UFOs Have Been Here Since Ancient Times

Extrea Terrestial visitors and crafts have been described for millenias, and vet clearly, in many cases. Such as this, amongst many more:

"The evening of 18th August 1783 four witnesses on the terrace of Windsor Castle observed a luminous object in the skies of the Home Counties of England. The sighting was recorded the following year in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. According to this report, witnesses observed an oblong cloud moving more or less parallel to the horizon. Under this cloud could be seen a luminous object which soon became spherical, brilliantly lit, which came to a halt; This strange sphere seemed at first to be pale blue in colour but then its luminosity increased and soon it set off again towards the east. Then the object changed direction and moved parallel to the horizon before disappearing to the south-east ; the light it gave out was prodigious; it lit us everything on the ground.; The image was captured in this by Thomas Sandby (a founder of the Royal Academy) and his brother Paul, both of whom witnessed the event. "

Here is an interesting site analyzing "UFO-depictions" in Renaissance paintings. Unfortunately it's an italian site, but at least some articles are translated into English.

sprezzatura.it...

At least these paintings seem not to illustrate UFOs.

reply to post by sensfan

Although the glyph looks like a helicopter, is it just the result of recarving

Well, in that case, it would have to be an extremely coincidental recarving, wouldn't you agree. I personally see more than just a helicopter, as I said earlier.. other shapes besides the chopper, can be interpreted as some sorts of vehicles. Were they also magically recarved to fit that profile along with the chopper?

This is just my personal opinion people, I don't get why many here are reacting to me. I never said that this is evidence of UFOs, I said that it's interesting in relation to the topic, and everyone should draw his/her own conclusions.

Originally posted by Majorion
Well, in that case, it would have to be an extremely coincidental recarving, wouldn't you agree. I personally see more than just a helicopter, as I said earlier.. other shapes besides the chopper, can be interpreted as some sorts of vehicles. Were they also magically recarved to fit that profile along with the chopper?

There is no magic involved, they just carved the stone and wrote over what other people had written there, like today's graffitis.

What many people forget is that what we are looking at is not a collection of figures, that is text, and many people know how to read it, and that is one of the reasons they say this is just a reutilisation of the stone to write something.

This is just my personal opinion people, I don't get why many here are reacting to me. I never said that this is evidence of UFOs, I said that it's interesting in relation to the topic, and everyone should draw his/her own conclusions.

Right, but you should not ignore that some people know about these things (not me, but others, from where I got that information), and ignoring what they say is not a smart move.

And your comments about "magically re-carved" stones makes me think that you are not only stating your opinion, you are ignoring and making fun of other people's opinions just because they are not the same as yours.

Originally posted by Majorion
Well, in that case, it would have to be an extremely coincidental recarving, wouldn't you agree. I personally see more than just a helicopter, as I said earlier...

Yes, but coincidences do happen; and the human brain is wired to recognize patterns where there are none. Seeing a helicopter there is as much as result of coincidence as it is pareidolia.

But if one wants to believe that palimpsest does represent a helicopter, one must ask themselves why there is no other evidence for helicopter or any other of the supposed wondrous objects represented therein. Why are these representations only found at that one temple?

thay have been here longer than that, aslong as thay want to travel back to and see if thay/we was right, watching us and making records to understand them selfs more like we do today,


thay are time travelers thay are us...


when we start to look more like them though Evolution - evolving, we know we are a step closer to cracking time travel..

if we are to continue evolving we are not going to need a strong body legs arms etc, while machines & divice's make life easyer for us, we will not be doing much work or moving at all for that matter, but where going to need a bigger brain & head to acomadate it, are you getting a picture of wot we will evolve into or look like yet?

pretty much a gray, lets not forget we look nothing like a ape or monkey why do so many people allways asume were going to look like this forever think harder because we wont are surroundings mould us & are bodys adapt to are world and needs over time, its the facts of life and the evidance is there,

if we are not traveling back in time, and we are not seeing strange craft we have at some point in the future all died out, and thats more worrying than anything, nothing is impossible we just do not know how to do it yet, a cave man would not belive you if you told him about your time/world and wot you/we can do. are technologys the earth being round planes and wot not, he would probly think you was mad and talking nonsence wouldnt he...

if we can look back in time like we do today with telescopes, we can go/get there one day for sure, but by then we will have evolved so much, thay/we risk changing there own future if thay make themselfs known and interact with us,

ArMap,

I have seen you post in many threads, you often assume the role of a skeptic, and I've never once disrespected you, because you have you're opinion, and I have mine. But since you engage me so aggressively, without provocation other than expressing what appears be to be a much controversial aspect of this topic, allow me to kindly respond.

Originally posted by ArMap
you should not ignore that some people know about these things (not me, but others, from where I got that information), and ignoring what they say is not a smart move.

I did not ignore what others have said, if you will notice, my second post was a response to Fastwalker's links; in which the "helicopter" glyph is nothing more then a palimpsest.

please check slide 7/7 here;

www.ufoartwork.com...

that will refer you to more info here;

members.tripod.com...

from there,

On the pictures below you can see the original pictures of the carvings at Abydos. Note the colour difference, and the clearly visible hieroglyph in front of the 'heli'. On the drawing you can get a clearer view of how the process of recarving influenced the carvings found on the Abydos cartouche...

And that it why I said that this picture was the original;


And my response, was that I still see some craft in the carvings. That is my opinion, but I never once imposed it upon others. ArMap, there was no need to insult me, by saying; Not a smart move.

Originally posted by ArMap
And your comments about "magically re-carved" stones makes me think that you are not only stating your opinion, you are ignoring and making fun of other people's opinions just because they are not the same as yours.

My comments about 'magically recarved' was never meant to be an insult, I fail to see how you consider my personal observation as ignoring and making fun of other people's opinions. My apologies if you see it this way.

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
Seeing a helicopter there is as much as result of coincidence as it is pareidolia.

SaviorComplex,

Where some see 'pareidolia', others see a pattern. You're entitled to your opinion, and I'm entitled to mine.

It has been argued that the slab to which these carvings are engraved on, would have been very simple for the ancients to place a new slab to re-write something.

Ancients went to great pains to "get it right the first time" because of the intense labor involved in dealing with heavy stones blocks and stone slabs. That slab with the helicopter and hover land craft isnt exactly the weight of a 2x8 wood frame painting, and it is not exactly at waist level for easy access.

Point is...if there was an error in the first place, which please someone provide evidence that re-carving ever took place over an exsisting glyph due to error or re-writting something, the ancients would have simply replaced the slab with the new writting on it.

Ancients of all things, were quite concise in what they were putting down into their records.

It is modern mankind that needs the eraser or "backspace" key.



Cheers!!!!!

[edit on 22-2-2009 by RFBurns]

Originally posted by Majorion
But since you engage me so aggressively, without provocation other than expressing what appears be to be a much controversial aspect of this topic, allow me to kindly respond.

Sorry, although I always re-read my posts before posting, I did not thought it as an aggressive post, but I was thinking that it could have been because it was written at a time I was angry with a completely different thing, and although I tried to avoid any of that anger on my post (you should have seen the first version ), apparently I was not able to do it.

Sorry.

That is my opinion, but I never once imposed it upon others. ArMap, there was no need to insult me, by saying; Not a smart move.

That was not the best choice of words, but I am still thinking how should I have said that.

What I meant is that by ignoring what people that know about some subject say is not the best way of gaining knowledge about that subject.

My comments about 'magically recarved' was never meant to be an insult, I fail to see how you consider my personal observation as ignoring and making fun of other people's opinions. My apologies if you see it this way.

My interpretation of your whole post was somewhat affected by my feelings, as was my answer, but the biggest problem is that my knowledge of English is limited, I learnt it by myself, so when people talk in a way that is not what I am accustomed I have some difficulties in understanding it, or I think I am understanding it but I am not, as apparently happened here.

So, once more, sorry for all this mess between bad understood posts and anger affected posts.

reply to post by RFBurns


I am not sure (my memory is not as good as it was) but I think that the re-carving was made at a latter date, and that the stone (and the whole room) were used to something that was not the original idea.

I will try to find some concrete information about it.

reply to post by ArMaP


If that is the case, there should be some analysis somewhere on which carving was there originally before the additions were applied.

Something tells me tho that Seti was symbolizing the time before, or first time, to which refers of the time of Plato and Atlantis.

Question would be what were their refrences? What archives did they have of that first time to symbolize it in such detail where we see machines that were not in existance during Seti's time.

Either way, its quite fascinating.

I tend to lean to the belief that the slab is showing exactly what was put onto it originally. Its just a shame, and quite odd however, that there is no other reference elsewhere within the structure that also has machines carved into the stone slabs. At least that we know of anyway.


Cheers!!!!!

reply to post by RFBurns


I have found at least one of the explanations I was thinking about on my previous post, this one.

reply to post by ArMaP


Yes I have that one saved in my archives and favorites. Its a good analysis. The problem I have however is that the analysis doesnt mention or provide proof that the helicopter was there or not already when something else was applied to it to change it, or the date at which it was applied vs the date of the alledged hellicopter.

Still it would be beneficial if there was another slab somewhere in that structure that is similar to the helicopter slab.

But perhaps other glyphs could be a clue that are located elsewhere. I would find it difficult to believe that this would be the only slab anywhere in ancient Egyptian stone carvings that would symbolize the first time.

I dont think that the ancient Egyptians had helicopters or hover land craft or tanks of any sort. I do believe that the ancient Egyptians, who were master artists and did in fact symbolize many things, were doing just that, symbolizing of a time before their time, long long before their time. Basically, like a snapshot, a frozen moment of time caught in a picture, except this is not a picture from a camera per say, but a picture created in stone from even more ancient articles and scribes and was put on the slab in a visual manner based on the scribe descriptions.


Cheers!!!!

[edit on 22-2-2009 by RFBurns]

reply to post by ArMaP


Please, also check out these links;

On The Helicopter at Abydos

The "Lost Tombs" Revisited: "Success Has a Thousand Fathers ..." Part II





[edit on 22/2/09 by Majorion]

reply to post by RFBurns


A thread about the Abydos temple also has some good explanations from Byrd, one of the ATS members that knows about these things, this thread.

The "helicopter" is supposed to be the combination of the first carving and the second carving, that was done on plaster covering the first carving.

Here is the opinion of an independent researcher and author, Alan F. Alford, he traveled to Abydos himself;

Alongside the "helicopter", to its right, another strange object can be seen, resembling a tank with a turret. And beneath the "tank" is a hieroglyph which some have compared to a submarine or aircraft, with a pronounced fin at one end.

The consensus is that there is no mystery about this wall panel, which is simply a re-carved inscription of a royal name. But whilst it may be true that King Ramesses II overlaid the panel of his predecessor King Seti I with his own inscription, this does not explain why there is a helicopter-like hieroglyph. This standard response of the Egyptologists seems to be ducking the issue...

Could the helicopter-like image be an archaic image of a real flying machine at the beginning of Egyptian history, which has been copied and recopied countless times?

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

The other problem I have with the adding of more carvings is that the added parts do not have the same depth as the previous carvings. The helicopter for example seems true in its depth throughout, indicating to me that the carving is a whole, and not formed from a combination of two seperate carvings.

Just some food for thought there.

What amazes me is that if this is a combination of carvings, they would have to had been extremly careful in applying the 2nd set of carvings to an already carved slab hanging on that support beam. Standing on some support structure such as a ladder, they would have to have carved very lightly to prevent over-carving and cracking the slab along points where the deeper carvings were made.

Intriquing.



Cheers!!!!