by New Page Books
available for Amazon Kindle, iPod/iPad iBookstore, Sony
and Barnes & Noble eReaders, as well as audiobook
visit the store
Ancient Aliens Debunked
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
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.”
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?)
claims that we create false dichotomies.
how does White go to work?
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.”
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. 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.
mentioned, it is absolutely false that Anna Mitchell-Hedges never
allowed for any testing. Nor is it true that “Anna spent
her entire life trying to sell the skull.” 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 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.
short, the conclusion White reaches on the crystal skull is representative
of the entire documentary. His conclusions are simply wrong and
it is my opinion that he knows they are wrong, but presents them
nevertheless in this manner so that he can make it appear that
there is nothing to crystal skulls. And though aspects of the
argument he represents are on a number of instances indeed correct,
rest assured White did not uncover these, and in the case of the
crystal skull, are well-known and discussed, as shown above. Somehow,
White fails to include that, for if he did, he would be unable
to maintain the serious, yet ridiculous and erroneous allegations
would agree with the criticism against Sitchin – I have
written this myself in my book, The Ancient Alien Question. But
even in these sections, it is clear how manipulative White is
with his debunking. At one point, Giorgio Tsoukalos says: “Were
they giants or is that the wrong word and [should] the correct
word be an extraterrestrial?” I leave it up to Giorgio Tsoukalos
to defend himself, but it is clear that he means here that we’ve
labeled them giants, but that maybe we should call them extraterrestrial
instead. Yet White interprets this statement to say that Tsoukalos
is claiming the word Nephilim has been mistranslated as giants
and should be instead translated as extraterrestrial! From the
very excerpt White includes, it is clear this is not the tone
or the implication one should make from this. Similarly, when
Erich von Däniken states: “How can angels have sex?
This is impossible. In our view, angels were something spiritual
not something that has a body and the feeling of sex… but
they had sex.” White ridicules this statement, stating:
“Von Daniken’s idea of an angel is defined more by
hallmark cards than ancient texts. Obviously ancient cultures
including the writers of the Bible believed that angels could
and did have sex with human women.” This is precisely the
point Erich von Däniken is making too, but it is clear that
White fails to see this! Either White is stupid, or deliberately
maybe I am nitpicking – which is what White engages in,
as shown in the above accounts, constantly. When at one point
in a show, the narrator relates that there is a written source
dating from 6000 BC, White then relates that Tsoukalos in an interview
gives the correct age. So the narrator made a mistake. In 48 hours
of footage, you will find some, obviously! Let me assure White
that in his 190 minutes, he has made several more! But for White,
this is once again evidence of a conspiracy by everyone involved
in Ancient Aliens to deceive, in a type of conspiracy theory that
defies all logic, but which is apparently clear to White. Which
is why he uses such bombastic phrasing as: “Ancient Aliens
just adds another 5,000 years as if no one would notice. They’re
actually even contradicting themselves with this date because
in another episode they correctly state that the oldest writings
in the world are the Sumerian tablets, the oldest of which date
to about 4000 BC. So why they now say that there are some writings
2,000 years older than the oldest writings, I don’t think
anyone knows.” Mr. White, most people will know, but clearly
you don’t: as I said, it’s an error by the narrator.
These things happen.
also claims us experts are bad researchers. Within the first few
seconds of his documentary, White claims that “Ancient Aliens
[…] premiered April 20, 2010”. Well, you see, it did
and it didn’t. You could say that, but what about the two
hour special, also called Ancient Aliens, on March 8, 2009, which
on Wikipedia is referred to as a pilot – it was not really
a pilot, though. It was a two hour special which proved popular,
as a result of which a series was created. But it was not created
as a pilot as such. But here is the issue: you can take it both
ways. You can say the series started either in 2009 or 2010. Both
are right. But if ever such a choice is available when it comes
to the evidence under discussion in Ancient Aliens, White will
make sure to highlight the other possibility and claim Ancient
Aliens instead set out to deceive and misrepresent!
he goes after Tsoukalos for not knowing that the material at Puma
Punku is andesite, while Tsoukalos says diorite, White doesn’t
seem to realize there is no true difference between those two,
or deliberately chooses to ignore or reference that! Yes, Tsoukalos
is wrong, but it is truly a tiny error. The two rocks are equivalents,
but are given different names because of the manner in which they
were created. But when it comes to hardness, there is no difference.
White fails to point that even though Tsoukalos is indeed in error,
this error does not change the debate. But wait, instead, White
pretends the error does change the debate. It does not.
the section on the show itself addresses the hardness of the rock,
White makes it appear as if the mystery of Puma Punku is that
ancient alien theorists pretend the polishing of the stones is
somehow otherworldly. This is a misconception White arrives at
either through his own stupidity or misdirection. The mystery
of Puma Punku is that a number of stones – not all of them
– have remarkable drill holes that, in the opinion of experts
on the subject matter, can only be made with mechanical tools.
White never addresses that enigma – for it is an enigma.
Instead, he creates a false dichotomy and then disproves it, pretending
it was the point the show was trying to make.
Puma Punku is about far more than the archaeology. This is the
area where Viracocha, a god, was said to have manifested on Earth.
That is not a claim made by the series, but by the Inca. White
is clearly of the notion that the Inca invented a deity and that
we should not at all take this claim of theirs seriously. It is
the bog standard line that we should not trust our ancestors.
Mr. White, that specific stance is precisely why series like Ancient
Aliens were created and you merely state the bog standard perspective,
somehow pretending or assuming that is the truth.
Aliens is based on the premise that the pool of evidence of history
and archaeology allows for an other than standard interpretation.
Our ancestors reported that they had been visited by a non-human
intelligence, and there is evidence both in the archaeological
and historical record that suggests that our ancestors could be
writes: “Part of the Incan state religion was that the Incan
empire was the first civilization and was created by God himself.
It was a very convenient idea for bolstering the Incan case for
the right to rule everyone else.” White here clearly assumes
the Inca invented this “convenient” lie.
rest of his section once again clearly presents his total neglect
or misunderstanding of the legends of Viracocha. He claims that
the show mistakenly depicts Viracocha as a sky god, not a sea
god. In truth, Viracocha is both, and neither – he was a
creator god most specifically. But when you rely on Wikipedia
and especially, it seems, the first opening lines of a Wikipedia
entry, you tend to come up with the erroneous conclusions White
makes throughout this show. But once having established such “truths”,
he then pretends the show and its contributors are the ones falsifying
again, White sides with the bog standard view that archaeologists
have conclusively dated the site. They have not. The dating of
Puma Punku is indirect, and everyone knows it. The “official
dating” of Puma Punku is based on circumstantial evidence
and though that circumstantial evidence might be true, it is not,
as White pretends, right by default!
what “ancient alien theorists” try to show, is that
in the very location where Viracocha was said to have emanated,
there is a site which has anomalies, and which shows workmanship
that is at odds with the rest of that civilization and even that
very site, and is suggestive of a higher technology. But White
dismisses it out of hand, as he knows the Inca “conveniently”
created Viracocha. It seems that for Mr. White, the Inca were
just as deceptive as the producers of Ancient Aliens!
the interest of brevity, I will mainly focus on the other topics
in which he features me. Everyone else on the show, given that
they have sufficient time, can speak for themselves if they feel
the need to.
Baalbek, he suggests that 630 tons is the same as 1200 tons, and
hence that because Romans could lift 630 tons, they could have
lifted 1200 tons. Uhm… 1200 tons is pretty much double.
Also, when he draws the comparison between 630 and 800 tons, he
says “just 100 tons more”. It’s actually 170
tons more! Details, but important, for he is trying to minimize
the difference, which in truth, is still quite a bit larger.
my book The Ancient Alien Question, I clearly state that at the
end of the 20th century, we had no tools in existence to lift
1200 tons. That’s a fact. A fact White conveniently sidesteps,
instead focusing on other things and trying to bedazzle his audience
with things that might seem important, but truly are not.
is also disingenuous to pretend that these stones are not part
of the foundation, but instead of a retaining wall. I don’t
know what universe White lives in, but it is clear that the retaining
wall is part of the foundation on top of which the temple was
built. And it is a platform. Sitchin is indeed wrong to claim
it is a landing place, but it is clearly a platform and a foundation
on top of which at some point a Roman temple was built. Also,
simply because Baalbek is not a landing place, doesn’t mean
it’s not an anomaly! White also conveniently forgets to
mention that there are no records at present that show the Romans
actually built the retaining wall/foundation. That is right: no
evidence. It is an assumption. Even some of the illustrations
he shows in his documentary have the words “hypothetical”
written on them, but White seems to feel he does not need to point
the Tolima “fighter jets”, he uses a quote of mine
arguing I make a leap of faith. What he fails to highlight is
that officially, the “goldflyers” are classified as
insects. Sure, White can make the point that they are fish, but
his beloved experts in this subject matter have identified these
as insects, not fish. So either White is wrong, or the experts
are. I am merely pointing this out, because once again, we are
confronted with a pool of evidence, in which the experts have
decided to label them insects, White decides to label them fish,
and ancient alien theorists have highlighted the resemblance to
modern planes. The type of insect that is proposed – a bee
or a fly or like – indeed does not have wings at the bottom
of their body, which is why we have said that these goldflyers
cannot be such insects. But instead, White shows us completely
different insects, with no resemblance to the golden objects at
all, to pretend we are somehow wrong. In truth, he creates a misdirection.
this section, his logic is this: “Consider that all we know
about this culture reveals them to be simple farmers, fisherman
[sic], and artisans; people that lived of the land and, considering
that there is nothing in the extensive amount of archeological
material from this culture that would suggest knowledge about
planes landing and taking off all the time, is it logical to assume
that aliens landing and taking off in their back yards made so
little impression on them that they only devote 10 of the 100s
of figurines to it, and only in one tomb?”
of all, “all we know” is clearly the traditional academic
perspective. Science by default excludes the ancient alien hypothesis,
so you can use “all we know” all the time. Again,
White seems incapable of realizing what this series is about:
to discuss material that science refuses to reconsider or analyze
from a different perspective.
specifically: how many of us wear jewelry that has a space shuttle
on it? I’ve seen few people wear such gold jewelry! But,
clearly, in White’s opinion, there has to be far more than
ten percent of our current jewelry on Earth with space imagery,
as we have witnessed objects going into space. I can safely say
that if all our jewelry of Mankind is put together, produced since
1960, not even one percent will reveal objects of spaceflight.
Yet, somehow, in White’s world, aliens landing and taking
off would lead to thousands of golden figurines depicting this!
It is a false premise, Mr. White, which you created, either of
out stupidity or to deceive your viewers.
it comes to ancient nuclear warfare, we are once again treated
to a careful editing of the case. The fact – yes, fact –
that there was a radioactive patch in an area of India over which
the gods were said to have fought a battle in the sky is never
mentioned by White. His argument on Mohenjo Daro is so badly produced
he actually contradicts himself, when he argues the series doesn’t
mention the names of experts, but he seems to have forgotten he
himself has included the section where the series says it is Davenport!
importantly, White makes the allegation that the dead at Mohenjo
Daro are buried and did not die in some type of massacre. On his
site, he refers to a source, which redirects to another source,
where we find the basis for his claim. This source, however, says
something far different than what White pretends. The source says
that the way in which the excavations happened have left us in
a situation in which no-one – that is right, no-one –
can conclude whether the dead died in a massacre or were buried.
Seeing that some were holding hands however, would suggest they
might indeed have suddenly died in a massacre, not? And the possibility
that there was a massacre is not speculation created by ancient
alien theorists, but an opinion held by many experts in the field
– something White fails to highlight for by now obvious
from a pool of evidence, Ancient Aliens and its contributors have
made an alternative suggestion, which is not excluded by the evidence.
But White instead pretends it is, even though the very sources
he cites, show differently!
In the opening section of the documentary, White states: “I
hope that, even if you disagree with my conclusions, you will
come away from this essay believing that I reviewed the claims
of Ancient Aliens with respect and without bias.” I would
disagree both on the respect and the bias.
of motive: White is a Christian fundamentalist. So he will side
with such topics as the Nephilim as being real, but claims they
cannot be alien. As White is somewhat unclear about what he believes
they are, I do believe he doesn’t consider them to be human.
So if not human, what are they? By default, that makes them alien
– though not extraterrestrial as such, indeed – but
then the evidence shows they descended, so clearly they came from
above, suggestive of an extraterrestrial origin. But at the very
least he cannot exclude an extraterrestrial origin. Yet White
somehow feels he can! The mind boggles…
quick overview of the rest, maybe? Jean-Pierre Houdin’s
theory of how the pyramids were built is totally irrelevant in
this documentary. It addresses no single point of criticism, and
White even says that he explores this out of his own interest.
Clearly, the documentary wasn’t long enough without it,
in his opinion. All the other allegations about the pyramid construction
are once again carefully edited. Where does he tackle the Davidovits
claims? Oh wait – nowhere! On Easter Island – which
I personally don’t see as evidence of an alien intervention
– his bias is once again on show. Sure, the statues could
have been put in place with wooden rollers. But the stories are
that the statues walked into place, which is why there is speculation
about levitation in the first place. That our ancestors stated
they walked into place is another fact White somehow fails to
include in the documentary. Why?
my book, The Ancient Alien Question, I outline that Pakal’s
tomb, the Nazca lines and a few other subjects White has included
in the documentary are not evidence of alien contact. But even
in those sections of White’s documentary, I would disagree
on a number of points with the way in which White sets out his
argument, and on a number of occasions uses deception in order
to make a point he could have made if he had done some proper
research or, heaven forbid, read my book.
I would like to tackle the section on Ezekiel, but quite frankly,
this section was incomprehensible to me. I do not understand what
his argument is, apart from the obvious fact we are clearly and
think I have clearly shown that White has made exaggerated claims
about his debunking, in e.g. the case of the crystal skulls. That
he is deceptive, in e.g. the case of Mohenjo Daro. They are, as
outlined above, not the only errors, but representative of his
methodology. For whatever reason White has produced this documentary,
it is clear that White has done so not because he feels he needs
to warn the world of gross untruths in the series, for if that
were the case, his documentary would not have resorted or needed
to resort to falsifying the counterarguments. In my opinion, White
is upset with the notion that Ancient Aliens is making people
re-evaluate certain paradigms, and his documentary is all about
trying to pretend that we should not do that.
it is deplorable that White makes the false dichotomy that Ancient
Aliens and the Ancient Aliens Hypothesis are one and the same.
Clearly, the series is a visualized rendition of a debate –
not the debate itself.
is impossible to counterargue every counterargument White has
made in this ridiculously long documentary as it would take months.
But I think I have shown Mr. White is white (read: innocent) in
name only. In Mr. White’s opinion, we are a black kettle.
He is definitely not a white pot.
It is now entirely possible that this reply will be used to create
another reply, in the vain hope of trying to elicit from me another
reply, so that the debate goes on endlessly, with loads of blablabla.
As far as I am concerned, the debate ends here. The very reason
why this reply was created, was because people wanted me to reply
and hear my opinion on the documentary, so I did. In truth, I
feel I have written more than 4100 words that I could have written
about far more important topics than Mr. White’s documentary.