Even if this thing did not fly when it is enlarged, does that matter? It obviously was not the actual aircraft, it is too small. How many hand-made models carved out of wood will actual function as the real thing if they are enlarged? Whether this thing flies or not when enlarged proves nothing. The fact that it resembles aircraft is what is significant. It is one small piece of a much larger picture.
There's too many people with closed minds being fed disinformation.
@MrNomahd It looks like a bird. Not an aircraft. It only looks like an aircraft if you want shoehorn that shape onto it for some desperate hope that the ancient Egyptians could fly when there's no sort of physical, written, or ANYTHING other than the existence of these childrens' toys. They're just toys. Nothing more. They're not even aerodynamic. Da Vinci remains the first to create it.
@Cainus44 I revised my comment. I thought I was replying to another video.
You are dead wrong about saying this did not fly. I also read the article by Martin Gregorie and he said it did fly, it just didn't glide very well.
Another thing about Martin Gregorie; Why did he remove the article from his own personal website? There is nothing about the Saqqara bird on his website. Yet there are other aviation related articles.
OMG it almost looks like a ummm wat do you call them oh YEAH a frikken BIRD!!!!! fusalage MY ASS! I think the birds fusalage is known as its breast/chest. come on people do you really think that RA jumped on his private jet to go to the local markets??????
I don't think it's just a bird toy .. Ancient Egyptians made the art very close to reality but here in the wooden shape you will easily notice that the bird till angle vertical like the airplane not like the real bird, this wooden shape was the first step for airplane just like the study of this channel said
That looks to me like a wooden bird, that's all. What about the head looking exactly as a bird with peak! Is it surprising that if it looked like a bird it would most likely pass the aerodynamic test of the wind tunnel? Hello, as far as I can tell birds do fly! Gullibility is just everywhere.
its a childs toy ,crafted by a father who had a bit of skill with wood ,possibly a carpenter,,,,a little bit of imagination,,,and wait for it....there you go my son look what daddy has made you.....
@MegaChristaras you miss my point.......i refer to this as a childs toy.....but i,m sure as fuck daddy had the real thing.....never doubt who you are dealing with at the other end of your keyboard :)...brain not shutting down....just waiting for you to think ahead :)
@MegaChristaras You're a fucking liar. They've recreated these on larger and smaller scales and they didn't fly. They're not aerodynamic in the slightest. This is why the History channel is full of shit. It's a weather vane or a toy. Occam's Razor.
@Cainus44 Yay, another naysayer who doesn't provide anything more than their personal opinion. Link the the website where they show the results of this NOT flying...
@Davew277 Don't need to be. This study was done numerous times with similar results by far more reputable people than the History channel, a shit source. And "naysayer"? The fuck? You're fucking trying to say ancient floew around in gliders base solely on a toy bird that isn't even aerodynamic. This isn't opinion, this is fact.
Look up Martin Gregorie's "Flying the Saccara Bird". The guy IS an aeronautics engineer and he proved beyond a shadow of a doubt this won't fly.
@Cainus44 LOL! I found his article on catchpenny. I think you need to reread it... He specifically says, "The performance of this model proves conclusively that the Saqqara Bird never flew. It is totally unstable without a tailplane." Which is why they added one in this video...
Also look up the info about the solid gold plane figurines found... which do in fact have stabilizers on them... They made a large "exact" model of them and they flew flawlessly. Your theory is flawed.
@Davew277 Hey. Did you read the results when he put a tail-wing on it? It still didn't fly. Your solid gold "plane" figurines? They're decoration. You're still sitting here trying to say the ancient Egyptians could fly when there's no fucking evidence I haven't already torn to shreds in existence.
You're the one coming up with outlandish theories, not me. Until you come up with real fucking proof, you're nothing but another crazy moron.
@Cainus44 Is there a reason you feel you have to cuss? Yes I did read it, you need to read it again... He said, "Even after a tailplane was fitted the glide performance was disappointing. The Saqqara Bird was certainly never a test piece for a low speed, cargo carrying aircraft." Which means it did fly...
Those gold figurines may have been for decoration, but they did fly. I didn't come up with anything. It's in other videos. Cuss some more, it shows your intellect. I'm done with you.
@Davew277 Of course you're done with me. You know I'm right and to save face, your ego is telling you to get out. You've provided no proof, so you're wrong.
@Cainus44 Your "proof" only proved you were wrong. If you read an article multiple times and still not comprehend it, then how much weight do you expect people to put into your "opinion"?
I have not provided proof? Where is yours? This video alone has provided more proof than you have. That is why I am done with you. That and your language.
Every comment you have made has been to cuss and hurl insults. That is the first act of someone who knows they have lost.
@Davew277 You immediately took my proof out of context then attempted to use it against me. If anything you're just grasping for straws here. The video is from a horrible source, and if I need to explain why, you're hopeless. And what happened to "I'm done with you" from before?
Also, it's not my fault that your beliefs are so nonsensical and without evidence that I fly into a rage at the very thought of flying fucking ancient Egyptians.
@Cainus44 You like to put words into people's mouths too. I never said Egyptians were flying anything yet you have said that I said it more than once now. You lack the ability to read with comprehension and you imagine things that have never occurred.
If you don't believe any of this, why are you here? Simple answer... to be a troll.
The only person here who believes you is you. There's a medical term for that. But you wouldn't comprehend it. I await your next brilliant comment...
@Davew277 Oh yes, everyone in the world believes, even though there's contradicting evidence, that Egyptians had flying machines gifted to them by their alien fathers, right? Mind you there's no evidence, no writing, no third party sources that state they ever had any magic flying gliders, just a handful of TOYS.
@Cainus44 Those same sources also expect the world to believe that all of the ancient structures were built using rudimentary hand tools, without the aid of metal other than copper. When even with our sophisticated technology of today we cannot reproduce those structures to the size and tolerances that ancient civilizations did.
Have you ever tried to sculpt granite with a copper tool? Some megalithic stones also weight in excess of 1,200 TONS. Yeah, ropes and wood...
@Cainus44 I noticed you haven't posted a comment calling anyone a liar for the videos regarding the golden Mayan aircraft figurines. Does that mean flying Egyptians sends you into a rage but airborne Mayans is okay?
While you are at it, you are obviously Atheist. No believer in God would cuss and insult people for their beliefs the way you do. Why not go around to all of the churches and tell them they are morons too for believing in God?
@Davew277 Actually the idea of ancient Mayan aircraft is even more ridiculous. Thankfully, that is fully within the realm of pseudoarchaeology, right along with the belief that Mayans were visited by aliens and sailed to South America from West Africa 2000 years ago.
Would you rather I leave here and start saying things there? OR do you want to continue going further off subject? OR will you claim "I'm done with you" again and yet keep responding?
@Cainus44 I said I was done with you mainly because of your language and insulting behavior. A person cannot change their mind? As long as you keep it civil I have no problem discussing this.
As for being on subject... You still have not provided evidence to the contrary of this video. So until you can provide some evidence to contradict this video, it stands as being correct. Until then I do not have to provide any evidence as you have not provided anything which requires it.
@Cainus44 I just wanted to clarify this since I failed to do so previously:
I personally do not believe that the Egyptians or the Mayans actually flew around in anything. But I do believe that it is entirely possible that they witnessed something they could not comprehend and that these items which appear to be aircraft are merely their representations of what they seen. (with more emphasis on the Mayan example)
The bulk of my study has been on ancient structures. This was merely a tangent.
Let me make this clear for the people out there not getting it: it DID NOT FLY! It was capable of gliding. It was a toy. To FLY however, it would've needed a propulsion system.
If you put control surfaces on a brick, it would glide too. I'm sure the ancients made gliders though. It's no different then us making paper planes at the office.
@BVargas78 Yeah, because they needed highly technological toys to waste their time with instead of growing food and building homes. They built it to scale..it flew perfectly, that takes some serious aerodynamics for something to fly perfectly, especially a toy during those times. This is an amazing find....not one to be just dismissed as a toy.
@StarkFelinity i heard that the reconstruction couldnt fly, although i'll be happy to check out any evidence of the successful test if you can refer me to sites, or links.
Even if this thing did not fly when it is enlarged, does that matter? It obviously was not the actual aircraft, it is too small. How many hand-made models carved out of wood will actual function as the real thing if they are enlarged? Whether this thing flies or not when enlarged proves nothing. The fact that it resembles aircraft is what is significant. It is one small piece of a much larger picture.
There's too many people with closed minds being fed disinformation.
MrNomahd 1 month ago
@MrNomahd It looks like a bird. Not an aircraft. It only looks like an aircraft if you want shoehorn that shape onto it for some desperate hope that the ancient Egyptians could fly when there's no sort of physical, written, or ANYTHING other than the existence of these childrens' toys. They're just toys. Nothing more. They're not even aerodynamic. Da Vinci remains the first to create it.
Cainus44 1 month ago
Comment removed
MrNomahd 1 month ago
Comment removed
MrNomahd 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Cainus44 I revised my comment. I thought I was replying to another video.
You are dead wrong about saying this did not fly. I also read the article by Martin Gregorie and he said it did fly, it just didn't glide very well.
Another thing about Martin Gregorie; Why did he remove the article from his own personal website? There is nothing about the Saqqara bird on his website. Yet there are other aviation related articles.
Preach your disinformation to someone else.
MrNomahd 1 month ago
does anybody have any idea or a video link about saqqara pyramid being an energy generator?
one4star 5 months ago in playlist Information
So, the falcon head dude is actually a pilot!
balakdurjana 11 months ago
@balakdurjana that "falcon head dude" is known as Horus
CurlythePirate 11 months ago
OMG it almost looks like a ummm wat do you call them oh YEAH a frikken BIRD!!!!! fusalage MY ASS! I think the birds fusalage is known as its breast/chest. come on people do you really think that RA jumped on his private jet to go to the local markets??????
WAkiwi1980 1 year ago
I don't think it's just a bird toy .. Ancient Egyptians made the art very close to reality but here in the wooden shape you will easily notice that the bird till angle vertical like the airplane not like the real bird, this wooden shape was the first step for airplane just like the study of this channel said
egyptcenter 1 year ago
Inscribed in the tomb where the Sakara was found said I want to fly !!!!! Freaky
Pnutt5100 1 year ago
That looks to me like a wooden bird, that's all. What about the head looking exactly as a bird with peak! Is it surprising that if it looked like a bird it would most likely pass the aerodynamic test of the wind tunnel? Hello, as far as I can tell birds do fly! Gullibility is just everywhere.
albertocl2 1 year ago
its a childs toy ,crafted by a father who had a bit of skill with wood ,possibly a carpenter,,,,a little bit of imagination,,,and wait for it....there you go my son look what daddy has made you.....
ShitJitsu 1 year ago
@ShitJitsu it can fly . they have find 15 more of these . they can fly exceptionaly good , think about it before shuting ur brain down
MegaChristaras 8 months ago
@MegaChristaras you miss my point.......i refer to this as a childs toy.....but i,m sure as fuck daddy had the real thing.....never doubt who you are dealing with at the other end of your keyboard :)...brain not shutting down....just waiting for you to think ahead :)
ShitJitsu 7 months ago
@ShitJitsu hem. anyway
MegaChristaras 7 months ago
@MegaChristaras You're a fucking liar. They've recreated these on larger and smaller scales and they didn't fly. They're not aerodynamic in the slightest. This is why the History channel is full of shit. It's a weather vane or a toy. Occam's Razor.
Cainus44 1 month ago
@Cainus44 Yay, another naysayer who doesn't provide anything more than their personal opinion. Link the the website where they show the results of this NOT flying...
So I take it you're an Aeronautical Engineer?
Davew277 1 month ago
@Davew277 Don't need to be. This study was done numerous times with similar results by far more reputable people than the History channel, a shit source. And "naysayer"? The fuck? You're fucking trying to say ancient floew around in gliders base solely on a toy bird that isn't even aerodynamic. This isn't opinion, this is fact.
Look up Martin Gregorie's "Flying the Saccara Bird". The guy IS an aeronautics engineer and he proved beyond a shadow of a doubt this won't fly.
Cainus44 1 month ago
Comment removed
Davew277 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Cainus44 LOL! I found his article on catchpenny. I think you need to reread it... He specifically says, "The performance of this model proves conclusively that the Saqqara Bird never flew. It is totally unstable without a tailplane." Which is why they added one in this video...
Also look up the info about the solid gold plane figurines found... which do in fact have stabilizers on them... They made a large "exact" model of them and they flew flawlessly. Your theory is flawed.
Davew277 1 month ago
@Davew277 Hey. Did you read the results when he put a tail-wing on it? It still didn't fly. Your solid gold "plane" figurines? They're decoration. You're still sitting here trying to say the ancient Egyptians could fly when there's no fucking evidence I haven't already torn to shreds in existence.
You're the one coming up with outlandish theories, not me. Until you come up with real fucking proof, you're nothing but another crazy moron.
Cainus44 1 month ago
@Cainus44 Is there a reason you feel you have to cuss? Yes I did read it, you need to read it again... He said, "Even after a tailplane was fitted the glide performance was disappointing. The Saqqara Bird was certainly never a test piece for a low speed, cargo carrying aircraft." Which means it did fly...
Those gold figurines may have been for decoration, but they did fly. I didn't come up with anything. It's in other videos. Cuss some more, it shows your intellect. I'm done with you.
Davew277 1 month ago
@Davew277 Of course you're done with me. You know I'm right and to save face, your ego is telling you to get out. You've provided no proof, so you're wrong.
Cainus44 1 month ago
@Cainus44 Your "proof" only proved you were wrong. If you read an article multiple times and still not comprehend it, then how much weight do you expect people to put into your "opinion"?
I have not provided proof? Where is yours? This video alone has provided more proof than you have. That is why I am done with you. That and your language.
Every comment you have made has been to cuss and hurl insults. That is the first act of someone who knows they have lost.
Davew277 1 month ago
@Davew277 You immediately took my proof out of context then attempted to use it against me. If anything you're just grasping for straws here. The video is from a horrible source, and if I need to explain why, you're hopeless. And what happened to "I'm done with you" from before?
Also, it's not my fault that your beliefs are so nonsensical and without evidence that I fly into a rage at the very thought of flying fucking ancient Egyptians.
Bet you think aliens built the pyramids.
Cainus44 1 month ago
@Cainus44 You like to put words into people's mouths too. I never said Egyptians were flying anything yet you have said that I said it more than once now. You lack the ability to read with comprehension and you imagine things that have never occurred.
If you don't believe any of this, why are you here? Simple answer... to be a troll.
The only person here who believes you is you. There's a medical term for that. But you wouldn't comprehend it. I await your next brilliant comment...
Davew277 1 month ago
@Davew277 Oh yes, everyone in the world believes, even though there's contradicting evidence, that Egyptians had flying machines gifted to them by their alien fathers, right? Mind you there's no evidence, no writing, no third party sources that state they ever had any magic flying gliders, just a handful of TOYS.
Cainus44 1 month ago
@Cainus44 Those same sources also expect the world to believe that all of the ancient structures were built using rudimentary hand tools, without the aid of metal other than copper. When even with our sophisticated technology of today we cannot reproduce those structures to the size and tolerances that ancient civilizations did.
Have you ever tried to sculpt granite with a copper tool? Some megalithic stones also weight in excess of 1,200 TONS. Yeah, ropes and wood...
Davew277 1 month ago
@Cainus44 I noticed you haven't posted a comment calling anyone a liar for the videos regarding the golden Mayan aircraft figurines. Does that mean flying Egyptians sends you into a rage but airborne Mayans is okay?
While you are at it, you are obviously Atheist. No believer in God would cuss and insult people for their beliefs the way you do. Why not go around to all of the churches and tell them they are morons too for believing in God?
Davew277 1 month ago
@Davew277 Actually the idea of ancient Mayan aircraft is even more ridiculous. Thankfully, that is fully within the realm of pseudoarchaeology, right along with the belief that Mayans were visited by aliens and sailed to South America from West Africa 2000 years ago.
Would you rather I leave here and start saying things there? OR do you want to continue going further off subject? OR will you claim "I'm done with you" again and yet keep responding?
Cainus44 1 month ago
@Cainus44 I said I was done with you mainly because of your language and insulting behavior. A person cannot change their mind? As long as you keep it civil I have no problem discussing this.
As for being on subject... You still have not provided evidence to the contrary of this video. So until you can provide some evidence to contradict this video, it stands as being correct. Until then I do not have to provide any evidence as you have not provided anything which requires it.
Davew277 1 month ago
@Cainus44 I just wanted to clarify this since I failed to do so previously:
I personally do not believe that the Egyptians or the Mayans actually flew around in anything. But I do believe that it is entirely possible that they witnessed something they could not comprehend and that these items which appear to be aircraft are merely their representations of what they seen. (with more emphasis on the Mayan example)
The bulk of my study has been on ancient structures. This was merely a tangent.
Davew277 1 month ago
Let me make this clear for the people out there not getting it: it DID NOT FLY! It was capable of gliding. It was a toy. To FLY however, it would've needed a propulsion system.
Adkit2 1 year ago
If you put control surfaces on a brick, it would glide too. I'm sure the ancients made gliders though. It's no different then us making paper planes at the office.
theinfamousmoose 1 year ago
It was probably made that way so it could glide and make a good toy of a bird
BVargas78 2 years ago
@BVargas78 Yeah, because they needed highly technological toys to waste their time with instead of growing food and building homes. They built it to scale..it flew perfectly, that takes some serious aerodynamics for something to fly perfectly, especially a toy during those times. This is an amazing find....not one to be just dismissed as a toy.
StarkFelinity 1 year ago
@StarkFelinity i heard that the reconstruction couldnt fly, although i'll be happy to check out any evidence of the successful test if you can refer me to sites, or links.
BVargas78 1 year ago
@StarkFelinity wonder what they,ll make of frisbe........when we are gone
ShitJitsu 1 year ago 2