DOL = dumb out loud.

this crap looks dumb, I don't think 800 years after mary died, someone would know UFOs tried to suck her up.

Love it. Think I'll use that sometime...

Well... these paintings take months if not years to paint. And whatever the objects are, the decided they are important enough to include!

Well, if the glowing objects and wheel shaped objects represent the physical manifestation of the divine (ex, the annunciation of Christ to the shepherds in the fields) in other words, God telling them something, that would have been seen as quite significant. The Lord showing up to tell humanity something would have darn well been considered important!

The majority of the paintings depicting objects in the sky are clearly very ambiguous in their symbolism and meaning, but some of them are not so easily dismissed. Some of them in this link http://www.crystalinks.com/ufohistory.html are just too damn "UFO-like" to brush off... a few of them clearly look like metal 'spaceships' and I find that odd how they could have been regarded as a religious symbol. And the green figures in the top painting... classic alien physiology as humans have depicted it today.

I'm not saying they are definately spaceships or aliens by any means, but there is far more than a passing resemblance in a few of those paintings... uncomfortably so.

Very good find Richdog.

[attachmentid=19719]

Is there any information available on that first painting (the one with the green aliens)? When was it painted and by whom? The writing at the top appears to be Hebrew but that doesn't give any clues as to when and where this picture was painted. I'm really quite interested in it's origins, Thanks.

The Egyptian heiroglpyhs on that site, that seem to resemble a helicopter and other flying crafts was actually proved to be just a set of normal Egyptian symbols.

The plate with the greys on it is a fake.

Ahh right didn't know anything about it, where's a link?

This is the third time I have posted the link now.
It is the ultimate site for all UFO art, the guy has actually researched it and discounted those that can be explained.

Here you go:

The Ultimate UFO Art Site

lol just because it's the first time you've posted it doesn't mean i've seen it before. I'll have a look now.

EDIT - Ahh I thought you meant the blue painting with the green entities, I see which you mean now. So the blue picture hasn't been proven as fake?

Lol I seriously doubt that the blue picture is even meant to be ancient.
If it is, it looks very, very, very, very fake to me.

That blue one looks like something a kid in kindergarten have done, not me though as Im creatively challenged and not in kindergarten anymore

Some of the most famous paintings look like a child has painted them! It’s a style!

It makes my paintings look like works of sheer genius. I was always hopeless at art. I ocnsidered stickmen an achievement.

True, but isnt that a fairly modern concept?



Stickmen are great, but I liked making them "figures" where you put arms and legs directly on the head and skipped the body

those virgin mary pictures dont show UFO flying inthe sky. It shows an opening in the sky which shows GOD casting out on her to be the mother of his child. God had a quicky!!!

Frankly, I'm of the opinion that the first painting (with the green aliens) was painted in modern times. The images included in it are very modern UFO images. For example, the black triangle looks exactly like the triangles recently reported over Belgium. I really think this is a piece of modern artwork that is being used to introduce and illustrate the topic. They don't mention it's origin or who the artist even is.

That is what I also thought.

yea, That looks like an MJ12 that i seen while being stationed in jacksonville.

Fine detail color prints of the Mona Lisa can be found in this book:
Leonardo Da Vinci: The Complete Paintings
by Pietro C. Marani

My initial assertion (which was based upon the uber-convincing art students at my university) might be classified under the "use your imagination" umbrella because the conjecture over what may or what may not be "seen" in Mona Lisa is, arguably, in the rocks to the left of the path at the inverted "S" by her right breast.

Looking at several detail color prints today, it was a stretch even with a creative eye and imagination to discern what is allegedly "there."

Now I feel foolish and must retract my previous blather. Sincere apologies to all.

Also this is interesting, notice the ships in the sky: this is called temptation of anthony

Look closely and you'll see that this picture also includes jesus on the cross, he's in the colloseum-like thing.

Painting here.

[edit: made the pic a link to not distort the page]

Being able to "retract previous blather" is a strength few people on this site have.

Here is a link to my thread about this fenomenon.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum...showtopic=53305

Ok, I found a link that explains the religious icons in several of these paintings. Take a look here. It explains the reddish hat shaped object as being a Cardinal's hat representing Saint Jerome. The painting of the Annunciation is also shown in detail, and clearly shows this to be an event of Angelic presentation. The strange "satellite" shaped object is also discussed...it's actually a globe of the world. They show many of these globes in various paintings.

When looking at ancient artwork one always has to keep in mind that something being used as a physical representation of some event may not evoke the same same response from modern people as it did from the people of that time period.

Nice Lilly,thanks for the link.

Good site. The “Hat” seems interesting, and I can understand when it’s laying on the ground or on a table, but when it’s floating in the sky?

And the Satellite! Sounds interesting and looks right when it’s stood upon or shown in the right context. But with two long prongs coming from it, none of the others show these?

Some of the suggestions sound feasible, but mostly it comes down to just as much guess work as ufology uses!

Even today,several paintings of Alien spacecrafts and such are made, It doesn't mean somebody later in the future can look them up and hold it to be the ultimate proof of Alien existence, does it? People express their imagination in several ways and the art of painting is just one of the ways. All that the paintings depict, needn't neccessarily be true, after all, they are just paintings, not photographs.

Some of the pics I've seen on this thread seem fake to me and some pics maybe attributed to religious symbolism. Having said all this, I find it very hard to dismiss the aboriginal paintings by cavemen thousands of years ago. I find it almost impossible that they, with their very limited knowledge at that time would have imagined and painted something like this. Very intriguing!

Great work kryso!

Why shouldn't the symbol of Saint Jerome be able float in the sky? Saints and angels do that sort of thing according to Christian beliefs of the time period. Remember, the hat serves as a symbol of Saint Jerome's spirit.



The two long "prongs" are wands (frequently used in religious paintings). These wands symbolizes the Earth being held in place. Notice that in the first pix (the one in question) the wands are being held by Jesus and The Father (God). If you read Genesis the Earth is supposedly immmobile, held fast in place by the power of the divine. In the last pix (scroll all the way down) the symbolism actually shows the hand of God holding the Earth.



Really? "Just as much guess work as ufology uses!"... No. There exists quite a bit of historical material that details the religious beliefs of medieval times, and the use of icons in religious artwork. Now, if you want to say that guess work is being used as regards the aboriginal rock paintings, I'm might agree there. BTW, how do modern aborigines explain that particular artwork? I'm curious as to what they see as being depicted in the paintings.

Nope, but to some people it proves that these UFO sightings weren't just a 20th Century fad.

Good point, I will see what I can dig up!

Lilly, great site, thanks for that!



That's interesting; to me the hat doesn't appear to be floating at all, it looks like it's laying on the floor next to the cross. If the artist wanted the hat to float wouldn't they have painted it above the hill and not on it?

....but...why a hat?!?......a floating cross or somethign would've been better. now this has everyone confused!
don't u wonder that these sites and links that show the true meanings of these"flying hats and ufos" are made cuz....they don't want to believe? people don't want to to believe in aliens, ghosts, ufos.....why? cuz people are always making up opinions as to why certain things can't or don't exist. u can encoutner something strange like a ufo of ghosts, but still try to make up an exuse as to why it happen..."oh i must have been hallucintating or dreaming!" hmmm.....honestly..... people try to hard to cover evidence up.

OOOO interesting! This is somthing that I've never noticed before in paintings!

I'm not confused. The Cardinal hat was used to symbolize Saint Jerome (I first said St. Germaine, I was incorrect). Please read this. The author is an expert in this area of art history.



Honestly, to people of this time period a Cardinal hat did not symbolize an alien space ship!

This is debunkers heaven because they can all pat each other on the back and shout ..."BUT THESE ARE NOT PHOTO'S" when they see photo's they say buit it could have been doctored ...see a pattern here ?.
Ask yourselves this why would artists in the 15th century paint discs fighting over a town in Germany ....what the hell does that relate to ?
The same with a lot of these other paintings ...completely out of kilter for their time ....huge metallic discs in the sky with rays or beams coming out of them......what inspired these ....Cardinals hats ????? Oh yeah thats really more plausible aint it ?
Derbunkers stop congratulating yourselves on your smarts....get real and wake up....
That thing thnat looks like sputnik complete with camera port.....oh yeah thats a very convincing religious symbol instantly recognisable to the faithful isn't it ?????
Sheeeeesh ye just cant win can ye

Did you read the article I linked to above? If you look at a close up of some of these lighted "discs" you can see angels peeking out through the edges of the glowing disc cloud. In others you can see a dove in the center, representing the Holy Spirit.



That's because it isn't a 'camera port' and the 'antenna' are wands. Want to know what it really is? It's a Creation Globe. If you go back to that Art and UFOs? then scroll down about 3/4 of the way down the page the authors shows numerous examples of Creation Globes! Please look at the pictures at the very least...you'll see lots and lots of these Creation Globes, some of them are even astrological representations.




If you take the time to read the article, it becomes pretty obvious that what looks like a satellite to us, wouldn't have evoked the same response to people in the past.

Not really. The 'debunkers' are not saying anything of the kind. They are saying that what you perceive to be UFO's are actually a symbolic language that has been extensively studied and documented and that is currently taught in art history classes for people who wish to correctly interpret the painting of the Rennaissance artists.



They didn't paint disks fighting over a German town. That is what you have interpreted it as, and it is understandable that you are confused because that interpretation has nothing to do with what the disks actually represent.



Yes, especially when you look at the bottom right corner and you see a group of cardinals wearing the same things on their heads. At that point, it becomes your option: You can either believe that the artist chose to paint a UFO on the ground beside the kneeling saint under the cross (awfully small UFO), as well as a group of cardinals wearing UFO's on their heads, or you can accept that this is the same symbol used not just in this painting, but in many others of thisperiod as well.



No, it isn't instantly recognizable to the faithfull. It was easily recognizable back in the Rennaissance age, since everyone was familiar with the symbology of the period, but today, it would only be recognized by the people who studied the artwork of that period.

Yes. Though I hate saying it, UFOs in historical artwork mean nothing, except UFOs in historical artwork... I would love to have everything come together and somebody explain that every painting that has a UFO in it, is a depiction of an alien craft...But, I could easily gather 100's of paintings that depict fairies, Elves, Gnomes, Dragons, etc., but that doesn't mean that all those depictions mean that they are all real, does it? I think the problem with a lot of people's critical thinking is that, they want to believe. So when they see something that even remotely justifies what they believe, they will grab on and hope for the best...You shouldn't do that! Skeptics included, do some research, get a grasp on the subject...know it, study it...then make your decisions...
Don't get me wrong, these pictures are fascinating, in that they do have UFOs in them...But we can only speculate as to what they are...And in science, speculation only draws up a hypothesis, which can't be determined without proof. Sad, but true. For all of you believers out there, these paintings will get you no where in finding the truth (unless of course there is something like a Real-Life Da Vinci Code... )...Keep searching, and I promise you, in one way or another, you will find out the truth. You might have already, but how would you know? That is why it is so frusterating. But, the time will come!

Okay i'll concede
I didnt read the article and now that i have i've been educated a bit....thats me and ufo's in paintings finished ...this subject always interested me but now with that site you put up i can see where it comes from so i apologise and bow to your superior knowledge (on this subject )
Mannnn why cant i ever be right about something

Well, it's not that I have any "superior knowledge", it's just that I've been looking at the subject of UFOs for quite awhile. There are some things that I've already covered quite extensively.

Frankly, I've yet to find any evidence that definitively links UFOs to alien visitation, but the idea itself is not impossible per say. However, I do think it's important that we not rule out any possible explanations for odd things people see in the sky. This ranges from the mudane to seemingly *unexplainable* causation (something we don't have knowledge of at this time). Fascinating and frustrating at the same time!

I'm gonna go with what Mind Freak said.

Absolutely! We're both on the same page here.

So called experts are a dime a dozen, and are exactly what the name implies in most instances being X = the un-known quantity, and a spurt = a drip under pressure.

What can these so called x-spurt’s then tell us about the following rock and cave drawings from Aboriginals which date back aprox. 5000 years? Are these Cardinals perhaps in their Mc Happy day uniforms? The mind boggles. (These are images from Kimberley, Australia) .

Oh, fo heaven's sake! Experts are a dime a dozen because the subject is simply not all that difficult to understand. They are experts because they have actually looked into the subject matter, not simply decided on what they wished to believe.

Wiitticisms do not a counter make. Merely a dodge.



What can a student of Rennaissance art tell you about aboriginal cave paintings? Probably very little. I am sure, however, that they would assure you that they do not represents any sort of judeo-chrisitian mythology, however. I also suspect that they would tell you to consult with an expert in anthropology.

Since you seem to hold experts in such disdain, then perhaps I, as a complete non-expert, can reassure you that these pictures do not represent aliens, but rather are hard evidence of precognition, in that these people were able, in defiance of all known natural laws, where able to correctly predict Munch's The Scream and record it for posterity.

What!! An expert is someone widely recognized as a reliable source of knowledge, technique, or skill whose judgment is accorded authority and status by the public or their peers. Experts have prolonged or intense experience through practice and education in a particular field.There is no shortcuts to knowledge.

Yes! The spitting image of The Scream

So you think that "I AM" to believe this garbage? Who educated the experts in the first place? Were they also "x-sperts" perhaps, or was the x-spert born with this knowledge to begin with, thus making it their own statements of wisdom?





There are no shortcuts to knowledge? Do you know this as a scientific fact? Ever heard of the endless universal pool of knowledge and wisdom? Perhaps if a so called "Expert" can come up with something from this pool, I would give this person more credibility than the dime a dozen circle of knowledge, self gratified diploma waving has beens with all their cardinal hats and vatican indoctrinated beliefs, to wave at the gullible masses of this world to swallow.

"I AM" amused! Thank's for the injection of laugter to lighten up this forum! This is one of the greatest medicines known to man!

Please read the following book of facts, and then come back to me with the correct answers.

Universal pool of knowledge and wisdom???? Wisdom is the ability to make correct judgments and decisions. It is an intangible quality gained through experience.For example, "freethinkers" and others believe that wisdom may come from pure reason, while others believe that it comes from intuition or spirituality.They are all wrong as far as I'm concerned.

"Am I appealing to intuition?? No; I am appealing to knowledge
and experience." --Jay Windley.

The experts were educated by experts (no surprise there). No one was born with the knowledge, nor was the knowledge gained by merely sitting in class and memorizine by rote everything that the teacher said (I wish!). Becoming an expert involves doing your own research, studying the existing evidence on your own, and forming your own conclusion by following the evidence trail. Experts do not, despite what you seem to think, simply make up stuff and claim that it is true.



Yes. Wishful thinking that results in such myths as the 100 monkeys spontaneously learning a single action.



If someone claimed to come up with information based on nothing more than some ethereal psyhcic pool, bne assured no one would consider him an expert of any kind. How can you possibly tell the difference between obtaining knowledge from this mythical pool and simply making it up?



There is nothing quite as mystifying as someone who believes laughing at others is the same as putting forth a reasoned counter-argument.



Correct answers? Here's your correct answers: Marlo Morgan invented this entire story. In 1996 a delegation of Aboriginal elders went to the United States to protest the book. Morgan admitted that she had lied about the authenticity of her story and Harper Collins has now published it as "fiction." She still has the same pre-face though, about how this is a 'true' story of her going to live with these mythical people.

http://www.mq.edu.au/house_of_aboriginality/marloweb/

But hey, by all means, keep believing, instead of doing your own research.