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.
Originally posted by fred3110
i dont buy into that theory what heiroglyphics are they ment to look like
Originally posted by fred3110
yea the helicopter may look photoshopped, how can you explain original photos of them by people who have been there to see them with there own eyes? (not all can be photoshopped unless theres some sort of conspiracy to make people believe) even in these photos it to me it still looks like a helicopter, i couldnt offer an opinion on the ufo shaped one as it really could be anything it could just be a rectangular shaped nothing
...i see what is infront of me and think wow where have i seen these before lol these aircraft,ufo, zepplin should resemble some word or they wouldnt have cut the stone in this manner its not like writing in a book and misspelling somthing these things would take time to chip away. what does it say i cant find any meaning to these heiroglyphics...
Originally posted by fred3110
as for them not knowing much about flight...we cant really be the judge of this, people have destroyed our history over and over again since the begining of civilisation so who knows what important texts have been lost in time, some of the vedas are actually kept hidden in the vatican library this baffles me why would catholics want the vedas from india hidden?
Originally posted by fred3110
apologies harte ive just read ur post above mine, you must ov post while i was writing one out, yea that site does shed quite alot of light on the abydos subject wish i had of seen it sooner i may have written a totally different post!
Originally posted by fred3110the vatican hiding some of the vedas was on a tv program on bbc a little while back im sure it was part of a series
Originally posted by OuterSpaceMaster
My question is, how can we debunk these things when we don't even know for sure if they are decoded correctly. If you think about it, people who claim to be able to read them could be totally wrong. Its pretty obvious if you look at that inscription, with what looks like helicoptors and aircraft, that it isn't a mistake. people didnt carve that # into the wall so humans, thousands of years later, could say "well, its just worn down, thats why we don't know what is says"
Originally posted by OuterSpaceMasterThose are flying machines if you ask me...humans today cannot admit that the technolgoy we hold dear today pales in comparison to that which was achieved thousands of years ago
Originally posted by StellarX
www.s8int.com...
Some background on page 1 and 2 ..... I always find it striking that people are so ready to dismiss all the obvious clues hinting at a VERY different past than the one in our history books. I have not spent a lifetime researching this topic but luckily others have and the evidence is not only overwhelming but VERY obvious so one should seriously question the motives of those who propose that history is as our text books tells us.
Stellar
Originally posted by OuterSpaceMaster
Those are flying machines if you ask me...humans today cannot admit that the technolgoy we hold dear today pales in comparison to that which was achieved thousands of years ago
Chariots were expensive, clumsy and prone to breakdowns. Yet their use continued for centuries, and they were not replaced by horseback riders until the first millennium BCE [5]. The reasons for this were manyfold. Bronze Age cavalry was mostly deployed as a highly mobile archery force against lightly armed and scantily protected infantry.
Originally posted by Harte
Your link to that Creationist site was particularly unwelcome, IMO.
I for one certainly do not believe that the Earth is only 6,000 years old.
BTW, the site (s8int.com) contains no artifacts whatsoever that have not been perfectly explained by scientists that have spent a little time looking into the claims,
and several of the claims (bullet hole in a Neanderthal's head) are just obvious attempts to mislead.
You may not have spent a lifetime researching these topics, but I've spent 20 or so years (that's not a lifetime to me, maybe to others here) doing just that - though of course, not full time.
I was taken in by von Daniken back then, and found out how I'd been lied to. Been researching this kind of stuff ever since.
Your linked site has resided in my "Favorites file" for quite some time. I use the claims it makes sometimes to make my point about this or that mischaracterization about artifactual evidence.
If you want a source for these kinds of silly claims that is not so overtly religious, here:
Check's in the mail
I swear I'll pull out
If you believe these things because of your Christian upbringing (not saying you do,) then I suggest you take another look at the url of the website you linked:
s8int.com
Say it with me slowly:
S 8 int
S eight int
Sa tent
SATAN!!!
Originally posted by StellarX
I for one certainly do not believe that the Earth is only 6,000 years old.
Well i have not seen much evidence for that either....
Originally posted by StellarXWell that is very interesting considering how many of those scientist frequently say that they have no explanation for artifact X or Z.... I love the blanket statements that is the staple of your kinsmen.
Originally posted by StellarX
and several of the claims (bullet hole in a Neanderthal's head) are just obvious attempts to mislead.
Obvious how exactly?
Originally posted by StellarXAnd frequently scientist spent their lifetimes ending up being dead wrong anyways. Time spent is absolutely no indication of achievement or understanding even if it generally helps when one is not particularly astute, imaginative or interested in finding flaws in popular theories
Originally posted by StellarXWould be funny if the topic was not so deadly serious....
If you believe these things because of your Christian upbringing (not saying you do,) then I suggest you take another look at the url of the website you linked:
s8int.com
Say it with me slowly:
S 8 int
S eight int
Sa tent
SATAN!!!
Originally posted by fred3110
yea the helicopter may look photoshopped, how can you explain original photos of them by people who have been there to see them with there own eyes? (not all can be photoshopped unless theres some sort of conspiracy to make people believe) even in these photos it to me it still looks like a helicopter, i couldnt offer an opinion on the ufo shaped one as it really could be anything it could just be a rectangular shaped nothing
1910 is wrong its in one of my books but the first mention of vimanas was long before this.
yes these pictures looked flawed to us, they may have not have relied on pictures and designs as people do today(people cannot build anything nowadays without detailed schematics) people could make potts thousands of yrs ago which are a better standard than ones produced today.