Vajradhara said:
for instance? [hellbent on maintaining the status quo]
Egyptologists come to mind, but also archaeology/paleontology as a whole. Science has decided that the cosmic clock is now clearly visible, thanks to carbon dating, and thus any ideas that challenge this method are ridiculed, and all efforts are made to shoot them down. Another branch of science that is slow to adapt, is astronomy. Most of us are fairly open to the idea that intelligent life is actually the
rule, and not the
exception in Cosmos ... yet it is often the hardcore radio astronomer sitting at his terminal
ostensibly searching for faint signs of ET life, who ironically decries the very likelihood that ET is even "out there," let alone
here, or has already
established contact. But this gets a bit off topic again.
Vajradhara said:
that isn't what the TOE proposes, it says that apes and humans shared a common ancestor, rather different than saying that humans arose from apes.
Precisely. I am in complete agreement. I think you missed my sarcasm ...
lol This entire sentence is meant tongue-in-cheek:
Man rose from the ape, the pyramids are a few 1000 years old (& built by slave labor), and "modern man" is, again, just a few thousand years old - at best.
Here are stated four explicit non-truths, though many scientists maintain at least three of them (or 2 & 1/2), while Creationists are convinced that the ape bit is still what science teaches! So again, wrong x 4.
Vajradhara said:
why do you say that it is an absurdity?
Because, although yes, granted, the evidence has
yet to be properly considered by a non-biased, open-minded audience (of scientists & laypeople alike, who are
not determined to
keep to the conventional understanding of human history), this is
not for lack of trying! The evidence is
there, it is just being ignored, or only
slowly pondered. That's okay, it will out! But in the meantime, I look at our current understanding
in precisely the same way that you & I both view the members of the Flat-Earth Society. Sure, one has the right to hold to such a ... "view." So long as we don't teach that in schools, it's okay.
Vajradhara said:
how have you determined what i will accept as evidence or not?
Mmmm ... good point. I think you're a pretty open-minded dude.
However, when we get to the part below about the scientific method & all, you do come across as quite the rationalist. And that's fine.
Reason is goooooood.
However, neither as the pure empiricist, nor as but an armchair philosopher, shall we reach & attain the deeper Wisdom. Each has its place, but science is only a means of inquiry, an avenue of approach. I trust that the Holy Grail (whose
symbol may be a cup, yet whose truth is non-
material in essence) can be discovered, and lifted, by artists, holy rollers, and
maybe even politicians alike (!)
... just as well as by scientists. Strange, though. Our society has made of science,
a god (or simply, `G-d'), and tends to bow down ... (
when we are not worshipping before the television, of course). What,
me a cynic?
Vajradhara said:
that is a rather unusual sentence. you say that the "certainly were not and no evidence of any sort, in almost any of them" which would imply that there was this evidence in some of them.
Yes, I think that one of the pyramids (
not a Giza Pyramid) did have clear evidence that it had been
used as a tomb. Even it, may not have been built as such, however. What is most likely is that the pyramids were built -
almost universally - no matter the country, or world era, as both Temples and as sacred sites for Initiation, and maybe even for more mystical purposes than these ...
Vajradhara said:
the 50,000 years is genetic evidence of a male gene traced back to an African Bushman tribe and has nothing to do with pyramids or anything of that sort.
No, not
per se. I'm just pointing out that ...
while we may "know" we're at least this old ... we
may well be a good bit older. But to me, the "
may well" is not just a definite possibility, it is a matter of fact, plain & simple. The African Bushmen represent the last surviving remnants of Lemuria, and even 50K years ago ... were
ancient. Today, this is more so, but compared to a Lemurian civilization at its height
5 million years ago, 50K years is -
just yesterday. 1 small % point of their total history. (And no, Lemurians certainly
did not "look" like that. They have certainly
evolved, adjusted, adapted, and so forth ... so that as I say, they are a
remnant.)
Vajradhara said:
"almost always" indicates that sometimes they weren't.
I could be wrong. But my guess is that, while many - or even most - ancient monuments are built with
concrete evidence of an
expert knowledge of astronomy (and various other natural sciences) ... still, even in these cases, there is often the incorporation of (an appreciation for)
Beauty, and the spiritual/sublime. It just may be possible that in some cases, it is the
latter which "rules" (governs, determines) the layout & design of the monument(s) in question, rather than astronomical/astrological factors. However, to most of the ancients, the
distinction I am trying to make ... was probably
not as pronounced as it might be to us, just as their religious beliefs were
not considered separately from their socio-political system - and lo! ...
it seemed to work for them.
Sadly, we insist on separation of Church & State, and while this
would be good for American Democracy right now,
imho, it's already out the window, as the window itself is being slammed shut -
fingers caught being
of little consequence to those doing the slamming. If that's obscure, then good. But if you get my point, also good. Right now, a
Frank Lloyd Wright can still build his home the way he wants. Just wait. Perhaps soon, those funny designs will ... will ... ummm ...
attract Terr'rists, yeah, and ... ummm, be illegal. God help us all.
Vajradhara said:
which experts are you referring to? i'm not all that keen on overly generalizing such things. of course, that is just my view
The experts I refer to include probably 90 to 95% of mainstream archaeologists, paleontologists, geologists, etc. There are those who have their own national interests in mind, including the implications for one's national history, if current dating schemes prove inaccurate. Zahi Hawass, the "
Secretary General of the Supreme Council of Antiquities," is a good example. I daresay he has the tourist trade in mind, to boot. And understandably so, but the consequences of his pride, arrogance, and special interests ... are that we face tremendous obstacles in moving forward.
But there are also those in almost every field of human endeavor, who would be required to
rethink the current "world picture," if we were able to conclusively push the dawn of human civilization back to
15+ million years. Don't you think so?
Although I do know for certain that many
do maintain the current dating methods & resultant world/human self-understanding ...
for conspiratorial reasons ... I
certainly do not suggest that this is the case for most scientists & religious thinkers. Rather, it's simply the
upset that would be caused if we were forced to
re-evaluate our self-understanding (world history) from square one.
Vajradhara said:
you know.. that would make us nearly the size of King Kong...
Ahhh, back to the topic. Yes, I suppose you're right. Never thought of it that way!
But certainly, yes. If we were 27 feet tall at one point, that height
clearly diminished over time ... and perhaps was much closer to today's average human height even a million years ago or more. I don't know - needs more research. But there
are varying descriptions, from clairvoyant investigations. I'm afraid you'll have to settle for that now,
if it's of any interest to you at all. One can certainly compare such investigations to the various world scriptures (the
real topic of this thread, I guess) ... and that's as objective as we can be. Anything purporting to come "from the Akash" - I tend to approach with a huge chunk of salt
... but this is where the
vivekha (spiritual discrimination) comes in. And as you say, it's not good to
generalize, and cast suspicion on an entire
means of inquiry, just because
it isn't easy to verify.
Vajradhara said:
it seems wholly reasonable to use the scientific method to determine scientific results. how one could do so otherwise is quite a mystery.
A mystery that is well explained, for one interested enough to make serious study of the subject. The Sanskrit word for such abilities, is
siddhis. These describe both the occult, mystical powers such as clairvoyance & clairaudience, as well as those Higher and more permanent spiritual abilities that enabled Shakyamuni Buddha to ascertain his own former existences ...
as well as those of anyone he met or inquired about. Yes, it seems mysterious to us, and even Edgar Cayce could not fully account for his
unconscious abilities. I recommend reading the accounts of actual (or purported) sibyls, in order to learn more about
how their knowledge is ascertained, and how one goes about developing such abilities (dangerous, even
disastrous, without proper guidance).
Vajradhara said:
is it your view that claiming scientific results without verifying them through the scientific method is likely to produce valid cognitions of the phenomena under discussion?
Valid only insomuch as one is willing to
temporarily suspend disbelief. In order to verify
one single word of what I, or anyone else, puts forth ... it is required that one embark upon a
personal journey - be it brief, as of an instant ...
or a lifetime endeavor. Some make the latter effort, in order to
get to the truth of such accounts as are related in the Holy Bible, or Buddhist Sutras, or Hindu Vedas. Likewise, there are earnest investigators who are interested in out-of-body experiences, or rather the
accounts of such experiences as provided by firsthand experiencers. I myself have only had perhaps a handful of such experiences, though
one, with vivid enough recall, is enough to convince me
entirely of
another world or worlds ... and everything else becomes
academic as I begin my investigation & journey of (self-) discovery.
It is my opinion, that if we are so determined, we can either confirm or discount
any given proposition ... given enough time, patience, determination, and effort (science, no?). It just becomes rather silly if I say there are four rocks in a certain arrangement on a certain remote planet in an obscure solar system in another galaxy altogether, halfway across the known Cosmos.
As Shakespeare, via Hamlet, put it, "
There are more things under Heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
Vajradhara said:
i've been there many times. [pyramids]
Neat! I'm envious; would like to go!
Vajradhara said:
you know they don't let people do that, right?
Sure they do. See John Anthony West about it. Of course, they may have stopped allowing it. That would be
most unfortunate. A true cause for lament.
Vajradhara said:
according to this fellow :
"... the possibility remains open that the initial carving of the Great Sphinx may be even earlier than 9,000 years ago." (Schoch)
which is, i should say, a rather far cry from 200,000 years ago as you claimed initially.
Yep. Little by little. Schoch is helping to open a door. As yet, there is but a crack. But ... the light is already shining through!
In time, it will be as radiant as the noonday sun - and through that gate,
all shall pass.
(yeah, yeah, I know -
the drama! )
Vajradhara said:
perhaps you have my confused for somebody else?
Nahhhh. There's a skeptic in all of us.
And a believer. You seem pretty level-headed. Much more so than me!
Vajradhara said:
how do you know that more digging and excavating wouldn't hurt them?
I don't. But I'm making an educated guess. Nope, I ain't no geology expert. But's let's think about this. The Sphinx is ...
waaaaaay over there. I do some damn good scientific study. Under me now,
there ain't nuthin'. So what do I do? I
dig. I do this very carefully. I do not throw caution to the wind. I go down far enough, and go
over, toward the chamber under the Sphinx's paw. Now what do I do? Well, I do my research, so I know at this point,
just exactly how to make contact with that chamber. I will use lots of high-tech, newfangled equipment. I will maybe punch a little hole into the corner of the chamber first (?), and capture the gases & dust/debris that comes out. I will probably try to do it right, and I will not hire "Joe's Ditch-Digging Company" to do it.
Once I got a tiny hole (carefully) knocked into the bottom portion of one wall of the chamber (preferably the one closest to where my instruments detect
contents for that chamber) ... I can poke in my handy-dandy camera, and take a peek. It pretty much
doesn't matter what I see at that point. It's likely to be of interest, likely to be worthy of further investigation, and if it looks like
there's any remote chance that it could contain, or be, some sort of record(s) - hell, I don't care if they're even old 78's - I'm gonna get 'em outta there.
If the whole damn Giza Plateau suddenly destabilizes, and everything gets sucked through the Sphinx's left paw, down into that little chamber, and kills me in a flash (!) ... well ****, I screwed up.
You think that's gonna happen?
lol
BTW, I submit that there
are fossil remains (which I might guess would be a valid comeback & challenge to all of this) ... for Lemurian man,
et al (Atlantis, airships/vimanas, etc.). Presently, they are carefully guarded, but will be accessible, in time. Perhaps that time is near? I hope so.
(And if I read somehwere that this
museum has been opened to the public, I will certainly post a link to that article here!
)
cheers,
andrew
