Golden Icons

[Bianca]

                                                          V I M A N A S
 
 
In the Vedic literature of India, there are many descriptions of flying machines that are generally called Vimanas. India's national epic, The Mahabharata, is a poem of vast length and complexity. According to Dr. Vyacheslav Zaitsev: "the holy Indian Sages, the Ramayana for one, tell of "Two storied celestial chariots with many windows" "They roar like off into the sky until they appear like comets." The Mahabharata and various Sanskrit books describe at length these chariots, "powered by winged lighting...it was a ship that soared into the air, flying to both the solar and stellar regions."

There is a just a mass of fascinating information about flying machines, even fantastic science fiction weapons, that can be found in translations of the Vedas (scriptures), Indian epics, and other ancient Sanskrit text.

There are no physical remains of ancient Indian aircraft technology but references to ancient flying machines are commonplace in the ancient Indian texts.  Several popular ancient epics describe their use in warfare. Depending on one's point of view, either it contains some of the earliest known science fiction, or it records conflict between beings with weapons as powerful and advanced as anything used today. 



 



Grandiose time scales


Hinduism’s understanding of time is as grandiose as time itself. While most cultures base their cosmologies on familiar units such as few hundreds or thousands of years, the Hindu concept of time embraces billions and trillions of years. The Puranas describe time units from the infinitesimal truti, lasting 1/1,000,0000 of a second to a mahamantavara of 311 trillion years. Hindu sages describe time as cyclic, an endless procession of creation, preservation and dissolution. Scientists such as Carl Sagan have expressed amazement at the accuracy of space and time descriptions given by the ancient rishis and saints, who fathomed the secrets of the universe through their mystically awakened senses.

(source: Hinduism Today April/May/June 2007 p. 14).





 "European scholarship regards human civilization as a recent progression starting yesterday with the Fiji islander, and ending today with Rockefeller, conceiving ancient culture as necessarily half savage culture." It is a superstition of modern thought that the march of knowledge has always been linear." "Our vision of "prehistory" is terribly inadequate. We have not yet rid our minds from the hold of a one-and-only God or one-and-only Book, and now a one-and-only Science." 

 ~  wrote Shri Aurobindo Ghosh (1872-1950) most original philosopher of modern India. For more refer to chapter on Quotes21_40).



Unlike time in both the Judeo-Christian religious tradition and the current view of modern science Vedic time is cyclic. What goes around come around. The Vedic universe passes through repetitive cycles of creation and destruction. During the annihilation of the universe, energy is conserved, to manifest again in the next creation. Our contemporary knowledge embraces a version of change and progress that is linear. The ascendancy of Christianity brought the first major shift to historiography as handed down by the Greeks. Rejecting the cyclic understanding of existence, Augustine (AD 343-430) saw history as moving in a linear path, purposely from point A to point B. 

(source: Searching for Vedic India – By Devamrita Swami  p. 335 and 47).





“The ancient Hindus could navigate the air, and not only navigate it, but fight battles in it like so many war-eagles combating for the domination of the clouds. To be so perfect in aeronautics, they must have known all the arts and sciences related to the science, including the strata and currents of the atmosphere, the relative temperature, humidity, density and specific gravity of the various gases...”

~  Col. Henry S Olcott (1832 – 1907) American author, attorney, philosopher, and cofounder of the Theosophical Society in a lecture in Allahabad, in 1881.   





"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." - Aldous Huxley (1894-1963). For more refer to chapter on Quotes1_20).

"Don't let your minds be cluttered up with the prevailing doctrine." - Alexander Fleming (1881-1955).





Frederick Soddy (1877 - 1956)  English born scientist. Studied in the University of Oxford. From 1900 to 1902 and was Chemistry assistant in the University of McGill, Montreal, where he co-worked with Rutherford. He received in 1921 a Nobel Prize Laureate in Chemistry. He awarded the Nobel prize in 1921 - ""for his contributions to our knowledge of the chemistry of radioactive substances, and his investigations into the origin and nature of isotopes" In 1903, with Sir William Ramsay, Soddy verified that the decay of radium produced helium.

He had a great regard for the Indian epics of Ramayana and The Mahabharat. In 1909 when academics were first beginning to grasp the awesome power of the atom, he did not take these ancient records as fable. 

In the Interpretation of Radium (1909) he wrote these lines: 

“Can we not read into them some justification for the belief that some former forgotten race of men attained not only to the knowledge we have so recently won, but also to the power that is not yet ours?”

When Dr Soddy wrote the book, the atom-bomb box of Pandora had not yet been opened.

In 1909 when academics were first beginning to grasp the awesome power of the atom, physicist Frederick Soddy wrote in his Interpretation of Radium: "I believe that there have been civilisations in the past that were familiar with atomic energy, and that by misusing it they were totally destroyed."

(source: We Are Not The First: Riddles of Ancient Science - By Andrew Tomas  p. 53). For more refer to chapter on War in Ancient India.




Alexander Gorbovsky ( ?) an expert at the Russian Munitions Agency has written:

“The Mahabharata - an ancient Indian epic compiled 3000 years ago - contains a reference to a terrible weapon. Regrettably, in our age of the atomic bomb, the description of this weapon exploding will not appear to be an exaggeration: '.... a blazing shaft possessed of the effulgence of a smokeless fire (was) let off...'. That was how this weapon was perceived. The consequences of its use also evoke involuntary associations. '... This makes the bodies of the dead unidentifiable. ... The survivors lose their nails and hair, and their food becomes unfit for eating. For several subsequent years the Sun, the stars and the sky remain shrouded with clouds and bad weather'.

"This weapon was known as the Weapon of Brahma or the Flame of Indra......".

(source: Riddles of Ancient History - Alexander Gorbovsky, The Sputnik Magazine, Moscow, Sept. 1986, p. 137).


Introduction



Some Puranic accounts of Air-Chariots
References from Ancient Literature
India had a Superior Civilization
Ancient Writings tell of UFO visit in 4,000 B.C.
Fly the Friendly skies in Air India Vimanas
Flying machines in old Indian Sanskrit texts
Chariots of The Gods
Vymaanika Shaastra  Aeronautics of Maharshi Bharadwaaja

http://www.hinduwisdom.info/Vimanas.htm

[mdsungate]

Bianca2001,
I'll try to post some of what I know, as I try to seal a moment here and there while tending to my family, as any good pisanno would, (as mentioned mine are 4 under 17 years old).  I have 30+ years of research on ley lines, and Coral Castle, (a tourist attraction in the keys you could visit), are just some of my key interests. But first let's see what I can add to this dialogue on ancient flying machines.  You have one representation of Ian Sanderson's zoomorphic gold bug, but it's a drawing.  Check out this site for better pictures of the actual gold artifacts: http://www.world-mysteries.com/sar_7.htm

Here's a quote from that site:

Precolombian Airplane Models
Is the concept of an airplane limited to Egypt? That doesn't seem to be the case. Gold trinkets were found in an area covering Central America and coastal areas of South America, estimated to belong to a period between 500 and 800 CE, but since they are made from gold, accurate dating is impossible and based essentially on stratigraphy which may be deceptive. However, we can safely say that these gold objects are more than 1000 years old.

And here are a few pictures, (not too many, the last post I tried failed).



The actual artifact is a small gold piece of jewelry. There are about 25 of these objects worldwide, and they sit in museums and collections of Pre-Columbian art.  They were discovered and classified in the 1800's before anyone knew what a jet plane looked like.  Now no respectable archelogist will challage what his professor's professor called a zoomorphic bug.  Yet there they sit for all to see.  Too late for suppression of this knowledge by any secret brotherhood, LOL

Here's another view:



Ian Sanderson took a reproduction of this object to an aeronautical engineer, not telling him what it was, and asked him to analyze it.  The engineer said that in his opinion it was a type of aircraft that we have not yet designed or achieved.  The craft in his opinion was designed to leave the earth’s atmosphere and reenter it.  The front of the plane was designed to fold down to create a heat shield in front of the craft to  prevent it from burning up on reentry.  You can see that in this sketch:



The Hindu texts are not the only source of these crafts.  And we're only just begining to recognize them.

[Bianca]

Sungate,

I think the model airplane from the tomb in Saqqara is a hoot too.

Thanks for the link, I'll add a few more items to the peculiar objects that have been dug up
over the years.  Have you guys seen the ANTYKHITERA thread?  That's a mind-boggler too,
especially  if you are an Astrologer like me.  I always wondered how the Ancients were so
good at calculating the planets' positions.

b

[mdsungate]

 

Say Unknown,
I still want to know where you read that the Vimani were made of stone. 

Here the little gold jaguars.  Again gold is hard to date.  These are from a precolumbian art exhibit, with these pictures taken from this site:

http://www.mcguinnessonline.com/gold/cocle.htm

If man was so "primitive" then why does this thing look so much like a bulldozer.  The joints are hinged backwards, and jaguars or nothing in nature is hinged that way.  But modern machinery is!



Here's another one:



What does it look like to you?

[Qoais]

Ohmigod - I thought that was a frog!

[Bianca]

I'd say, because of the cogs in the little wheels, it's some kind of crane.  And I don't mean the

BIRD......

[mdsungate]

   They are cute.  Here's a frog, Qoais.  Again it looks like a vehicle of some sort more than a frog of any type.  Perhaps an amphibian vehicle of some type.  What do you think?




By the way Qoais, thank you again for inviting me here to Atlantis Online.  I keep thinking it was Bianca, because we hit it off immediately, but I know it was you.  Chronos also invited me aftwards.  I keep looking for his posts but haven't found him yet.

[Qoais]

You're welcome.  I thought you might find this forum a bit more stimulating and interesting.

Personally, I don't think those pieces "represent" anything.  I think they are some artists idea of beauty for adornment. 

I just showed my husband the pictures and asked him what he thought.  My husband is extremely clever at mechanical stuff and even if he's never seen a tool before, he can figure out what it's for in no time.  He doesn't think they're a depiction of a device either.  He has no idea about the cultures from antiquity, and when I showed him the picture of the jaguar I asked him, "What do you think this is"?  He said "A broach".  (I was really surprised at that) Then I asked him "If it was a replica of a working something, what would that something be"?  He said "Nothing". 

This one looks more like a grasshopper at the top, but it looks like a cross bow at the top too.  If, in reality, those back "paddles" actually work up and dow like blades, it could maybe be propelled in the water, but the front or top, is not condusive to water movement in that it would have two prows then plowing thru the waves.

[mdsungate]

   It does remind me of a grasshopper.  But not the cog wheel on the jaguar, LOL.  I'm having trouble finding the right pictures on the net.  I have SOOOOO many books, (I know you relate), and maybe I'll just have to scan the pictures in them.  Give me a bit more time to find what I want to show you.  There are pre-Columbian artifacts with things that look so much like machinery that I have little doubt that at least the earth mounds were not made with people carring dirt in a bucket. 

[Qoais]

Hi sungate
I do agree, that they must have had some type of machinery, altho look at the accomplishments of the Chinese.  The ruler decided they needed more land to grow crops, so every person had to carry a bucket of dirt up the hill, until that hill became a terraced "mountain" and the crops were all grown (still are) on these man-made terraces.

Altho there are "teeth" on the wheel of the "jaguar", I haven't a clue what they might represent.  (I really don't think that's a jaguar - look at the tongue on the thing.  It's like a frog, reaching out for a fly)  Maybe it's a leather working tool.   

[mdsungate]

   Love these little gold bugs!  Here’s another one:






The following quote is taken from

http://www.philipcoppens.com/bbl_plane.html

In 1994, three Germans, Algund Eenboom, Peter Belting and Conrad Lübbers, decided to create a scale model of the “airplane”. They wanted to experiment with its flight capabilities. At the same time, they began to draw parallels between the features of this artefact and other similar artefacts – as well as insects, and airplanes.
The trio soon realised that the people of South America were always able depict insects and other flying animals anatomically correct. If this gold artefact was indeed an insect, than it was still an anomaly, as this “insect” was not depicted anatomically correct. The wings were at the bottom of the body, not the top; all insects have their wings at the top of the body. Still, even some planes do; in fact, most propeller planes do; only the more modern jet engine planes have their wings attached to the bottom of the body.
Eenboom, Beltung and Lübbers concluded this could therefore not be an insect. The design of the artefact nevertheless corresponded perfectly with the design of aircraft – and even the space shuttle and the supersonic Concorde. 

By 1996, Peter Belting had created a scale model – an area he was well-versed in, so much so that his interest in the field of scale models had led to his decision to study the Columbian artefact. The scale model was baptised “Goldflyer I”. Built at a scale of 16:1, the plane measured 90 cm long, with a wingspan of approx. 1 metre. It weighed 750 gram. A propeller was added to the nose of the plane and the wings were equipped with the necessary flaps and rolls.
Early test flights were a success. The plane had a stable flight path and was able to make accurate and comfortable landings. In short: the artefact behaved as a plane was meant to behave.
Next in the “BBL” development line was the Goldflyer II. The model had the same dimensions, but was equipped with a landing gear and a jet engine. The engine itself was a “Fun jet”, able to make 20,000 rotations per minute. The modification from a propeller to a jet engine was made as the scale model did not have a propeller. If it had, it would have been an ominous task for established scientists to label the artefact an insect… If the “insect” had been an airplane, then it was clear that its mode of propulsion was a jet engine.

The next problem to overcome was the location of the jet engine. On modern airplanes, this jet engine is on the wings (e.g. modern Boeings and Airbuses) or at the back (e.g. Fokker); the space shuttle has them at the back, but its take-off and flight is vastly different from traditional airplanes, as its airborne status is aided with the aide of booster rockets. Goldflyer II’s jet engine was positioned at the back of the aircraft, the only position the artefact allowed for such a position. This insertion of the jet engine in that position was a novelty and a risk; the air flow into the engine would be different from the accepted standard. Test flights learned that the plane continued to behave impeccably: take-off and landings were perfect and its flight path was stable. In short: the insertion of an engine at the back of a plane could be perfectly achieved in modern aviation, if they wanted to!

I guess Qoais brings up a point about the jaguar.  It could have been used for leather.  But what are the odds of these lilttle gold bugs actually flying? 

[Qoais]

I can certainly see where this thing could fly, but not that thing I call a Frog!!!!

[mdsungate]

   LOL, yes Qoais, perhaps the “frog” can’t fly.  Here’s what I think about these curious objects.  I am a great believer in the “ancient technology” theory.  Although I also think the “ancient astronaut” theory has merit, I think it raises more questions than answers.  I do believe we have been visited by alien civilizations from other worlds, but I’m not convinced that they taught ancient people advanced technology.  If that were true, then “why aren’t they continuing to do so?”  You see?  More questions.  Instead, I’m a true believer that very ancient men attained a high level of technology, and then were destroyed by natural cataclysms, (i.e. the theory of destruction, as so well put but misunderstood by the story Plato puts forth in the Dialogues of Timaeus and Critias).  To most these dialogues are about Atlantis, and there are many more people who believe Atlantis existed, than there are that Atlantis was part of predeluvian civilization that was technologically advanced, perhaps even more than we are today.  Even Plato’s own student made comment that “he who had created them destroyed them” in reference to the whole tale being an allegory of a utopian society, and not an actual historical account.  But I think the actual meaning of the dialogues is, that even though the Atlanteans were advanced and knowledgeable, they were destroyed by the cyclical natural destructions that the priest of Sais state in the very beginning of the dialogue.  I also don’t think Plato failed to finish the dialogue.  I personally think he became disgusted that no one understood what he was driving at, and because he was loosing his audience. No one then or now wants to believe in the “theory of destruction” because it’s too disconcerting to know that the very land we stand on could sink to the bottom of the ocean in an fortnight without warning.  No one wants to believe that we could attain a high level of civilization and technology, only to be thrown back into the Stone Age, time and time again. But all the Hindu legends, and the Hopi legends say that this happens every 26,500 odd years, and that this is at least the “Forth” world, and we are about to be destroyed againsoon.               

     With that said, here is what I think about the “frog.”  I think the predeluvian civilizations had a lot more “style” than we have.  They stylized their machines to look like animals, perhaps in a belief system that gave the machine the strength of that animal.  The “frog” is probably some sort of aquatic vehicle, a boat or amphibian craft.  Of course if it is no older than the Mayan or Aztec’s than perhaps it is just that, a “frog”. But as I’ve said, gold is impossible to date, and has been valued as precious since time immemorial.
     
     I know I’m probably no better than Erich Von Daniken, dragging out every thing under the sun to support his theories.  But I know I’ve read, that there are at least 20 different zoomorphic gold bugs that could be “ancient flying machines” and I’ve only been able to find the two I’ve posted here, and the gold jaguar, (which I think is an earth moving machine.)  I’ll keep looking. The “frog” was just one I noticed and thought perhaps it could also be something technological, but that one probably is just a frog, LOL.
 

[mdsungate]

   Okay Bianca helped me find another one:  Here it is:



Now I have to take exception to what the "Enterprise" site says about this picture, which is:

As near as one can reconstruct the history, it was Erich von Daniken  -- author of the 70's best seller, "Chariots of the Gods?" -- who first suggested that these "gold insects" (some with delta-shaped wings -- see image, right) didn't resemble true insects at all; I mean, what insects come with an unmistakable vertical stabilizer?!
These "insects," in fact, do look far more like some kind of manufactured, technological artifacts -- like, in fact, "miniature jet fighters!" -- than anything from the zoological kingdom here on Earth.

It was definately Ivan T. Sanderson who brought these little zoomorphic gold artifacts to the worlds attention.  I'll have to set them straight later.

Here's another one I'm sure you've seen, but it's more ammo for the ancient technology theory:



And here's yet another view of what those German guys recreated and tested to see if it COULD fly:



Perhaps one tactic is not just finding "conclusive" evidence for ancient technology, but collecting so much of it, that it's hard to ignore, LOL

[Qoais]

Hi Sungate
I've posted that picture from Hoagland's site so many times, I figured everyone had seen it by now!!!  When I posted it before, I was told that those weren't really flying machines, they were just a chance outcome of the Egyptians "rubbing out the original picture, and carving another picture over top.  The picture underneath wasn't erased totally, so when the new picture was put on, it co-incidentally made these pictures that look like flying machines".  HA.  Like I said, one would be co-incidence, two would make you really wonder, 3 is beyond co-incidence, and 4 is positively on purpose.  Seems to me that those flying machines were rather important to SOMEONE since they were carved in his tomb!  An Egyptian tomb at that.

I think your frog is a plow   What's on the underneath side, do you know?