50,000 year old paintings of 'Aliens'

I'm quoting an entire post made by someone who claims to have got the info pretty much from the horses mouth, or at least as close as presently possible.

Immediately after this post, people continued their inane speculative discussions without batting an eyelid. What's with ATS?!? Don't you guys read other posts in a thread you're contributing to?

So either most people don't believe you are legit littlewolf (despite the tatt ), or they simply don't read, or they read it and promptly dismissed your knowledge as it doesn't fit their pet theory on the matter

Frankly, if your post is honest, I'd rather take the word of Aboriginal elders and story tellers about their ancestors' paintings, over a bunch of pseudo-intellectual posturing from ATS members, some of whom seem to take themselves a little too seriously

Originally posted by 1littlewolf
I got a pretty keen interest in the Wandjina. As a kid I had an aboriginal babysitter who used to tell me dreamtime stories and my favourites were always those about the Wandjina. This sparked in me a lifetime interest. I studied (and have a degree in) Anthropology at uni and have looked into many of the stories surrounding them. Unfortunately however many are not well documented. I now work in the mining industry in the Pilbara/Kimberly area as a geologist where the Wandjina tales originate form and have on a few occasions had a chance to meet with some of the traditional landowners and discuss some of their dreamtime stories regarding them.

The Wandjina were a Dreamtime creator spirit which according to legend came from the stars and created much of the landscape and cultural heritage for the Aborigines of north-western Australia. They were honoured annually by either repainting their images or dampening the already painted images in order to bring forth the monsoonal rains, however when they were displeased they actually brought violent thunderstorms and flooding. Indeed when it did rain their images within cave shelters were meant to become far more vivid or glow; however many anthropologists simply put this down to the fact that the ochre used to paint their images absorbed the water which then enhanced the colours.

They were not nor were ever meant to represent humans (living or deceased) nor despite their appearance do they have anything to do with owls. They are ‘creator spirits’ which is somewhat analogous with ancient gods although Aborigines do not think of gods or God the same way most of western civilization does. The lines you see around their head are not a headdress but are meant to represent a kinda of ‘halo’ or light which emanated from their head. They are almost never depicted with mouths as they did not need them to communicate. The dashed lines you see on them when painted in full figure form (earlier paintings - 10,000+ years ago only ever depicted the head and/or head and shoulders) are meant to be symbolic of rain.

For most Aborigines the primary creator spirit is known as the Rainbow Serpent. Though the Aborigines of NW Australia do mention the Rainbow Serpentin some of their myths, the Wandjina are the primary creators and are also unique (in both form and function comparatively to other aboriginal spirits) to the Aborigines of the Kimberly and Pilbara regions.

As to whether or not they were ancient aliens, obviously no one will ever really know. But I personally think it’s as good an explanation of anything. In my experience every myth and legend contains a small aspect of the truth. Below are some links to two epic threads on both the rainbow serpent as a possible alien and another regarding ancient aliens within indigenous cultures around the world.

The Rainbow Serpents

Ancient Astronaut Theory - An ATS research project

This is actually a tattoo on my left ribcage (ouch!). Twisting round to try and get a semi-decent pic of it has made it look a little wonky even though it's not.

edit on 29/7/2012 by 1littlewolf because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by RogerT3
I'm quoting an entire post made by someone who claims to have got the info pretty much from the horses mouth, or at least as close as presently possible.

Immediately after this post, people continued their inane speculative discussions without batting an eyelid. What's with ATS?!? Don't you guys read other posts in a thread you're contributing to?

So either most people don't believe you are legit littlewolf (despite the tatt

), or they simply don't read, or they read it and promptly dismissed your knowledge as it doesn't fit their pet theory on the matter

Frankly, if your post is honest, I'd rather take the word of Aboriginal elders and story tellers about their ancestors' paintings, over a bunch of pseudo-intellectual posturing from ATS members, some of whom seem to take themselves a little too seriously

Thanks Roger.

I'm by no means an expert, but rather more an interested collector of tales and related info. I haven't practiced any Anthropology since I left uni nor did I specifically to meet the elders of NW Australia to gather any info regarding them (more to negotiate land use rights). However i have had access to a lot of sources of info I'm sure no one else here has and I'll bet this year's tax return that I know far more about them than anyone else on this thread.

As for the others on this thread.....well......posts on ATS are kinda like web pages on Google. If you don't get them on the first page they may as well not exist. On page six I had no chance

Cheers for noticing. I was beginning to think I'd spilled my heart completely in vain...

Most ancient myths contain truth. But skeptics just claim these are fairy tales and nothing more. Just coincidence. Personally I believe ancient man was indeed visited and helped along culturally spawning many God and creation myths. The evidence is too strong to be coincidental.

Originally posted by nerbot

Originally posted by Sozen94
Wow, that's amazing.

I still don't believe how people can be so skeptical when it comes to aliens.

It's called being level headed.

Or one could say if you are so narcissistic that you believe we are the only intelligent life in the entire universe you are the opposite of level headed, off-balance.

I'm just saying, it's a completely irrational position.

If we think like this now over ancient cave artwork, just think what people 500 years from now will think when they see works by Salvador Dali et al. lol

Originally posted by lucifuge
If we think like this now over ancient cave artwork, just think what people 500 years from now will think when they see works by Salvador Dali et al. lol

You might like this: The Beatles, as seen from the year 3000

reply to post by HumanCondition


They're not 50,000 nor 70,000 years old.

Cave painting is a relatively new thing, and humans show no evidence of being mentally capable of doing it that long ago.

Simply put, the ability to make art is a relatively new advancement for the human brain.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by HumanCondition

 

They're not 50,000 nor 70,000 years old.

Cave painting is a relatively new thing, and humans show no evidence of being mentally capable of doing it that long ago.

Simply put, the ability to make art is a relatively new advancement for the human brain.

Because you say so?

I was looking at some religious text the other day and read something along the lines that the previous generations were wealthier, and more advanced than us however the perished due to their arrogance (whether you believe this or not).

You can't also deny that we humans in this day and age believe that we are smarter because we have more rocks to throw around...

Having an iPad doesn't make you smarter, it just makes you reliant on toys. I have seen people with a few simple tools do amazing things in 3rd world countries - that is proof enough to me that the we humans were capable of so much more in the past and we didn't need to rely on technology or rather our use of the surrounding world was different.

reply to post by HumanCondition


The Holy Bible is not a work of fiction and to say it is shows me you've not read it and you have not done any real research. So for you to speak of the scientific method is sad and laughable. For your information, science means knowledge. Get to know the meaning of words and actually educate yourself so you don't look so ignorant.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by old_god


No, because that's what real science says.

And yes, I do believe that in former times men were something more. Even the Bible alludes to that. Most ancient civilizations do. And to be honest the more I read into it the more I see evidence for it.

That said, such things would not necessarily be 50,000 years ago. 50,000 years is literally the birthplace of the human species as we know it. Oh yes, we've physically been around for at least 200,000 years. But mentally, we've only been here for 50,000 years. The brain kept evolving after the body fit its niche. Some evidence even points to 20,000 years ago being the last major series of alterations to the human body as it took rest in its new niche.

Either way, I've for a time been investigating technologies that fall within the local of being both highly primitive yet highly efficient. And the scary thing is that it looks like there exists technologies that are fully biodegradable and as good as, say, concrete, but will easily return to the Earth if you dispose of it, leaving nothing behind.

However the point of all this all comes down to a simple fact. Art stops showing up in history past around 20,000-40,000 years ago. Past that, it's nothing but knives and sea shell coins.

reply to post by RogerT3


Except all of that could just be their explanation of an earlier people's work. There is no evidence for sure that they are descendants of those who made it. What's to say they didn't find them and make up a story?

Bare in mind that Australian aboriginals are somewhat famous...or infamous, for not knowing that sex is how humans reproduce. They thought children came from dreams. Sex was something else entirely. So I sort of question the legitimacy of such a people to know what is truth or history, when only a few generations ago they did not even know the basics of human reproduction.

Granted their ideas of reproduction are as beautiful and fantastical as their explanation of the paintings. But again, that's just evidence of creativity. Not that aliens came down 40,000 years ago.

www.jstor.org...

Originally posted by old_god

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by HumanCondition

 

They're not 50,000 nor 70,000 years old.

Cave painting is a relatively new thing, and humans show no evidence of being mentally capable of doing it that long ago.

Simply put, the ability to make art is a relatively new advancement for the human brain.

Because you say so?

I was looking at some religious text the other day and read something along the lines that the previous generations were wealthier, and more advanced than us however the perished due to their arrogance (whether you believe this or not).

You can't also deny that we humans in this day and age believe that we are smarter because we have more rocks to throw around...

Having an iPad doesn't make you smarter, it just makes you reliant on toys. I have seen people with a few simple tools do amazing things in 3rd world countries - that is proof enough to me that the we humans were capable of so much more in the past and we didn't need to rely on technology or rather our use of the surrounding world was different.

Thank you!!! This is exactly what I have been trying to say!!!

The topic of this thread is "50,000 year old paintings of 'Aliens'", so please discuss that and not each other.

Thanks in advance.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by HumanCondition

 

They're not 50,000 nor 70,000 years old.

Cave painting is a relatively new thing, and humans show no evidence of being mentally capable of doing it that long ago.

Simply put, the ability to make art is a relatively new advancement for the human brain.

I did explain in a later post that the 50,000 is more about the influence of the work as we can never know the true dates of when they began.

Cave painting is an ancient thing and these people traveled from Africa all the way to Australia so obviously they were mentally capable.

Do you have any sources to back up your claims?

Originally posted by soaringhawk
reply to post by HumanCondition

 

The Holy Bible is not a work of fiction and to say it is shows me you've not read it and you have not done any real research. So for you to speak of the scientific method is sad and laughable. For your information, science means knowledge. Get to know the meaning of words and actually educate yourself so you don't look so ignorant.

edit on 30-7-2012 by soaringhawk because: (no reason given)

So what exactly makes it non-fiction?

Originally posted by stew4media

Originally posted by greyer
reply to post by HumanCondition

 

Hey, I would consider that the art images are disinformation. I found a picture of the original and they appear to have 4 fingers, it is a fact that aliens have 4 fingers so that would increase the chance of ancient aliens being a reality.

I'm guessing you're playfully being sarcastic? opposable thumbs I thought would limit their ability to advance. and then the comedy behind it is it's a known fact in the cartoon industry that it saves thousands of Man hours to draw 4 fingers instead of 5.

Disinformation has gone out of style, I am not sure why so many peole still go to such great lengths to 'stir the pot' or 'muddy the waters.' Either that or the people just have lifted a page on the subject with any of their 4 fingers lol.