Technologically/Intellectually Superior Aliens: "Unpleasant Visits"?

[ydoaPs]

Asteroid? Seriously dude, that would be as wild as an alien space craft since they had no concept of asteroid when that was painted.

Really? Large fiery rocks waited until AFTER that painting to appear in the sky? For realzies? For serious?

 

that picture when blown up looks like a craft of some sort to me, i can't see it as anything else, I'd admit it might be a stylized idea of a boat of some kind but to say it doesn't show a craft of some sort is really out there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia

 

And if it is a simple boat why is it in the sky?

And if it is a UFO, why is it in the painting?

 

I don't get the option of view picture when I right click on it, i have to down load it to my computer then to this site and then get the pic to put it in the thread.

 

You should at least get 'copy image url'.

Edited April 30, 2010 by ydoaPs
Consecutive posts merged.

[Moontanman]

Really? Large fiery rocks waited until AFTER that painting to appear in the sky? For realzies? For serious?

 

Lots of meteors are portrayed in art, this is not a flaming rock by any means.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia

 

No thank you, i don't drink from that particular brand of koolaid, the face on mars was obviously in question but this object floating in the sky is a structured craft, the painter went through great pains to show it as such, it is not a simple rock in the sky. it has details no rock would have or need in a painting.

 

And if it is a UFO, why is it in the painting?

 

That would pretty much be the $64,000 question ya know,

 

the whole idea is that aliens are some how involved in or inspired religion.

[ydoaPs]

the whole idea is that aliens are some how involved in or inspired religion.

I know of NOTHING in the birth story about UFOs. Perhaps the shiny blob in the upper right is the guiding star.

 

Even if you're right about aliens inspiring religion, THEY didn't know it was aliens, and would paint alien angels as angels rather than aliens.

[insane_alien]

looks like it could be a rock to me.

 

chances are, only the artist will ever know what it is, could be a rock could be a spacecraft, could be an attempt to cover up a blemish. there are many many many far more plausible explanations thant 'ZOMG ALIENS!!!one!!!'

 

but anyway the point is moot as it says nothing on whether aliens are goodies or badies.

[Moontanman]

 

 

 

 

I think you may have created a monster, lol, i had to go around my elbow to get to my ass to do this but i figured out how to get the URL to the image, i had to go to properties to get it.

[ydoaPs]

Let's see. The human neurological tendency to anthropomorphize leads us to the 'men in the sky' from ancient times. What else could meteors be but the men traveling? Artists then put men in meteors. Not at all out of reach of Medieval men.

 

If there were little green men with rocket packs shooting ray guns, you might have a case.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

looks like it could be a rock to me.

 

chances are, only the artist will ever know what it is, could be a rock could be a spacecraft, could be an attempt to cover up a blemish. there are many many many far more plausible explanations thant 'ZOMG ALIENS!!!one!!!'

Especially since no one has really presented a reason why it would be a UFO other than that they want it to be.

[Moontanman]

Obviously there is no proof, and yes if it was aliens the ancients didn't know it, at least not publicly. some conspiracy theorists (i say it that way because it is indeed a conspiracy theory) say that it was known to some and the painting portrayed it secretly as in the tiny hard to see space craft or other hidden ways. I'm not sure I buy that but the images are hauntingly familiar to modern day UFO sightings and if they are connected the connection could have real meaning even if it wasn't aliens or gods. While it doesn't say they were good or bad it does seem to say something odd is happening.

 

Let's see. The human neurological tendency to anthropomorphize leads us to the 'men in the sky' from ancient times. What else could meteors be but the men traveling? Artists then put men in meteors. Not at all out of reach of Medieval men.

 

This is really reaching dude.

 

If there were little green men with rocket packs shooting ray guns, you might have a case.

 

So you really think aliens would be little green men with ray guns? How would you expect aliens to be portrayed?

 

looks like it could be a rock to me.

 

Really, you don't see the details the artist put in the rock? Why were the details put in, why is the man and the dog looking at the rock?

 

chances are, only the artist will ever know what it is, could be a rock could be a spacecraft, could be an attempt to cover up a blemish. there are many many many far more plausible explanations thant 'ZOMG ALIENS!!!one!!!'

 

Blemish? Painters cover blemishes with paint, not space ships, if it was blemish why is the man looking at it, why would the man the dog and the "rock" be in the deep back round of a painting of the Madonna?

 

But anyway the point is moot as it says nothing on whether aliens are goodies or badies.

 

The idea is the painter was trying to preserve the idea of something being behind the religious ideas that was not religion? Good or bad, if is was a lie then it had to be bad.

[ydoaPs]

This is really reaching dude.

Really? How so? It seems perfectly reasonable to me. I see no reason such a picture would be completely out of the range of human imagination at the time. They DO look a lot like meteors(especially the one on the left).

 

 

 

So you really think aliens would be little green men with ray guns?

Maybe. I haven't met any.

 

How would you expect aliens to be portrayed?

Not as humans.

[Moontanman]

I cannot believe that aliens would closely resemble humans either but of course the conspiracy theorists say the people we meet as aliens are actually humans they have raised and trained (the reason for the late night baby stealing) if it was easy to see and the evidence was irrefutable then there would be no doubt and all would be revealed.

 

the idea is to see into the past via these images and some stories as well to get at a hidden truth. I'm not sure if there is a hidden truth or if the truth is even close to what has been proposed but i know if we dismiss the ideas out of hand then we will never know unless the aliens reveal themselves to us at some point.

 

Of course there are those who say this has already happened and the government has chosen to hide this from us.

 

I'd love to continue this as an intelligent discussion but I'll have to dig very deep to find any more intelligent material. there used to be some plausible if unlikely theories available but in recent years every crazy on the planet has been able to post his or her personal take on this and the ideas are seldom intelligent or even resemble any realistic credible possibility. I'll try to see if I can dredge up any of the older stuff but my google search today has turned up nothing but bull butter.

 

i still say the most likely IF is that aliens live in our solar system independant of planets, if they are here, if frogs had wings they wouldn't bust thier asses everytime the jump

[mooeypoo]

Mooeypoo, seriously, you picked the absolutely least convincing pics out of all those pics. You have done what most skeptics do, they cherry pick the data to show the least convincing reports and ignore or gloss over the really convincing stuff.

Just to make a point here, I didn't cherry pick, Moontanman, I took the offered site and linked the first three pictures I saw.

 

I didn't even skip... it's the first three.

[Moontanman]

Just to make a point here, I didn't cherry pick, Moontanman, I took the offered site and linked the first three pictures I saw.

 

I didn't even skip... it's the first three.

 

Sorry mooeypoo, we were looking at different sites, the one I offered showed medieval paintings first.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

this is the most reasonable discussion of the subject I have been able to find.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleocontact

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oannes#As_Oannes

 

Oannes (Hovhannes [Հովհաննես] in Armenian) was the name given by the Babylonian writer Berossus in the 3rd century BC to a mythical being who taught mankind wisdom. Berossus describes Oannes as having the body of a fish but underneath the figure of a man. He is described as dwelling in the Persian Gulf, and rising out of the waters in the daytime and furnishing mankind instruction in writing, the arts and the various sciences.

 

The name "Oannes" was once conjectured to be derived from that of the ancient Babylonian god Ea [1], but it is now known that the name is the Greek form of the Babylonian Uanna (or Uan) a name used for Adapa in texts from the Library of Ashurbanipal.[2][3] The Assyrian texts attempt to connect the word to the Akkadian for a craftsman ummanu but this is a merely a pun [2]. Scholars have long speculated that the name might ultimately be derived from that of the 8th century figure of Jonah (Hebrew Yonah). Bible critics have made the reverse claim, although the Hebrew name has the known meaning of "dove". [4]

 

Oannes was portrayed as a man wearing the skin of a fish.

 

Iosif Shklovsky and Carl Sagan cited tales of Oannes as deserving closer scrutiny as a possible instance of paleocontact due to its consistency and detail.[5]

 

It has honestly been many years since I delved very deeply into this stuff and i find that Erich von Däniken was conservative compared to the stuff out now. From what i read now this stuff has feed on it's self using it's self to reference it's self and now has mutated beyond any recognition of any real facts or even speculations. It's really sad, at one time I was almost a reasonable line of inquiry, now it's crazies pumping sunshine up the skirts of other crazies to the point it has no relevance what so ever to reality.

 

WOW maybe I should set up a site and hawk my theory, it's as good as anyone else's and just as based in fact and I could be a crazy too...

Edited April 30, 2010 by Moontanman
Consecutive posts merged.

[ydoaPs]

water≠sky

[Moontanman]

water≠sky

 

Yes, I can agree with that. Now look at this picture, as a totally independent picture. don't take into account where it came from or what it is supposed to be.

 

What do you see?

 

[Mr Skeptic]

 

 

These are pretty good evidence against trusting the factual accuracy of alien UFO claims. 1) It looks like your typical "lights in the sky" meteorite. 2) As a craft, this cannot be how it actually looks -- the person inside should not be visible, or if it is actually intended to be an "open" ship, these people have no idea how nasty wind can be at supersonic speeds.

[Moontanman]

These are pretty good evidence against trusting the factual accuracy of alien UFO claims. 1) It looks like your typical "lights in the sky" meteorite. 2) As a craft, this cannot be how it actually looks -- the person inside should not be visible, or if it is actually intended to be an "open" ship, these people have no idea how nasty wind can be at supersonic speeds.

 

I think that if indeed this was supposed to represent a real space craft it is a cut away view to demonstrate there is someone inside the craft. it is not intended to show a real space craft but a stylized version of what the artist thought was going on.

 

We do the same thing when we draw stylized versions of airplanes, of course it could be the space craft are really not traveling that fast and are in fact gliding over the scene slowly.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

My wife gave me a rather unique view point when i asked her what she saw in the above pic. She is not into UFOs as a skeptic or believer.

[ydoaPs]

Yes, I can agree with that. Now look at this picture, as a totally independent picture. don't take into account where it came from or what it is supposed to be.

 

What do you see?

 

 

Are you seriously suggesting that deliberately taking things out of context helps your case?

 

 

edit: It looks like a peach pit.

[King, North TX]

Dragons are in cultures all over the globe. Does that mean they're real too?

 

Doesn't "dragon" mean 'terrible lizard', AND aren't there actual reptiles named "Komodo Dragons".

 

Moreover, I think you are making my point for me. There ARE 'big lizards', that can and DO eat people, and we have fossilitic records of REALLY big lizards. The error that was made was attributing super-natural powers to these real entities.

 

While they don't breathe fire or fly anymore, they DO eat men, women, and children if given the chance, their very saliva able to melt flesh and or poison you unto death...

 

Dragon have always been real, they just lack the qualities we've ascribed to them.

 

ETA:

 

And this is the point I tried to make, U.F.O.'s/Flying Saucers have 'ALWAYS' been in our skies, according to the 'global' historical record. The problem lies with men attributing qualities to them that they may or may not actually have, such as "Godliness"...

Edited May 1, 2010 by King, North TX

[Greippi]

As a craft, this cannot be how it actually looks -- the person inside should not be visible, or if it is actually intended to be an "open" ship, these people have no idea how nasty wind can be at supersonic speeds.

 

Or maybe it was covered by glass, or some sort of clear substance.

Maybe people in that age weren't familiar with a material THAT clear so to them it looked like nothing.

 

Having said that, I think it's unlikely that intelligent life lurks out there, or at least that it's got anywhere close to Earth.

[Mr Skeptic]

You'd think that if there actually were [/i']any oversized reptiles, there'd be some evidence -- bones, perhaps.

Indeed. Probably used by humans as tools or discarded in trash heaps. I wonder if we've found any dragon bones.

 

Well I was kind of joking, considering dinosaur bones and all. But you do have a point. Where's the stuffed dragons, or other trophies from such an impressive kill? You'd think someone would have kept a tooth or a claw at least.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

And this is the point I tried to make, U.F.O.'s/Flying Saucers have 'ALWAYS' been in our skies, according to the 'global' historical record. The problem lies with men attributing qualities to them that they may or may not actually have, such as "Godliness"...

 

Or such as intelligence.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Or maybe it was covered by glass, or some sort of clear substance.

Maybe people in that age weren't familiar with a material THAT clear so to them it looked like nothing.

 

Glass was known about in 3500 BC in Mesopotamia, and by the Romans at around the time of Jesus (depicted elsewhere in that painting). Regardless, clear materials also reflect light, and there is no bright spots on the clear area where there might be some transparent material.

[insane_alien]

more to the point, where is ANY evidence outside of myth and legend which is, thanks to our impressive imaginations, full of stuff that never existed.

 

Legends and religions are full of lots of other bumf that cannot be attributed to aliens or superior technology. If they can make that up fine then why can't they have made up people living in the sky.

 

After all, the constellations are often anthropomophised, such as orion the hunter. So people in the sky is hardly a unique thing. And then there is the whole man on the moon thing because of a coincidence of geology. whyc not assume that all the little points of light aren't similar to the big smudge.

 

Humans have rampant imaginations you can't just write that off and jump to aliens when we enjoy fiction so much that even today in more educated times the fiction section of shops and libraries is still much larger.

 

NOW can we get back to whether contact is good or not and leave this crap about aliens maybe being depicted in ancient cultural pictures that are more often than not prone to misinterpretation?

[Moontanman]

This has everything to do with is contact good or not, i say it's nuetral, aliens would have no desire to take our planet because it's unlikely that star traveling aliens would need planets.

 

My wife thought the pic was a cartoon army tank... go figure!

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

I'm really not trying to prove UFOs are real any more than Hawkings was trying to prove they are real. i think Hawkings is sadly unaware of how unlikely it would be that aliens could use the earth, He is brilliant man in his field is is a giant but in biochemistry he is not the same giant.

 

Any aliens would be far more likely to be inhabiting the fringes of our solar system if they are here at all.

 

It does how ever annoy me for people to dismiss out of hand UFOs as lights in the sky or crazies. there are UFO reports that have an embarrassing amount of evidence, are seen by multiple witnesses recorded on ground radar, military aircraft radar seen on the ground and in the air by military pilots and crews and civilian airline crews and this is just one sighting over a nuclear missile base!

 

J Allen Hynek started out as a skeptic hired by the military to debunk UFOs, he ended up believing that some UFOs were inexplicable and should be studied.

 

the first US Air force study concluded that UFOs were interplanetary space craft of alien origin. the air force general or what ever refused to believe it and got a new group together that came back and told him what he wanted to hear.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimate_of_the_Situation

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Sign

 

Now to me the idea that you might get tangible evidence of a flying saucer seems unlikely at best and totally unreasonable any way you look at it. I live near an airport under a landing path that takes aircraft directly over my house many times a day at low altitudes of a couple hundred feet. i have yet to see a bolt or any other piece of an aircraft fall off. Why would anyone expect to find a piece of an advanced interplanetary craft fall off?

 

i admit that the actions of UFOs seems obscure at best and the idea that an alien intelligence would fly light years to buzz an airplane and leave seems unlikely but if they are actually here in our solar system getting information about our reactions to their craft might be important enough to do a fly by every once in a while. They might even stop a lone traveler and do some tests on him or her.

 

None of this proves anything but I think the idea of aliens coming her and taking over the earth is highly unlikely due to biology if nothing else.

[King, North TX]

 

...

 

i admit that the actions of UFOs seems obscure at best and the idea that an alien intelligence would fly light years to buzz an airplane and leave seems unlikely but if they are actually here in our solar system getting information about our reactions to their craft might be important enough to do a fly by every once in a while. They might even stop a lone traveler and do some tests on him or her.

 

None of this proves anything but I think the idea of aliens coming her and taking over the earth is highly unlikely due to biology if nothing else.

 

'They' don't need to travel light years to get here... They've been 'here' for as long as we have.

 

I think it unlikely that they intend to do anything other than what they're doing now...simply because they haven't.

 

---

 

Any attempt to make contact in a public manner, would be treated by our government as an extreme biological hazard. If they landed on the White House lawn, we wouldn't allow them to shake hand with the President.

 

So, I think it is likely they'll continue to study us from a distance, while leaving little to no real evidence as to their existence.

[Mr Skeptic]

the first US Air force study concluded that UFOs were interplanetary space craft of alien origin. the air force general or what ever refused to believe it and got a new group together that came back and told him what he wanted to hear.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimate_of_the_Situation

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Sign

 

Now that's more interesting. However, I can't say I'm too surprised that Project Sign would see signs of extraterrestrial intelligence, nor conversely that Project Grudge would conclude otherwise.

[Moontanman]

Here is the disclosure projects take on what Hawkings said.

 

http://www.disclosureproject.org/response-to-hawking.htm

 

http://www.disclosureproject.org/index.shtml

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Can you elaborate why you weren't surprised that project sign saw evidence of extraterrestrials and project grudge didn't?

[King, North TX]

Here is the disclosure projects take on what Hawkings said.

 

http://www.disclosureproject.org/response-to-hawking.htm

 

http://www.disclosureproject.org/index.shtml

 

I wrote Professor Hawking an e-mail, pronouncing my displeasure in his public statement, also.

 

I find that his stance forces one to literally ignore our entire ancient history...in that "god" seeks to help and protect us...'now' anyways. There was the whole Sodom and Gomorra, and the Flood thing, but those days are supposed to be over.