Cygnus Mystery

This post is copied from my FB post of the same name in Dec 2012. Corrected a number of typo. This is the reason why I switched back to Blogger.

Watched a video about "Ancient Alien - The Cygnus Mystery". The story evolves around the star Deneb in the Cygnus constellation. It quotes from various ancient sites that either refer to the star Deneb or the symbol of a swan.

I have no problem with the individual artifacts that is used. Only problem is that they are strung together to form the story. 

Cygnus constellation is first mentioned by Ptolemy (Babylonian era). It is probably a copy of an earlier reference. Chinese constellation related to Deneb is 女宿 and Denebe is one of the star made popular by the story "cowboy and the weaver girl" (牛郎织女). Egyptian, Indian and Chinese each use the swan as celestial beings that is related to life and death.

Each of the exhibit by itself is existing ancient reference. However, by stringing them together to highlight "Cygnus Mystery", the author is trying to say that they are actually the same mystery. That I could not agree.

Deneb is one of the brightest star visible (19th). It is not surprising that people all over the world has a reference to it. The swan is a graceful animal and it is not surprising that it is used as a reference to life and death. However, using the Babylonian reference to the starts as Cygnus to say that they are related is too far fetched. You just can't pull two facts together just because there are common terms between them. Cygnus is just a name to describe a certain group of stars so that people can easily find it. It has no direct relation to the swan in Indian, Chinese and Egyptian celestial object reference. The video itself does not indicate any link between the star constellation in relation to all the celestial object reference besides a modern reference to the pyramids location and Cygnus constellation (a book written by Andrew Collins).

I must say that this is one common issue with people's conception. They simply set their mind to a conclusion then pulled information from unrelated realm to support their theory. Is this the scientific way? I doubt so. People like me does not have scientific qualifications. Even by using common sense, it failed to convince me, how would that be possible to convince people with better qualifications?

In Darwin Evolution Theory, by pulling together various bones and skulls together, modern archaeologists are trying to prove that man evolved from Apes. I won't deny that "evolution" exists. I am only skeptical about the way it is done. Unless scientists could prove beyond doubt the link (the so called evolution) between different species like bears and whales (Darwin's withdrawn theory). I would say that it is just a hypothesis not a theory.