UFOs Have Been Here Since Ancient Times

reply to post by SaviorComplex

I don't believe I missed your point in the least. I just meant that it works both ways. I rather agree with the "recognisation bias" idea but the fact is that we still dont know.

They could be things seen in visions, things they ACTUALLY saw, poor carvings... "There perfec.. aw # it chipped!"

For your lack of evidence point, there's a lack of evidence for countless things. Keep in mind that the Christians/Romans destroyed any evidence that they viewed as Satanic or denied their view of history. I've even heard a theory from someone that Iraq was invaded in 2003 to destroy some excavation sites that proved something crazy (I forget what he said). Its not probable but it is possible.

Originally posted by Ridhya
For your lack of evidence point, there's a lack of evidence for countless things. Keep in mind that the Christians/Romans destroyed any evidence that they viewed as Satanic or denied their view of history. I've even heard a theory from someone that Iraq was invaded in 2003 to destroy some excavation sites that proved something crazy (I forget what he said). Its not probable but it is possible.

It was an ancient underground complex that contained a real live Stargate. No misspelling...stargate I'd hesitate before using that one again in future.

You're definitely right that there's a *lot* of artifacts, statuary, documents etc missing from the historical record. Visions are hearsay and shouldn't be used to support many arguments.

The point to focus on is that technology requires supporting infrastructure. Complex machinery requires elements that aren't available in one country. Today we import materials for our cars, planes, buildings etc. It was the same in the past. Trade routes were a necessity. The commercial spread of materials ensured communication between countries. Literature and art reflect the technologies of the time. There isn't any corroborative evidence from primary sources to support *any* concept of an advanced lost or existing culture.

The idea that there was an ancient advanced race with space technology is a purely 20th Century outcome of speculative publications. The authors of these books and websites dazzle us with mystery and appealing, well-chosen evidence. They never explain the absent archaeological record. The cultural reflections in neighboring nations are absent.

I used to have a shelf full of these kind of books. They encouraged me to think outside of reported history and dream of discovering evidence of a romantic, advanced culture. They offer dreams and nothing else. Never stop questioning the evidence that anyone offers. Test it. Check it. Facts don't require belief. There's so much mystery in standard history it hardly requires anymore.

Originally posted by Ridhya
I don't believe I missed your point in the least. I just meant that it works both ways. I rather agree with the "recognisation bias" idea but the fact is that we still dont know.

No, we do know. There is no doubt among archaeologists of what this palimpsest represents or says.

Originally posted by Ridhya
They could be things seen in visions, things they ACTUALLY saw, poor carvings... "There perfec.. aw it chipped!"

As I said earlier, that is moving the goal-posts. Presented with a lack of evidence to establish these are machines, the claim becomes one that is impossible to verify.

Originally posted by Ridhya
For your lack of evidence point, there's a lack of evidence for countless things...

For sure; such as the claim these are wondrous machines. See Kadinsky's post above.

It is becoming very clear that UFOs have been visiting our world since the beginning of mankind. Alien life could have pre-dated our own by millions of years. So it is not difficult to imagine how advanced they are compared to our own advancement, we as 'intelligent' human beings are less than 100,000 years old. The rate at which we have progressed in this short span is itself amazing. Compare this to a million year old civilization. No wonder ancient humans were stunned to see flying crafts and brightly colored space ships. This was beyond their comprehension. So came the Gods from the skies.

Has anyone noticed something odd about these two images of the helicopter glyph?

Note what is circled, the "hand" in red and the "bird" in yellow.

One image is a video capture and the other is a still photo.

Look very carefully between these two images of the circled items.


Photo:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/53abca4d3e8e.jpg[/atsimg]

Video capture:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/553866279209.jpg[/atsimg]


I will let you folks hammer it out since I already know the answer.

One thing...even though one image is from a video capture, and the other is from a still photo, both were taken at about the same angle looking upward at the glyph slab...so camera angle and the fact one is a video capture and the other is a still photo has NOTHING to do with the difference.

Examine closely and lets see how many spot the differences of the circled items. There is also a 3rd difference not circled, see if you spot that one as well.


Cheers!!!!

[edit on 28-2-2009 by RFBurns]

reply to post by RFBurns


I know that it's not even a one line answer but I think that my answer would be:

Photoshop.

Good work spotting the differences.

The glyphs are a result of both erosion of the stone surface (evident elsewhere in the temple) and the process of filling in and re-carving the stone to replace some of the original hieroglyphics. The technical term for such a surface that has been written on more than once is a palimpsest. The usurping and modifying of inscriptions was common in ancient Egypt throughout its history. The Abydos glyph was modified at least once in antiquity, and perhaps twice. Some of the filling has fallen out in places where the older and the newer inscriptions overlap, and the result is unique and odd-looking.

www.catchpenny.org...

re carved perhaps ?

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by RFBurns

 

I know that it's not even a one line answer but I think that my answer would be:

Photoshop.

Good work spotting the differences.

Its possible that the still photo could have been photoshop altered. The question would be, how would that be proven that it was?

I do know, from my decades experience in the broadcast engineering field, working with all kinds of video production equipment plus everything found in broadcasting, that even a video can also be altered. A film can be altered as well. Even early non-linear video editing systems can do some very impressive creations and alterations to video frames. Babylon 5 is a very good example of the impressive non-linear video editing capabilites during that program's first couple of seasons.

So we are left with a possibility of one or the other or even both being altered by a photo editing program and a video editing program.

What is needed I think, and I am not even sure if it exists, is some other kind of documentation or comparable slab of glyph that might give some insight about this particular slab of glyphs.

Till that is found or disclosed, its a 50/50 deal IMO.

Ancient Egyptians were very symbolic and memorialized many things about their world and their history. Seti was doing just that when constructing the site, to symbolize the times before his time. I lean more to the theory that he was symbolizing a time that was tens of thousands of years before his time, known as "The First Time". I dont have any evidence of that but just using "rationalization" here, and knowing the ancient Egyptians symbolized so much of their lives and history into slabs of stone with glyphs and carvings, it seems that is what we have here, Seti's own version of a "snapshot" of a time long before his time, based on records he had.

Would be fantastic if those particular records could be found.



Cheers!!!!

Originally posted by easynow

re carved perhaps ?

That is possible too. See the bird in the still photo? The bird seems to not have as much "depth" as shown in the video.

The "hand" in the still photo does not show a thumb section carved into the slab. The video image however, does show the thumb carving with depth.

The third difference is the lower shape of the "landspeeder". Near the tail section, on the video there is a slanted backwards "c", and in the still photo, there is nothing.

Blue circle to highlight tail section on video capture showing backwards slanted "c"

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4f18e177f32e.jpg[/atsimg]

Blue circle to highlight tail section on still photo with no backwards slanted "c".

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/f3592ddb542c.jpg[/atsimg]

There is a 4th difference below the glyph of the "spaceship" right beneath the tail.


Again it all could be altered or modified imagry. But....which one, and by whom and what.

Its quite intriquing. Both cannot be right though.


Cheers!!!!

[edit on 28-2-2009 by RFBurns]

reply to post by RFBurns


That area marked with the blue line shows signs of the clone tool, there is a repetitive pattern visible.


Edit:
These other versions posted by Majorion look like the one on the video grab.





[edit on 28/2/2009 by ArMaP]

reply to post by RFBurns



i don't know if these have been photochopped to decieve or to just make enhancements. we will never now imo.

personally i believe the re carve theory and along with the enhancements done to the photos we arrive at what we see now in these pictures.

i could be wrong but that's what i believe.

here is another controversial Glyph(needed to test out the new ATS picture code)

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3a06c1d02d08.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by easynow



Yes I have that one too. I have read that its either a depiction of two aliens and their craft which is shaped like a typical modern rocket, or two Egyptians standing next to a monument.

Looks like the image posting is working good!


Cheers!!!!

Originally posted by ArMaP

That area marked with the blue line shows signs of the clone tool, there is a repetitive pattern visible.

I wondered about that as well. I also wonder how many versions of this slab there are!


Cheers!!!!

I posted this image earlier in the thread. Here it is again...


The link to the original is available here.

It's a palimpsest. The glyph is highlighted on this image...



source

reply to post by RFBurns


One more version.

I finally found a video that shows those hieroglyphs.



Choose "watch in high quality" to see the best quality available.

The hieroglyphs appear at 2:07.

reply to post by ArMaP


Good Video ArMaP

screen shot...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4d9c137453c5.png[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/80bea618c3fd.png[/atsimg]
comparison..
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ba47032be38b.jpg[/atsimg]

i am beginning to think the last photo is completely Fake

it does not look like the others at all

[edit on 28-2-2009 by easynow]