Coming
along behind Von Daniken is Zecharia Sitchin who suggests that civilization
was instigated by beings from a tenth planet in our solar system and
that human beings themselves were genetically engineered by these same
beings around 450,000 years ago. Basing his theory on strictly three
dimensional aliens leaves some serious observations unanswered as we
will soon see. So it is that, as a theory that can predict, it is too
full of holes. When the concepts of hyperdimensionality are included
in the fundamental idea of "inspiration" for civilization
and scientific development, it makes some strange sense. But that,
of course, excludes the "creators" or sources of inspiration
from physically residing on a tenth planet and leaves them free to come
and go as they choose from wherever they are to wherever they wish to
go in the universe via hyperdimensional physics, space/time transfer,
which is what they seem to be doing anyway.
The Martian
hypothesis is also very popular nowadays, promoted by many people who
ought to be able to think out of the box better than that. Again, why
does civilization have to have originated somewhere else and come to
Earth? It is a far more reasonable hypothesis that a high civilization
developed on Earth (even if inspired from elsewhere, assuming that this
happened), and that this former civilization had space travel capabilities.
If there are monuments on Mars that are similar to structures on Earth,
why couldn't they have been built by space travelers from Earth TO
Mars, rather than vice versa?
Von Daniken
and Sitchin, and many others, are still inculcated with the notion that
our ancestors were fundamentally stupid. They have the idea that any
technological sophistication must have been brought from somewhere else
because they simply can't erase the image of the howling savages with
bear grease in their hair that has been so thoroughly implanted in the
perception of our culture. More significantly, they don't want to
think about what could happen to wipe such a a civilization from the
face of the earth.
Plato
and the Vedas both suggests exactly that: mankind did
create an advanced civilization. What is more, they both tell us that
there was a terrible, ancient war. The Vedas talk about
flying machines and nuclear bombs. In the Timaeus Plato
tells us that the conflict was between Atlantis and Europe, and
that it was in full fury around twelve thousand years ago. He records
that the Atlanteans had conquered Europe as far as Italy, and North
Africa as far as Libya, and it was the Athenians who finally conquered
Atlantis. Shortly after, both Atlantis and Athens were destroyed in
a global catastrophe. The idea of a global civilization being destroyed
in a "single day and night" is not, to understate the matter,
a thought that one wishes to contemplate in any serious terms for any
lengthy period of time. Science avoids having to do so by negating
it as a possibility.
I would
like to add the one point that never seems to be mentioned even conjecturally
and it is this: if an ancient civilization was so advanced, particularly
if there were "aliens" in charge, why weren't they aware of
the impending disaster? The cheap excuse that it was a "punishment
from God" doesn't get it if the gods were aliens because if they
did destroy the civilizations of the earth, they effectively dirtied
their own nest and damaged their own "possession." So that
theory really doesn't wash. If we posit that there is a source of "inspiration"
for science and civilization, perhaps we ought to consider that there
is also a source of inspiration for the tendency to blindness? Perhaps
there are "gods" of some sort, and they do not want us to
know the truth? Perhaps there are beings of some sort with an agenda?
Perhaps the story of Blind Orion and the strong man "bound by demons"
or the blind leading the blind, have important messages to convey to
us today?
In this
sense, a comparison of the ancient civilization to the state of our
own might be a useful idea. Perhaps the ancient people were vulnerable
because they simply did not consider such a possibility? Perhaps,
just like us, their "science" assured them that such a thing
was either impossible or so unlikely that they didn't have to worry
about a thing. Perhaps, like ours, their science was uniformitarian
also, and they closed their eyes and minds to potentials, thereby leaving
themselves altogether vulnerable to sudden disaster. In Matthew 24,
Jesus points out that right up to the moment of the disaster in the
days of Noah, people were "eating and drinking and marrying,"
and essentially conducting their lives with no thought whatsoever for
what was about to fall upon them. So it seems that, another of the
conditions of "as it was in the days of Noah" is a scientific
philosophy that is in denial about possibilities and potentials of terrestrial
cataclysm. And that is, most definitely, our present state. We should
like to know if this condition serves some hidden agenda of some thing
or someone?
Are we
in a Time Loop? Are WE the Atlanteans?
Are we
the playing pieces in the Secret Games of the Gods?
