Amazing Artifact

I have a question slightly off topic but not. If egyptians or any civilazitaion for that matter had been given alien technology such as being able to fly, then why would they give the design for an areoplane style craft and not a flying saucer type craft which seems to be the common alien vehicle of choice?

Always wondered

Originally posted by justin_barton3
as it so happens yes there is. i cant remember it exactly but it is computers and our reliance on them that is killing our brains. the proof is african memory men i cant remeber why or how but it is.

oh and dacomb i think maybe you should look into the problem of evil.

justin

Justin this is not true. Computers are designing building which used to take months or years now takes only weeks. Ships, planes, weapons are being designed more efficiently with computers. Even medicine is improving. Our life expectancy has risen dramatically using MRI/CAT imaging and even cancer research. It wasn't too long ago that a heart attack usually meant you were doomed, cancer was usually a sign of death as well. If it wasn't for the fact that our computers are so advanced we would not have all the accomplishments in the last half of the past century. I mean really if you look back at it we were savages in the Wild West not more then a little over 100 years ago and look at how far we have progressed. Albeit with a few bumps along the way.


Pie

Originally posted by almeister 5000
I have a question slightly off topic but not. If egyptians or any civilazitaion for that matter had been given alien technology such as being able to fly, then why would they give the design for an areoplane style craft and not a flying saucer type craft which seems to be the common alien vehicle of choice?

Always wondered

Really? Do you have proof? The flying craft mentioned in Indian Vedic manuscripts look nothing like what we call "flying saucers" Do you have proof that all aliens use that type of craft? And ONLY that type of craft?

So how many Aliens do you know of that use this common form of transport?

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by almeister 5000
...If egyptians or any civilazitaion for that matter had been given alien technology such as being able to fly, then why would they give the design for an areoplane style craft and not a flying saucer type craft which seems to be the common alien vehicle of choice?

...The flying craft mentioned in Indian Vedic manuscripts look nothing like what we call "flying saucers"...

Actually, I'm not certain that we even know what Vimanas looked like, as the only diagrams of them were drawn in the 20th Century and added to the Vimanika Shastra, itself composed and published in the 20th Century as well.

Harte

So the fact that they are described in the Ramayana is irrelevant?

The Ramayana ("Rama's Journey") is a tale of loyalty, honor, and duty that has been told in myriad forms in many parts of South and Southeast Asia for 4000 years.

ca 1650... doesn't look like a saucer to me

Source

The Epic of Rama Prince of India. This story is set in northern India, 1200 - 1000 BC; and was recorded in the Ramayana by Valmiki c. 400-200 BC. Nothing is known of the author, other than the fact that it was written by a single hand.

Ramayana

Zorgon,

Nice find on the 17th Century painting. But I'm not sure that this is a Vimana. The descriptions I've read indicate that they are somewhat smallish, at least compared to an entire flying city, which is what your pic appears to show.

Even so, when we look at the discrepancy in dates between the origin of the Ramayana, the actual writing of the Ramayana and the painting of this picture, there's not much difference really in my argument that we can't tell what Vimanas looked like:

The Ramayana epic existed as an oral tradition, for as many as 1,500 years, before it was written down in nearly 25,000 stanzas in Sanskrit by the poet Valmiki. The date of Valmiki's Ramayana is uncertain, but is most probably the 4th century b.c.e.

(From your first source above.)

As you have so graciously provided, the document itself predates this painting by around 2,000 years, and the story as an oral tradition predates the painting by as much as 3,500 years. As such, the painting can only be an artist's interpretation and can't be in any way considered to be in the least bit accurate regarding what a Vimana might actually look like.

However, I admit that an accurate visual description might be found in one or another of the Vedic texts. I haven't seen any such description and that's why I said "...I'm not certain that we even know what Vimanas looked like..."

Harte

[edit on 10/30/2006 by Harte]

[edit on 10/30/2006 by Harte]

Those artifacts were probably the same ones found in Saqquara, Egypt.

This site has some pretty interesting information on Egyptian artifacts that people assume are relating to flying objects:

paranormal.about.com...

There's an image on that page that almost seems too good to be true:



People believe that it depicts UFOs as well as helicopters. Would anyone here be able to anyone confirm the validity of the symbols?

Originally posted by DJMessiah
Those artifacts were probably the same ones found in Saqquara, Egypt.

This site has some pretty interesting information on Egyptian artifacts that people assume are relating to flying objects:

paranormal.about.com...

There's an image on that page that almost seems too good to be true:



People believe that it depicts UFOs as well as helicopters. Would anyone here be able to anyone confirm the validity of the symbols?

Not a great source but, I think this explains it.
Click here

[edit on 30-10-2006 by netobrev]

Originally posted by Harte
However, I admit that an accurate visual description might be found in one or another of the Vedic texts. I haven't seen any such description and that's why I said "...I'm not certain that we even know what Vimanas looked like..."

That's okay.... at least we have you believing they existed, just not sure they didn't look like "modern" UFO's

Originally posted by DJMessiah

People believe that it depicts UFOs as well as helicopters. Would anyone here be able to anyone confirm the validity of the symbols?

Those symbols are on a beam in the temple of Seti I in Abydos... this much is true...

However "main stream" archeologists claim that it is a result of plaster being chiped out from several "rewrites" of the hieroglyphs....

Some of us that are researching stargates use this one as possible evidence...

I would like to see it personally to check the "plaster" story...

That particular image is retouched a little...

Here is the original.... You decide

Originally posted by zorgon
However "main stream" archeologists claim that it is a result of plaster being chiped out from several "rewrites" of the hieroglyphs....

Thanks for posting that image. So they say it's from rewrites, meaning the symbols previously used were actual characters, before the new ones were being written, right? Have any ever translated what the old hieroglyphics stood for, or are they considered as unfinished symbols?

Originally posted by DJMessiah

Thanks for posting that image. So they say it's from rewrites, meaning the symbols previously used were actual characters, before the new ones were being written, right? Have any ever translated what the old hieroglyphics stood for, or are they considered as unfinished symbols?

Funny you should ask that!!! As far as I know no one has offered a translation... they just say "it can't be what you think it is!...

Dag nab it missed the obvious... LOL thanks for pointing that out... now I have a new quest. I have found several odd hieroglyphs that I am trying to get an interpretation of to now avail. Its funny how the "experts" remain silent on those when asked directly.

This link is the best one for the "main stream" side of things...

Abydos Helicopter Etc


Now with that said... I find it VERY strange that the ONLY section of that beam to show signs of having been over written is that one! But I guess you are not supposed to question that...


Archeologists



[edit on 31-10-2006 by zorgon]

[edit on 31-10-2006 by zorgon]

the first thing that struck me was how similar they look to a flying fish.

Flying Fish

I don't know if it had been mentioned already though...

There are numerous instances of ancient peoples attributing metaphysical or spiritual qualities to naturally occurring events and animals...

The manatee for one = mermaids

ignore if it's been pointed already (I did a quick scan of the thread)

You can see the little "planes" in the Museo del Oro (gold museum) here in Bogotá, Colombia. I think they were made by the Calima culture, located at the southwestern part of the country some 1500 years ago.

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Harte
However, I admit that an accurate visual description might be found in one or another of the Vedic texts. I haven't seen any such description and that's why I said "...I'm not certain that we even know what Vimanas looked like..."

That's okay.... at least we have you believing they existed, just not sure they didn't look like "modern" UFO's

Sorry Zorgy. I should have said "I'm not sure that we even know what Vimanas were supposed to look like."

No, they never existed.

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by DJMessiah

Thanks for posting that image. So they say it's from rewrites, meaning the symbols previously used were actual characters, before the new ones were being written, right? Have any ever translated what the old hieroglyphics stood for, or are they considered as unfinished symbols?

Funny you should ask that!!! As far as I know no one has offered a translation... they just say "it can't be what you think it is!...

Dag nab it missed the obvious... LOL thanks for pointing that out... now I have a new quest. I have found several odd hieroglyphs that I am trying to get an interpretation of to now avail. Its funny how the "experts" remain silent on those when asked directly.

These heiroglyphs have been translated with ease, several times by several people. Links have been posted in other threads:
Please learn to use the search function as I'm very tired of arguing the same things over and over and over...

Lazy? Here's two links from that thread:

www.catchpenny.org...
www.ufocom.org...

A quote from the second link:

There is a simple explanation to what you are seeing, at least, as we see it in Egyptology. There is no mystery here; it's just a _palimpsest_ (though without the use of that term, and which is defined as "... A manuscript, typically of papyrus or parchment, that has been written on more than once, with the earlier writing incompletely erased and often legible" AHED). It was decided in antiquity to replace the five-fold royal titulary of Seti I with that of his son and successor, Ramesses II. In the photos, we clearly see "Who repulses the Nine Bows," which figures in some of the Two-Ladies names of Seti I, replaced by "Who protects Egypt and overthrows the foreign countries," a Two-Ladies name of Ramesses II. With some of the plaster that once covered Seti I's titulary now fallen away, certain of the superimposed signs do indeed look like a submarine, etc., but it's just a coincidence.
What is happening in the photographs is quite clear; just consult Juergen von Beckerath, Handbuch der aegyptischen Koenigsnamen, Muenchner aegyptologische Studien 20, pages 235 and 237.
This issue comes up from time to time on such academic e-mail lists as the Ancient Near East (ANE) List and so on, so we're all pretty familiar with it. Regards. Katherine Griffis-Greenberg"
Member, American Research Center in Egypt
International Association of Egyptologists
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Special Studies
www.geocities.com...

Please. I mean, helicopters? Come now.

Harte

Originally posted by Harte
Please learn to use the search function as I'm very tired of arguing the same things over and over and over...

S0 DON'T

Lazy? Here's two links from that thread:

www.ufocom.org...

Speaking about READING I believe that is the SAME site I just listed 2 quotes above...

And thats "Your Excellency Zorgy" to you

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Harte
Please learn to use the search function as I'm very tired of arguing the same things over and over and over...

S0 DON'T

You're right, of course Zorgmeister. I suppose I am obsessed.

But I will say that I certainly have let quite a few silly posts slide on by without challenge here at ATS, mainly due to pure exasperation and lack of time and will.

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Harte
Lazy? Here's two links from that thread:

www.ufocom.org...

Speaking about READING I believe that is the SAME site I just listed 2 quotes above...

And thats "Your Excellency Zorgy" to you

Pahdon me, your excellency, but might I point out a small discrepancy in your post?:

Funny you should ask that!!! As far as I know no one has offered a translation... they just say "it can't be what you think it is!...

Dag nab it missed the obvious... LOL thanks for pointing that out... now I have a new quest. I have found several odd hieroglyphs that I am trying to get an interpretation of to now avail. Its funny how the "experts" remain silent on those when asked directly.

(My emphasis.)
Gee, yer lardship, maybe you should read your own references, as the translation of these heiroglyphs, which to your knowledge no one has offered (or so you say,) appears right there on the page you linked to!

Knowing as I did that this translation is offered on at least two different websites in my "favorites file," I incorrectly assumed that the site you linked probably did not contain the translation. This is, of course, because I assumed you'd actually read what was on the webpage you linked to and you claimed no such translation had been offered. With this in mind, given the subject at hand, I figured that your reference was not worth looking into. IOW, I missed an opportunity to really make fun of you, considering that your statement that no translation had been offered was contained within the same post where you link to a site that actually does contain this "non-offered" translation!

Ahh, you snooze, you lose. I should endeavor to check out more of your links, I suppose, before I miss another excellent in-your-face opportunity like that one!

Harte

[edit on 11/1/2006 by Harte]

Originally posted by Harte
I suppose I am obsessed.

Hadn't noticed...


But then that is a common disease here at ATS. I wonder if there are any statistics that show how mant people in here have ever changed their minds about anything offered in here?

But I will say that I certainly have let quite a few silly posts slide on by without challenge here at ATS, mainly due to pure exasperation and lack of time and will.

LOL I hear that... on that point I agree with you . So then the question remains why are we here?

A] To try to convince the other side we are RIGHT!! Dang it!
B] To snag the innocent questioner before the other side gets em...
C] To seek out like minded souls to share our theory with....
D] We're stubborn mules who don't have a life....

Originally posted by Harte
Pahdon me, your excellency, but might I point out a small discrepancy in your post?:

Much better! But there is no discrepency... I just don't consider that version valid considering how many different hieroglyphs they pasted on top of each other to come up with their translation... [the hawk actually is a chip in plaster.... but they draw it as a hawk...] And still there is no answer why ONLY THAT SECTION has been overwritten...

I find that very convenient...

Now had someone said it was damage or vandalism... maybe
LOL Maybe it was a ticked off Archeologist that chipped it out...

The point is no other section of that area shows any signs of re-plastering and
re-writting... and it doesn't look like plaster anyway, more like sandstone slabs that have been carved... but ontil I see them up close I can't say that for sure.

Ahh, you snooze, you lose. I should endeavor to check out more of your links, I suppose, before I miss another excellent in-your-face opportunity like that one!

Well wakie up then... I have on many occasions given the "other side" a pearl LOL. Mostly to gauge reactions but whether you believe it or not I do look at both sides. And I do admit its fun teasing the "enemy" into frustration

[edit on 1-11-2006 by zorgon]