The "Helicopter" and other Strange Objects at AbydosOn the left, another view of the relief on Egyptian temple wall at Abydos. "Dr. Ruth Hover, and her husband
took a trip to the pyramids and temples of Egypt. In the temple at Abydios, she photographed a wall panel in a section where an overlaying panel with Egyptian heiroglyphics crumbled and fell, revealing an older panel beneath it. This older panel, shown below, contains embossed images of what appear to be ancient aircraft."
What we do know about these images is that they are not fakes. By that we mean, that the images do actually exist. What is in question then is what do they mean--what do they represent? Egyptologists certainly think that they know what they mean. Their explanation includes the notion that it is a combined image of a later symbol over an older one.
Of course, those same experts can't adequately explain how the pyramids were built, how and why the Egyptian civiliztion appeared fully developed or why the oldest pyramid, the Great Pyramid was built with higher technology than later pyramids.
On these pages, because the items we're looking at usually aren't being scrutinized by science or experts, there is a liklihood that some objects will turn out to have fairly straightforward explanations. This could be the case here. However, undeniably we have what nearly 100% of people would recognize as an advanced modern helicopter--if they didn't know where it had been found. Add to that the fact that symbols proximate to the "helicopter" also appear to be instruments of war. It's certainly an interesting find.
The Saqqara Bird
" While excavating an Egyptian tomb, near Saqqara in 1891, investigators came upon a small, birdlike object made of sycamore wood. ..and like the rest of the tomb's contents, dated to at least 200 BC. Little more thought was given to the matter until almost 80 years later, after the Wright brothers had made their landmark flight and ushered in the era of modern aviation.
To the next generation of Egyptologists, the birdlike artifact looked uncannily like an airplane. The resemblance was so striking that a team of aviation experts was assembled in the early Seventies to explore this hypothesis.
Their study revealed that the 5.6-inch long body was aerodynamically sound. In fact, one aeronautics engineer noted a remarkable similarity between the Saqqara bird and a new, oblique-winged aircraft that NASA planned to build. And when the tiny wooden relic was subjected to the ultimate test -- a flight trial -- it soared through the air with the ease and grace of a modern-day glider.To the experts, the conclusion was inescapable: The 2,000-year-old object was a model airplane."....
Far Shores Website
More: "The model has the exact proportions of a very advanced form of "pusher-glider" that is still having "some bugs ironed out". This type of glider will stay in the air almost by itself; even a very small engine will keep it going at low speeds, as low as 45 to 65 mph., while it can carry an enormous payload. This ability is dependent on the curious shape of wings and their proportions. The tipping of wings downward, a reversedihedral wing as it is called, is the feature behind this capability. A similar type of curving wings are implemented on the Concorde airplane, giving the plane a maximum lift without detracting from its speed".
The South American Airplanes (aerodynamic artifacts)
On the left, a number of small South American artifacts. Currently at the Smithsonian, they were found in a number of places including a grave. The small artifacts are made of gold, which means that conventional dating methods won't work on them. Even though archeologists admit that they don't know how old they are, it can safely be assumed from their surroundings, including other "dateable" artifacts, that they are a minimum of 1000 years old.
For a number of years, a disagreement has "raged" over the "meaning" of the artifacts. As seen from the pictures, the shape of the sample object is rather ambiguous. The archaeologists labelled these objects as zoomorphic, meaning, animal shaped objects.
The question is, what animal do they represent? When we compare these with other objects from the same cultures depicting animals, a curious facet of the comparison would be obvious: the other objects are recognizable, rendered usually with a great accuracy and attention to realistic detail.
There are several types of animals which fly; birds, insects, and several mammals, such as bats and some gliders, for instance flying squirrels, oppossums, and then there are some lizards; there are also some fish which for brief periods glide through the air.
There are water animals which seem to fly through the water, such as rays, skates and some selachians. But how does the depicted object compare with these choices? All its features taken into a consideration, we have no match. Seen from above, the object obviously has no fish features, but seems to show rather explicitly mechanistic ones.
The structures just in front of the tail are strongly reminiscent of elevons (a combination of ailerons and elevators) with a slight forward curve, but they are attached to the fuselage, rather than the wings. In any case, they look more like airplane parts than like the claspers of a fish.
No doubt adding to the mystery, an insignia appears on the left side of the rudder,where ID marks often appear on contemporary airplanes. Aeronautical engineers when approached thought that the objects had possible aerodynamic qualities but that they also had defects which likely would make them difficult to fly.
Erich von Daniken said 30 years ago that an artifact dug up from an Incan grave was not an insect as scientists said, but a plane.
In 1997, two Germans, Algund Eenboom and Peter Belting, put the theory to the test.
Eenboom centered his research on historical evidence and concluded the "wings" of all insects are attached at the top of the corpus, not at the bottom, and that all Incan artifacts except these few suspected "planes" were made correctly.
Belting made a model plane, first with a propeller, afterwards with a jet engine. Whereas the first has to be launched by hand, the jet engine one was also equipped with landing gear.
At the recent Ancient Astronaut Society World Conference in Orlando, Florida, the two researchers showed extensive footage of their model planes.
The propeller-powered plane flew perfectly stable. But the crowd almost gave a standing ovation for the jet-engine model plane. With an impeccable take-off, flight and landing -- and an exact match to the model found in the Inca grave -- the model is truly an airplane.
Eenboom and Belting gave a live demonstration in a parking lot of the Florida Mall in Orlando, in case anyone would still doubt it after the videos.
Michael Lindemann, Editor, CNI News
Additional Source: Enterprise Mission site:
The Human Skull in Ancient Rock
Right: Evolution Takes a Hit
Scientists fear evidence that man is as old as coal Photo Right:Hard evidence for hard hearts? Solid rock proof for hard heads? Smithsonian squelching evidence again?
"Physical evidence currently exists that proves man inhabited the earth while coal was being formed, shaking the very foundations of who we really are and how we really got here. An assortment of human bones and soft organs, transformed to rock-like hardness, has been discovered between anthracite veins in Pennsylvania.
Since one of the golden rules of geology is that coal was formed during the Carboniferous -- a minimum of 280 million years ago -- it means that man has existed multi-millions of years before the ... insectivore from whom the evolutionists claim we eventually evolved.
However, the scientific establishment has wielded its powerful disdainful influence -- deceit, dishonesty, collusion and conspiracy -- to prevent evidence of the most important discovery of the 20th century to be documented as fact and, therefore, keep us from learning a monumental truth about ourselves." ...Ed Conrad
Additional Info:Quoted from Anomalies and Enigmas Forum
"Aside from the evidence of bones, evidence of human occupation of this area in Carboniferous times included one particularly strange item: a petrified handle of some sort of a tool.
This item was totally petrified and appeared almost to be made of coal; "coalified" might be a better term. Other than that, it appeared entirely similar to and entirely as well-made as any normal handle to an axe or sledge hammer of our own day and evinced a fairly high level of technology. The grain structure of a wooden handle was there.
It appears that the bones in all cases were there first, that the shale formed up around the bones, and that the bone was then gradually replaced with minerals being carried into the cavities they left by water.
The human femur bone we saw was very large; I would guess that its owner was eight or nine feet tall.(see "Giants" Page 6) Other than that it entirely resembled a normal femur bone from a man about my size which we had along with us for comparison in photos. ...
Vine (an author) has also claimed that the American Indian was here in America from the beginning, his most recent book, "Red Earth, White Lies", strongly challenging the standard Bering land bridge thesis. I should think that what I saw would shatter the Bering land bridge thesis for anybody with lingering doubts.
The experiences which Ed Conrad has had in trying to present these findings to scientists are entirely in line with what I would expect, given what experience has taught me about scientists in these fields. He has had several writeups in local and regional papers, including one in the Reding Eagle which indicates that all relevant tests have been done, and that all favor Conrad's claims.
Conrad has had several prominent scientists agree to the validity of his claims, and yet these had their own schedules and projects and none were willing to attempt to take any of these findings and do anything with them, and attempts to deal with the Smithsonian and with major universities has been much like beating his head against a tree and, as of the last four or five years, he had simply given up. That, of course, was in the age just prior to the age of the WWW page...
Conrad has previously assumed that his findings indicated man's presence on Earth in the accepted period of the Carboniferous age, i.e. almost 300 million years ago, and his writings in some of the documents noted here reflect that.
The evidence seems to suggest one of three possibilities:
1. humans/hominids were around in the Carboniferous period, conventionally dated to 300m (million) years ago.
2. The Carboniferous period is vastly more recent than conventionally dated.
3. The evidence is the result of an elaborate hoax.
I rule possibility 3 out from my own direct observations; the femur bone embedded in shale along with other petrified bone embedded in shale boulders could not possibly be faked. Item 1 does not strike me as plausible for numerous reasons, not the least of which being that no complex species such as ours has ever lasted that long.
I thus see the second possibility as the only viable one, and would recommend the section of Velikovsky's "Earth in Upheaval" titled "Collapsing Schemes" as a starting point for anybody seeking further information.
It would appear that all of the dating schemes we are familiar with are simply FUBAR, standard army jargon meaning "Fouled Up Beyond Any Recognition". Either of possibilities 1 and 2 above should cause major grief for evolutionists; the one requires man to be here long before monkeys or apes were, the other indicates there hasn't been time for evolution."--Endquote
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72 73
Please Support the Research of S8int.com!
Since 2002, Chris Parker has done the majority of the research and writing of articles for s8int.com. If this site has been an encouragement to you, please donate to support Chris's ongoing research. (S8int.com is not incorporated and your donations may not be tax deductable.)