Did ancient India have flying machines ?

[UM-Bot]

The Indian Science Congress drew crticism this week over a lecture on the topic of 7,000-year-old planes.

The event, which took place in Mumbai on Sunday, included a controversial lecture by Captain Anand Bodas on the topic of ancient airplane technology.

Read More: http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/276554/did-ancient-india-have-flying-machines

[seeder]

The same idiot man also says the ancients had radars.

Ancient texts, vimanas etc have been heavily and easily debunked on these forums many times...sigh

Ancient India had radars, says Captain Anand Bodas

The retired captain further said that ancient Indian scientists had also developed a radar system that was named the rooparkanrahasya that would display the actual shape of the flying object rather than just a blimp that the modern-day radar systems show.

typo

Edited January 6, 2015 by seeder

[Calibeliever]

I had mixed feelings reading this article. While I don't subscribe to the notion of India having space faring vehicles 7K years ago, I'm not very comfortable with the arrogance of our western scientist's reactions. I'm a subscriber to the "scientific method" but much of modern day science and academia is just a good ol' boys club and too quickly dismisses and derides anything they didn't think of themselves. Good for the Indian Science Congress for shaking the tree a bit. Even if some of it is a bit too fantastic to swallow.

[seeder]

I had mixed feelings reading this article. While I don't subscribe to the notion of India having space faring vehicles 7K years ago, I'm not very comfortable with the arrogance of our western scientist's reactions. I'm a subscriber to the "scientific method" but much of modern day science and academia is just a good ol' boys club and too quickly dismisses and derides anything they didn't think of themselves. Good for the Indian Science Congress for shaking the tree a bit. Even if some of it is a bit too fantastic to swallow.

if you read the article thru it shows the people 'against' his ideas

Bodas’s bodacious claims infuriated other participants in the congress, however.

NASA scientist Ram Prasad Gandhiraman started an online petition, demanding that the Indian Science Congress to cancel Bodas’s lecture, because it mixed mythology and science. "If we scientists remain passive, we are betraying not only the science, but also our children," said the petition, which was signed by over 1,000 people. Overall, in the last couple of weeks dozens of scientists slammed the idea to give a platform to “pseudoscience.”

No wonder, more of his claims

Among other technologies, introduced at the congress there were polymers to build houses, made of cactus juice, egg shells and cow dung; a cow bacteria that turns anything eaten by an animal into pure gold, and the curious procedure of an autopsy, conducted by leaving a dead body floating in water for three days.

.

Edited January 6, 2015 by seeder

[seeder]

The AA debunked series says this, or this is a part of a bigger page I should say

But before we look into the real descriptions of Vimanas in the Vedic texts we must first examine a fake text, because almost everything that Ancient Aliens says about Vimanas comes from a totally bogus text called the Vimanika Shastra.

AA: “Although mainstream historians believe the Vimana texts are myths, many of the documents contain passages that seem to describe modern machinery and technology.”

AA: “The Vimanika Shastra goes into metals that are used in these crafts. It talks about electricity and power sources. It talks about pilots and the clothing they need to wear. It talks about the food that they eat. It talks even about the weapons that are kept on these airships.”

AA: “The flight manuals of the Vimanas are quite similar to the flight manuals you find in the modern passenger-flight business or when you go to the military jet engines. Of course, they also have flight manuals because it’s necessary for a pilot to get knowledge about [the] plane he [wants] to fly with.”

The Vimanika Shastra is not an actual ancient text. It was channeled, or dictated, to the author from the spirit world in 1918.

The spirit who supposedly dictated the text claimed to be and ancient seer named Bharadvada, who is prominent in some ancient writings, so I guess that is what is supposed to give this text credibility – that is, the idea that the ghost of someone ancient supposedly dictated it.

But they’re not even sure if that version of the story is true, because the first mention of any of this in in 1952 by the guy who supposedly found and translated this text from 1918, so as far as anyone knows he could have made the whole channeled by a famous ghost story up in 1952.

http://ancientaliensdebunked.com/references-and-transcripts/vimanas/#sthash.t6UowxOj.dpuf

[Kenemet]

I had mixed feelings reading this article. While I don't subscribe to the notion of India having space faring vehicles 7K years ago, I'm not very comfortable with the arrogance of our western scientist's reactions.

Is it arrogant to say "no, that's not correct?"

How would you recommend that academics approach this (because it HAS been studied before, in the 1900's when this was first brought up in an "ancient book" that was actually channeled by someone.)

My question is actually a serious one, because every time a scientist or academic says "wait a sec, you've got that backwards. You haven't got it right." everyone hops on them and beats the scientist up for speaking truth instead of telling the other person they need to educate themselves more.

How do you recommend we proceed? Researching this 500 times or a thousand times or every single year still won't make it right or change the answer.

[Calibeliever]

Is it arrogant to say "no, that's not correct?"

How would you recommend that academics approach this (because it HAS been studied before, in the 1900's when this was first brought up in an "ancient book" that was actually channeled by someone.)

My question is actually a serious one, because every time a scientist or academic says "wait a sec, you've got that backwards. You haven't got it right." everyone hops on them and beats the scientist up for speaking truth instead of telling the other person they need to educate themselves more.

How do you recommend we proceed? Researching this 500 times or a thousand times or every single year still won't make it right or change the answer.

I don't disagree with you. It's tough. I had a hard time with my own internal conflict while I was writing that comment. It's more the spirit of it though.

60 years ago there were plenty of academics who were willing to snort and dismiss the idea of a black hole and make derisive comments about anyone who supported such a fantastic notion. They would have petitioned against anyone wasting their time at a convention discussing such a thing and would have discouraged any career that pursued it. 30 years ago there were those who were drummed out of the room for suggesting that Asians might have reached the west coast of the Americas 3000 years ago or that Columbus wasn't the first European to find the Americas. All of those things are now becoming common wisdom.

It's not a matter of correctness, there is a centuries old practice of western academia fighting hard to suppress any idea that isn't widely endorsed by it's ranks. There was enough merit and support for this material to be presented that it earned a spot at the podium, right or wrong. If it is ridiculous then it will be dealt harshly as it should, but to try and suppress it with petition before hand is arrogant and elitist.

I don't know. I'm struggling with it myself, as I said. If, as you say, there is nothing new in his discovery then it's a waste of time. If there is something new, then why not let him speak?

Edited January 6, 2015 by Calibeliever

[seeder]

[quiXilver]

Absolute certainty, is to me, the realm of fools.

[Ashotep]

Maybe there were flying machines but they didn't belong to earthlings.

[stereologist]

I don't disagree with you. It's tough. I had a hard time with my own internal conflict while I was writing that comment. It's more the spirit of it though.

60 years ago there were plenty of academics who were willing to snort and dismiss the idea of a black hole and make derisive comments about anyone who supported such a fantastic notion. They would have petitioned against anyone wasting their time at a convention discussing such a thing and would have discouraged any career that pursued it. 30 years ago there were those who were drummed out of the room for suggesting that Asians might have reached the west coast of the Americas 3000 years ago or that Columbus wasn't the first European to find the Americas. All of those things are now becoming common wisdom.

It's not a matter of correctness, there is a centuries old practice of western academia fighting hard to suppress any idea that isn't widely endorsed by it's ranks. There was enough merit and support for this material to be presented that it earned a spot at the podium, right or wrong. If it is ridiculous then it will be dealt harshly as it should, but to try and suppress it with petition before hand is arrogant and elitist.

I don't know. I'm struggling with it myself, as I said. If, as you say, there is nothing new in his discovery then it's a waste of time. If there is something new, then why not let him speak?

You are clearly misrepresenting what happened.

You claim that there were "academics who were willing to snort and dismiss." That is simply not true. What happens when people come up with new ideas they are challenged. That happens all of the time. That is what keeps science being science. Ideas new and old are continually being challenged. Challenging ideas is important. That is why students are made to repeat experiments in classrooms. It shows that they too can repeat experiments and test the validity of the experiments themselves. These other ideas are not conventional wisdom. The migration of peoples is based on evidence. That's not wisdom. That is following the evidence. What we do know is that Heyerdahl's controversial ideas did not pan out. That's ok. Many, many ideas do not work out.

You also incorrectly claim that "there is a centuries old practice of western academia fighting hard to suppress any idea that isn't widely endorsed by it's ranks." That is simply not true. Suppressing ideas is outside of science. It comes from politics, culture, and religion. It does not come from science. The act of challenging an idea in science is not suppression. Go to any scientific meeting and see the challenges.

What is missing here from this speech is evidence. There is none. So why does a presentation belong at a scientific meeting if it does not have the basic requirement of some evidence? Should every dubious claim without evidence be allowed. Should every nutter be allowed at scientific meetings even if the evidence if overwhelmingly against them? Should every group have to put up with what amounts to spamming of stupidity?

Imagine every geology meeting shutdown by a gaggle of creationists spouting nonsense.

Imagine every astronomy meeting shutdown by a troop of UFO nutters spouting nonsense.

Imagine every physics meeting shutdown by loonies claiming relativity is wrong.

If you go to a scientific meeting you can learn that not every attendee speaks. Many attendees do presentations called poster sessions. Why not let them do poster sessions? Posters sessions are often used to get feedback before the research is completed. You learn from people with similar research. There is an exchange to improve the experimental method. There is a chance to learn about possible pitfalls.

The speech should have been relegated to the poster sessions. That avoids tying up the meeting on a subject that lacks evidence and has evidence against it.

[Thorvir]

Did ancient India have flying machines?

No.

Maybe there were flying machines but they didn't belong to earthlings.

Interesting, can you provide proof to back up that claim?

[paperdyer]

Well, there's no real proof that od exists, but it doesn't stop a huge number of people from believing in one. Without a God, another reason would need to be given for all of the "Holy Wars" that have occurred over the ages and are still having today.

[Hanslune]

An old joke - did the Indian have flying machines? No unless you consider arrows, spears and the odd rock a 'machine'.

I once knew a geologist who was a Hindu fundamentalist 'archaeologist' and who use to berate and rant constantly about how research to find the cities and cultures described in his holy books was constantly being unsuccessful; he blamed western science, the British, the Swedes (long story), the Danes (an even longer story), Israelis, Communists, Christians, Pakistanis, Muslims, Jains, Parsis, and pretty much every one who was not a Hindu fundamentalist for this. It was all there until 2004 when he hit on the idea that our modern world was an aberration and a different 'plane' and the world he sought was in the 'real' world we could only see if we reached a new spiritual level - he went off and became a sadhu.

[Karasu]

Creationists will have you believing humans, and dinosaurs lived together. So by that logic, the first flying machine was a Pteranodon.

Damnit! Now I want to ride a Pteranodon.

Edited January 6, 2015 by Karasu

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Creationists will have you believing humans, and dinosaurs lived together. So by that logic, the first flying machine was a Pteranodon.

Damnit! Now I want to ride a Pteranodon.

I wouldn't, anything that has anytning that sounds like "terror" in it's name is a bit of a turn off.

[Karasu]

I wouldn't, anything that has anytning that sounds like "terror" in it's name is a bit of a turn off.

More for me!

[seeder]

Damnit! Now I want to ride a Pteranodon.

Well, it makes a change from riding sheep I guess

[bubblykiss]

The appearance of the wheels and their work was like unto the colour of a beryl: and they four had one likeness: and their appearance and their work was as it were a wheel in the middle of a wheel.

Ezekiel 1:16

Clearly Ezekiel is describing a monster truck being piloted by another smaller monster truck....or possibly some sort of death cage filled with a half dozen rabid motocross maniacs piloting their intersecting-never-crashing machines at some wholly dangerous and unrealistic speeds who have somehow devised a way to pilot the vehicle with their death cage.

What does this prove?

That the ancients were awesome on levels we can't even conceive.

Edited January 6, 2015 by bubblykiss

[Hanslune]

The appearance of the wheels and their work was like unto the colour of a beryl: and they four had one likeness: and their appearance and their work was as it were a wheel in the middle of a wheel.

Ezekiel 1:16

Clearly Ezekiel is describing a monster truck being piloted by another smaller monster truck....or possibly some sort of death cage filled with a half dozen rabid motocross maniacs piloting their intersecting-never-crashing machines at some wholly dangerous and unrealistic speeds who have somehow devised a way to pilot the vehicle with their death cage.

What does this prove?

That the ancients were awesome on levels we can't even conceive.

......or they took opium, datura and other drugs and recorded the experiences

[Kenemet]

I don't disagree with you. It's tough. I had a hard time with my own internal conflict while I was writing that comment. It's more the spirit of it though.

60 years ago there were plenty of academics who were willing to snort and dismiss the idea of a black hole and make derisive comments about anyone who supported such a fantastic notion.

Actually, they didn't. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole#General_relativity While some argued the math was not correct, most not only accepted that the foundational ideas were correct but struggled to find models to explain and identify it.

They would have petitioned against anyone wasting their time at a convention discussing such a thing and would have discouraged any career that pursued it.

Note the list (a partial list, actually) in the Wikipedia article of the major theorists who actually pursued the idea and had careers devoted to this. No one discouraged them, and in fact their work was important for many fields.

Now... politicians might have sneered. The average man (who didn't know much about math) might have laughed at the idea. But the academics (I can link a whole heap of papers and books here) took it very seriously.

30 years ago there were those who were drummed out of the room for suggesting that Asians might have reached the west coast of the Americas 3000 years ago or that Columbus wasn't the first European to find the Americas. All of those things are now becoming common wisdom.

We knew farther back than 30 years ago that Native Americans are descended from people who crossed from Asia and Siberia over the Bering Straits (the European connection is more recent) -- I can show you links about that. Academics also knew that Columbus wasn't the first European to land in the Americas. It got popularized in the past few decades, but the Columbus idea has been understood for well over 600 years... and the idea of the Bering land bridge is at least a hundred years old.

There was enough merit and support for this material to be presented that it earned a spot at the podium, right or wrong.

Actually, the merit is in the nationalism -- the idea (by some Indians) that every single ancient technology and development was initiated by India and the rest of the world stole everything.

. If there is something new, then why not let him speak?

We live in an age of misinformation. Misinformation really doesn't need more of a podium than it already has, IMHO.

[Kenemet]

......or they took opium, datura and other drugs and recorded the experiences

I blame it on the beer, personally.

[SHaYap]

The principles of aviation was known for a long time and though successes with aeronautics were rare if any , the ideas were not exactly unique to the nature of the civilization of the times ~

Early flying machines include all forms of aircraft studied or constructed before the development of the modern aeroplane by 1910. The story of modern flight begins more than a century before the first successful manned aeroplane, and the earliest aircraft thousands of years before that.

• wiki link
  

A Bird in the Hand: Aviation Experiments in Ancient China

The literary evidence we have for ancient experiments in manned flight from China is so substantial that it is surprising there is no classical Chinese word for “air traffic control”. Mythology is certainly replete with instances of man flying, an obsession that likely dates back to our Australopithecus ancestors standing erect for the first time, seeing a bird, and thinking “Wow, wings would be cool”, right before he knocked it on the head with a rock and put it on the rotisserie

• EsoterX link
  

~

[Ozfactor]

Maybe there were flying machines but they didn't belong to earthlings.

My knowledge of the Veda's is limited , but I am sure the flying machines only belonged to the gods , not for the mortal earthling .

Krishna or Siva, I forget which god, had a flying island , with forests, waterfalls, wild animals and lakes !

[Space Commander Travis]

Were they flown by Bigfoot?