The series was originally known as Montauk, as the setting of the script was in Montauk, New York and nearby Long Island locations. The brothers had chosen Montauk as it had further Spielberg ties with the film Jaws, where Montauk was used for the fictional setting of Amity Island.
I find this explanation hard to believe, for Montauk Air Force Base, in the Eastern coast of the United States, was already famous among aficionados of conspiracy theories for exactly the kind of experiments that take place in the series. According to some, secret experiments took place underground there in the late Seventies that succeeded in doing all sorts of dark and very strange things.
2) The Annunaki were on Earth in ancient times for mining purposes.
3) The Annunaki created a hybrid human, a mixture of themselves and Homo Habilis, four-hundred-thousand years ago, so that they had a worker available to do the back-breaking mining activity.
I was very sceptical about those three ideas for rational reasons. Firstly, I concluded that point 1 wasn't true, as there was no evidence at that time of an eccentric, long-orbit planet around our solar system. I was also very sceptical of point 2 and 3, because I felt that a race from another planet would find the mining and transport of raw metals to another planet far too costly in terms of resources for the activity to be worthwhile.
But this scepticism may have been misplaced. Recently, several scientific developments seem to have boosted Sitchin’s theory. There has been the discovery that a planet around our sun may be a reality, thanks to the studies of orbital anomalies in the Kuiper Belt, the large region of comets on the edge of our solar system. There has also been the genetic discovery that the changes in genes required to turn Homo Habilis into Homo Sapiens are so extensive, specialised and mutually dependent that it’s almost impossible that they could have occurred purely through natural selection. Thirdly, just last week, a scientific report was published describing the discovery of Homo Sapiens bones in an ancient mine in Morocco, bones that have been reliably dated to 300,000 BC, two-hundred-thousand years before Homo Sapiens was supposed to have developed in Africa.
All the above three scientific discoveries are ground-breaking and seem strong enough to force the scientific establishment to re-assess their conclusions about many major subjects. What’s more, all three discoveries support Sitchin’s theories about the Annunaki. If these ‘gods’ did create a hybrid annunaki-habilis person, Homo Sapiens, four-hundred-thousand years ago, then it would explain both the bizarre acceleration of genetic changes from Habilis to Sapiens and the presence of Homo Sapiens in a mine, three-hundred-thousand years ago.
Because of these developments, I put aside my earlier misgivings and read Sitchin’s book. I’m very pleased I did because it’s a fascinating read. Sitchin’s decision to learn cuneiform as a way to really find out what the Sumerians were saying is exemplary. The book is also very readable and engaging. His ideas may still sound crazy but at the moment, from a scientific point of view, Sitchin’s theory is actually the most plausible theory for our current state on this planet. An ancient, technically advanced race colonising Earth half a million years ago, then hybridising Homo Habilis to create a worker-slave, is actually the most plausible explanation of why Homo Sapiens is here, how our civilisation arrived, appearing from literally nothing in 4,000BC, and where we need to look for answers and further understanding of ourselves and our past.
I do though have to give a warning; since Sitchin's translations of the Sumerian texts are so different to other translations, and I don't know of any other researcher who supports Sitchin's translations, it may be that Sitchin is wrong about some elements described in his book. For example, I think his belief in the Annunaki using rocket ships and landing platforms is probably wrong. It is far more likely that the Annunaki used far more advanced technology that glorified fireworks.
Apart from that cautionary comment, I found the book fascinating and I heartily recommend it.
As Darling Schulze-Makuch's book explains, the story of evidence for life on Mars kicked off with Percival Lovell and his claims for Martian 'canals'. In truth, Lovell was simply re-iterating an Italian astronomer's observations of 'canali' on Mars, which is Italian for 'channel', but Lovell's embellishments and conclusion that Mars was inhabited by a civilisation struck a popular chord.
Later on, probably the most important episode of 'life on Mars' evidence came from the Viking lander expedition. Devices on the Viking lander found evidence of life in the Martian soil. This evidence should, at least if NASA had followed its own rules, have been enough for scientists to declare that life does exist on Mars, but certain scientists on the NASA panel had their way and the evidence was eventually dismissed as inconclusive. Read More...
But if that's true, then either those aliens are keeping a very low profile or the powers-that-be leading our countries on Earth know about them and they're keeping the fact a secret. This second possibility shouldn't really come as a shock to anyone. 'Knowledge is Power' goes the old adage and powerful people like to be as powerful as possible. We're therefore left with two possibilities; there are no aliens visiting Earth (which is statistically highly unlikely) or there are aliens visiting Earth and our governments are keeping it secret (which is statistically highly likely, but hard to prove). Which is it? Read More...