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.

 

Nuremburg UFO “Battle” of 1561 Debunked

page: 2
24
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 04:41 AM
link   
So ALL of those different weather phenomenen happenend at the same time in the same place? What a load of rubbish. These debunkers can convince themselves of anything it seems. absolutley NOT debunked in the slightest.




posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Elvis Hendrix
 


You're right, not necessarily debunked. But multiple rather mundane weather phenomenon occurring simultaneously is a much more likely explanation than extraterrestrials fighting a giant aerial battle.



posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 08:00 AM
link   
I would like to see the parts or pieces from the allegedly crashed UFO's. Surely some museum, monastery, or town hall type of institution would have relics of some sort to remember an epic battle in the sky. it would be easy to test the metal for advanced alloys and manufacturing different from the terrestrial techniques of the time.

The allegedly Roswell crash didn't disintegrate and in fact some claim a saucer was recovered, The woodcut according to some show UFO's crashing from battles and it would reason that something would have survived.

And why would ET's travel light years just to fight above Earth?

If that technology is available to ET's then why don't they battle on their home turf?

Just trying to make sense from a woodcut that offers only interpenetration to the viewer.



posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

Originally posted by elitelogic
I think the woodcut clearly shows the smoking wreckage of crashed vehicles.

How could someone in 1561 even contemplate the smoking wreckage of a crashed air vehicle?


It clearly shows something smoldering, but I'm not sure how you can say it is clearly a "crashed air vehicle". The smoldering object could be one of many mundane 16th-century things:




edit on 12/14/2012 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)


From the translation:
And after the battle, which moved for a while into and again out of the sun from one side to the other most violently, exhausted itself by each other, everything (as drawn above) fell from the sun and the sky down to the earth like burning alltogether and vanished ["vergangen"] down on the earth gradually [? "allgemach"] in a big smoke.


Of course, you could be right. The smoke could simply be a farmer burning dead brush, a BBQ out of control, a witch being burned at the stake.

However, in the context of the illustration and the accompanying translation, a case can be made for crashed air vehicle.
edit on 15-12-2012 by elitelogic because: typo



posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 11:50 AM
link   
Excellent photo study and analysis, OP.


I'm not sure that it all could have occurred simultaneously just that once in the local memory, but it is something to consider.



posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 11:51 AM
link   
I appreciate all of the thought and research you put into this, but simply claiming 'debunked' is a bit of wishful thinking. I believe you're underestimating these people's understanding of the weather and their surroundings. At this time in history, i can imagine that they were much more attuned to what was happening in the sky, as their livelihood relied on crops and agriculture. Being naive about what the sky was doing was a sure fire way of becoming extinct, or in the very least famished. Also, if what they are describing was simply weather phenomena, why did they feel the need to record it? Surely in the many years before, and many years after, a similar occurrence would have repeated itself and made history again, so to speak. If you are going to write something as curious and noteworthy off as simple natural occurrences, i wonder why this was an isolated incident and why the vivid descriptions seem so specific to something other than weather.

Added: Also from a logistical standpoint,
suggesting that all of these natural occurrences and placed bonfires happened simultaneously is as likely as the alternate explanations.
edit on 15-12-2012 by haunebu52 because: Added thought.



posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Amenti
 


It could be all false, but suggesting that it was a natural phenomenon and mentioning orbs and halos to me is more ignorant than thinking it was swamp gas.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:08 AM
link   
Good research.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 02:59 PM
link   
It's a good thing we were able to use our time machines to travel back to 1561 to debunk this. This is what strikes me as odd about these debunks of anything supernatural from the days before photography: those silly Europeans were smart enough to build a device like the antikythera Mechanism and create wondrous Architectures that still stand today...but they weren't smart enough to notice that it was just clouds and sun-light...And the reason they weren't smart enough is almost invariably blamed on religion or a lack of education. They had the ability to sculpt statues that were near perfect replications of the human form, but when they drew things on paper and described it in terms that would suggest an otherworldy presence, they were making errors in record keeping? Look at the city in the first image, It is a pretty good drawing isn't it? But the weird crap in the sky? Oh, that's just weather phenomenon then? I am not saying you are wrong OP, but i think we don't give our ancestors as much credit as we should. It reminds me of an article i read that debunked a super-natural claim about egypt. The egyptians were smart enough to construct stone monoliths that can barely be replicated using modern day (and therefore more "advanced") machinery but weren't smart enough to know that the sun DIDN'T get swallowed by a snake at the end of the day.


It's a good Explanation, but let's not be so hasty to pass it off as "Debunked".



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:31 AM
link   
OP , you should change your subject title , as nowhere in your theory i see debunkment.

you forwarded an interesting theory , but the amount of all atmosphere phenomena happening all at once and at the same time is statistically impossible.. and the massive amount of flying balls are not explain in detail with your theory.

you should consider these before debunking :

- your theory is just that, a theory and not 'fact' since you or any of us witness the said phenomena.
- do not underestimate people just because they are not born in 20th century.
- you should learn the cultural level of people at that place and that time before theorizing
- the documentation implies an unusual happening ('battle') that happened in the sky, it not necesarily UFO or Aliens or Faerie battling in the sky, but maybe a rare astronomical phenomena explanation is more suitable.
- the lower right corner (the burning field with balls all around it) suggest that the phenomena struck the earth and cause fire. should work your theory to include this.

no need to go to the extreme.. while someone might have an extreme theory of alien and ufo war in the sky, your's go to the opposite extreme.

my own theory ? well to be honest i dont know what to say about this. i do not believe this is UFO or 'aliens' though... maybe some scientist make an experimental hot-air balloons ?
edit on 17-12-2012 by milomilo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amenti
a sensationalist/biased media and a consumer public hungry for outrageous stories.


Had to smile at this.

S&F, excellent post and provides good evidence to back up the theory - should become the definitive alternative explanation.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Amenti
 


I was quite sure that such a battle couldn't have took place at this time. Just too early. Thanks for this thread.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by milomilo
 


A lot of folks are saying that this phenomenon happening at the same time makes this explanation improbable, but it should be noted that these particular anomalies very often occur simultaneously, as they are a result of the same weather conditions. When you add to that the location Nuremberg was particularly prone to these conditions it makes even less strange.

It is notable that if you were to do a study of sundogs in history you would find that Nuremberg keeps coming up again and again. The reason is because they occurred often there, and the people put a huge emphasis on them when they did. If you look through the woodcuts I linked where it is obviously reporting sundogs, you will see that Nuremberg is often mentioned.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Amenti
 


You know, its difficult for me to take your hypothesis seriously when your optional title says "Deny Ancient Astronaut Ignorance". If you want your findings to be taken seriously and not viewed as the short-sighted and petty ramblings of a debunker, I'd change that to anything else.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amenti
It is notable that if you were to do a study of sundogs in history you would find that Nuremberg keeps coming up again and again. The reason is because they occurred often there, and the people put a huge emphasis on them when they did. If you look through the woodcuts I linked where it is obviously reporting sundogs, you will see that Nuremberg is often mentioned.


Which leads me to question why, if it is and was such a commonplace occurrence in Nuremberg, the very same phenomena would generate such excitement in that particular year. I could see if it had been the first time in local memory that they had witnessed such meteorological activity, or even if all of the effects you described had happened simultaneously, making for an unusually spectacular display, but neither seem likely. I had heard somewhere that these wood cuttings were the tabloids of the day, and media sensationalism played a role in amplifying the events. True today, so perhaps it was true then.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 11:12 AM
link   
While I applaud the attempt at explaining away what happen -- it reminds me of the Air Force and its "Venus" explanations for very well documented cases, I have to say that you have not debunked anything. Many have already pointed out the holes in your theory. Also, "balls of light" have been seen often. Pilots who have gotten close to them have seen UFOs inside the balls of light.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by draknoir2

Originally posted by Amenti
It is notable that if you were to do a study of sundogs in history you would find that Nuremberg keeps coming up again and again. The reason is because they occurred often there, and the people put a huge emphasis on them when they did. If you look through the woodcuts I linked where it is obviously reporting sundogs, you will see that Nuremberg is often mentioned.


Which leads me to question why, if it is and was such a commonplace occurrence in Nuremberg, the very same phenomena would generate such excitement in that particular year.


There was no real significance to this year. The key to this is seeing that about 1/4 of all these "tabloids" were regarding sundog and similar phenomenon like lunar pillars, which can be seen by reviewing the others, the only real difference is that this one wasnt as obvious as the other ones were, and that is the reason why it could be used for the AAT.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 12:36 AM
link   
i really dont think this is just ordinary sun dog or any other usual natural phenomena..

this maybe very very rare natural phenomena that significant enough to be recorded such.. trying to explain this with sundog is a bit to much.. there has to be more that that.

personally i think its a rare astronomical and atmospheric phenomena happening at once. no UFO or anything just a very rare occurence of something in the sky.

btw there's a lot of documented rare astronomical phenomena in roman or chinese history (ancient).. no need to go overboard and think this is UFO or Aliens.. but on the other hand there's no need to also debunk something by fitting our limited knowledge to the case.

after all, we are not there at the time. who are we to judge ? the phenomenon happened , that should be enough.. what is it ? no one knows



posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Great thread, thought I would bump it for those who have not seen this before. I came across this video "debunking" the event, and looked to see if it had been posted and per the usual, ATS has already done it! Great job all in the replies.



posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Amenti
 



Utter Garbage. There are people on this site that think they can debunk every UFO sighting. It's constant attack on even the most credible cases. You would think there was an agenda on here would you not? I repeat, Utter garbage.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join