Nicholas Roerich, Shambhala, and UFOs

  • #1
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,842
988
From the UFO napster:

Ivan said:
I contacted the Roerich Museum in New York and confirmed the following quote. The curator’s assistant, being very familiar with this excerpt then added that Roerich’s wife was also on this expedition. In her diary she comments that this must have been a craft with people from somewhere else; then she suggests the existence of life on other planets. [Ivan]

“On August fifth [1929] - something remarkable! We were in our camp in the Kukunor district not far from the Humboldt Chain. In the morning about half-past nine some of our caravaneers noticed a remarkably big black eagle flying over us. Seven of us began to watch this unusual bird. At this same moment another of our caravaneers remarked, ‘There is something far above the bird’. And he shouted in his astonishment. We all saw, in a direction from north to south, something big and shiny reflecting the sun, like a huge oval moving at great speed. Crossing our camp the thing changed in its direction from south to southwest. And we saw how it disappeared in the intense blue sky. We even had time to take our field glasses and saw quite distinctly an oval form with shiny surface, one side of which was brilliant from the sun.”
-----Nicholas Roerich, Altai-Himalaya

What a shame that they didn't get a photo!!!

If you are interested in his art, poetry, any of his other writings, the mystery of Shambhala, or his connection to UFOs, the Roerich museum website is worth a visit. Many of his writings, paintings, and photographs from his expeditions are available.
http://www.roerich.org/nr.html?mid=wrtgs
 
Last edited:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
210
0
This is hardly worthy of the debunking forum IMO. What is there to debunk? Theres no evidence other than someone saying he saw something shiny in the sky. Seems more like a topic that belongs in general chat. I think the fact he remarks "We even had time to take our field glasses" but not enough time for a picture, makes this a totally unremarkable story.
 
  • #3
6,362
1,283
GOD__AM said:
What is there to debunk?
These people saw what appeared to them to be a large, unidentified flying object, specifically: "an oval form with shiny surface, one side of which was brilliant from the sun,” and which moved with non-ballistic motion.

Why not suggest it was some sort of large balloon that was first carried by one wind, then dropped altitude into a cross wind?

I once saw an unidentifiable thing flying around erratically above the swap meet. Eventually it dropped low enough to see it was a plain, old plastic grocery bag that had somehow gotten carried way up to the level where hawks cruise.
 
  • #4
selfAdjoint
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
6,852
10
Notice that at the time the expectation was that if you saw something shiny in the sky it would be roughly cigar shaped. The only shiny things in the sky normally were dirigibles and zeppelins. Airplanes were not yet shiny, but made of fabric at this date.

I think that seeing something you can't identify tends to get edited in your subconscious to be like somehing you can recognize.
 
  • #5
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,842
988
GOD__AM said:
I think the fact he remarks "We even had time to take our field glasses" but not enough time for a picture, makes this a totally unremarkable story.

I don't think they had point and shoot digital cameras back then. :biggrin:
 
  • #6
selfAdjoint
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
6,852
10
Ivan Seeking said:
I don't think they had point and shoot digital cameras back then. :biggrin:

The famed Leica 35mm camera was available in 1929, and a climbing expedition would surely have had one along.
 
  • #7
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,842
988
They may or may not have, but in either case the camera may have been packed away. This is often the problem with unusual sightings like this. Generally one has a few seconds to react and it's all over. Heck, it can take weeks to get a clear shot of our deer, and they live on the property.
 
  • #8
DaveC426913
Gold Member
20,000
3,271
Ivan Seeking said:
Heck, it can take weeks to get a clear shot of our deer, and they live on the property.
I think Ivan's on to something there.
A UFO blind. A big tarp you set up so they can't see you. It would be camouflauged as, say, a crop circle. You must be very quiet. Don't make any sudden movements or you will scare the UFOs away.

:biggrin: :biggrin:
 
  • #9
selfAdjoint
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
6,852
10
DaveC426913 said:
Don't make any sudden movements or you will scare the UFOs away.

Well according to Jack Sarfatti, Ph.D., they can hear you thinking.
 
  • #10
6,362
1,283
Ivan Seeking said:
They may or may not have, but in either case the camera may have been packed away. This is often the problem with unusual sightings like this. Generally one has a few seconds to react and it's all over. Heck, it can take weeks to get a clear shot of our deer, and they live on the property.
This is true. Even with my digital camera I almost never make the effort to get it out to snap a shot of anything that's not sitting still. That's me, though. On the other end of the scale are journalists and paparazzi who shoot incessantly in the hope they'll get a good shot. If someone's not in the mindset of the latter, getting the camera out isn't necessarily their first reaction to something unusual.

I don't think there's any reason to doubt they saw something unusual they couldn't identify. My reservation is with the wife's later jumping to notions about life on other planets.
 
  • #11
Office_Shredder
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
4,673
669
We actually just saw a cloud that looked like a UFO. Nick just made the rest up to impress his friends at the bar.
 
  • #12
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,842
988
zoobyshoe said:
I don't think there's any reason to doubt they saw something unusual they couldn't identify. My reservation is with the wife's later jumping to notions about life on other planets.

Yes, and like SA pointed out, our memories may be modified a bit given unrecognizable input.

I see it like this. First of all, it is one of many well documented examples that "UFOs" weren't invented in 1947. In fact people have supposed such things as unknown beings "from somewhere else" to explain UFOs, for thousands of years. This alone debunks about 80% of the debunkers. Next, since this comes from a seasoned explorer who begins his account with "remarkable!", if we take the story at face value it seems reasonable to assume that something very unusual was seen. His wife's comments support this notion. Next, it may have been something very unusual that has nothing to do with aliens.

That said, this is only anecdotal evidence for whatever might have been seen. Perhaps it could be considered a striking account given the circumstances, but it is still anecdotal evidence; and not even specific.
 
Last edited:

Related Threads on Nicholas Roerich, Shambhala, and UFOs

  • Last Post
3
Replies
54
Views
54K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
33
Views
8K
Replies
41
Views
6K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
23
Views
8K
Top