn, Professor of Oceanic Geoscience at the University of the South Pacific, has studied these structures extensively and notes that the structures below the water continue in the Sanninudai slate cliffs above, which have "been fashioned solely by natural processes" and concludes in regard to the underwater structures that "there seems no reason to suppose that they are artificial."[16]
Other examples of natural formations with flat faces and sharp straight edges are the basalt columns of the Giant's Causeway and the natural staircase formation on Old Rag Mountain.[17]
What we need to do is look at what the ancient aliens theorist use to back up their claims and either prove that it (a) can not be as old as they say (b) that it is obviously man made (c) it is obviously natural etc. The list could be quite long.
The thing is the more you look at what they say then find out about the places and artifacts you end up finding out what they are not telling.
This is the main thing it is what they do not say that gets them caught out here and there. There is one other trap that these people full into far to often and that is seeing an ancient object through the eyes of a modern human.. that can be fatal for objectivity. for example is it a space man with a helmet on? or a ritual object with a headdress on?
Which is more likely?