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.

 

Was Pre-Flood (anti-diluvian) man capable of Air Travel?

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 1 2008 @ 04:09 PM
link   
I have been researching this question off and on for the past 10 years or so. I have been able to obtain (supposed) Hindu texts which depict an air battle between the Hindu god rama, and the atlanteans. They go on to state that the aircraft were all preserved and are still operational, stationed and guarded in the Himalayan Mountains.

I have speculated that perhaps if early man were capable of air travel, it might answer some interesting enigmas from around the world.

For example: the Nazca lines outside of Peru.

What if those lines were in fact an airport, and flight path markers going to the Atlantean capital?

I also saw a program on the History channel on which an archaeologist (don't recall his name) utilized NASA satellite imagery to locate a canal mentioned in Plato's writings buried until the earth's soil/sand. He found that the only place with a potential likelyhood of that canal was on the plains of Peru. (i.e.: within a mile of the site of the Nazca lines.) He measured from landmarks he located on the plain using European measurements (as Plato would have), and found the remnants of walls.

Also, there are said to be the ruins of 12 kingdoms throughout South America, which no one seems to know much about.

Archaeologists unearthed 3 "broaches" in the early-mid 1900's which were long believed to be bugs. Scientists conducted research on those "broaches", and found that they had aerodynamic qualities to them and scale models of them could in fact fly. They even had swept wings like our modern day fighter jets.

"Evidence" from elsewhere in the world:

When King Tut's tomb was excavated, the archaeologists discovered something which they called a child's toy, carved into the likeness of a bird. When scientists created a scale model of this bird, it too had the aerodynamic ability to fly.

An ancient bablyonian petroglyph supposedly states that the ability to use a flying machine should only be reserved for royalty, as the responsibility that goes along with operating a flying machine is too much for the common person.

Lastly, I cannot escape the evidence of the Temple of Abyddos in Egypt depicting what appears to be a helicopter, a fighter jet, a hydrofoil, and a submarine.

But what do you think?

I would like more evidence to support my theory that early man had the ability to fly.




posted on May, 1 2008 @ 04:42 PM
link   
So, you finally noticed huh?


I believe that he not only was capable of flying in the sky, but that space travel was commonplace. I think that the monuments on the moon and on mars were actually built by humans (from earth, if it needs to be said).

Think about that for a moment. What if someone started building a huge ark (ala "Evan Almighty") today? Think he might get the same derision as Noah?

"As it was in the days of Noah, so it shall be in the coming of the Son of Man".



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 04:45 PM
link   
Until someone digs up a flying device from before the flood, I don't think this will be anything other than a fringe idea.

But, I have to admit, I too believe that advanced societies may have existed in the distant past.



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Wildbob77
 


All to true unfortunatly.... it would be soo good to have more research into this area but if there insnt enough interest in the people that would be doing the researching then not too much can be done about it.

-fm



posted on May, 5 2008 @ 11:09 AM
link   
A great deal of research has been done on this by fringe and more serious amateurs. The basic finding is no, there is no evidence for mechanical flying prior to modern times.

There are some materials that can be interpreted as being about flying but they can alternatively be explained as religious. No technical support structure or the crart themselves have been found to date.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 12:08 AM
link   
Wrong.

There is many accounts from all over the world of ancient flying vehiciles/shields.

The Hopi, The east indian, american indian just to name a few


The Story of Vimanas
India's Tradition of Flying Machines
www.main.org...



From the hopi legends

The Third World
Now in the Third World they multiplied in such numbers and advanced so rapidly that they created big cities, countries, and a whole civilization. This made it difficult for them to conform to the plan of Creation and to sing praises to Taiowa and Sotuknang. More and more of them became wholly occupied with their own earthly plans.

Some of them, of course, retained the wisdom granted them upon their emergence. With this wisdom they understood that the farther they proceeded on the Road of Life and the more they developed, the harder it was. That was why their world was destroyed every so often to give them a fresh start.

Some Hopi accounts of the Third World contain the tantalizing information that "flying shields" had been developed there, capable of attacking faraway cities and coming back so quickly that no one knew where they had gone. When this world and its advanced civilization was finally destroyed by Sotuknang, this time with great floods, the people who still remembered the plan of Creation took refuge inside the hollow stems of the bamboo. Then came their emergence into the Fourth World.

www.zetatalk.com...



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 07:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
A great deal of research has been done on this by fringe and more serious amateurs. The basic finding is no, there is no evidence for mechanical flying prior to modern times.

There are some materials that can be interpreted as being about flying but they can alternatively be explained as religious. No technical support structure or the crart themselves have been found to date.



Originally posted by IvanZana
Wrong.

There is many accounts from all over the world of ancient flying vehiciles/shields.

The Hopi, The east indian, american indian just to name a few


The Story of Vimanas
India's Tradition of Flying Machines
www.main.org...



From the hopi legends

The Third World
Now in the Third World they multiplied in such numbers and advanced so rapidly that they created big cities, countries, and a whole civilization. This made it difficult for them to conform to the plan of Creation and to sing praises to Taiowa and Sotuknang. More and more of them became wholly occupied with their own earthly plans.

Some of them, of course, retained the wisdom granted them upon their emergence. With this wisdom they understood that the farther they proceeded on the Road of Life and the more they developed, the harder it was. That was why their world was destroyed every so often to give them a fresh start.

Some Hopi accounts of the Third World contain the tantalizing information that "flying shields" had been developed there, capable of attacking faraway cities and coming back so quickly that no one knew where they had gone. When this world and its advanced civilization was finally destroyed by Sotuknang, this time with great floods, the people who still remembered the plan of Creation took refuge inside the hollow stems of the bamboo. Then came their emergence into the Fourth World.



Okay, so where is HansLune wrong again?

I'd like to see the bamboo that could save all the people from a flood. Obviously, if the flying shields (made of animal hide, BTW) part is true, there must have been some big bamboo back then as well.

And I don't mean the Cheech and Chong record.


Harte



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by livingtorch
 


I seriously doubt it. If that was the case, then their language, customs, culture, artifacts, and DNA would have been far more widely spread than we currently see. From DNA we can accurately look at the movements of people from around the world, in any given time-frame. Just look what happened to humanity when we got heavier-than-air aircraft? We flew all over the place, now you can fly from one part of the world to another in a day, for not much money.

It's a great idea though - ancient flying machines. It's very enigmatic, but that in itself is not enough to give this theory legs. Actual evidence, not just religious writings, is required to gain any credibility. The Nazca lines have been demonstrated to be easily creatable by a land-based human. Their purpose is still unknown, but the technical nature of their creation does not require the use of flying machines.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 12:30 PM
link   
We have tens of thousands of artifacts from early man - but nothing that might be considered of technical nature to allow a flying craft.

If I had the technology to make metals and other high tech equipment I wouldn't be chipping out stone arrow heads.

New technology, as in the present world was the same in the old wold, it tended to show up first in warfare.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 11:59 PM
link   
I have theorized too that antediluvian civilization was far more advanced than we are today. They flew, went to Mars & Moon. They build and left structures on Mars & the Moon as well. The earth's population was in the Billions back then as it is today. These Atlantians used power points on the Earth & Mars to teleport between the two planets, which is more efficient than rockets. Mars back then could sustain life without the need for space suits. And it had plenty water as well.

Why we don't see any evidence of thier tech today is because most of it was in Atlantis proper, not spread evenly over all Pangea. When the earth split open & released oceans of water, it cracked through atlantis. The searing hot steam-water ejected at near escape velocities, carrying with it huge sections of the continents, including most of or all of Atlantis. What was Atlantis is now the Atlantic Ocean. This escaping water produced Noah's flood. It also put rocky/ice mixtures into outer space, blasting other planets with newly formed comets & asteroids.

The same thing happened on Mars, only the effect on it was worse. Mars lost all of its escaping water to space, as well as most of its atmosphere.

The effect on humanity was the same, extinction, all but one man & his family. Noah built the ark for the animals as well, the Hebrew word for ark is actually closer to the meaning 'coffin'. With all that flying debris God surely protected the Ark from it, else it would really become a coffin.



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 12:10 AM
link   
Howdy TC Mike

Well that was an inventive scenario. What do you base these ideas on?

Pangea was from around 250 million years ago, so what time frame are your assigning to your idea?



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
A great deal of research has been done on this by fringe and more serious amateurs. The basic finding is no, there is no evidence for mechanical flying prior to modern times.

There are some materials that can be interpreted as being about flying but they can alternatively be explained as religious. No technical support structure or the crart themselves have been found to date.


Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

If something like a hi-tech flying vehicle were found at an archaeological dig - I suspect we would never hear about it. Two different 'special forces' types have told me of assignments which involved retrievals and securing of ancient "hi-tech" artifacts.

The case of Virginia Steen-McIntyre is not an isolated example either.

I know for a fact that many mining companies who discover fossils and other weird archaeological 'things' during routine mining, simply dynamite them out of the way - rather than report them and have work interrupted.

Remember consensus reality demands that you believe the following: Everything you see around you, created itself, out of nothing.
Go figure.

Duncan



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 12:53 AM
link   
Howdy Duncan



Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


Yes but absence of evidence is an indicator that there may be nothing there. There is a shocking absence of evidence for trolls but that doesn't mean trolls existed.



If something like a hi-tech flying vehicle were found at an archaeological dig - I suspect we would never hear about it. Two different 'special forces' types have told me of assignments which involved retrievals and securing of ancient "hi-tech" artifacts.


I believe you suspect wrongly - and why would these guys tell you this?



The case of Virginia Steen-McIntyre is not an isolated example either.


Actually it is and is rather openly known




I know for a fact that many mining companies who discover fossils and other weird archaeological 'things' during routine mining, simply dynamite them out of the way - rather than report them and have work interrupted.


Your fact is correct but misinterpreted, they avoid involving archaeologists so the project will not be delayed-not that there is anything unusual with the finds




Remember consensus reality demands that you believe the following:
Everything you see around you, created itself, out of nothing.
Go figure.


Not really sure what the comment is suspose to mean



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 01:25 AM
link   
(Removed quote of entire post above)

[edit on 8/5/08 by masqua]



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 01:37 AM
link   
Howdy Nexusmagazine

You quoted the page but didn't actually reply



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 01:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune


Remember consensus reality demands that you believe the following:
Everything you see around you, created itself, out of nothing.
Go figure.


Not really sure what the comment is suspose to mean


No surprises there - judging by the rest of your post.

Consensus reality says the universe created itself via a big bang. No intent, just a mechanistic explosion, before which existed nothing. After this alleged big bang, matter formed (lucky for us it was all ejected at the correct velocity range so that this could occur)
Matter -> Suns -> planets -> then suddenly a bunch of molecules got drunk one night and became enzymes or some other primitive lifeforms - next thing you know, we have zillions of life forms, (most of which died in mass exinctions as you know)
In other words, the mechanistic view is that it happened on its own, ie it created itself, from nothing.

I don't know why I bother answering your other comments, but for the record:
- go to Scandanavia - thousands of people believe in trolls - seriously!! they will cite you plenty of evidence - so maybe they do exist?
- archaeological coverups exist - whether you want to believe it or not.
- Virginia's case is not unique - heck ask her about the many others who contacted her with cases of their own. Do they speak up about them? No - they want their jobs. I have heaps of case examples in my files going back 25 years.
- I know personally of cases where unusual findings in mines were blasted. Sorry about that.

Duncan


 

fixed quote

[edit on 8/5/08 by masqua]



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 02:12 AM
link   
Howdy Duncan

Thanks for trying to post again



Consensus reality .....


So Duncan what is your nonconsenus reality?



I don't know why I bother answering your other comments, but for the record:


So why are you responding?



- go to Scandanavia - thousands of people believe in trolls - seriously!! they will cite you plenty of evidence - so maybe they do exist?


Yes and they believe that , your point is that people all over the world believe weird stuff without evidence?



- archaeological coverups exist - whether you want to believe it or not.


Yes archaeological coverup exist - they have been discussed here on this forum. However they don't exist as part of world wide conspiracy- as you seem to believe.



- Virginia's case is not unique - heck ask her about the many others who contacted her with cases of their own. Do they speak up about them? No - they want their jobs. I have heaps of case examples in my files going back 25 years.


I'm afraid Duncan that you don't understand the word "cover up', nor 'unique'. Virginia was able to publish her papers -as were all the others associated with that dig - what did happen is that the evidence was not accepted as being valid - there is a difference.



- I know personally of cases where unusual findings in mines were blasted.


Evidence for that??



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 02:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune

Howdy Duncan

Thanks for trying to post again

So Duncan what is your nonconsenus reality?



I don't have one.





Yes archaeological coverup exist - they have been discussed here on this forum. However they don't exist as part of world wide conspiracy- as you seem to believe.



Umm - where do I say anything like this? I haven't even hinted at any world wide conspiracy. You puttin' words in my mouth to make yourself look good or something?



- Virginia's case is not unique - heck ask her about the many others who contacted her with cases of their own. Do they speak up about them? No - they want their jobs. I have heaps of case examples in my files going back 25 years.


I'm afraid Duncan that you don't understand the word "cover up', nor 'unique'. Virginia was able to publish her papers -as were all the others associated with that dig - what did happen is that the evidence was not accepted as being valid - there is a difference.



Oh I know the difference all right. You said her case was unique - I know otherwise and said it was not unique.
You obviously haven't spoken to Virginia to hear her side of the story - maybe you got no further than the semi-truths in Wikipedia and the skeptics' sites?



- I know personally of cases where unusual findings in mines were blasted.


Evidence for that??



Nothing that will convince you.





posted on May, 8 2008 @ 04:07 AM
link   
reply to post by TC Mike
 


TC Mike,

I'm curious as to how you can reconcile your "theory", much of which makes for a good story, with the time frames of known events, such as:

Final phase of the breakup of Pangaea: c. 34 Million years ago

Earliest Australopithecines: c. 4 Million years ago

Earliest Homo Sapiens: c. 195,000 years ago

Mars loss of Magnetosphere and Atmosphere: c. 4 Billion years ago

Mesopotamian/Noah's flood: between 2900 BC and 2750 BC

cormac



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 04:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by cormac mac airt
reply to post by TC Mike
 


TC Mike,

I'm curious as to how you can reconcile your "theory", much of which makes for a good story, with the time frames of known events, such as:

Final phase of the breakup of Pangaea: c. 34 Million years ago

Earliest Australopithecines: c. 4 Million years ago

Earliest Homo Sapiens: c. 195,000 years ago

Mars loss of Magnetosphere and Atmosphere: c. 4 Billion years ago

Mesopotamian/Noah's flood: between 2900 BC and 2750 BC

cormac



These are 'consensus reality' 'facts' - there are plenty of scientists specialising in these areas who will disagree - but strangely enough they do not get their papers published in 'peer review' outlets. I have trafficked with scientists and whistleblowers for over 25 years, in all fields of science - and I can assure you that much control is exerted over what gets published and what doesn't. It is not just financial interests that dominate 'suppression' of valuable discussion through peer-review - it is now at the point where much of science has become a religion - and theory overrides fact in more and more cases.
One ground-breaking technique to date when rocks were carved by ancient man was applied to Stonehenge a decade or so ago. When the readings came back with dates unnacceptable to archaeologists - the archaeologists ruled the day and had the whole technology scrapped.
Quoting peer-reviewed information is as irrelevant to truth these days, as creationists quoting from the bible. Both are meaningless in terms of the uncomfortable facts that are being suppressed.
I am reminded tonight by a story on local TV about the new discoveries of the genetic makeup of the Platypus. The news item opened with a reminder that all the world's experts back in Europe said that such an animal was impossible, and it was considered by everyone as a hoax. It didn't even matter that they had dead specimens. No one dared to press the matter for fear of ridicule because of their fear of upsetting consensus reality.
They were wrong too.

Duncan



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join