If we found evidence of a digital age in prehistoric times, would we even realize what we found?

When I get coupons in the mail, I tend to just drop them in a little container by my front door and figure I will look through them later.  I don't really do a lot of shopping, so I don't really do much couponing, so by the time I get around to going through the pile of coupons I do have, a lot of them are already expired.  As I was going through them today, I was thinking how much nicer it would be to just have all the coupons saved digitally instead of on paper that just creates clutter.

After that, I got to thinking about what it would be like if we eventually went to just having everything we get on paper saved digitally.  A lot of things are already available digitally -- books, bank statements, receipts, etc -- but paper versions of all those things still exist.  But what if the time comes when there are no paper versions?

My next thought after that was what if a long lost advanced civilization had developed to the point of a digital age and kept all of their records on some sort of digital recording devices?  Would we even be able to find evidence of such sophistication if they no longer kept records on paper (or stone) and had not done so for a long time prior to the fall of their civilization?

If you've been reading my blog for a while, you probably already know the topic of lost civilizations fascinates me.  Some people who are interested in the topic tend to have rather grandiose views on the subject, oftentimes imagining some highly advanced civilizations equal or beyond our own today, with things like advanced flying machines and nuclear technology (you can just search Google for fantastical interpretations of stories from the Mahabharata or of Atlantis).  But I tend to think that any prehistoric advanced civilization that has been lost to time would probably be something more along the lines of a Renaissance Italy, but thousands or even tens of thousands of years earlier.  In other words, a high level of architectural skill, formal government, and sophisticated culture (and, to be fair, I think it may be possible they could have had some sort of aircraft, but probably something more simplistic like a glider or balloon).  

But just to have some fun with conjecture, lets go with one of those more fantasy-like lost civilizations.  Let's say some advanced prehistoric culture not only had flying machines, but digital archives.  If we unearthed evidence of those digital archives, would we even know what we had found?

Imagine an ancient Roman farmer tilling his land and then finding something like one of our modern USB drives.

What would he do with it?  Well there's a chance he might think it to be some small, insignificant rock and just continue to do his work.  There's also a chance he might stop and think it to be something fascinating and take it to show to a priest.  The priest may say it is something from the gods, or he might take it and show to some great magister.  Or he might just say it's a rock.  But no matter how many people saw it, I think it is doubtful that it would cross anyones mind at the time that the funny little rock they had found potentially contained someones tax records and photos of their trip to Spain.  They just wouldn't have even had the concept that all of that information could somehow be contained in that funny little rock.  

So what would happen to that funny little rock?  Well, assuming the farmer didn't just ignore it, it might have ended up in a temple or maybe even the Emperor's personal collection.  This could be particularly likely if it was a novelty usb.

Realistically though, there's probably a better chance the farmer would have ignored it.  If the civilization that developed the USB had existed 10,000+ years before the farmers time, there's a good chance the USB would have deteriorated to the point of not really being recognizable as anything, perhaps even to the point of essentially being non-existent as an artifact at all.  So if we found something like that today, would we even know what we found?  

Considering the academic community that would study such an artifact today is generally of the opinion that prehistoric civilizations consisted primarily of hunter-gatherers and farmers, it's unlikely it would even cross their minds that an artifact could potentially contain some prehistoric person's bank statements and videos.  

We do, however, have the story of the Dropa stones.  As the story goes, the allegedly 12,000 year old circular stone discs known as the Dropa stones were said to have been found decades ago and that a Chinese researcher determined that grooves in the discs were actually very tiny hieroglyphs.  It is said he eventually deciphered the hieroglyphs and determined that they told the story of an alien people known as the Dropa whose spacecraft crash landed on earth and, because they could not fix their spacecraft, they had to learn to adapt to living on earth.  

Ridiculed for his research, the Chinese researcher exiled himself in Japan and the stones were allegedly sent to Russia to be studied.  It is said the Russian researchers determined that when the discs were placed on a special turntable, they would hum in an unusual rhythm like an electrical charge was passing through them.

After that, it is said the stones ended up in some Chinese museum, but have not been seen since at least 1994.  If the story were true, then it would appear to be evidence of a prehistoric advanced civilization (albeit, an alien one) that potentially had some sort of digital archive...or at least something of that nature that was different from the usual rock art of prehistoric times.  The problem is the story of the Dropa stones is probably, at best, wishful thinking about some unusual artifacts, and at worst, an outright hoax.

But true story or fabrication, I find the story of the Dropa stones interesting either way because it makes me wonder what we would do if we actually found something like that.  If someone found a prehistoric digital archive, would anyone even be able to figure out how to view the contents of the archive?  Would it even occur to anyone that an artifact could potentially be a digital archive?

Prehistoric digital age or not, sometimes I wonder if we find stuff that is so old, and become so unrecognizable, that we don't even know we've found something interesting at all.

Did the 'gods' forget how to be 'gods'?

I was listening to the latest episode of the Paranormal Podcast, where Jim Harold interviews Dr. Rita Louise about ancient aliens, and I began to think about my preferred explanation for who the ancient pagan 'gods' were -- humans from a lost advance civilization.  I've written about this idea before in my post Give our ancestors more credit, but after listening to the Paranormal Podcast today, I started thinking more about what might have happened to the pagan 'gods'.

Questions raised on the Ancient Aliens TV show about the ancient astronaut hypothesis include where did they (the aliens) go and will they return?  And those are good questions to consider if you follow the ancient astronaut hypothesis.  All you can really do is speculate as to where they went and if they will come back.  Other questions to consider are why did they leave in the first place?  And if they are coming back, why have they been gone so long?

I feel these questions are more easily answered by replacing the aliens from space with humans from Earth.  Like I said before in the post I mentioned above, the so-called 'gods' may have just been a prehistoric class of aristocrats.  Maybe we can take it a step further and consider the possibility that these prehistoric aristocrats were the remnant of a highly advance civilization that existed prior to some sort of prehistoric cataclysm.  Perhaps it was a civilization with technologies similar to what we have today.  Maybe they had cars, flying machines, and laser technologies.  Dr. Louise speculated that when 'gods' smote people with lightning, maybe they were using laser weapons and the people just called it lightning.  What if that were true....except it wasn't aliens but advanced humans instead?

It's easy to replace ancient aliens with advanced prehistoric humans, but what about the questions I mentioned above?  Where did the 'gods' go?  Will they return?

If the ancient pagan 'gods' were the remnant of a highly advanced prehistoric civilization, they may have been able to attain the position of 'god' in a post-apocalyptic society by saving or scavenging technologies from the time before the cataclysm.  They may have impressed less developed populations with flying machines and charm, or scared them into obedience by threatening them with their advanced weapons...possibly some kind of laser weapons.  The problem for the 'gods' would come when they could no longer maintain their old technologies.

Let's take a look at our technologies today.  If you are reading this, then you must know how to operate a computer or tablet or smartphone.  But if you survived some sort of massive cataclysm on the Earth, would you know how to build a computer from scratch?  If, by chance, you just so happen to be a computer hardware engineer, do you know where you would get the parts to build one from scratch?  And if you do, do you also know how to program the software for it too?  You can probably see where I'm going with this.  You may know how to use a computer, but can you build one?  You may know how to drive a car, but can you build one?  You may know how to fly a plane, but can you design and manufacture one?  Not everyone has the same skill set.  Not everyone has the same level of education.

Now let's go back to the possibility of an advanced prehistoric civilization remnant living in a prehistoric post-apocalyptic world.  Perhaps a prehistoric pilot flew his flying machine somewhere and was able to impress some people with his fancy gadgets or maybe they feared his laser.  Maybe those people would begin to worship and serve him.  Maybe his knowledge gave him leverage and he didn't want to pass it along because he liked being worshiped and served.  Maybe being served was as close as he could get to a life of luxury he had had before.  Or maybe his life wasn't all that luxurious in the first place, and he saw his technology as an opportunity to have the life he couldn't have before.  It's also possible that the first generation of people living after the prehistoric cataclysm understood that he wasn't actually a 'god', but a leader.  Later generations may have perpetuated a myth that he was a 'god' because they were so far removed from the time before the cataclysm that they had no recollection of the way things were or they technologies that had existed.

The problem would come for this 'god' when he could no longer maintain his old technologies.  Maybe he had some mechanical knowledge and was able to MacGuyver some repairs for a while, but eventually the engine would probably fail and he may not have known how to build another one.  His days of flying would be over.  As for his laser, maybe he no longer had the appropriate power source to charge it.  After a few generations, no one would even have any memory of the old world and without proper maintenance, the technologies of the old world would no longer work.

So where did the 'gods' go?  They simply died.  Let's take a look at Greek mythology for a possible example.  Cronus was the original leader of the gods of Greek mythology.  He was eventually overthrown by his son Zeus.  What if Cronus was actually from an advanced prehistoric civilization?  Maybe he flew to ancient Greece and was worshiped by the ancient Greeks already living there.  His son Zeus may have been able to maintain the old technologies for a while, but would the next generation still know how to do that?  What if there were no engineers?  Is this why there were no more generations of 'gods' after the Olympians?  Did the 'gods' simply die off, and with no more technologies, their offspring eventually just merged with the rest of the society, only to be replaced by a preisthood that claimed to have a continued connection with them?  Is this why the 'gods' also had children with 'mortals'?  Did the 'gods' and 'mortals' merge together after that because the 'god' families no longer knew how to build the technologies of their ancestors?  Did they forget how to be 'gods'?

So, if the 'gods' were real humans, will they ever return?  Maybe the question should be, have they already returned and no one has noticed?  Obviously the original 'god's won't be returning if they were human and are now dead, but have we built what they lost?  The technologies that are attributed to ancient aliens such as space ships and lasers are things we have today in one form or another.  Granted, we don't have long distance space craft capable of carrying people to other star systems, but if the 'gods' were actually prehistoric humans, maybe they didn't either.  Maybe they just had flying machines capable of flying in the atmosphere, and those without flying machines just saw them as magical people coming from the sky.  Maybe they never really came from space at all.  Maybe we now have all that they ever had...or more.  With that in mind, could the 'gods' have returned in us?

Give our ancestors more credit

I was listening to an episode of Jim Harold's Paranormal Podcast titled Ancient Aliens Debunked, and it got me thinking about the whole ancient astronaut theory again.  In the podcast, Jim interviews Chris White about his documentary titled Ancient Aliens Debunked.  I didn't feel the need to watch the whole documentary because I don't put a lot of stock in the ancient astronaut theory in the first place.  I'm not completely closed minded to the possibility of ancient aliens visiting earth, but a lot of theories put forward on the TV show Ancient Aliens are just silly to me.  My main interest in the show is the ancient anomalies they present, not their analysis of them.

So what is an alternative theory to explain the mysteries presented in Ancient Aliens?  You can simply replace the aliens with our ancestors.  I don't think we give our ancestors enough credit.

And I think part of the reason we don't give our ancestors enough credit is due to failure on the part of our academic establishment to properly interpret our early ancient and prehistoric history.  The modern academic establishment is controlled by an atheistic paradigm that believes evolution explains the history of the world and because of that, the idea that advanced civilizations existed in prehistoric times just doesn't fit into their interpretation of history.  So they end up ignoring things that don't fit with their worldview or attempting to explain them away in someway that does fit it.  And what happens when that happens?  The ancient mysteries don't get explained, so theories like the ancient astronaut theory develop to fill the void.

But it need not be so overly complex.  We don't need aliens to explain the mysteries, we just need to realize our prehistoric history isn't a cut and dry story of progression from primitive hunter gatherers to the jet flying, car driving, computer using people we are today.  You can see the history of civilization in the world today...not everyone is like us.  There are still people living in small, simple farming communities as well as people who live in tribal communities.  If you were writing a book about modern society, you wouldn't base your whole book on people living in the Congo or Amazon jungle.  And I don't think our history books should be solely based around the idea that all prehistoric people lived in primitive tribal communities.  I think the world before the flood (or before the last ice age, for any of you who don't want to believe the hundreds of flood stories from around the world) may have been a very different place than what we have been taught in school.  I think that some of those prehistoric civilizations may be underwater now (I've written about that in more detail here).  There is a lot of evidence of prehistoric sophistication, and none of the ancient anomalies presented in Ancient Aliens is all that mysterious if you consider that some people in the prehistoric past were actually very advanced.  We didn't need aliens to teach us how to develop our modern technologies (although some people may think that is debatable), so maybe prehistoric people didn't need aliens either.

The so-called 'gods' of the ancients were probably just humans.  It's possible the mythologies were just fiction, but I think it is more likely that they were based on real people (I've written about that here).  The 'gods' were probably just a prehistoric nobility, or an ancient class of the "1%".  Maybe they had advanced technologies that they used to their advantage to set themselves up over everyone else.  Their technology may have seemed magical to those that didn't understand it.  If the people of the cargo cults of World War II thought that they could gain the material wealth of the advanced people (the Allies) by creating religious rituals, who's to say an advanced prehistoric culture couldn't have had the same effect on a primitive prehistoric culture?  The Allies, who were dropping off supplies on Pacific islands, were not even trying to portray themselves as gods....imagine if they had actually tried to convince the islanders they were some kind of gods!

Eventually these prehistoric aristocrats gave way to ancient priesthoods who claimed to have a connection with the prehistoric aristocrats, or 'gods'.  If I am correct in that the 'gods' were actually real people, then the original 'gods' probably just died and later people created a priesthood that claimed to have a continued connection with the 'gods' and maintained their power through charisma, fear, parlor tricks, or any combination of the three.  From that point on, we have written accounts of history that we can track fairly accurately.

Napoleon Bonaparte said "history is a set of lies people have agreed upon."  I think Napoleon was being overly cynical in that statement, but it is true that history is a matter of perspective.  It's often been said that history is told by the winners.  That I can agree with.  Today we have the cliche that "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."  And in the political world, various subjects are debated every day.  It's all a matter of perspective.  If we can't even agree on our current events today, then why should we act as though history is all agreed upon?  The history we are taught is just someone's perspective of it.  Even with contemporary historical accounts, you are only getting the perspective of the writer.  Modern writers of history are merely basing their version of events on whatever evidence they can find about a period of time that they themselves didn't even live through.  We shouldn't assume they know the whole story.

So am I right about this?  I don't know, I'm only speculating.  I'm not completely closed minded to the possibility of ancient astronauts, but I do think it's unlikely.  I also think it's possible the 'gods' were purely fictitious creations by ancient priesthoods.  But I do think when you consider all the ancient anomalies out there, the mysteries are better explained when you consider the possibility that they were built or designed by people of an advanced prehistoric civilization.   It was all a very long time ago though, and I really don't know the answer, but I am free to speculate.  And I suppose that's probably why I am a blogger instead of a professor.  I like to consider the possibilities and don't want to feel as though I have to mold my view of history to fit into someone else's established curriculum.  I'd like to know all the answers, but I'm fairly content just keeping an open mind to the possibilities.

King Solomon said there is nothing new under the sun.  Perhaps that was more true than even he imagined.  And maybe it is more true than even we have imagined.

A UFO crash at Roswell...or two?

A report on the Huffington Post says a retired Air Force Lt. Col claims there was not just one UFO crash in Roswell, NM in 1947, but two.  So after all these years of people investigating whether or not a UFO crash was covered up by the government, someone has decided to throw a second crash into the mix!

The retired officer says he was told about the crash by another officer.  So it doesn't sound like he was directly involved with investigation himself.  So I would take the story with a grain of salt.  But you can read the report here.

Just some humor

I saw this and thought it was amusing.

Made me wonder...if someone found that and didn't know what it was...what might they think it is?  Something to tie a rope through?  A faceplate for some kind of small figurine?  Would it ever occur to them that it was used to play recorded music?  Probably depends on who found it and when they found it.  Hopefully they would know what it is though!

I also saw this comic and thought it was amusing.

Ha!  Imagine if there were people up there just playing a big joke on us!

Images via iFunny

Also check out my humor site here.

The Baltic Sea Mystery: UFO or Lost civilization?

Artist interpretation. Image by Vaghauk

A mystery object that was spotted on sonar in 2011 at the bottom of the Baltic sea has been in the news recently after divers investigated the anomaly up close.  The anomaly has been referred to as a UFO, even by the mainstream media, due to it being somewhat disc shaped and bearing a resemblance to the Millennium Falcon from Star Wars.

Millenium Falcon

However, now that divers have seen it up close, they have found it doesn't look spaceship, but it is still mysterious.  It appears to be made of stone, which wouldn't be what we would expect a spaceship to be made out of.  Maybe we shouldn't assume a spaceship could't be made of stone, but I would think something less porous would be more suitable.  But that doesn't mean the formation isn't unusual.  Here are some things that have been noticed about it:

• The central part of the object has an egg shaped opening that leads inside of it.
• There's no silt on the rock.
• It's covered in soot.  Stone doesn't normally burn.
• A 300-400 meter trail or "runway" leads away from it, giving it the appearance of having skid marks.
• An 8 meter pillar as well as stone circle formations described as looking like small fireplaces have been found.
• It has rounded sides, as well as what appears to be construction lines and boxes drawn on it.  It also has rugged edges and straight edges.

So that does sound pretty mysterious.  But does it really sound like a UFO?  Or could it be evidence of a lost civilization that has been submerged?  Some type of temple or public building perhaps?  Lets consider some of the oddities that have been noted about it.  

An egg shaped opening doesn't really indicate much besides the fact that it's an opening.  It's hardly any conclusive evidence of it being the opening to a spacecraft.  Small fireplaces would explain why there is soot on it, and if it was a structure built by men long ago, then fireplaces wouldn't be unusual (especially in such a cold environment) and it would make sense that they are there (and why would a spaceship have fireplaces on the exterior anyway?).  The "runway" may just be some type of road or path constructed for people to get to the building or monument.  

It's also reported that it looks like the kind of stone seen by divers in keys and harbors -- one that seems to originate from before the ice age.  I've written about the possibility of finding submerged lost civilizations along where the coastlines would have been during the last ice age in my post Forgotten Civilization: The Science of Questioning or the Questioning of Science?.  The exact coordinates of the object have not been released (at least not as of this writing), but it is said to be at the bottom of the Botnia Gulf.  So could this be evidence of a forgotten civilization along where an ice age coastline may have been?  Could it be man-made, or possibly a natural formation that men carved into a structure and settlement of their own?  If it's not a completely natural formation, then it would seem more likely to me that it is probably a man-made structure and not a crashed UFO.

Although, even if it was proven to be a man-made structure, I wouldn't be surprised if there was an episode of Ancient Aliens where Giorgio Tsoukalos questions whether or not ancient people were building a structure similar to something they had seen in the sky.  :)

See more on Know Your Meme

News Links:
Fox News

RT

CBC

What if Bigfoot didn't need a significant breeding population?

For those with an interest in cryptozoology and Bigfoot (a.k.a. Sasquatch or Yeti), there are various theories out there as to what Bigfoot might be.  One theory is they may simply be an unidentified upright walking ape.  Another is they may be ape/human hybrids, or even just another tribe of humanity that has kept themselves hidden from the rest of us.  Some think they may be interdimensional beings or even visiting aliens.  And, of course, there are many that are skeptical of their existence at all, assuming the stories are just made up, hallucinations, or misidentifications.

We don't know much about interdimensional realities, if they even exist at all, and the idea that they may be interdimensional beings seems far-fetched...at least within our current level of knowledge.  There's little evidence that they are alien visitors either, besides circumstantial evidence that some sightings of Bigfoot have corresponded with sightings of UFOs.  And if they are simply living flesh and blood beings, then it is assumed they would need a significant breeding population to be able to sustain themselves as a species...and if a significant breeding population is needed, then skeptics question why they remain so elusive.

But what if they didn't need a significant breeding population?  Would they even need to breed at all if say, they were....immortal?

Immortal?  You think that sounds pretty far-fetched?  Yeah...actually, I guess it is pretty far-fetched.  But maybe we could consider that they live incredibly long lives and have trait known as negligible senescence (also see this cool video about aging).  Senescence is the process of becoming old.  But there are some organisms that exhibit negligible senescence, meaning they don't appear to age after their initial development into adulthood (or more specifically, they don't lose reproductive ability or have a measurable functional decline with age).  Hydras are even thought to be biologically immortal, meaning it's thought they only die due to injury or disease, and not through deterioration with age.  Lobsters also appear to exhibit negligible senescence and may even be capable of living indefinitely, barring injury, disease, or capture.  The tortoise is also known for long lifespans.  Some plants are known for longevity too, like the Great Basin Bristlecone Pine.  The Methuselah tree is estimated to be over 4700 years old.

So what if Bigfoot existed and exhibited negligible senescence?  What if they could live indefinitely...barring injury, disease, or capture?  If they were a community of biological immortals, perhaps reproduction would be limited or even unnecessary, and maybe they would choose to avoid us because it would put them at risk of being injured or captured?  So what if instead of needing a significant breeding population to sustain their existence, theres actually just a few hundred of them around the world total, and they are the same ones people have been seeing for many years?

Ok, so maybe the idea that Bigfoot could be biologically immortal still sounds far-fetched.  But what about the possibility that they just live exceptionally long lives?  What if the average lifespan was 1000 years and they rarely reproduced?  It could still explain why they are so rarely seen.

But then again, there's all those other theories mentioned above too.  And, of course, it's also possible that they really just don't exist at all.

Are extra-terrestrials really any different from the 'gods'?

So I feel compelled to write a little more about Ancient Aliens and their ancient alien hypothesis.  It seems that those who profess this hypothesis seem to think that the 'gods' and the stories told by ancient man about the 'gods' were stories based in fact, but told from the perspective of men in terms that they were familiar with.  Although, it seems to me, that those who profess this hypothesis are doing the same thing -- they are just reinterpreting past events in terms they are familiar with.  In other words, instead of interpreting events as magical or supernatural, they interpret them as science and technology (more like sci-fi than actual science though).

But is calling the beings spoken about in these mythologies 'extra-terrestrials' instead of 'gods' really make them any different?  Or, perhaps the better question to be asked is if events would have happened differently if the ancients used the term 'extra-terrestrials' instead of 'gods'?  If we are to believe that some kind of intelligent beings with advanced technologies visited ancient man from another planet, then what difference would it have made in what you called them?  What difference would it have made if you thought their flying machines flew by magic or science?  If you didn't understand it, then, well, you didn't understand it.  And that would have been an advantage or privilege these 'gods' had over men...regardless of whether it was science or magic.

The next question is, if these alleged extra-terrestrials were to return, what would be different now?  If we called them extra-terrestrials and their mode transportation "spaceships" instead of 'gods' and flying chariots (or whatever), would anything really be different?  If they were malevolent, then they may demand worship.  If they were benevolent, they might not demand worship, but people might worship them anyways.  They may not bow before them and offer sacrifices, and the term 'worship' might not even be used, but people would still probably look upon them as being higher beings.  People would want to know about them, they'd want to ask them questions about the mysteries of the universe, and perhaps ask for solutions to their own problems.  They'd sort of be like the new celebrities...but celebrities with advanced knowledge.  So I'm not sure that things would really be all that much different if the 'gods' of the past turned out to just be extra-terrestrials.

And I'm not sure why those who profess the ancient alien hypothesis seemed to be so convinced that those aliens have to be flesh and blood aliens.  My guess is that they are just interpreting it in a way they are familiar with...sci-fi.  But why would they have to be flesh and blood aliens?  Why couldn't they just be supernatural beings?  Do they think that only flesh and blood beings are capable of sentience?  That seems kind of narrow minded to me.  I think they ignore the possibility of spiritual beings existing, and may also be ignoring the possibility of lifeforms we don't even recognize existing.

So what are some other possibilities about who these 'gods' of the past were?

1. The stories of the 'gods' were entirely fictional stories made up by charismatic men who were able to convince people that they were the intermediaries between the 'gods' and men.  In doing so, they were able to elevate their own status among men, and live lives of luxury and wealth due to people coming and making offerings to the 'gods'...who were really just statues in a temple.  These priests maintained power by keeping people in fear of these 'gods'.  
2. The stories of the 'gods' were based on real people.  Real, human, people that is.  Throughout recorded history, many men have been worshipped as gods, such as Roman Emperors and Egyptian Pharaohs.  So who's to say the mythological gods weren't once real people who's stories got passed down over time?  Obviously the stories had some fabrications, but maybe there was some truth to them.  Perhaps the 'gods' were just an early ancient or even prehistoric nobility.  Various royal families throughout recorded history have been known to intermarry and have a lot of drama, which bears some similarities to the stories of the mythological gods.  So maybe that's really all the 'gods' were -- strong, charismatic families who were able to get other people to follow them.  Maybe they weren't really all that advanced...maybe they were just charismatic and told good stories (or had good stories told about them).
   
   Or maybe they were advanced.  Here we can invoke another myth...the myth of Atlantis.  Perhaps the 'gods' were just a more advanced and sophisticated people from Atlantis or somewhere else.  I've written before about the possibilities of lost civilizations being submerged after the flood/ice-age.  It's possible there were some advanced civilizations in those predeluvian days.  Even today, there are still people who live in tribal societies much the way their ancestors did.  In some cases, after World War II, some tribal cultures who saw airplanes dropping off cargo came to think they could obtain the material wealth of the advanced culture through religious rituals and practices.  These came to be known as "cargo cults" (read more about those here and here).
   
   So who is to say this couldn't have happened before?  Could an advanced prehistoric human civilization visited less advanced people who though they were some kind of 'gods'?  Considering how long anthropologists say humans have been around, it seems like we have advanced rather quickly.  But maybe people have advanced to high levels of sophistication before, and we have just forgotten about it?

I'm not sure which possibility is more likely. My mind isn't completely closed to the possibility that the 'gods' of the past were flesh and blood extra-terrestrials, but of the possibilities listed, I consider it the least likely.  I think it is more likely the mythological stories are fictional, or based on real humans or some type of supernatural beings.

Maybe one day we will know for sure.  But would they show themselves to us, or would we just have to take the word of some intermediaries?

Ancient Aliens and The Mysterious Origins of Man

I've had mixed feelings about the History channel show Ancient Aliens over the course of its run.  When the original special aired a couple of years ago, I thought it was interesting and presented the information well.  I'm not a believer of the ancient astronaut hypothesis it presented, but I'm open to the possibility (at least certain aspects of it).  So when they decided to turn it into a series, I figured I would give it a shot.  After watching a couple of episodes though, I lost interest.  I thought they were just getting silly about it, seemingly assuming aliens had something to do with almost any ancient mystery.  Although inspired by writers like Zecharia Sitchin and Erich von Daniken, ultimately, all they are doing is inserting science fiction concepts that have been developed primarily over the last 60-70 years into history.

But I did catch some second season episodes that sounded like they might be interesting when I didn't see anything better on.  My impression of the show didn't change much, but I did realize that the information they were presenting was interesting, even if their analysis of it could be a bit silly at times.  So I've decided to watch the third season just to see what they bring up.  I figure whatever they bring up will be interesting, even if I don't agree with their theories.

On the other hand, I was surfing around on Youtube today and came across a video called The Mysterious Origins of Man.  It was obviously pretty old since Charlton Heston was the presenter (from 1996, according to Wikpedia), so there isn't any new information in it, but I thought the information was presented well.  It covers topics such as out of place artifacts, Tiahuanaco, and ancient Egypt.  If you're interested check it out below.



Here is a shortened version of that video: http://youtu.be/nne_-j08yMo

Is there anything we could teach aliens?

Sometimes I wonder what an advanced alien race might be like.  Would they be like we see them in movies and on TV?  Would they be technologically advanced with spaceships capable of crossing great distances?  Or would they be spiritually advanced?  Would an advanced alien race have mastered things like telepathy and remote viewing?  Would they even be made of flesh and blood?  Would they be completely spiritual in nature, capable of crossing vast distances due to not being made of flesh and blood and not necessarily needing things like atmosphere to breathe?  Or maybe they would be like Superman, made of flesh and blood but still capable of flying at high speeds.

Personally, I tend to think an advanced alien race would be more spiritual in nature, but it may be possible that both technologically advanced and spiritually advanced aliens could exist.  Some might even be advanced in both categories.  

Some people wonder what an advanced alien race could teach us, but if we were visited by an alien race, is there anything that we could teach them?

That question crossed my mind the other day when I was watching an episode of ABC's V.   In V, the aliens, known as "Vistors" (or just Vs), have come to earth portraying themselves as a benevolent alien race bringing gifts and sharing knowledge.  In reality though, they have sinister intentions and seek to exploit humanity (possibly for breeding purposes...which I think is the direction the series is going in).  The Vs tend to be emotionless, and don't really understand human emotion.  They begin to think that human emotion may come from the soul, a concept they seem to be unfamiliar with.  In the episode I was watching, the Vs attempted an experiment to extract a soul from a person, despite the man's pleas for the experiment not to be carried out.  So I thought, instead of begging for mercy, the guy should have attempted to exploit the Vs apparent lack of knowledge of what a soul is.  He should have tried convincing them  that he was an expert in the subject of what the soul is and offered to teach them about it.  Maybe then they would have let him go.

Now if we were visited by aliens that were not sinister, no one would need to attempt to exploit their lack of knowledge of what a soul is.  But is there anything we could teach a truly benevolent alien race?  Sure, we could give them a history lesson, but is there anything else?  If the aliens were technologically advanced and non-spiritual in nature, then perhaps we could teach them something about spirituality.  Of course, humans have widely differing views on spirituality, but if the aliens were oblivious to concepts such as the soul and psychic phenomena, then maybe we could teach them a little something about that.  

If the aliens were already spiritually advanced, then there probably isn't much we could teach them.  What would aliens who have mastered telepathy need with cell phones?  Many of our technologies may seem kind of backwards to them.  

Ultimately though, unless we actually are visited by a race of aliens, it's difficult to know whether or not there is anything we could teach them.  Until we see what they already know, we won't know if there is anything we can teach them.

Alien Teachers Too?

In a post I wrote titled 'Elusive Aliens: Are They Watchers?', I compared a modern theory suggesting that ET aliens remain elusive because they are merely here to observe us with the story of the Watchers from the Book of Enoch.  The Watchers were angelic beings who were apparently supposed to just 'watch' us.  Eventually, some of the Watchers betrayed their duty and began intermingling with humans.  As I mentioned before, the Book of Enoch says the fallen Watchers taught men things such as cosmetics, building weapons, astrology, and writing.  When I wrote about that in my previous post though, it didn't occur to me at the time to mention that the fallen Watchers teaching men new things bears a resemblance to another modern theory about aliens -- a theory that suggests the rapid advancements in technology over the last century are the result of aliens from an advanced technological society secretly working with governments and people in power to teach them how to develop new technologies (or, alternatively, the government is secretly reverse engineering crashed alien spacecraft).  This also bears resemblance to the ancient Greek story of Prometheus, who defied Zeus and taught men to make fire.

So it seems that the modern theory suggesting aliens are assisting men in developing new technologies is not really all that modern afterall.  Modernized perhaps, but not really a modern concept.

View my original post on this subject here.

Elusive Aliens: Are They Watchers?

The Book of Enoch is an apocryphal text that has been left out of nearly every edition of the Bible today.  However, the book was popular in the 1st century AD, and Jude, author of the canonical text of Jude, even quoted a passage from the Book of Enoch in his epistle.  The book was supposedly written by Enoch, the great-grandfather of Noah in Genesis.  Scholars have only been able to date the book to around the 3rd century BC, but this doesn't necessarily mean the book isn't older.  It may also be important to note that Genesis says that God took Enoch, indicating that Enoch may have avoided mortal death altogether.  If so, it's possible he could have written the book later.  And, of course, I also realize the whole book could have just been someone's imagination.  But for the rest of this post at least, we're going to take the stance that the book is at least partially based on truth.

One of the most notable stories in the Book of Enoch is the story of the Watchers.  Here's an excerpt from chapter 6 of the Book of Enoch:

And they were in all two hundred; who descended in the days of Jared on the summit of Mount Hermon, and they called it Mount Hermon, because they had sworn and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it. And these are the names of their leaders: Sêmîazâz, their leader, Arâkîba, Râmêêl, Kôkabîêl, Tâmîêl, Râmîêl, Dânêl, Êzêqêêl, Barâqîjâl, Asâêl, Armârôs, Batârêl, Anânêl, Zaqîêl, Samsâpêêl, Satarêl, Tûrêl, Jômjâêl, Sariêl. These are their chiefs of tens.

As I've pointed out in previous posts (here and here), the word 'angel' means 'messenger'.  The 'angels' and the 'Watchers' may very well be the same type of entities (or species, whatever term you prefer), but they apparently have different roles in their society.  Some relay messages, some are apparently just supposed to watch.  The fallen Watchers taught men things such as cosmetics, building weapons, writing, and astrology.  The passage above says of the fallen Watchers that "they were in all two hundred."  But does that mean there are only 200 Watchers?  Or does it mean that only 200 Watchers are fallen?  Could there be more Watchers out there?

I've pointed out before some similarities between the elusive 'aliens' of today and the angels and demons spoken of in ancient texts (here, here, here, and here).  In the past, the beings known as 'angels' typically only appeared to certain individuals.  Today, most people never see any aliens.  And last I checked, there is no ancient story of a group of angels descending on the Roman Forum and declaring, "Hey, were those angels people have been talking about all these years," and then shaking hands with the emperor.  Nor have any aliens landed on the White House lawn and shook hands with the President either.  Is it a coincidence that angels and 'aliens' tend to be elusive?

And what about these Watchers?  The Book of Enoch is not the only place that watchers are mentioned; the book of Daniel also mentions watchers (lowercased though, and Daniel does not elaborate about them).  There are those among UFOlogists today who have postulated that the reason aliens are so elusive is because they are merely here to observe.  I wonder how many among those who have considered that theory have considered that the idea that the earth is being observed is a very ancient idea?  Indeed, it seems the ancients thought they were being 'watched' too.  So could the aliens that are allegedly observing us be Watchers?  Could they be Watchers that didn't break the Watcher status quo and have continued to watch throughout the millenia?

The Book of Enoch may be folklore akin to Greek mythology.  But maybe some of these old stories are at least based on truth.  Maybe some of the best evidence for that comes from comparing ancient folklore with some of our modern 'folklore'.

------------------------------------------------
P.S. View an update to this post here.

Excusing 2012

My latest thoughts on 2012 were inspired by a post by Lon on  the blog Phantoms and Monsters.  Lon's post is about what appears to be planet sized spheres in the sun's corona that may be UFOs, expelled plasma, light distortion, or something else.  Lon's post isn't about 2012, but thinking about the anomalies around the sun's corona made me consider possible excuses people may use if the year 2012 comes and goes without the world ending or a great awakening.

Would anyone suggest that aliens came and numbed the effects of the sun during 2012?  Would they point to something like planet-sized UFOs around the sun claiming that the UFOs were there to prevent the earth's poles from shifting?  Would others accuse aliens of preventing a great awakening?  What other excuses might believers use?

Maybe instead of accepting that nothing significant happened, they would instead point to some event such as a major election or fancy new invention and herald it as the beginning of a new age.  The event itself might not be that significant in the grand scheme of things, but maybe they would consider it to be only the very beginning and that the world would change more over time because of it.  In other words, they may say an event occurring in 2012 is beginning of a new era in much the same way someone might use the phrase, "Today is the first day of the rest of my life."

As for me, I still just have a wait and see attitude.  I'm not really a believer or a non-believer.  But if 2012 comes and goes without anything significant happening in the world (or to the world), I'm curious to see how the believers will deal with it.  Even if nothing significant occurs, I doubt the hype will go away over night.

Bill Clinton discusses the Roswell Incident

Here is an interesting video clip with former President Bill Clinton discussing the Roswell UFO incident.



Early in the questioning, Clinton mentions that there were people in his administration that thought there was a UFO and an alien buried in Nevada by the government (the location was off-limits to the public).  Clinton said he sent someone there to "figure it out."  According to him, there was just a secret defense installation there with people doing "boring" work that they didn't want anyone else to see.  Maybe that's true, but what I found to be interesting about it was that Clinton had to send someone to figure it out.  Not only were there people in his administration that thought there was a UFO there, but apparently this installation was so secret that he didn't even know what it was and couldn't just ask one of his generals what it was or pull it up in some sort of encrypted database of secret installations on his computer.

As far as Roswell goes, Clinton said he did attempt to find out if there were any secret documents about the UFO incident, but said that if there were any secret documents about it, they were concealed from him too.  He also said, "I wouldn't be the first President that underlings have lied to or that career bureaucrats have waited out.  But there may be some career person sitting around somewhere hiding these dark secrets even from elected presidents.  But if so, they successfully eluded me, and I'm almost embarrased to tell you I did try to find out."

So apparently, like a lot of us, even Clinton wanted to find out if something other than the official story happened at Roswell.  Many people suspect the government of lying and covering up Roswell and many other incidents and programs.  According to Clinton, underlings (i.e. government officials) have lied to Presidents before.  So if they'll lie to the President, who's to say they won't lie to us too?

I think we can also glean from Clinton's statement just what a tangled web the government is.  Not only did he not know about everything that was going on in the government, he also alludes to not being able to just pick up the phone and find out anything he wants to know about particular government operations - he had to send someone to find out about the secret operation in Nevada.   He said that operation was in the public domain now, but you have to wonder how many other operations there are that are going on now that aren't in the public domain.  You also have to wonder, considering that he admitted that 'underlings' have lied to Presidents, how many times a President sought information about secret information and was lied to about what was really going on.  You also have to wonder why the 'underlings' would lie about it to the President in the first place.  You also have to wonder why an 'underling' would be privy to something the President wasn't.  Makes you wonder who the 'underling' really is.

And I couldn't tell for sure, but I thought Clinton seemed slightly fidgety in the video and had a tendency to look down a lot (but, granted, it was hard to tell if he was looking down and I'm not sure where the audience was sitting either).  If my observation is accurate, I can't help but wonder if he wasn't hiding something himself.

Sometimes I think the President has become to much of a figurehead to the people.  People often applaud the President when things are going good, and blame the President when things are going bad.  But I don't think we should lump to much of the praise or blame on the Presidents.  I think that video clip really shows that a President does not rule alone - there is a lot more going on in the government than just what the President does.  I think the 'career bureaucrats' that Clinton mentions wield a lot more power in Washington than the Presidents do, but the career bureaucrats seem to remain mostly behind the scenes.


H/T for the video.

The Queen of Heaven

Today, the designation 'Queen of Heaven' is often associated with the Virgin Mary.  Historically, the designation has been associated with Isis and Astarte.

In regards to the so-called 'Marian apparitions', it seems to me that the Catholics who claim to have seen the Lady assume she is Mary.  In the accounts that I have read about her, she either refers to herself  as something like 'Lady of the Rosary', or she may not introduce herself at all.  So if she does not specifically introduce herself as the mother of Jesus, why should we assume that she is?

I am not denying that Mary existed; nor am I denying that she gave birth to Jesus.  I'm not denying that she was a virgin either.  The question in my mind is whether or not these so-called Marian apparitions are actually visitations by the spirit of Mary, the mother of Jesus.

What if these apparitions have been appearing for much longer than previously thought?  Could it be that this entity or spirit - whatever you prefer to call her - is the same as Isis?  It's long been thought by mainstream historians that Isis, along with all the other pagan gods and goddesses, is a myth.  Some of the more open minded ones may consider that these ancient pantheons of gods and goddesses were once based on real people that had stories about themselves fabricated or were perhaps fabricated over time.  Fringe historians have suggested that some of the gods and goddesses were aliens or some other type of non-human intelligences.  I tend to think that the gods and goddesses may have once been based on real people, but I can't discount the possibility that the stories are entirely fictional.  But I'm also not closed to the possibility that the pagan gods and goddesses were some sort of aliens, or non-human intelligences - perhaps something akin to angels or fallen angels.  It could be that the pagan pantheons consisted of a combination of any or all three of these viewpoints.

So with that in mind, I can't help but wonder if these apparitions are some sort of non-human intelligent being who has been visiting people for thousands of years.  Maybe she just adapts to the audience.   To the Egyptians, she let them think she was Isis.  To modern Catholics, she lets them think she is Mary.  Mac Tonnies suggested a possibility that the 'aliens' people claim to see today have merely adapted to our cultural expectations.  In the past (and still today, actually), people may have observed such phenomena as gods, angels, fairies, or something else.  Perhaps the aliens are not the scientists with advanced technologies that they are assumed to be; maybe it's just a facade to fit our modern expectations.  The aliens may be something else entirely.  So could it be that this 'Queen of Heaven' (translatable as Queen of the Sky) is doing the same thing?  Does this 'lady' just try to fit the appearance that the viewer(s) would expect?

Catholic traditions that grant Mary her Queen title and divine status come later in history.  The Bible never says that she ascended to heaven and it doesn't say she remained a virgin throughout her lifetime.  In fact, the Bible even makes reference to Mary having other children.  The Catholic version of Mary more closely resembles a pagan goddess than the Mary depicted in the New Testament.   Pagan goddesses of the past were often known by many names and titles, and the alleged apparitions of Mary have many titles too (Lady of the Rosary, Lady of the Pillar, Lady of the Snow, etc).  So the question in my mind remains; are the so-called Marian apparitions actually appearances by Mary?  Or is the apparition actually someone else - perhaps a pagan 'goddess' from the past?  I'm not aware of her ever specifically introducing herself as Mary, but she doesn't deny being Mary either; so does she want people to think she is Mary?  Or does she just not care who they think she is?  Is she content just being called 'Our Lady'?

Of course, skeptics say these apparitions are just hallucinations or hoaxes.  Maybe they are.  But if they are real, I wonder if she is who she is assumed to be.  If she isn't who she is assumed to be, then who - and what - is she?

The Alien - Angel Topic Revisited

I've written about the alien-angel connection before and dedicated a whole post to the topic a while back.

As I stated previously, the phrase 'angel from heaven' translates to 'messenger from the sky'.  But people have been questioning for a long time whether or not extraterrestrials could exist from a religious perspective.

Here is an article I came across today about it.  But the topic isn't something new, people have been questioning the subject for years.

I guess I'm just really surprised that there is some much confusion about this.  I mean, it just seems like such a non-issue!  If an angel from heaven has come to earth from the sky, then technically, you could classify it as a type of extraterrestrial.  This doesn't mean that the traditional concept of an angel is the only type of extraterrestrial life there is - there may very well be grays, reptillians, insectoids and other types of extraterrestrial life - but the point is, by definition of the phrase 'angel from heaven', angels themselves could very well be considered extraterrestrial.  So the whole question as to whether extraterrestrials exist from a religious perspective is like questioning whether or not angels themselves exist.  I suppose it's possible some angels could actually be terrestrial in origin, but if it's an angel that has specifically come from heaven, then technically, it's an extraterrestrial.  I don't think it matters if it is made of flesh and blood or not, a lifeform is still a lifeform.

So why all the hoopla about whether or not extraterrestrials fit into God's universe?  I guess it's somewhat understandable why some people might question from a religious perspective whether or not specific types of alleged ETs such as grays or reptilians exist, but I see no reason why anyone with a religious perspective should question whether or not extraterrestrials exist at all.

The whole debate just seems like a waste of time to me.  It's like spending years trying to decide whether or not we should say the sky is blue, or say the sky appears to be blue.


H/T for the linked article.

Paranormal Hotspot: Mount Shasta

Photo by Bill Gracey.

On a whim, you decide you want to take a vacation and go on a multi-faceted paranormal investigation.  You want to investigate bigfoot, ghosts, aliens, UFOs, lost civilizations, mysterious ancient legends, and some sort of new agey beliefs too. But you just don't have the time and resources to visit the Pacific Northwest, the Myrtles Plantation, Roswell, Rendlesham Forest, Akrotiri, Teotihuacan, and Stonehenge.  So what are you to do?  Go to Mount Shasta of course!

The area around Mt. Shasta, CA has been inhabited for thousands of years.  The peak the city is named after has long been viewed as a sacred place to Native American tribes in the area.  It was thought that the mountain was the center of creation, and the Great Spirit created it by pushing ice and snow through a hole from heaven and then using the mountain to step onto the earth.  It was also thought that the Great Spirit, known as Skell, dwelled on the mountain after creation.  It even has a story of a great flood attached to it.

New Age groups have regarded the mountain as a sacred location as well.  It's been claimed that beneath the mountain is a very ancient city called Telos, which is allegedly where people from the ancient lost continent of Lemuria (a.k.a. Mu) settled after Lemuria was destroyed.  Allegedly, they continue to live beneath the mountain in a utopian like civilization.  Sometimes it's claimed they are physical people, sometimes it's claimed they dwell on a different plane of existence, perhaps as 4th or 5th dimensional entities (4th dimensional denoting a higher awareness of spirituality/consciousness, 5th dimensional meaning a non-physical intelligent entity).  The story of Telos actually comes from a fictional novel called A Dweller on Two Planets that was written in 1800s by Frederick Spencer Oliver.  It was thought that the author must have 'channeled' the story because he was only 17 and the depth of the topics covered seem to be beyond what a 17 year old of the time would have been capable of writing.  Decades later in the 1930s, the secret society known as the Rosicrucians would popularize the belief that advanced Lemurians lived beneath Mount Shasta.

Native American legends and New Age beliefs aside, there are many reports of strange phenomena occurring at Mount Shasta.

-Bigfoot has been sighted there. Link
-Ghosts have been sighted there. Link
-UFOs have been sighted there. Link Link 2 Link 3 (Update 11/16/12: Original Link 2 no longer worked so I replaced it with a new link I found and added a third link)

In addition to claims that Mount Shasta is an entrance to the hollow earth, it's also been claimed that there is an underground military base there.  Even Batsquatch has been sighted there!  Interestingly, Batsquatch is a creature allegedly sighted around Mount St. Helens, a stratovolcano.  Mt. Shasta is a stratovolcano also.

There's a lot stories regarding paranormal phenomena on Mt. Shasta, however it's hard to find a lot of good, credible research regarding those stories.  Some of the stories are probably fictional or fabricated, some of them may be misidentifications, others may be exaggerated.  However, despite some of the stories being questionable, I think there is enough evidence to suggest that Mt. Shasta is indeed a mysterious place.  Whether it's ghosts, legends, UFOs, or cryptozoology, a paranormal researcher can probably find something of interest to study at Mt. Shasta.  It seems to be quite the 'paranormal hotspot'.

The UFO Hunters return

On Thursday, October 29th, the History Channel is going to be showing four new episodes of UFO Hunters.  For whatever reason, they don't seem to be advertising the marathon much (yet).  I haven't seen any advertisements for it on TV and I haven't seen it mentioned on the History Channel's website.  The only places I've seen it mentioned is over at the Alien Casebook Frontier and on an article about Men in Black that references material that will be covered in one of the upcoming episodes.

I'm excited about all four episodes, but I'm really excited about the Men in Black (MIB) episode (the episode is named "The Silencers").  I think the MIB stories are very interesting, not just because men wearing black suits come and try to make sure someone stays silent about a UFO they saw, but because sometimes the MIB seem to behave in an unusual manner.  Sometimes they seem to be confused by everyday items such as pens or eating untensils, and sometimes they use outdated slang.  Sometimes they are threatening, other times they may try to convince the subject they didn't really see what they saw.  Some people think that the MIB are aliens themselves (at least some of them).  The MIB typically claim to come from some government agency and may provide identification, but when verification of their identities is sought later, there is no record of them.

You also have to wonder how many potential testimonies have been silenced by the MIB.  Hopefully the new episode of UFO Hunters will provide some new insights on the subject.

And if you like the show and haven't signed the petition to get the series renewed, go here and sign it.  To read synopsis' of the four new episodes on October 29th, go here.

Disclosure Hype?

There seems to be a lot of buzz on the internet lately about a potential upcoming disclosure by the government of extraterrestrial contact.  It seems like the hype may have picked up after the British government started declassifying their UFO files.  But now, it seems some people are suggesting a potential date has been set for the disclosure; November 27 of this year.  You can view a video clip about that here.

I doubt there will be any disclosure this year.  I've looked at Bill Ryan's website (Projectcamelot.org) before, and he has some pretty far fetched stuff on there.  I just don't think the government is ready for that yet.  Heck, for all we know the government may not even be in contact with extraterrestrials.

But if I'm wrong and there is a disclosure, here are a couple of things to keep in mind:

1. If the government announces that they are in contact with friendly extraterrestrials, don't necessarily assume that is the truth.  Bear in mind, the government that is saying the extraterrestrials are friendly is the same government that was lying about it and covering it up for decades.  We shouldn't automatically trust everything they say just because it sounds 'cool' and is exciting.  There could be an ulterior motive.  
2. The government legitimately thinks the extraterrestrials are friendly.  But...the extraterrestrials may be deceiving the government.  Sort of like ABC's upcoming reimagining of the 1983 miniseries V.  In V, the extraterrestrials claim to come in peace, but they actually have an ulterior motive and are a threat.

I'm not saying everyone should jump to the conclusion that we are being lied to, I'm just saying we shouldn't jump to the conclusion that we are being told the truth either.  If and when disclosure ever occurs, I'm sure there will be a lot of people excited about it and readily believe whatever they are told.  This isn't necessarily a good thing.  People should still question things and think for themselves.

And speaking of V, is it just a coincidence that there is all this hype about disclosure right before the premiere on November 3rd?

The Messengers

A documentary I was watching last night about the history of angels got me thinking more about a concept I've written about before in my posts Angels, Demons, and Aliens and Those oh so standoffish aliens.  The concept suggests that aliens may be angels and/or demons, or vice versa.

The word "angel" is derived from the Latin word "angelos," which is derived from the Greek translation of the Hebrew word for "messenger."  The Bible doesn't really give a clear description of what angels look like.  Artistic depictions of angels with wings and halos didn't start appearing until around the 5th century AD.  It's pretty obvious that these depictions are just carried over from traditional depictions of pagan gods.  Numerous gods from the ancient Egyptian, Greek, and Roman pantheons were depicted with wings.  Cupid, Eros, and Hermes are probably the most recognizable (although Hermes' wings were on his sandals, not his back).  Interestingly, Hermes was the messenger of the Greek gods.

In the Bible, it seemed people weren't always aware they were in the presence of angels, such as in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19).  But oftentimes, people seemed to recognize the angels as angels.  The Bible never really describes in any great detail what the angels look like though.

I think this fits with the modern stories I've heard of angel encounters. In some stories, people don't even recognize the angel as an angel.  Typically, the angel just seems to come out of nowhere at just the right time to relay a special message or perform some good deed (read some angel stories here).  Othertimes, the angel's appearance may be more obvious, it may be glowing.  Or it may just give off a calming 'presence'.  So various modern stories of angels seem to fit with the ancient stories, sometimes they look like regular people, other times it's more obvious that they are angels.  It seems angels can choose how they want to appear to a person.

Looking to the skies for 'alien' life isn't something new at all.  People have been doing this all along.  The ancients thought of angels as messengers from heaven, and heaven is just another word for sky.  When people capitalize it as "Heaven," then it's considered to be the dwelling place of God.  But the word "heaven" is just a word for the sky and space.  So essentially, the ancients thought of angels as entities from space.

So is it really any different for us to look for aliens from space?  Is it just a case of semantics?

Maybe part of our problem in looking for life in outer space is we are too arrogant.  It seems that people are always looking for "life as we know it," meaning flesh and blood beings who breathe oxygen and drink water and like 70 degree (Fahrenheit) temperatures.  But who's to say that other life, including intelligent life, couldn't exist in environments totally different from what we are accustomed to?  With that in mind, how would an angel from 'heaven' be that much different than an 'alien' from space?  What qualifies as an 'angel' and what qualifies as an 'alien'?  Does it have something to do with how they look?  Or does it have something to do with how they behave?  Or does it have something to do with whether or not they travel on a spaceship?  Are the angels a type of 'alien'?  Or are what we think of as aliens something totally different?  And if angels and 'aliens' are both forms of intelligent life, then what exactly differentiates them each other?  And how many different types are there?

Typically, Greys, Nordics, and Reptilians are the three most common types of aliens some people claim to have seen.  I guess out of those three, the Nordics would be the type that look the most 'angelic'.  But are Nordics the same as angels?  Or would it be more accurate to ask are angels the same as Nordics?  If not, what makes them different?  Of course, it may also be necessary to ask whether 'Nordics' exist at all.

It seems that looking to the sky for 'aliens' may just be a 20th and 21st century interpretation of looking to the sky for angels.  The big question is are they really any different?  And how many different types are there?  And if aliens and angels are different, then what exactly is different about them?  Is it the appearance?  The mode of transportation?  Their behavour?  Their agenda?  Their purpose?

Perhaps sentient life is sentient life, regardless of what form it takes.