Hehehe. Where these figurines were found people had only llamas actually. They can carry some packages, but riding on them is rather a silly idea. The fastest way to journey was by running. 
Or maybe flying?
http://nott.com/nazca/
LOL - really? What about the warming that took place before humans? I know, obvious retort - but have to ask.
Like you regurgitating liberal talking points and bumper stickers . . .
You . . . actually . . . went . . . 3000 messages . . . with someone . . . who did not think 9/11 actually happened? Or, are you the someone that thinks 9/11 did not happen. LOL.
Tell me, if your granny would have moustache she would be a grandpa?
Too late to ask about that. We have humans already and its fact we are gasing like crazy.
Better tell us about your encounters of the third kind and stop posting this pointless offtop.
Well, my Granny did have a mustache, but she was still my Granny. LOL.
Iâve never seen anything remotely close to being odd enough to be considered a UFO. I have seen some pretty odd stuff, but it was right here on Mother Earth.
Aside for some pretty interesting pics, mostly bogus no doubt, there are so many people that have seen what they considered alien objects. Not just the typical nutjobs, but Government Leaders (okay, nutjobs), Airline pilots, Astronauts, Military Pilots and all manor of civilians from scientists to sausage makers . . . makes it hard to wonder if something is not really out there. I, personally, hope we are not the only humanoid intelligent life there is - because we rate pretty low in my opinion (except Yiole, who has an unusually perfect grasp on all truth and learning - I bow down). LOL.
How would ancient man describe an alien craft, if they had in fact seen one? What kind of descriptors would he use? Think about that for a moment and then read this passage:
âAnd I looked, and, behold, a whirlwind came out of the north, a great cloud, and a fire infolding itself, and a brightness was about it, and out of the midst thereof as the colour of amber, out of the midst of the fire.Also out of the midst thereof came the likeness of four living creatures. And this was their appearance; they had the likeness of a man.â Ezekiel, approx 600 BC.
3000 messages with someone who claimed that the Government did 9/11. As I said, it was a weeks long discussion, and there was other people also answering him after he challenged the forum to prove him wrong. 
âSee, forest fires happened before mankind. Thus it wasnât me who set that forest on fire, sirâ -I guess arsonists really could use this novel technique in Galicia an Portugal, which last week just had 400+ forest fires, almost all them suspected intentional, during terrible weather conditions (30/30/30, more than 30 degrees, less than 30% humidity, sustained winds above 30 km/h).
What never happened before was that many milion years worth of CO2 sequestering kept underground was returned to the air in just 150 years, effectively doubling CO2 levels. This never happened before and itâs Man who did it. But hey⌠climate change happened before.
Another funny fact, by breathing you pollute the air.
1 Like
About those models, i think they put some of them to test. IE made them like RC planes and some actually flew well.
Yes and cow farts do it too, thats why we must eat as many as we canâŚ
1 Like
We need proofs we could study, the witness can lie. âI have seen it on my own eyesâ when claiming something supernatural is the worst kind of evidence when presented alone. Videos and photos were also faked so its not helping to have a video also usually. Something physical have to back it up. The reason eyewitness is accepted in court is because there is evidence in a first place, for example damaged physical object, that proofs that something indeed happened.
Not really. When you breathe, you return to air CO2 that was sequestered by a plant a few months or years ago. Thatâs different from taking CO2 that was sequestered millions of years ago when climate was radically different than today and just drop it to present day atmosphere.
Funny fact about breathing:
The real use for oxygen is to remove hydrogen from our cells by creating water; thatâs
why our breathe is always more humid than the air we intake. Our body haves a limited ability to âburnâ carbohydrates without supplemental oxygen, but that leaves behind hydrogen which must be eliminated. An easy way is to produce lactic acid, although it haves limited effectiveness and is bad for our muscles. Letting oxygen from the air capture 2 atoms of hydrogen for one of oxygen provides extra energy and removes all that nasty, nasty hydrogen⌠also prevents oxygen from wrecking the delicate chemical processes in our metabolism. In a way, we live by manufacturing a poison gas (H) and removing it with another poison gas (O). CO2 is not really poisonous, but in excess it disrupts the blood capture of oxygen so hydrogen builds up and kills us.
1 Like
I almost didnât know all that. And now I know, not to ever argue with a politician again.
The most advanced technology is at SpaceX now.
Look at it!
How would people thousands of years ago describe it?
I think they would talk about column, tree pole, giant stick, flying on flame.
1 Like
Or in older Chinese literature they speak of riding a dragon - dragon, another mystical creature from ancient tells.
Here is one thing that puzzles me for ages now. Why did the ancient folks invent a word for a create that did not exist, or did it?
You mean like Empress Catiz I, ruler of the Amarran people at the Amarr Empire in New Eden? 
Dunno, why would people invent a word for something that doesnât existsâŚ?
They would use words they know. That is the hardest part to deciphering meaning. Doesnt make it easier that these ancient people had fairly enigmatic systems to store information.
What makes it even harder, they could have had it usually written on material different than clay, that already decomposed, and only fragmentary information is provided, similar to a few magic runes on a sword or a stick.
I would assume there is evidence to suggest arsonists were the cause, yes? Pffft. LOL. Such a ridiculous argument.
Earthâs climate record shows that warming has preceded, not followed, a rise in CO2. According to a 2003 study published in Science, measurements of ice core samples show that over the last four climactic cycles (past 240,000 years), periods of natural global warming preceded global increases in CO2. In 2010 the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences published a study of the earthâs climate 460-445 million years ago which found that an intense period of glaciation, not warming, occurred when CO2 levels were 5 times higher than they are today. Further, according to ecologist and former Director of Greenpeace International Patrick Moore, PhD, âthere is some correlation, but little evidence, to support a direct causal relationship between CO2 and global temperature through the millennia.â
Agreed. Two witnesses to a car accident can each tell very different tales of what they âwitnessedâ.
Seriously dude, you should stop using denialist drivel thatâs been debunked dead a thousand times. In normal warmings spanning over 10,000 years (not just a century) CO2 peaks after the heating has started, as in heat causes an increase of CO2, BUT, CO2 alone causes too an incrase in temperature which then triggers even more CO2 and more temeprature. Actualy, one of the funny things about GW is that temperature is nearing the point after which, in normal warmings, CO2 skyrockets to its peak⌠just this point has been reached in less than 100 years instead of 10,000.