Val loves the mystery of everything, especially where the whole paradigm is challenged with yet unexplored possibilities.
I am sure the universe is full of intelligent life. It's just been too intelligent to come here.
-- Arthur C. Clark
It appears historically (and at times hysterically) evident how every single epoch is displaying certain symptoms of intellectual arrogance, as they claim to be holding the bag with truth. Paradigms refusing to give space to new ideas seem only explainable by their academic proponents and careerism struggling for survival in face of new evidence.
Those highly educated members of science community just can't stand the idea of having wasted all that time and money in wrong studies. Another painful notion would be losing all that status and scholarly authority -- not to forget their bare livelihood.
It's a kind of sad that so many brilliant brains, even some amateurs, can't get support from the mainstream science, some of them being downright ridiculed for daring to have out-of-box ideas. A number of them have lost their careers for daring to suggest something that's not in agreement with the general scientific consensus.
Now, when it comes to the theory of life on other planets -- and especially when it dares to connect it to an alternative origin of man -- it's not only those dogmatic scholars, but also religionists who are sharply opposing to it.
At expense of turning science into religion whose taboos are not to be challenged, old schools are actually obstructing the progress. And while it may, or may not be a major issue in exact sciences, in those that lean towards interpretation it is a regular feature.
Those of our interest here are sciences of cosmobiology, studying the possibilities of a life on other planets, anthropology, studying the origin of man, and alternative history as a possible outcome of it.
The theoretical battle between evolutionists and creationists is just fierce enough, so that the alternative historians are being pooh-poohed aside as if not worth any attention.
But these new brave theorists are not easy to be silenced, with evidence literally too huge not to point to some very credible facts. And when it's about the origin of man, they are debunking both the theory that we were created by a deity, and that ours is a long line of ancestry all the way down to a microscopic amoeba.
What they contend -- and my intellectual adventurism is just hot enough to agree with them -- is that man was genetically engineered by advanced space visitors, crossing their genes with ones of an ape roaming around the earth and looking like the most qualified candidate for that cosmic experiment.
It takes courage to throw off unproductive methods and approaches that the majority of scholars in your field have unquestioningly yoked themselves to for decades.
-- Graham Hancock
A Speculation, but a Reasonable One
Throughout the history, as well as in present days there have been exceptional human specimens for whom we could say that they have "more expressed non-earthly genes". Like geniuses, savants, people excelling incredibly on intellectual, artistic, and humanistic fields.
On the other hand, I am only partially joking when I place those with pronounced urges for power, territoriality, greed, and violence into the category of primates. Somehow I have no problem categorizing those who start wars, claim special personal importance, or, yes -- do their texting while driving.
Now, I have no credentials to cross swords with those highly learned scholars of any camp. And even if I had such impressive credentials, I would not involve myself in an intellectual fight -- hmm...maybe there is not enough monkey in me after all.
For quite awhile now, science is not the monopoly of scientists anymore, as thinking folks all over the globe are coming up with their own theories. The only difference being that -- exactly due to their lack of credentials -- they are not likely to appear on a TV science documentary.
Of course, that alone may not serve as an umbrella for every crazy idea of an armchair smart-ass. But then, it takes an open mind with a lack of intellectual snobbishness not to fall for credentials as the only parameter of being right.
So I, for one, tend to believe such theorists who contend that we all have a mixture of "ET genes" and those inherited from our primordial ape mother. I also believe that, since everything is vibrating in certain frequencies, those monkey ones are outlouding those subtle and refined ET ones in our genome.
Geneticists are telling us that we only use 1.5% of our genes, and the rest is called "genetic junk". There is a serious arguments voiced by some that nature would have disposed of anything in our nature that has no purpose. So, could those 98.5% hint at our space fathers?
And are those genes merely waiting for our consciousness evolution to come to a point where they would come to their full expression?
I am made in the image of God. Therefore, if I don't know God, I can't know myself.
-- Craig D. Lounsbrough
And So Man Created God in His Own Image
And finally, this question announced in the title about a likely friendly or hostile nature of hypothetical extraterrestrials -- if they would ever revisit us.
Now, almost every cultural tradition has it that "gods will return to earth some day". Ancient aliens theorists don't hesitate to call those "gods" extraterrestrial visitors, and those claims sit well in my mind as highly probable.
However, the problem with that belief, probably amplified by science fiction movies and literature is, that we see them as a threat, not as someone who could help us in (another) quantum leap in our own evolving. It's truly amazing how quickly we go paranoid about anything or anybody that we are not familiar with.
Just look how we are portraying our Christian deity.
Ever since we read that "God created man in His own image", we had that need to somehow make obvious that resemblance. So, after quickly realizing that there is hardly anything "godly divine" in our nature, we rushed to make that resemblance evident by attaching to God our human attributes.
So, we portrayed Him as an old bearded dude, forgiving ourselves that we couldn't make Him be "everywhere" like the Holy book was saying; also, He could be "pleased", He could be "angry", and He could also "punish" us -- of course, at times when He was forgetting to "love us unconditionally".
Indeed, we are so prone to this ascribing our human qualities to every celestial or space entity, regardless if divine or flying in fancy spaceships. Hollywood didn't want to complicate things with a language barrier, so those ET's are speaking a fluent American English -- with a possible aberration here and there like in case of the "Terminator" who added a dash of German accent to it. Schwartzie's impressive musculature made it easy to be forgiven.
Only the sixth sense can expose what the other five have hidden.
-- Matthew A. Petti
The Great Pyramid -- also a Great Evidence
There is a disagreement between alternative and mainstream archaeologists who claim that the Great Pyramid of Giza was built some time during so called "Bronze Age." The argument is over the fact that the only tools available at that time for cutting and shaping those blocks had to be chisels made of some softer metal which would require constant sharpening.
I am not an expert in metallurgy, but from my simple experience in machine shop I may know enough to contend that the use of those chisels would be equal to washing the Statue of Liberty with toothbrushes.
Then, there is this crazy story that a pharaoh had it built for his last resting place. I simply can't see any logic in it -- because according to architects, thousands of workers had to work non-stop 24/7 for more years than was a lifespan of people of that era -- including pharaoh's.
Should we also add that with all modern technology we wouldn't be able to duplicate that marvel of architecture.
Besides, the Sphynx sitting beside it is showing something like marks of a flood on its lower half -- suggesting that it was built before the Great Flood, pushing it back in time when no pharaohs existed on that location.
A simple logic about every "out of this world" architectural wonder around the world is suggesting that they couldn't possibly be done without an advanced technology. Anybody interested in this field of study might as well watch every episode of "Ancient Aliens" available on You tube. I am not saying that they should come to the same conclusions as I did -- but at least a look at all that evidence has to make them re-think what they "know" about the origin of man.
For those who got intellectually stuck at the Darwin's theory of evolution (please note it is still only a "theory", not a hard science), I would suggest that they consider the terrible inconsistence in the upper part of that evolutional scale. Namely, there is an unexplainable gap between those primitive tribes who suddenly "jumped" intellectually to the level of mathematicians, astronomists, physicists, and architects of a strange skill and knowledge.
I mean, according to Darwinism, it took some eons for those microscopic forms of life in the sea to evolve into those adaptable to the life on earth. But then, as if overnight we see coexisting of those terribly primitive humans with those of advanced intelligence.
Doesn't it point at an intervention from "above"?
If government is covering up knowledge of aliens, they are doing a better job of it than they do at anything else.
-- Stephen Hawkins
Friends or Foes
So, what's the general consensus about the ET's agenda, should they ever decide to land in New York's Central Park?
Why would they be arrogant, like we prefer to imagine them? After all, if it's true that they made us by crossing their kind with an ape, it was the ape that got their transfusion, not the other way around -- so why would they act like apes?
All joking aside -- if there was a joke here -- imagine an untold millennia older civilization than ours. And even if they were also genetically created with their own animal -- hopefully not a crazy monkey -- their super long consciousness evolution would have made obsolete and dysfunctional those animalistic aspects of their mentality.
Let's use some more logic here -- could you possibly imagine one Einstein in a boxing ring? The genius dude was not only an embodiment of peacefulness, but he baby-talked to his kid up to an age when it became bad for the kid's development. Look at his eyes with that fixed smiling expression.
Getting back to E.T.'s -- they could not have an arrogant bone in them, no tendencies to conquer, kill, or hurt in any way. By a simple logic, anybody who would be intelligent enough to come here from outer space, would also be too intelligent as to have any primitive intentions toward us. Sorry, Hollywood, but maybe you should stick to crazy humans killing other crazy humans in your violent movies.
So why are they hesitant to visit us? Fear is out of question, it's more a concern that we would have if we walked into a gun shop and found ourselves surrounded by preschool kids handling loaded guns.
Namely, they must know us enough not to take our friendliness for a given. Not that they couldn't make our nukes disabled, or even wipe us off the surface of this planet -- but the fact that haven't done it so far means that they are friendly.
So why do we need this image of some "cosmic Hitlers and Attilas"? Haven't we invented enough enemies of our own kind? Why not imagine them as our peaceful space brothers, as avatars capable of healing with a touch and producing a contagious blissfulness with their smile?
For, who knows, if they ever come (back) , they might refresh our memory about how to build some more incredible architectural marvels with nothing but levitation -- instead of showing us how to build space military stations.
Also, after seeing all the flaws in their original genetic engineering, maybe they could fix us -- so that this time around they really create us "in their own image.
No beard this time.
Video below depicts the topic above
© 2020 Val Karas
Val Karas (author) from Canada on November 27, 2020:
Stella -- I understand how ancient aliens theory sounds unacceptable under the scope of present mainstream archaeology and anthropology.
But think for a moment how downright ridiculous the idea of a spherical earth sounded to people who believed that it was flat. Their reasoning instantly took them to the fact that water couldn't stay on a ball, so oceans "couldn't stay on a spherical planet".
Likewise, those who, for a lack of interest, never heard about artificial intelligence, would have a hard time to grasp that the technology of robotics has reached the stage at which we are talking about a future virtual reality of robots, who will "believe" that it's real.
Which prompted physicists like Elon Musk and other visionaries to speculate that our reality is also a virtual one, computed by a higher intelligence of an advanced civilization.
With our limited ways of conceptualization, we can't fathom the real reach of such an intelligence. So, as we see the Great Pyramid, which might have served, together with others around the world, as an energy generator -- like you say -- all we can think of is how to attach it to the known history of pharaohs.
It's in the special interest of organized religion that alternative origin of man doesn't take roots in academia, because this world still needs a deity to run the show.
Thank you for your interesting comment. Have yourself a great weekend.
Stella Kaye from UK on November 27, 2020:
An interesting, thought-provoking article on a subject that's constantly topical. One can spend their whole life wondering about the origins of life and come up with more questions than answers. I've always thought along the same lines as you about the Great Pyramids... they just don't look like tombs and more fit the bill for power plants. I think the thing is to keep an open mind about such things. Even the more outlandish theories such as those explored on 'Ancient Aliens' serve as great entertainment.