The 10 Most Not-So-Puzzling Ancient Artifacts: Ancient Model Aircraft, Plus a Rant!

This appears to be more of a category than an individual artifact, it seems to cover a couple of different artifacts that share the common thread of vaguely looking like flying objects. Or at lest that’s what you’re supposed to think. Two major items stand out in this category, The Saqqara Bird and the Tolima Artifacts, though it can also be said that flying carpets, winged chariots, and dragons also belong here (more on this later).

Let’s start with the Saqqara Bird.

The Bird in Question

The Saqqara Bird is an actual artifact kept in an actual museum, it was uncovered by actual archaeologists and studied by same. The Bird’s existence is not in question and not disputed. It’s the Bird’s function that people want to debate, and by people I mean the Fringe.

The Bird was discovered in 1898 by Dr. Khalil Messiha during an  excavation of the Pa-di-Imen tomb in Saqqara, Egypt (Fitzpatrick-Matthews 2010). It is made out of sycamore wood and appears to have a falcon shaped head, complete with Horace like eyes. It’s exact function is unknown but it is mostly accepted that the Bird was part of a mast-head used on sacred boats like those used during the Opt Festival, of which we have documentation (Fitzpatrick-Matthews 2010, Orcutt 2001].

Please note bird images on the masts of the ships.

Now, some will have you think that the Bird is a scaled down replica of a glider. There are several issues with this, mainly that, if you faithfully replicate the Bird to a larger scale, it will not fly. I know most of us have seen the Ancient Aliens episode where they make a model, and then fly it, but they also make several modifications to it, none of which have any evidence of existing. To be a final nail in the glider coffin, others have tried to replicate the models and have found them to be lacking. Larry Orcutt points out in his article “Model Airplane?” talking about the Bird:

“The requirements for a Free Flight model glider to be automatically stable in flight are that it should:

  1.  Balance somewhere between 25% and 60% of the wing chord back from the leading edge. The wing chord is the average width of the wing, measured from front to back. A glance at the bird shows that the body is made from a single piece of wood whose proportions are such that the balance point is at or behind the trailing edge of the wing. The bird’s head region has clearly never had a weight attached to it or buried within it. Such a weight would be needed to bring the balance point forward into the range given above.
  2. Have a horizontal tail surface of around 20 – 25% of the wing area. Despite some claims to the contrary, no such tail surface currently exists and there are no traces of a tail plane’s attachment point on the bird’s fin or rear body. The fin is the vertical tail surface that forms the rear of the bird’s body.
  3.  Be shaped to provide spiral stability. The presence of a large fin at the rear of the body must be balanced by a dihedralled wing if the bird is to glide without tipping over sideways into an terminal spiral dive. A dihedralled wing is one with the tips raised above the center of the wing like virtually all passenger planes and model aircraft. The bird has the opposite wing arrangement. Its wing tips are drooped to give anhedral, which would only serve to increase the bird’s spiral instability.

 As can be easily seen, the bird meets none of these requirements for flight, so it is quite unlikely that it ever flew or that accurate replicas could fly. [Orcutt 2001]”

He also shows several examples of the mast mounted birds that look very much like the Bird, and has a link though to a report on the replication and attempted flight of the Bird.

Next, let’s look at the Tolima Artifacts.

One of several small animal totems.

Again, these are another set of real artifacts recovered in real digs and displayed in real museums. It’s the interpretation of said artifacts that is disputed. Not by anyone who knows anything about them, or the Tolima people, but by Ancient Alien theorists and such. These little gold charms are so low-key you’ll be hard pressed to find anything academic on them. However, you can go see them in several museums around America, including the Smithsonian in DC and The Field Museum in Chicago. To the Ancient Alien people though, these small gold artifacts are hard evidence of ancient Jet fighters.

I really can’t even begin to tear this one apart because it’s just so ridiculous to me. Where the Fringe sees an airplane, I see fish and moths. Maybe it’s because I understand that ancient peoples took liberties and stylized their interpretations of their world, especially when it came to ritual items. Maybe it’s because these things don’t look a damn thing like airplanes or jets. IDK.

Da Plane Boss, Da Plane!

But honestly, let’s look at the larger issue with this whole ancient airplane thing, Where are the remains of these planes? Where are the parts, the broken bits, the actual plane themselves? Where is all the stuff associated with flying planes? Where are the airports, the air towers, the luggage claim racks…

If man was making them, where are the production sites? If Aliens flew them down, why is there no physical evidence? What did these things run on? Jet fuel is an expensive, complicated, explosive mix. How did our ancestors make it and not kill themselves?

This brings us to the more imaginative part of this entry, the whole idea that flying carpets, dragons and winged chariots were really ancient man’s way of interpreting ancient flying machines. In order for these ideas to work we have to make several assumptions that no one should be comfortable making.

First, we have to assumes that the mythologies of ALL ancient peoples are accurate and true.

Second, we have to assume that whenever the ancients said “God or Gods” they were really  talking about aliens, they just didn’t know it.

Third, we have to assume that our ancestors were too ignorant of the natural world to understand a non-natural object, and instead of faithfully representing the actual object in story and art, they took artistic liberties to create winged chariots, flying carpets, and yes, Dragons.

Fourth, we have to ignore that our first assumption and our fourth assumption are in opposition.

Fifth, we have to never ask what happened to all the physical evidence advanced machinery would have left behind, or where these “Alien Gods” went to, or why they came or left in the first place.

In order for the Saqqara Bird and the Tolima Artifacts to be real, all these questions and assumptions need to be addressed. Evidence needs to be produced, and reality itself has to shift. I’ve yet to hear anything resembling a reasonable answer to the logical objections to the idea of ancient airplanes. If one could be provided, it would be the first.

Reinterpreting the Known World.

Another thing sticks out here that is of  some interest, and that is the reinterpreting of actual artifacts. It’s something I’ve noticed the Ancient Alien theorists do often. They take known discoveries and try to make them fit the Alien narrative. They reject documented and researched interpretations by experts and substitute their own, that are often based on nothing more than observing a photograph. I’m often left wondering why? What makes a non-professional individual reject the accepted opinion of a professional and supplement a much less informed opinion instead? Why do they think these two opinions are equal in validity?

This has nothing to do with intelligence, I want that to be clear. It has everything to do with experience and education. All three of those things are separate and are not actually dependent on each other, so none of this “they’re stupid” talk. Irrational? Perhaps. Uniformed? definitely. But not stupid.

Whatever the answer to those questions might be, we in the “Mainstream” will continue to be plagued by weird reinterpreting by the “Fringe”. Which leads to the other problem I have with this kind of thing, misinformation.

Regardless if the misinformation is being distributed knowingly or unknowingly, the biggest problem is that they can put that bad information out there faster than most people can fact-check. Which creates confusion in a normal, rational, individual. What can be done about that?

Critical articles like these, critical arguments, critical thinking, and access to open, honest facts, are the only way to combat this barrage of misinformation. People need access to factual information so that it can be used to counter the bad information. People also need to be taught how to think both skeptically and critically, something a lot of people think they are doing, but in reality are not. I feel that these goals are being met to some degree. Open Access is a huge thing among scientists today, and I think it will only continue to become the norm. That thought gives me hope.

If you’d like to support this blog, consider donating on Patreon.
Comment below or send an email to
If you want more on this topic, got to: 10 Most Not So Puzzling Ancient Artifacts.



Fitzpatrick-Matthews, Keith

2010 “Egyptian ‘aeroplane’ models?.” Bad Archaeology. Accessed July 9th 2012.

Orcutt, Larry

2001 “Modle Airplane?” Catchpenny’s Mystries of Nacent Egypt Explained. Accessed July 9th 2012.

“The 10 Most Puzzling Ancient Artifacts.” Accessed April 2 2012.

Categories: 10 Most Puzzling Ancient Artifacts, Ancient Astronauts, History Channel, Rants, Weird Archaeology | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , | 13 Comments

Post navigation

13 thoughts on “The 10 Most Not-So-Puzzling Ancient Artifacts: Ancient Model Aircraft, Plus a Rant!

  1. Tim Johnsen

    Ever notice that the ancient alien theory guys are authors, and magazine editors? It”s about MONEY. They always have the title of the book they wrote in the subtitle with their name. Even the few P.H.D’s on the show have to be in it for the cash. But hey what do I know? I’m just a lowly mechanic who watched Ancient Aliens a few times and shouted “balderdash” and “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”, and other (albeit more colorful) things.


    • I have found that a lot of the professional that get quoted are often misquoted or lied to about the intentions of the interview. I think the number that are looking to make a buck are few, but I’m sure they exist.


      • Tim Johnsen

        I don’t know if anyone gets paid to be on the various shows. The authors certainly get the benefit of having their book listed in the subtitle with their name. I was referring to the professionals who are clearly pro aa theory. I should have made the distinction between them and the pros who use actual science in their respective areas. I believe the latter are edited or as you stated lied to or misquoted to fit the aa agenda.


      • I agree with you there, the AA people often seem to have a profit motive. That and a lack of evidence really doesn’t help their case.


    • rabbitnexus

      I haven’t actually noticed this at all. However, have you noticed how academics owe their own income to sticking close to accepted “wisdom” and how stepping too far away from the status quo which pays everybody, means they lose it all?


  2. landl47

    What amazes me is what possible reason they think aliens hundreds or thousands of years ago could have for leaving models of 20th century aircraft lying around? Surely everyone would agree that if aliens had interstellar travel they most certainly did not come by airplane. Any airplane that ever existed in their world would be very ancient history, while in our world it was in the distant future. Moreover, aircraft only looked like that for a short period. The prop-driven planes of the first half of the 20th century bore no resemblance to these models and the stealth bomber which flew over the Bears game the other day didn’t either. So if the aliens left models which would only make sense to people from about 1950 to 2000, what was the point?

    It’s this pareildolia (seeing meaning in random images) which infests the whole show. There’s no attempt to explain why aliens would do bizarre and pointless things like building stone temples or carving symbols on obelisks (can you imagine the extraterrestrial briefing meeting? “This is a 10,000 light-year trip to a planet on the outskirts of the galaxy with no power tools, so don’t forget to pack the rock-carving equipment.”).

    What’s sad is that so many people seem to believe this isn’t nonsense.


  3. landl47

    Sorry- just noticed a typo. It’s pareidolia.


  4. Editor WP

    Plane is spelled plane, not plain


  5. Geza

    Why is everyone ignoring the most obvious explanation: it’s a fish?!… You can see flying fish in (and above) all the oceans and in many seas, including the Mediterranean.

    Liked by 1 person

    • rabbitnexus

      Now that really does work for me and Occams razor doesn’t leave me with any other options at this point, thank you. This does in fact bear a very striking resemblance to a flying fish, and whilst their tails are usually horizontal they do twist them in flight and I’ve seen them in the vertical position. Very possible and way more convincing than a bird.


  6. Jan

    I would like to just point out that the original archaeologists of the 1890-1930s had just as wild of ideas that modern methods and new finds are proving to have been pure fantasy. On top of that the modern scholars education is based on these original discoveries. Now I do not agree with all the ancient aliens enthusiast ideas. Some times they are as bad as a religious zealot. However I respect the fact that there are people willing to look outside the box at the possibilities. ..

    Liked by 3 people

  7. Neil

    Only just found you (via an investigation of some utter nonsense on a creationist website). Fantastic work my friend.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: