5 ms·
Ancient Aliens conflates two very different ideas. The show’s core argument is that ancient civilizations were more advanced than we give them credit for. That
by alberth 4mo ago
Ancient Aliens conflates two very different ideas.
The show’s core argument is that ancient civilizations were more advanced than we give them credit for. That may be true, but “more advanced” does not mean they had superior technology or help from aliens. It can simply mean they had technical knowledge, methods, or craftsmanship that we have since lost or forgotten.
Elon Musk has made a similar point about the US space program. We landed on the moon more than 50 years ago, but in some ways we now have to relearn how to do it (because we forgot how). That does not mean we had better technology in the 1960s, and it certainly does not mean aliens were involved. It means knowledge, systems, expertise, and institutional capability can fade over time. And that doesn't mean aliens were involved (as the tvshow would make you believe).
- thewebguyd 4mo ago> It means knowledge, systems, expertise, and institutional capability can fade over time This has also been happening since ancient times. Famously, how to make roman concrete was lost after the fall of the empire and Europe did not reinvent high quality concrete until much later in the 18th century. They also lost entire industrial-scale manufacturing pipelines for pottery and had a regression back to crude, hand-shaped pottery. Turns out we humans have been dealing with the same human problems for hundreds of thousands of years.
- theturtletalks 4mo agoThis reminds me of Gall’s Law. You cannot create a complex system, you must create a simple system and improve it over time. The issue arises when you get so many iterations in, you’ve forgotten the process. Any catastrophic event can mean you won’t be able to create the silicon chip or airplanes and so much other technology. Maybe I’m wrong and people and books do exist that can explain the process and human might would succeed.
- inigyou 4mo agoA semiconductor company couldn't get their second plant to work until they tore it down and set it up again in an exact copy of the floor layout of the first plant. They don't know why.
- ahazred8ta 4mo agoThe Freefall webcomic can sympathize. http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff1500/fc01415.htm http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff1500/fc01415.htm
- dgellow 4mo agoHave we actually forgotten how to land to the moon? That sounds very fishy, I’m pretty skeptical that’s not the case, that was done at a time where we had good records and still have access to them. And it’s close enough to current time that people who worked on it are still alive (not all of course). Coming from musk makes me believe that’s not true, he’s far from a reliable narrator
- dotancohen 4mo agoMany of the manufacturing processes used to make the Apollo spacecraft were not followed in the production floor - and nobody wrote those changes down. That's one well-known example of Apollo-era knowledge lost, there are a few others if you seriously care to DDG them.
- marshray 4mo agoCan you see how far "some Apollo program last-minute production-floor manufacturing changes were not written down" is from "humans lost fundamental technology needed to land on the moon"?
- throw2ih020 4mo agoIn aerospace, those are the same statements. Those production floor changes are often the difference between a payload working or failing.
- marshray 4mo agoHow many years did these production floor changes take to engineer?
- throw2ih020 4mo agoOver a period from 1960 to 1969: > Landing humans on the Moon by the end of 1969 required the most sudden burst of technological creativity, and the largest commitment of resources ($25 billion; $187 billion in 2024 US dollars)[24] ever made by any nation in peacetime. At its peak, the Apollo program employed 400,000 people and required the support of over 20,000 industrial firms and universities.[25] A large chunk of those industries and supporting academia no longer exist in the US outside the defense sector.