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.

 

Is She Hiding Something?

page: 3
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 05:43 PM
link   
Forgive me for being crude but that chest looks like a back side to me. The line apears to follow up through the neck. Or make be she was just realy lopsided..


Does any one know if DaVince was mad at anyone or everyone? That would be a real kick in the kester if that's true

That could give a whole new meaning to the term turnings.

[edit on 30-6-2006 by angryScientist]




posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 10:26 AM
link   
I hate to be the last one to post on a thread. It make me feel llike I killed the thing.
Could somebody just tell me I'm seeing things or something. It would make me feel better.



posted on Oct, 27 2006 @ 01:39 PM
link   
I love those pictures that have a hidden message in them.
Here is another one for you. This one is pretty tame.

Look at the hands



Back about a decade ago the "Watchtower" from the Jehovahs Witnesses had some very blatant pictures like this. I found one picture on the cover of their magazine that was just so blatant and easy to see that I had to tell someone. The picture was of a man coming out of a tomb in the side of a hill. When you looked closer you could clearly see that his hand made the sign of the devil. And looking at his body I noticed that it was not really a body but eye peering out from the strips of cloth that wrapped him.

After I showed that to all of my friends and everyone I knew I went and did something really stupid. Every year the Mormons in the town that I live in put on this big pageant. The Jehovahs Witnesses were there handing out their paraphernalia. I walked up to some kid handing out papers and I show him his magazine and pointed out the things I found. He looked at it, didn't say much but did kind of agree with me. He started to look a little scared and didn't have anything to say anyway so I let him go and I continued on with my friends.

I was a little disappointed that I didn't get a better reaction. I was kind of expecting the world to fall apart or big fireworks display or something.

Later on that night me and my friends were sitting in front of a store just hanging out. Two men came up to me and one of them shook my hand in that certain way, the way that my father showed me, and he said "It's nice to see you are one of us." That floored me. I had to sit down. I didn't know what to think.

I believe that most everybody knows the secrets of this world. Religion is here to keep it hidden. It is to our detriment.



posted on Oct, 28 2006 @ 09:19 AM
link   
If Mona Lisa is Davinci himself, then would that mean that in everyother painting where we see a Mona Lisa look-a-like that it is actually Davinci??? The Last Super, Les Bergers D'arcadias and all the others? Maybe its a pattern, and this could lead straight to the treasure map theory, maybe each painting with 'Mona Lisa' in it leads closer to the 'truth'.....Maybe we should look at which painting was made first with a 'feminine looking Davinci' in it and go from their..Nobody has mentioned this yet so I decided to mention it...Just my 2 cents.

-Jimmy-



posted on Nov, 16 2006 @ 06:05 PM
link   
There are some who say the John or Mary in the Last Supper looks very much like the Mona Lisa.

Close up of John or Mary's face. From Dan Brown's site of all places...


Mona Lisa


Bit of a strech but I can see some simliarties....

[edit on 16-11-2006 by MrMysterious]

[edit on 16-11-2006 by MrMysterious]

[edit on 16-11-2006 by MrMysterious]

[edit on 16-11-2006 by MrMysterious]

[edit on 16-11-2006 by MrMysterious]



posted on Nov, 17 2006 @ 02:56 AM
link   
That is a good Point.

But, Does the Mona Lisa intentionally have no collar bone?

Seriously though, looking a bit more closely, I think we may be just scratching the surface.

[edit on 17-11-2006 by angryScientist]



posted on Nov, 17 2006 @ 03:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProjectX1986
I could sound crazy but her eyes are not centered to the painter, they are to the right. We have learned when question people who have lied or are keeping a secret that there eyes either go to the right or the left, avoiding eye to eye contact, but then again I could be crazy.


actually, her eyes were looking left - it is you that see them as looking to the right because you sit opposite her. does that mean she must be being truthful then?

i like the idea that it is the background that must be concentrated on and that if you find the place in real lifem you must look in the direction she was looking and see what's there. you would have to compare it to other works of his to see if more detail and effort was put into his other backgrounds as this one seems very vague but with just a few hints in there.

i note that her 'ring finger' is in a strange position (slightly lower than the other fingers) - try holding your hand in the same position and see how uncomfortable it feels. the other hand looks very relaxed but not her left hand (perhaps she was holding something)

my eyes also get drawn to the very light area in the top right hand corner next to the trees though i dont know why - it just seems a little out of place to me, as does the black 'blob' above the bridge.

the background does appear to be to seperate places to me - the right hand is higher than the left hand. i wonder then if he actually painted one side of what was behind her and the other side was what was behind him and the 'secret' is slap bang where she is sitting, only you dont see it because she is there instead. just a thought anyway.



posted on Nov, 17 2006 @ 03:38 AM
link   
When I look at Mona Lisa I see Mary Magdalene as depicted in the pictures I've seen of her.

This picture of Mary here looks how Mona Lisa might have looked at a younger age (just made a little prettier with the rouge and eyebrows, lashes etc...)




Also note the similar body language/pose in both



[edit on 17-11-2006 by ImJaded]

[edit on 17-11-2006 by ImJaded]



posted on Nov, 17 2006 @ 06:14 AM
link   
When DV painted the ML he encoded certain info, the picture represents the male and female as we all have 2 halfs. He was also telling us how important the sacred feminine was and was most likely encorporating a portrait of Mary. Smiling down on a male dominated world but DV new the truth, whilst those who surveyed her could not fathom the message.



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 10:06 PM
link   
I got digging a little deeper into this image and it definitely looks like his back is twisted. Using Photoshop I could make out a slight indentation where his spine would be. Also the right side is higher than the left up toward the middle of his back. It was as if he was looking over his shoulder at a mirror and painted exactly what he saw.

They could always scrape away the paint to find out for sure but I would never want that piece of art destroyed. They could use X-rays. In fact, somebody should use that new X-ray scanner that's being put in the airports. That could reveal the layers more clearly I would think.

In this animation I did as little to modify it as I could. I chose to make this an animation so you could see the difference between how it looks untouched and only slightly modified.


So is there a hidden message in this painting? I think there definitely is. Your mind is yours to make up.



I wonder if this thread belongs in the Conspiracies In Religion category? Oh well. I didn't start it.



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 05:26 AM
link   
this painting does fasinate me.

the book the davinci code is based on the factual boook holy blood holy grale.
cant any one remeber the massive court case over the the two books by the authors of the original book and dan brown

on to mona lisa i do think there is something about this painting.

just a question wasnt davinci meant to be in some secret society cant remember if he was or if ive got him mixed up with someone else



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Toadmund
Why doesn't she have eyebrows, or even eyelashes?
Why did Leonardo miss putting those things in, did he even finish it?



Women during that time shaved their eyebrows, but I don't know why she doesn't have eyelashes. It could just be small detail that DaVinci didn't feel the need to include.

As for the background, DaVinci was actually the first artist to use a different background than what had been behind the person. The woman in that image was probably sitting in a small room somewhere when DaVinci made that painting, and then the background was added later on.



posted on Mar, 14 2007 @ 06:40 AM
link   
What we have here is an enigmatic persona, a physical background which functions symbolically as a 'mindscape' as well as landscape and the pioneering of several 'artistic' techniques. Basically, a great work of art where the synchronicity of form and content 'lead' us to ask what the story 'behind' the portrait is.

[edit on 14-3-2007 by granny smith]



posted on Oct, 5 2007 @ 06:00 AM
link   
i read a news story today about a stolen da vinci being recovered in glasgow. tha painting was called 'madonna with the yarnwinder' and is one of several with this theme that da vinci painted.

i googled the painting name in the picture search to see what the other paintings looked like but only two are shown there - the stolen one and one other.

strangely, the other picture has an imposing mountain range in the background while the stolen one does not. there is also far more detail in the backround in the other and it looked very familiar. i checked this thread out and see there is the same features in the background of the mona lisa.... very windy river/path and the arched bridge.

in both pictures, there appears a line across mary's forehead and a change of colour. the mona lisa also has a line on her forehead but no colour change.

are these clues or just oddities in da vinci's paintings?

picture one

picture two (the recovered one)

mona lisa



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 06:48 PM
link   
Leonardo Da vinci was a freemason. The positioning of Mona Lisa creates the freemason "square/compass" symbol: her arms positioned into a v and her body positioned into a pyramid,thus creating the"as above,so below" philosophy in symbolic form the freemasons hold dear. The fingers of her right hand are positioned into a subtle devil's horn sign and the fingers of her left hand are positioned into a "W" which is an important letter to the secret occult illuminati societies like the freemasons. In the original painting there were two columns to the left and right of Mona Lisa indicating that she was sitting on a balcony but also completing the freemason symbol. You can still see the bases of the columns to the lower left and right just below her shoulders if you look carefully.Thus the reason for her devilish smile.lol
Leonardo would carry this painting with him wherever he went, I believe, as a calling card for those "in the know" whom he wished to conduct business with. Well,there you have it. That's my theory.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 05:34 AM
link   
She is wearing a transparent veil around her head, and apparantly it was worn by women who are pregnant or have just given birth. Secondly, in the 16th century, the only women that had their hair hanging loosely down were unmarried or prostitutes.

I don't know why I came to this conclusion but maybe it is something to do with Jesus. Maybe the subject in the painting was carrying Jesus' child?




top topics



 
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join