Montana Smith said:
The images are fascinating. Some may be explained as rational objects, such as the cardinal's hat. Some may be simply interpretations of celestial objects. The remainder ask us to look to other explanations, such as a South American carving that I recall, of the man controlling a machine-like object with jets of smoke emitting from it.
I am still fascinated by the idea that in the Mahabharata a single projectile was dropped from a vimana, destroying a city and leaving its surviving population and animals with effects similar to radiation sickness.
The idea that the gods are in the sky seems to be a world-wide phenomenon, and thereby spans different cultures. The Greeks had the idea that the sun was drawn across the sky by Helios or Apollo’s chariot, and similar ideas exist in ancient Egyptian religion.
At first glance there seems to be a world-myth spanning the globe, but it may simply be that humans thought along similar lines because they share a brain with the same potential for understanding.
As science began to explain the events previously ascribed to myth, those myths become stories, and religion changes to maintain its dominance over a newly educated society.
Since the atomic 1950s we have a possible new world myth available to us. For since that period the idea of UFOs has really taken off and entered the popular consciousness. This has given us the opportunity to re-interpret the events of the past and present them in new terminology.
I agree that some images from the past test our skills of interpretation and open up a new seductive way of exploring our history and our future.
Human imagination is not a new invention, though with every year we discover new things, and we have the potential to learn old news from new sources. Consequently, as time passes, the scope of our imagination is expanded. I always think back to Homer’s Odyssey, which was originally conceived in the eighth century BC, and remains a remarkable tale of science fiction and fantasy, with its mention of “tripods” that moved on their own – possibly our first reference to robots?
I agree. And it is very easy (and very dangerous) that this phenomena be, through conclusion-jumping and wishful thinking, turned into a new religion. That would do nobody any good.
Actually, I break from traditional ufologists at this point. It's easy to see "space ships" because that was our cultural reference in the 1950s (when these things either started to show up in greater numbers or we simply had the technological means to observe them), no different than medieval folk seeing elves or fairies when they saw these entities on the ground. What's important to note that there is phenomena that is far outside anything accepted or invented by the culture at the time, and it has a consistency with what is being seen today.
A theory I favor is that whoever or whatever is behind this phenomena, they adapt their appearance (not necessarily literally -- perhaps psychologically) to assimilate the culture of the world they are visiting. For example, in ancient times, maybe they did, either through holography or psychotronic means or something else, appear as a chariot, while today, seeing that we have machine-based vehicles, they appear like metallic craft. Or, could it be they always have indeed been metallic craft and that only now, finally, after thousands of years, we're able to catch-up at least a little in terms of understanding (and in the past, when machine-based vehicles were seen, "chariots" was merely the best word the ancients had to describe them?)
Montana, you make a good point. And I do indeed recognize it. I myself think a lot of UFO-buffs buy into things too easily. I think it's that quickly buying into something that has crippled our civilization's understanding too many times in the past (and is the same reason we still have so many problems). For example, why, exactly, are some things illegal, besides some Puritan Biblical reason? Or, in a much better example, why, exactly, do we believe the Great Pyramid to be a tomb? It was a conclusion jumped to early on in Egyptology, the same way many UFO witnesses assume what they see is a "flying saucer". Very dangerous thinking indeed.
The paintings I linked to are only a few examples. There are hundreds of other great examples of UFOs in ancient art, from caves to paintings to sculpture. Some not so easy to find images of, even on Google, but they are there. I will search and try to find some more. In the meantime, I ask others to consider this when viewing them: Where did the ancients get these ideas? Why did they draw UFO-like craft? Given their cultural basis, you'd think drawing an angel in the sky or something like that would have made more sense. Why these disc-like, craft-like things?
Montana Smith said:
Here's the 'ancient astronaut' I was thinking of earlier:
http://www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk/mexicopalenque.htm
Actually, this is one image I don't think has anything to do with UFOs. That's just my opinion, but I like to show that I can be skeptical, even in this topic I am so passionate about. My reasoning is this: Von Daniken saw a guy riding a rocket. To me, in cosmic terms, that's too precisely synced to the 1960s in which Von Daniken wrote. In cosmic terms, our use of rockets came and went in a blink. It's more likely that UFOs use some sort of propulsion that is timeless, or so advanced as to be magic even to our eyes today. I seriously doubt they used fossil fuels. However, that's not to say this image could not have been inspired by some sort of ancient contact. Perhaps this machine wasn't a vehicle at all, but something else. Or, perhaps, another theory for ancient aliens could account for this: Time travelers. Namely, ourselves. It's indeed possible that many ancient alien accounts could be human chrononauts from the near future, who are (or will be) still using comparatively clumsy machinery that involves hoses, wires, and other such things carved into many ancient sites.
This image, however, does bring us back to the real question: What inspired the ancients to create artwork that was clearly so far afield of their gods and other cultural basis?
Pale Horse said:
I'm not so sure that they have been systematically disproved, here. I did a quick review of the thread and this aspect certainly could be discussed a bit more.
That said, the moderators here have been reading and tentatively posting in this thread. It has been said on more then one occasion that we like to do our best to keep a loose leash on things. And to the credit of all who are participating here, we haven't felt the need to close this yet. Conflict can be good.
But know this. Everyone is on note that the Terms of Service of the Raider.net have been violated in this thread. There have already been two moderator warnings to keep ... passionate... posts in check.
This thread will remain open for now, and this post is the marker that clearly says "enter discussion at own risk".
We (on the moderator side of the screen) would hate to have to close it, and dole out the knuckle raps in the process.
...Well, maybe not. Sometimes we like it.
Thank you, not only for this warning, but also for the charity of allowing this thread to continue. Having worked so hard now to get it back on track (a nice, open-minded thread about ancient aliens), I'm excited to see where it goes. This morning's posts are all great! I hope this it continues this way.
And thanks for no knuckle raps!
