Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,692 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,661,723
Pageviews Today: 2,248,121Threads Today: 419Posts Today: 9,187
04:19 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Philip Coppens fires back at Debunking Ancient Aliens Video Debunked !!

 
Nostril Domus
Offer Upgrade

User ID: 9357516
United States
10/15/2012 08:30 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Philip Coppens fires back at Debunking Ancient Aliens Video Debunked !!
I watched the debunking film and i have read the below article. Both make claims against one another for false statements. So who do we believe? I for one would like to believe that the AA theorists are correct and the theories expressed by the show are somehow true. This goes to show me that we really don't know shit about our past. We could conjure up answers to all of our questions regarding our past, but i think we will never know unless we find undeniable proof!


“Ancient Aliens Debunked” is a YouTube released, 190 minutes long documentary by Chris White. In the documentary, he tackles 16 topics that in his opinion form the backbone of the Ancient Alien Hypothesis, which White claims he conclusively refutes, which in his opinion conclusively proves that the evidence presented in the series Ancient Aliens is factually incorrect and worse, he claims, sets out to deceive.
He concludes: “The main thing I want to stress is that I’m not trying to suggest that, while Ancient Aliens got a few claims wrong, there’s room for truth in their main theory. That, in light of this information, is not a tenable position. You have just witnessed the unmistakable symptoms of the entire theory being wrong.”

This is a heavy claim to make! In short, he argues that in his opinion the series has failed to show we were visited by ancient aliens and implies we should therefore forget all about it! So it is now up to television series to prove or disprove scientific theories? Wow! It’s a heavy burden to place on any television series! Far more importantly, it would leave the likes of Carl Sagan flabbergasted, as he felt there was good evidence to look into a number of ancient contact scenarios, especially the story of Oannes – which for some reason, White does not include in this documentary. Why?

White continues: “I would ask you also to take a long, hard look at the authors, speakers and charismatic personalities that led you to believe some of the things that I hope you can now see are wrong. I hope that this helps you realize they are not as smart as they have led you to believe, and to consider what other untruths they may have taught you.”

I am one of those people, I assume, seeing I feature in the documentary. So I took this rather personally. White has accused the makers and contributors of this show of a number of things: first, even though he claims we are not that smart as we apparently have told the world we are (where did we say that?), we also are apparently, according to White, very smart, but use our intelligence to knowingly deceive the audience. (Which one is it, Mr. White?)



[link to www.philipcoppens.com]

Thread: Ancient Aliens Debunked (Full Movie)

Last Edited by Nostril Domus on 10/15/2012 09:03 PM
Nostril Domus (OP)

User ID: 9357516
United States
10/15/2012 08:39 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Philip Coppens fires back at Debunking Ancient Aliens Video Debunked !!
bump
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 25445959
United States
10/15/2012 08:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Philip Coppens fires back at Debunking Ancient Aliens Video Debunked !!
The paintings allegedly showing ancient alien UFO have simply been retouched in recent years. William Schnobelin was on the Ancient Alien program and says he informed them of this but that segment was cut from the final production. The show wanted to deceive.
Nostril Domus (OP)

User ID: 9357516
United States
10/15/2012 08:50 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Philip Coppens fires back at Debunking Ancient Aliens Video Debunked !!
The paintings allegedly showing ancient alien UFO have simply been retouched in recent years. William Schnobelin was on the Ancient Alien program and says he informed them of this but that segment was cut from the final production. The show wanted to deceive.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25445959


But there is more symbolism than just painting's. Just about all of the ancient civilizations made some reference to the stars. Why would they do that? Who told them to do that? How did they have any knowledge of the cosmos without some direction on the subject.
Earth Daughter

User ID: 25376784
United States
10/15/2012 09:01 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Philip Coppens fires back at Debunking Ancient Aliens Video Debunked !!
I don't need a show to tell me if there are aliens are not. I know first hand that there are.

Trying to debunk it is a waste of time, imho, and somewhat funny to me.

If one really wants to experience the phenomena, it's really not that hard. But some people would rather spend their time gathering 'evidence' or debunking it, than actually experiencing it for themselves.

The truth is not 'out there'. It's right here and it's available to all those with eyes to see.
"Arrows of hate have been shot at me too, but they never hit me, because somehow they belonged to another world, with which I have no connection whatsoever." - Albert Einstein
Nostril Domus (OP)

User ID: 9357516
United States
10/15/2012 09:06 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Philip Coppens fires back at Debunking Ancient Aliens Video Debunked !!
I don't need a show to tell me if there are aliens are not. I know first hand that there are.

Trying to debunk it is a waste of time, imho, and somewhat funny to me.

If one really wants to experience the phenomena, it's really not that hard. But some people would rather spend their time gathering 'evidence' or debunking it, than actually experiencing it for themselves.

The truth is not 'out there'. It's right here and it's available to all those with eyes to see.
 Quoting: Earth Daughter


But they have careers that depend on credibility and if that is lost then their career is no more. I know what you are saying about the evidence, but for these guys their image is everything. I think them arguing and trying to debunk each other would be more entertaining in a public venue!
Nostril Domus (OP)

User ID: 9357516
United States
10/15/2012 09:37 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Philip Coppens fires back at Debunking Ancient Aliens Video Debunked !!
bump
Nostril Domus (OP)

User ID: 2786442
United States
10/16/2012 09:42 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Philip Coppens fires back at Debunking Ancient Aliens Video Debunked !!
cool2
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 11369766
United States
10/16/2012 09:45 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Philip Coppens fires back at Debunking Ancient Aliens Video Debunked !!
Wasn't Ancient Aliens cancelled recently? I think because people were starting to wake up to their B.S. I love the Ancient Aliens Debunked vid. It really doesn't take much to unearth the lies. People who want to believe in something extraterrestrial do so to fill the void where God should be.
Nostril Domus (OP)

User ID: 2786442
United States
10/16/2012 06:48 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Philip Coppens fires back at Debunking Ancient Aliens Video Debunked !!
Wasn't Ancient Aliens cancelled recently? I think because people were starting to wake up to their B.S. I love the Ancient Aliens Debunked vid. It really doesn't take much to unearth the lies. People who want to believe in something extraterrestrial do so to fill the void where God should be.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11369766


I think it was canceled mid season i thought i heard.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1689042
United States
10/16/2012 08:33 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Philip Coppens fires back at Debunking Ancient Aliens Video Debunked !!
I (Chris White) the maker of Ancient Aliens Debunked answered Coppens, I think you will that Coppens was being a bit deceptive in his "debunking"
[link to ancientaliensdebunked.com]

Here is a sampling:

Coppens: I will use the subject of the crystal skulls as the first example. The conclusion of this section is, for White, the following: “In conclusion, all of the proposed crystal skulls have now been conclusively proven to be hoaxes. The last holdout (the MHS [The Mitchell Hedges skull]) was only still a candidate because it was not allowed to be examined until recently. Its history is full of greed and lies, and it genuineness could only be accepted by the most dedicated devotee given the facts we now know.”

This is simply not true. For one, the “MHS” was studied by the likes of Hewlett-Packard and the British Museum more than three decades ago. When Anna Mitchell-Hedges came to Britain to have the latter tests performed, there were reports and footage of the event. The Hewlett-Packard testing was reported by the organization themselves and I have copies of it – as have hundreds of other people, no doubt. But White either is not aware of this, or as it does not fit his agenda, disregards it.

Actually, I am aware of this, I didn’t include it because the Hewlett Packard test was not a test to see if it was a fake or not, it had nothing to do with the method of manufacture or dating. Instead it basically determined the type of crystal it was, and that is was made from the same crystal.

It was a test set up by Frank Dorland and Richard Garvin, the writer that Dorland (Anna’s skull promoter), commissioned to write the atrocious book The Crystal Skull. Garvin was an ad man, and one of his clients was HP. He used that connection to have this non-test in order to give the impression of credibility for his upcoming book. He would be able to say “Oh yeah, it was even studied by Hewlett Packard!” But as I mentioned, the reason why this is irrelevant is that nothing they did in that study had any bearing on whether it was a fake or not. There was no dating of the skull or investigation of tool marks.

As far as the British Museum test in 1936. I was aware of that study too, I even referred to it in the film. They are the ones that said it was probably copied from the one that they had in their collection (which they later also determined to be a fake)
[link to www.archaeology.org]
Incidentally, all this was before Mitchel Hedges owned the skull, and certainly before Anna did.

Things like the negative British Museum report are almost certainly why Sydney Burney abandoned his 10 year effort to sell the skull to an actual museum, and instead dumped it off at a public auction to Mitchell Hedges.

Coppens: White instead opts for or – to use the type of wording he prefers to use on the documentary in making accusations – “leads us to believe” that in 2007, when Bill Homann took the skull to the Smithsonian, it was finally revealed to be a fake. That is once again not the case. That the skull is a modern reproduction is indeed the opinion of Jane Walsh, who was present at this test. But she arrived at that belief many years before ever meeting this skull. Though I was not present, I do have in my possession the complete video footage of the 2007 Smithsonian session, and I can assure anyone, and will make available if needed, sections of this tape (it is many hours long) that will show a radically different nature of this session than what White pretends the meeting was all about. Let me note that White was not present and has never seen this footage.

If you have proof that the Smithsonian study was somehow faulty, now is a good time to dig it out!

In the show, on this point you say something like “in short, we believe that those experts are wrong in their conclusions.”

Well I’m very interested, what kind of evidence would you propose to negate the findings of the Smithsonian?

Coppens: As mentioned, it is absolutely false that Anna Mitchell-Hedges never allowed for any testing.


Perhaps I should have said “Anna Mitchell-Hedges never allowed for any testing that would prove the skull was a fake.” Because she did allow the HP test, which I have already described basically as nothing better than a PR stunt which had no bearing on its validity, nor could it have.

Coppens: Some of the other claims he makes in this section, that Mitchell-Hedges lied about the origins of how he acquired the skull, are true. But let it be clear that the likes of White were not the ones who discovered this, even though he implies quite cunningly that he somehow seems to have been involved in finding these documents, by making claims he has seen letters and the like. So have thousands of others, as these letters are in the public record.

I said “we actually have the letter that he wrote to his brother” The WE there is clearly meant to be taken in the same way that people say “we now know that the universe is expanding.” In that example I had nothing to do with the scientists figuring out that the universe is expanding, its just a figure of speech.

Coppens: I personally wrote that the story was an invention, and that there are good reasons why Mitchell-Hedges created the story. It can be read here. Mr White seems to be unaware of this, or fails to mention it.


I read your article, you say:

“Legal experts have noted that, under contemporary law, by purchasing the skull at auction there could be no contest over its ownership: Mitchell-Hedges was the rightful owner, regardless of how he acquired it. Hence, the true importance of the auction might have been totally missed by the skeptics. It is true that Mitchell-Hedges began to speak about the skull only in the late 1940s, but, rather than this being evidence that he acquired it in 1943, it might be evidence that from 1943 onwards he felt
liberated and able to speak openly about it, knowing that he now legally possessed it and no one could take it away from him.”

So you basically take the story Anna put out after the Sotheby’s auction stuff surfaced, which basically says that Hedges did find it in the jungle like he always maintained, but that after that he loaned it to Sydney Burney for 10 years for safe keeping, and then Burney’s son tried to auction it, so Hedges had to rush down and buy it from the auction. I detailed that story in the film.

You only add the twist that in addition, it was also a clever scheme for him to gain perfectly legal ownership of the skull.

Obviously he bought it at the auction and that was the first time he had seen it, and that was the reason that the first time he mentions the skull is not until after the auction (10 years after he supposedly found it.) The truth is plain in the letter he wrote to his brother. It’s pretty darn obvious to anyone that wants to read it, and that’s why devotees need to weave this web to try to explain it away. He never wanted anyone to know about the auction or that letter.

In your article you also say that no one knows where Burney got the skull 10 years prior, obviously trying to make room for Anna’s story, but that’s not entirely true. Burney obtained his crystal skull in early 1933, as attested in a letter he wrote on Burney Gallery stationary to the director of the American Museum of Natural History in February of that year (AMNH 2/17/1933):

“I have just acquired a life-size rock crystal skull with separate jaw, from Mexico, and I shall be glad to know if it is of interest to you or your museum.”

It should be noted that Mitchell Hedges claimed he found it in Belize not Mexico, it should also be noted that J. J. Braunholz of the British Museum said that he saw it in a shop in London before Hedges or Burney bought it, according to J. Eric Thompson.

When you take in to account that the British museum skull is a fake, and the Mitchell hedges skull is basically an exact copy of that one, adding to that that it has been determined that the MHS does have tool marks on it, this issue is decided, it’s a losing battle, get out while you can.

News