Wow, this thread is getting hit hard by spam.
Here's a page about the Abydos glyphs, when it comes to the contents of the glyphs, I don't know what they say, I'm not a Egyptologist feller.
I agree with this part though:
If the ancient Egyptians had vehicles such as helicopters, submarines, and jet airplanes, one would expect to find some evidence of this other than in a single inscription on the lintel of a single temple. This type of large machinery requires a vast amount of support (including fuel, parts, factories, etc.) but there is no trace of any such support in all of Egypt.
Are you aware that "ALL CULTURES BEGAN SUDDENLY" and were fully developed? A long preliminary period is not supported by archaeology. Before cities on earth, there was nothing. There was no transition whatsoever between the ancient civilizations and any primitive forebearers. They were at their peak from the beginning. :
That part is is a straight out lie. most historical sites build up over time, with a good deal of history as the culture grew.
Look at Rome and Greece, or Egypt. All left obvious traces fo their rise as their cultures grew.
A example would be Egypt's pyramids, they started out as piles of mud bricks, generally more step that steady slope. Over time they became the monuments we know of today.
As for the Pi Res Map, here's a link that shows a comparison between Antartica, and what the map supposedly shows:
The Piri Reis Map
Woof, there's a lot of stuff there to go over.
Looking through there again, the Bagda batteries are kinda true.
The problem with them is that they have to be adapted in order to actually work.
Baghdad Battery - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Sceptical archaeologists see the electrical experiments as embodying a key problem with experimental archaeology; such experiments can only show that something was physically possible, they say nothing about whether it actually occurred. Further, there are many difficulties with the interpretation of these artifacts as galvanic cells: