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.

 

Prehistoric UFO and ET images found in remote cave in India!

page: 6
63
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 06:18 PM
link   
Has anyone gotten any closer too a verifiable truth about this image or its location?




posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by debris765nju
 

Everything seems to point to its legitimacy. However, it is from Australia, not India. It is aboriginal, and from the Kimberley's area. It is "thought" to be between 10,000 and 35,000 years old, depending on the website you look at. It was supposedly found by Joseph Bradshaw of "The Bradshaw Foundation" in the late 1800's. There is a bit more info on the previous pages, but that is a short synopsis. It really comes down to what a person wants to believe I guess.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by harishindl
 


Sweet post. Keep piling on the evidence



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Klassified
 


I need to see a link to Australia, the Aborigines or the Kimberley's spaceman. I checked all those and came of with nothing tying the photograph to them. Wassim Khan however went so far as to mark the cave's location on a map and is cited on a dozen sites as the man who brought the picture to public attention. Granted they all originated from the same root source. The video that shows the picture expanded provides a large confusion factor.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by debris765nju
 

In this thread, you will find a link to a video clip. This clip is from a documentary called "Secret Space 2".
The documentary was released in 2007. (I originally said 2009, which was incorrect) The gentleman in the clip explains it's origins, and where he got it. The rest is up to you. You'll get a lot of info just reading through the thread. I've already spent a lot of time tracking it down. I'm not going to go through another 100 sites again.

In short. It can't have been found in February 2010, if it was in a documentary made in 2007. Good luck, maybe you'll find some info the rest of us didn't.

BTW. You can also find that documentary on youtube.

edit on 19-11-2010 by Klassified because: Add



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Klassified
 


Lol that's what I said on the page before!! Sorry must have written it in invisible ink.......




posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 12:13 AM
link   
This has gone nowhere so far, and will not go anywhere. Here's why. The painting we are all seeing is not the original cave painting. It's an artist's rendering of the original cave painting. We have no original pictures, and probably won't see any.

The aboriginals, according to some members here, occasionally repaint these cave paintings to preserve the stories for future generations. If this is true, we will never see the original paintings. I don't care how good your artists are, going over something many times over with fresh paint is bound to change some things. Who's to say they never added to it, or changed elements?

This story is closed, and there is nothing more you can do with it because the original evidence will never be seen again.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Klassified
 


Thanks, but i did watch the video, did read every post and went through every link posted and google images for both India and Australia which is what sparked my comments. I merely inquired about any links you might have found. Thanks for your reply.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by stevcolx
 

Yeah, thats why I was telling him to read through the thread. There's a lot of repeats in this thread. I think anyone who did the same hunting through google I did came up with the same info as a whole. And quit using that invisible ink.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by spacemanjupiter
 

Your point is well taken. However, I did read somewhere the Aboriginals are very strict about not adding to, or taking away from the original paintings. But after that many layers of paint, the original would be distorted at best.
But true enough, we may never really know on this one.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by debris765nju
 

Hope I didn't come off snippy. It wasn't my intent. I did a lot of research on this thread. I (and others) tried to post what seemed to be the most relevant stuff we found. The internet is a marvelous tool. But I am amazed sometimes at how quickly a bit of disinfo or misinfo can perpetuate itself and make the truth that much harder to find.
I think what I found most interesting about this thread though, was the point mentioned by several people. There were no pictures to be found other than what we already had. Specifically, no contextual pictures. This did not help the case for authenticity whatsoever. I couldn't even find a picture of this on the Bradshaw Foundation's website. And they're founder is supposed to have discovered it.

Unless someone finds more relevant evidence than what we have, I have to agree with the above poster.
Case Closed.

edit on 20-11-2010 by Klassified because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by debris765nju
 

Hope I didn't come off snippy. It wasn't my intent. I did a lot of research on this thread. I (and others) tried to post what seemed to be the most relevant stuff we found. The internet is a marvelous tool. But I am amazed sometimes at how quickly a bit of disinfo or misinfo can perpetuate itself and make the truth that much harder to find.
I think what I found most interesting about this thread though, was the point mentioned by several people. There were no pictures to be found other than what we already had. Specifically, no contextual pictures. This did not help the case for authenticity whatsoever. I couldn't even find a picture of this on the Bradshaw Foundation's website. And they're founder is supposed to have discovered it.

Unless someone finds more relevant evidence than what we have, I have to agree with the above poster.
Case Closed.

edit on 20-11-2010 by Klassified because: (no reason given)


It isnt just this photo but is all the evidence thats all over the world piling on to support this unreal claim that ancient astronauts visited our planet in our infancy. When you study Easter Island, the Pyramids of Giza, the Gazda Strip, the Sun Temple, or Tiunacho, youll come to the same conclusion. Tiunacho is especially convincing being that it is the oldest city in the world and drills were used to build it when the mainstream theory is that the native indians (that could barely communicate with each other) built this intricate city. All over the world at the very same time man was compelled to put this story on their walls. A story of beings coming down from the skies in machines and engaging in commerce with mankind.

Its mind blowing stuff



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Secularist
 

I can't argue with you on that. There is a lot of evidence out there. And a lot being covered up as well. I just wish we could have found more on this specific one. I used to be a super hardcore skeptic. Even worse than some of the guys on here. But a chain of events which I won't go into changed my whole perspective of history, this planet, and indeed, reality itself. I had a true shock to my system. But I still try very hard to maintain an objective and reasonable approach.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by Secularist
 

I can't argue with you on that. There is a lot of evidence out there. And a lot being covered up as well. I just wish we could have found more on this specific one. I used to be a super hardcore skeptic. Even worse than some of the guys on here. But a chain of events which I won't go into changed my whole perspective of history, this planet, and indeed, reality itself. I had a true shock to my system. But I still try very hard to maintain an objective and reasonable approach.


I agree with you that if we should see a ghost there must be a more logical explanation for it. I just dont clump extraterrestrials into the paranormal category myself because they are very real. Mathematically its already proven that life will exist outside of our planet. Saturn's moon Titan is the Earth 6 billion years ago. We just found Gilese 581g which they say has an almost 100% guaranteed chance to support life as we know it. Being that the Earth is a baby in regards to the age of the rest of the universe it would make sense that alien civilizations had billions of years head start on us and that they do visit the Earth for whatever reason - to document its species or whatever else. Wouldnt we after all do the same thing? (I would love to see a planet with some dinosaur like creatures on it. The dinosaurs are awesome because it shows us that alien life can literally be that monstrous! Its awesome!)

I do support this theory though. As logical a person as I am I just dont see mainstream science shedding any light on these topics and they never do. Mankind must have had some kind of technology presented to them to accomplish such feats that we cant even replicate today with our technology. Being that these cultures lack in all other fields of technology, like in medicine, I dont see it logical that they would develop anti-gravity machines capable of lifting 900 ton solid stone blocks, etc., etc., without the intervention of some other advanced species. Why this species would even engage with primitive man kind's beyond me but I can see the human race doing the same thing should we discover other intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. I know Stephen Hawking likes to think if aliens should visit the Earth it would be Christopher Columbus and the Native Americans all over again but I like to think that not every alien race out there is as war hungry as we are



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 04:03 PM
link   
Clearly fake. The website looks bad. The domain name is juvenile. The writing looks like an average forum poster's writing (too much personal opinion, like describing the lines behind the saucer as emitted energy or whatever) not journalist writing. The cave painting is horrible.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 06:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by spacemanjupiter
 

Your point is well taken. However, I did read somewhere the Aboriginals are very strict about not adding to, or taking away from the original paintings. But after that many layers of paint, the original would be distorted at best.
But true enough, we may never really know on this one.


My main point about that painting is that it would be a pretty radical departure from the style of aboriginal art (which varies from place to place) across australia. That said there are plenty of paintings that the uninitiated are never allowed to view. I might ask someone I know at the NGA (National Gallery of Australia) what they think of the style of that painting and if they know of that foundation which has it.

cheers mob



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by mobtek
 

I would be very interested as to what you find out. Most of the info I've uncovered is somewhat obscure at best. Other than the usual stuff we know about the Aboriginals. But I'm still looking at some other sources. Please do post back here and let us know what you turn up.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by mobtek
 

I would be very interested as to what you find out. Most of the info I've uncovered is somewhat obscure at best. Other than the usual stuff we know about the Aboriginals. But I'm still looking at some other sources. Please do post back here and let us know what you turn up.


I also emailed the Bradshaw Foundation to find out if that is really in their collection



new topics

top topics



 
63
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join