UFO's in history? - Page 2

Ceritus · 22nd August 2006, 07:17 PM

Originally Posted by Patricio Elicer

Ceritus,

Maybe you missed this post by Wolverine?. It contains in-depth analysis of the most emblematic "UFO's" in ancient artwork cases. The title says it all: "Art & UFO's?,.... No Thanks!, Only Art".

It's a real shame that not all articles are translated into English, but anyway there's great stuff in there, the most comprehensive treatise on the subject I've ever read. Some of the articles appeared on the "Skeptic" magazine, as is publicized on the site.

Couldn't go there yet, stupid firewalls at work!

Ceritus · 22nd August 2006, 09:14 PM

any other places to read it?

Ceritus · 22nd August 2006, 09:17 PM

The reason I find the paintings more interesting than a photo or video is that the person who made the painting took the time to put something there. If it didn't look right the artist would most likely fix it.

Where photos tend to have defects in the images or are unfocused.

Patricio Elicer · 22nd August 2006, 10:24 PM

Originally Posted by Ceritus

The reason I find the paintings more interesting than a photo or video is that the person who made the painting took the time to put something there. If it didn't look right the artist would most likely fix it.

Yes, but on closer look, there's always a symbolic meaning (mainly religious), that has nothing to do with UFO's.

King of the Americas · 23rd August 2006, 08:19 AM

...most of these photos that depict a UFO, are indeed featured along side other 'religious' symbols or figures.

CONNECTING ufo's with sacred or godlike imagery.

Hence our ancestors believed that heavenly figures were close to or connected with God.

Ceritus,

What was that picture by picture self-starred explaination of what YOU thought those images were...??? From what I read, you don't understand art interpretation any more than you know about the make-up of Neptune's Seas.

There were objects in the skys in those picture that neither you nor I can idenfity, moreover, I am not sure the artist who MADE the rendering could either which is why the objects lack detail.

The conclusion you should be able to reach is that Unidentied Flying Objects or "UFO's", have been around for a LONG time.

Ceritus · 23rd August 2006, 03:02 PM

Originally Posted by King of the Americas

...most of these photos that depict a UFO, are indeed featured along side other 'religious' symbols or figures.

CONNECTING ufo's with sacred or godlike imagery.

Hence our ancestors believed that heavenly figures were close to or connected with God.

Ceritus,

What was that picture by picture self-starred explaination of what YOU thought those images were...??? From what I read, you don't understand art interpretation any more than you know about the make-up of Neptune's Seas.

There were objects in the skys in those picture that neither you nor I can idenfity, moreover, I am not sure the artist who MADE the rendering could either which is why the objects lack detail.

The conclusion you should be able to reach is that Unidentied Flying Objects or "UFO's", have been around for a LONG time.

Neptune is made of rock and metal in the core. The core is probably bigger than Uranus's because Neptune weighs more, but is the same size. Around the core is rock, water, ammonia and methane. The atmosphere is made of hydrogen and helium. Lower down in the atmosphere, there is methane and ammonia too. The methane makes Neptune look blue-green.

I paint and write for fun, I just stated the opinion's I had. I formed the opinion's on what or why a painting would look the way it did I were the artist.

I am not an expert by any means, I never claimed to be. If you noticed I did state some things that I found were interesting which would sway me to think there could have been objects in the sky that couldnt be explained. While other things I thought were extreme stretches.

But to conclude that they were "aliens" is just as silly as if it were to be concluded that the "mysterious" objects in the paintings reflected an advanced human civilization that decided to clean its tracks and leave earth leaving evidence only in the minds of artists. That would be far more interesting obviously......

Are you an art expert? Perhaps you could share your thoughts and retort my list of personal observations of the paintings.

El_Spectre · 23rd August 2006, 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by King of the Americas

Then again, you have the "Comodo Dragon", a child snatching, human eating beast that still roams parts of the world today...

Well... the Komodo Dragon is actually not particularly close to dinosaurs, it's a big monitor, tho it only lives in one small part of the world. And forget child snatching, the damned thing has eaten adult tourists!

King of the Americas · 24th August 2006, 07:59 AM

Ceritus,

You should read my responses more carefully.

I said:

"There were objects in the skys in those picture that neither you nor I can idenfity, moreover, I am not sure the artist who MADE the rendering could either which is why the objects lack detail.

The conclusion you should be able to reach is that Unidentied Flying Objects or "UFO's", have been around for a LONG time."

---

The only 'experiece' I have with art interpretation was a brief dating experience I had with an art major in college. Since then I have visited many art museums and attended a couple of weekend seminars on understanding art.

I fancy myself a total amature when it comes to deciphering any given piece... It would take decades and decades to become even a novice at such a thing. But if I know anything about the endeavor, I know this, understanding ANY given work first starts with 'perspective'.

Knowing and understanding from what vantage the original artist was looking from; the less we know about the artist, where he came from, what he experienced in life, what time period he existed in, and what purpose the work was for, the less we will be able to interpret with 'our perception' which hails from somewhere and sometime FAR different than the original artist.

We know very little about these artists and the times in which they actually lived.

But what we CAN identify are commonalities in shapes and themes, all pointing in a general direction.

Multiple oval shaped disks that are uniformly rounded & semeterical are probably NOT 'clouds', unless you are acussing the artists of shotty work.

You may be an artist, but I doubt I'd pay to see your work...

Ceritus · 24th August 2006, 03:52 PM

Originally Posted by King of the Americas

You may be an artist, but I doubt I'd pay to see your work...

I paint as a hobby to humor myself and occasionally my wife.

My trade is a meteorologist.

I have sold a few paintings in the past, mainly at charity auctions. I donated one of my paintings at an auction for my old highschool it happened to fetch $1200 which blew me away.

I assure you I would never attempt to charge anyone to see my work.

But if you are going to ask me what the weather is going to be like, I'll charge you a dollar for each forecast.

Silly Green Monkey · 24th August 2006, 03:53 PM

Actually, historians know quite a bit about the time period these artists painted in. They also know the meanings of the symbols the paintings are full of. As these paintings are mostly commissioned for religious purposes, do you really think that any image that WASN'T a religious symbol could be slipped by? These weren't paintings of current events, these were paintings of religious stories and myths!

King of the Americas · 24th August 2006, 04:08 PM

I am SURE 'historians' know all about the people and political cliamate these images came from, I am just not such a historian and I saw no evidence that Ceritus was either.

IF we had we all the information these 'historians' did, we would indeed be able to have a much more clear understanding of what is in these paintings.

Presently, I find that "UFO's" are depicted in art throughout time, and that they have been idenfitied with or as religious symbols.

I think this is a fairly 'sound' finding...

Jiri · 10th March 2007, 03:50 PM

Originally Posted by Loss Leader

I think I read that the object most commonly misidentified as an alien spaceship is Venus. That sucker is bright. Still, please point me towards examples of UFOs in pre-flight art because I don't actually know of any.

And, for the love of Jebus, don't tell me about Jacob's ladder.

Would flying machines do instead of the ubiquitous UFOs? Then let me remind you of Vimanas, which are plentiful in numerous Sanskrit texts.
The revolutionary prescience in these vedic accounts makes Jules Verne's predictive imagination look anemic.

1) Transport by machines made of metal, engines powered by fuel.
2) Instrumentation onboard, radar, misssiles, rockets, weapons of mass destruction, description of a nuclear blast, whose effects are just like those of a nuclear weapon.
You couldn't ask for more.
These accounts are extraordinary. It would be reasonable to hitch divine chariots to giant birds, or winged horses, or enormous sails. Not internal engines, wingless craft, etc.

22nd August 2006, 09:17 PM	#43
Ceritus Suspended Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: I am the mind that you call home. Posts: 650	The reason I find the paintings more interesting than a photo or video is that the person who made the painting took the time to put something there. If it didn't look right the artist would most likely fix it. Where photos tend to have defects in the images or are unfocused.
	Last edited by Ceritus; 22nd August 2006 at 09:51 PM.

22nd August 2006, 10:24 PM	#44
Patricio Elicer Obsessed with Reality Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Santiago, Chile Posts: 4,350	Originally Posted by Ceritus The reason I find the paintings more interesting than a photo or video is that the person who made the painting took the time to put something there. If it didn't look right the artist would most likely fix it. Yes, but on closer look, there's always a symbolic meaning (mainly religious), that has nothing to do with UFO's.
	__________________ "Well, I've never discussed it before on the forum, but, Patricio, you're the real reason I didn't show up at TAM I. Once I found out you were going, I cancelled all my plans, knowing that you would likely hunt me down and ask me questions about English language usage. I finally decided that I wouldn't be able to handle the pressure of your questions ..." - Mr. Skinny on 5th April 2007.

23rd August 2006, 08:19 AM	#45
King of the Americas Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: North Central Texas Posts: 5,071	You are still not making the connection... ...most of these photos that depict a UFO, are indeed featured along side other 'religious' symbols or figures. CONNECTING ufo's with sacred or godlike imagery. Hence our ancestors believed that heavenly figures were close to or connected with God. Ceritus, What was that picture by picture self-starred explaination of what YOU thought those images were...??? From what I read, you don't understand art interpretation any more than you know about the make-up of Neptune's Seas. There were objects in the skys in those picture that neither you nor I can idenfity, moreover, I am not sure the artist who MADE the rendering could either which is why the objects lack detail. The conclusion you should be able to reach is that Unidentied Flying Objects or "UFO's", have been around for a LONG time.
	Last edited by King of the Americas; 23rd August 2006 at 08:54 AM.

23rd August 2006, 03:02 PM	#46
Ceritus Suspended Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: I am the mind that you call home. Posts: 650	Originally Posted by King of the Americas ...most of these photos that depict a UFO, are indeed featured along side other 'religious' symbols or figures. CONNECTING ufo's with sacred or godlike imagery. Hence our ancestors believed that heavenly figures were close to or connected with God. Ceritus, What was that picture by picture self-starred explaination of what YOU thought those images were...??? From what I read, you don't understand art interpretation any more than you know about the make-up of Neptune's Seas. There were objects in the skys in those picture that neither you nor I can idenfity, moreover, I am not sure the artist who MADE the rendering could either which is why the objects lack detail. The conclusion you should be able to reach is that Unidentied Flying Objects or "UFO's", have been around for a LONG time. Neptune is made of rock and metal in the core. The core is probably bigger than Uranus's because Neptune weighs more, but is the same size. Around the core is rock, water, ammonia and methane. The atmosphere is made of hydrogen and helium. Lower down in the atmosphere, there is methane and ammonia too. The methane makes Neptune look blue-green. I paint and write for fun, I just stated the opinion's I had. I formed the opinion's on what or why a painting would look the way it did I were the artist. I am not an expert by any means, I never claimed to be. If you noticed I did state some things that I found were interesting which would sway me to think there could have been objects in the sky that couldnt be explained. While other things I thought were extreme stretches. But to conclude that they were "aliens" is just as silly as if it were to be concluded that the "mysterious" objects in the paintings reflected an advanced human civilization that decided to clean its tracks and leave earth leaving evidence only in the minds of artists. That would be far more interesting obviously...... Are you an art expert? Perhaps you could share your thoughts and retort my list of personal observations of the paintings.
	Last edited by Ceritus; 23rd August 2006 at 03:21 PM.

23rd August 2006, 03:46 PM	#47
El_Spectre Lizard Scum Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Arizona Bay Posts: 1,206	Originally Posted by King of the Americas Then again, you have the "Comodo Dragon", a child snatching, human eating beast that still roams parts of the world today... Well... the Komodo Dragon is actually not particularly close to dinosaurs, it's a big monitor, tho it only lives in one small part of the world. And forget child snatching, the damned thing has eaten adult tourists!
	__________________ Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel. - Ambrose Bierce Question your argument if you must mock your opponent to make it... Step 1 in helping spread the skeptical way of thinking: Don't be a jerk.

22nd August 2006, 07:17 PM	#41
Ceritus Suspended Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: I am the mind that you call home. Posts: 650	Originally Posted by Patricio Elicer Ceritus, Maybe you missed this post by Wolverine?. It contains in-depth analysis of the most emblematic "UFO's" in ancient artwork cases. The title says it all: "Art & UFO's?,.... No Thanks!, Only Art". It's a real shame that not all articles are translated into English, but anyway there's great stuff in there, the most comprehensive treatise on the subject I've ever read. Some of the articles appeared on the "Skeptic" magazine, as is publicized on the site. Couldn't go there yet, stupid firewalls at work!

22nd August 2006, 09:14 PM	#42
Ceritus Suspended Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: I am the mind that you call home. Posts: 650	any other places to read it?

24th August 2006, 07:59 AM	#48
King of the Americas Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: North Central Texas Posts: 5,071	Ceritus, You should read my responses more carefully. I said: "There were objects in the skys in those picture that neither you nor I can idenfity, moreover, I am not sure the artist who MADE the rendering could either which is why the objects lack detail. The conclusion you should be able to reach is that Unidentied Flying Objects or "UFO's", have been around for a LONG time." --- The only 'experiece' I have with art interpretation was a brief dating experience I had with an art major in college. Since then I have visited many art museums and attended a couple of weekend seminars on understanding art. I fancy myself a total amature when it comes to deciphering any given piece... It would take decades and decades to become even a novice at such a thing. But if I know anything about the endeavor, I know this, understanding ANY given work first starts with 'perspective'. Knowing and understanding from what vantage the original artist was looking from; the less we know about the artist, where he came from, what he experienced in life, what time period he existed in, and what purpose the work was for, the less we will be able to interpret with 'our perception' which hails from somewhere and sometime FAR different than the original artist. We know very little about these artists and the times in which they actually lived. But what we CAN identify are commonalities in shapes and themes, all pointing in a general direction. Multiple oval shaped disks that are uniformly rounded & semeterical are probably NOT 'clouds', unless you are acussing the artists of shotty work. You may be an artist, but I doubt I'd pay to see your work...
	Last edited by King of the Americas; 24th August 2006 at 08:11 AM.

24th August 2006, 03:52 PM	#49
Ceritus Suspended Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: I am the mind that you call home. Posts: 650	Originally Posted by King of the Americas You may be an artist, but I doubt I'd pay to see your work... I paint as a hobby to humor myself and occasionally my wife. My trade is a meteorologist. I have sold a few paintings in the past, mainly at charity auctions. I donated one of my paintings at an auction for my old highschool it happened to fetch $1200 which blew me away. I assure you I would never attempt to charge anyone to see my work. But if you are going to ask me what the weather is going to be like, I'll charge you a dollar for each forecast.

24th August 2006, 03:53 PM	#50
Silly Green Monkey Cowardly Lurking in the Shadows of Greatness Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Colorado Posts: 3,044	Actually, historians know quite a bit about the time period these artists painted in. They also know the meanings of the symbols the paintings are full of. As these paintings are mostly commissioned for religious purposes, do you really think that any image that WASN'T a religious symbol could be slipped by? These weren't paintings of current events, these were paintings of religious stories and myths!

24th August 2006, 04:08 PM	#51
King of the Americas Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: North Central Texas Posts: 5,071	I am SURE 'historians' know all about the people and political cliamate these images came from, I am just not such a historian and I saw no evidence that Ceritus was either. IF we had we all the information these 'historians' did, we would indeed be able to have a much more clear understanding of what is in these paintings. Presently, I find that "UFO's" are depicted in art throughout time, and that they have been idenfitied with or as religious symbols. I think this is a fairly 'sound' finding...

10th March 2007, 03:50 PM	#52
Jiri Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 389	Originally Posted by Loss Leader I think I read that the object most commonly misidentified as an alien spaceship is Venus. That sucker is bright. Still, please point me towards examples of UFOs in pre-flight art because I don't actually know of any. And, for the love of Jebus, don't tell me about Jacob's ladder. Would flying machines do instead of the ubiquitous UFOs? Then let me remind you of Vimanas, which are plentiful in numerous Sanskrit texts. The revolutionary prescience in these vedic accounts makes Jules Verne's predictive imagination look anemic. 1) Transport by machines made of metal, engines powered by fuel. 2) Instrumentation onboard, radar, misssiles, rockets, weapons of mass destruction, description of a nuclear blast, whose effects are just like those of a nuclear weapon. You couldn't ask for more. These accounts are extraordinary. It would be reasonable to hitch divine chariots to giant birds, or winged horses, or enormous sails. Not internal engines, wingless craft, etc.
Jiri Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 389