Ufo depictions throughout history

Ufo sightings are well documented since the early 1900s but it's widely thought that they go back much further into history and have even been apart of human development. The following are some the more famous images of what seems to be exact depictions of modern day ufo descriptions.




15th century painting by Domenico Ghirlandaio





"The Baptism of Christ" from 1710 by Aert De Gelder shows beams of light coming down onto John the Baptist and Jesus





"Flaming shields" that appeared in the sky during battle are shown from the 12th century manuscript “Annales Laurissenses”





"The Crucifixion", painted in 1350





"The Annunciation” by Carlo Crivelli showing light beams shining onto Mary





Ancient sculpture of a ufo looking object along with a helicopter looking craft and others





The famous artifacts that strongly resemble airplanes, they are said to be insects or some type of animal life





Ancient sculpture of a man that looks to be working a large machinery





Side note: some of the following images people can claim to be debunked as shown in the comments, debunking them by saying the ufos are actually angels or symbolic imagery. This is true, however the ones that show modern day ufo depictions aren't how angels were depicted. For the ones that show what debunkers will say are angels shinning lights onto people, it can be argued that angels are extraterrestrials, that aliens and angels are the same thing and that's why a ufo would be depicted, ufo meaning angel. Also the image of the "flaming shield" is not an angel or of symbolic nature, it's a depiction of an object that was sighted over a battle field, again, not symbolic

Awesome pictures!

A little part of me thinks that way back, there was something or someone helping humans develop, but when we began to advance to a point when we could "Look after ourselves"... We were left alone or monitored from far away. That's not me saying we were put here, but more that we were helped in getting started.

In line with this, I think we failed in developing the way other civilisations have done before us. We focused on weapons and control, rather than peace and prosperity.

Like I said though, only a small part of me thinks that. I want a larger part of me to believe in it, and I am open to it.

You're right ,it's obvious they've been around for quite a while.
Millions of modern day witnesses can't be wrong.

I think that Egyptian picture has been debunked though ..

S&F

a reply to: radarloveguy

Yeah I think your spot on with the Egyptian one. Wasn't it miss-interpreted hieroglyphs?

a reply to: radarloveguy

No those are real sculptures, it's just debated as to wether or not it's a ufo etc

a reply to: brace22
Which one, those are real sculptures it's just argued as the wether or not the ufo looking object is a ufo or something else

a reply to: Telepathy3

All of the images you have shown have been extensively debunked in the past.

See this excellent thread;

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And this website;

sprezzatura.it...

The Egyptian hieroglyphics have been done to death on ATS, and are simply separate overlayed hieroglyphics.

a reply to: Telepathy3

The helicopter one. I understand they are sculptures somewhere in Egypt, but like the post from Cuckooold says, they have been discussed and clarified. To my knowledge anyway

a reply to: cuckooold

The link you just gave that "debunks" ufos shown in old paintings literally just showed one painting, that debunking was one image and you act like that "debunks" others

As cuckooold posted, you can't look at medieval representations of Christ and say "ooo, ufos", because in that era they filled the canvas with symbology you don't understand now.

Think of it as 15th century icons. Paintings from that era are filled with sun/moon symbols, openings in heaven with angels looking down, halos, beams of heavenly light from holes in the sky and the like. You're supposed to understand what that means in context if you're a Catholic from that period.

a reply to: brace22

Even if so that's just one out of how many others, cocko posted a link that said debunks all painting with ufos in them and it was just one painting. All the others are pretty much on wether or not someone believes or how they look at the clear depictions of modern day ufos in these paintings

originally posted by: Telepathy3
a reply to: brace22

Even if so that's just one out of how many others, cocko posted a link that said debunks all painting with ufos in them and it was just one painting. All the others are pretty much on wether or not someone believes or how they look at the clear depictions of modern day ufos in these paintings

Did you even look at the links I posted? They're sure as hell are a lot more than one debunked painting in both links.

a reply to: Telepathy3

I was specifically talking about that Egyptian one, not the others. I am not knowledgeable on any of the others

originally posted by: Bedlam
As cuckooold posted, you can't look at medieval representations of Christ and say "ooo, ufos", because in that era they filled the canvas with symbology you don't understand now.

Think of it as 15th century icons. Paintings from that era are filled with sun/moon symbols, openings in heaven with angels looking down, halos, beams of heavenly light from holes in the sky and the like. You're supposed to understand what that means in context if you're a Catholic from that period.

Sure, but you can't either say "ooo that's symbolic" and that's it's not a ufo even tho that's exactly what it is. Angles aren't depicted like these, that's just an easy way to discount anything. Confirmed sightings of craft back before aircrafts where invented so either way the argument as to what they are is rendered meaningless. That ufo depiction of the "flaming shields" is depicting actual objects seen in the sky, not angels and symbology

originally posted by: Telepathy3
a reply to: cuckooold

The link you just gave that "debunks" ufos shown in old paintings literally just showed one painting, that debunking was one image and you act like that "debunks" others

No, the website you are referring to covers many others, you have to look through the different parts. They are showing what at the time was the stylised version of the manifestation of God in some, the idea of angels in stars etc, etc.

The problem is, looking at something clearly stylised and contemporary to its time will be open to interpretation without any study of artwork of its time - it's a little like finding a Dali or Picasso in a couple of centuries with absolutely no other frame of reference and thinking how weird things must have been at the time they were painted.

Also, remember the religious pieces of art you have included grabs are would have been commissioned by the Church. What do you think they said to the artist...

A) Paint me a specific biblical scene where God is looking down on Mary and the Child Christ
or
B) Paint me a picture of a woman and kid with some huge alien flying ship shooting rays at them

I can tell you which my money would be on.

a reply to: cuckooold

None of these are "debunked", people can claim their debunked by saying its symbolic imagery or angels etc, but that's not debunking anything that's just putting your own meaning to it. Sure some are symbolic but many are exact images of modern day accounts of ufos and are not depicted how angles are depicted. I could even argue that fact that angels are in facts extraterrestrials and that's why their crafts are shown. The image above of the "flaming shield" isn't a drawing of symbology, it's a depiction of something they saw during a battle. Even for the ones that are of symbology sightings still go back before aircraft invention

a reply to: uncommitted

And I could easily argue that the so called angels shinning lights down on them are in fact aliens, that aliens and angels are the same thing and that's why a ufo would be depicted. As I also mentioned the painted above of "flaming shields" isn't one of symbolic imagery, it's of an object that was seen over a battle field

I must say, aliens and angels could easily be the same thing, but in modern times they are not.

We say aliens... We think of little grey men running around with lasers shooting up Dulce.

We say Angels... We think of glorious humans with wings who are gracious... Or Cobie Smulders in her Agent Hill outfit.


Is there any possibility, at all, that IF aliens were indeed present way back in history, they could have been humanoid in their look, thus given humans an interpretation of Angels?


Just a thought... I am not claiming that.

In the Book Invisible Residents by Ivan Sanderson he sites the log from Columbus's ship where they watched a UFO.

His entire book is about witness reports from seeing UFO's especially those that go under the sea and fly out of it. If you think about it, where is the best place for a UFO to land on earth - land or the vastness of the oceans? His book is full of accounts from the Navy, Merchant Shipping logs and from all around the world. Well worth a read.

a reply to: brace22
That's defiantly possible, especially if one takes the beliefs of modern alien encounters of not only short, large headed grey beings, but also the accounts of very tall human looking beings, and taking the belief that these reported human looking beings are real, then it could be argued how long they've visited here and that they would be called angels when first seen. But also many people believe that in some cases angels could be psychical beings but that their capable of dimensional travel and so would appear from this dimension as a non psychical being. But some believe this is only some cases and that other cases angels are only beings of light or non psychical and aren't actual alien beings