Comments on: Ancient jets? The amazing flying beings

By: Just 1 Random Guy

Just 1 Random Guy — Wed, 16 Jun 2010 00:22:31 +0000

I was just now watching Ancient Aliens on history and was surprised they never mentioned the pretty obvious connection. I mean they did say many of the golden figures were obviously based after fish but that the dozen or so were “clearly” not in nature by showing dissimilarities to birds and insects. Immediately flying fish came to mind and so I did a search to see if anyone else had a similar theory. Found your blog and here I am commenting.

I do believe in a few aspects of the “ancient aliens” or believe that many things are unexplained. This, however, is not one of them. That is not a bad thing either, as the more things you can rule out (debunk) allows you to put more thought to those you can’t.

By: Mori

Mori — Sat, 22 May 2010 21:25:11 +0000

Not quite. Aircraft doesn’t have teeth or gills. Also, we know the people who created these idols saw flying fishes, as they also represented them quite accurately. But we don’t know, and it’s in fact very dubious, that they would have seen any swept-wing airplanes.

Overall, the evidence for the interpretation of flying fishes rather than airplanes is overwhelming. Not dishonest at all.

By: Joe

Joe — Sat, 22 May 2010 20:23:08 +0000

Hey Josh, toy airplanes today don’t have wings shaped correctly. Your argument is meaningless since these are representations of airplanes and were never meant to fly. Your evidence is crap.

By: Joe

Joe — Sat, 22 May 2010 20:21:38 +0000

This article is absurd. It’s amazing how little thought people put into “debunking” anything. First, this guy may be right. These could very well be idols of flying fish. Seems like a stretch, but whatever. Let’s say primitive man didn’t build airplanes, which these certainly look like more than a flying fish. Primitive man would have judged airplanes flying overhead as creatures, probably not vehicles. They would have then stylized them with animal faces, ornamentation, any number of things. Who flew these craft? We don’t know. And to the dope who claims we need factories and microprocessors etc. to fly I guess he never heard of the Wright Brothers, or any other flying machine until the advent of the microprocessor. These sculptures truly could be nothing more then flying fish or bird representations, but you have just as much evidence to support that theory as those who believe these represented aircraft. I defy you to find any layman who would look at these artifacts and think flying fish. They would immediately think aircraft. Saying otherwise is just being dishonest and making up things to fit your theory.

By: Fourth Kind Encounters with Ancient Astronauts — The Origin of Religions?

Fourth Kind Encounters with Ancient Astronauts — The Origin of Religions? — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 15:46:01 +0000

[...] left archaeological traces. To date, no traces have been found. The same can be said of the old Columbian gold carvings which appear to depict modern jets; these may actually depict flying [...]