The helicopter of ancient Egypt

[Hanslune]

The writing exists... I never said it didn’t.

You’re just insisting that only the writing matters, and the physical carving somehow doesn’t?
I’m looking at both.

But you're pick the 'drawings' which are drawings as they made out of the language...?

[imitator]

But you're pick the 'drawings' which are drawings as they made out of the language...?

If it were just me, sure... you could say I’m picking drawings. 
But the helicopter, UFO, and aircraft shapes were pointed out by millions of people long before I ever saw the image.

If it were pareidolia, people would all be seeing different things. But they don’t... they consistently identify the same shapes. The Egyptian language is made of drawings... that isn’t something I invented. 

[Kurokage]

If it were pareidolia, people would all be seeing different things. 

Pareidolia doesn't quite work like that. The 'face' on Mars for example, is a perfect example of people all seeing the same thing.

[Hanslune]

If it were just me, sure... you could say I’m picking drawings. 
But the helicopter, UFO, and aircraft shapes were pointed out by millions of people long before I ever saw the image.

If it were pareidolia, people would all be seeing different things. But they don’t... they consistently identify the same shapes. The Egyptian language is made of drawings... that isn’t something I invented. 

Yep they are two separate sentences put together that resembles something from a period of time from around 1920 to now, odd isn't it, and both sentences are real and readable - clever those Egyptian scribes to know what things would look like thousands of years later... and again what's the big chicken for then? and all the other bits and pieces that are ignored? Except for the one you want to believe are real images of something? If it isn't writing and images what are those other images then? https://i.imgur.com/4ZkN45s.jpg

[imitator]

Yep they are two separate sentences put together that resembles something from a period of time from around 1920 to now, odd isn't it, and both sentences are real and readable - clever those Egyptian scribes to know what things would look like thousands of years later... and again what's the big chicken for then? and all the other bits and pieces that are ignored? Except for the one you want to believe are real images of something? If it isn't writing and images what are those other images then? https://i.imgur.com/4ZkN45s.jpg

Look, the funny part is you’re acting like I’m the one choosing the shapes… when the shapes are literally right there. If it truly didn’t look like a helicopter, millions of people wouldn’t instantly recognize it as one.

And the big chicken?   
I already addressed that on page 7…  You can call it a chicken, a duck, a flamingo... whatever…  but its placement fits the interpretation far better than the random crumble explanation.

Also on page 7 I said: I’m having some hypothetical fun... clearly that memo got lost somewhere. LOL

You keep insisting everything must be read only as text... but Egyptian writing is drawings.

Pretending the most visually clean, most recognizable shape out of the whole panel doesn’t count just because it’s too clear… is just silly. I’m simply describing what I’m seeing, based on the info given.

No need to work overtime to explain why the most obvious shape doesn’t count. 
I’m talking about what the shape looks like. They carved what they saw... that’s the whole point. 

I think we’re wasting too much time on this primitive decoding.
If the Egyptians could draw a chicken, they could draw a helicopter too. 

[Wepwawet]

A bit of a necro post, but less than a year old so still luke warm I guess.

I've read the thread, and find that greater emphasis is needed on the other hieroglyphs on the lintel. I know these have been mentioned by other posters, but I want to deal with context. To the left of the palimpsest we can read "King of Upper and Lower Egypt", and the palimpsest is a jumble of names of Seti I and Ramesses II. Of note is the fact that the titles are completely undamaged. On the underside of the lintel we can see a cartouche containing a mishmash of the names of Seti I and Ramesses II, but on either side, again undamged and perfectly legible, we have to the right, "King of Uppper and Lower Egypt", and to the left of the cartouche, "Given Life".

The context is that while the name of a king changes reign by reign, the titles do not, they are literally set in stone. Therefore all hieroglyphs next to, or bracketed by the titles of a king, must be the name of a king and nothing else. To try to say that this palimpsest in the Abydos temple shows anything other than the name, mangled or not, of a king, would need evidence from other inscriptions that showed that something other than the name of a king could be present. Has anybody ever presented such evidence, can anybody provide any context in which the name of a king would not follow the titles of a king.

The Abydos temple palimpsest, of which there are in fact a large number, not just this one, cannot be anything except the name/s of a king.

[Harte]

These glyphs clearly combine to make a "helicopter."


Harte

[Runespider]

Look, the funny part is you’re acting like I’m the one choosing the shapes… when the shapes are literally right there. If it truly didn’t look like a helicopter, millions of people wouldn’t instantly recognize it as one.

And the big chicken?   
I already addressed that on page 7…  You can call it a chicken, a duck, a flamingo... whatever…  but its placement fits the interpretation far better than the random crumble explanation.

Also on page 7 I said: I’m having some hypothetical fun... clearly that memo got lost somewhere. LOL

You keep insisting everything must be read only as text... but Egyptian writing is drawings.

Pretending the most visually clean, most recognizable shape out of the whole panel doesn’t count just because it’s too clear… is just silly. I’m simply describing what I’m seeing, based on the info given.

No need to work overtime to explain why the most obvious shape doesn’t count. 
I’m talking about what the shape looks like. They carved what they saw... that’s the whole point. 

I think we’re wasting too much time on this primitive decoding.
If the Egyptians could draw a chicken, they could draw a helicopter too. 

 

Egyptian hieroglyphs were a phonetic script, not just drawings. It wouldn't have taken so long to translate if it was.