Thanks to one of our fabulous scoopers, MovieWeb.com has your very first exclusive look at the actual Crystal Skull from
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull! Not much is known yet about the role the Crystal Skull takes in the movie, but we do know that Indiana Jones will be hunting to find the mystical skull in the jungles of South America before Soviet agents do. Take a look!
Update: Sorry Indy fans, by request of the studio, we have taken down the image.
DVD News
2 Comments
89 Comments
Scroll to the second story there and look at his Movieweb image/poster comparison. All sites I've seen now have confirmed Movieweb had the legit skull, before they were asked to take it down.
i knew i should have checked this out yesterday, but i forgot. fucking jerk ass studios.
We all know that archeology is a fascinating field, and the history of society is well documented in many cases. We've theorized and uncovered techniques that possibly explain pyramid construction. We've found artifacts that may explain the disappearance of civilizations. Some of these findings have been accepted as fact and are taught as such, while others remain theories.
That said; while we know much about ancient cultures, there is much we cannot prove one way or the other. We may have evidence that supports common theory, but unless you've got a photograph or time machine, the idea will remain just that - a theory.
Therefore I suggest, that any viable "theology" reference should not be criticized, unless you've got foolproof evidence that it's INCORRECT. I really don't care how foolish some ideas are, but honestly, unless you can prove otherwise I wouldn't try to discredit anyone's suggestions.
And now you know.
And knowing is half the battle.
Cheers
I didn't fail to answer your question of recorded history, that's exactly what you got, various highlights from experts in history, the History Channel that airs many great documentaries.
You failed to address any of the historical points within the paragraphs, that would take thinking, it's easier to just blow everything off.
I guess the History Channel is in the business of conjuring up history, bypassing any fact checking, so that myopic jerks such as yourself can act like they know everything there is to know.
The wikipedia site is just a depository, the actual information is correct.
Your problem is that you just want to keep arguing, that is your end goal. You have no intention of having an open mind, yours is made up and that is certainly fine. I'm sure others here are tired of this bickering.
Your arrogant attitude makes me laugh.
Stick to digging up other peoples achievements.
This idea clearly has you upset and rattled. Is it ok for others to believe what they like?
My support is in part because of these hard to reconcile occurrences:
The History Channel/History.com (crackpot website):
Throughout history there have been numerous sightings of UFO's. In fact the ancient Hindu Ramayana described the use of complicated flying machines. In Sumerian culture the word annunaki means "those who came from heaven to earth." Annunaki is found in the ancients Sumerian myths, and some believe that the annunaki were visitors from the stars. Zecharia Sitchin claims that the anunnaki were extra-terrestrials who came to earth in its infancy, and tampered with the genetic makeup of primitive mankind. The evidence of this according to Sitchin is the fact that there are 223 non-human genes found within the human genome. Scientists believe these genes were horizontally inserted into the human genome by bacteria. However, Sitchin believes that "...these 223 genes were horizontally inserted into the human genome by alien visitors, not bacteria."
The Mayans thought that their gods came from the star system "Pleiades." Inca ruins have been found at 13,000 feet, with one stone weighing 20,000 tons. There is an ancient Mayan legend which says that spaceships descended from the stars. There are some who believe that the stone could only have been put there with the help of extra-terrestrials.
In Egypt during the reign of Pharoah Thutmose III around 1450 B.C. there is a description of many "circles of fire" brighter than the sun and around 5 meters in size. The Egyptians wrote that these UFO's appeared over multiple days and finally disappeared after ascending higher into the sky.
A sighting was recorded by Julias Obsequens, a Roman writer in 99 BCE, "in Tarquinia towards sunset, a round object, like a globe, a round or circular shield, took its path in the sky from west to east." On September 24th, 1235 General Yoritsune and his army observed globes of light flying in odd patterns in the night sky near Kyoto, Japan. Fearing for his army, Yoritsune asked his advisors what was happening. His advisors explained to him that there was nothing to worry about - it was just wind causing the stars to sway.
The next recorded sighting was on April 14th, 1561 in the skies over Nuremberg, Germany. There was a report that the skies were filled with a multitude of objects engaged in an aerial battle. Small spheres were described as having emerged from large cylinders. Another historical sighting of a UFO happened in the July of 1868. The investigators of this UFO define the first modern documented sighting as having happened in Copiapo City, Chile.
The Nazca Lines are a series of geoglyphs located in the Nazca Desert, a high arid plateau that stretches 53 miles or more than 80 kilometers between the towns of Nazca and Palpa on the Pampas de Jumana in Peru. They were created by the Nazca culture between 200 BC and AD 700. There are hundreds of individual figures, ranging in complexity from simple lines to stylized hummingbirds, spiders, monkeys, fishes, sharks, llamas and lizards.
The Nazca lines cannot be recognized as coherent figures except from the air. Since it is presumed the Nazca people could never have seen their work from this vantage point, there has been much speculation on the builders' abilities and motivations.
Last, but not least, is the infamous Roswell, New Mexico incident in 1947 where the US Airforce intially states that they have recovered a crashed UFO, then quickly retract their story. Their conclusion, it was not a crashed saucer, but a weather baloon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roswell_UFO_incident
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witness_accounts_of_the_Roswell_UFO_incident#Jesse_Marcel.E2.80.99s_testimony
Also...
"Also, your other argument is: if something is not commented in a peer reviewed journal, then that something can not exist? If that's true, then all species of animals must not have existed until man discovered them and wrote about them. Only man's collective experience define others' existence."
Actually, I never said that.
No, you didn't, never said you did. The above is MY explanation of your flawed logic and apparently your flawed reading skills.
Indeed. Read, can you do that?
Agree to disagree.
http://fusedfilmblog.com/
http://www.enterprisemission.com/IntelligentDesignandGod-Man-and-ET.htm
with Tiny URL version of link
http://tinyurl.com/2cdu6c
Here is what we have so far: You're defending your argument that human culture may not have developed on its own and you are citing extraterrestrial life as a possible explanation. You are also stating that "recorded history" and "anachronistic advancement in ancient times " is proof of this. This said proof therefore supports the "out of the box" idea that alien intervention is a viable theology.
My question to you again is: where is this proof? Show me these examples in recorded history.
"Also, your other argument is: if something is not commented in a peer reviewed journal, then that something can not exist? If that's true, then all species of animals must not have existed until man discovered them and wrote about them. Only man's collective experience define others' existence."
Actually, I never said that. Once again, I simply asked for proof of your argument. If you want to send me a link to some crackpot website, go ahead. Likely I won't be convinced. But if you show me an example from a peer reviewed journal, chances are I might be more likely to join your side.
"Go surfing...Can you do that?"
Indeed. Provide me with proof, can you do that?