Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
Sheep Smart

AA artifacts - evidence or speculation ?

165 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Youre wrong if you dont think Romans left ufo accounts. "romans see flying sheilds". google it. i believe that you know less than you think.

as for "eroded hieroglyphs",

they happened to erode into perfect shapes of helicopters and submarines and the image of what people have describes in ufo sightings? If thats the case then why isnt there erosion on the other heiros around it? also if they were eroded, what were they before depicting? this halfass theory is straight up lame. and it Is a theory its not proven.

I have 2 things ill never understand,

1, why do people have to accept a theory because some shmuck with a degree proposes it, in order to be original? and probably write a book? (by the way theres a lotabiut Daniken i disagree with)

aside from that you DO know theres alterior motives dont you? people should just think for themselves develope their own opinions based on what they see and hear.

Well, for one thing, those Schmucks With Degrees (and I assume thereby we can safely refer to you as a Schmuck Without a Degree?) have proven they know what they're talking about, in the same way you have here proven you Don't Know What You're Talking About. I guess the Schmucks With Degrees are just less militant about their ignorance than you.

To put it simply: you do understand that all Art is not photorealistic, right? That the idea of a piece of art literally representing actual reality didn't occur to anyone until (arguably) the mid 19th Century, after the arrival of photography? Look at portraits, where physical imperfections were routinely erased. George Washington had wooden teeth and was covered with smallpox scars, but you never see that in pictures of him, do you? And that's only the tiniest example. I mean, until the Renaissance and the development of perspectival painting, it was literally impossible to make a realistic image. So no, for the vast majority of these images, they aren't reflecting anything literal or real.

Additionally, all art is concieved of and created according to certain artistic conventions. These conventions vary from time to time and place to place, and if you're not familiar with them -- with these contexts -- you cannot intelligently say what a painting within that convention means. For instance, in Egyptian art (and lots of other civilizations, up until the Renaissance), physical size reflected political importance. The Pharaoh was very big. Regular people were very small. In no way does that suggest Egyptian citizens were 2 feet tall or that the Pharaoh was 10 feet tall. In European art before the Renaissance, babies were portrayed as small figures with adult forms (http://content.artof...06/Byz18jpg.jpg). You can see images of baby Jesus with male-pattern baldness. Does that mean there were no babies in Early Medieval Europe? No, of course not. It just means you lack the education to tell us what the artist meant in these images and what the contemporary audiences understood in them. And that you saying they're space ships is cramming yourself and your opinion where it is neither intended, wanted nor useful. Bluntly, people *shouldn't* think for themselves, in this instance, until they spent time learning about artistic conventions -- this is why the poet Alexander Pope said "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing."

And this is the sort of things those Schmucks With Degrees spend years learning and understanding, and why in a very fundamental way, they understand things you don't, and why you shouldn't be posting these kinds of images and telling us what they mean, that they "really" show aliens or spaceships.

2nd, do you really think historical stories of a worldwide flood and depictions of celetial beings from around the world are just coincidence? mind you im only going by physical evidence here.

It's no more a coincidence than the fact that virtually every major city in the world is next to an easily flooded body of water and always has been. It's no more coincidence than the increased popularity of zombie films after the rise of AIDS.

And if you /actually/ look into it, you'll see such stories are hardly universal, anyway. (I mean, go ahead and list every one you know and we'll see.)

i dont get why the idea is so implausible that in the past another being could have came here. we can even be the result of that. sim city earth haha. really its just us , this is the greatest thing god can make since sliced rock?.?.?

There's nothing ipso facto implausible about it, I agree. But you have to understand your ignorance is hardly an argument /for/ the existence of anything.

--Jaylemurph

Edited by jaylemurph
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Too bad they dont come with written explanations like the glyphs.

Suffice it to say that, to the First Peoples, it doesn't matter what you think an ancestral depiction of their mythical supernatuiral beings looks like.

Harte

I believe the Sumerians did leave both. The story is that they came from another planet. Its the one Sagan chose when he and Nasa sent out the communication back in the 70's. Presumably it must have meant something if it were chosen to be sent out for communication with extraterrestrials.

Edited by Sheep Smart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A word of advice to anyone looking for AA explanations among ancient artifacts or art. Don't take anything out of context, be it art or artifact. You need to understand the culture that is responsible for any artifact to understand it's meaning and significance. Without context AA is nothing more than a speculative fantasy with no meat on it's bones.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the Sumerians did leave both. The story is that they came from another planet. Its the one Sagan chose when he and Nasa sent out the communication back in the 70's. Presumably it must have meant something if it were chosen to be sent out for communication with extraterrestrials.

Not from the actual Sumerians there isn't.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And this is the sort of things those Schmucks With Degrees spend years learning and understanding, and why in a very fundamental way, they understand things you don't, and why you shouldn't be posting these kinds of images and telling us what they mean, that they "really" show aliens or spaceships.

what? when did i say they "really" are aliens, in case you missed it. which you clearly DID, i stated uner then 2nd post i believe saying, "IM NOT SAYING THESE ARE ALIENS...THEY APPEAR TO BE".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

A word of advice to anyone looking for AA explanations among ancient artifacts or art. Don't take anything out of context, be it art or artifact. You need to understand the culture that is responsible for any artifact to understand it's meaning and significance. Without context AA is nothing more than a speculative fantasy with no meat on it's bones.

I NEVER said its not speculative.

Edited by Sheep Smart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the Sumerians did leave both. The story is that they came from another planet. Its the one Sagan chose when he and Nasa sent out the communication back in the 70's. Presumably it must have meant something if it were chosen to be sent out for communication with extraterrestrials.

No Sumerian story was singled out for inclusion on the plaques for Pioneer 10 and 11, nor for the Voyager "golden record."

Also, no Sumerian story tells of anyone coming from or going into space. The Sumerians certainly did not believe they came from another planet. The Sumerians, like most cultures, had a creation myth that places their origin right here on Earth, of course. That is, they didn't know other planets even existed, and they didn't know Earth as a planet at any rate.

Harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be alone if you want. But you're wrong there too.

There's a conversation going on right now at this boardabout how we know Khufu had the Great Pyramid built.

Harte

I had a guy tell me yesterday on here that he could build it himself. Im supposing he started the thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a guy tell me yesterday on here that he could build it himself. Im supposing he started the thread.

You're supposing incorrectly. Kmt_sesh wouldn't have the time even if he wanted to. Nor would he make such a claim.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Look for anyone who doesnt have their own words, or isnt into the coincidence, rather than call me names and post a zillion links on crap i dont care about because as i already said, its SPECULATIVE and NOT imposed to AA from my perspective,..go somewhere else and refrain from the topic.

I have my own reasons for being interested. simple.

You're supposing incorrectly. Kmt_sesh wouldn't have the time even if he wanted to. Nor would he make such a claim.

cormac

i dont think that was his name, but thanks anyway.

Edited by Sheep Smart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I NEVER said its not speculative.

I NEVER said you did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look for anyone who doesnt have their own words, or isnt into the coincidence, rather than call me names and post a zillion links on crap i dont care about because as i already said, its SPECULATIVE and NOT imposed to AA from my perspective,..go somewhere else and refrain from the topic.

I have my own reasons for being interested. simple.

i dont think that was his name, but thanks anyway.

And for those of us who know better, BS is not speculative. And in regards to at least two items you've posted about, namely the Pacal sarcophagus lid and the Abydos "machines" it's already known what they are, so not speculative in the least. Neither has anything to do with AA.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I NEVER said you did.

now that we cleared that up...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And for those of us who know better, BS is not speculative. And in regards to at least two items you've posted about, namely the Pacal sarcophagus lid and the Abydos "machines" it's already known what they are, so not speculative in the least. Neither has anything to do with AA.

cormac

if you believe that that is fine. I still try to point out the coincidence. that is all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Be alone if you want. But you're wrong there too.

There's a conversation going on right now at this boardabout how we know Khufu had the Great Pyramid built. The thread was started some years back, but was recently picked back up - page 3 or 4 I think. And in that conversation, there are many of the ignorant that strive to remain ignorant in the face of information that is the cure to their ignorance.

Harte

I suppose then one would attract the other.

I think you dont understand though. The current standing theories on construction are accepted. They are not proven. As i mentioned before, this thead was to emphasize depictions.

Edited by Sheep Smart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

i dont think that was his name, but thanks anyway.

I am kmt_sesh, I am indeed the guy who started that thread, and I would of course never make such an inane claim.

That being the case, for someone who so strongly emphasizes that you're not really saying these images represent ancient aliens, you're going to notable lengths to try to show how these images must represent ancient aliens. You seem to be shooting down all counterarguments left and right, regardless of cogent explanations presented, in order to favor the ancient-alien myth.

And that's all it is, in the end: a myth. Period.

I'd be interested to know what your sources are. If you care to share them, I am open to hearing them. I think the rest of the posters would appreciate knowing, too. I am left wondering because a couple of times or more, you suggested to other posters that the Romans did indeed write of UFOs and all we have to do is Google it. Well, I can at least say for myself, the day I turn to Google as a research method is the day I can no longer take myself seriously. I would turn the question back at you and ask: in what peer-reviewed, academic paper does a vetted and respected classical scholar state that the Romans wrote of UFOs? Now, that is a better-directed question.

And please don't try to push the conspiracy angle. If you're trying to push the notion that the Vatican has and keeps most of ancient Rome's records, you're not only not very familiar with the Vatican's holdings, but you're equally unfamiliar with the collections of great museums and universities around the world. All I can say is, in my own twenty-plus years of researching ancient Mediterranean civilizations, I've never once heard a vetted classical scholar state that the Romans wrote of UFOs. So, indeed, I turn the question back on you: which scholar or scholars have written of this?

I certainly don't have time to plumb all the posts and comment on all of the images you've posted, and to be honest numerous of them lie outside my own research forte. But as a general rule, how much time have you invested in researching and studying the societies and cultures which produced all of these images? What does proper historical analysis of these cultures tells us about their artwork? Time and again the ancient-alien crowd trots out the same images, divorces the same images completely from their cultural contexts, and points at them as "proof" of ancient aliens. Now, that is more or less the overall approach one sees on the TV show Ancient Aliens, but this TV show is without intellectual merit and has contributed mightily to human stupidity.

I question, for example, one image from your OP: the "cave drawing" supposedly from France and dating to 15,000 to 17,000 years ago. As it happens I've invested a significant amount of time over the past month or so researching this very subject for a large new exhibit on Lascaux at our museum, and my studies have caused me to look into many of the 340 painted caves in southwest France and northeast Spain. This subject of prehistoric Europe is pretty new to me, I admit, but I would ask you exactly in which cave this image is supposed to appear? It doesn't even resemble the cave art of Magdalenian France. What does the wider cave wall show? What other images and symbols are present?. What is your source?

As I mentioned, my main area of study is the ancient Mediterranean world, and most especially pharaonic Egypt. Few images are trotted out by the ancient-alien crowd with such frequency as the Abydos inscription (the image in the link, by the way, has been "touched up" in Photoshop, as is obvious). I don't have the time tonight to go into depth on how one should properly view and interpret ancient Egyptian reliefs and inscriptions, but suffice it to say this is a classic example of a palimpsest. That's its technical term: a piece of art or inscription copied over by another piece of art or inscription. One should ask why the ancient Egyptians would even bother to carve a bunch of high-tech craft willy-nilly in a state temple, which is nonsensical on the face of it. But in point of fact, what's going on here is not a mystery. I've done my own work to straighten out this inscription, and I provide a color-coded image of it below:

Abydos-Palimpsest-Coded.jpg

In the way of brief explanation (brief for me, anyway), as most here know, this temple was commissioned by Seti I early in Dynasty 19. It was left unfinished when this king died. His son and successor, Ramesses II, finished it for him, as all dutiful crown princes were supposed to do upon assuming the throne. Archaeologists have dubbed Ramesses II "the chiseler" due to his penchant for usurping older royal monuments for his own use, and it was no different in this temple at Abydos. Ramesses II added his own name and titulary throughout the temple.

The blue glyphs in the palimpsest were those carved first, by Seti I. Note how they underlie the red glyphs, which were added by Ramesses II. The glyphs not color coded were those shared by both men, and thus unchanged. A proper analysis and translation of this inscription is as follows (I first provide transliterations so others can check my work, if interested):

Blue: Seti I:

nbty nx Kmt (H)w(i) xAswt nsw-bity nb-tAwy mn-mAat-re sA-ra...

"He of the Two Ladies, protector of Egypt, defeater of foreign lands, he of the Sedge and Bee, Lord of the Two Lands, Menmaatre, Son of Re…"

Red: Ramesses II

nbty d(A)rt psdt nsw-bity nb-tAwy wsr-mAat-re stpn-re sA-ra...

"He of the Two Ladies, suppressor of the Nine Bows, he of the Sedge and Bee, Lord of the Two Lands, Usermaatre Setepenre, Son of Re…"

That's enough for me for one night. Everyone else, have at it!

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

kmt,

FIRST OFF ,I didnt drag your name in here, im not sure why that dude did. Some people just have an answer for everything i guess

.. Infact i replied saying it wasnt you so calm the freak down. (Who said they could build the giza) hahaha

Secondly im not here to "prove" anything. So there goes your argument.

I sure hope youre not refering to me when you say "blablabla-bla bla blah ..push the conspiracy ", because in my initial few posts I said its all speculative coincidence regardless of where i stan. Furthermore I posted the following in the stat bar:

She of two men say; "It wasnt Ancient Aliens, it was humans prior to mutating dumbward."

Edited by Sheep Smart
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am delighted and amazed with the images of the 'wall paintings' posted ... great job and a world of thanks

My approach is if we were to express ideas of 'extra terrestrials' how do we compare ours today to those images of those ages with using only the tools available then?

Bear in mind again the only way/path on those trips to those 'holy sites' are perilous and difficult today even with the modern pathways and steps created to make our visits less demanding.

I don't believe its Aliens though I am most interested in knowing what put those 'inspirations' in their heads .... Graham Hancock's book "SuperNatural" does touch on the many theories put forward thus far, but mentioning Mr Hancock's name around here is a bit of a taboo ... ;lol:

Good one Sheep Smart .... baa baa baa to ye :tu:

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to stir up **** here (more that's been already) but seriously who can claim to truly understand what the ancient people really thought? Even today with so much available communication world wide there's more than a few cultural blocks. What I mean by that is that even if you go live abroad with a different culture and learn everything you can about them you still will never have their mind set.

The ancients made art and wrote a lot about their every day lives. Who's to say that what we interpret as just their beliefs and myths weren't actual descriptions of what really went down?

Time machine or it didn't happen. lol

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

thank you third eye ;)

Edited by Sheep Smart
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Exeter makes a good point. We barely know the tip of the ice burg regarding our past.

and to backup MY quotex on behalf of evolving backwards: (the special non google edition for kmt_) :yes:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2291228/Have-scientists-discovered-reverse-evolution-Study-shows-house-dust-mites-abandoned-parasitic-lifestyle-free-living-just-like-ancestors.html

I may just have a new theory here.

Edited by Sheep Smart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Sheep smart!

Thats called artist creativity.

What do you say on this, below?

33big00.jpg

TMNT?

Or this?

2j6742s.jpg

And last I like the most.

You dont actually think that Natives from Colima... :blush:

10prtbb.jpg

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1st one - a flying tortois BECAUSE it closely resembles a UFO. Ha! and probably because there was no Pottery Barn back then.

2nd one- that is def an astronaut in...... possibly disney inspired gear.

3rd one - Do you happen to have the x-rated version off hand?????????

Edited by Sheep Smart
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi the L.

You're using extreme examples in an attempt to prove your point which is not far removed from a strawman argument. I know the previous posts have been addressed but to be truly open minded you have to allow for a margin of doubt.

Donna

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to stir up **** here (more that's been already) but seriously who can claim to truly understand what the ancient people really thought? Even today with so much available communication world wide there's more than a few cultural blocks. What I mean by that is that even if you go live abroad with a different culture and learn everything you can about them you still will never have their mind set.

The ancients made art and wrote a lot about their every day lives. Who's to say that what we interpret as just their beliefs and myths weren't actual descriptions of what really went down?

Time machine or it didn't happen. lol

So we can dismiss the theories from professional archaeologists and anthropologists who spend the better part of their lives studying ancient cultures who then must put those theories into the lion's mouth called peer review? Simply because they weren't there? All the artifacts, all the documentation and records, all of the oral histories passed down to descendants, all of the cultural evidence left behind by ancient civilizations don't matter?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.