Noah's Flood...

[Guest]

Who said that Erich von Däniken is my reference material, Archhole?
Reading, and actually understanding what it is you are reading, is clearly a bridge too far for you

i didn't, so maybe you need to refer those comments to yourself

[Minimalist]

you focus on the messenger and not the message.

Because the "message" is horseshit but the "messenger" is still spouting it.

[Guest]

Because the "message" is horseshit but the "messenger" is still spouting it.

everyone is entitled to their opinion, even you.

read the book 'the flood' i think it will provide you with a more detailed argument than what can be provided here.

[Minimalist]

Von Daniken, who should, like Columbus, be given credit for being the first, even if he didn't know where he was going, put forward an interesting theory to explain certain petroglyphs he found and mythology. He made two mistakes. First, like the now-discredited bible, he tried to use his theory to explain EVERYTHING and Second, he failed to understand that there were other possibilities aside from aliens.

Cro-Magnon, who are modern humans....just like most of us....had a period of at least 30,000 years after the demise of the Neanderthals to do pretty much whatever they wanted. We are asked to believe that these people, who are just like us, sat around on rocks for all that time until somewhere around 8,000 BC in the Middle East they suddenly learned how to farm and build stone houses.

One need only consider human progress since 3,000 BC even as allowed for by archaeology and then realized that Cro Magnon had at least six times as long to develop.

I recall looking at one of Van Daniken's petroglyphs of an 'alien in a space suit' and thinking, 'it could also just as easily be a diving suit' because it seemed to have a hose. What a petroglyph of a man in a diving suit would be doing in the Australian desert is beyond me but it was equally unconvincing as a 'god' which is always archaeology's fallback position.

Von Daniken never addressed why his aliens would bother to come here and why they stopped. 25,000 years ago, 5 guys with revolvers could have conquered the whole planet had they wished to. Hancock's theory, that a wholly human civilization grew up and forms the basis for much of our mythology before being wiped out in the catastrophe of the ice age meltdown seems far more plausible than either Von Daniken or the bible.

[Minimalist]

Von Daniken, who should, like Columbus, be given credit for being the first, even if he didn't know where he was going, put forward an interesting theory to explain certain petroglyphs he found and mythology. He made two mistakes. First, like the now-discredited bible, he tried to use his theory to explain EVERYTHING and Second, he failed to understand that there were other possibilities aside from aliens.

Cro-Magnon, who are modern humans....just like most of us....had a period of at least 30,000 years after the demise of the Neanderthals to do pretty much whatever they wanted. We are asked to believe that these people, who are just like us, sat around on rocks for all that time until somewhere around 8,000 BC in the Middle East they suddenly learned how to farm and build stone houses.

One need only consider human progress since 3,000 BC even as allowed for by archaeology and then realized that Cro Magnon had at least six times as long to develop.

I recall looking at one of Van Daniken's petroglyphs of an 'alien in a space suit' and thinking, 'it could also just as easily be a diving suit' because it seemed to have a hose. What a petroglyph of a man in a diving suit would be doing in the Australian desert is beyond me but it was equally unconvincing as a 'god' which is always archaeology's fallback position.

Von Daniken never addressed why his aliens would bother to come here and why they stopped. 25,000 years ago, 5 guys with revolvers could have conquered the whole planet had they wished to. Hancock's theory, that a wholly human civilization grew up and forms the basis for much of our mythology before being wiped out in the catastrophe of the ice age meltdown seems far more plausible than either Von Daniken or the bible.

[Minimalist]

Von Daniken, who should, like Columbus, be given credit for being the first, even if he didn't know where he was going, put forward an interesting theory to explain certain petroglyphs he found and mythology. He made two mistakes. First, like the now-discredited bible, he tried to use his theory to explain EVERYTHING and Second, he failed to understand that there were other possibilities aside from aliens.

Cro-Magnon, who are modern humans....just like most of us....had a period of at least 30,000 years after the demise of the Neanderthals to do pretty much whatever they wanted. We are asked to believe that these people, who are just like us, sat around on rocks for all that time until somewhere around 8,000 BC in the Middle East they suddenly learned how to farm and build stone houses.

One need only consider human progress since 3,000 BC even as allowed for by archaeology and then realized that Cro Magnon had at least six times as long to develop.

I recall looking at one of Van Daniken's petroglyphs of an 'alien in a space suit' and thinking, 'it could also just as easily be a diving suit' because it seemed to have a hose. What a petroglyph of a man in a diving suit would be doing in the Australian desert is beyond me but it was equally unconvincing as a 'god' which is always archaeology's fallback position.

Von Daniken never addressed why his aliens would bother to come here and why they stopped. 25,000 years ago, 5 guys with revolvers could have conquered the whole planet had they wished to. Hancock's theory, that a wholly human civilization grew up and forms the basis for much of our mythology before being wiped out in the catastrophe of the ice age meltdown seems far more plausible than either Von Daniken or the bible.

[Minimalist]

Von Daniken, who should, like Columbus, be given credit for being the first, even if he didn't know where he was going, put forward an interesting theory to explain certain petroglyphs he found and mythology. He made two mistakes. First, like the now-discredited bible, he tried to use his theory to explain EVERYTHING and Second, he failed to understand that there were other possibilities aside from aliens.

Cro-Magnon, who are modern humans....just like most of us....had a period of at least 30,000 years after the demise of the Neanderthals to do pretty much whatever they wanted. We are asked to believe that these people, who are just like us, sat around on rocks for all that time until somewhere around 8,000 BC in the Middle East they suddenly learned how to farm and build stone houses.

One need only consider human progress since 3,000 BC even as allowed for by archaeology and then realized that Cro Magnon had at least six times as long to develop.

I recall looking at one of Van Daniken's petroglyphs of an 'alien in a space suit' and thinking, 'it could also just as easily be a diving suit' because it seemed to have a hose. What a petroglyph of a man in a diving suit would be doing in the Australian desert is beyond me but it was equally unconvincing as a 'god' which is always archaeology's fallback position.

Von Daniken never addressed why his aliens would bother to come here and why they stopped. 25,000 years ago, 5 guys with revolvers could have conquered the whole planet had they wished to. Hancock's theory, that a wholly human civilization grew up and forms the basis for much of our mythology before being wiped out in the catastrophe of the ice age meltdown seems far more plausible than either Von Daniken or the bible.

[Minimalist]

Von Daniken, who should, like Columbus, be given credit for being the first, even if he didn't know where he was going, put forward an interesting theory to explain certain petroglyphs he found and mythology. He made two mistakes. First, like the now-discredited bible, he tried to use his theory to explain EVERYTHING and Second, he failed to understand that there were other possibilities aside from aliens.

Cro-Magnon, who are modern humans....just like most of us....had a period of at least 30,000 years after the demise of the Neanderthals to do pretty much whatever they wanted. We are asked to believe that these people, who are just like us, sat around on rocks for all that time until somewhere around 8,000 BC in the Middle East they suddenly learned how to farm and build stone houses.

One need only consider human progress since 3,000 BC even as allowed for by archaeology and then realized that Cro Magnon had at least six times as long to develop.

I recall looking at one of Van Daniken's petroglyphs of an 'alien in a space suit' and thinking, 'it could also just as easily be a diving suit' because it seemed to have a hose. What a petroglyph of a man in a diving suit would be doing in the Australian desert is beyond me but it was equally unconvincing as a 'god' which is always archaeology's fallback position.

Von Daniken never addressed why his aliens would bother to come here and why they stopped. 25,000 years ago, 5 guys with revolvers could have conquered the whole planet had they wished to. Hancock's theory, that a wholly human civilization grew up and forms the basis for much of our mythology before being wiped out in the catastrophe of the ice age meltdown seems far more plausible than either Von Daniken or the bible.

[Minimalist]

Von Daniken, who should, like Columbus, be given credit for being the first, even if he didn't know where he was going, put forward an interesting theory to explain certain petroglyphs he found and mythology. He made two mistakes. First, like the now-discredited bible, he tried to use his theory to explain EVERYTHING and Second, he failed to understand that there were other possibilities aside from aliens.

Cro-Magnon, who are modern humans....just like most of us....had a period of at least 30,000 years after the demise of the Neanderthals to do pretty much whatever they wanted. We are asked to believe that these people, who are just like us, sat around on rocks for all that time until somewhere around 8,000 BC in the Middle East they suddenly learned how to farm and build stone houses.

One need only consider human progress since 3,000 BC even as allowed for by archaeology and then realized that Cro Magnon had at least six times as long to develop.

I recall looking at one of Van Daniken's petroglyphs of an 'alien in a space suit' and thinking, 'it could also just as easily be a diving suit' because it seemed to have a hose. What a petroglyph of a man in a diving suit would be doing in the Australian desert is beyond me but it was equally unconvincing as a 'god' which is always archaeology's fallback position.

Von Daniken never addressed why his aliens would bother to come here and why they stopped. 25,000 years ago, 5 guys with revolvers could have conquered the whole planet had they wished to. Hancock's theory, that a wholly human civilization grew up and forms the basis for much of our mythology before being wiped out in the catastrophe of the ice age meltdown seems far more plausible than either Von Daniken or the bible.

[Minimalist]

Von Daniken, who should, like Columbus, be given credit for being the first, even if he didn't know where he was going, put forward an interesting theory to explain certain petroglyphs he found and mythology. He made two mistakes. First, like the now-discredited bible, he tried to use his theory to explain EVERYTHING and Second, he failed to understand that there were other possibilities aside from aliens.

Cro-Magnon, who are modern humans....just like most of us....had a period of at least 30,000 years after the demise of the Neanderthals to do pretty much whatever they wanted. We are asked to believe that these people, who are just like us, sat around on rocks for all that time until somewhere around 8,000 BC in the Middle East they suddenly learned how to farm and build stone houses.

One need only consider human progress since 3,000 BC even as allowed for by archaeology and then realized that Cro Magnon had at least six times as long to develop.

I recall looking at one of Van Daniken's petroglyphs of an 'alien in a space suit' and thinking, 'it could also just as easily be a diving suit' because it seemed to have a hose. What a petroglyph of a man in a diving suit would be doing in the Australian desert is beyond me but it was equally unconvincing as a 'god' which is always archaeology's fallback position.

Von Daniken never addressed why his aliens would bother to come here and why they stopped. 25,000 years ago, 5 guys with revolvers could have conquered the whole planet had they wished to. Hancock's theory, that a wholly human civilization grew up and forms the basis for much of our mythology before being wiped out in the catastrophe of the ice age meltdown seems far more plausible than either Von Daniken or the bible.

[Minimalist]

Von Daniken, who should, like Columbus, be given credit for being the first, even if he didn't know where he was going, put forward an interesting theory to explain certain petroglyphs he found and mythology. He made two mistakes. First, like the now-discredited bible, he tried to use his theory to explain EVERYTHING and Second, he failed to understand that there were other possibilities aside from aliens.

Cro-Magnon, who are modern humans....just like most of us....had a period of at least 30,000 years after the demise of the Neanderthals to do pretty much whatever they wanted. We are asked to believe that these people, who are just like us, sat around on rocks for all that time until somewhere around 8,000 BC in the Middle East they suddenly learned how to farm and build stone houses.

One need only consider human progress since 3,000 BC even as allowed for by archaeology and then realized that Cro Magnon had at least six times as long to develop.

I recall looking at one of Van Daniken's petroglyphs of an 'alien in a space suit' and thinking, 'it could also just as easily be a diving suit' because it seemed to have a hose. What a petroglyph of a man in a diving suit would be doing in the Australian desert is beyond me but it was equally unconvincing as a 'god' which is always archaeology's fallback position.

Von Daniken never addressed why his aliens would bother to come here and why they stopped. 25,000 years ago, 5 guys with revolvers could have conquered the whole planet had they wished to. Hancock's theory, that a wholly human civilization grew up and forms the basis for much of our mythology before being wiped out in the catastrophe of the ice age meltdown seems far more plausible than either Von Daniken or the bible.

[Minimalist]

testing

[Minimalist]

Von Daniken, who should, like Columbus, be given credit for being the first, even if he didn't know where he was going, put forward an interesting theory to explain certain petroglyphs he found and mythology. He made two mistakes. First, like the now-discredited bible, he tried to use his theory to explain EVERYTHING and Second, he failed to understand that there were other possibilities aside from aliens.

Cro-Magnon, who are modern humans....just like most of us....had a period of at least 30,000 years after the demise of the Neanderthals to do pretty much whatever they wanted. We are asked to believe that these people, who are just like us, sat around on rocks for all that time until somewhere around 8,000 BC in the Middle East they suddenly learned how to farm and build stone houses.

One need only consider human progress since 3,000 BC even as allowed for by archaeology and then realized that Cro Magnon had at least six times as long to develop.

I recall looking at one of Van Daniken's petroglyphs of an 'alien in a space suit' and thinking, 'it could also just as easily be a diving suit' because it seemed to have a hose. What a petroglyph of a man in a diving suit would be doing in the Australian desert is beyond me but it was equally unconvincing as a 'god' which is always archaeology's fallback position.

Von Daniken never addressed why his aliens would bother to come here and why they stopped. 25,000 years ago, 5 guys with revolvers could have conquered the whole planet had they wished to. Hancock's theory, that a wholly human civilization grew up and forms the basis for much of our mythology before being wiped out in the catastrophe of the ice age meltdown seems far more plausible than either Von Daniken or the bible.

[Minimalist]

testing

[Minimalist]

Von Daniken, who should, like Columbus, be given credit for being the first, even if he didn't know where he was going, put forward an interesting theory to explain certain petroglyphs he found and mythology. He made two mistakes. First, like the now-discredited bible, he tried to use his theory to explain EVERYTHING and Second, he failed to understand that there were other possibilities aside from aliens.

Cro-Magnon, who are modern humans....just like most of us....had a period of at least 30,000 years after the demise of the Neanderthals to do pretty much whatever they wanted. We are asked to believe that these people, who are just like us, sat around on rocks for all that time until somewhere around 8,000 BC in the Middle East they suddenly learned how to farm and build stone houses.

One need only consider human progress since 3,000 BC even as allowed for by archaeology and then realized that Cro Magnon had at least six times as long to develop.

I recall looking at one of Van Daniken's petroglyphs of an 'alien in a space suit' and thinking, 'it could also just as easily be a diving suit' because it seemed to have a hose. What a petroglyph of a man in a diving suit would be doing in the Australian desert is beyond me but it was equally unconvincing as a 'god' which is always archaeology's fallback position.

Von Daniken never addressed why his aliens would bother to come here and why they stopped. 25,000 years ago, 5 guys with revolvers could have conquered the whole planet had they wished to. Hancock's theory, that a wholly human civilization grew up and forms the basis for much of our mythology before being wiped out in the catastrophe of the ice age meltdown seems far more plausible than either Von Daniken or the bible.