It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The MYSTERIOUS Case of The NAZLET ALIEN (Egypt)

page: 2
14
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 06:42 AM
link   
a reply to: skalla



And as others have said, clearly not the same gate, just look at the other walls surrounding the gates in both pics


Give over!

It's certainly the same archway in both pictures. The difference is that the left side of the adjoining wall has also been repaired. It's been skimmed with new plaster and you can see the clean edge too. This would raise the possibility that structural work (new entrance for example) to that particular wall caused the collapse of the archway on that side.

Likewise, Egypt has had its fair share of terrorist activity. Perhaps the archway and wall were damaged during a skirmish? I




posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 07:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

Nah..it's a completely different gateway, there's probably a few of these ornate gateways in a row or something.

The giveaway is the red bricks on the upper floor of the building on the upper right side of the first image.

It's no longer red brick on the second image.

Even if the doorway or window on the lower level had indeed been rendered over to get rid of the arch and the small buttress, this wouldn't change the bricks on the upper level of the building behind the gateway...if you see what i mean.



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: MysterX

I can't see it! It looks to be the same archway no matter how much I look at it. Where I wrote 'left' in the other post, I really meant 'right' as that's obviously where the damage was sustained.

I've had a look for news items relating to the Islamic violence of 2011 and haven't seen anything for this place. It's still on the doorstep of Cairo and spitting distance from it all kicked off. I tend to think that some jackass or insurgent has damaged the right-side wall and archway.



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 07:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: MysterX
Nah..it's a completely different gateway, there's probably a few of these ornate gateways in a row or something.

No and can people stop saying its a different one without even looking closer at the image?

Compare the left side (which is nearly untouched unlike the collapsed right) and its the exact same gate. You can see the same marks in the stones.

Its the same gate and there's no doubt about it.

Its just shoddy reconstruction work.

Sidenote: Someone mentioned it had "womens shoes"... doubt that is an indication of anything. Keep in mind wierd fashion in medieval times. Its unlikely that they would depict a random peasant, wouldnt surprise me if its a fancy pants noble that is depicted.

Either way, it has nothing to do with aliens. Just incompetent destruction of our history.

Someone that know arabic (or whatever it is) that can read the inscription above it?
edit on 2-11-2014 by merka because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 07:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

I can't understand how people who think it's the same gate can say that. I suppose we all see what we see, and then stick to it.

But nobody is explaining how the red bricked building above and behind the gate in the 2nd photo, is a grey brick one in the 1st photo...but still.

Well...same gate, different gate, or the same gate imaged from the other side...i doubt this is a sculture of an ET...probably the Egyptian god 'Bes', often depicted as a dwarf.

The carving looks dwarf-like (making people think of ET greys) but have a quick search for 'Bes' and the figure is quite similar to this gateway carving.




edit on 2-11-2014 by MysterX because: typo



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 07:57 AM
link   
a reply to: merka

I think there are several almost identical gateways with these ornate arches.

With the same carvings, and the same faded yellow wash over them...the difference is in the building either in front of or behind the almost identical gateways.



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

FairPlay, I think you are right on closer inspection, going purely by some of the yellow marks at the top left and a couple of marks bottom left. Damn your eyes!

You sounded reet Yorkshire when you said "give over" too, but I had a vague notion that you were a Merseysider...



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 08:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: MysterX
With the same carvings, and the same faded yellow wash over them...the difference is in the building either in front of or behind the almost identical gateways.

With the same notches in the stones?

The most noticable similarity is the exact same black spot on the left arch, lower ornate pillar. Go further left and a little lower, you notice the exact same chip in the left edge of the archway stone. Go upwards to find the same chip behind the animals backlegs, followed by the identical yellow coloration above it (complete with the darker spot on the right). The zoomed in pics are not so clear, but if you look at the top left you will notice part of another sign - a leaning vertical line with the exact same shape in both arches, with the little chip in its center. Look to the right of that, beneath the little ornate outcrop - again, same stone chips everywhere.

Its not coincidence. Its the same arch. The right side was no doubt destroyed when they built the houses around it.
edit on 2-11-2014 by merka because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 08:28 AM
link   
It is the same gate. Same yellow staining and also blue graffiti on left wall.

Wooden doors can be replaced, I don't know why the door is an issue
A second floor added to the building on right with new red bricks.

I think it is just shoddy repair work. They've plastered the building on the right and there is a lot of stone on the floor that probably fell on the archway like someone else said.
edit on Sundayam021430Sun, 02 Nov 2014 08:33:52 -0600332014-11-02T08:33:52-06:00k by LadyTrick because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 08:44 AM
link   
Badly repaired gate showing an African. I would suspect that village was once one of the receiving villages of slave coming up from the Sudan and that the family name noted in Arabic was owner of the compound. The slaves were often 'groomed' prior to being moved to Cairo for sale.

Earthquakes are not uncommon in Egypt and fragile old arches might have taken some damage.



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 10:22 AM
link   
Pay attention to the details around the little guy, what is depicted at the feet ? The symbolism on the archway from images depicted around the person may help to decipher what or whom the guy represents.

For example in this photo look at the symbol or writing above the guys head. Is this a language or word written on the wall ?

Now take a better look at the animals on both sides of the archway. What animal is this ? If you find out what animal this is you may find answers. The characteristics of animals are used to depict the nature of a person or place.



leolady



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 10:27 AM
link   
It's too bad people have to come up with off ideas to explain what seems to be perfectly obvious. That looks like a grey alien to me, and someone didn't realize it was there until someone else pointed it out. Probably been there centuries and no one really noticed. So someone takes a gander at it, realizes what it represents, and has someone 'remove' it. Only that someone does a crappy job, trying (or so it seemed) to do the tried-and-true Egyptian tradition of grinding out the existing image, to carve something else. He failed. The stone was obviously not the usual soft stuff he was used to working with, and he broke it. Someone then decided that job was good enough, and they moved on. Pretty sure that's what the OP was getting at.



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: leolady

Arabic Arahman = merciful, it part of the phrase that is written across the gate.



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 10:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Chronogoblin

.....Or its a gate that broke, was fixed (badly) and I must say it look like an African to me. The fact that the slave trade from the south moved thru here for thousands of years must of course not be related :]



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: JamesTB

Pretty interesting little alien but the doors aren't the same doors. If you look to the right side of each image you can see the walls are different. One wall is stone and one wall is brick, the building behind the bottom gate isn't in the image of the alien gate.



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Jennyfrenzy

One might presume that the gates are on the perimeter of an enclosure and one is still whole the other repaired and our less than earnest reporter (the original website) in this case is trying to create a story where none exists.



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hanslune
a reply to: Jennyfrenzy

One might presume that the gates are on the perimeter of an enclosure and one is still whole the other repaired and our less than earnest reporter (the original website) in this case is trying to create a story where none exists.


Exactly. Different gates, but some intrepid ufologist is cooking up a 'coverup' where none exists.



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: leolady

The animals either side, without zooming in anyway, look like a pair of leopards or Lioness...certainly a big cat of one type or another.



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 12:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Chronogoblin
It's too bad people have to come up with off ideas to explain what seems to be perfectly obvious. That looks like a grey alien to me, and someone didn't realize it was there until someone else pointed it out. Probably been there centuries and no one really noticed. So someone takes a gander at it, realizes what it represents, and has someone 'remove' it. Only that someone does a crappy job, trying (or so it seemed) to do the tried-and-true Egyptian tradition of grinding out the existing image, to carve something else. He failed. The stone was obviously not the usual soft stuff he was used to working with, and he broke it. Someone then decided that job was good enough, and they moved on. Pretty sure that's what the OP was getting at.

I'm also pretty sure that's what the OP was getting at, but that's not what the picture show. There is no grinding at all. The stones are poorly reseated after having been broken off entirerly (why the "alien" is further in on the arch) and there is a ton of plaster around and on it.

Unless you are implying that someone grinded about 10cm of stone down, only to find another "alien" image identical to the first and then plaster all over it while still leaving it perfectly visible. And smear plaster all over the right arch while also purposely messing up the angle of the right arch (presumably to confuse photographers). How you do that without having destroyed half the arch first is beyond me but hey, I'm not an architect.
edit on 2-11-2014 by merka because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2014 @ 12:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: skalla
I'm shocked to learn that Greys were fighting for Christ in the Holy Land.

Great find OP!

I know, right?

I thought that was the purview of the Tall Whites!

Harte



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join