The Istanbul Shem rocket-ship

I came across this picture today when a friend sent it to me...





Apparently found in a museum in Turkey and well known by those versed in Zecharia Sitchin. It does look like a rocket to me and I do beleif that we as a species have been technologically advanced before. Does anyone else have any ideas what this item could be....

Is this a replica (see photo) of an ancient single-seat rocket-ship? That’s what it looks like to Zecharia Sitchin, the leading authority and scholar on the Ancient Astronaut theory. Hidden away in the Istanbul Archaeology Museum in Turkey for a quarter of a century.

Sitchin recently convinced the Museum that this artifact may indeed be ancient, and not the modern forgery they concluded it must be, simply because our current view of our ancient history doesn’t include rocket-ships.

ancient-contact.blogspot.co.uk...

Any more pictures of this item, preferrably taken from different sides? Usually, these artifacts claimed to be showing ancient spaceflight just look like that being viewed from one specific angle.

Otherwise: Nice find. Didn't see this before. S&F.

I've not seen this before, and I've read my fair share of Sitchin...

Nice find!

Any more info on where it's alleged to have come from, what society may have created it etc?

reply to post by FlyInTheOintment


I have not seen it before thats why I posted it up... I dont really know much about it either and was hoping some peeps on ATS might have something to add...

It was excavated at Toprakkale, a city known in ancient times as Tuspa, where the kingdom of Urartu reigned briefly over 2500 years ago

ancientaliens.wordpress.com...

I thought outside of "it's a rocket" interpretation, and the first idea I came up with was that it's a depiction of some kind of bivalve or shelled creature, the "spaceman" being a cutout to display the internal organs - but not only do I not know enough about zoology to compare the real deal with the above, but I was able to make out specific parts of the "spaceman" before I even looked at the drawing...

History repeats itself.

However, we will never truly know what has gone on in our past.

Originally posted by AaronWilson
History repeats itself.

However, we will never truly know what has gone on in our past.

History does repeat itself. legends and myth from around the world say that. Like the history in the Vedics.

If they're going to make it so detailed, why didn't they make it accurately? Why only be part-way accurate? The ship itself is much too small for a real astronaut, particular the propulsion part. Why go so far as to make ribs on the "space suit" but make the "cockpit" unrealistically small such that the astronaut would have to stick his head out to fly it like a jet airplane?

It makes me think that it was part of a larger sculpture, possibly of a chariot or boat, and this broken off part just happens to look like something we're familiar with but that's not what it really is. It might also be that it's not really a human figure with the head broken off at all, but something else entirely.

Oh, and of course it could be a stupid hoax.

I've seen this on multiple Ancient Alien episodes. To me, this is definitely one of the most intriguing pieces of evidence in the "ancient astronaut" theory because it really, really does look like a model of an astronaut in a rocket ship and I haven't heard a good alternative explanation for what it could be or been able to think of one myself.

I just wanted to say that no one should use Sitchin's beliefs in their research or in forming their beliefs. The man had no clue what he was doing, and it is a proven fact that just about all of his translations were either just plain wrong, or manipulated in a big way to support his personal agenda and ideas. This evidence comes from actual scholars who are well versed in the language.

With that said, the first thing I thought was this is a forgery, or at least a re-creation from modern times. People do this kind of stuff ALL THE TIME, so to say that it is not true is being extremely illogical. It obviously wasn't aliens, because aliens wouldn't be traveling interstellar distances with a rocket like we use today...They would be much more advanced than that.

And there is no other evidence to suggest that ancient humans possessed this kind of technology. If they did we would have found evidence of it by now, most likely at least. But no, all proponents of these ideas can produce are extremely fine-cut stones, which coincidentally COULD have been done by ancient people...It would just take a bit of time, of which they had plenty, considering they didn't live on the clock like we do today.

Life was much slower. So that is my conclusion, and I think it is the most logical conclusion that can be drawn from this. And if anyone doesn't believe me about Sitchin, I advise you to just use Google for 5 minutes and you will find actual credible scholars and scientists who say the same things. Not only that, but all of these texts are available to you online, so you can see for yourself that they are not translated correctly.

reply to post by purplemer


it does look like a man squidged up in a rocket... but as many other posters have said - if they did have that kind of technology the dude in the cock pit wouldnt be all scrunched up like that... but it may have been very simple technology idk...

interesting find though

If you rotate the picture clockwise 90deg then it looks like a heavily bearded man wearing a helmet of some kind. Just to pick a random image off the internet (with no attempt to place it at the right time or place in history, just a generic idea) this kind of image:

Ive seen this pic loads of times over the years.
And on tv progs.

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
I just wanted to say that no one should use Sitchin's beliefs in their research or in forming their beliefs. The man had no clue what he was doing, and it is a proven fact that just about all of his translations were either just plain wrong, or manipulated in a big way to support his personal agenda and ideas. This evidence comes from actual scholars who are well versed in the language.

Strange, because he claimed the exact opposite (that he was the ONLY person in the world able to accurately translate sumerian.)

Anyway i don't if he could translate well or not, it's his belief i am interested in. He genuinly believed in something nobody 'academic' dares to believe in.

Mainly because of people like you (no disrespect) instantly dismissing someone because of their point of view.

Originally posted by Reignite

Mainly because of people like you (no disrespect) instantly dismissing someone because of their point of view.

I dismiss Sitchin because he was charlatan, con man, ignorant of archaeology and the cultures he wrote about...he was good at 'making stuff up thou! lol


The piece is a cornice, it been covered here before many times

reply to post by Hanslune


You miss my point:

He genuinly believed in something nobody 'academic' dares to believe in.

besides, do you have a valid reason to believe he made stuff up? or is it something you blindly assume?

he was wrong,,

its not SHEMS.

Originally posted by Reignite
reply to post by Hanslune

 

You miss my point:

He genuinly believed in something nobody 'academic' dares to believe in.

They don't believe in it because it's nonsense - you do realize that some people do make up stuff that has no basis right?

besides, do you have a valid reason to believe he made stuff up? or is it something you blindly assume

No I actually know something about the subject, read his books and worked in the Middle East and the subject area.

You want one example? Sitchin stated and maintained for over thirty years that modern cranes couldn't move a 200 ton rock - despite ample evidence that they can........

Originally posted by Reignite

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
I just wanted to say that no one should use Sitchin's beliefs in their research or in forming their beliefs. The man had no clue what he was doing, and it is a proven fact that just about all of his translations were either just plain wrong, or manipulated in a big way to support his personal agenda and ideas. This evidence comes from actual scholars who are well versed in the language.

Strange, because he claimed the exact opposite (that he was the ONLY person in the world able to accurately translate sumerian.)

Anyway i don't if he could translate well or not, it's his belief i am interested in. He genuinly believed in something nobody 'academic' dares to believe in.

Mainly because of people like you (no disrespect) instantly dismissing someone because of their point of view.

Yes, it was Sitchin's point of view, alright.

But he never claimed to be able to read or translate cuneiform, so that's just your "point of view."

Harte

It's a garden gnome. At least according to my girlfriend. First thing she saw was a garden gnome.