The Search For Life. Part 1 - Earths Extraterrestrial Past...

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by Rising Against

 

so you dont think its a cardinals hat on the ground?

scroll down a bit for a much clearer picture of the painting. sprezzatura.it...

edit on 8-11-2010 by yeti101 because: (no reason given)

Ok, you're confusing me. You previously say you are talking about the crucifixion painting, now you seem to be talking about the one I showed in a previous post. Can you try and clarify what you're trying to say at the very least here and stop swapping between the 2 images.

And No, I don't think there is any “cardinals hat” in both images. And again, IMO the site you're talking about is ridiculous in it’s effort to debunk/explain.

Thank you for the thread, it must have taken you some time and a lot of research to put all this together. There is very interesting material here and entertainment for hours! Thanks for sharing this information.

reply to post by Rising Against


Great job OP on this thread... I like how you put it all together. I was aware of all this information before but it is still nice to read it all together. I am looking forward to parts 2 and 3. In my opinion it would be ignorant to not at least consider the ancient astronaut theory as being true. All evidence certainly points towards this... there is so much that was hidden from us like the fact that the builders of the pyramids had knowledge of electricityl

reply to post by Rising Against


Great thread. I am a firm believer in an extraterrestrial presence both in the past and in the now.

You didn't include one of the most significant of the ancient anomalies.

The Great Pyramid of Giza.

I'll possible be making a thread on it later.

reply to post by Rising Against


Great thread. I am a firm believer in an extraterrestrial presence both in the past and in the now.

You didn't include one of the most significant of the ancient anomalies.

The Great Pyramid of Giza.

I'll possible be making a thread on it later.

reply to post by Rising Against


Great thread. I am a firm believer in an extraterrestrial presence both in the past and in the now.

You didn't include one of the most significant of the ancient anomalies.

The Great Pyramid of Giza.

I'll possible be making a thread on it later.

reply to post by 11118

You didn't include one of the most significant of the ancient anomalies.

I'll possible be making a thread on it later.

Well, I started writing it up originally but I changed my mind as it would've been waayy too long and I have very limited knowledge on it as it is so decided against it, not to forget I tried to keep this thread as short as possible. I was hoping someone would bring it up for discussion though so if you have anything to add concerning it then I'd seriously love to hear it.

I look forward to reading your thread as well.

Firstly, RA - amazing work, you've really nailed the detail on this and got some great debates started. Personally, I'm not convinced, but I do believe that this is an area that deserves more scrutiny.

Secondly, has anyone else seen this:

www.youtube.com...

I'm intrigued - how seriously do ATS members take the hybrid theory? What's the evidence to back this up?

reply to post by Rising Against


hi, i'll try explain better i didnt use the right name for the painting in a previous post. The painting im talking about is called "Scenes of Eremite Life"

Here is the picture that you posted in the OP and is posted on various ufo websites as evidence of flying saucers in ancient art. The red thing they claim is a flying saucer its a very poor quality scan of the original painting.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/613ba9a7e74c.jpg[/atsimg]

Below is a much better scan of the same painting. We see the man and animal on the ground, its clearer now the red object is also on the ground not in the sky. yes?
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/38f45348dde0.jpg[/atsimg]

heres what a cardinals hat looks like. see the hat at the top with the tassles attached?
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/afe4a92a7d43.jpg[/atsimg]

ok so now, what do you think the red object in the painting is. A UFO in the sky or a cardinals hat on the ground?

reply to post by yeti101


I see what you mean now, thank you for taking the time out to post again as well as clarify this for me and I agree with you, it could most definitely be a cardinal’s hat indeed, something which wasn't very clear at all previously.

reply to post by Rising Against


ok cool we got there in the end. Now the important part you need to think about.

Why are UFO websites posting a poor quality picture and claiming its a ufo? Can you rely on such websites to investigate these pictures and portray the truth? What does that tell us about some of these ufo websites and are they reliable or not.?

I'll leave those questions for you to ponder.

Originally posted by Rising Against
reply to post by 11118

 

You didn't include one of the most significant of the ancient anomalies.

I'll possible be making a thread on it later.

Well, I started writing it up originally but I changed my mind as it would've been waayy too long and I have very limited knowledge on it as it is so decided against it, not to forget I tried to keep this thread as short as possible. I was hoping someone would bring it up for discussion though so if you have anything to add concerning it then I'd seriously love to hear it.

I look forward to reading your thread as well.

I'm going to finish my argumentative paper on the Great Pyramid (also known as Khufu's pyramid which is somewhat biased) that I'm writing for a college course, then I will put together a detailed thread on it.

Bloody hell Goat, beautiful thread put together excellently...it's nice to have all this information put together..easy to access.

I can't wait to read the next 2 parts but more importantly...your conclusion.

The Nazca Lines, depiction of aliens in art and the other things you've brought up have always interested me....There's some fascinating points to be pondered over the appearance of E.T's in scriptures...I'll implore further into it and post it into this thread probably

Once again Goat, amazing job.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by Rising Against

 

ok cool we got there in the end.

Yes, thank Gawd we did! I hate feeling confused like that. lol

Anyway, serious discussion.. .......

Why are UFO websites posting a poor quality picture and claiming its a ufo? Can you rely on such websites to investigate these pictures and portray the truth? What does that tell us about some of these ufo websites and are they reliable or not.?

I'll leave those questions for you to ponder.

I agree, I really do, because yes, it would/is most beneficial for a UFO propaganda website to uphold such tactics, but whether I think that's what's occurring here, well I disagree. Personally, and this is me being naive I bet, but I really do think it's nothing but a case of being uninformed rather than purposefully trying to show poor quality images to fool the reader.. I really do.

After all, I myself only posted because I felt it was the real deal, even after a long time researching, and then you came along and showed me it was no such thing, something I'm grateful for might I add. I think the same occurred with this website and the many like it unfortunately. There appears to be a wealth of misinformed information out there and sifting through it to get what it genuine is difficult to say the least.

Anyway in regards to the rest of the images I added and the many I didn't, well I'll still believe (in some of the better ones) until I can be shown otherwise, remaining and being extra sceptical will be my aim though of course.

On that note though, if anyone can prove to me that some of the AAT images are false, then as always, I'd appreciate it.

reply to post by 11118


Awesome and once again, I look forward to it.

Many of the paintings of "ufo's" in the skies on most of these are easily explainable through verifiable archialogical data regarding how they commonly depitced religeous thingas. You can google it, or I guess I could get off my butt and fins it for you, but I'm lazy today.

But they are low fruit for the ufo groups to pick, and without further investigation they are very easy to use in order to not only bolst one's one beliefs, but to persuade others as well. I fell for it for a little while, until I actually looked into it more and found that those things are used to depict very certain meanings and they have nothing to do with little green men.

Originally posted by 11118
reply to post by Rising Against

 

You didn't include one of the most significant of the ancient anomalies.

The Great Pyramid of Giza.

I'll possible be making a thread on it later.

Well before you do, please be sure to check the search function here at ATS. The Pyramid thing has been done to death, much like AAT and such.

To the OP- I have to applaud you for your time and effort in assembling all this information. However I think the material you've posted regarding this subject is being interpreted incorrectly. That's my own opinion and no shot against you. But this "evidence" is not really evidence unless we're able to get a first hand explanation from the artists themselves. Otherwise it's just conjecture, at best. We tend to see what we want and not what was intended by the creator.

I'll be looking forward to the 2nd part of this series as I have a theory as to why I think we may never have actually been visited by an extraterrestrial intelligent race. Won't be a popular idea I'm sure but one worth discussing. I have a thread in the works about it and would be interested to get your thoughts.

EPIC THREAD - (This is why I visit ATS) absolutely awesome work, I was aware ofmostof it but nice to see it all put together so well.
S & F for you brother...looking forward tothe follow ups.

reply to post by Rising Against


Regarding the Easter Island Moai:

I don't recall the exact year, but in the early 1970's I viewed a film in a University course you might find interesting. In the film a group of Easter Islanders moved one of the Moai out of the quarry area and stood it up in one day to demonstrate how their ancestors were easily able to do it. Why these video's and mentions in books keep appearing is beyond me, but anyone peddling information on it who does not know it was demonstrated long ago is either not qualified or lying about that one. Not qualified is in fact the correct answer I think. Because of this I look at them all with some amount of skepticism.

In the video we watched, about 20 of the native residents used straight poles laid out to lay the stone down on. Rolled it to its intended location by using another poll as a lever to move it forward while moving the poles underneath front to back. Then when they got to where they wished to stand it up, they used a lever again to raise it a few inches while they shoved rocks under it. They repeated this over and over again, slowly building a mound under it until they got it upright, then removed the mound. I'd guess man has been using the fulcrum and lever since the Stone-Age. I've never forgotten the video as it taught me a valuable lesson in critical thinking.

The Easter Islanders probably get a real kick out of people still peddling the myth about the Moai after they went to all the trouble to demonstrate it 40 some years ago. I'm still to this day amazed the Easter Island myth is still in play.

The tools they used to create the Moai were found in large numbers at the quarry site(s). If I recall they were fashioned from Tuff a light easy to carve material.

At the time the Moai were created, the Easter Islands were still forested. I think the lack of trees played a part in this myth. The Easter Islanders apparently wiped out the forests. We need to send the Sierra Club to them via a time machine I think. Now I suppose perpetuating the myth is a source of income?

The Easter Island Statue Project must be desperate for money to perpetuate a myth they can't possible believe. That nobody knows how the statues were moved. Too many Archaeologists and not enough work?