Ancient jets? The amazing flying beings
At the end of the 1960s, biologist Uvan Ivan Sanderson, more well-known as a promoter of Bigfoot, called the attention of the world to some gold pre-Columbian artifacts, centuries old, produced by indigenous cultures.
According to him, those were reproductions of jet aircrafts, a conclusion supported by doctor Arthur Poyslee, of the New York Aeronautic Institute.
Absurd, if only the artifacts didn’t in fact look so much like modern airplanes. Click on the image to continue reading:
One can identify vertical and horizontal stabilizers and swept-wings, ideal for supersonic flights. We can even see what could be looked as corrugated metal or underlining structures. And there are not one, but many of these artifacts, like the other one at right.
On its wings, in this case smooth, we can also see what could be a symbol, much like the ones adorning our planes today.
The artifact ended up becoming the symbol for the AAS (Ancient Astronaut Society), and the comparison below can be seen on many places, both online and offline, of the years before the Internet in the books of one Erich von Däniken.
Some years ago, the AAS-RA (Archaeology, Astronautics and SETI Research Association) even tried to actually reproduce those ancient jets.
One was fitted with propellers, while the other was actually fitted with a small jet engine, in the exact location they assumed it was in the original jets.
If you are still skeptic, then swallow this: the models by Algund Eenboom and Peter Belting flew. They didn’t brake the sound barrier, but they flew quite well.
The location of the jet engine and the air intake may look strange, but it’s incredibly similar to the design seen in one of the first jet airplanes of the modern age, the Heinkel-162 (at right), of 1944.
Finally, if this is all sounding too good to be true, and your debunking sense starts to doubt the whole thing — do these artifacts actually exist? Are they actually pre-Columbian? — we have to tell you.
They can be found in the Museo del Oro, in Bogota, Columbia. They are solidly dated and accepted as being some centuries old. Those are the real thing.
BUT ARE THEY ACTUALLY JETS?
If you ask conventional, orthodox experts about them, they will tell you that they these small gold artifacts in fact represent insects, like bees, or maybe birds, fishes or flying fishes.
Flying fishes?
Fact is, one other pre-Columbian gold artifact, particularly beautiful, clearly represents a flying fish.
That proves those ancient people had contact with these flying things and cared enough about them.
And if you think again about it, flying fishes are the only animals with a tail that’s vertical in relation to its body — which could be the “vertical stabilizer” of the more strange gold artifacts. They also have longer fins that act as wings. And they do fly.
Now, anyone must admit there’s some similarity between flying fishes and the artifacts we are discussing, just as the similarity with jet aircraft is also a fact. The question is if the artifacts are more related to a jet aircraft or with a flying fish.
And some characteristics particular to flying fishes, but not to jet aircrafts, can be clearly identified on the artifacts. The vertical and horizontal “stabilizers”, for instance, are not fit together at the end of the tail, as most aircrafts.
The horizontal stabilizers in the gold figures are always closer to the wings, which actually is not very good aerodynamically, since the stabilizer will not stabilize much in that position. It will help, though, and curiously is exactly what one can see in flying fishes.
All the artifacts also have eyes and mouths, often with teeth. That’s another thing one do not see very much in aircrafts — except, ironically, in paintings made to make them resemble animals.
Granted, there are some characteristics in the gold artifacts that do not fit very well with the flying aquatic animals. The vertical stabilizer, for instance, does not extend below the body, unlike the fishes.
But these small differences can be accounted for by the stylization of the figures. There’s actually a continuum between the clear and pretty representation of a flying fish seen previously, and the more stylized artifacts we are wondering about:
Each artifact has a slightly different style, but seen as a whole, it’s clear they all represent flying fishes. Eyes, mouth with teeth, even gills. They all have gills, which was interpreted as an air intake for jet engines. Air intake, in a way yes, jet engine… no.
Finally, one can ask then how could the scale model of the artifacts fly so well. But that’s not more surprising than the fact that some fishes can actually fly. And this goes on to show how amazing it is that pre-Columbian people stylized these animals but preserved some basic elements that allowed them to fly.
Or not that amazing, since the scale models are not actually 100% accurate reproductions of the artifacts, allowing for many crucial modifications that ensured the flying success, like a modified profile for the wings, that gave them lift. Note also how a cumbersome detail that in the original artifact is located exactly where in alleged jet exhaust was simply ignored.
DOWN TO EARTH
These are really wonderful artifacts. Some of them do resemble jet airplanes, some not. Flying fishes have this similarity with jets too, and had people been more inspired by them than with birds, maybe we would have been flying long before the Wright brothers. Who knows, but before Columbus is still quite a stretch. And without any evidence, unfortunately.
- - -
Links
- Museo del Oro
- Postales del Museo del Oro
- Fliegende Amulette
- Flying Fish
- - -
A movie about ancient flying beings would probably make the sci-fi movie hall of fame. Even an amateur movie about this topic is bound to draw some attention.
22 Comments so far
Leave a reply
Live Comment Preview
Subscribe to the RSS feed
The explanation offered here appears to answer the question of ancient flight as offered by some speculators. But, to me, the question goes a bit further when its noted similar golden objects were discovered in the Egyptian tomb of Tutankhamen. The similarity between the objects depicted here and the object(s?) found in the Egyptian tomb bear on the location of the Biblical “land of Ophir” from whence came the gold and other items of King Solomon. Did the navy of Hiram and Solomon bring these objects found in King Tut’s tomb from South America?
I re-read INVESTIGATING THE UNEXPLAINED not long ago, and
Sanderson makes an intersting, if not terribly convincing
case for the artifacts representing aircraft. But my recoll-
ection of the chapter is that much more of it was spent on
comparing a figure of a Jaguar to a modern backhoe.
Granted it makes a lot more sense for them to be representations of flying fish, but still, what a strange
and wonderful notion.
Glad to see you posting again-best wishes for the New Year.
[...] folks at Anomalist mentioned (thanks!) the relation between the pre-Columbian gold artifacts and the so-called Saqqara bird. I had already seen it mentioned before, but had never looked upon [...]
<p><p>Thanks, Craig. Many thanks also for the references in Precognitive Dissonance to the work around here, and wishing you a happy 2008 too!</p></p>
It just doesn’t fit. Why even make such a representation?
I’ve seen flying fish, and these aren’t.
Nice try at cognitive dissonance.
Nice try at scientific method f debunkers,
if it’s out of my range of acceptance, it can’t be.
right.
ed
The problem with your debunking efforts in my view is that the actual gold flying fish object looks substantively different from the other gold objects. Also, while a modern reproduction of the gold flying fish object wouldn’t fly if your life depended on it, the other gold objects that look like aeroplanes more than they do flying fish have been proven to fly. Nothing has been debunked here….the debate is still wide open as to what those objects were really intended to be.
Are the flying fish in question available in that part of the world? Where were they (artifacts) found and where are the fish located?
could they possibly through observation of flying fish been inspired to attempt to make flying craft which mimic the form?
fun to think about.
maybe it is a both/and rather than an either/or situation.
I believe these designs are more of a predictions to what’s coming.I believe these so-call prophets learn to design their visions and have a sketch artist do their vision quest.
Like our people have done to develope the “Crooked Beak Of Heaven” is a great example.If you google up the name and see the design yourself,you can see how the shamans learned to have a council meeting to describe their vision quest.
All the ones we see now through the eyes of Von Daniken and the ancient drawings are symbols of what’s going to transpire in the future.hey draw it out.Shape it out.That’s what I believe so far and I hope this helps out at least?Thank you for your time and patiences>>>>———————>>::::::/\
Cat Thunder
[SKY-LITE-STENCILS]
Ancient peoples basically copied their surroundings when fashioning idols, and artpieces … everything from plants and animals, to celestial objects. So more than likely, these gold artifacts are replicas of flying fish.
But imagine some primitives who actually witnessed flying airplanes 5000 years ago. They would try to figure out what those planes were, and they’d only have their natural surroundings to compare their experience to, and so they’d probably think that the plane in the sky was a god … the “God of the Flying Fishes”.
Maybe because of someones beautiful and immaginative artwork of the past, we are able to fly today. I mean they say the fiction of today is the truth of tomorrow. I remember an ancient Greek story about some who made wings of feathers and wax and flew, one flew too close to the sun, the wax melted and the boy crashed. Today is the only thing between yesterday and tomorrow. Maybe the people who made the Nazca lines knew that someday, man would fly like the birds. I mean we had science fiction writings of man on the moon way before he got there. Now is the only time between then, and some day when. I think that probably plenty of things have been pulled into reality, from fantasy. We all need to pay attention, to our dreams.
Interesting. But one correction. The biologist was Ivan Sanderson, not Uvan. As a kid I had a book of his about the rain forest.
So they can make representation of a flying fish actually look like them but take the effort to stylize them beyond their natural feature. You’ve debunked nothing.
Next you’ll claim those ancient depiction of Dinosaurs aren’t dinosaurs.
http://www.cryptomundo.com/wp-content/trackscambodiastegasarus.jpg
it’s hard to prove or disprove a thing like this
because it does not imply that the makers of these figurines flew in them, it implies that they saw something like that in their lifetime, and if they really did see an airplane, they would of course regard them as giant metallic flying fish – and that means SEE, DESCRIBE and FORGE them using concepts of their minds and lives
for instance, if they saw intake for jet engines, they would describe them as gills, wouldn’t they?
not that I think these are airplanes, but to be fair
its so hard to be scientific sometimes
this debunking effort is not
There is absolutely NO POSSIBILITY of the ancient people to have built airplanes. Why? Because to built an airplane you need factories, computers, microprocessors, electronic equipment, factories which construct computers etc. etc. in other words a full techological civilization. Where are all of these?
Pericles
Greece
The stones depicting the dinosaurs, yes, I’m glad someone brought that up, those might be very, very, very , very old carvings on very old stones. I mean maybe even older than carbon 14 lets on. Hey, a machine at the pump can’t give you a receipt and you have to go into the convenience store for the cashier to make you one inside, therefore, how do I really know carbon 14 or anything else mankind “has” is accurate. I’m just saying that Appolos have blown up before, and there have been automotive recalls, see what I’m saying? A cut down tree has 85 rings so we know the tree was 85 years old right? Well maybe not. Is it fact or is it handed down and accepted theory. One other point is that there was this theory about these beautiful gold artworks being airplanes, and I certainly want to believe they are, and now let’s not forget the paintings on the egyptian walls that seem to depict flying aircraft and modern day machines as well. I’m just saying that if someone wasn’t at least up in a glider of some sort in Peru, or a hot air balloon, or whatever the heck, what did they do, make a tall pole so they could climb up it and look at the spider monkey design on the ground? Peru looks to me now to be about the most fascinating country on earth!
Today is still the only thing standing, between yesterday, and tomorrow.
If I could say just one more thing, if these objects were made of gold, they obviously were held in high regard. It was like they were important, representations. Lesser important representations would have been made of clay. Baked Clay. So we have gold objects resembling flying fish? Why do we not have gold objects resembling cows, or goats or other creatures from nature from this same country. No, those aren’t flying fish, those are aircraft!
I just feel like saying again that today is the only thing that stands between yesterday and tomorrow. Now is the only time between then, and someday when. I hope people can understand, my point! The ancient peoples couldn’t have possibly generated electricity of any kind, it’s absolutely impossible. It couldn’t have been done. Yet there stands the Baghdad Battery! Now is the only time, between then, and someday when!
how cool
If there isn’t a way, who is to say that someone among us can’t find a way. I bet if we put our minds to it, we could find a way to fly, right now, without having to rely on oil. I believe we could, find a way to make a plane or something simmilar fly, without oil. And also cars to go back and forth to work in. I believe someone long ago had a stanley steamer? I’m going to try to pull up some information on the stanley steamer tonight on the computer. But oil is a finite resource that will one day be all used up. there are going to need to be steam powered cars or cars powered by some other means for us to be able to get around. around.
I mean I find it ammusing that man has even developed a way for man to walk on water, so to speak. I saw this english sci fi movie where a guy was in this plastic, air filled bubble. Needless to say, it floated, and he kept putting one foot in front of the other inside this air filled plastic bubble and got across the water. when he arrived at the other side, he unzipped the bubble and got out and went along his way. anything, anything is possible. Man may have flown somehow, four thousand years ago, and man may fly some different way, four thousand years from now. I like to dream and immagine. How do I know that the Tesla tower couldn’t have made an electronic bubble which could have collected me up and taken me from the United states to England. and if not, maybe some day! Maybe some day a thousand years from now, people will go to the airport and be placed in an electric bubble of some sort and fired to their destination. We will go like balls of light, from this place, to that.