Ancient Aliens Debunked?

reply to post by ButterCookie


Why does it have to be ET though? Reports of UFOs and their occupants have always matched the time period they appear in. They have appeared as everything from angels, to fairies, to mad inventors. It was not until after 1947 that the ET hypothesis became popular and that's because we could finally reach the heavens. When it comes to the entire UFO phenomena, the only researchers I have found that explain everything are the likes of Jacques Vallees and John Keel. The ultradimensional theory is the only one I have found that properly explains the ancient evidence and modern evidence, as well as the cases of high strangeness.

So much flaws in this OP. "We invented the planes, not humans" I believe in the real answer, not the official answer. The E.T's can give us technology and the government's can make it look like we invented it. For example, radar and micropships and fibre optics. These were certainly not invented by us. Fail Op.

Originally posted by Pauligirl

Originally posted by ObvTruth
Let me ask again...What could this be?




You can abviously see its not a bird. Its skinny, and has a dome....What could it be?

Maybe something like this
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/bd8a8699f6e3.jpg[/atsimg]

Possibly. How often does this happen in nature though?

reply to post by HazyChestNutz




So wait aliens actually invented planes and gave us the technology. So scientists and inventors spent years working to improve stuff like this:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b986dd21acdc.jpg[/atsimg]

Into stuff like this:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2e83d6a934bc.jpg[/atsimg]

And eventually into something like this:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c0f73772e9b3.jpg[/atsimg]

So over 100 years of slow progress was actually just alien technology and the well documented development of the airplane over more than a century has all just been a cover-up. This includes forging a centuries worth of photos, blueprints, documents, not to mention tens of thousands of people who would need to be in on the conspiracy. And all to organize a century long hoax of PRETENDING to develop the airplane ourselves.


What we have is a well-documented steady progression of technology when it comes to planes, to suggest aliens and cover-ups in the face of the obvious while saying my OP is flawed is ironic. And yes I'm sure there's some flaws in it, I'm not perfect.

You miss the concept that the AAH is a new theory....

Originally posted by ObvTruth

Originally posted by Pauligirl

Originally posted by ObvTruth
Let me ask again...What could this be?




You can abviously see its not a bird. Its skinny, and has a dome....What could it be?

Maybe something like this
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/bd8a8699f6e3.jpg[/atsimg]

Possibly. How often does this happen in nature though?

Don't really know, but google images has lots of pictures of them. I can understand why people would think "UFO" when seeing one.

reply to post by Titen-Sxull
The aircraft analogy can be applied to a lot of the ancient alien fans too. They insist on clinging to ideas that have had their day when better ones are out there. They want bi-planes rather than jets.

Years ago, I believed in all this stuff and thought the world concealed patterns and secrets left behind by ancient races. I don't accept of any of it anymore, having exchanged my 'bi-plane' ideas for jets. The AA ideas are way more simplistic than real-life, but maybe that's part of the point? I wonder if some guys prefer the fantasy world over the real world? That isn't a dig at anyone; real life is pretty tough sometimes and maybe it's 'any port in a storm.'

Originally posted by Pauligirl

Originally posted by ObvTruth

Originally posted by Pauligirl

Originally posted by ObvTruth
Let me ask again...What could this be?




You can abviously see its not a bird. Its skinny, and has a dome....What could it be?

Maybe something like this
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/bd8a8699f6e3.jpg[/atsimg]

Possibly. How often does this happen in nature though?

Don't really know, but google images has lots of pictures of them. I can understand why people would think "UFO" when seeing one.

Wow but it cant accound for everything though.

the ancients were in contact with aliens, it has been proven, stop allowing the disbelievers to post, hunt them.

consult my signature link for more infos

reply to post by fishspeaker


Hunt them? I'd like to know what you mean by hunt, because it sounds like a call for violence. You're also calling for censorship in saying that disbelievers should not be allowed to post.

Care to provide some evidence that ancient aliens are proven? Nope you just wanna drop off a link and remind everyone that they should bag their quota of doubters.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by ButterCookie

 

Why does it have to be ET though? Reports of UFOs and their occupants have always matched the time period they appear in. They have appeared as everything from angels, to fairies, to mad inventors. It was not until after 1947 that the ET hypothesis became popular and that's because we could finally reach the heavens. When it comes to the entire UFO phenomena, the only researchers I have found that explain everything are the likes of Jacques Vallees and John Keel. The ultradimensional theory is the only one I have found that properly explains the ancient evidence and modern evidence, as well as the cases of high strangeness.

ET= not terrestrial.....meaning not of Earth origin

Originally posted by Pauligirl

Originally posted by ButterCookie

and countless numbers of parallel 'coincidences'

I

edit on 8-6-2011 by ButterCookie because: (no reason given)

Looks to me like one culture borrowed and built on prior myths.
I don't think it can be considered "parallel" if there are two thousand years in between.

The story didn't happen 'many times'

the same story has been TOLD many times, between the different cultures, cultures who had desserts and oceans between them.

How'd they do that?

Originally posted by ObvTruth
There are something at the bottom of the picture and the UFO's are above them. They are in the sky Obv. If you cant idenify them then technically they are UFO's seeing as how you dont know what they are and seeing as its 29,000 years old there are no secret Government aircraft so it has to be ET.

Obv

Here is cave painting carved into the side of a hill looking out over the steppe, c. nine kilometres off the main highway from Kondoa to Arusha, about 20 km north of Kondoa, in Tanzania.

Some points to note, notice how much precise detail I can give about this paintings location.

Your "UFO" cave painting only seems to show up on UFO blogs and sites......and even here no specific detail is given other than it it 29,000 years old and from Tanzania.
So there is certainly some doubts about whether those "UFO" paintings are genuine Tanzania cave paintings at all.........I challenge you to find the "UFO" paintings on any site with Tanzania rock art depicted (Non UFO sites of course).

Now lets suppose that the UFO images were genuine, look at the cave painting I posted above......are those flying animals in the sky?

Originally posted by Logical one

Originally posted by ObvTruth
There are something at the bottom of the picture and the UFO's are above them. They are in the sky Obv. If you cant idenify them then technically they are UFO's seeing as how you dont know what they are and seeing as its 29,000 years old there are no secret Government aircraft so it has to be ET.

Obv

Here is cave painting carved into the side of a hill looking out over the steppe, c. nine kilometres off the main highway from Kondoa to Arusha, about 20 km north of Kondoa, in Tanzania.

Some points to note, notice how much precise detail I can give about this paintings location.

Your "UFO" cave painting only seems to show up on UFO blogs and sites......and even here no specific detail is given other than it it 29,000 years old and from Tanzania.
So there is certainly some doubts about whether those "UFO" paintings are genuine Tanzania cave paintings at all.........I challenge you to find the "UFO" paintings on any site with Tanzania rock art depicted (Non UFO sites of course).

Now lets suppose that the UFO images were genuine, look at the cave painting I posted above......are those flying animals in the sky?

Simple.

This particular cave drawing is not of any craft or E.T.s

You have chosen to post a very simple, plain, not relevant to the conversation cave drawing.

Every cave drawing or Egyptian Heiroglyphic was not of the Anunnaki or their technology, just as artwork today is not all about people or our technology.

The pictures that Obv posted earlier, however, depict something more than grazing animals. How do you account for the numerous drawings of biblical characters with 'flying vessesls' in the background? I used to draw exceptionally well, and anyone who knows art knows that to draw something that is to be perceived distant to the audience is drawn above the other objects, and size is proportionate to give the effect of distance.

But a flying vessel is different altogether, no?

The flying Vinmas

The Ramayana describes Vimanas as a double decked, circular or cylindrical aircraft with portholes and a dome. It flew with "the speed of the wind" and gave forth a "melodious sound."

Originally posted by ButterCookie

Every cave drawing or Egyptian Heiroglyphic was not of the Anunnaki or their technology, just as artwork today is not all about people or our technology.

It's actually VERY relevant to what was put forward by Obv.

Firstly it demonstrates that objects that appear above other objects in cave paintings do NOT necessarily mean the object is hovering in the sky as Obv maintains.

Secondly the above cave painting which I posted above can be easily located amongst the cave work collections of the area mentioned.

However the "UFO" cave painting doesn't seem to be located amongst any collection and ONLY appears on UFO blogs and websites.

The aforementioned UFO cave painting is labelled as coming from Itolo Tanzania.
However Itolo does not appear to be a place in Tazania (I challenge you to find it in Tanzania).

So I would go so far as to suggest that the Itolo Tanzania UFO cave painting is fake.
I am willing to be proven wrong ......but can anyone show me where the Itolo Tanzania UFO cave painting actually comes from.

Originally posted by WingedBull

Originally posted by mac420
Thank you for proving that people with no argument like to nit-pick everything,

You are proving this yourself. As you do not have facts and evidence to support your beliefs, you instead want to dismiss and ignore any evidence that disconfirms those beliefs.

Just seek knowledge people. Bilu said!

Originally posted by ButterCookie

Originally posted by Pauligirl

Originally posted by ButterCookie

and countless numbers of parallel 'coincidences'

I

edit on 8-6-2011 by ButterCookie because: (no reason given)

Looks to me like one culture borrowed and built on prior myths.
I don't think it can be considered "parallel" if there are two thousand years in between.

The story didn't happen 'many times'

the same story has been TOLD many times, between the different cultures, cultures who had desserts and oceans between them.

How'd they do that?

The cultures you named were not that far apart. As far as I know, all have creation myths. Some sound alike, some don't. The Iroquois trace the beginning of human life to a time when Skywoman fell to an island created by a giant turtle............the Hopi thought the ancestors of humans were living down below in a world under the earth.

As far as flood stories, most cultures have them too. Why, because most most early settlements were along by water sources. Rivers flood. Some guy saves his cow and sheep on a boat. Story get told and retold, getting bigger every time. We end up with the story of Noah's ark.

Here's some flood myths from around the world. www.talkorigins.org...
Some have a lot in common with the bible story, some don't.

reply to post by Pauligirl


The word 'myth' was created to debunk any other god than the one that rulers wanted people to serve.

Yes, they were too far apart to share mass hallucinations (without cars, trains, buses, ships, planes)

How did civilizations from

Africa
Greece
India
North American Indians
Mexico
Austrailia
China

share in mass hallucination??????

Originally posted by TheArchaeologist

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by TheArchaeologist

 

Check out Abydos Palimpsest in ATS search or google.

The Catchpenny site is pretty good, but there's also a straightforward paper out there that briefly covers it.

I've seen the catchpenny comments on palimpsests as an explanation for these glyphs. I personally don't see his basis for calling it a palimpsest, and/or attributing it to natural occurances.

I'm not trying to debunk,or gather info ( I have seen most of it through my journeys and studies and colleagues just picking the OP's brain on some of this, as it seems they have put some thought into it.

Archaeologist,

I'm responding without reading further in this thread so forgive me if this has been covered.

The panel in your picture supposedly depicting a helicopter, etc. is certainly a palimpsest, though not in the usual sense of the term.

Usually a palimpsest is when writing, usually on papyrus, is written over. In essence re-using or repurposing the papyrus for another, newer written document. This palimpsest is a deliberate attempt by Ramses II to put himself in his fater's (Seti I's) position in the Osiris temple.

In the case of Seti's temple, that particular panel is one of a series. The series is a common listing of the various titles for the king. That panel involves the "two ladies" part of the titulary (as this list of titles is called.) That section is also called the "Nebty Name" of the king in question. You can see most of the "two ladies" (a vulture and a cobra representing Upper and Lower Egypt - I might have those reversed) just to the right of the panel. Parts of these two figures have fallen off with the missing chunk that is evident.

Overall, it's called the 'five-fold" titulary because there are five titles.

These titles take the same form for every king in that period. Each title has slight variations from others (obviously, since the kings had different names) but essentially they all cover the same five ideas. You can read all about it on wiki if you don't want to wade through a bunch of Egyptology papers:
Wiki: five-fold titulary

The panel you posted is preceded on the left by the throne name panel (see the Bee and the Sedge) and behind that is the panel for the King's personal name (nomen) starting with the duck.

See, even the wiki page has an example of this string of titles. Not a good pic but if you look at it closely, you can see the same forms (duck, bee and sedge, "two ladies," etc.)

What AA "theorists" do is lean heavily on the fact that very few average people know about this sort of thing. Otherwise, they couldn't claim that, in the middle of a well-known string of titles used by practically every king in that period (Middle Kingdom,) is suddenly a panel depicting pharoah's airforce getting their tail handed to them by giant bees and cobras or whatever.

You can find a more in depth explanation here at ATS that I posted a couple of years back if you are less lazy than I and use the search function.

Regarding your question about the so-called lightbulbs, rather than continuing on into a too-long post, let me just give you this linkso you can go read about this yourself. I'll just say that the carvings in question are actually the Greek take on a story out of Egyptian mythology. You can read at the link for yourself what every figure in every carving represents (it's written right there on the walls next to these carvings. Like captions. Funny how they never tell you these things, right? Please begin to wonder why exactly that might be so.)

Anyway, I diodn't want you to think people were ignoring your questions. I had the same questions thirty (Good Good! Has it been thirty?) years ago.

Harte

Originally posted by MrAndy
I agree with a lot of what you've said, but the rest of which I think is still open to debate, and there's also a lot you didn't get to. People seem to get divided into two sides in ancient astronaut theory - those who are insulted with the notion that mankind needed alien intervention to advance technologically and those who feel that because mankind advanced too quickly technologically, alien intervention was required.

Mr. Andy,

There is a third side. Those of us who initially fell for this claptrap and, upon further investigation (motivated by sheer curiosity about such a fascinating idea) learned that we had been lied to.

We do not appreciate being lied to.

Harte