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

reply to post by 1AnunnakiBastard


It sure looks like you have ruffled a few feathers with this thread..
I will say that this has been very interesting to read and follow no matter what others have negative to say good job.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


"feathers" ruffled?

No.

When way out there, unsupported claims are made, then it is important to squash them, with facts and logic and rational thinking. Before they infest and infect more gullible, inocent minds who don't yet have the skills to adequately process false information.

Originally posted by QuantumSanctum
People need to give more credit to Humans - We're a very intelligent species and manage to find a way even in the most difficult of problems or situations (I'm referring to how the Pyramids were built)

Which is a clear contradiction of your previous statement in the same post...

Originally posted by QuantumSanctum
It's more than likely that early Humans couldn't draw or paint properly (Hence the lack of clearly distinguishable drawings or paintings of Humans from those times).

Originally posted by Quantum Sanctum
I'd also imagine that people living simple lives would find it very hard to make a bird using the resources available at the time ...

So which is it? They could build the pyramids but not make a bird, or replica of a flying machine? There's some great critical thinking for you, or a very unsound argument...

The troubling thing for me is that with anti-gravity appearing ufo's, where does aerodynamic flying machines fit into the picture or timeline...

reply to post by weedwhacker


Not sure if this has been mentioned, as I've only read the first few pages of comments, but, one of your main arguments to the validity of the claim that these are ancient airplanes was the valid point of the timeline. If the Europeans had found evidence of aircraft in the 1400s, we'd be looking at an entirely different series of events as far as the history of our planet.

It appears to me, however, that the title of this thread may be incorrect, as, in the video, there are claims that the artifacts are closer to the neighborhood of 2000 years old. Not sure how, if at all, this changes your view of the validity that these are possibly ancient craft, especially given my lack of knowledge of the Incan empire, furthermore as far back as the beginning of time Ad.

To my untrained eye, however, these certainly look to be airplanes. Sure, as with anything else, there is conflicting reasoning as to what it could be (case in point the previously posted hieroglyphs.) With the hieroglyphs, it is completely reasonable to see helicopters and spaceships, as well as it is completely reasonable to see a sarcophagus covered with earth. The only fact is, with both the
airplane/guitar fish artifacts and the helicopter/sarcophagus hieroglyphs, we don't know what the creators' intentions were. As such, the holier than thou mentality from both sides, such as considering the opposing thought to be ignorant, is absolutely incorrect, not to mention pointless.

This is a good thread with a very thought provoking subject (even if it has been brought up on ATS many times.) S+F

What claims have been made that are unsupported which need to be "squashed"?

Seeing these Incan artifacts made out of gold, which were written off as winged animals… there's no need to believe someone else's theory. Just look at what you're being shown and piece the puzzle together yourself, if you don't believe in the research someone else has spent time on.

reply to post by 1AnunnakiBastard


These look similar to the ones Von Dunnycan had made in Peru to prove
Aliens visited earth in the Past.

Originally posted by SaturnFX

alternative theories are...they are moths or other types of bugs..
the video states that wings don't go on the bottom...well, they are assuming they are holding it right side up first off...if you flip the statue over, then voila...the wings are on top like any other bug.

Well!
If you watch the video
www.youtube.com...
you will notice the figurine is hollow underneath, which means that that would not be the area to give attention to.
Unless of course they were flying bathtubs, for those upscale users of transportation that wanted to upgrade from their flying carpets.

Originally posted by zcflint05
reply to post by QuantumSanctum

 

Why does the burden of proof have to fall so heavily on us? The fact is, our natural history has been recreated by scientists and historians through a variety of methods because of the simple fact that WE CAN'T VERIFY MUCH OF ANYTHING. We don't KNOW why they built the Nazca Lines, so how can you rule Ancient Astronaut theory out? We don't KNOW why they built the Pyramids, we don't KNOW why they built the Moai, actually, we don't KNOW much of anything. So if you're willing to provide 100% proof of these things NOT being of extraterrestrial origin, then we can talk.

Our natural history hasn't been pulled out of thin air, it's been created using what available evidence there is that we can find around us. Using your theory, it would mean that everything that is taught to us is a load of rubbish and that we can't take anything for granted. Although I do like that reasoning, that you shouldn't accept anything as fact unless there is 100% proof that it is, a lot of history and science has developed based on fact.

However, what you are babbling on about are Nazca lines, Pyramids and Ancient Astronauts without a shred of evidence. There is no evidence, logic or reasoning in your argument except a lot of assumptions. I've seen many videos and read many articles regarding these topics, and it has failed to convince me in the slightest. To me, it all looks like wishful thinking. I don't have to provide evidence that something is not the case when it wasn't from the beginning. But, if you're going to state such grand ideas, then the burden of proof does fall on your shoulders. Following your logic, I could say that the Sky is Green and then asking you to prove that it isn't. It's flawed from the beginning. Putting aside that we are limited in how we view the world in terms of the visible spectrum, from what we Humans see, it is Blue and always was. If your argument showed evidence and logical conclusions based on that evidence, then people would take you seriously.

Originally posted by Versa

Originally posted by QuantumSanctum
It's more than likely that early Humans couldn't draw or paint properly (Hence the lack of clearly distinguishable drawings or paintings of Humans from those times). I'd also imagine that people living simple lives would find it very hard to make a bird using the resources available at the time and without the technology available to us now so would make a rough model. People need to give more credit to Humans - We're a very intelligent species and manage to find a way even in the most difficult of problems or situations (I'm referring to how the Pyramids were built)

I'm undecided as to weather these artefacts are fish or planes but you can't say on one hand ancient humans probably couldn't draw and on the other they were perfectly capable of building pyramids! Why couldn't our ancestors draw in your opinion? Some of the art and sculpture from early and pre-history is exquisite much better than the unmade beds and brick circles our 'modern' artists come up with!

That part was in reference to cave paintings. I was merely stating that they probably couldn't draw or paint Humans to the level of detail that you see today. Even paintings found in caves show no human figures, but there are humanoid figures in those drawings. Of course, human imagination being what it is, in some of them the paintings appear to depict astronauts to some people. I see it differently. With the lack of clearly Human figures in any of those paintings, one can assume that those "humanoid" figures are not astronauts but are Humans that were painted with the primitive tools available at the time.

The art and sculpture that our ancestors made is certainly exquisite but it's not perfect. My point is that no matter how hard they tried, they couldn't make perfect real life replicas of anything. If they tried to paint a Human, the result would be humanoid, but with a lack of detail. Today, we'll look at it and try to see something different when there's nothing to see - It's the best they could do when painting a person. Same applies to sculptures, wall carvings, anything. In relation to Pyramids, the cultures were sufficiently advanced in geometry and mathematics, so building Pyramids probably wouldn't have been that hard.

Often, the simplest answer is the right one. If it looks like a bird, it most likely is.

reply to post by QuantumSanctum


Old cave drawing are very similar to how a Child draws their Parents in Skool.
I certainly don't put much credence on those drawings. And I'm sure there's a bit Psycology
going on with the Painters, by seeing something that others can't see in order to put themselves above everybody else.

Originally posted by Toxicsurf

Originally posted by QuantumSanctum
People need to give more credit to Humans - We're a very intelligent species and manage to find a way even in the most difficult of problems or situations (I'm referring to how the Pyramids were built)

Which is a clear contradiction of your previous statement in the same post...

Originally posted by QuantumSanctum
It's more than likely that early Humans couldn't draw or paint properly (Hence the lack of clearly distinguishable drawings or paintings of Humans from those times).

Originally posted by Quantum Sanctum
I'd also imagine that people living simple lives would find it very hard to make a bird using the resources available at the time ...

So which is it? They could build the pyramids but not make a bird, or replica of a flying machine? There's some great critical thinking for you, or a very unsound argument...

The troubling thing for me is that with anti-gravity appearing ufo's, where does aerodynamic flying machines fit into the picture or timeline...

My apologies, I wasn't clear enough in that post since I quickly replied and left. The first quote is supposed to tackle the "Aliens helped us build the Pyramids" argument. "Early Humans not being able to properly draw" was in reference to cave paintings made thousands of years ago. Regarding the birds quote, I wonder how well we'd be able to make a bird if all current technology disappeared and we went back 2000 years.

As stated in my previous post, I don't believe that they had the resources necessary to make accurate real life replicas of anything. Most artifacts look like deformed versions of people, animals or Gods. An interesting question to ask would be why there are no artifacts that, provided the maker wanted to make a bird, actually looks like a bird? If you want to paint or make a statue of a Human, why do they not look Human most of the time? Of course, delusional people will state this as proof positive that they were Aliens when they weren't - They just couldn't make anything better.

Here's something to ask. There must be thousands of Incan artifacts. Do any of them look like what they were intended to look like? Do the animals accurately look like animals? Humans accurately like Humans? Does anything accurately look like anything when they only had primitive tools to work with? Of course, with those primitive tools and knowledge of mathematics and geometry, a lot of cultures managed to make pyramids but that just shows the scope of human ingenuity. The way some of you are talking, it's as if ancient humans could paint like Da Vinci when that's ludicrous. Nothing in the ancient world, from sculptures to paintings, was perfect. They probably had the ability to make more accurate representations of what they wanted, but the tools weren't available to them.

And here we are today with people claiming these artifacts represent Aliens. It's all based on assumptions and circumstancial evidence with no facts to back it up.

What a lot of fuss about Flying Fish!!!!!!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/67c3067ab3d6.jpg[/atsimg]

What those little figures are has been known for some time. These Documentaries on Cable never give you any explanation from the people who are actually qualified to give oppinions. That is on purpose and quite dishonest. You would not watch the video's if they gave all sides and explanations from qualified people. Those Documentaries are entertainment and mostly pure garbage. Research and finding truth does no include watching made for the stupid masses Documentaries made by people who likely don't even believe it themselves.

Aliens from another world fly airplanes? Must be a hell of trip across a vacumn relying on a craft that fly's using an airfoil

I know I'm not the first to point this out, but it seems some want to either believe so badly they are defending junk science and lies or they are just being Trolls. I understand that with children, but I'd hope some are actual adults in these conversations.

People do themselves no favors clinging to pure unadulterated nonsense and fantasy, just because they have closed their minds rather than find out they may have been wrong.

Carry on destroying the validity of these topics. Worship your Hero's or should I say Confidence Persons by defending their insanity and lies. That will insure these topics will never, ever be taken seriously. We will all be seen as fools or crazy and deservedly so.

If you all can't understand why people from a time before we developed all our scientific knowledge, would be fascinated with fish that fly across their path and over their boats while fishing, just maybe your the ones with the closed minds.

A 2000 year old "computer" (which basically was a device with 70 gears), hardly proves there were advanced aircraft, no. Where do you make that broad leap of logic? They also found a very advanced barge with plumbing and the works, recovered from a lake - it hardly means they had aircraft carriers.

Those devices and advanced, ancient discoveries were amazing - but not anything CLOSE to as being as advanced as an aircraft. And those items were unique curios - one of a kind items that were hardly mass produced in a factory.

Like I said, if those were made by humans, we'd have seen proof, no doubt about it. If they can recovered a unique single gearwork from the bottom of a shipwreck, they certainly could recover metal bits from factories and planes and vehicles.

Also consider: there is a LOT of knowledge needed to make these sorts of things. Anything we have is very well documented. Ancient civilizations also had (for them), advances.. in farming, building and so on, and they recorded that, as well. But there is nothing.. not one page, of all their knowledge they would have needed to know. Of course, it's more complex than that. Do you think they drafted out plans on papyrus or did a bit of cuneiform cadwork? All the industrial revolution in intertwined - lighting and power and phones and other telecommuncation, all this makes it possible for all the pieces to come together for advanced discoveries and advancements.

But you have nothing.. no proof of any of this. It's like these planes just popped into existence, and then disappeared without a trace. Honestly.. how likely is that?

Originally posted by fleabit
A 2000 year old "computer" (which basically was a device with 70 gears), hardly proves there were advanced aircraft, no. Where do you make that broad leap of logic? They also found a very advanced barge with plumbing and the works, recovered from a lake - it hardly means they had aircraft carriers.

Those devices and advanced, ancient discoveries were amazing - but not anything CLOSE to as being as advanced as an aircraft. And those items were unique curios - one of a kind items that were hardly mass produced in a factory.

Like I said, if those were made by humans, we'd have seen proof, no doubt about it. If they can recovered a unique single gearwork from the bottom of a shipwreck, they certainly could recover metal bits from factories and planes and vehicles.

Also consider: there is a LOT of knowledge needed to make these sorts of things. Anything we have is very well documented. Ancient civilizations also had (for them), advances.. in farming, building and so on, and they recorded that, as well. But there is nothing.. not one page, of all their knowledge they would have needed to know. Of course, it's more complex than that. Do you think they drafted out plans on papyrus or did a bit of cuneiform cadwork? All the industrial revolution in intertwined - lighting and power and phones and other telecommuncation, all this makes it possible for all the pieces to come together for advanced discoveries and advancements.

But you have nothing.. no proof of any of this. It's like these planes just popped into existence, and then disappeared without a trace. Honestly.. how likely is that?

Well, by one side we have a 2.000 years old industry-like mechanic portable computer, 6.000 years old Vedic scriptures with technical specs of giant aircrafts, 4.000 years Egyptian steles depicting electric lamps and also aircrafts and by the other side we have a couple of skeptics and disinfo shills in a conspiracy forum, attempting to discredit these evidences of high-advanced technology of probable extraterrestrial origin, in ancient civilizations. This thread can reach hundreds of pages and none of you will disprove their authenticity. The only thing you can do is repeat 10.000 times these are not evidences. Just empty words and nothing more.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by 1AnunnakiBastard

 

"ETHNIC card"????

NO!! GEOGRAPHY!!!

Gawd, didn't think I would have to write the obvious. India versus South America.....heck the west coast of SA!!! Know how far away from India that is?

The assertions just don't survive rational scrutiny, sorry. Can fool some people, who may not stop to ponder, and apply logic and reason to them, first. It SHOULD be taken into consideration, though...rather than blindly believing any crackpot idea, base don flimsy interpretations, and perhaps, "gut" feelings......

Don't pretend you didn't make a pathetic and clear racist irony, in attempt to discredit ancient Hindu scriptures. You are still embarrassing yourself. Besides baseless, you also are a racist ignorant, that having nothing to debunk the Vymanika Shastra, pulled the ethnic card to belittle the history of Hindu people. Anyway I really doubt your situation is getting better here. To insult others culture won't make you more credible. I mean, not that you ARE credible, which definitely is proven you are NOT, but you know... At least try to show some class.

The flying fish looks pretty convincing, although it does not leave out the possibility that there aircraft it does suggest that the Inca were making small fish idols.

The pyramids are very impressive, it would take many years with just man power alone. However it could be done it would be far simpler to get ETs to do it.
The latter has not been debunked meaning that the logical step would be to disprove humans made them before trying to prove aliens did instead.

I have listened to Phd's debate this, and other similar topics. In the end, even they usually walk away agreeing to disagree. How is it that anyone thinks this debate is going to be solved any better here?

Enjoy the debate. Don't take yourselves too seriously. And walk away believing what you want to believe.

No offense intended to anyone.

BTW. S&F.

Originally posted by 1AnunnakiBastard


Well, by one side we have a 2.000 years old industry-like mechanic portable computer, 6.000 years old Vedic scriptures with technical specs of giant aircrafts, 4.000 years Egyptian steles depicting electric lamps and also aircrafts and by the other side we have a couple of skeptics and disinfo shills in a conspiracy forum

This disinfo agent bails out whenever the tired ol' Egyptian light bulb comes up. Not a light bulb. It's clearly a corndog with a squiggle of mustard atop it's crunchy fried cornmeal outer shell. Later.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3d97261b14b5.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by 1AnunnakiBastard I beleive theses are what you say they are..

I never understood why these aliens brought the technology to build pyramids and airplanes, yet they missed some important stuff. They didn't bring them airconditioning, refrigiration for storing foods,or medicines to cure diseases like small box and measels.

For some reason they just flew in on their space craft, built star maps, and built airports shaped like animals, then they left. They just packed their bags and hit the road. They didn't leave a machine behind, or some air traffic control towers. What was the purpose? It just doesn't make sense to me.

reply to post by Blaine91555

If you all can't understand why people from a time before we developed all our scientific knowledge, would be fascinated with fish that fly across their path and over their boats while fishing, just maybe your the ones with the closed minds.

Speaking of closed minds.. Yours is not very open is it? Who says the aliens would be flying to earth in airplanes? couldnt it be a sort of reconnaissance craft to explore a planet? Im just saying.. And I just resent that know it all attitude your post is filled with, sorry to say. Also those objects from page 1 could be fish, but to me they dont really look like it.. The people had the ability and skill back then to do realistic looking sculptures. I will not deny it could be fish but neither will I deny any other possibility. Keeping an open mind like you say.