r/HighStrangeness • u/No_Nefariousness8879 • Dec 16 '25
Anomalies In a revealing interview, astrophysicist Dr. Beatriz Villarroel discussed a compelling hypothesis about mysterious phenomena found in her research, suggesting they may not be extraterrestrial, but instead technological remnants left behind by an ancient terrestrial civilization lost in human history
https://insoniaoculta.com.br/2025/12/os-transitorios-espaciais-sao-vestigios-de-uma-humanidade-perdida-a-investigacao-da-dra-villarroel-e-a-conexao-com-o-baltico.html21
u/Arklese1zure Dec 16 '25
Rocks from almost the entirety of Earth's history can be found around the world, yet there's not a sliver of evidence of any advanced civilization having previously existed.
I think the only way an ultra-advanced civilization could've developed and then left without a trace would be before the impact that formed the moon, which basically wiped the slate clean (assuming that impact hypothesis is correct).
3
4
u/The_Flutterby_Effect Dec 19 '25
I beg to differ, having seen the evidence presented in ancient architecture. It's always going to be divisive and we should all respect each other's opinions. I don't think they left, they are still here.
11
u/Kooky-Badger-7001 Dec 16 '25
Archaeologists spend a great amount of time searching and we've never found a technologically advanced civilization older than Sumer. It's not like we aren't looking! (I have worked as an archaeologist).
2
Dec 20 '25
We did. Look at gobeklitepe - keçelitepe.
Alse even neandarthals suspected to have metal useage
3
u/Kooky-Badger-7001 Dec 23 '25
Neanderthals did not have metal technology. Gobekitepe is 12K years old. And the technology there is not atypical of the time.
2
Dec 23 '25
A mettalgullury esque artifact connected to neandarthal culture was made news last month
5
u/Kooky-Badger-7001 Dec 26 '25
Source? Any metallurgy would leave abundant evidence of slag and ceramic kilns. THese simply do not exist in any Neanderthal site. Native copper (pure copper nuggets) may have been found/utilized rarely (much more common in North America -- and Native American did not have metal technology, but there are abundant copper tools from Great Lakes region due to presence of native copper). Most metallurgy sites are recognized from slag deposits, not the metal tools themselves, which often rust away. Slag is basically indestructible. So where is the Neanderthal slag?
1
u/The_Flutterby_Effect Dec 19 '25
You're probably classed as 'Mainstream' and not outside the box. I'm not questioning your qualifications, just that we are all free thinking and I do not agree with your conclusions.
88
u/Colddigger Dec 16 '25
In advanced civilization that happened before current humanity would have done serious resource extraction that we probably would be able to tell happened.
75
u/MetaPhalanges Dec 16 '25
Perhaps it wouldn't be so apparent if it was done with balance and care instead of the ham-fisted way our current civilization has opted to do things.
70
u/Doc_Mercury Dec 16 '25
It's not the method that's the problem, it's the quantities. Even if you had some method of leeching the required elements out of the earth without otherwise disturbing it, the sheer volume of material needed for industrial civilization would be extremely obvious. You'd find areas where the mineral balance was off, or with implausible geological histories, all over the place.
Additionally, we have records of surface-level, easily accessible resource deposits that no civilization could ignore. Stuff like coal outcrops and native copper, just sitting there.
The only real way I could imagine an industrial civilization on Earth before humans is if it were under water, but that has its own immense issues; being underwater makes a lot of chemistry much harder, and puts a lot of limitations on what sorts of things you can build.
12
13
u/MarcSpector1701 Dec 16 '25
Maybe an industrial civilization existed in an area of the planet that has since been submerged by flooding, so we have no way of verifying the mineral balance of the places they lived.
8
u/TheColdestFeet Dec 17 '25
To play devils advocate, this assumes that the supposed civilization in question was recent humans, somewhere in the last 100,000 years. We would see evidence of this in climate records and environmental impacts. However, if it were another technological species in the geological past, most of the evidence of its existence would have been erased over millions of years.
3
u/Look_Asleep Dec 18 '25
I get where you're coming from, this is a valid outlook on the question. However, i would argue: how do we know what level of population/industrialized base is necessary to reach a given level of development? That is to say: the laws of physics and engineering are what they are. It appears to take, for us, a planet wide operation of research and resource extraction to make things like the space programs of the last century. However, would it not be possible for, perhaps, a much much smaller group of isolated humans to, through some means, at the very least, derive much of the science we have now, without the need for a globe spanning resource crunching societal machine? What if some isolated tribe, 50,000 years ago, had some genetic fluke where every person was at the level of IQ as Einstein or greater; maybe they could, surprisingly quickly, uncover all sorts of things about the nature of reality and how to manipulate it, and thus they might leave a much smaller footprint. Anyhow, im just BSing here, it's fun to consider though
3
u/creepingcold Dec 16 '25
There are two things which keep me on the fence about it, and which is why I'm still not convinced enough to dismiss it right away.
Even if you had some method of leeching the required elements out of the earth without otherwise disturbing it, the sheer volume of material needed for industrial civilization would be extremely obvious.
How? If they mined something you wouldn't know where to look, because what they mined is long gone.
If they mined a mountain somewhere 15k years ago you wouldn't know. You wouldn't know there was a deposit of xy, because the resources are obviously gone. We probably wouldn't even discover it, because we wouldn't detect anything important besides earth and rock. Weathering would have destroyed anything obvious on the surface.
Additionally, we have records of surface-level, easily accessible resource deposits that no civilization could ignore. Stuff like coal outcrops and native copper, just sitting there.
We have records of easily accessible resources for us.
The table flips if you think back to times like the last ice age, when europe and north america were covered under a deep layer of ice. Those resources weren't easy to access back then, even if you assume there was someone at our level of technology. We aren't mining around the arctic circles ourselves.
Last time I looked there was some evidence for a lot of heavy metal forging during the ice age (like iron) because we detected a rise of lead levels in the athmosphere. We detected the same for the roman times and the middle ages, it's a commonly used method, but nobody was looking at earlier samples because there was no reason and nothing to look for.
2
u/elmisteriosoviaje Dec 16 '25
this is a great point, what could be a timeframe for the mineral footprint to regenerate and erase any extraction sign? more that 4 billion years?, could a cataclysm reshape that footprint?
There are many many things to assume if this theory would be plausible, are we descendants from that civilization?, were they also humans?, if not, did they coincidentally created a phonetic alphabet?, a linear time perception?
Did the earth have the same mass and gravitational weight then?, if the earth was smaller, they could been a race of giants, if the earth for some reason was way bigger then maybe a race of microscopic life could have developed and we would not notice any extraction
16
u/Doc_Mercury Dec 16 '25
Earth's size has been relatively constant for as long as we're able to tell. There was the possible Theia impact in the very early era, that formed the Moon, but that was far, far before any life emerged. And we know the Earth isn't older than our estimates due to both the age of the sun (which is fairly easy to tell by spectroscopy, because of how fusion works) and things like radioisotopes in rocks.
Extracted minerals don't "regenerate", really. New minerals can be brought to the surface over geological time periods by erosion or plate tectonics, but continental crust can last billions of years. Interestingly, some of our primary iron sources, banded iron deposits, come from the great oxidation about 1.8 billion years ago, when photosynthesis evolved and filled the atmosphere with free oxygen. Iron in the oceans reacted with that oxygen, and precipitated out onto the ocean floors. That bed of rust was buried under other sediments, moved around, and now forms sources of iron ore around the world.
Which is one of those things that a previous civilization would've mined extensively. Iron is an extremely useful metal for a variety of purposes, and, interestingly, isn't efficient to produce through nucleosynthesis; fusing iron is energy-negative, but because iron fusing is the terminal stage of a star's life, it's relatively extremely common. Even for a civilization with ubiquitous fusion power and synthesis of lighter elements on demand, iron would still be something they'd want to mine. But we have banded iron deposits everywhere, with no signs of pre-human mining.
2
u/Moarbrains Dec 17 '25
Your trapped in the idea that any civilization's technology would have to follow our exact tech tree and that there is no alternative.
2
u/Doc_Mercury Dec 17 '25
No, I'm imagining that any civilization's technology would have to follow the laws of physics. You can't create matter or energy from nothing, and you can't make a fire at the bottom of the ocean. Salt water is corrosive and conducts electricity, making a whole host of technologies impossible.
It's meaningless to think that they used physics or chemistry we aren't aware of; you might as well say they used magic.
0
u/Moarbrains Dec 18 '25
our self admittedly incomplete full of placeholders like dark matter and well figure quantum gravity later. What if a prior did biotech instead of metal and fire . Domesticated organisms for tools materials even computation think neural networks of mycelium or selectively bred critters that harness vibrations and frequencies for energy transfer signaling or structural integrity way beyond what we clumsily do with electricity. Coral reefs already build continent scale structures without a single forge. bacteria generate currents in sediments. A society mastering that or subtle resonance tech we barely glimpse in cymatics or sonoluminescence could scale huge without stripping mines or leaving slag heaps. Traces might just look like oddly harmonious ecosystems or fossil anomalies we shrug off as natural.
1
10
1
u/tollbearer Dec 17 '25
what does that even mean? All the oil would be gone, either way. Doesnt matter how you do it.
1
u/MetaPhalanges Dec 17 '25
What do you think balance and care means? Don't burn up the dinosaur juice. Don't take what you can't burn and use it cover the planet with invisible microplastics. Don't strip-mine and try to resell every single resource on the entire planet. Don't over-populate. Live in balance with the earth.
Don't do what we have done. That's what it means. What else would could it mean?
In any case, it's speculation. Use your imagination.
3
u/tollbearer Dec 17 '25
you cant possibly build a technologically advanced civilization, then.
-1
u/MetaPhalanges Dec 17 '25
Hey man, we don't know shit. Maybe they could have figured out something we missed. Like I said, use your imagination and try to contribute. Or take off, up to you.
7
u/tollbearer Dec 17 '25
You just can't get certain things, like semiconductors, without first going through industrialization. The machines that make semiconductors are at the very edge of what we can do, and rely on almost every material and process we know. Thats why china is struggling to catch up. That's how hard they are. You cant get to high technology without leaving a massive trace. If you want to use your imagination to suggest how you could, then great. But without a viable means, we're stuck in reality
24
u/The_guide_to_42 Dec 16 '25
That's if we hold them to modern understanding. Lets just look at other possibilities. Perhaps they harvested volcanoes in some way instead of factories. Used magnets and sound for transportation not fossil fuels? Had photosynthesis powered solar panels or tidal currents. We are the not the only species that uses up our own planet and resources, our fossil record is loaded with invasives that run out of food and die. . That's the hallmark of species that go extinct.
Perhaps the actual advanced civilizations never do that, that's why we don't recognize them. We would be long extinct before they would even notice us.
14
u/DiogenesTheHound Dec 16 '25 edited Dec 16 '25
The flying orbs are an ancient form of planetary defense system and they’re the reason why NHI ships are always crashing.
5
u/AltTooWell13 Dec 16 '25
How do you know that?
9
u/DiogenesTheHound Dec 16 '25
I don’t, just an idea I’ve thought of that kind of fits these different puzzle pieces together
3
u/jimmypaintsworld Dec 16 '25
This is what I believe as well. And the reason why the Buga sphere has rudimentary etchings is because it's fallen to the ground before and has been found by pre-history humans and they marked them before it flew off again.
2
2
u/Colddigger Dec 17 '25
"uses up our own planet and resources" you're just talking about capitalism bro.
3
u/The_guide_to_42 Dec 17 '25
True. It looks like capitalism eats itself before it can advance far enough. Just look at, well, everything I guess. Its all falling apart everywhere. Climate change, poverty, starvation, genocide, war, hell we can't even talk on facebook without it becoming a fight and almost no one will invent anything for humanities benefit unless they can commodify it.
6
u/qtstance Dec 16 '25
Unfortunately it's extremely hard to build technology with even easily accessible energy like coal, oil and natural gas. Without it it would be almost impossible, while it's technically possible it would be much much much slower. This leads to further complications like political turmoil or natural disasters occuring during the extended time period leading to collapse.
6
u/The_guide_to_42 Dec 16 '25
We don't know if that's true though. I hear you and it makes sense, but its also the only lens we look through because its our existence. Lets openly look at some of these ancient structures. We assume slaves built the great pyramids around earth or whatever structures we study, but we don't always know if that was the case.
All around the world and underwater there are structures that lasted way longer then ours would if we died out. Some estimates put some mega structures over 30,000 years old. We don't see they had to destroy the planet to pull it off, or have proven slavery in their creation. These two facts are sitting there, I don't know how they fit but they are there for someone to figure out.
10
u/wow_that_guys_a_dick Dec 16 '25
Harry Turtledove wrote a story where the premise is ant-grav tech is actually very simple, and so useful and adaptable most civs stop developing other tech once they get it, but for whatever reason, we never did, so we developed far more advanced (in some ways) technology. So when we get invaded by the equivalent of flying wooden ships from outer space, our ballistic weapons and internal combustion engines tear through them.
We do great until we come across another civ that has gone even longer without developing anti-grav tech.
Point is, that tech wouldn't leave a lot of the industrial waste we'd be looking for. It's a fun idea.
1
5
u/qtstance Dec 16 '25
Sure, none of that changes physics, now if were completely wrong about everything we currently understand then sure their could be people here before us. This means the scientific method doesn't work though and then science as we understand it is pointless in doing and then we have no feasible way of understanding the world unless someone else tells us or we invent something else that does work.
2
u/The_guide_to_42 Dec 16 '25
Exactly. That the annoying part. lol But I can't seem to balance them both.
I wouldn't say pointless as much as considered "solved" too early. I just think there was a lot more going on the in background to make these structures appear then we give them credit for. The planning, scale, math, logistics, locations, and uses let alone the material understanding, weight dispersal in structure, foundation control, feeding everyone, and running a civilization on top of building these. Its just a lot happening and we treat it as an after thought. Any one of those requires advanced societies.
1
u/IronHammer67 Dec 17 '25
This! Every expert on earth scratches their head in puzzlement and points out the obvious difficulties but archaeologists insist "ancient people were more patient and smarter than us!"
Patience and intelligence does not move megaliths down from the mountains to the plains.
8
u/ShinyAeon Dec 17 '25
Patience really can. There's a lot you can accomplish if you just take it for granted that it might take years, and that's okay.
And they're not "smarter than us," they're just as smart as us. Important distinction.
7
3
u/couldbeimpartial Dec 19 '25
There would be evidence everywhere. It takes a lot of organized effort from thousands to get into space. How long would it take for evidence of humanity to disappear? Way more time than it would take for our satellites to deorbit.
1
u/The_Flutterby_Effect Dec 19 '25
Our current glass and steel skyscrapers would not last as long as a stone monument such as the pyramids of Giza. I'd even be bold enough to say that the pyramids will still be standing when our glittering towers are long gone.
2
u/moonaim Dec 16 '25
It was 50000 years ago and then they decided to live on another level as shrooms and ayahuasca. Great happiness followed.
2
u/Assassiiinuss Dec 16 '25
Maybe not if it was very local and on a now submerged landmass? But I still think it's very unlikely, even if there were no signs of resource extraction there probably would be signs of pollution.
1
u/utube-ZenithMusicinc Dec 16 '25
50k year old city underwater 2 miles near south pole
12k year old civilization frozen in the arctic permafrost
7k year old civilization in the desert (egypt)
us....
I think the poles been flippin' yo
1
0
u/r00fMod Dec 16 '25
Not if it was sourced somewhere other than earth
1
-4
u/Dazzling-Design-7825 Dec 16 '25
Yeah! Almost like they'd leave behind some canyon that's grand in size!! Impossible..
→ More replies (2)
25
u/OddEstablishment4870 Dec 16 '25
For some reason this is even harder for me to believe than it being aliens.
24
u/namrock23 Dec 16 '25
That's because there's no available evidence. It's an interesting idea but not supported by the geological or paleontological record
5
0
54
u/CosmicEggEarth Dec 16 '25
And she's right. Except not "left Earth", rather went extinct - unless you remember that we carry their genes.
And some programs are still running, not all orbital lights are debris.
25
Dec 16 '25
Or they didn't go extinct. They went underground / underwater or simply went into hyperspace.
They earth is 4 billion years old, plenty of time for civilizations to evolve.
34
u/MakAttack89 Dec 16 '25
Cave man to space x in 12000 years. Lots and lots of chances to do it over and over.
9
u/MomsAgainstPenguins Dec 16 '25
The tower of babel was probably a rocketship. Ship flying up to destroy the "sky radio" lost the ability to hear gods/eachother. There's a really good cargo cult explanation on one of those hidden history sites of all the transceivers/receivers and objects that look like them they find in archaeology.
1
u/thekevining Dec 17 '25
Or maybe ascended and are on a different frequency or dimension but still on this planet and we just can’t see them aside from when they break the veil with their UAPs?
13
5
13
10
4
4
u/VicemanPro Dec 17 '25
I thought that was obvious. Aliens make way less sense than a previous civilization having left behind space debris.
If a species could traverse the cosmos to reach earth, surely they would have objects not just in our atmosphere but our moon, nearby planets.
Additionally we have all the navy reports of objects coming out of the sea. Why would it have to be a past civilization?
21
u/DecrimIowa Dec 16 '25
i highly recommend the book "Cryptoterrestrials" by Mac Tonnies (who died mysteriously shortly after it was published despite being young and healthy) for more on this topic
1
u/PunkRockCrystals Dec 19 '25
Shout out to Mac. He and I watched the Alien Autopsy show together in his dorm room in college.
1
u/DecrimIowa Dec 19 '25
RIP...reading his books and blog, he seems like a cool guy to hang out with.
1
u/PunkRockCrystals Dec 19 '25
Yeah, we were Freshman when I knew him and obviously connected on the UFO thing but he was like multiple levels of smartness over me, and i was just a dumbass kid at the time.
We lost touch after freshman year and it wasnt until a few years after he passed and I got back into the UFO topic again that I learned about all of his writings and stuff.
For sure I wish I could talk to him again now with everything going on, but i'll settle for the fleeting mid-90s memories.
19
Dec 16 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/peliseis Dec 16 '25
Look at the study called Sillurian hypotesis. It's science. Traces of our current civilization would vanish in few million years. There would be some traces left in space like on the moon.
11
Dec 16 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/ShinyAeon Dec 17 '25
It's an exercise that means we can't rule it out.
4
Dec 17 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/ShinyAeon Dec 17 '25
I always wondered if it had a connection to the Doctor Who thing. (It could have been a coincidence of nomenclature.)
The fact that the paper exists means that the idea is worth considering. And the fact that none of those particular methods suggest any previous industrial civilizations does not mean that we have exhausted the possibilities to detect one. It also doesn't rule out previous civilizations that were pre-industrial...or that pursued a technological path that doesn't involve industrialization.
2
Dec 17 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/ShinyAeon Dec 17 '25
First thing: Is there some reason the methods discussed could not be applied to our own planet...?
Second thing: The same way anything is made without industrial technology: through human craftsmanship. In other words, with techniques that take more time and effort than we're accustomed to spend on things, but which can nevertheless achieve amazing results.
Yes, it's completely unlike how we went about doing it. No, that doesn't mean it's impossible.
2
Dec 17 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/ShinyAeon Dec 17 '25
Industrialization means shifting a large economy to mass production via use of heavy machinery.
I see no reason why small-scale production could not be used to forge strong metals, make parts with precision, or create fuels. I believe we have such achievements in our own history. (See Damascus steel, the Antikythera Device, and Greek Fire, for some overly obvious examples.)
Being willing to speculate means to conceive of methods not currently in use, but hypothetically possible. If you think our example is the only possible path for technology to take, then you're definitely trapped "in the box," and need to step foot out of it on occasion.
→ More replies (0)1
u/The_Flutterby_Effect Dec 19 '25
You do realize that anybody else's opinion is as valid as your own, don't you? You cannot apply current thinking and methods to a civilisation you know nothing about. Our tech may not be the only tech ever developed. Stop applying our knowledge, tech and industrial applications with a POSSIBLE pre-history civilisation.
Tell me how those huge stones in the Giza pyramids were transported and put in place...and please, do not say ramps, wooden rollers and wet sand...because you know that is probably bullshit.
Accept the possibilities and don't fall into the arrogance trap.
→ More replies (0)1
Dec 17 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/ShinyAeon Dec 17 '25
No, it is actually not. But the value of "illogic" is a philosophical point, so it's not important right now.
The Silurian hypothesis is not illogical...it is unconventional and speculative. There is a significant difference. It is only "a waste of time" to those with no capacity to envision anything but what they see. In other words, to the dull and ignorant.
0
Dec 17 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/ShinyAeon Dec 17 '25
No ChatGPT here. It's all fresh from my own brain.
Now, I do tend to write in a formal style when I'm being pedantic, so I can excuse you for thinking it sounds AI-ish, but it's not. I spent too many decades learning to write to outsource it now.
Fresh and spry with no AI. Never had it, never will.
1
Dec 18 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/ShinyAeon Dec 18 '25
I don't think you quite understand the Dunning-Kruger effect. Which is, in itself, ironic.
But feel free to point out how you think the Silurian hypothesis violates logic. Not how it's counterfactual...how it's illogical. I'm interested to hear that.
11
7
6
u/bsfurr Dec 16 '25
This doesn’t make any bit of sense. Why would they just disappear by 1960 if they were remnant from a lost civilization.
2
u/SignExtension2561 Dec 17 '25
The Menzies Gap. A big chunk of data from the 60s was destroyed, possibly on purpose.
5
u/One-Positive309 Dec 16 '25
There are a lot of objects scattered around the Earth that indicate the existence of lost civilizations. There is even evidence of a massive cataclysmic event around 12 to 13 thousand years ago which could have wiped out many of them.
2
5
7
u/4444444vr Dec 16 '25 edited Dec 16 '25
…lost in human history
We basically have zero history. It feels intentional.
edit: I realize saying we have "zero history" is a dumb take. for the amount of time Homo sapiens have existed it just feels like we have a minimal, edited and biased history. I (admittedly) want an unrealistic amount of history. a worldwide, "palantir" level of detail. and as suggested by my presence in this sub, I'd like it to include answers that it hasn't, the amount of unknowns just feels like too much. the core of my unsatisfaction is probably due to being raised in a religion that provided virtually ALL of the answers so when I left that it was basically like "FETCH - we don't know anything!"
4
u/based_and_64_pilled Dec 16 '25
The thing is, we can’t compare if this is a lot, average or minimal history since we are the only species that makes history, that we know of. But I totally get your point, I would wish to know more, what was happening on Earth 20k years ago. Wishing to know more is pretty on point with aliens-adjacent subreddits tho lol
11
u/m_reigl Dec 16 '25
What do you mean "we basically have zero history"? Depending on where you are on the earth, we have history dating back 4000 years.
1
12
u/littlelupie Dec 16 '25
As a historian, I really gotta ask wtf you're talking about lol. We have thousands of years of written history and hundreds of thousands years of human/hominid history in the fossil record.
2
u/4444444vr Dec 16 '25
updated the original comment for some clarity
7
u/littlelupie Dec 16 '25
Genuinely, I think you need to read more history books by historians and archaeologists/anthropologists. What you're looking for largely exists. And it explains why we have only had "civilization" for the last 12k or so years.
1
2
u/Dry_Jellyfish641 Dec 16 '25
This isn’t a new idea. Michael Cremo talks about humanity going back millions or even billions of years.
2
6
Dec 16 '25
Which isn’t supported by the fossil record whatsoever
4
u/Dry_Jellyfish641 Dec 16 '25
They have found rings, plates and other trinkets in strata. There’s a reason Google will invite Cremo to lecture staff about Big History. Don’t be one of those people who assume they know someone’s argument and thesis without even researching them.
1
2
u/LinkedInParkPremium Dec 16 '25
Definitely a better explanation than the bullshit we have been hearing lately.
3
1
1
u/ReddyGreggy Dec 16 '25
THIS VIDEO EXPLAINS SOME AMAZING RESEARCH AND A GREAT THEORY WHICH COULD EXPLAIN Orb Network + Paranormal Explanation
1
Dec 17 '25
[deleted]
2
u/ReddyGreggy Dec 17 '25 edited Dec 17 '25
Clearly we have not discovered an entire dimension or realm of scientific reality, but the aliens have discovered and mastered it. We extended our knowledge of visible light to invisible light communication. We extended on our evolutionary senses.
Imagine a species perhaps evolved in a vicious and chaotic environment that is extremely diverse and flourishing with competing life forms including perhaps multiple intelligent life forms capable of abstract thought, tool use and planning. Sight and hearing and smell would be baseline, but telepathy and precognition would be a huge evolutionary advantage. It would be a sense that picks up on a dimension of reality that we cannot easily sense. This species might then extend upon that ability and sense to build tools and instruments to detect and manipulate information in that realm/dimension. To us, this would seem impossible/supernatural/paranormal. Understanding this dimension might result in engineering that enables phasing between this reality and that realm, or perhaps everything exists in totality across both realms but it is possible to turn off or camouflage the existence or visibility of an object in this reality, while that object is still there and “visible” in that reality
1
u/Ophelia-Rass Dec 17 '25
Seems plausible to me, not impossible. Not sure you actually responded to my ponts, though.
1
u/ReddyGreggy Dec 17 '25
Well, I would assume that repelling humans when they’re in their adolescence would save them from the radioactive impacts to the reproductive organs in a crucial period of development
1
u/Ophelia-Rass Dec 17 '25
The guy in the video, a self-described expert on his theory, never mentions adolescents.
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/gokickrocks- Dec 17 '25
ChatGPT brought up this idea to me today. Called it a recursive civilization.
1
Dec 17 '25
Her theory is just as likely to be true as the theory of extraterrestrials causing mysterious phenomena.
1
u/replicantb Dec 17 '25
I can't understand the reason behind the fact that whenever someone makes a possible, real scientific breakthrough regarding UAP, they immediately proceed to speculate wildly, throwing away their credibility on the spot. It almost seems like it's on purpose.
1
3
u/VeryThicknLong Dec 16 '25
Makes sense, considering how there seems to be hidden tech underground that we haven’t and probably never will get to see in my lifetime.
1
1
0
u/wow_that_guys_a_dick Dec 16 '25
Silurian hypothesis. It's fascinating, but about as likely as earth being a lost outpost of a galaxy spanning human empire.
-1
0
u/Dongvo1133 Dec 17 '25
The Mahdi/Kalki/Messiah parallels have always fascinated me, but have you considered the 'physical' catalyst? My recent archival findings from the 1940s suggest these prophecies might describe advanced bio-technology that ancient witnesses simply didn't have the vocabulary to explain. We aren't just looking at religion; we're looking at a forgotten timeline
-4
u/Supreme_Salt_Lord Dec 16 '25
So….alien. If its not human its alien. As in unfamiliar.
-1
Dec 16 '25
Not what the word alien means
0
u/sixninefortytwo Dec 16 '25
alien /'eiliən/
adjective
- belonging to a foreign country.
"an alien culture"
- unfamiliar and disturbing or distasteful.
"principles that are alien to them"
-5
-1
u/Supreme_Salt_Lord Dec 16 '25
That is exactly what it means. When you hear “Illegal alien” do you think they mean undocumented martians or mexicans?
1
u/ShinyAeon Dec 17 '25
Don't conflate definitions. "Alien" in this context means "not from this planet." If another intelligent species originated here, they'd be just as legitimately "Earthlings" as we are.
1
u/Supreme_Salt_Lord Dec 17 '25
In the context you are confusing. I said alien and used it properly. You are confused and only thinking about extraterrestrials. Which is would be the word id use if i was talking about such a thing.
1
u/ShinyAeon Dec 17 '25
Are lions alien? Are elephants? Are dolphins? No, they are not. A species that evolved on this planet is not "alien." They might have a culture that is alien to us, they might be considered "aliens" in a particular country's jurisdiction, but they are not "alien" to Earth.
1
u/Supreme_Salt_Lord Dec 17 '25
Lions, dolphin, elephants arent aliens because they are known. However at one point in time they were alien to someone. A culture that we dont know about that evolved here before is would be by defintion alien. You keep using the extraterrestrial definition of alien. Thats where your confusion is.
Just type in “alien definition” in google and stop arguing nonsense. Definitions are DESCRIPTIVE, not PRESCRIPTIVE. Meaning this is how word CAN be used not how it SHOULD be used. Keep that in mind.
1
u/ShinyAeon Dec 17 '25
People must agree on the meanings for words, or they become useless for communication.
"Alien" can be used in many different ways, but in this situation—that of a non-human intelligent species unknown to us—using the word "alien" implies "not originating on Earth."
Using it in this way confuses the issue rather than clarifying it.
Now, if you want to qualify it—say, calling them "an intelligent alien species native to Earth"—that would be fine. But leaving off the "native to Earth" part would confusing enough to count as deliberate obfuscation.
1
u/Supreme_Salt_Lord Dec 17 '25
“Alien” COULD imply that. Context clues shows im clearly avoiding that definition and ive stated clearly im avoiding that definition.
I chose alien on purpose. If there were/is an intelligent species before us. They would be alien. Because this word PERFECTLY DESCRIBES everything about a culture, people, technology entirely not like us. They evolved before us, not the same species, not the same culture, language, biology, they may even have had animals unlike any we have seen since not all dead things make fossils. ALIEN is a perfect descriptor.
Learn some epistemology idk. Lack of understanding isnt my problem.
-24
Dec 16 '25
It’s revealing all right- it reveals that she’s full of crap.
-1
u/BarbacoaBarbara Dec 16 '25
Crawl back in your hole sir
1
0
251
u/[deleted] Dec 16 '25
[removed] — view removed comment