The Spaceships of Ezekiel
Are there Flying Saucers in the Bible?


Widening the Basis


Table of Contents

Webmaster's Introduction

About the Bible



Email the Webmaster

Site Map

Keywords: UFO, unidentified flying objects, Bible, flying saucers, prophecy, Paleo-SETI, ancient astronauts, Erich von Däniken, Josef F. Blumrich, Zecharia Sitchin, Ezekiel, biblical prophecy, spacecraft, spaceship, NASA, Roswell, aircraft, propellant, extraterrestrial hypothesis, Jacques Vallee, interdimensional hypothesis, Project Blue Book, Condon Report, ancient history, Jesus, Judaism, Christianity, Middle East, end times, engines, rockets, helicopters, space travel, aliens, abductions, alien abductions, crop circles, extraterrestrials, astronomy, economics, biology, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Space Shuttle, Apollo, stars, planets, solar system, scriptures, design, fuel tank, aerodynamics, fuels, hydrogen, oxygen, wheels





Chapter 10


Go to Chapter Comments

    The engineering evidence presented in this book follows the logic of algebra which says that if A = B and B = C, then A = C. In our case these symbols mean:  [p.145] 

    A. Presentation in the original text;

    B. Identification of text with known technical forms in a general way;

    C. Analysis and reconstruction proving that the general presentation indicates—in this particular case—not only a possible but also a meaningful technical entity.

    It is important to recognize that in the equation B = C, value B already represents a technical concept which, while it was inspired by the original text (A = B), nonetheless wholly consists of elements pertaining to our times. This equation is therefore entirely technical and the spacecraft expressed by the symbol C is an independent technical entity. In our case, the argument is further strengthened by descriptions of events whose course agrees perfectly with our reconstruction.

    To wish to negate this self-contained evidence by continuing to speak of vision, dream, hallucination, or poetic invention means to accept a long series of coincidences which would indeed be needed to substantiate all the congruities we have proved here. A juxtaposition of this acceptance of chance with the analytical and structural argumentation illustrates best how untenable the former attitude is.

    We owe everything acquired so far to Ezekiel's superior abilities. With his help a basis could be created which is reserved for future studies to broaden. The question now arises: Are there indeed other reports which, regardless of their form, speak to us of such events?

    As we think of the size of the spaceships, of the noise they make, and of other attending circumstances, we have no choice but to assume that there must have been observations by other men too. The material available for further search and study in the form of ancient writings, legends, and archaeological findings is of enormous volume. It is not really probable that Ezekiel's book is the only report containing statements of such great scope. Probably there exist other reports too of comparable quality of content, even though we may not yet be aware of them. On the other hand, we may well expect to find most of the reports in a veiled or fragmentary form. This applies not only to written and oral legends but particularly to archaeological discoveries because sculptures and depictions necessarily present either a scene or a symbol. As fragments such findings would have the meaning that pot shards have to archaeologists. A single piece conveys but little information; correlative and comparative research is needed to develop the mosaic of knowledge.

    Another point to be considered is that perhaps Ezekiel's mental acumen is really the only instance of such kind. Moreover, in those ancient times, the total absence of technical knowledge must have prompted men more strongly to lose what they saw in what they believed; the mighty unknown would turn into the psychologically familiar, into a deity or a demon. Accordingly, the cover under which reality lies concealed will vary from epoch to epoch, and from people to people.

    These thoughts lead us to recognize the need for yet another effort to broaden the basis: increased cooperation. I have already stressed and explained the need for the participation of qualified engineers. However, both at the outset and as it develops, this work requires—as an evident prerequisite—the willing cooperation of scientists and scholars in all fields where source material is available.

    All such work begins as a question, a quest—the way I introduced this book. I cannot judge whether we are already obligated today to raise this question; it is certain, however, that we are both entitled and able to raise it. Neither the right to formulate the question nor the right to seek an answer to it can therefore be doubted or denied. Neither he who questions nor he who contributes to finding the answer should be deterred by concern over possible damage to the reputation and professional standing he may have earned by hard work.

    Because it is not negation but research, not narrowmindedness but tolerance, not divisiveness but cooperation, that lead us to progress.

    And it is not our destiny to cling to the impossible—but to find the possible.  [p.147]