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.

 

1.000 years old Inca artifact proven to be a replica of an ancient aircraft.

page: 4
77
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 11:44 PM
link   
I have personally seen those in the Gold Museum in Bogota Colombia, they also have birds which look nothing like these planes. In case people keep saying they are birds...



this can tell you they knew how to picture a bird



Oh they also have what I call an "Ancient Pimp"



edit on 25-11-2010 by aNdReSk because: adding a bird




posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 12:05 AM
link   
Awsome !! Star for Yousa. A flag also because this is one of those stories that have fact and help convince people like my sister that the main stream media is keeping folks in the dark and lying to them .

I noticed that the craft have some different locations for the "Propulsion System" seems to be on top. Like magentic field points instead of our smoke belching tail pipe designs



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 03:00 AM
link   
reply to post by 1AnunnakiBastard
 




Here are a couple of sources.

Not sure it needs to be debunked really... or if it even matters... people who believe will believe, no matter what the actual facts are.

members.tripod.com...

www.catchpenny.org...

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 04:06 AM
link   
reply to post by 1AnunnakiBastard
 


Actually I saw a pretty good debunking of this Idea. Apparently, although the shapes don't look much like birds, or insects there is one animal which matches the design pretty good. A Flying Fish. Apparently all of the 'plane-like' aspects of these pieces of Jewelry are consistant with the basic shape of the Flying Fish with its 'wing-fins' spread out as it jumps out of the water and glides. There was one more aspect of this case that was attacked and that was the Idea of making a working model based on this design. Although it was certainly true that the one they chose to replicate flew great....it was claimed that this particular design was only one from among quite a few (much more examples exist than what is shown in the photo above), and that many of the others, although possesing the same basic elements, did so in a way that was less in proportion to that of a modern day plane, and therefore, in many cases, less conducive to being made into an actual working plane or glider. It was claimed that when they decided to make their working model...they specifically chose to model one of the pieces that showed the most in common with a modern day airplane...ensuring that it would be able to fly.
Keep in mind, these are not my own Ideas.....Im just repeating something I read quite a while ago, repeating them to the best of my ability, from memory. If I knew an exact link that would show you the same story I read, I would give it, but alas I do not....I, none the less, wanted to share what I remembered of the Article as I found it , if perhaps not COMPLETELY 100% a convincing debunking, then at the very least good food for thought, and something worth considering.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 04:47 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Only 1,000 years ago...when Pizarro, and the Spaniards, found (and conquered/committed genocide) in South America, it was in the 1400s....they certainly wrote accounts of their discoveries and exploits.

Where are any evidences of their seeing, and reporting on, any "airplanes" that were in use by the indigenous peoples? The Incas? I mean, IF such things existed in 1,000 AD, then they would have still been there ~400 years later, to be seen/captured/appropriated by the Spaniards?

Can you envision how things would have been very different, with that sort of technology in the hands of Europeans? In that era? lol finally someone who gets it.I*f they had been so advanced why did they get wiped out so Easy. And what is truly sad is they thought of white people as their gods showing more evidence to the fact that Europeans help create their pyramids then they did. Didn't they get instructions from their gods on how to build the pyramids?yes. And at the first sight of a white man riding a horse didn't they think it was their god? yes. thats how the Spanish being massively outnumber took over their land. I think there is more evidence of them being boats with two side sails and a back paddle then anything else.
edit on 26-11-2010 by pcrobotwolf because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 07:08 AM
link   
all the anwsers we're seeking are in our ancient history, discovered yet or not

this thread is fascinating, i know those artefacts and i always tried to look as them as birds or insects but as one showed in here, we got insects and birds artefact from the same period and they look nothing like those "planes"...

it would explain nazca, but also the ancient astronaut figurines

great thread

i personnaly dont think that it involves ETs.... our history is so ancient and we know so little that i m sure ancient civilizations used to be as advanced if not more than us....

think about it 6k years of history and we have come from nothing to space travels ... 6k years ! what could have been done in the millions of years before.....
edit on 26/11/10 by estebadia because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by 1AnunnakiBastard
 


Another point (and the hieroglyphs are thoroughly explained, already)...but, in this post I reference, you mention Sitchin. AS IF he actually is worthy of giving credibility to??

NO, he isn't. He was a scam artist, an entertainer....in other words, a liar.

Of course, it is possible he honestly believed in everything he wrote and said...in which case he wasn't an intentional liar, but just delusional, and off his rocker crazy.

This is the same guy, remember, who made claims of the mystery planet "nibiru" (which does NOT exist, BTW), and once he got himself painted into a corner, by tying down an "orbital period" for that "planet" of 3,600 years, rational people were able to expose him, and his timeline of events, and future "predictions". So THEN, since he was trapped by the "3,600 years" figure, he had to alter the time when "nibiru' would be near, in the Inner Solar System, again.

I just posted, in another thread, with a member who informed me Sitchin revised "niburu's" approach to the year 2900 AD. BUT, two years ago, this SAME ATS member wrote in a post that Sitchin predicted its return in 2085 AD!!! So, Sitchin "fans" didn't seem to notice when he kept changing his "story"!!

BTW...again, like I pointed out with the thread title here, the "1,000 years"....the timeline doesn't match up with historical records. Same with Sitchin, and his "nibiru". IF it was going to "be here" in year 2085, then travelling at normal orbita velocity, it would have to be close enough (like, Neptune's orbit distance, or so) to be observed from Earth. It isn't seen, by ANYONE.

SO.....he changed it to 2900 AD. BUT....with a 3,600-year orbit, that would mean last time it "swung by" our neighborhood, would have been around 700 B.C.E., right??

Yet, where are the records, in the histories of the civilizations then? Ancient Rome? Persia? CHINA!???
NO, hanging one's hat on Sitchin and his tales is a futile endeavor.......oh, and one more thing.

His "translations" of ancient Sumerian texts? Wrong, all the way 'round, as has been pointed out by actual scholars, and experts on the Sumerian language.......



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 07:47 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


You're in fine form in this thread weedywhacker! Always a pleasure to read your posts mate!

Keep Keeping it real!

IRM



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 09:13 AM
link   
All of those plane models appear to have heads. I also first thought of flying fish when I saw them. Just yesterday I was watching a show of life in the Borneo jungle, the third largest island in the world. It showed a lizard that could glide over 200 feet with wings spread. The part of the models that appear to be tail wing could in fact be a representation of a, you guessed it, a tail.

If the many Nazca lines were in fact landing strips would it be beyond possible that we'd find at least one single actual artifact of full scale flying machines? Of yet there are none, just imagination interpreting ancient artifacts into what they appear to look like to us today.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 09:20 AM
link   
i m repeating myself but well, you probably know a lot of historians begin to think that other Civilizations lived on earth before ours...

"think about it 6k years of history and we have come from nothing to space travels ... 6k years ! what could have been done in the millions of years before....." is what i said above...

so flying fish, ok... and about finding artefacts of a real plane, well how much artefacts of our civilizations do you think we 'll find in 100 thousand years ? yeah, none....
edit on 26/11/10 by estebadia because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 09:28 AM
link   
I think one will find many artifacts of our civilization thousands of years from now. Think of all of the underground hardened bunkers our military has constructed, and of course don't forget the storage of nuclear spent fuel buried in mountains. If we are finding ceramic artifacts thousands of years old today from ancient civilizations don't you think some of our steel structures could last that long?

No I don't buy that ancient civilizations were more advanced technologically than us today, there's simply no signs of it, just rudimentary ancient tools. And why were abacuses used to calculate if they were more advanced than us today, why didn't they use computers?



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 09:36 AM
link   
wow this looks interesting..
I'm tagging this now, so i can read it later thank you



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by 1AnunnakiBastard
 


I love out-of-place-and-time objects. It's easy to explain extraordinary things during our time, but no so easy to explain them when our current comprehension of ancient times is the opposite of some knowledge that they display.

I'm always marveled by engineering achievements, explained or not, and this small displays of knowledge of an advanced technology.

I'm not very keen on jumping to the conclusion of aliens, or theories like that, but rather to eliminate all mundane possibilities first, before going "wild".

The first thing that I always wondered, was how much this things could resemble some kind of bird, maybe a species that is now extinct. But looking at the shape, I draw (although without scientific research) the same conclusion. Those are not representations of birds, not even mid-flight.

So, they are either some sort of display of technology that we know nothing about, or they are some sort of mundane object that simply looks like an airplane.

I'm really on the fence of this things, because while I maintain an open mind (and curious), I still use logic as a standing stone.

...and for that, I must ask:

If this is in fact a representation of an advanced civilization "from the stars", then why does that civilization use a type of design that we now know that is not the best one? It might work, it might be very good (multiple jet fighters used/use it, the Concorde or even the Space Shuttle), but at the end, we already know that it isn't the best possible design for an aircraft, it's the just the best one WE can manufacture with our materials.

I must raise the question of why did this possible advanced civilization (that could travel between planets, according to some theories) use a design and model that we used between the 70's and the 90's...



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 09:41 AM
link   
Just nonsense imo. It -is- simply stylized pieces of art, ceremonial or otherwise.

Doesn't it strike anyone as odd that we have art of supposed aircraft, but we have not a single piece of any aircraft itself, or proof of its production? Let's consider for a moment what exactly it entails to create aircraft of any kind. They don't simply pop into existence. You need factories to manufacture the different parts of the plane. And it's not made simply out of a hunk of metal. It requires advanced knowledge of things like metallurgy, engineering, plastics and rubber manufacturing, ergo advanced knowledge of chemistry. The sheer amount of needed know-how and parts needed to simply make one is quite something. If you are then talking about jet aircraft, that ups the ante even further. If they could create jet aircraft, they could create the propulsion to create rockets.

If they had aircraft, why wouldn't they have other technology that uses similar technical knowledge, as we do? It stands to reason if they had aircraft, they had many other things besides. Other transportation and much greater structures, for starters.

Now, consider the footprint we currently have on this planet. The sheer amount of waste and materials. There will be evidence of our existence for a very long time. 200,000 years for just most materials, but much longer for other things, like radioactive materials, and of course, the evidence left in space will last perhaps 100s of millions of years.

And yet.. even though we are supposedly finding civilizations that used airplanes, we have no proof of the craft themselves? Not a single nut, bolt or other material that would easily still exist? No factories, no records of their advanced knowledge.. nothing except for some reason, their art. Their art miraculously survived when all other traces vanished.

Doesn't make a lot of sense when you think about it like that. Unless you are suggesting an incredibly clean alien species "lent" us the aircraft, and then managed to take every single piece of technology back when they left, there would be SOME amount of proof of the existence of planes. There is not a single shred other than artwork. Common sense tells us this IS art, it has to be.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Here are some common objects that end up in landfills or on the side of the road and the estimated time they take to break down. Remember, these are estimates of time and vary depending upon the conditions they are in when they are breaking down, so some of the times may be higher or lower than what is indicated.

How long before it breaks down?

Traffic ticket = 2 to 4 weeks

Rope = 3 to 14 months

Cigarette butt = 2 to 5 years

Painted wooden stake = 13 years

Boot sole = 50 to 80 years

Tin can = 80 to 100 years

Aluminum can = 200 to 500 years

Plastic bag = 100 to 800 years

Glass bottle = unknown.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by 1AnunnakiBastard
 


Another point (and the hieroglyphs are thoroughly explained, already)...but, in this post I reference, you mention Sitchin. AS IF he actually is worthy of giving credibility to??

NO, he isn't. He was a scam artist, an entertainer....in other words, a liar.

Of course, it is possible he honestly believed in everything he wrote and said...in which case he wasn't an intentional liar, but just delusional, and off his rocker crazy.

This is the same guy, remember, who made claims of the mystery planet "nibiru" (which does NOT exist, BTW), and once he got himself painted into a corner, by tying down an "orbital period" for that "planet" of 3,600 years, rational people were able to expose him, and his timeline of events, and future "predictions". So THEN, since he was trapped by the "3,600 years" figure, he had to alter the time when "nibiru' would be near, in the Inner Solar System, again.

I just posted, in another thread, with a member who informed me Sitchin revised "niburu's" approach to the year 2900 AD. BUT, two years ago, this SAME ATS member wrote in a post that Sitchin predicted its return in 2085 AD!!! So, Sitchin "fans" didn't seem to notice when he kept changing his "story"!!

BTW...again, like I pointed out with the thread title here, the "1,000 years"....the timeline doesn't match up with historical records. Same with Sitchin, and his "nibiru". IF it was going to "be here" in year 2085, then travelling at normal orbita velocity, it would have to be close enough (like, Neptune's orbit distance, or so) to be observed from Earth. It isn't seen, by ANYONE.

SO.....he changed it to 2900 AD. BUT....with a 3,600-year orbit, that would mean last time it "swung by" our neighborhood, would have been around 700 B.C.E., right??

Yet, where are the records, in the histories of the civilizations then? Ancient Rome? Persia? CHINA!???
NO, hanging one's hat on Sitchin and his tales is a futile endeavor.......oh, and one more thing.

His "translations" of ancient Sumerian texts? Wrong, all the way 'round, as has been pointed out by actual scholars, and experts on the Sumerian language.......




The hieroglyphs were explained by whom??? By a bunch of skeptics and disinfo shills that blindly deny these ARE DEPICTIONS of ancient aircrafts????
Wow, facing this so compelling evidence that you haven't explained or debunked NOTHING, the only advice I can give to ATSers is:" Guys, don't believe in Zecharia Sitchin, the guy that spent over 40 years translating Sumerian tablets, Egyptian and ancient Hebrew scriptures... Believe on that guy nicknamed "Weedwhacker", with several expertise in babbling."



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by 1AnunnakiBastard
 


Too bad. You still haven't realized that Sitchin was a fraud?

How many sources will it take, before your trust in him is finally broken, as his true nature is revealed? I know, it's hard, once you have "believed" in something someone said, to find that they were either lying for profit, or just plain crazy.

You should read this thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Still waiting, BTW, for that "proof", as promised it this thread's title?? "Ancient aircraft" that had eyes?? :shk:

The consensus seems to be far, far away from that contention (aircraft), for many other reasons too. Small pieces of gold jewelry do NOT "proof" make.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 10:30 AM
link   
so how come there are so many diagrams on the ground that are only visible from that air?
then of course columbus discovered america
till then the world was flat
except for the maps that show it wasn't

the chinese had rockets
so man has been making things that fly for quite some time.
they also tell of how the emporer destroyed a flying machine that was invented at the time because
the emporer was afraid it was an invention that could be used to get in over the great wall

if one were to investigate the actual machinists' analysis
of the machining tolerances involved in the stone work in egypt
which they haven't figured out to duplicate today well
they must be looking at us like we are the dummies.

to say that someone who built the pyramids around the world couldn't have had flight
is well ...
oh yeah then the bible couldn't be true then could it
ezekial and all.....say didn't someone build a working model of that....?



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by blupblup
reply to post by 1AnunnakiBastard
 




Here are a couple of sources.

Not sure it needs to be debunked really... or if it even matters... people who believe will believe, no matter what the actual facts are.

members.tripod.com...

www.catchpenny.org...

en.wikipedia.org...


I'm waiting the shill disinfos around here, debunk this:

Vymanika Shastra

A 4.000 years old Vedic aeronautic treated (some say 6.000 years old) depicting with richness of details, the ancient aircrafts named "Vimanas" used by the Vedas, the "star gods" of ancient India. The link above contains summarized translations of the full work developed by Aeronautical Society of India, that scrutinized the original books, proving that they are scientific evidence of ancient aerial vehicles.






posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by 1AnunnakiBastard
 


Too bad. You still haven't realized that Sitchin was a fraud?

How many sources will it take, before your trust in him is finally broken, as his true nature is revealed? I know, it's hard, once you have "believed" in something someone said, to find that they were either lying for profit, or just plain crazy.

You should read this thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Still waiting, BTW, for that "proof", as promised it this thread's title?? "Ancient aircraft" that had eyes?? :shk:

The consensus seems to be far, far away from that contention (aircraft), for many other reasons too. Small pieces of gold jewelry do NOT "proof" make.



I see how qualified you are to say that Sitchin is a fraud!! I wonder that the ATSers (at least the open minded ones) must have an enormous difficult on believing him, after the "Weedwhacker" had said he's a hoaxer...


And by the way, I see that you are so committed in discredit this video and the thread, so that I feel more comfortable to post more scientific evidence of ancient aircrafts. You feel free to read the summarized version of the Vymanika Shastra, a 4.000 years old Vedic aeronautic treated (some say 6.000 years old), translated and scrutinized by the Aeronautical Society of India.

Vymanika Shastra

You will find elaborated technical specifications of the aircrafts used by the Vedas and also sketches of models that I'm afraid are NOT "ceremonial birds".






Have fun, embarrassing yourself a little more.

edit on 11/26/2010 by 1AnunnakiBastard because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
77
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join