Erich von Daniken believes that we as a species have been influenced throughout history and time by supernatural beings, or what many would refer to as aliens or ancient astronauts. His work and theories have caused uproar in both the scientific and historical communities since the publication of his first book Chariots of the Gods in 1968. Within Chariots he makes the argument that our ancient predecessors did not have the intellectual capacity or creative means to create such magnificent structures such as the Great Pyramids of Giza, the Nazca Lines, as well as the ability to create mathematics and the like. His central thesis of the book is that we have been in contact with these other worldly beings since the beginning of human existence …show more content…
and that within the structures mentioned, within paintings and even within the evolution of the human race there was and is evidence that supports these claims that we are the offspring of such beings, we are the byproduct of these ancient astronauts. Since these claims go against what science and history have told us to be true, his book has allowed for him to obtain a relatively large following across Europe and beyond, as many people now stand behind him and his claims. Daniken makes various claims throughout his book, one example being his emphasis that on probability alone there has to be some sort of intellectual life in the ever expansive cosmos. He recites off numbers as “evidence”, thus giving off the impression to a suggestible reader that one can be scientific with a handful of numbers. Like stated in the introduction, he makes many ostentatious claims and backs it up with “evidence” that would not pass any scientific testing, one of these being the Orion Correlation Theory. Daniken mentions this theory within his book but the theory itself has been disproven by many academics. It’s been proven that the correlation between the actual pyramids does not accurately match up Orion’s belt, and even though they may appear to be so, the Egyptians could have done it by sheer coincidence. This by no means points to aliens or a supernatural helping power, thus the correlation is no actual correlation at all and has been written off as pseudoscience. Other ancient artifacts that he points to as further proof we have been in contact with aliens, is that of art found all across the globe. Drawings and depictions found in Egypt, South Africa, and within Maya civilizations, Daniken points out, are visual indications that supernatural beings visited and procreated with our ancestors. One example being a Maya drawing found in the Temple of Copan in Mexico. The visual depiction that Daniken refers to in Chariots of the Gods is found on the sarcophagus lid of ancient Maya ruler Pacal. According to von Daniken, the figure of Pacal looks like he is within some sort of ancient space craft, which looks incredibly similar to twentieth century space shuttles and astronauts. “Mayan scholars however have little doubt as to what is being depicted on this lid -- it shows the descent of Pacal into the underworld on top of the sun monster. (The Mayans believed the sun entered the underworld at night when it set.) The world tree is a symbolic representation of creation. This is a very common depiction of the world tree, with branches that were believed to stretch into the heavens, while the roots reached down into the underworld, hence its use in the transition between those worlds.” (Chris White, 2013:21-22) By simply looking at Danikens “evidence” for face value alone, you can clearly see that this proof can all be very coincidental. Just because the stars of Orion’s belt may line up with the three Great Pyramids of Giza does not prove that aliens had a part in their creation. And just because an ancient Mayan depiction of a ruler has a similar stance to that of a modern day astronaut waiting for takeoff, does not point as evidence that our past predecessors had a relationship with intelligent otherworldly beings. Neither of the arguments listed above or within his book facilitate the extraordinary claims that extraterrestrial life built monuments, or aided in the building of past civilizations, thus not creating a convincing argument. Erich von Daniken has a skewed vision of the ability of our ancestors. Stated throughout his book, is that our ancestors did not have the intellectual capacity to build such massive monuments such as the pyramids and the Moai of the Eastern Islands. Furthermore he even goes as far to state that they did not hold the capability of the imagination to dream up such elaborate religious icons and figures. John T. Omohundro puts Danikens faith in our predecessors so eloquently within his article by stating that: “Chariots of the Gods? plays upon most people’s inability to break out of these assumptions. It implies that up until the last thousand years or so the world was filled with primitives, heathens, savages, dummies. Their intelligence matched their simple technologies; their languages were simple, their cultures were primitive, they were brutes. If they seem to have come up with something quite fantastic by our standards, someone smarter than them must have given it to them.” (1976: 1) Daniken constructs many errors throughout his book and like the example stated above, committed the crime of ethnocentrism, where he viewed the society and culture in which he is from as more intellectual and superior to that of past generations.
His main argument and thesis made within the text would not be able to pass Carl Sagan’s baloney test because Danikens argument would not be able to pass Occam’s razor, in which the simpler answer is more often than not the correct answer. His arguments and evidence would never be able to be questioned because pseudoscience leaves no room for questioning or debating, it leaves no room for Black Swans. As well as failing Sagan’s baloney test, Daniken also commits many logical fallacies. These include, begging the question, in which Daniken asks so many questions that he gives the allusion that the reader has the power to but in reality has the book set up in a way that you start to agree with him and his thought process simply because he never makes any solid claims, but instead persuades you into viewing the “evidence” as he does. Another logical fallacy that Daniken commits is suppressed evidence, or half-truths. He withholds a great deal of proven factual information, thus having an even greater sway towards the readers because he had the power to add or take away valuable
information. It’s no secret that Erich von Daniken has created a mass following by airing and publishing these pseudoscientific works, as well as making a profit by lying to the general public. Like Kelly states in his article Rethinking History, Daniken is “creating a mythology, not a history”. (2008: 11) Daniken’s claims and theories within Chariots of the Gods fall under the category of pseudoscience because he presents the claims as science but actually shows the reader no hard, testable and provable evidence.
On December 13, 1973, a French man named Claude Vorilhon claimed that he encountered an extraterrestrial being. The alien, called Yahweh, explained that he was a representative of an advanced race of beings, the Elohim, who created humankind is their image via cloning techniques. As an experiment, humanity failed to achieve equilibrium within itself and the world it lived in. Throughout history, the Elohim sent prophets to Earth to guide people’s way of life based on that of the superior race. A primary reason that people failed to achieve that peace is that the prophets, “whose teachings, actually scientific and not religiously oriented, had been misunderstood.” (Laderman 248) Religions thus misinterpreted the Elohim’s teachings, and their different understandings of them separated humanity.
Creation stories have profound effects on humans. Those associated with ancient cultures/civilizations aim to ensure the successful survival or well-being of themselves and that particular culture/civilization of their association, but not all are beneficial, prosperous, or fortunate. Mesopotamia’s “The Gilgamesh Epic”, Egypt’s “Hymn to the Nile-Documents”, and Mesoamerica’s Mayan and Aztec creation stories/religion are influential to establishing significant relationships within society, whether that is between humans and nature or humans and their “god(s).”
In today’s world there are always people trying to come up with a new way to explain something. There will always be people trying to pedal a new product or story about an innovative new way to look at things. Some of these ideas will really be ground-breaking, but many of these will be false ideas. Many of them will just be honest mistakes, but just as many will be ideas from people trying to trick other people. Carl Sagan recognizes this and writes about it in his article The Fine Art of Baloney Detection. Within it he describes how he has been vulnerable himself wanting to believe things that people have told him that didn’t seem true, but was what he wanted to hear. He then goes on to talk about how people need to be skeptical about what they are told/read. He has developed a system using the scientific which he calls “Tools for Skeptical Thinking.” These are things that people can do when evaluating a situation or idea to check for “baloney.” I have picked six of these tools to explain in further detail.
One of a few problems that hypothetico-deductivists would find in Chalmers statement is contained in the phrase, “Scientific theories in some rigorous way from the facts of experience acquired by the observation and experiment.’’ Theories are never produced strictly, Popper would say, but firstly crafted through the thought and feeling of a scientist in their given field. This then discards the idea that theories are the result of facts and it then forwards the idea that a theory will be manipulated by individual people as they are no more than a personal concept with reason. Furthermore if theories were derived meticulously from the facts the implication would then be made that the theory is virtually perfect. Yet these theories that are disproven all the time through falsifying this then demonstrates that these theories are not just part of a scientists thoughts but also that falsification is a more precise form of proof and justification than that of induction.
Sokal's essay seems to show a few important things. The views about the concepts of truth and evidence have gained widespread acceptance within the present day academy. This has had precisely the sort of harmful consequence on the standards of scholarship and intelligent responsibility. Neither of the
Triangles are an important shape when it comes to the construction of buildings. They're a sturdy, simple shape, so it's no surprise to see that ancient civilizations built pyramids. The most notable being the Great Pyramids of Giza in Egypt, as well as the Mayan Pyramids. But, what sets them so much apart? What are the similarities? What key parts make them so unique?
Roman and Greek mythology are filled with multiple interpretations of how the creator, be it the gods or nature, contributed to the birth of the world. These stories draw the backgrounds of the gods and goddesses that govern much of classical mythology. Ovid’s Metamorphoses and Hesiod’s Theogony are two pieces of work that account for how our universe came to be. A comparison of Theogony with Metamorphoses reveals that Hesiod’s creation story portrays the deities as omnipresent, powerful role whose actions triggered the beginning of the universe whereas in Metamorphoses, the deities do not play a significant role; rather the humans are center of the creation. The similarities and differences are evident in the construction of the universe, ages of man, and the creation of men and women on earth.
This book revolves around the idea that one does not have to be a scientist in order to use and appreciate the scientific method. The author, Carl Sagan uses the scientific method to debunk the very thought of demons, myths, gods, devils, and strange obsessions to the supernatural that he believes plagues humanity. Scientists explain this behavior in humans as an intellectual curiosity towards science, however it is pseudoscience. Pseudoscience is a collection of beliefs mistakenly regarded as being based on the scientific method. From this scientists have also come up with an art which they like to call the art of baloney detection. Sagan uses this throughout his book to debunk theories that many people in this society tend to believe, and
Bryjak appeals to readers in a serious tone and makes very valid points for his reasoning. Bryjak’s thus fails to provide sufficient evidence on some of his reasoning to convince readers on his position.
My infatuation in fractals began freshmen year at Greeley after taking a Seminar with one of the seniors. I’m not sure exactly when simple interest turned to a kind of obsession, but during that lesson something seemed to click. It seemed as if this was the universe’s answer to everything; the mystery was solved, however complex the answer was to understand. I’m still not sure if I was misunderstanding the lesson, or if I had somehow seen it for what it really was; a pattern to describe the way the universe works.
Thesis Statement: The Great Pyramid is a mystery to the modern age, even though its
...e an advanced form of technology such as levitation? Perhaps the Egyptians received technological assistance from extraterrestrial beings who might also provide information about the alignment of the stars. However, it seems more believable to consider that the advanced technology and knowledge originated on our planet. There very well could have been an advanced human civilization in the distant past and this civilization could have been wiped out by natural forces during the last Ice Age. Furthermore, records of the technology and astronomical knowledge of this advanced human culture could have been available to the Egyptians. Therefore, I think the most reasonable explanation provided by the evidence given, is there must have been an advanced human culture, pre-dating written history, involved in the design and technology in order to build the Great Pyramid.
I just woke up from a small nap on the plane. My partner and I were going to Egypt to dig a new site that our team had found on our satellite images. We were “armchair archeologists”, we used satellite images to find lost egyptian sites.
Pyramids of Menkaure (c. 2470 BCE), Khafre (c.2500 BCE), and Khufu (c.2530 BCE) are located in Egypt. The significance of the three main pyramids of Egypt are the subject of much debate, but their form may well derive from the image of the God Re, who in ancient Egypt was symbolized by the rays of the sun descending to earth. The Pyramids of Ancient Egypt were built as tombs for Kings and Queens, and it was the exclusive privilege to have a Pyramid tomb. There are three pyramids, one for King Khufu, one for King Khafre, and one for King Menkaura.
The pyramids of Egypt are fascinating, however, they remain to be a mystery. The well-built architecture is located in Giza, Egypt, on the west bank of the Nile River. The pyramids of Egypt are the oldest and only surviving member of ancient wonders. It is also the pride and one of the most important factors in Egyptian culture.