"For thousands of years, humans have recorded events that seem to suggest other-worldly beings came down from the skies to visit Earth".

Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: David Hatcher Childress By: Ancient Alien History Date: 02/05/2016

So that is what is all about for you eh! The last word. Cherry Picking and assumptions.

I did write that, this is what I wrote, Also I said I would not reply to your continued mannerisms. (More Cherry Picking.)

Subject: Re: David Hatcher Childress By: Ancient Alien History Date: 23/04/2016

A bad statement with no references. There is only one reference on the web that has no collaboration and comes from a debunking site to which the author likes to use profanity to achieve his point. This is bad literature and very hard to take seriously...There are no tweets or google+ shares, there are no dead links, not one. I don't even think it even happened. Just more nonsense from the debunking community.

Moreover to the point ~ I do not see anything wrong with a publisher promoting his clients material. With today's digital age, reviews are a form of promotion, ratings have a tendency to guide the buyers decision. Regardless of the charge of violating reviewers guidelines ~ There are in place so as Amazon can profit from sellers material by promotion or by setting guidelines for authors to sell their books at a cheaper prices. Amazon, Apple or whatever does not market item(s) for free.

Read more: https://www.ancient-alien-history.com/got-a-comment/discussioncbm_476685/9/

So now I must assume that although you can write english, you do not comprehend it.
~What action does the second paragraph present? It clearly states (Hang on I have already said this)
Subject: Re: Re: Re: David Hatcher Childress By: Ancient Alien History Date: 30/04/2016

Rationalwiki is anything but rational, a poor reference. I clicked the link, However as I had already stated by using this phrase : "Moreover to the point ~ I do not see anything wrong with a publisher promoting his clients material...[..]"
~ Which begs to say that no reference is required as to prove whether or not the review happened. We have moved on from that point.

Read more: https://www.ancient-alien-history.com/got-a-comment/discussioncbm_476685/12/

Who is delusional? Listen it is obvious that you are not a rational thinking person, you are subjective and you have a hard on for David and perhaps anyone else that is within the community. And as you keep going, you present yourself to be as such.

~ Also I never defined what a publisher does, did I?, And yet, you have decided that I have, to support your irrational thinking. And this is the reason that no intelligence can come from you regarding this topic. I provided a quote and a link.
Here it is once again.

"marketing/promoting--how does the public find out about a book? Most don't just pick it up off a shelf in a bookstore. They read a review, see an ad, hear about it from a friend on Facebook, or even watch an author on TV. Publishers have marketing staffs that send out review copies, create promotional items, send out posts on social media, and book authors on tours. If you are self-publishing, you will likely need to hire a marketing specialist.

What a Publisher Does: Key Roles
read more: https://www.underdown.org/publisher-expertise.htm

Read more: https://www.ancient-alien-history.com/got-a-comment/discussioncbm_476685/12/

~ I can assume that everyone knows who David H. Childress is on the format that we are mentioning because of the comments from people like you in regards to our topic, Also we are talking about it (Gumshoe~Debunker)

Answer me this..(And I have already asked you this but I will re-write it again.)

Why is that the Author can review his own work (In this here situation) and Amazon will not pull the review down?

Answer: Because he is not the seller.

Subject: Factual errors in Ancient Aliens S4E5: The NASA Connection By: Martin Blaise Date: 19/04/2016

00:45 (Bara) "The Brookings Report said very specifically ... Don't tell anybody." It did not. The report recommended that the question of public dissemination of extraterrestrial intelligence _should_be_considered_, but it did not express any prejudicial opinion on the matter. No such study was ever in fact undertaken, so the point is moot.

05:05 (Narr) Coordinates of the Apollo 11 landing site "lined up directly under Orion's belt." Not true, there was no such alignment.

05:08 (Bara) Farouk El-Baz picked all the Apollo landing sites, dates & times. Not true. Dr Farouk El-Baz was the Secretary of the Apollo Landing Site Selection Committee. As such, he was very influential over the actual landing sites, but not the dates and times. Those were dictated by technical factors unrelated to El-Baz's specialty, geology & selenology.

06:33 (Bara) Orion on the horizon 33 minutes after Apollo 11 landing. It was not. See Bara's own book, 'Dark Mission,' p.14.

06:44 (Bara) Buzz Aldrin performed a ceremony 33 minutes after Apollo 11 landing. He did not. His ceremony, a catholic mass, was performed at MET 105:25:38, 2h 40m after landing. This can easily be checked in the official transcripts.

06:47 (Bara) "...with Neil Armstrong." Not true. Armstrong took no part in the ceremony.

07:05 (Bara) Catholic mass "has it's origins" in Egyptian ritual. It does not. Its origin is, of course, the last supper of Christ.

11:22 (Von Daniken) Mariner photographed the "Face on Mars." No, it was Viking Orbiter.

22:05 (Narr) President and Congress established NASA as part of DoD. Absolutely NOT. NASA was specifically designated a civilian agency whose space activities were to remain separate from those of the armed forces.

23:30 (Narr) "Founding scientists" of NASA (over a still of Paperclip scientists inc. Von Braun). The Paperclip group did not join NASA until 2 years after its establishment.

24:10 (Bara) Kenneth Kleinknecht Head of the Mercury Program, the Apollo Program, the Gemini Program. Inaccurate. Kleinknecht was Manager of the Mercury Program, Deputy Manager of the Gemini Project Office and Manager for the Command and Service Modules in the Apollo Spacecraft Office.

25:12 (Narr) Again, "NASA's founding fathers" over a still that did not depict the so-called "founding fathers."

26:04 (Bara) "The only launch pad (at White Sands) is launch pad #33." Not true. There are Launch complexes designated LC-32, LC-35, LC-37, LC-38. Pad 33 was built by the US Army in 1945, 17 YEARS BEFORE NASA WAS ESTABLISHED. Thus it cannot possibly support the wild notion that NASA uses the number 33 in a ritualistic way.

27:26 (Bara) "If you look at the mission patches, the symbol for Mercury is really similar to the Egyptian ankh, and it's kind of ironic that you have ... Egyptian symbolism in what's supposed to be a representation of Mercury the messenger -- supposed to be a Greek mythology, rather than an Egyptian mythology." The Mercury mission patch represents the astronomical symbol for the planet Mercury, with a figure 7 inside it.

35:14 (Prod) Anachronism. Kennedy's speech "We choose to go to the Moon...." was not delivered until Sept 12, 1962, at Rice University.

42:34 (Bara) ""NASA's core mission was to go to the Moon and retrieve evidence that there was a prior civilization." Not true. No such mission was ever envisaged or declared.

Subject: Re: Factual errors in Ancient Aliens S4E5: The NASA Connection By: Ancient Alien History Date: 23/04/2016

You have a lot on your mind, don't you? So much so that your references are incomplete. Not one actual quote. Cherry picking comes to mind but I won't go there, I'll take the easy way.

You have no subject heading for referencing nor do you imply what was said before or after. Afterall your main topic is a tv show that puts together a collaboration of clips and uses a narrator to introduce a subject or topic, and then an ensemble of presenters touch basis on that topic. Granted in some cases it is obvious on what the subject matter is that you have implied ~ For the most..it is not.

I would ask what reference you are using for a broadcast script but as mentioned before you did not share enough of it. Lucky for you, I have my own that I have edited from the broadcast point ~ There aren't any actual correct scripts currently on the web, they are full of errors.

So I will address the first one now and perhaps others at a later date ~ Due to the lack of information that is stated by you and the length of your list.

Martin Blaise said.

00:45 (Bara) "The Brookings Report said very specifically ... Don't tell anybody." It did not. The report recommended that the question of public dissemination of extraterrestrial intelligence _should_be_considered_, but it did not express any prejudicial opinion on the matter. No such study was ever in fact undertaken, so the point is moot.

~ The report is very opinionated on all matters that pertain to this subject as you will see..That's why they call it a report..

Brookings Report

"Since intelligent life might be discovered at any time via the radio telescope research presently under way, and since the consequences of such a discovery are presently unpredictable because of our limited knowledge of behavior under even an approximation of such dramatic circumstances, two research areas can be recommended:

Continuing studies to determine emotional and intellectual understanding and attitudes -- and successive alterations of them if any -- regarding the possibility and consequences of discovering intelligent extraterrestrial life.

Historical and empirical studies of the behavior of peoples and their leaders when confronted with dramatic and unfamiliar events or social pressures. Such studies might help to provide programs for meeting and adjusting to the implications of such a discovery. Questions one might wish to answer by such studies would include: How might such information, under what circumstances, be presented to or withheld from the public for what ends? What might be the role of the discovering scientists and other decision makers regarding release of the fact of discovery?" – pages 183–184

~ The first recommendation clearly states to continue studies, already existing.

~ Let me ask you. Does the information of discovering aliens scare you? Will you question your religion and fall apart at the seams?

If the answer is no then I would say that you have been desensitized by media Ie. movies, videogames.or any other platform that answers the question ~ Are we alone? This would be considered to be an adaptation of those studies. Also, think about it. Why would such a study be made public?

The report regarding this section is stating continued studies and new studies and then asks [..] "How might such information, under what circumstances, be presented to or withheld from the public for what ends?[..]

~ What are those circumstances? NASA denies alien visitation, meanwhile other countries around the world have disclosed on the phenomenon and they have the same questions that I have ~ In other words, they are left clueless as I am, but at least they are not denying it..

~ Although you did not use the whole quote. I will.

"The Brookings Report says very specifically, number one, don't tell anybody. If you tell anybody, it will shatter the fabric of our civilization"

~ This is the quote from the opener in which you see Mike for about 6 seconds.
Although you are correct and the report is not written this way, I would not call this a factual error. The report is suggestive of this and Mike more or less gets to the point. NASA has not disclosed anything, they deny everything, and yet you have an agency that has former astronauts talking about aliens on the moon. The moon conspiracy along with the former germans scientist that once worked for hitler in charge with operations of the first moon landings. And then a 454 billion dollar budget proposal was done by NASA for a Mars mission that was asked by the Bush administration (senior).

Would you trust these people?

I'll ask you once more

Are you compelled to question your existence if it was true?

Subject: alien power plants By: Ed Doerr Date: 09/02/2016

In your videos you keep depicting the power as a lightning bolt its not . It is a electro magnetic frequency that is revibrated by obilisks . Teslas wardencliffe was I power wave not a directed lightning bolt that a simple antenna would convert to any use they wanted . The Dendura light is a big antenna converting the electromagnetic wave to a larger scale use - - - - like antigravity moving of stone

Subject: Re: alien power plants By: Ancient Alien History Date: 17/04/2016

I don't have any videos depicting a lightning bolt as energy. You have this website confused with Ancient Aliens the television show. However I do believe, that this is done just to show the viewer a symbolism of electricity.

Items: 136 - 140 of 145

<< 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 >>

New comment


Ancient Alien History

Toronto, Ontario Canada



KGRA-DB Logo                                     DM-DB Logo


Who's Your Favorite Cast Member?

Robert Clotworthy (515)


Erich von Daniken (128)


Giorgio A. Tsoukalos (575)


Philip Coppens (66)


David Hatcher Childress (1,303)


George Noory (54)


Jason Martell (35)


Jonathan Young (56)


William J Birnes (62)


Graham Hancock (38)


Michael Dennin (47)


Linda Moulton Howe (149)


Mike Bara (104)


Robert Bauval (30)


Richard Rader (63)


William Henry (59)


Michael Cremo (24)


Sara Seager (57)


Andrew Collins (31)


Nick Redfern (26)


Robert Schoch (34)


David Wilcock (88)


Peter Fiebag (61)


Total votes: 3605

Get it on Google Play

Ancient Merchant Cart

Ancient Alien History Logo Mug




gods, Aliens


Technologically Advanced Ancient Civilizations?

Neither this Website nor any view or opinion expressed in it, nor the context in which the Ancient Astronaut Hypothesis and its application, to any likeness of Ancient Aliens™, is approved or endorsed by, or is in any way associated with the production company, Prometheus Entertainment™, or A&E Television Networks™, The History Channel™, or anyone else connected with the making of the television series Ancient Aliens™.



Please standby...