Pyramids and The Orion Belt (mind blowing) [Archive]

View Full Version : Pyramids and The Orion Belt (mind blowing)

Pages : [1] 2 3 4

singular_me

3rd April 2014, 06:11 AM

considering that those pyramids are at least 10,000 years old, cavemen could not have done it. Maybe is ot time to admit the existence of very advanced and pre-diluvian civilizations... History as we know it is a complete hoax. Those who control the past control the future.

Not only do pyramids appear in countries all over the world, they are also sometimes arranged in very similar proximity with one another other. These pyramid complexes found in China, Mexico and Egypt are just about as far apart from each other as you can get on the planet and yet at all 3 complexes the pyramids are arranged with the same orientation as the stars in the belt of the Orion's Belt constellation.

Anything considered spiritual, metaphysical or paranormal is generally just the physics we do not yet understand.” - Nassim Haramein
http://resonance.is/

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-5Xtqc4TZTdk/T2oVC0URAqI/AAAAAAAAITo/4zcgXBze3MI/s1600/Pyramids_Orion's+Belt.JPG

The attached photos are arial views of the Great Pyramids of Xi'an in China, the Great Pyramids of Teotihuacan in Mexico and the Great Pyramids of Egypt. Separated by thousands of miles of land and ocean, these three ancient civilizations whom never had contact with each other managed to design, engineer and build these fascinating structures that (coincidentally) match the Star alignment in Orion's Belt, known as the 'Orion's Mystery'...
Additionally, the larger of the three Pyramids of Teothuacan has exactly the same size base of 750 x 750 sq-ft and is also exactly half the height of the largest pyramid in Egypt... weird, huh?
...And to top it off, each of the three locations are positioned in a near-perfect line with each other across the globe http://www.design-laorosa.com/2012/03/ancient-pyramids-match-alignment-of.html

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-jm_5FiU0vok/T2qFTyQOXMI/AAAAAAAAITw/l9G0-jLHXzM/s1600/Pyramid_Locations.png

aeondaze

3rd April 2014, 06:16 AM

considering that those pyramids are at least 10,000 years old, cavemen could not have done it.

Where did you get this FALSE information.

The oldest pyramids are dated to 2600 BC, not 10,000 years old.

Show where were the pyramids dated to this - It isn't a fact if you can't show any proof, its just, well BULLSHIT.

aeondaze

3rd April 2014, 06:31 AM

Radiocarbon dating verifies ancient Egypt's history By Katia Moskvitch

Experts have used scientific dating techniques to verify the historical chronology of ancient Egypt.

Radiocarbon dating was used to show that the chronology of Egypt's Old, Middle and New Kingdoms is indeed accurate. The researchers dated seeds found in pharaohs' tombs, including some from the tomb of the King Tutankhamun.They write in the journal Science that some of the samples are more than 4,500 years old. (~2600 BC)

Radiocarbon dating of ancient Egyptian objects is nothing new. But this time, the scientists say, they were able to use a very precise statistical technique to actually verify the Egyptian history."The very first dating done with radiocarbon was dating Egyptian material of known dates, to check that [the method] worked," said Andrew Shortland from Cranfield University in the UK.

"Now, for the very first time, [we] managed to get radiocarbon techniques so good, that we can do it completely the opposite way around. We can say, from using radiocarbon, whether the Egyptian history is correct or not.

"Previously radiocarbon hasn't had a voice on this because the errors had been so great. Now radiocarbon is able to distinguish between different ideas of reconstructing the history."The study brought together researchers from the UK, France, Austria and Israel. Oxford radiocarbon accelerator Scientists used Oxford's radiocarbon accelerator to date the items. They dated 211 various plants, seeds and papyrus samples, obtained from museum collections.

"The museums were all very helpful in providing material we were interested in—especially important since export of samples from Egypt is currently prohibited," said Christopher Ramsey, the lead author of the study, from the school of archaeology at the University of Oxford. "Fortunately, we only needed samples that were about the same size as a grain of wheat," he added.

Thomas Higham, another member of the team who is also from the University of Oxford, explained that many items were found in ancient Egyptians' tombs and other archeological sites "where we could independently determine their historical age".

King Tut's tomb

"For example, we used seeds and plant material from Tutankhamun's tomb, which is very precisely dated. We also used seeds from a room underneath the Saqqara step pyramid dated to a specific year of the reign of King Djoser," he said.

Djoser was one of the pharaohs of the third dynasty of the Old Kingdom. The step pyramid of Djoser in Saqqara is believed to be the oldest stone pyramid in Egypt. Dr Ramsey's team was able to determine the exact period when this king reigned Egypt - from about 2691 to roughly 2625 BC, said the scientist.

The team found that this particular event took place earlier than some scholars previously thought."For the first time, radiocarbon dating has become precise enough to constrain the history of ancient Egypt to very specific dates," said Dr Ramsey. "I think scholars and scientists will be glad to hear that our small team of researchers has independently corroborated a century of scholarship in just three years."

aeondaze

3rd April 2014, 06:39 AM

So, now that we've firmly established the age of the pyramids, what has that got to do with the fact that other cultures may have built structures that mirror the alignment of Orions Belt, one of the birghtest stars in the night sky?

Thats the brightest object they see at night, HARDLY A COINCIDENCE...

:(??

singular_me

3rd April 2014, 06:53 AM

the mainstream already accepts, no more than 5,000 years ago.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/pyramid/explore/howold.html

renegate/non mainstream archeologists say between 10,000-12000 BC

That are the historians supporting the 2600BC number that also tell us that pyramids were built by slaves pushing, lifting, rolling, ect such incredibly heavy weight rocks. How serious are they?

also, carbon dating has been proven inaccurate way too many times. Additionally the erosion on the Sphinx shows that it was built in the Age Of Leo, when Egypt was not a desert.

EDIT:
Anthony West
The ancient Egyptians themselves attributed their wisdom to an earlier age going back 36,000 years. West set out to test the hypothesis that the Sphinx was much older than its conventional date of 2500 BC. His findings provide the first hard evidence that an earlier age of civilization preceded the known development of civilization in the Nile valley.
http://www.gizapyramid.com/bio-west.htm

Glass

3rd April 2014, 06:57 AM

comment
It never dawned on you that all three (Mexico, Egypt, and Xi'an)of these civilizations were black. The geodetic location of these three sites show to much of a correlation not to be connected...logic dictate this connection. Just say you don't know and leave it at that.

What does being a 'Black Civilization' have anything to do with anything??

Everything...it was through Black genious that produced and designed all three sites presented above. The history of the world is the history of black people...including those who classify themselves as white. "Who the heck designed these damn Pyramids... seriously??!!" That was the initial question..

Star light,
star bright,
The first star I see tonight;
I wish I may,
I wish I might,
Have the wish I wish tonight

singular_me

3rd April 2014, 07:04 AM

well, there are a lot of mathematics/astronomy involved ... as pyramids match the position of the constellation.

More over, Egyptian, Mexican and Chinese pyramids are also aligned that way... the only to resolve this is to admit the existence of previous very advanced civilizations, I am afraid

Thats the brightest object they see at night, HARDLY A COINCIDENCE...

:(??

chad

3rd April 2014, 07:10 AM

i live in the middle of nowhere, 10 miles to the nearest city with lights. if i go out and look at the stars, orion is the first thing that jumps out. it's a neon sign up there. i think it's cool they all look like orion, but it's hardly shocking. orion is the first thing you see if you look at the stars in a near dark environment.

aeondaze

3rd April 2014, 07:20 AM

The only to resolve this is to admit the existence of previous very advanced civilizations, I am afraid

No. There are other ways.

And you still haven't provided any proof or analysis (chemical prefered) that the pyramids are dated to 10,000 BC.

Remeber you prefaced the whole thread with this supposed fact, so back it up.

Lastly there are no mainstream/non-mainstream archaeologists in regards to dating the pyramids. There may be novices that pose as 'profesional' archaeologits that claim this, but they aren't real profesisonal archaeologists with accepted degress.

aeondaze

3rd April 2014, 07:32 AM

also, carbon dating has been proven inaccurate way too many times.

What do you mean by 'accurate'. Nothing can be measured with exactitude, because it doesn't exist.

You throw this around like its menaingful, but its not in any way shape or form.

Scientisits use confidence intervals to measure accuracy.

Carbon dating is a relative dating technique, it takes lots of reasonably well known samples with dates to calibrate Carbon-14 dating, the first few times carbon dating was used were atrocious, but as a database of accepted dates was built, carbon dating get a whole lot more accurate, to a point where today it can be and is TRUSTED.

To call it inacurate and not want to acknowledge this shows ignorance.

Carbon dating is a sound tool for dating organic material, way more sound than your unproven 'theories' .

singular_me

3rd April 2014, 07:43 AM

Aeondaze, before you ask for proofs, you'd do some homework... one of the main proof against the 2600bc is to believe historians telling us that man/slave power was used to build them, while up to these days no computer models have an answer...

yes mainstream outlets tell us the (twisted) truth... that how we can see behind it and come up with conspiracy theories.

??? Carbon dating is a sound tool for dating organic material, way more sound than your unproven 'theories' . ???

ERRORS ARE FEARED IN CARBON DATING - New York Times

By MALCOLM W. BROWNE
Published: May 31, 1990
Since 1947, scientists have reckoned the ages of many old objects by measuring the amounts of radioactive carbon they contain. New research shows, however, that some estimates based on carbon may have erred by thousands of years.

It is too soon to know whether the discovery will seriously upset the estimated dates of events like the arrival of human beings in the Western Hemisphere, scientists said. But it is already clear that the carbon method of dating will have to be recalibrated and corrected in some cases.

Scientists at the Lamont-Doherty Geological Laboratory of Columbia University at Palisades, N.Y., reported today in the British journal Nature that some estimates of age based on carbon analyses were wrong by as much as 3,500 years. They arrived at this conclusion by comparing age estimates obtained using two different methods - analysis of radioactive carbon in a sample and determination of the ratio of uranium to thorium in the sample. In some cases, the latter ratio appears to be a much more accurate gauge of age than the customary method of carbon dating, the scientists said.

In principle, any material of plant or animal origin, including textiles, wood, bones and leather, can be dated by its content of carbon 14, a radioactive form of carbon in the environment that is incorporated by all living things. Because it is radioactive, carbon 14 steadily decays into other substances. But when a plant or animal dies, it can no longer accumulate fresh carbon 14, and the supply in the organism at the time of death is gradually depleted

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/31/us/errors-are-feared-in-carbon-dating.html

aeondaze

3rd April 2014, 07:52 AM

See, you have it all mixed up again!

Historians aren't archaeologists or chemists, they aren't scientists. They may well be very good at what they do and use the tools of science to establish chronologies, but then again they may not! Historians study under the Arts at universities, not the sciences, BIG, BIG, BIG difference.

Do you get that?

An article from 1990...? Where have you been for a quarter of a century!

The article you mentioned caused a BIG uproar, which now has thankfully been resolved. Now there aren't any detractors from the field anymore. Its accepted as sure as the sun rises each and everyday.

:)*#*

singular_me

3rd April 2014, 08:00 AM

I gave to you the proof one cannot trust carbon dating

and the fact is that schools still teach the 2600BC dating, number that has not changed since the Egyptian pyramids were discovered... now even the mainstream acknowledges that 5000bc is very likely.... but schools still spread diinsfo.

sorry in this case archeologists and historians are from the same academy cartel, which you seem to endorse...

history as we know is a massive hoax, if we ever are serious to get rid of the Egyptian-mason-NWO, the investigation starts there... WHO were the Egyptians ????

kiffertom

3rd April 2014, 08:09 AM

aeondaze

3rd April 2014, 08:16 AM

You did not give me proof, You dug up and article from 1990, and all it said was Carbon dating is unreliable out to 30,000 years BP, and that the 3500 years discrpency was for an object dated to 20,000 BP.

Scientist KNOW full well that carbon dating has its limit, because it is based on an isotope which has a half life of 5730 +/- 40 years. So how much carbon-14 is left at 30,000 BC, lets do the math...without getting into logs etc (making it easy for you)

so if the half life is 5730, then by 11460, there is 25% of carbon 14 left, and by 22920, there is like about 6% C-14, by 30,000 your looking at about <3%, still enough to get an accurate date however, but at 50,000 BP you may as well give up.

Again you think you've found the holy grail but you don't understand what your dealing with and I keep saying it, but you just refuse to listen.

Your theories are a Hoax.

aeondaze

3rd April 2014, 08:25 AM

Aeondaze, before you ask for proofs, you'd do some homework.

Sister, this really gets my ire.

How would you feel if a complete novice told you to 'go do some homework' in the very field you toiled endlessly for years on end to achieve a high degree of proficiency. I AM one of the people you are slagging off at from your fucking comfortable armchair, you twit.

I've calle you insolent before, and it is apt. You have no repsect whatsoever. Don't give me your new age shit anymore, you're nothing but a snotty nosed little upstart.

:mad:

aeondaze

3rd April 2014, 08:45 AM

You threw at me the weathering associated with the Sphinx, claiming that it proves it is older than stated, but you have never looked at the argument of why it appears more weathered than the age has been shown to be.

Its because its made of limestone. Does this mean anything to you? Do you even know what limestone is? CaCO3, it is soluble in water and prone to a weathering process called haloclasty, which hastens deteriation.

Your weathering theory is a HOAX as well.

Various geologists have proposed alternative explanations for the evidence of weathering in the Sphinx enclosure.

One of the alternative erosion mechanisms proposed is called haloclasty. Moisture on limestone will dissolve salts, which are then carried by percolating moisture into the spaces inside the porous limestone. When the moisture dries the salt crystallises, and the expanding crystals cause a fine layer of surface limestone to flake off. It is accepted by Schoch et al. that this mechanism is evident in many places on the Giza Plateau. One proponent of the haloclasty process is Dr James A. Harrell of the University of Toledo, who advocates that the deep erosion crevices were caused by the haloclasty process being driven by moisture in the sand that covered the carved rock for much of the time since it was exposed by quarrying.[22] Lal Gauri et al.[23] also favour the haloclasty process to explain the erosion features, but have theorised that the weathering was driven by moisture deriving from atmospheric precipitation such as dew.

Analysis of the Sphinx's bedrock by the Getty Conservation Institute (1990-1992) concluded that "Continual salt crystallization, which has a destructive effect on the stone, would explain at least some of the deterioration of the Sphinx.

midnight rambler

3rd April 2014, 08:54 AM

aeondaze

3rd April 2014, 08:59 AM

I just don't understand why you have an illogical desrie to believe this stuff and I don't use the term illogical lightly. Everyhting you've proposed thus far on each and every thread has not been seated in rational thought.

You have this overwhelming desrie to believe a lot of claptrap to support some deep seated phsychological desire to believe that the technology we have today is primitive and that the past was a glorious technological feat that far surpasses anything present today without a single shred of evidence.

If the past was so great where are the advanced alloys and ceramics or the the surviving machinary from this golden age? Surely something from the past would've survived. Or do you think the aliens came and did a quick whip around and tidied up the place.

We don't have anything even remotely like this.

What we have is Aurignacian stone technology then microlithic stone technology. Marvelous in and of itself, but not advanced technology, that is just plain stupid and it shows complete disrepsect for OUR (yours included) acnestors and what they achieved with so little at the time.

Your very attitude is an affront to mankinds history.

aeondaze

3rd April 2014, 09:08 AM

Those who are passionately curious and have serious doubts about the 'history' of the world as presented by those who control money and religion should check out Michael Cremo's Forbidden Archaeology.

And for those that want a quick critique that insn't as bloviated as the book:

http://ncse.com/rncse/19/3/review-forbidden-archaeologys-impact

Horn

3rd April 2014, 09:45 AM

http://www.labyrinthina.com/pumapunku1.jpg

In assembling the walls of Pumapunku, each stone was finely cut to interlock with the surrounding stones and the blocks fit together like a puzzle, forming load-bearing joints without the use of mortar. One common engineering technique involves cutting the top of the lower stone at a certain angle, and placing another stone on top of it which was cut at the same angle.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumapunku#cite_note-Vranich2006-4) The precision with which these angles have been utilized to create flush joints is indicative of a highly sophisticated knowledge of stone-cutting and a thorough understanding of descriptive geometry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descriptive_geometry).[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumapunku#cite_note-ProtzenNair2000-6) Many of the joints are so precise that not even a razor blade will fit between the stones.[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumapunku#cite_note-10) Much of the masonry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masonry) is characterized by accurately cut rectilinear blocks of such uniformity that they could be interchanged for one another while maintaining a level surface and even joints. The blocks were so precisely cut as to suggest the possibility of prefabrication and mass production (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_production), technologies far in advance of the Tiwanaku’s Inca successors hundreds of years later.[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumapunku#cite_note-ProtzenNair1997-9) Tiwanaku engineers were also adept at developing a civic infrastructure at this complex, constructing functional irrigation systems, hydraulic mechanisms, and waterproof sewage lines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumapunku

6192

http://www.labyrinthina.com/tiwanaku.htm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumapunku)

Norweger

3rd April 2014, 10:04 AM

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-jm_5FiU0vok/T2qFTyQOXMI/AAAAAAAAITw/l9G0-jLHXzM/s1600/Pyramid_Locations.png

http://www.themuslimtimes.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/220px-Golden_ratio_line.svg_.png

aeondaze

3rd April 2014, 10:13 AM

http://www.themuslimtimes.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/220px-Golden_ratio_line.svg_.png

If you need to read more in to it than is necessary go right ahead, just do me one small favour, tell me what then does this mean to you?

Horn

3rd April 2014, 10:15 AM

Was the ancient technology that Nazi's were apparently after a fabrication of Hollywood, or real?

Why stop a modern era fascist steamtrain to look backwards, if so?

6193

http://coolinterestingstuff.com/nazi-germany-and-the-alien-connection

Horn

3rd April 2014, 10:20 AM

Sister, this really gets my ire.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=panties%20in%20a%20bunch

Current evidence of man's progress towards biodegradability could be inherent of past civilizations technology, and the lack of fossilized evidence attendant thereto. All previous by product waste packaged and levitated towards the moon.

Also hencefor the relatively recent advancements in edible underwear garments.

http://www.ediblecomputerchips.com/

Norweger

3rd April 2014, 04:37 PM

If you need to read more in to it than is necessary go right ahead, just do me one small favour, tell me what then does this mean to you?

It's just a pattern that i recognized.

Horn

3rd April 2014, 04:42 PM

It's just a pattern that i recognized.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXiOQCRiSp0

singular_me

3rd April 2014, 07:13 PM

exactly and then when one really starts paying attention to patterns, one can only ask oneself "who made this ??? "... then the journey really begins. Some people can spend their lives ignoring those patterns and labeled those who notice as "irrational", but that doesnt change the fact that they exist and are messages hidden in plain sight. which will be understood by those who want only...

here are for those interested in egyptian-masonic NWO architecture/patterns, its a blockbuster: 3,226,771 hits. Its long, have something to munch :)

Secrets in Plain Sight (Full video)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L777RhL_Fz4

Patterns in Art, Architecture, Urban Design, & the Cosmos
http://www.secretsinplainsight.com/

It's just a pattern that i recognized.

aeondaze

3rd April 2014, 07:28 PM

Here is a pattern...

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_S8Cc_0n559A/SrTrhFihC5I/AAAAAAAAAbI/LXh3HuyDQGg/s400/dogshit.bmp

What does it mean? Can you see a message in this mystical pattern?

I can.

A dog took a shit is all.

:D

Horn

3rd April 2014, 07:44 PM

and we thought it would be hard finding someone to fill Book's shoes.

Glass

3rd April 2014, 07:49 PM

it isn't patters per say its that ratio thing, The golden ratio? Fractals and so forth. The fractals were widely embraced maybe 10 years ago. Cool patterns inside patterns. But in reality they appear in everything, the arrangement of flower petals, tree branching, snow flakes, from the very small to the very large. near and far.

Patterns are also part of the scientific endeavour. That is what they are looking for. Is there a pattern here? Is it repeatable? etc.

I see curly sausage.... Anyone see a documentary show called People like us? Was a mockumentary but very clever. I will never forget curly sausages. My question is, did the dog walk around in a circle to lay that or did the golden ratio play a part?

singular_me

3rd April 2014, 07:56 PM

sure Glass, I wanted to make it simple :)

it isn't patters per say its that ratio thing, The golden ratio? Fractals and so forth. The fractals were widely embraced maybe 10 years ago. Cool patterns inside patterns. But in reality they appear in everything, the arrangement of flower petals, tree branching, snow flakes, from the very small to the very large. near and far.

Patterns are also part of the scientific endeavour. That is what they are looking for. Is there a pattern here? Is it repeatable? etc.

I see curly sausage.... Anyone see a documentary show called People like us? Was a mockumentary but very clever. I will never forget curly sausages. My question is, did the dog walk around in a circle to lay that or did the golden ratio play a part?

Horn

3rd April 2014, 07:57 PM

I believe that by recognizing and associating with patterns found in nature or thru course history great wisdom and valence can be gained. Sometimes I apply working patterns to real world problem solving to get desired results.

I've yet to be noticed sitting atop my pyramid of friends and family for instance... lol just kidding :)

Glass

3rd April 2014, 08:11 PM

no thats ok. I'm trying to keep up with the conversation. Got lots going on atm.

singular_me

3rd April 2014, 08:31 PM

well actually, excrement follows a pattern made of energy and called a Vortex, every human being/living creatue is a Vortex onto itself, as well as earth, the sun, a galaxie.... the Universe is itself a Vortex

vortex in: mouth
vortex out: anus

http://holofractal.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/18.jpg

Here is a pattern...

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_S8Cc_0n559A/SrTrhFihC5I/AAAAAAAAAbI/LXh3HuyDQGg/s400/dogshit.bmp

What does it mean? Can you see a message in this mystical pattern?

I can.

A dog took a shit is all.

:D

aeondaze

3rd April 2014, 09:23 PM

Your theories are a vortex of emptiness.

If a have to hear you cary on about the golden ratio one more time as if you've discovered the keys to the universe I'm going to have a fucking aneurism.

You go on and on about it. You never fucking stop. Why is the golden ration so important to you, is it the name? I suspect it is, you think because its called the 'golden ratio' that it is some magical key to the universe don't you. If they had called it the shit ratio I'm sure you wouldn't be as enamoured as you are. You can only grasp things on a very superficial level. Complex, advanced math is not you forte.

I never ever see you carry on about Pi, or e, the base of a natural log, or any other myriad of physical constants used in both maths and physics, its alll about the fucking golden ratio. Golden ration this and golden ratio that.

What I'd like to see for a change is for you to marvel at the other constants, why do neglect them? The answer is because you're a fucking hairbrained novice who clutches at anything that sounds vaugely magical. Its pathetic, your pathetic!

singular_me

3rd April 2014, 09:45 PM

that is why you are an atheist... and that I am not.

there is no magic per se, there are things we dont know... and call esoteric because we can't fathom those tings but can witness their effects through patterns.

the problem with modern sciences is that it is working more on the effects (hence assumptions and theories that end up going ashtray after a while) than the prime cause. Morden sciences is more preoccupied with what "comes out" than what "goes in" so to speak.

Your theories are a vortex of emptiness.

If a have to hear you cary on about the golden ratio one more time as if you've discovered the keys to the universe I'm going to have a fucking aneurism.

You go on and on about it. You never fucking stop. Why is the golden ration so important to you, is it the name? I suspect it is, you think because its called the 'golden ratio' that it is some magical key to the universe don't you. If they had called it the shit ratio I'm sure you wouldn't be as enamoured as you are. You can only grasp things on a very superficial level. Complex, advanced math is not you forte.

I never ever see you carry on about Pi, or e, the base of a natural log, or any other myriad of physical constants used in both maths and physics, its alll about the fucking golden ratio. Golden ration this and golden ratio that.

What I'd like to see for a change is for you to marvel at the other constants, why do neglect them? The answer is because you're a fucking hairbrained novice who clutches at anything that sounds vaugely magical. Its pathetic, your pathetic!

aeondaze

3rd April 2014, 10:17 PM

Do you even see what you've done?

You've invented this neat little infallible pakage in your mind about the way the universe is. The universe will always suprise us, yet you've consrtucted this unmovable ivory tower about the way things are, all neatly wrapped in some inane mysterious nonsensical gibberish which you call 'esoteric'.

Its like a safety valve for you, whenever challenged you always talk about what we don't know then couch it some pseudo mystical term like 'esoteric' and make huge sweeping bombastic procalamations. You think you are some kind of modern sage! You're not even close...

To top it all off you think that atheists have no right to challenge you or anybody else on these rediculous assumption or even have opinions about the way world works. In your narrow minded world the only good atheists are the ones who shut their mouths, all the while you give yourself carte blanche to speculate in the most absurd fashion.

Deep down all you are is a conceited hypocrite with a vastly deluded worldview and overblown sense of self importance, yet all ther while you masquerade as some peachnik, passive flower child.

Its just fucking horrible, really it is.

Horn

4th April 2014, 01:12 AM

Aeon's dazed inward singing theme song.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAKxVCoTYXs

Almost as if every word that is typed is meant for himself.

Dogman

4th April 2014, 01:49 AM

Humm?

Some on this earth can if lucky see the hypocrisy of organized religion, and can see that any one that pays a hoot of what archaeology types dig up....

People have questions, that can not be answered , they see birth, growing up and death!

Questins Questions, that the churches try to answer, in there heavy handed way (past millions killed) (trying to control and grasp power) and the so called christian/cathloic church are the most bloody. Seeing if with an open mind that most of the old ways/religions and gasp, let me repeat gasp, that our bible which is a great histrocial work, has in the old testament , story's that match much older tales, except the conquest of some of the old Hebrew leaders which were for sure spin doctored. The old testament borrowed from a mix of older believes/religions.

So New age which I have a hoot and a grin, (sometimes) would never condemn them,

Who is right?

Of all the so called religions past and present, who is right, I think I would trust my Indian part of me 1/8 or so than any modern white crap.

Fire storm from the Christians, that have not a lock, nor the Muslims. Which may ways are the very same.

Nuff said..

For now.

I have studyed most world religinons, and the funny thing is the common is norm, with the spin of local.

Cebu_4_2

4th April 2014, 04:38 AM

If you truly believe than it is real, if you don't than it is not. Your own mystical power can put you anywhere you want in life and universe. When one fights another about beliefs it is obvious one is lost while another simply is where he or she wants to be.

Have at it and enjoy. I'm good.

singular_me

4th April 2014, 06:01 AM

dear Aeondaze, I don't want to fight with you. I have been an agnositic/atheist until 911, then I made a complete U-turn while investigating masonic history. I realized that if I didn't have any faith, it is because what I had been taught my whole life was dissonant, not ringing true with my heart and mind. I have to say to that I always have had an appeal for mystery and the unknown, which really started taking shape after 911.

The cure for boredom is curiosity and there is no cure for curiosity. what I am speaking of are things that have been out there for millennia.

And there is a reason as why, this knowledge has been concealed. Everything we have been taught is wrong on purpose: monetary, religion, social, scientific history... every now and then the academic cartel will allow bits of Truth to surface because otherwise there would be a complete stagnation and also because it is a tool for control which calls for book/witch burning and trashes pioneers on a regular basis. Nothing has changed since the middle ages.

Every new data should be approached with an open mind but also a healthy dose of skepticism, this because we cannot know the whole truth. But if ancient knowledge is used against mankind, we should wonder why 24/7.

Considering that sciences are use to commit evil, it is extremely difficult for scientists to realize that what they learn in colleges is going along those lines. Just like getting a PhD in economics is going to favor fiat monetary policies... right now all academic mainstream knowledge must be seen as a plague that needs to be eradicated.... WE MUST UNLEARN.

watch Secrets In Plain Sight, it is all about maths and patterns... more than 3 million hits should convince you to give it a chance.

Very best

ps: ooh and in the matrix we live in, there is room for all kinds of thinking, as long as we dont start killing each other for our différences I am all fine. We all need each other to help our own subjectivity (fractal innerverse) make sense of The Whole.

Patterns in Art, Architecture, Urban Design, & the Cosmos
Geometric and numeric encoding appears in architecture, in urban design, and in alignments across the Earth. Does this happen by pure coincidence, has it been done to preserve knowledge, or is it an ancient form of magic that continues to this day? Are the synchronicities we experience in our personal lives manifestations of these same patterns?
http://www.secretsinplainsight.com/

The film profiles monuments such as the Great Pyramid, Stonehenge, and the World Trade Center and brings to your attention symbolism encoded in such diverse locales as Babylon, Baalbek, Jerusalem, Mecca, San Francisco, Washington DC, London, the Vatican, and Hollywood.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L777RhL_Fz4

Do you even see what you've done?

You've invented this neat little infallible pakage in your mind about the way the universe is. The universe will always suprise us, yet you've consrtucted this unmovable ivory tower about the way things are, all neatly wrapped in some inane mysterious nonsensical gibberish which you call 'esoteric'.

Its like a safety valve for you, whenever challenged you always talk about what we don't know then couch it some pseudo mystical term like 'esoteric' and make huge sweeping bombastic procalamations. You think you are some kind of modern sage! You're not even close...

To top it all off you think that atheists have no right to challenge you or anybody else on these rediculous assumption or even have opinions about the way world works. In your narrow minded world the only good atheists are the ones who shut their mouths, all the while you give yourself carte blanche to speculate in the most absurd fashion.

Deep down all you are is a conceited hypocrite with a vastly deluded worldview and overblown sense of self importance, yet all ther while you masquerade as some peachnik, passive flower child.

Its just fucking horrible, really it is.

Norweger

4th April 2014, 06:09 AM

aeondaze

4th April 2014, 07:04 AM

The profane and the profound exist side by side.

Horn

4th April 2014, 09:46 AM

The profane and the profound exist side by side.

We're still waiting for the profound.

I guess these include dull statements such as, Early on in man's timeline great social upheavals weren't apparent in complete opposite direction of cultural activities?

The fact that nothing exists in Alexandria should be enough evidence of man's ability to scour and completely remove any unwanted knowledge or artifacts.

Glass

13th April 2014, 10:53 PM

In another thread I talked about this guys videos. He is the Aussie who we have discussed or seen here (http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?76804-Santos-Bonacci-outside-court-Melbourne-Australia-April-1st-2014&highlight=santos) who is standing up to the magic-strates.

A 2 part video presentation called the Magnum Opus. The great work. I will try and post some relevant time points to get people going but it is worth starting at the beginning for anyone who is interested and if you have a few hours spare to watch them.

Equator, Primemaridian, Right Ascension (RA) explained (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsCtlR8DvVU#t=7m23s) minute 7 Part 1

Ra, Royal Arch Masonry and some other esoterica (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsCtlR8DvVU#t=49m31s) - minute 49 Part 1. this one gets really interesting over the following 20 minutes.

There is about 40 minutes between each time point I've linked above but I think these are the two more interesting ones. The first one goes to the OT. It explains why the same alignment of pyramids can be found in multiple locations around the world. Yes it is to do with Orion's Belt but there is more. And it's very interesting.

All of Part 1 from Beginning

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsCtlR8DvVU

All of Part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xETBVN72NJQ

singular_me

13th April 2014, 11:12 PM

Bonacci is one among the top esoteric researchers. It is very disturbing that "some" have subverted Knowledge at THIS level.... almost unfanthomable but true.

when you get a chance, youtube "sevan bomar"... he is my latest finding.

Horn

14th April 2014, 12:08 AM

I dunno Glass, how is all this going to help me while trying to survive on Mars?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4B5zmDz4vR4

Glass

14th April 2014, 12:49 AM

try watching between minutes 30 and the 49 minute mark. I tagged the 49 minute but from 30 - 49 is also very very good and it's probably equal important segment. It's all good though. I'm watching it again.

The Age of Pisces is about gluttony and wealth (money). This is the age we are/were in. Just leaving. An age ruled by Jupiter, money gluttony. The church of Saturn (Satan) has power and harvest energy - church of greed. Makes sense debt, slavery, stupidity. Is the world not full of gluttonous and greedy?

Stowes bible astrology? Never heard of it.

late edit. I'm just making bullet points. I don't get a lot of it still/will. I'm going to need more info but I'm broadly aware of the things he's drawing on. We discussed the concept of the solar systems motion is not how it is taught. The sun is not stationary in space but is moving (expanding universe) and as a result, our orbits are more like a spiral. That takes on another perspective.

Cebu_4_2

14th April 2014, 02:23 AM

That David Bowie video has me going to the shower, saw it before but now it's dirty... that's messed up.

Glass

14th April 2014, 05:31 AM

That David Bowie video has me going to the shower, saw it before but now it's dirty... that's messed up.

was a bit weird. Looking at it now it has a whole different appearance. That was the style for the time. Glam. UK music was very contrived. Still is I suppose. Don't pay any attention to music now days. I can't stand listening to the morons between songs. It's too big a price to pay.

Horn

14th April 2014, 09:08 AM

Glam rock is dirty, lol! you guys are a barrel of laughs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eiQTFcFPDY

Belinda Mae Fender's got a Cadillac Bone
Jenny's lost her cherry walking all the way home
The passions of the Earth blasted it's mind
Now it's neat sweet ready for the moon based grind

Horn

14th April 2014, 10:47 AM

Metal Dirty?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUjUIP2ugG4

Neuro

14th April 2014, 12:38 PM

How would you feel if a complete novice told you to 'go do some homework' in the very field you toiled endlessly for years on end to achieve a high degree of proficiency.
Don't take it personally. It is a tactic she is using whenever someone asks for proof of her often outlandish claims...

Start doing some home work Neuro, the crimes of Vatican are well documented.
I am questioning your very dubious sources, and you lecture me of not doing homework? I don't question the fact that the Vatican is involved in many criminal enterprises. Your sources include a court that doesn't have an address, and an Israeli diamond dealer, none of whom provide any evidence of wrongdoing...

singular_me

14th April 2014, 04:47 PM

neuro, please dont mix up/spoil threads...

Glass

14th April 2014, 05:33 PM

Horn

14th April 2014, 05:54 PM

I'm bumping this up because there is an effort to push it down the thread.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxcJW6bs5os

Dogman

14th April 2014, 05:58 PM

I'm bumping this up because there is an effort to push it down the thread. There is some other material I'll add in later but it's worth a watch. It clear others haven't give the response times. It does really need watching from the beginning.

Glass there is evidence in what remains as archaeological sites that can not be explained, and are ignored because they upset the basket of common thought. I have no doubt way back in the past , before written language, people knew one hell of a bunch more in some areas than we do now.

We as a species are relearning what was lost and over time forgotten.

For one of many examples is the great pyramid granite coffer that was polished inside and had square edges and corners.

Hard enough today with modern tools, and they did this by hand?

singular_me

14th April 2014, 07:32 PM

and history repeats itself over and over... but it surely seems as if Truth surfaces *right before* a civilization massive collapse though

maybe a pole shift occurs every time humans have polluted earth so much that it changes all magnetic fields - or caused by electro-magnetic wars (atlantis vs lemuria for example)... does that make sense?

We as a species are relearning what was lost and over time forgotten.

Horn

14th April 2014, 07:41 PM

It expands and astrology shifts to add a new sign.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kL7qDeI05U

Glass

14th April 2014, 08:15 PM

ok so Part 2 is the video that contains the material applicable to this thread. I've been watching through both parts and part 2 at 11 minutes is where he's dealing with the pyramids and how they have always been setup on the earths equator. Start at the beginning of part 2 because it's all good.

That's a very interesting concept. That the earths equator moves up or down the globe OR the globe moves angle relative to the Sun. We know we are on a tilted axis at the moment. Hence we have 4 seasons. But the equator marks the line where the sun is always directly overhead so that portion of the planet doesn't have seasons. Make sense.

This would also explain why there are old records of weather patterns or periods of different weather patterns over areas that are inconsistent with what we see in those areas now.

It would also explain why parts of the globe what are under ice now, were not under ice at some time in the past. FOr instance, those old old maps of the Arctic region that clearly show land masses that are starting to be exposed now AND the maps correlate. How could this be? Obviously those areas were not under ice in the past and this is the probable reason.

Ponce I recall you were all over this info about the Ancient maps of the arctic. I think that was you anyway.

The Prime Meridian -
(he talks about that in part 1 but it relates to the stuff about the equator here.)

The Giza pyramids were originally built on the planets equator and were the Prime Meridian. Apparently the prime meridian is an object, not so much a date line. It is used as a dateline because of the power it brings to the place where it is located.

Egypt - So pre Romans - Giza was prime meridian.
Romans - Roma was prime meridian. (I can't see anything that states this but I think that is the inference)
Louis XIV - Paris was prime meridian - this I remember from my history studies. Not that it was an object but that the French made themselves the centre for measurement etc. They adjusted some things. The King was known as the Sun King. He held the power of Ra during his reign. He held the Meridian. 1666.
London - Greenwich mean time. Great Britain acquired the prime meridian from the french and now posses it. The sun never sets on the empire is often considered because it is so vast it is always in sunlight. It could be because they hold the power of Ra through the prime meridian.

What about the pyramids/diderods(?) in the south american continent? How far from the current equator are they? Could they have been on the physical equator at some time?

Horn

14th April 2014, 08:36 PM

Mean Mr. Mustard sleeps in the park, shaves in the dark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cffdcwPGz1s

You will keep revolving into Sett.

Dogman

14th April 2014, 08:51 PM

and history repeats itself over and over... but it surely seems as if Truth surfaces *right before* a civilization massive collapse though

maybe a pole shift occurs every time humans have polluted earth so much that it changes all magnetic fields - or caused by electro-magnetic wars (atlantis vs lemuria for example)... does that make sense?

And the truth seems not to save them!

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Forum Runner

singular_me

14th April 2014, 10:32 PM

Dogman

14th April 2014, 10:38 PM

well this is because it is a free will universe which needs positive and negative to be sustained... one cannot prove that day light exist without the night. both must remain in balance.. and there are worlds in this universe that are still going through this karma, while others have overcome it...

Andrew Bartzis, Akashic Galactic Historian, explains this... fasten your seat belt, it sounds like 'star wars' but Drama is the result of the lack of free will.

I will agree with balance. I need not search anymore, spent the first 40 years doing that. Then the last 20 and so fine tuning to where I am at now.

You are still searching and reaching and trying to find the real peace of the soul that most search for and can find, to the point of no fear in this life remaining for me, and look forward to what is next.

Peace!

Horn

14th April 2014, 11:27 PM

All human life emanates from Cygnus, not from below Orion's belt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W80iQe9hRUo

6248

Neuro

15th April 2014, 12:34 AM

neuro, please dont mix up/spoil threads...
What?

Horn

15th April 2014, 12:48 AM

All humans including the Pope are pagan megalithic and maniacal.

This is in Turkey, maybe you can go there and get in tune for us, Neuro?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mo0sxT7nIJ8

http://www.redicecreations.com/ul_img/254941-e.jpg

Google Earth coordinates for Gobekli excavation site: 37.223237 N, 38.922546 E
View over the main excavation area at Gobekli Tepe. In the foreground Enclosure D,
to the left Enclosure C, in the background Enclosures B and A. Image © 2012 by DAI,
N. Becker, Summer 2012 Issue 02 of Actual Archaeology Magazine-Anatolia,
“The First Temple of the World: Gobekli Tepe.”

On Wednesday, June 13, 2012, as the sun rose I was standing on the Gobekli Tepe hilltop in southern Turkey not far from the Syrian northern border. Carbon dated to 12,000 years ago, Gobekli is older than Egypt, Sumeria, classical Greeks and Stonehenge. I had hoped, expected, that being there physically would help me understand the function of the mysterious 12,000-year-old rings of tall, T-shaped, oddly carved limestone pillars. But instead of understanding, I felt something alien, incomprehensible and disturbing.

http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=25495 (http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=25495)

Glass

15th April 2014, 02:03 AM

tons of correlation between the two sources of information. The Cygnus guy needs to watch Santos. They, Cygnus guy and interviewer, wonder about a fair few things they could correlate if they did.

Needs to get up to speed on the junk DNA because I think this concept is being stood on it's head.

God out there, priests down here as mediators, etc. He could fill a fair few blanks or give him somewhere else to look. He has some other ideas about why Monks can't move rocks now like the apparently could. There's a thing called "the profane" in the bible they can be referred to as the swine. Churches keep people at the level of the swine, gluttonous and greedy. Unworthly or even unwilling to see more than what is material. Je-zeus cast bad spirits into swine is how the parable goes.

singular_me

15th April 2014, 06:13 AM

that is all good with me, Dogman... the world needs both: some searching and some who dont... :)

I will agree with balance. I need not search anymore, spent the first 40 years doing that. Then the last 20 and so fine tuning to where I am at now.

You are still searching and reaching and trying to find the real peace of the soul that most search for and can find, to the point of no fear in this life remaining for me, and look forward to what is next.

Peace!

Horn

15th April 2014, 11:50 AM

that is all good with me, Dogman... the world needs both: some searching and some who dont... :)

Whatever you do,

don't become preoccupied with drawing conclusive star maps for monkeys that will be lost among the dusts of time. :)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1d/Milky_Way_Arms.svg

http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=29211

https://middlesavagery.wordpress.com/tag/gobekli-tepe/

Horn

15th April 2014, 11:55 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh23A2GptAQ

Glass

16th April 2014, 05:39 AM

I watched this presentation. If you have seen the others this would be a recap and expansion on other ideas. And obviously talking about the structure and purpose of stonehenge as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0TPeRJbrj8

Buddha

16th April 2014, 02:31 PM

Horn

16th April 2014, 02:44 PM

I've been reading about this for awhile, the position of these 3 sites on the planet appears to correspond to Orion's Belt itself

My question is why they would just use his belt for markers,

then amputate his arms and legs which are brightest?

Pushy Orion nudges out the Northern Cross on November nights - See more at: http://astrobob.areavoices.com/2012/11/18/pushy-orion-nudges-out-the-northern-cross-on-november-nights/#sthash.uuOzVZlV.dpuf

Buddha

16th April 2014, 03:58 PM

My question is why they would just use his belt for markers,

then amputate his arms and legs which are brightest?

Pushy Orion nudges out the Northern Cross on November nights - See more at: http://astrobob.areavoices.com/2012/11/18/pushy-orion-nudges-out-the-northern-cross-on-november-nights/#sthash.uuOzVZlV.dpuf

Good question, but you are asking the wrong one (I know it's rhetorical, somewhat)... Seems like I have reading to do. My coffee table is saturated with books... uggg

Horn

16th April 2014, 04:40 PM

Saw this interesting photo at ATS forum, not sure what he is referring to with a documentary or if the photo was generated?

6261

So.. if they've marked these three stars, why do we associate the Pyramids with Orions belt?
Mostly because we forget that the Pyramids lign up with both sets.. and that Cygnus came first.. the bird was the image for a matriarchal society after all...

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread912247/pg8&mem=

Buddha

16th April 2014, 05:03 PM

Saw this interesting photo at ATS forum, not sure what he is referring to with a documentary or if the photo was generated?

6261

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread912247/pg8&mem=

No, Im sure that they line up with Orion's belt, WHY is the reason. We know that it was not slave labor moving and cutting fucking granite stones over hundreds of years... shits fucking rediculous. How were they moved? How were they CUT? I read about the pyrimids in south america incan teritory, story goes they tryed to move A giant stone and 15,000 people died when they lost control of it, shits documented. To have them lined up all over the world , and in a time when there was no tech to do that supposetly. Something we don't know of has gone on.

Horn

16th April 2014, 05:41 PM

Quite possible the sky was showing them something different then, think these things would have been recorded somewhere else.

Their straight line track across the globe also lends credence to that, but think it would be recorded elsewhere in the plans.

Unless it were so common as not seeing the need for record.

They also seem to represent family, Father, mother, offspring.

Blink

16th April 2014, 05:52 PM

Good question, but you are asking the wrong one (I know it's rhetorical, somewhat)... Seems like I have reading to do. My coffee table is saturated with books... uggg

Read "Fingerprints of the Gods" by Graham Hancock. You won't put it down once you start.......

singular_me

16th April 2014, 05:54 PM

I concur... bump!!! Hanckock has the smartness to bridge the mainstream and heresy. :)

I recommend all the vids you can find on the net with his lectures

Read "Fingerprints of the Gods" by Graham Hancock. You won't put it down once you start.......

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 06:12 PM

And the obscene display of intellectual frottage continues unabated...

All of this is just wild speculation because most of you don't believe in modern dating techniques.

There is three thousand years between when the pyramids were built and any of the great South American structures.

THREE THOUSAND YEARS IS A LONG TIME.

Q1) How many other large ancient structures around the world DO NOT match the position of stars in Orion's Belt?

Q2) How many large cities across the globe today match the position of Orion's Belt?

The first thing science wants to investigate is wether this occurrence is purely anomalous and these are the questions one would ask.

If you had a shred of credibility you would attempt to answer these questions BEFORE speculating wildly about either their origin or purpose.

Blink

16th April 2014, 06:15 PM

^^ Why are you so offended by this topic? And why do you wish to steer it in some other direction using insults and derogatory name calling?

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 06:28 PM

^^ Why are you so offended by this topic? And why do you wish to steer it in some other direction using insults and derogatory name calling?

First off it's been over a week since I posted those posts, you should look at the dates.

Secondly, in the above post I didn't use any 'colourful' language, so you should thank your lucky stars, lol.

Thirdly why do you have problem with applying a rigorous scientific methodology in your pursuit of the truth about this 'claim'?

Lastly my colourful language should have no bearing on the merit of my assertions, only one with an extremely poor unsubstantiated argument would use that as a reason for exclusion. No expletives here Blink, just genuine questions which, if you were honest in your endeavour, deserve your attention.

singular_me

16th April 2014, 06:38 PM

aeondaze: THREE THOUSAND YEARS IS A LONG TIME

egyptian pyramids are at least 10,000 years old, but sure if you wish to support the rigorous academic cartel, what can I say ???

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 06:47 PM

egyptian pyramids are at least 10,000 years old, but sure if you wish to support the rigorous academic cartel, what can I say ???

Where is your proof, for the millionth time, you can't substantiate that claim? The best you can do is an utterly pathetic attempt to destroy 100 years of good science by quoting ONE article written a quarter of a century in the past.

ONE article doesn't destroy the validity of a method, it takes a LOT more than that.

You have no proof. I give you alternate angles to validate your claim and what do you do, ignore them and keep posting the same old unproven assertions. Here is your chance, answer the two questions above...

Are these sites anomalies or not? Simple question....

Buddha

16th April 2014, 06:52 PM

Read "Fingerprints of the Gods" by Graham Hancock. You won't put it down once you start.......

I'm half way through that actaully.

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 07:03 PM

I'm half way through that actaully.

Well you should give up, Hancock is full of it...

The claims made by Hancock, Bauval, and others (such as Adrian Gilbert and Anthony West) concerning the significance of these proposed correlations have been examined by several scientists, who have published detailed criticism and rebuttal of these ideas.

Among these critiques are several from two astronomers, Ed Krupp of Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles and Anthony Fairall, astronomy professor at the University of Cape Town, South Africa. Using planetarium equipment, Krupp and Fairall independently investigated the angle between the alignment of Orion's Belt and north during the era cited by Hancock, Bauval, et al. (which differs from the angle seen today or in the 3rd millennium BC, because of the precession of the equinoxes), and found that the angle was somewhat different from the "perfect match" claimed by Bauval and Hancock in the Orion Constellation Theory—47–50 degrees per the planetarium measurements, compared to the 38-degree angle formed by the pyramids.[9]

Krupp also pointed out that the slightly-bent line formed by the three pyramids was deviated towards the north, whereas the slight "kink" in the line of Orion's Belt was deformed to the south, and to match them up one or the other of them had to be turned upside-down.[10] Indeed, this is what was done in the original book by Bauval and Gilbert (The Orion Mystery), which compared images of the pyramids and Orion without revealing that the pyramids’ map had been inverted.[11] Krupp and Fairall find other problems with the claims, including noting that if the Sphinx is meant to represent the constellation of Leo, then it should be on the opposite side of the Nile (the "Milky Way") from the pyramids ("Orion"),[9][10] that the vernal equinox c. 10,500 BC was in Virgo and not Leo,[9] and that in any case the constellations of the Zodiac originate from Mesopotamia and were completely unknown in Egypt until the much later Graeco-Roman era.[11] Ed Krupp repeated this "upside down" claim in the BBC documentary Atlantis Reborn (1999).

According to Bauval and Hancock, some astronomers (including Dr. Archie Roy, Dr. Percy Seymour, Dr. Mary Bruck, Dr. Giulio Magli), however, have rejected Krupp's argument. The correlation, they claim, is a visual one when standing north of the Giza pyramids and looking south. Archie Roy, professor Emeritus of Astronomy at Glasgow University, and Percy Seymour, astronomer and astrophysicist at Plymouth University U.K., have both publicly rejected several of Krupp's arguments, including the accusation that Bauval and Gilbert deliberately inverted the pyramid map.[11][not in citation given][12]

In a ruling by the Broadcasting Standards Commission (UK), the committee ruled in favour of Robert Bauval that Krupp's statement that maps were placed upside down was "unfairly" presented in the BBC documentary Atlantis Reborn, without Bauval's having been given a right to a filmed response.[1] Bauval and Hancock's filmed responses to Krupp's statements were included in the modified version of the documentary Atlantis Reborn Again shown on 14 December 2000.

steyr_m

16th April 2014, 07:06 PM

Where did you get this FALSE information.

The oldest pyramids are dated to 2600 BC, not 10,000 years old.

Show where were the pyramids dated to this - It isn't a fact if you can't show any proof, its just, well BULLSHIT.

Read The Fingerprints of the Gods -- he makes the case for the Sphinx and the Great Pyramids being 30,000-35,000 years old [I forget the exact number]

One thing about being on this forum is being prepared to possibly shed things you see on "The History [Indoctrination] Channel" and the "education" you got in school.

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 07:19 PM

Read The Fingerprints of the Gods -- he makes the case for the Sphinx and the Great Pyramids being 30,000-35,000 years old [I forget the exact number]

One thing about being on this forum is being prepared to possibly shed things you see on "The History [Indoctrination] Channel" and the "education" you got in school.

Hancock is exactly as his namesake says, he has his hand on his cock.

There is no proof these structures are that old, any claims made about the sphinx use the scientific process of weathering to make the claim of a more ancient origin, all the while ignoring the true reality of the material, limestone, which weathers completely differently to say something like sandstone.

The point is you are all picking and choosing which parts of science to use to bolster your arguments. That is nonsensical. You want to use the phenomena of weathering to back your claim, but you do so using a false model based on sandstone when the material in question is limestone. Limestone I might add that undergoes haloclasty when exposed to salty environments meaning the salts permeate the limestone causing it to expand and contract which leads to sloughing or flake off which you then claim is indicative of its ancient origin.

You can' pick and choose models. It's either the limestone model and haloclasty or nothing. Again what material is the sphinx made of? Simply answer that.

Buddha

16th April 2014, 07:25 PM

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 07:30 PM

I should give up, maybe I should read your fucking book? Where is it, Ill be glad.

Sorry I'm being sarcastic, I guess I'll just read your fucking bullshit posts, I'll consider that a "book"

We used to have someone here named "Book"...

My post make more fucking sense than your precious drivel. I ain't the one making absurd claims with no basis in fact, that's you department.

Lastly I don't need to write a fucking book debunking stupid assertions just to please your sorry arse so take a hike tough guy.

Buddha

16th April 2014, 07:34 PM

My post make more fucking sense than your precious drivel. I ain't the one making absurd claims with no basis in fact, that's you department.

Lastly I don't need to write a fucking book debunking stupid assertions just to please your sorry arse so take a hike tough guy.

What "precious" drivel? I'm not your enemy, you seem to be here just to start fights. It's something that you will never win. I take shits at 6 am more consistant than you are.

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 07:39 PM

What "precious" drivel? I'm not your enemy, you seem to be here just to start fights. It's something that you will never win. I take shits at 6 am more consistant than you are.

What is it with you knuckleheads? I merely and initially politely question your assertions regarding the outlandish claims you make and next thing I know is you regard it as a fight.

An argument maybe, but that's different to a fight. An argument is what is made when supporting a premise.

singular_me

16th April 2014, 07:40 PM

Buddha

16th April 2014, 07:42 PM

What is it with you knuckleheads? I merely and initially politely question your assertions regarding the outlandish claims you make and next thing I know is you regard it as a fight.

An argument maybe, but that's different to a fight. An argument is what is made when supporting a premise.

You call me a fucking knucklehead and don't think of it as a challenge? "Outlandish claims?" You better get your mind right, I like everyonr here, but don't come at me like that. I like to talk out my misinterpretations not sling names, are you Jewish?

Horn

16th April 2014, 07:51 PM

I also tend to think those off Egypt platforms were built well after (maybe not as well after as mainstream permits) the Giza plateau.

Still the reasons for the straight line their order still needs to be deciphered. As well as the older sites leading to Giza, The religiosity is there as an first attempt at globalization in some manner.

Buddha

16th April 2014, 07:54 PM

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 07:55 PM

You call me a fucking knucklehead and don't think of it as a challenge? "Outlandish claims?" You better get your mind right, I like everyonr here, but don't come at me like that. I like to talk out my misinterpretations not sling names, are you Jewish?

That's right you're a knucklehead. You call my posts bullshit when I'm the only one here looking at the claims objectively. You can talk as tough as you like, but it still doesn't answer the paltry nature of your claims.

Here we go again, the internet gang bangers come out in force it would seem.

If you can mangle to just stick to the argument Buddha without getting sand in your vagina we might get somewhere...

Buddha

16th April 2014, 08:00 PM

That's right you're a knucklehead. You call my posts bullshit when I'm the only one here looking at the claims objectively. You can talk as tough as you like, but it still doesn't answer the paltry nature of your claims.

Here we go again, the internet gang bangers come out in force it would seem.

If you can mangle to just stick to the argument Buddha without getting sand in your vagina we might get somewhere...

Nah one can't talk to someone like you, "sand in my vagina?" you are the fucking Sahara... It looks like you are here to get people banned, that's not a contest you want to participate in. Why are Grahm Handcocks theories wrong, (I'm not saying that they are right) but come on, don't get hostile. I'll TTY next week it's time to go. Try to get your ball's up in the mean time.

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 08:07 PM

You trust carbon 14 and I trust geology above all

Also, according to an article by Robert Sheer, water marks were found on the sides of the Great Pyramid at a level 400 feet higher than the Nile river is today, and deposits of sea salt inside the Pyramid corroborate the theory that it and the Sphinx must have been built before the time of the melting of the last great Ice Age, about 12,000 years ago.

we are even.

You wouldnt rely on anything I say, same on my side of the fence

until you start pondering and investigating why we have a pyramid on bank notes, I cannot force you to change your views. The Theosophy society which is the worship of the NWO claims that Great Pyramids are at least three Zodiacal years, or 75,000 years old (!!!!)
http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/soph/sopqa11.htm#ageofthe

No computer model has ever succeeded to find out HOW they were built - WHY?

No you don't trust geology because you pick and choose your model to fit your bias rather than the correct model for the material and circumstance in question. That is plain for all to see and should be cause for everyone here to question the soundness of you claims.

Just because a pyramid is on the dollar bill doesn't make your claims any more valid. That is preposterous. It is symbolism. The correct question should be:

"What is the symbolism of the pyramid and the all seeing eye on the dollar bill".

Blink

16th April 2014, 08:10 PM

First off it's been over a week since I posted those posts, you should look at the dates.

Secondly, in the above post I didn't use any 'colourful' language, so you should thank your lucky stars, lol.

Thirdly why do you have problem with applying a rigorous scientific methodology in your pursuit of the truth about this 'claim'?

Lastly my colourful language should have no bearing on the merit of my assertions, only one with an extremely poor unsubstantiated argument would use that as a reason for exclusion. No expletives here Blink, just genuine questions which, if you were honest in your endeavour, deserve your attention.

Who's science shall we use? And while your at it, explain how the Piri Reis map came to be. I would like to hear your "scientific" conclusions on that one........

The Piri Reis map shows the western coast of Africa, the eastern coast of South America, and the northern coast of Antarctica. The northern coastline of Antarctica is perfectly detailed. The most puzzling however is not so much how Piri Reis managed to draw such an accurate map of the Antarctic region 300 years before it was discovered, but that the map shows the coastline under the ice. Geological evidence confirms that the latest date Queen Maud Land could have been charted in an ice-free state is 4000 BC.

http://www.world-mysteries.com/sar_1.htm

Secrets in the map?

It's the other stuff that fascinates people. Among other claims:

The map shows the earth as seen from space
The map shows the subglacial topography of Greenland
The map shows the subglacial topography of Antarctica
The map is aligned with the earth's energy grid (whatever that means)

http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/PiriRies.HTM

What does "your" rigorous scientific methodology say about it?

Its all a case of who's history you wish to "believe". I personally like to leave no stone unturned, especially concerning the history of our planet. There are far to many scientific anomalies cast aside because they do not fit the preconceived human history we've been made to swallow. I suggest you read more (from a variety of different authors/historians/archeologists) before you engage in useless banter that proves nothing......

steyr_m

16th April 2014, 08:18 PM

Hancock is exactly as his namesake says, he has his hand on his cock.

There is no proof these structures are that old, any claims made about the sphinx use the scientific process of weathering to make the claim of a more ancient origin, all the while ignoring the true reality of the material, limestone, which weathers completely differently to say something like sandstone.

The point is you are all picking and choosing which parts of science to use to bolster your arguments. That is nonsensical. You want to use the phenomena of weathering to back your claim, but you do so using a false model based on sandstone when the material in question is limestone. Limestone I might add that undergoes haloclasty when exposed to salty environments meaning the salts permeate the limestone causing it to expand and contract which leads to sloughing or flake off which you then claim is indicative of its ancient origin.

You can' pick and choose models. It's either the limestone model and haloclasty or nothing. Again what material is the sphinx made of? Simply answer that.

/ignore

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 08:27 PM

Why can't you accept the contrary opinions of academics?

There are two major discrepancies from known coastlines: the North American coast mentioned above, and the southern portion of the South American coast. On the Piri Reis map the latter is shown bending off sharply to the east starting around present-day Rio de Janeiro. A more popular interpretation of this territory has been to identify this section with the Queen Maud Land coast of Antarctica. This claim is generally traced to Arlington H. Mallery, a civil engineer and amateur archaeologist who was a supporter of pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact hypotheses. Though his assertions were not well received by scholars, they were revived in Charles Hapgood's 1966 book Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings.[36] This book proposed a theory of global exploration by a pre-classical undiscovered civilization based on his analysis of this and other ancient and late medieval maps. More notoriously these claims were repeated in Erich von Däniken's Chariots of the Gods (which attributed the knowledge of the coast to extraterrestrials) and Gavin Menzies's 1421: The Year China Discovered America (which attributed it to supposed Chinese voyages), both of which were roundly denounced by both scholars and debunkers of fringe works but which attracted huge popular followings.[36]

A more sober analysis of these claims was published by Gregory McIntosh, a historian of cartography, who examined the map in depth in his book The Piri Reis Map of 1513 (Athens and London: University of Georgia Press, 2000). He was able to find sources for much of the map in Columbus's writings. Certain peculiarities (such appearance of the Virgin Islands in two locations) he attributed to the use of multiple maps as sources; others (such as the errors in North American geography) he traced to the continued confusion of the area with East Asia. As far as the accuracy of depiction of the supposed Antarctic coast is concerned, there are two conspicuous errors. First, it is shown hundreds of miles north of its proper location; second, the Drake Passage is completely missing, with the Antarctic Peninsula presumably conflated with the Argentine coast. The identification of this area of the map with the frigid Antarctic coast is also difficult to reconcile with the notes on the map which describe the region as having a warm climate.[36]

It should be kept in mind that maps of the period generally depicted a large continent named Terra Australis Incognita of highly variable shape and extent. This land was posited by Ptolemy as a counterbalance to the extensive continental areas in the northern hemisphere; due to a lack of exploration and various misunderstandings its existence was not fully abandoned until circumnavigation of the area during the second voyage of James Cook in the 1770s showed that if it existed, it was much smaller than imagined previously. The first confirmed landing on Antarctica was not until 1820, and the coastline of Queen Maud Land did not see significant exploration before Norwegian expeditions began in 1891.[38][39] In 1513 Cape Horn had not yet been discovered, and indeed Ferdinand Magellan's voyage of circumnavigation was not to set sail for another six years. It is unclear whether the map maker saw South America itself as part of the unknown southern lands (as shown in the Atlas Miller),[40] or whether (as Dutch thought) he drew what was then known of the coast with substantial distortion, but in any case serious scholarship holds that there is no reason to believe that the map is the product of genuine knowledge of the Antarctic coast.[36]

The map does not display the accuracy that you claim. Simple. You need to accept this.

steyr_m

16th April 2014, 08:30 PM

Why can't you accept the contrary opinions of academics?
The map does not display the accuracy that you claim. Simple. You need to accept this.

I forgot to say why I'm ignoring you. Hancock didn't mention rock weathering, it was the Earth's precession.

/ignore

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 08:30 PM

/ignore

Looks like your another of those obtuse fringe theorists that run around with their hands covering their ears screaming like a kid with autism any time anyone refutes your absurd claims, FWIW.

steyr_m

16th April 2014, 08:35 PM

How sweet

6262

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 08:36 PM

I forgot to say why I'm ignoring you. Hancock didn't mention rock weathering, it was the Earth's precession.

/ignore

The guy wrote a number of books all centred around the very same theme. It's amusing how picky you are with those that disagree yet you prostrate yourself at the feet of this guy without looking at the counter arguements.

That is called wilful ignorance.

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 08:38 PM

Ok so thats three now that cannot back up there arguments and so would chose instead to put me on ignore. They don't want to have a discussion. They just want to partake in this obscene display of pseudo-intellectual frottage.

singular_me

16th April 2014, 08:46 PM

answer this question yourself but I assume that you wont investigate otherwise you would have to look into my so-called preposterous claims and discover they have legs... LOL

"What is the symbolism of the pyramid and the all seeing eye on the dollar bill".

Hancock is exactly as his namesake says, he has his hand on his cock.

hand on his cock... I dont mind disagreeing but you are just too insulting to continue this discussion. The whole planet is ruled by scams/hoaxes/deceptions, yet you choose to trust those behind the latter. The scammers are still teaching that Columbus discovered America to kids -- Hello!!!

Glass

16th April 2014, 08:50 PM

Santos points out that the eye of horus is a match for a cross section through the human brain front to back. I think he shows this by comparison in part 2 of the grand opus videos posted.

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 08:57 PM

answer this question yourself but I assume that you wont investigate otherwise you would have to look into my so-called preposterous claims and discover they have legs... LOL

What is irritating is how you think that I can't adequately explain away the symbolism on the dollar bill without admitting their was some advanced civilisation beyond 10,000 BC.

What does the eye of Horus mean to these psychos, and what did it mean to the cults of ancient egypt? These are two different questions.

Clearly this is a statement of dominance,couched in secrecy nothing more nothing less. You are making the claim that it means something else, so be upfront for a change and tell us what you think it means.

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 09:01 PM

Santos points out that the eye of horus is a match for a cross section through the human brain front to back. I think he shows this by comparison in part 2 of the grand opus videos posted.

And what is one to do with this superfluous information?

Can't any of you accept that the religious cults of ancient Egypt are a product of the culture in the region at the time.

singular_me

16th April 2014, 09:11 PM

http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_width/hash/da/db/dadba3460f2700ef16083a3f9d4bc3c9.jpg?itok=NIOPZr1O

do you know that the pineal gland is linked to the location of Consciousness in the brain that connects with the Aether? so what does respresent the all Seeing Eye?

http://efherne.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/human-brain-pineal-gland-eye-of-horus.jpg?w=807

What does the eye of Horus mean to these psychos, and what did it mean to the cults of ancient egypt? These are two different questions.

Clearly this is a statement of dominance,couched in secrecy nothing more nothing less. You are making the claim that it means something else, so be upfront for a change and tell us what you think it means.

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 09:23 PM

The aether, what is that? It doesn't exist, it has not had a place in science for over 100 years. It is the physicists equivalent of miasma, lol. A stupid word for a a redundant concept. Keep trying though, soon you will have dug up every last futile path that science has taken ( if you already have not) proclaiming it to be the true progenitor of modern science, lol

singular_me

16th April 2014, 09:29 PM

I am not pro Einstein but since you only swear by the academia here it is

Einstein aether theory -
https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=&oq=einstein+aether&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4AURU_enUS528US577&q=einstein+aether&gs_l=hp....0.0.0.4993...........0.Y33p1XUXSb0

the academia has the habit to release bits of truths at the time, so Einstein was looking in the right direction here.

The aether, what is that? It doesn't exist, it has not had a place in science for over 100 years. It is the physicists equivalent of miasma, lol. A stupid word for a a redundant concept. Keep trying though, soon you will have dug up every last futile path that science has taken ( if you already have not) proclaiming it to be the true progenitor of modern science, lol

Horn

16th April 2014, 09:42 PM

What is irritating is how you think that I can't adequately explain away the symbolism on the dollar bill without admitting their was some advanced civilisation beyond 10,000 BC.

Investigating the origins should be encouraged, a that man has a propensity to destroy all artifacts and connections to the past when he's become fed up with tptb realized.

Methods, techniques and technology are often kept away initially then scuttled away by those same powers to be used upon in future conquest, slowly released at points in the future to maintain power and control.

Popular among conspiracy theorists is the claim that the Eye of Providence shown atop an unfinished pyramid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid) on the Great Seal of the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Seal_of_the_United_States) indicates the influence of Freemasonry in the founding of the United States. This was dramatized in the 2004 Disney film National Treasure (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Treasure_(film)). However, common Masonic use of the Eye dates to 14 years after the creation of the Great Seal. Furthermore, among the members of the various design committees for the Great Seal, only Benjamin Franklin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin) was a Mason (and his ideas for the seal were not adopted). Indeed, many Masonic organizations have explicitly denied any connection to the creation of the Seal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_Providence

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 10:11 PM

If there is any body part that it resembles it is the clitoris.

It makes about as much sense as your claim that it is the pineal gland, pure speculation with no real basis in fact.

Do I need to show you a picture as proof?

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 10:16 PM

man has a propensity to destroy all artifacts and connections to

What cods wallop, show me where artefacts relating to your theory have been destroyed?

You make these claims, then show the proof...

Horn

16th April 2014, 10:24 PM

What cods wallop, show me where artefacts relating to your theory have been destroyed?

You make these claims, then show the proof...

I'm almost certain that back in the day you'd have been a christian grinding Hypatia's bones to dust.

There are to forms of dating something, dirt merchant dating and relative dating.

Your's has been and will continue to be,, a date with a dirt merchant. :)

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 10:35 PM

I'm almost certain that back in the day you'd have been a christian grinding Hypatia's bones to dust.

There are to forms of dating something, dirt merchant dating and relative dating.

Your's has been and will continue to be,, a date with a dirt merchant. :)

Ok, so you have nothing of substance in regard to this and instead resort to ad hominen attacks.

This is the very behaviour that you and your gutless band of internet gang bangers accuse me.

So not only do we have a wilfully ignorant bunch of delusional misfits, but a bunch of misfits that purely based on their commitment to these outrageous claims, hold themselves to a different standard than those that challenge their ridiculous theories.

What a bunch of hipocrites.

singular_me

16th April 2014, 10:41 PM

I think he loses control when he is faced with anyhting that may connect him to his denial that there is just something bigger than pure materialism/life.

hand cock ... clitoris... as to wonder if his parents were/are Freudian psychiatrists.

I'm almost certain that back in the day you'd have been a christian grinding Hypatia's bones to dust.

There are to forms of dating something, dirt merchant dating and relative dating.

Your's has been and will continue to be,, a date with a dirt merchant. :)

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 10:45 PM

Still nothing, no proof of the destruction of artefacts?

I guess then what you are saying is just bullshit.

Come on you made the claim, where's the proof?

Horn

16th April 2014, 10:48 PM

Ok, so you have nothing of substance in regard to this

Thing is aeon, you have your points I mine. You've been pointed to the library at Alexandria, shown the flaws of C-14.

Yet still, you insist at flogging more into an abyss. if you're determined to find answers to topic than join.

If all you can do is generally correct (and rather coarsely i might add) then your motives for even commenting are suspect.

As I said an xtian at the sacrifice of Hypatia.

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 10:51 PM

I think he loses control when he is faced with anyhting that may connect him to his denial that there is just bigger than pure materialism/life.

hand cock ... now clitoris... as to wonder if his parents were Freudian psychiatrists.

Another attempted hit by you and your internet gang bangers. Can't stand on your own two feet, can't make rational arguments, so you resort to snide remarks and ad hominen attacks..how very predoctable

You're the one who is making the Freudian connection.

Was it the word clitoris, did it get you all hot and bothered. You appear to need to see everything in a childish smutty context, ahaha.

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 10:57 PM

Thing is aeon, you have you points I mine. You've been pointed to the library at Alexandria, shown the flaws of C-14.

Yet still, you insist at flogging more into an abyss. if you're determined to find answers to topic than join.

If all you can do is generally correct (and rather coarsely i might add) then your motives for even commenting are suspect.

As I said an xtian at the sacrifice of Hypatia.

And this is your woefully inadequate response to show proof that quote "man destroys artefacts"

OMG, you are as dumb as a box of hammers, lol

I ask for some simple proof, and you go off on a tangent like a kid with ADHD.

http://www.youngie.com/images/y2kjoey3.jpg

Horn

16th April 2014, 11:02 PM

I imagine you work your profession straight from the queen's tit, is that so?

An Aboriginal historical evidence swathe & destroyer, possibly?

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 11:12 PM

I imagine you work your profession straight from the queen's tit, is that so?

An Aboriginal historical evidence swathe & destroyer, possibly?

Is that the best your poorly formed and unimaginative pea brain can come up with? :p

Horn

16th April 2014, 11:23 PM

"Yes, your highness that site was previously an Aboriginal burial ground but Aeon (our esteemed archaeologist)

had it cleaned up in jiffy then prepped for the New obelisk and pentagram turnabout."

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 11:27 PM

Bob, weave and dodge, but still no proof of this fabled destruction.

Remember, YOU made the claim....

o)(~

Neuro

16th April 2014, 11:34 PM

I wonder about the hieroglyphs inside the pyramids, they are the same or similar as you find in the valley of the dead, Luxor, Aswan, Alexandria, from different Egyptian civilizations carbon dated 2500-5000 (tel:2500-5000) years ago. Does Hancock make the claim that the hieroglyphs were put in the pyramid walls later, like a kind of graffiti. Or does he claim that the Egyptian civilization started 30-35,000 years ago, and the written language started then? And then you have the older smaller pyramids of Egypt built before the ones in Giza. Are these only attempts at copying the grandeur of the great pyramids of Giza? And then later pharaohs decided it would be much easier if they just broke into the existing pyramids of Giza and made these their burial ground?

Maybe Cleopatra lived 20,000 years ago? What about Anthony poor guy?

History becomes very strange and distorted, doesn't it?

singular_me

16th April 2014, 11:40 PM

you are the one insulting Handcock and ridiculing a picture of the brain, it just fired back at you :)

I am glad to see you can make fun of yourself :)

as much as I have a tough skin, I need more to feel offended.

Another attempted hit by you and your internet gang bangers. Can't stand on your own two feet, can't make rational arguments, so you resort to snide remarks and ad hominen attacks..how very predoctable

You're the one who is making the Freudian connection.

Was it the word clitoris, did it get you all hot and bothered. You appear to need to see everything in a childish smutty context, ahaha.

Horn

16th April 2014, 11:44 PM

I figure you'll get the message better from one of your brothers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVQs4B2jAW0

aeondaze

16th April 2014, 11:46 PM

Are you really that stupid? I didn't ridicule a picture of the brain, in fact I didn't ridicule anything, I just posted an equally plausible alternative to your fanciful claim.

singular_me

16th April 2014, 11:50 PM

Graham Hancock and Anthony West ... speaking of 10,000 BC at least.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsofKUDXds4

I wonder about the hieroglyphs inside the pyramids, they are the same or similar as you find in the valley of the dead, Luxor, Aswan, Alexandria, from different Egyptian civilizations carbon dated 2500-5000 years ago. Does Hancock make the claim that the hieroglyphs were put in the pyramid walls later, like a kind of graffiti. Or does he claim that the Egyptian civilization started 30-35,000 years ago, and the written language started then? And then you have the older smaller pyramids of Egypt built before the ones in Giza.

Horn

17th April 2014, 12:37 AM

Of course the Sphinx is that old, some said it was even moved from elsewhere, lion men are way ancient.

Still the orientation of the pyramids from Hancock seems weak to me. A 45degree angle is just that... I much rather like cygnus and the milky way column.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwgN2gHIWaQ

Löwenmensch - a lion-headed figurine found in Germany and dating to the Upper Paleolithic. (about 40,000 BCE)

Hypertiger

17th April 2014, 01:45 AM

Supposedly...there is a warning.

Before an ice age...or glaciation...there is massive heat...since you require massive heat to power the evaporation required to supply the demand of the cold...for water vapor to turn into Ice...and give life the ice age of death.

With water vapor being...the top green house gas.

In the spring or 3 March summer 6 June and late fall 9 September...the SUN of GOD sustains you...in the winter...the Black hole of the Universe tries to eat all the heat from you. it is 0 and 1.

Number 3 is where you start the march to doom with glee to the fall down into the black hole of absolute 0.

and around there...if you had a good boy harvest...you meet Santa Claus...But if you had a bad boy harvest...it's Satan's claws.

of course...following that...if you survive...in spring you begin the next march to doom with glee...

I see this all the time...explosion up to absolute 1 in June with the sun of god the most powerful and then implosion down to absolute 0 in December...with the black hole of the Universe most powerful.

cold...wants to become hot...and it claws its way down from the arctic or the north pole...trying to eat you all.

in the far north...the war against deflation will not last long...until the black hole or frozen star...freezes you to death trying to become GOD.

of course if you stare at the sun of GOD...your eyes will be burned out...and then you will really be a devout follower of the ignorance is bliss religion.

not too much power...not too little power...but always greater than previously.

not too hot...not too cold...but just right...warm...

White... light...dawn

Grey...shiny...silver....the singularity between the hyperinflationary or positive domain and the hyperdeflationary negative domain is here in the twilight zone.

Black...dark...dusk

The finite an fragile duality of conservative quantum liberal relativity is connected by the infinite an indestructible singularity of gravity...you all just do not seem to be able to connect them.

Since you have to know GOD...or Truth.

The Sun of GOD...Is a lie you think is Truth of course...especially when it burns you to a crisp...convincing you...you might think that.

You can see the visible chaos or effect of Gravity...but the invisible order or cause behind it all...you can not...like when a Chinese factory workers jump off the roof to their death...from absolute 1 above...to absolute 0 below.

Horn

17th April 2014, 02:06 AM

Speaking of lionheads...

what's the orientation for, HT?

Hypertiger

17th April 2014, 02:12 AM

Explain further.

Horn

17th April 2014, 02:22 AM

6263

Neuro

17th April 2014, 02:33 AM

Graham Hancock and Anthony West ... speaking of 10,000 BC at least.

Ok sure, but it really doesn't change the problems I outlined.

The hieroglyphs at Giza pyramids fits in a historical context, where the hieroglyphs actually evolved over time, if the pyramids in Giza are 12000 years old, everything else we know about the chronology of Egyptian history would be wrong, and Cleopatra died several thousand years before Anthony was born...

Glass

17th April 2014, 03:50 AM

From what I can tell the idea of the all seeing eye is that seeing every thing is Knowing.

singular_me

17th April 2014, 06:09 AM

Ok sure, but it really doesn't change the problems I outlined.

The hieroglyphs at Giza pyramids fits in a historical context, where the hieroglyphs actually evolved over time, if the pyramids in Giza are 12000 years old, everything else we know about the chronology of Egyptian history would be wrong, and Cleopatra died several thousand years before Anthony was born...

although I wouldnt trust the mainstream hieroglyths translation too much, that doesnt mean that we have the wrong chronology, the egyptian culture may well have appeared in 3000BC... or be itself the remanant of a civilization that was destroyed. However rogue historians do not attribute the pyramids to the egyptians but a previous civilization. It is sure that ancient egyptians - and sumerians - have been in contact with an incredibly advanced source of knowledge, hence the mystery that wont go away.

interesting thread
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=151166

aeondaze

17th April 2014, 07:34 AM

the egyptian culture may well have appeared in 3000BC... or be itself the remanant of a civilization that was destroyed. It is sure that ancient egyptians - and sumerians - have been in contact with an incredibly advanced source of knowledge, hence the mystery that wont go

So the Egyptians may or may not be the builders of the pyramids? Not much of a theory to go on the, that's a pretty serious admission you and the proponents of these theories make, that you really have no clue whatsoever.

The next one is a pearler, "it is sure they had contact with an incredibly advanced civilisation". Is it?

How do you arrive at this surety. What you are saying is there is no doubt, what proof do you offer that guarantees this is so, because so far you haven't provided ANY.

All you've supplied is gross supposition.

So you admit the chronology of the Egyptians that is currently accepted is correct? Right?

Look, I'm just trying to establish some firm ground to actually have a debate, changing the goal posts at every turn does not help your cause.

Also where are we at with Egyptian hieroglyphs? What are they dated to in this alternate theory of yours. I just want a straight answer, I shouldn't be required to trawl through hours of videos for a simple answer, that's just being unnecessarily evasive, neuro might have had the patience to, but I find it extremely poor form. A date for hieroglyphs is all I'm asking.

Neuro

17th April 2014, 08:18 AM

although I wouldnt trust the mainstream hieroglyths translation too much, that doesnt mean that we have the wrong chronology, the egyptian culture may well have appeared in 3000BC... or be itself the remanant of a civilization that was destroyed. However rogue historians do not attribute the pyramids to the egyptians but a previous civilization. It is sure that ancient egyptians - and sumerians - have been in contact with an incredibly advanced source of knowledge, hence the mystery that wont go away.

interesting thread
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=151166
Yes but it requires a logical somersault, if the Egyptians didn't build the Giza pyramids. Because you have older smaller pyramids, and you have the valley of the dead close to Luxor which are newer, like 1500 BC, in between you have the pyramids of Giza. They all have slightly different hieroglyphs on their walls, an evolution of the written language. So what it requires is that the Egyptians first then tried to copy the Giza pyramids. And left their dead in those carbondated to 3200 BC. Then 600 years later they broke into what you suggest is the really old Giza pyramids and scribbled their hieroglyphs on previously empty walls and buried the dead in those chambers carbon dated to 2600 BC. To later go on and put hieroglyphs in the burial chambers of valley of the dead close to Aswan carbon dated to 1500-1000 BC...

This means that ancient Egyptians are probably among the biggest historical frauds in history. Possibly barred the holohoaxers...

ps I am writing from memory so I may have gotten a few numbers wrong, as it was 23 years ago since I was in Egypt and saw the pyramids...

Horn

17th April 2014, 08:35 AM

Ok sure, but it really doesn't change the problems I outlined.

The hieroglyphs at Giza pyramids fits in a historical context, where the hieroglyphs actually evolved over time, if the pyramids in Giza are 12000 years old, everything else we know about the chronology of Egyptian history would be wrong, and Cleopatra died several thousand years before Anthony was born...

Conversely the similar orientation of those pyramids in Asia and Mexico would close their time window more towards the original Giza set. Lack of record creation from Giza assuming earliest known. Or if in fact as is possible with most human cultures, one culture moves in and lays claim to the existing, staking its claim by and through diligence of assuming or removing any and all past evidence and record.

Which is what we have here... masons are doing it every day assuming symbols from the past making all records their own.

Horn

17th April 2014, 01:13 PM

After the great deluge tptb was hard pressed to find any new pyramid slaves and usurpers long term interest holders,

All previous history was cut short at 3500 B.C. and new leases on the land made available to all high and insured long term bond holders everywhere.

Blood repository stations (branch pyramid banks) were instituted as far away as mexico, xiangland to get things jumpstarted again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61QyrqsdyTg

Twenty years ago, based on his geological analyses, Dr. Robert Schoch concluded that the oldest portion of the Great Sphinx of Egypt dates back thousands of years earlier than the traditional archaeological attribution of circa 2500 BCE. Egyptologists were outraged, saying such an early date was impossible because there was no evidence of sophisticated culture prior to circa 3500 BCE.

Now there is new and dramatic evidence that supports Dr. Schoch's original thesis; found in Turkey, it is a site known as Göbekli Tepe. Constructed of magnificently carved 10- to 15-ton stone pillars that are astronomically oriented, the site shows incredible sophistication yet dates back to nearly 10,000 BCE, overturning all our assumptions about the origins of civilization. Furthermore, the site was intentionally buried circa 8,000 BCE, but why? Dr. Schoch's new theory involves both meteoritic bombardments and plasma outbursts from the Sun, which brought the last ice age to an abrupt end during Göbekli Tepe times. Such events could occur again; we may be overdue.

singular_me

17th April 2014, 01:36 PM

singular_me

17th April 2014, 01:47 PM

so we had Nero burning Rome, Hitler accused of the burning down the Reichtag (sorry for spelling)... history is repleted with such stories, either to start a war OR/AND conceal important historical facts

Those who really believe that the Library Of Alexandria burned down accidentally are really not rational... they had to remove from the public all the Gnostic texts along with the true history of the world - and turn the Mystery Schools into a secretive organization... that is how the masonic cult started So it is utterly important to investigate what they have been concealing and which now is in Vatican's vaults.

The Burning of the Library of Alexandria
(mainstream view)
http://ehistory.osu.edu/world/articles/articleview.cfm?aid=9

the evidence is the Pine Cone statue and the Peacocks in Vatican Court - SYMBOLS OF EXTREMELY ANCIENT KNOWLEDGE that cavemen could NOT have possessed.

http://www.richardcassaro.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Pine-Cone-Symbolism-Pigna.jpg

The pine cone symbol is one of the most mysterious emblems found in ancient and modern art and architecture. Few scholars realize it, but the pine cone alludes to the highest degree of spiritual illumination possible. - See more at: http://www.richardcassaro.com/occult-symbolism-behind-pine-cone-art-architecture#sthash.05HpKvmT.dpuf

in very ancient cultures the pine cone is associated with the pineal gland/ Consciousness. The pinecone appears in the Sumerian, Egyptian, hindiuist/Vedic cultures

http://www.richardcassaro.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Staff-of-Osiris-Egyptian.jpg

http://www.ufo-contact.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Ancient-Annunaki-Sumerian-Gods-Sacred-Pine-Cone-Fertilization-Pineal-Gland-Cave-of-Brahma.jpeg

http://www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk/Images/countries/indian%20pics/maizeinindia2crop.jpg

so you guys, Neuro and Aeondaze, if you do not wish to DIG in there, leave this thread asap... you will NOT win.

Horn

17th April 2014, 01:50 PM

The 3 pyarmids, I reapeat, are OLDER than 3500 years. Period.

stop twisting what I am saying to suit your own mindset

snip, snip, slice, slice

The more I look at the alignment thing is that it must have some sort of polar North and Solar significance. A paper here tries to tie down creation dates based on that but still ends up somewhat inconclusive, but still in the approximate era.

http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/files/034_NatureArticle.pdf

What Orion has to do with it seems straight off.

Neuro

17th April 2014, 02:05 PM

No I am saying that Cleopatra may well have been the last ruler of Egypt... if the academia cartel REFUSES to go farther back than 3500BC, there lies the historical fraud, because they are HIDING evidence, that does NOT mean that during the 3500 years the chronology is wrong for that VERY period of time, we are talking OF PRIOR THAT... and the academia cartel prefers us NOT TO KNOW what has happened before they set up their calculations

The 3 pyarmids, I reapeat, are OLDER than 3500 years. Period.

stop twisting what I am saying to suit your own mindset
Really they don't refuse to go back beyond 3500 BC re Egyptian civilization history, present reliable EVIDENCE that it is older than that. You repeating your assertions is not evidence, btw... Re the alignment of the pyramids in relation to Orion's Belt, how is that important? Each day and hour I can see Orion's Belt in different alignments, is this supposed alignment only allowed to happen at a certain day and time? If so, how do you know what day and time of the year the Egyptians/aliens/whatever considered important?

singular_me

17th April 2014, 05:17 PM

all the evidence are from NON conventional archeologists like Graham Hancock- but you and aeon just go by the mainstream - so end of story

how is that important - Atheists cannot believe it anyway as they are allergic to esotericsm and spirituality. Go back to the OP and look well. Also make a search about the Pinecone when you get a chance... you see the NWO footprints all over the planet, yet refuse to dig deeper while 90% of what we are taught is a scam/hoax/deception ... so stay in your one-dimensional reality until you get an epiphany...

so Bye . :)

sure atheists will never go there:
ps: The pinecone: Masonic emblem of enlightenment and an ancient symbol of reproduction and regeneratio. Descartes had suggested that the pinecone-shaped pineal gland might be the "abode of the spirit of man", from which the soul "radiates forth through all the remainder of the body". Uglow describes how "the cone's slow ripening and opening to release the seeds came to stand for the expansion of consciousness."
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/aug/31/the-pinecone-jenny-uglow-review

HOW... look, the caduceus that the medical field is using!
http://earthelixir.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/masonic-pine-cone-caduceus-whitehall-ny.jpg

I am not trying to change the topic - but if you do not agree that esoterism rules the planet, HOW can non-mainstream/rogue archeologists convice you, really?? And the 3 pyramids hold a secret that many cannot even fathom - because the ancient egyptians N-E-V-E-R built them.

Did you know that the height of the pyramid (481 feet) is almost exactly 1/1,000,000,000 of the distance from the earth to the sun (480.6 billion feet)?

Really they don't refuse to go back beyond 3500 BC re Egyptian civilization history, present reliable EVIDENCE that it is older than that. You repeating your assertions is not evidence, btw... Re the alignment of the pyramids in relation to Orion's Belt, how is that important? Each day and hour I can see Orion's Belt in different alignments, is this supposed alignment only allowed to happen at a certain day and time? If so, how do you know what day and time of the year the Egyptians/aliens/whatever considered important?

Horn

17th April 2014, 05:18 PM

NEW STUDIES CONFIRM VERY OLD SPHINX:

by Dr. Robert M. Schoch © 2000

My research into the age of the Great Sphinx led me to ultimately question many aspects of the "traditional" scientific world view that, to this day, permeates most of academia. I got to a point where there were so many new ideas buzzing around in my head that I felt I had to organize them on paper, and this led me to author the book VOICES OF THE ROCKS: A SCIENTIST LOOKS AT CATASTROPHES AND ANCIENT CIVILIZATIONS (by Robert M. Schoch, with Robert Aquinas McNally. New York: Harmony Books, 1999).

The manuscript for VOICES was completed in August 1998. Since that time I have learned of two independent geological studies of the Great Sphinx and its age. These studies go a long way toward both supporting my analysis and conclusions and rebutting the inadequate counter arguments of the critics. In both cases they corroborate the primary conclusions of my original studies of the Great Sphinx, namely that the Sphinx and Sphinx enclosure show evidence of significant precipitation-induced weathering and erosion (degradation), and the core body of the Sphinx and the oldest portions of the Sphinx temple predate the pharaohs Khafre (ca. 2500 B.C.) and Khufu (Khufu or Cheops, a predecessor of Khafre, reigned about 2551-2528 B.C.).

The first study was undertaken by the geologist David Coxill ("The Riddle of the Sphinx" published in the Spring 1998 issue of the journal INSCRIPTION: JOURNAL OF ANCIENT EGYPT). After confirming my observations on the weathering and erosion of the Sphinx, and pointing out that other explanations do not work, Coxill clearly states (page 17): "This [the data and analysis he covers in the preceding portions of his paper] implies that the Sphinx is at least 5,000 years old and pre-dates dynastic times." Coxill then discusses very briefly the [I]seismic work that Thomas Dobecki and I pursued and my estimate of an initial date of 5,000 to 7,000 B.C. for the earliest parts of the Sphinx based on the seismic data. He neither supports nor refutes this portion of my work, but simply writes (page 17): "Absolute dates for the sculpturing of the Sphinx should be taken with extreme caution and therefore dates should be as conservative as possible -- until more conclusive evidence comes to light." I can understand that he could take this stance, although perhaps I feel more comfortable with, and confident in, the seismic analysis we did. Coxill, in the next paragraph of his paper (page 17), continues: "Nevertheless, it [the Sphinx] is clearly older than the traditional date for the origins of the Sphinx -- in the reign of Khafre, 2520-2490 BC." Bottom line: Coxill agrees with the heart of my analysis and likewise concludes that the oldest portions of the Sphinx date to before dynastic times; that is, prior to circa 3000 B.C

http://www.robertschoch.com/articles/schochgobeklitepenewdawnsept2010.pdf

aeondaze

17th April 2014, 05:45 PM

First up, Graham Hancock is an author not an archaeologist. He doesn't make money undertaking archaeological digs, he makes money writing books.

Second, to assert that there are non mainstream players in this endeavour is untruthful, there is a correct way to date artefacts and sites and then nothing else. Geology/strata alone is but one tool, the accepted methodology is to combine a few dating techniques and hope that they meet at a common point in time and then this can be viewed as corroboration, however this is by no means assured. Anything else is just bad science, picking and choosing techniques to fit a bias for a predetermined outcome, which is what every one of the proponents of this theory do.

Theories either stand up to the light of scrutiny, or they don't. Clearly in this case it is built on very shaky ground, there is ample evidence to the contrary and so it should be discarded outright. Willing a theory to be right will not make it so.

You may not like what we say but unfortunately you are posting in a public forum, if the debate is not going according to your personal bias you can always close the thread, but again in many ways that is tantamount to admitting defeat and that you have exhausted your argument and have nothing else to counter the rigorous challenges all good theories are able to withstand.

Horn

17th April 2014, 05:49 PM

http://earlyworld.tripod.com/RedatingtheSphinx.htm

A research team has discovered physical evidence that the Great Sphinx of Giza, Egypt, may be at least half again and possibly over twice as old as it was assumed to be. A date of between 5000 and 7000 BCE or earlier challenges the accepted chronology of world civilization. In response, archaeologists have thrown mud at geologists, historians have been caught in the middle, and the Sphinx, having revealed one secret, challenges us to unravel even greater ones.

The discovery originated half a century ago in the work of a neglected French scholar, R.A. Schwaller de Lubicz (1891-1962). Between 1937 and 1952, Schwaller undertook a survey of the Egyptian Temple of Luxor. His measurements of the floorplan and other detailed observations of the ruins disclosed geometrical relationships not previously suspected. These were confirmed by French archaeologists. Schwaller found similar relationships at other sites. He reported his findings in 1949 and gave a fuller account in 1957.[1] A reviewer for the Journal of Near Eastern Studies urged his colleagues to pay serious attention to Schwaller's work, which challenged the notion of Egypt's mathematical inferiority and suggested a new dimension to Egyptian religious belief.[2] But Schwaller stirred up opposition by the speculative meanings that he assigned to Egyptian architecture and inscriptions, and other scholars dismissed his findings.

Schwaller observed a curious physical anomaly in the pyramid complex at Giza. The erosion on the Sphinx, he noted, was quite different from the erosion observable on other structures. Schwaller suggested that the cause of erosion on the Sphinx was water rather than wind-borne sand. At the time, nobody understood the implications of this observation and it went largely unnoticed until the 1970s, when the independent Egyptologist John Anthony West took up the question.[3]

What is now the Sphinx head was probably at one time an outcrop of rock. The 240-foot body of the monument, in the shape of a recumbent lion facing east, was excavated from the limestone bedrock of the Giza plateau, forming an open enclosure around it. A small temple, the "Sphinx Temple," stands in front of the monument. This and an adjacent temple to the south, known as the "Khafra Valley Temple," originally stood close to the Nile river. The Valley Temple is at one end of a long 1600 foot causeway that leads to the Mortuary Temple in front of the Pyramid of Khafra (Chephren). The Sphinx and Valley Temples consist of huge limestone blocks quarried from the enclosure and refaced with Aswan granite. To the northeast of Khafra's pyramid lies the Great Pyramid of Khufu (Cheops) and to the southwest lies the Pyramid of Menkaura (Mycerinus). Causeways also link the Khufu and Menkaura pyramids to valley temples along the ancient Nile. Archaeologists attribute the Sphinx to the Old Kingdom fourth dynasty ruler Khafra, who reigned in the mid-2500s BCE.[4]
West compared the erosion on the Sphinx, on its temples, and on the enclosure walls to the erosion of other structures on the Giza plateau. On the Sphinx and its nearby walls, the rock was worn badly, giving it a sagging appearance. Edges were rounded and deep fissures were prominent. On structures elsewhere on the plateau, the surfaces showed only the sharper abrasion of wind and sand. Egypt experienced torrential rainfall in the millennia that marked the post-glacial northward shift of the temperate zone rainbelt. With some interruptions this period lasted from about 10,000 to 5000 BCE, turning the Sahara from green savanna into a desert. A shorter period of rainfall lasted from about 4000 to 3000 BCE, tapering off by the middle of the third millennium.[5] West thought that flooding from the post-glacial transition caused the distinctive weathering on the Sphinx complex, which meant that the Sphinx must have been carved during or before the transition.[6] Orthodox archaeologists refused even to consider West's hypothesis. But in 1990 West persuaded Robert M. Schoch, a geologist at Boston University, to examine the question. Curious, Schoch agreed and the two visited Giza in June 1990.

http://earlyworld.tripod.com/RedatingtheSphinx.htm

aeondaze

17th April 2014, 06:09 PM

The extreme weathering of the sphinx has been found to be caused by haloclasty not its ancient origin. These theories are always proposed by people that refuse to discuss the base material of the sphinxes construction, limestone, and it's peculiar weathering phenomena.

You can't talk about the sphinx weathering without discussing limestone, which you clearly refuse to do.

Horn

17th April 2014, 07:04 PM

You can't talk about the sphinx weathering without discussing limestone, which you clearly refuse to do.

Uhuh, now even Phd. scientist aren't good enough proof for Aeon's long term blood bond selling missions.

singular_me

17th April 2014, 07:09 PM

You do not even research anything I say before posting because you are so stuck in your point of view.

on BBC, he is considered as a rogue archeologist. He has had plenty of shows featured on that channel. Again, the academia cartel is so powerful and conspiratorial that we should disregard it completely

Description. Horizon puts Graham Hancock's controversial theories about the past to the test, dissecting his evidence for a lost civilisation. Although scientists believe they have categorically disproved the myth of Atlantis, the idea is more popular now than ever before. The latest exponent of the theory of a single lost source for all civilisation, is Graham Hancock. Although he doesn't call it Atlantis, his compelling ideas about a sophisticated society destroyed in a flood 12,000 years ago seem to be based on a reworking of the original Atlantis myth, whose survivors brought culture, religion, monument-building and civilisation to the rest of the world. Graham Hancock offers various pieces of evidence to support his theory. He claims that the mysterious lost civilisation left its mark in ancient monuments, which he calculates were built to mirror certain constellations of stars. His hugely popular ideas have attracted such a wide audience that they stand to replace the conventional view of the past, which is based on scientific evidence that the civilisations of the ancient world were developed independently, by different peoples, on different continents..... Hancock also believes that the great temples of Angkor Wat in Cambodia mirror the constellation Draco as it would have appeared 12,000 years ago - at a time when the world was in the Stone Age. They see this as evidence that a great civilisation existed at this time, and later conveyed its wisdom to the peoples of the ancient world, before disappearing without trace from the archaeological record.... Horizon further examines Hancock's claims that the Sphinx and the mysterious ancient city of Tihuanacu in Bolivia were built 12,000 years ago by survivors of the lost civilisation itself.
WATCH DOCUMENTARY
http://watchdocumentary.org/watch/atlantis-reborn-again-video_3ddc30d32.html
www.grahamhancock.com

keep holding on to your belief system... many are starting to open their eyes. If an academic cartel can use fiat money to DEFRAUD the whole planet, so why should it be DIFFERENT archeology wise ???

Atlantis Reborn Again
BBC2 9.00pm Thursday 14th December 2000
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2000/atlantisrebornagain.shtml

we have been lied to... AGAIN

First up, Graham Hancock is an author not an archaeologist. He doesn't make money undertaking archaeological digs, he makes money writing books.

Second, to assert that there are non mainstream players in this endeavour is untruthful, there is a correct way to date artefacts and sites and then nothing else. Geology/strata alone is but one tool, the accepted methodology is to combine a few dating techniques and hope that they meet at a common point in time and then this can be viewed as corroboration, however this is by no means assured. Anything else is just bad science, picking and choosing techniques to fit a bias for a predetermined outcome, which is what every one of the proponents of this theory do.

Theories either stand up to the light of scrutiny, or they don't. Clearly in this case it is built on very shaky ground, there is ample evidence to the contrary and so it should be discarded outright. Willing a theory to be right will not make it so.

You may not like what we say but unfortunately you are posting in a public forum, if the debate is not going according to your personal bias you can always close the thread, but again in many ways that is tantamount to admitting defeat and that you have exhausted your argument and have nothing else to counter the rigorous challenges all good theories are able to withstand.

singular_me

17th April 2014, 07:36 PM

however, Aeondaze endorses the same academia that bleeds Humanity to death... spiritually and materialistically

The extreme weathering of the sphinx has been found to be caused by haloclasty not its ancient origin. These theories are always proposed by people that refuse to discuss the base material of the sphinxes construction, limestone, and it's peculiar weathering phenomena.

You can't talk about the sphinx weathering without discussing limestone, which you clearly refuse to do.

aeondaze

17th April 2014, 08:02 PM

It's just more of the same.

Hollow assertions and ad hominen attacks, doesn't make a very good argument.

All the supposed documentaries you mention are just light weight entertainment, they aren't really meant to be serious archaeological discourses.

You pick and chose what scientific methods suit your purpose and anything that doesn't fit your cherished theories you callously toss asunder with disregard and flippancy. Science doesn't work that way, and that's why you theories aren't taken seriously by academia. Claiming that there is a cast conspiracy on knowledge is just paranoid thinking.

Truth is, we only very recently developed microlithic stone technology circa 15,000 BC or thereabouts.

Santa

17th April 2014, 08:26 PM

First up, Graham Hancock is an author not an archaeologist. He doesn't make money undertaking archaeological digs, he makes money writing books.

Considering that pretty much every academic scientific endeavor is about making money, academic scientists are most often relegated to little more than parrots in lab coats upholding a status quo bias.
And given that there is little to no direct financial incentive in archeology or history, it most always falls into the financial purview of land/power grabbing State or Corporate Institutional policy makers.

Is it really any wonder why forum posters might choose to follow their intuitions, rather than parrots in lab coats? Is it because they're stupid? Really? I don't think so.

My point is that basing your argument on academic credentials isn't helping your argument.

I think what people are looking for here on the internet are alternatives to the status quo bias.

Cebu_4_2

17th April 2014, 08:41 PM

Claiming that there is a cast conspiracy on knowledge is just paranoid thinking.

Call me paranoid but I believe your thinking is off...

Horn

17th April 2014, 09:01 PM

Truth is, we

We - context above

def.

My gang of wholly institutional compartmentalized blood bondsmen selectively swathing through antiquity.

Neuro

17th April 2014, 10:04 PM

Really they don't refuse to go back beyond 3500 BC re Egyptian civilization history, present reliable EVIDENCE that it is older than that. You repeating your assertions is not evidence, btw... Re the alignment of the pyramids in relation to Orion's Belt, how is that important? Each day and hour I can see Orion's Belt in different alignments, is this supposed alignment only allowed to happen at a certain day and time? If so, how do you know what day and time of the year the Egyptians/aliens/whatever considered important?
Repeat question because of non-answer...

singular_me

17th April 2014, 10:14 PM

Horn, although this article goes along with the mainstream dating of the pyramids, this link is truly compelling astronomy wise. Again how could have man known all this when most of the planet was still in the bronze age ??? the author of this article is obviously shooting himself in the foot.

ps: I just read the first page but will get back to it this weekend most likely

snip, snip, slice, slice

The more I look at the alignment thing is that it must have some sort of polar North and Solar significance. A paper here tries to tie down creation dates based on that but still ends up somewhat inconclusive, but still in the approximate era.

http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/files/034_NatureArticle.pdf

What Orion has to do with it seems straight off.

singular_me

17th April 2014, 10:25 PM

Cebu_4_2

17th April 2014, 10:31 PM

Singular_me, I very much am entertained and look into such things. Please don't be run off by spooks on this forum. You have listed tons of links, some I still have to go through. Done let them drive you off!

Horn

17th April 2014, 10:33 PM

Horn, although this article goes along with the mainstream dating of the pyramids, this link is truly compelling astronomy wise. Again how could have man known all this when most of the planet was still in the bronze age ??? the author of this article is obviously shooting himself in the foot.

ps: I just read the first page but will get back to it this weekend most likely

Yeah you can see also in the details how the earliest structures were more exact in their creation, this lends to the notion that the dynasties were regressing from a greater period of craftsmanship Khufu as peak, as was seen in those ancient azteca walls shown earlier.

Still the era of the pyramids themselves is figured circa 3k b.c.

Sphinx body along with Göbekli Tepe are conclusive to a lost period somewhere in conjunction with a great deluge.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1vRWQx6LE0

Dogman

17th April 2014, 10:37 PM

Glass

17th April 2014, 11:09 PM

Repeat question because of non-answer...

It would be worth watching one of the Santos videos. I would recommend the Stone Henge one because it is shorter. He has a map of the globe that shows the elipses? I think that is the right term. These arcs are no longer included in geography focused globes because they don't document seasons on those. Older globes documented the seasons, phases of the moon and sometimes constellations.

It doesn't speak to year but to time of year. The obviously thought the procession of the sun and the constellations each year had importance. At some point it seems that they did not have 4 seasons but maybe only 2, possibly 1. Then the relationship between Saturn and the Earth changed and we now have 4 seasons. These 4 give us trials and tribulations which are felt less today because we have buffers in our society. If there were less than 4 it would seem things could be more plenty less tribulation.

Anyway my opinion is that the time of the great change was the time of Noah and that I propose that the great rain was the ending of a very misty/cloudy period on earth. I think the planet was shrouded in a mist a that time which fell away and resulted in a lot more surface water but also much more drier land areas.

Video link here (http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?76792-Pyramids-and-The-Orion-Belt-(mind-blowing)&p=704566&viewfull=1#post704566) in this thread

Neuro

17th April 2014, 11:51 PM

first their traditions and texts tell us a lot - 2nd, computers can go back into time and show where constellations and other celestial events occurred. Astro-theology deserves another thread, I am afraid. But I am sure that any atheist would dismiss the whole topic. As a matter of fact we are still under the influence of astro-theology, that one likes it or not .

Anthony west has a very good 7 hour series on the net called "magical egypt" explainng all that quite deeply, and which I of course recommend.
First of all I really don't know why you keep calling me an atheist, I am not. Is it an holier than thou type of put down? Second, I can't watch any YouTube videos, because YouTube is banned in Turkey. It is a straight question. What Orion alignment did the builders of the pyramids consider to be important, and why did they consider them to be important? Third, what other historical artifacts in Egypt apart from the three pyramids and the Sphinx do you consider not built by the Egyptians?
Fourth, are their texts written in hieroglyphs. Did the Egyptians not invent those? Are they actually 12000 years old?

Easy straightforward REPEAT questions... Do you have answers that doesn't involve snide remarks, Hours of YouTube videos, or change of subject?

aeondaze

18th April 2014, 01:56 AM

First of all I really don't know why you keep calling me an atheist, I am not. Is it an holier than thou type of put down?

Sorry, I think your getting caught in the cross fire and lumped in with the riffraff, it's me who is the atheist.

I got to do something now, but i want to take a detour and address Santa's valid post because I don't think people have an understanding of how academia works or what it's actually like at the coal face in scientific institutions, I actually want people to get a better understanding of the dynamics involved.

Horn

18th April 2014, 02:07 AM

Second, I can't watch any YouTube videos, because YouTube is banned in Turkey.

What sort of strange Turkish Gods do you allow to roam free over there? :)

Neuro

18th April 2014, 06:27 AM

What sort of strange Turkish Gods do you allow to roam free over there? :)
Amazing gods, but they are called ministers, commanders and secretaries...

http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?76643-Turkeys-leaked-plan-to-invade-Syria!-YouTube-banned!&highlight=YouTube+turkey

Horn

18th April 2014, 09:10 AM

Amazing gods, but they are called ministers, commanders and secretaries...

http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?76643-Turkeys-leaked-plan-to-invade-Syria!-YouTube-banned!&highlight=YouTube+turkey

What about going down there to checkout Gobliki Tepe for us?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/24/Smithsonian_map_g%C3%B6bekli_tepe.jpg

singular_me

18th April 2014, 02:48 PM

First of all I really don't know why you keep calling me an atheist, I am not. Is it an holier than thou type of put down?

But you made several remarks going along the same lines (ridiculing esoterism). Mine just goes straighter to the point but I do apoligize if you are not an atheist.

Second, I can't watch any YouTube videos, because YouTube is banned in Turkey. It is a straight question.
didnt know censorship was that bad where you live.

What Orion alignment did the builders of the pyramids consider to be important, and why did they consider them to be important?

important? The mainstream interpretation says that the stars of Orion are associated with Osiris, the sun-god of rebirth and afterlife, by the ancient Egyptians... while rogue archeologists (like Michael Tellinger, Graham Hancock, Anthony West, etc) attribute the worship of Orion to the fact that they knew about the god's from havens coming from that specific area of the galaxy... ie: Aliens. The Orion Mystery, is a documentary produced by the BBC in 1994. I serioulsy think that the mainstream interpretation means just more than that - as usual - and it is a divertion to sedate the minds of people who might want to look beyond that. Pyramids just point to an answer FROM the skies.

Third, what other historical artifacts in Egypt apart from the three pyramids and the Sphinx do you consider not built by the Egyptians?

the list stops there... for that area.

Fourth, are their texts written in hieroglyphs. Did the Egyptians not invent those? Are they actually 12000 years old?

hieroglyghs are still not well understood, there is a Rosetta Stone controversy. Even biblical scholars are still arguing about the Scriptures. This said, hieroglyps from what I know so far are egyptians.

====
Their initial claims regarding the alignment of the Giza pyramids with Orion ("…the three pyramids were a terrestrial map of the three stars of Orion's belt"—Hancock's Fingerprints of the Gods, 1995, p. 375) are later joined with speculation about the age of the Great Sphinx (Hancock and Bauval, Keeper of Genesis, published 1996, and in 1997 in the U.S. as The Message of the Sphinx). According to these works, the Great Sphinx was constructed c. 10,500 BC (Upper Paleolithic), and its lion-shape is maintained to be a definitive reference to the constellation of Leo. Furthermore, the orientation and dispositions of the Sphinx, the Giza pyramids and the Nile River relative to one another on the ground is put forward as an accurate reflection or "map" of the constellations of Leo, Orion (specifically, Orion's Belt) and the Milky Way respectively. As Hancock puts it in 1998's The Mars Mystery (co-authored with Bauval)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_correlation_theory

Horn

18th April 2014, 03:25 PM

Plenty of info. out there questioning the Rosetta stone, and faulty interpretation of glyphs. though it is still fully supported by the status quo.

A consorted effort to keep anything pre-dynastic from entering the record is completely evident to this day. imo opinion the pharohs don't want you to know anything could be done without them, or that they might have been dependent on some earlier intelligence. Its well documented that they would remove anything or attempt to write over evidence from previous dynasties claiming all as their own. Fraud at the Giza plateau during the day is as inherent as it is to Washington today.

KHUFU KNEW THE SPHINX

A Reconciliation of the Geological and Archaeological Evidence for the Age of the Sphinx and a Revised Sequence of Development for the Giza Necropolis

EVIDENCE FOR PRE-FOURTH DYNASTY ACTIVITY AT GIZA
It is generally considered that extensive development at Giza was limited to the Fourth Dynasty and what little activity there was before this, was restricted to areas to the south of the necropolis (see item 2, page 10). Although my argument for an Early Dynastic solar-cult complex, with the Sphinx at its focus, clearly runs contrary to this general opinion, there is published archaeological evidence to indicate activity within the Giza necropolis from as early as the late Predynastic period.

Mortensen52 discusses four ceramic jars, reportedly found in the late 1800's "at the foot of the Great Pyramid" (the exact location has not been recorded). When these jars were first found, the Predynastic period of Ancient Egyptian history was little understood and, given the accepted Fourth Dynasty context of the Giza site, the jars were assumed to be of the Fourth Dynasty. Mortensen, however, has re-assessed these jars and considers them to be typical of the late Predynastic Maadi period. Given that the jars were found intact, Mortensen has also argued that they were from a burial rather than a settlement site.

The survival of pre-Fourth Dynasty artefacts within the Giza necropolis has to be considered in the context of the Fourth Dynasty development. Figure 7 shows, in general terms, the Fourth Dynasty land-use of the site, illustrating that most of the available area within the necropolis was either quarried or built upon. These are both rather destructive activities which may have necessitated the removal of earlier structures and the disposal of the resulting 'site clearance' debris. This debris may have been deposited in the base of worked-out quarries or in other known areas of dumping, outside the area of construction.
In the mid 1970's an Austrian Egyptologist, Karl Kromer, investigated one such area of debris, some 1km south of the Great Pyramid (Figure 7). Within the fill, Kromer reported finds from the Late Predynastic, the First, Second and Fourth Dynasties53.

Kromer's work has been criticised by Butzer54, however, analysis of this critique shows that Butzer did not question the age of the finds but concentrated on Kromer's interpretation, suggesting that the stratigraphy of the excavation site was more complex than Kromer had reported. Whereas Kromer identified the deposition of only a single 'settlement', Butzer suggested that a number of such episodes were represented, the remains of which were separated by layers of wind-blown sand and possible debris slides. Butzer did accept, however, that the deposits excavated by Kromer consisted of accumulations of drift-sand together with the remains of development which had been removed from the area of the pyramids and dumped at the excavation site during the Old Kingdom.
Although Butzer did not criticise the age attributed to the finds, Kromer's interpretation has been criticised by others. Whilst the age of ceramics, stone tools etc. may remain contentious, most people do accept the jar sealings that were excavated as being Early Dynastic

http://www.ianlawton.com/as1.htm

singular_me

18th April 2014, 03:34 PM

yeah, frauds are never eliminated, they just morph according to the context and era.

ps: anyone who gets/got a mainstream college degree should trash it asap. I only have been in college for 2 years, learning philosophy, I dropped off... up to these days, I dont regret it.

Plenty of info. out there questioning the Rosetta stone, and faulty interpretation of glyphs. though it is still fully supported by the status quo.

A consorted effort to keep anything pre-dynastic from entering the record is completely evident to this day. imo opinion the pharohs don't want you to know anything could be done without them. Its well documented that they would remove anything or attempt to write over evidence from previous dynasties. Fraud at the Giza plateau during the day is as inherent as it is to Washington today.

http://www.ianlawton.com/as1.htm

Horn

18th April 2014, 03:54 PM

Maybe I should restate that, Pharaohs make sure that anything done without them or prior to them isn't worthwhile, it's only after their arrival with slaves and kingly ideals that it is possible to get anywhere.

Everything emanates from the eye of horus, and bearer of the golden fleece. All history at Giza stops on a dime at 3500 b.c.

singular_me

18th April 2014, 04:11 PM

Horn, there is a reason why mainstream egyptian chronology must obey the status quo... because of the chronology of the Bible. In the West, everything is deep rooted in the ancient egyptian civilization... The rule of Amon-Ra is alive and kicking. :)

Bible Time-line (B.C.)
4004 .......2348.............1491........586 ........................ 4
Creation Noah’s flood...Exodus Temple destroyed Christ’s birth

Doesn’t Egyptian Chronology Prove That the Bible Is Unreliable?
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab2/doesnt-egyptian-chronology-prove-bible-unreliable

Maybe I should restate that, Pharaohs make sure that anything done without them or prior to them isn't worthwhile, it's only after their arrival with slaves and kingly ideals that it is possible to get anywhere.

Everything emanates from the eye of horus, and bearer of the golden fleece. All history at Giza stops on a dime at 3500 b.c.

aeondaze

18th April 2014, 04:16 PM

anyone who gets/got a mainstream college degree should trash it asap. I only have been in college for 2 years, learning philosophy, I dropped off... up to these days, I dont regret it.

It OK, not everyone has the ability to finish a degree. Philosophy is not a very practical subject, in fact it's mostly smoke and mirrors, so I understand how you have trouble differentiating fact from fiction. A science degree on the other hand, now there is something practical and useful in every day life.

Do you think if you had finished your degree, your personal insecurities and irrational hatred of academics would not have developed to the pathological extent it has? Serious question.

Anyhow clearly you don't know how academia in real subject works, so I'm going to give it a go. It's sort of amusing to see you guys develop an irrational fear about this, if only you knew the truth of how random and unfunded 95% of research is, then You could appreciate how ridiculous your paranoia over academics is.

Horn

18th April 2014, 04:22 PM

Bible Time-line (B.C.)
4004 .......2348.............1491........586 ........................ 4
Creation Noah’s flood...Exodus Temple destroyed Christ’s birth

It also took Noah 120 years to create his ark, shaving timbers with nothing more than spearheads.

Khufu slaves could've whipped it out in ten years.

aeondaze

18th April 2014, 04:23 PM

Horn, there is a reason why mainstream egyptian chronology must obey the status quo... because of the chronology of the Bible. In the West, everything is deep rooted in the ancient egyptian civilization... The rule of Amon-Ra is alive and kicking. :)

Bible Time-line (B.C.)
4004 .......2348.............1491........586 ........................ 4
Creation Noah’s flood...Exodus Temple destroyed Christ’s birth

Doesn’t Egyptian Chronology Prove That the Bible Is Unreliable?
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab2/doesnt-egyptian-chronology-prove-bible-unreliable

You can't put Noah's flood in a timeline because it's a myth with no corroborated dates or even any actual artefacts.

Yes lots of ancient foundation myths talk about floods, but floods happen all over the globe, there is nothing particularly significant about a flood, apart from the trauma it induces, but in no way does it correlate with any greater religious significance.

Horn

18th April 2014, 04:24 PM

Do you think if you had finished your degree, your personal insecurities and irrational hatred of academics would not have developed to the pathological extent it has?

You've learned everything you know about posting at forums from philosophical types.

aeondaze

18th April 2014, 04:36 PM

You've learned everything you know about posting at forums from philosophical types.

No, I learnt everything I know about posting at forums by well, posting at forums. :)

Horn

18th April 2014, 04:46 PM

This video about sums it all up for you, Neuro.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3wKckMVYbA

Is stated within that the pyramids were not built in 10k b.c., but the knowledge to create and align them did originate then.

singular_me

18th April 2014, 04:53 PM

aeondaze, mainstream academia is mostly deceptive... sorry pal.

Phds hoax uncovered:
go to my new thread to hear what mainstream scientists have done to the planet because they just repeat like perrots what they have been taught and dont challenge it on a daily basis, and most of those scientists make a 6 figure salary(!!!) 100% Evidence Weather Modification Hearing
http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?77048-100-Evidence-Weather-Modification-Hearing-At-The-UN-(what-a-fierce-woman!)

Ohh by the way, over a 30 year time frame, I have been a restaurant owner, art gallery partner, documentary film producer assistant, permaculturist farmer (ongoing), hotline rep for law firms into international settlements in **3** languages... a practitioner of hypnosis(ongoing).... screenwriter(have not sold yet)... internet columnist exposing the NWO for about 9 years (ongoing).... and now working on my documentary which will be my business card to find a job with **non** mainstream humanist organizations... :).. and world traveler: next destination, Ecuador and Peru.

yeah so much for someone who did only 2 years in college, heh? I also am fortunate that my only son, 30, is following my steps and that we can talk just about everything, from Atlantis to the "corporate blood coltane" happening now in Africa. He is an activist, screenwriter and in the process of becoming a film maker.

Philosophy is not a very practical subject? well it surely develops analytic skills. I wished philosophy 101 was taught in elementary schools and the Socrates' Trivium in high schools.

Thanks for the laughter, really. :)

It OK, not everyone has the ability to finish a degree. Philosophy is not a very practical subject, in fact it's mostly smoke and mirrors, so I understand how you have trouble differentiating fact from fiction. A science degree on the other hand, now there is something practical and useful in every day life.

Do you think if you had finished your degree, your personal insecurities and irrational hatred of academics would not have developed to the pathological extent it has? Serious question.

Anyhow clearly you don't know how academia in real subject works, so I'm going to give it a go. It's sort of amusing to see you guys develop an irrational fear about this, if only you knew the truth of how random and unfunded 95% of research is, then You could appreciate how ridiculous your paranoia over academics is.

singular_me

18th April 2014, 06:02 PM

Neuro cannot watch youtube

This video about sums it all up for you, Neuro.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3wKckMVYbA

Is stated within that the pyramids were not built in 10k b.c., but the knowledge to create and align them did originate then.

Santa

18th April 2014, 06:27 PM

Neuro cannot watch youtube

I wonder if or when the US is going to ban youtube.

singular_me

18th April 2014, 06:36 PM

ever heard of pole shifts.... ? How can you explain deserts formation for example

interestting, civilization didnt exist OR had been almost entirely decimated? Sure if there are almost no witnesses, there is nothing to worry about... 10,000 years interesting, heh? Back to Sumerians: the flood myth is also present in the much older Sumerian Gilgamesh poems.

Magnetic north shifting by 40 miles a year, might signal pole reversal, The magnetic pole is moving faster than at any time in human history, causing major problems for navigation and migratory wildlife. "Reversals typically take about 10,000 years to happen," said Jeffrey Love of the U.S. Geological Survey. "And 10,000 years ago civilisation did not exist. These processes are slow, and therefore we don't have anything to worry about."
http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/climate-weather/stories/magnetic-north-shifting-by-40-miles-a-year-might-signal-pole-r
MAY 2011

The cataclysmic pole shift hypothesis suggests that there have been geologically rapid shifts in the relative positions of the modern-day geographic locations of the poles and the axis of rotation of the Earth, creating calamities such as floods and tectonic events.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_shift_hypothesis

You can't put Noah's flood in a timeline because it's a myth with no corroborated dates or even any actual artefacts.

Yes lots of ancient foundation myths talk about floods, but floods happen all over the globe, there is nothing particularly significant about a flood, apart from the trauma it induces, but in no way does it correlate with any greater religious significance.

Hypertiger

18th April 2014, 06:46 PM

the orientation is 3...with the master on top then the servant in the middle and the slave at the bottom.

It is tied to a measurement system.

right measurement...or positive...or absolute 1...or YES...Relative

wrong measurement...or negative...or absolute 0...or NO...and Quantum

Maybe gravity is the singularity that eventually becomes a certainty that connects the two.

The pyramids were built to last...by things not built to last long....gradual absolute capitalism and violent absolute capitalism.

one is tax an spend...the other is tax an save.

tax an save or work sustains tax an spend or play

absolute 0's trying to survive or exist are the supply to the demand by the absolute 1 or biggest spender.

At the top it is a gusher of power that waterfalls down to sustain the trickle down effect to the power plants at the bottom.

but it is life force from the bottom to receive death force back from the top.

and death force is way better than nothing...but over time the fake power in return takes it's toll.

There is still warning imbedded in the visible chaos that still exists.

Hypertiger

18th April 2014, 07:18 PM

polarity shifts are between two forces...one is hyperdeflationary and one is hyperinflationary.

negative to positive to negative...absolute 0 to absolute 1 to absolute 0 again...with 0 and 1 the singularity point...for winter

where the shift happens...it is quick...it is like turning over an hour glass. 3 is spring...6 is summer...9 is fall...0 and 1 is winter...

summer is hyperinflationary while winter is hyperdeflationary.

Summer you have the Sun of GOD trying to burn you to death and in the winter you have the black hole of the Universe trying to freeze you to death.

With the Sun of GOD or absolute 1 the supply of power to the demand by the black hole of the Universe or absolute 0

Horn

18th April 2014, 08:06 PM

There's only two seasons on the equator, Mounty.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLXT_3QhQjw

mick silver

18th April 2014, 08:48 PM

Horn

18th April 2014, 10:42 PM

no one on earth build the Pyramids the one's that did the work came from other world , tell me how men could move stone that was over 400 tons ? so lets go at it and it cannot be done now with the tools we have

Secret of stone mick, we lost it with the deluge, once we regain it will be time for another flood.

Neuro

18th April 2014, 10:47 PM

Neuro cannot watch youtube
Horn, knows that! :)

Horn

18th April 2014, 10:50 PM

Horn, knows that! :)

well in there the hancock guy states clearly that he is not saying they where built 10k ago, but the knowledge and orientation comes from then.

ps. I thought all europeans were athiests? :)

Neuro

19th April 2014, 01:13 AM

well in there the hancock guy states clearly that he is not saying they where built 10k ago, but the knowledge and orientation comes from then.

ps. I thought all europeans were athiests? :)
I am just sceptical...:) Funny though how singular refers to among others Hancock as irrefutable proof that the pyramids was built 10,500 BC, when he himself doesn't believe so. At least not any longer...

Further I read on Wikipedia, that the position is supposedly matching the Orion position in the sky of the spring equinox of 10,500 BC, wouldn't that then mean that it would aproximately have the same position in the winter solstice of around 3,500 BC, considering the equinoxes would have done a quarter round by then, and between the winter solstice and the vernal equinox is a quarter year? If indeed the placement of the pyramids is astrotheological, which seems logical to me, after all the ancient Egyptians were heavy into that. Further the winter and summer solstices are much easier to detect, the autumn and spring are a bit bland, aren't they?

Horn

19th April 2014, 02:02 AM

No, the original was produced in 10, 500bc Egypt and the god pharoh have existed since the begining of time.

As you've insisted nothing before then.

Pharoh has his wool over your eyes.

Neuro

19th April 2014, 02:32 AM

No, the original was produced in 10, 500bc Egypt and the god pharoh have existed since the begining of time.

As you've insisted nothing before then.

Pharoh has his wool over your eyes.
Yes I suppose so, after all I suffered from Pharao's revenge while in Egypt 23 years ago, and I was assured it had nothing to do with the cleanliness of the Egyptian kitchen... The waiter also stated with absolute certainty that American wrestling was for real.

singular_me

19th April 2014, 05:35 AM

I have no problem with you being skeptical about the people I refer to over a mainstream academia that is designed to cover-up the evolution of masonry and the true origins of mankind... but if you choose to give that so-called academia more credibility, you will systematically discard anything I say anyway.

ooh and I forgot that Nassim Haramein, another fav of mine, explains the architectural accuracy of the pyramids mathematically and concludes that no modern means could reproduce them. In fact the mainstream explanation is debunked with straight maths...

Id suggest that you ask a friend to download and burn a DVD and for you with Haramein's investigation. He considered as a rogue PhD in astrophysics as he includes in his theories Sacred Geometry :) And anyone aware of Sacred Geometry realizes the very complex architecture, the pitfall of the mainstream.

Who REALLY built the Pyramids??? / not the Egyptians ...
(clip taken from Nassim Haramein 's EIGHT HOUR 2003 lecture)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0gx5Y48ssk

I am just sceptical...:) Funny though how singular refers to among others Hancock as irrefutable proof that the pyramids was built 10,500 BC, when he himself doesn't believe so. At least not any longer...

Neuro

19th April 2014, 05:41 AM

I am sceptical about any unsubstantiated claims. Btw you have not brought any substance to your claim of the pyramids being 12500 years old... Sorry you can't handle it.

singular_me

19th April 2014, 06:31 AM

I have always said that the pyramids are much older than 3500bc and that I am considering any theories that goes beyond that and even ready to accept 12,000BC, I leave it completely open to welcome useful info and make up my own mind.

YOU, on the other hand, cannot handle that the mainstream academic has been lying for so long, thats for sure. However, if your evidence is that from the mainstream, they are gargantuan hoaxes

to each his town as it is clear that you believe in the Phds dogma that is dooming humanity

I am sceptical about any unsubstantiated claims. Btw you have not brought any substance to your claim of the pyramids being 12500 years old... Sorry you can't handle it.

Neuro

19th April 2014, 06:45 AM

I have always say that the pyramids are much older than 3500bc and that I am considering any theories that goes beyond that and even ready to accept 12,000BC, I leave it completely open to welcome useful info and make up my own mind.

YOU, on the other hand, cannot handle that the mainstream academic has been lying for so long, thats for sure. However, if your evidence is that from the mainstream, they are gargantuan hoaxes

to each his town as it is clear that you believe in the Phds dogma that is dooming humanity
I heard you say they were much older than 3500 BC. Am I just supposed to believe that because you say so? You have no evidence for your claim. Period.

You are claiming that mainstream academics lie about the age of the pyramids... PROVE IT. The fact that they may lie about other things is not evidence of them lying about everything.

Present your evidence!

singular_me

19th April 2014, 06:50 AM

singular_me

19th April 2014, 07:10 AM

For those who like to keep an open mind. when we see how many lies are destroying the planet, really sticking to what the mainstream says, makes no sense at all.

I have NOT read that book, just putting it on here for the thought
--------------------------------------------------

5 star rating on amazon, 37 reviews

EGYPTOLOGY / HISTORY

"Ancient Egypt 39,000 BCE presents a cogent and insightful overview of competing theories that relate to the possible origins of ancient Egypt, along with compelling, new, specific evidence to suggest that its megalithic structures may be far, far older than traditionally accepted.

There is much food for thought here--even for a seasoned student of the mysteries of ancient Egypt--well conceived and well presented." --Laird Scranton, author of Sacred Symbols of the DogonTraditional Egyptologists have long resisted the notion that the architectural achievements of the ancient Egyptians required the existence of a much more sophisticated technology than would have existed at that time.

Yet, no records exist explaining who built Egypt's megalithic monuments and statues or how and why they were built. The ancient Egyptians did, however, record that their civilization resided in the shadow of a kingdom of "gods" whose reign ended many thousands of years before their first dynasty. What was this Civilization X that antiquity's most accomplished people revered as gods?

The recent discovery of a large stone at one of Egypt's oldest ruins presents physical evidence that clearly and distinctly shows the markings of a machining process far beyond the capabilities of the ancient Egyptians. Likewise, experimental modeling of the Great Pyramid's subterranean chambers and passageways gives scientific evidence to further support the theory that the civilization responsible for such magnificent monuments is much older than presently believed.

Ancient Egypt 39,000 BCE examines this evidence from historical and technical points of view, explaining who these prehistoric people were, what happened to them, why they built their civilization out of granite, and why they built a series of pyramids along the west bank of the Nile River.EDWARD F. MALKOWSKI is the author of Before the Pharaohs, The Spiritual Technology of Ancient Egypt, and Sons of God--Daughters of Men. He is a historical researcher and lives in Lincoln, Illinois.

http://www.amazon.com/Ancient-Egypt-000-BCE-Civilization/dp/1591431093

PS: of course reviews are opinions BASED on what one wishes to follow as a theory/hypothesis.

atomicoverload.com on November 13, 2010
While the idea the Giza monuments were not built by Egyptians and may be older and of a different purpose than currently believed is obviously nothing new, Malkowski lays out a compelling and sober case based on verifiable facts and common sense observations providing yet another example of why such notions are not as far fetched as they may seem. A well researched, well presented collection of known controversies, conflicting data, technological and even anthropological anomalies, intermingled with original insight and new discoveries, helps create a greater context unique to this particular book making it well worth the read. Definitely a cut above most of the genre and despite the title is not as fantastical as it seems. To his credit, as is often the fate of other such writers, Malkowski's final conclusions are not irreparable nose dives over the deep end of speculative fancy which would normally destroy the credibility of an otherwise fine piece of work. Close, but he is able to pull back in time before the damage is done leaving himself and the reader relatively unscathed. Definitely one of the better books I had read on the subject in a long time.

--------------------

Thomas Fortenberry on July 18, 2010
While the idea the Giza monuments were not built by Egyptians and may be older and of a different purpose than currently believed is obviously nothing new, Malkowski lays out a compelling and sober case based on verifiable facts and common sense observations providing yet another example of why such notions are not as far fetched as they may seem. A well researched, well presented collection of known controversies, conflicting data, technological and even anthropological anomalies, intermingled with original insight and new discoveries, helps create a greater context unique to this particular book making it well worth the read. Definitely a cut above most of the genre and despite the title is not as fantastical as it seems. To his credit, as is often the fate of other such writers, Malkowski's final conclusions are not irreparable nose dives over the deep end of speculative fancy which would normally destroy the credibility of an otherwise fine piece of work. Close, but he is able to pull back in time before the damage is done leaving himself and the reader relatively unscathed. Definitely one of the better books I had read on the subject in a long time.

However, Malkowski also suffers a bit from the same "wild speculations" disorder that many of the members of "fringe" historians/scientists do. He can't seem to relax into the proposal that, yes, quite probably Egyptian civilization or its precursors are far older and more advanced than we give them credit for being. He almost crosses that Sitchen-line from inquisitiveness into well maybe it was ancient gods or extraterrestrials who did it? Not necessary. He goes up and maybe peeks over, but should stay well on this side of the fence. My fear is that this book is misunderstood and lumped in with the kooky trash rather than being read on its own merits. But basically, Malkowski does a great service and should be commented for it.

Ancient Egypt 39,000 BCE is a fact-filled, fascinating read that raises many important questions.

----------------------
Alan Dale Daniel VINE VOICE on April 19, 2012
........... Somehow this knowledge was lost to incoming people who took over the Nile Valley after 39,000 BC (or BCE to the politically correct). He speculates that some type of catastrophe struck the valley and all but destroyed the advanced civilization and the newcomers were not able to pick up the knowledge left behind.

Using the age of the Sphinx, as shown by water erosion, he dates the early civilization to 20 to 40 thousand BC.

all reviews
http://www.amazon.com/Ancient-Egypt-000-BCE-Civilization/product-reviews/1591431093/ref=cm_cr_dp_see_all_btm?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

Horn

19th April 2014, 08:13 AM

Further I read on Wikipedia, that the position is supposedly matching the Orion position in the sky of the spring equinox of 10,500 BC, wouldn't that then mean that it would aproximately have the same position in the winter solstice of around 3,500 BC, considering the equinoxes would have done a quarter round by then, and between the winter solstice and the vernal equinox is a quarter year? If indeed the placement of the pyramids is astrotheological, which seems logical to me, after all the ancient Egyptians were heavy into that. Further the winter and summer solstices are much easier to detect, the autumn and spring are a bit bland, aren't they?

http://gold-silver.us/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=6255&d=1397622651

Turn not far enough, would need to be 180 minimum, correct? Hancock would not be so easily deceived or corrected.

My estimation says Pharaoh aligned the pyramid for assention in 10,500 (when Orion was parked on horizon) advanced planning required to do so in any case, all the world revolved about Pharaoh as was the intended case.

Generated proof that nothing came before him, as so many believe to be the case today.

singular_me

19th April 2014, 08:38 AM

Anthony West goes along those lines in his Magical Egypt doc... and Tellinger too IF I recall well

My estimation says Pharaoh aligned the pyramid for assention in 10,500 (when Orion was parked on horizon) advanced planning required to do so in any case, all the world revolved about Pharaoh as was the intended case.

Horn

19th April 2014, 08:42 AM

You are claiming that mainstream academics lie about the age of the pyramids... PROVE IT. The fact that they may lie about other things is not evidence of them lying about everything.

Present your evidence!

Mainstream academia believes the Pharoah's lie, it has been proven.

So let it be written.

Horn

19th April 2014, 12:29 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItsM1QOLoac&list=PL659079F742018D47

That is a good video, above is the entire string.

The level of accuracy and time frames given for building exceeds all known levels of current building techniques.

The accuracy of the pyramid's workmanship is such that the four sides of the base have an average error of only 58 millimetres in length. The base is horizontal and flat to within ±15 mm (0.6 in).The sides of the square base are closely aligned to the four cardinal compass points (within four minutes of arc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minute_of_arc)) based on true north (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_north), not magnetic north (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_north), and the finished base was squared to a mean corner error of only 12seconds of arc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_of_arc).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza

More evidence of advanced knowledge than was available at the time, and more evidence to counter the notion of mainstream science that the pyramids popped up out of nothing but the desert sand, and a diligent Pharaoh God bent on providing all of creation.

A (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItsM1QOLoac&list=PL659079F742018D47)rchaeology has no factual basis to make claims that it was built by the Dynastic Egyptian civilization, except for to serve their Pharaoh and by association.

Neuro

19th April 2014, 03:32 PM

you have presented yours...MILLENNIA of deception

Man should really pay attention to the ancient myths because when one puts them all together, earth has been through several huge catclysms, some say up to 5, that almost destroyed her...

research the subject for yourself... if you really want to debunk the topic instead of expecting me to prove it, as it is clear that you REJECT anything that is non mainstream, which is self-defeating on my end anyway.

ps: anyone not willing to delve into the topic and see through the fog, is in fact helping the NWO, which we never will get rid of if we continue to believe in fairy tales or ignore history.
I did debunk it, read my posts in this thread. You didn't deal with any of the objections I put forward, you never presented any evidence for 10,500 BC claim. Believe in your Orion alien fairy tale. Funny how you think this is resisting NWO though, surely you heard of project blue beam? Belief in advanced alien civilizations among the masses is a pre-requisite for it to be successful! Ever thought of that?

Horn

19th April 2014, 03:39 PM

considering that those pyramids are at least 10,000 years old, cavemen could not have done it. Maybe is ot time to admit the existence of very advanced and pre-diluvian civilizations...

What a tangled web we weave, when it is ourselves we only deceive.

The Pharaoh's followers and their blanket assumption, will keep those high heights from ever being achieved again.

6281

mick silver

19th April 2014, 05:29 PM

ban her Neuro your a mod

aeondaze

19th April 2014, 05:42 PM

Where do you get the idea that no one knows how the pyramids were built? If you could at least answer that, because this seems to be a core myth that proponents of your theory seem to make, and it's incorrect, here is easy to find information,

All kinds of imaginative (or not) theories emerged on time, from extraterrestrial beings having built

the pyramids, to lost ancient Egyptian technologies.

"But the process of building pyramids, while complicated, was not as colossal an undertaking as many of us believe," said Redford.

It seems that the largest pyramid required 20,000 and 30,000 laborers, who ended it in less than 23 years. Many European monuments took much longer. Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris was completed in two centuries.

"Pharaohs traditionally began building their pyramids as soon as they took the throne. The pharaoh would first establish a committee composed of an overseer of construction, a chief engineer and an architect. The pyramids were usually placed on the western side of the Nile because the pharaoh's soul was meant to join with the sun disc during its descent before continuing with the sun in its eternal round. The two deciding factors when choosing a building site were its orientation to the western horizon where the sun set and the proximity to Memphis, the central city of ancient Egypt," said Redford.

The transport of the material did not pose such a problem.

"The cores of the pyramids were often composed of local limestone," said Redford.

For capstone, a hard rock, like granite or basalt, was used. This was plated with gold, silver or electrum, an alloy of gold and silver, making the pyramids shiny.

"The image most people have of slaves being forced to build the pyramids against their will is incorrect. The concept of slavery is a very complicated problem in ancient Egypt, because the legal aspects of indentured servitude and slavery were very complicated. The peasants who worked on the pyramids were given tax breaks and were taken to 'pyramid cities' where they were given shelter, food and clothing," said Redford.

"Ancient Egyptian quarrying methods -- the processes for cutting and removing stone -- are still being studied. Scholars have found evidence that copper chisels were using for quarrying sandstone and limestone, for example, but harder stones such as granite and diorite would have required stronger materials," said Redford.

Massive chunks of dolerite, a hard volcanic rock, were employed in the Aswan quarries to detach granite blocks, by pulverizing the stone around the edge of the blocks.

"60 to 70 men would pound out the stone," said Redford.

At the bottom, they introduced wooden pegs into the cut slots, and when the pegs were removed, they detached the stone. Oxen or men dragged the stones on an oil lubricated slipway towards the boats waiting on the Nile.

"A scene from a 19th century B.C. tomb in Middle Egypt depicts an alabaster statue 20 ft (6.6 m) high pulled by 173 men on four ropes with a man lubricating the slipway as the pulling went on. Once the stones were at the construction site, ramps were built to get them into place on the pyramid," said Redford.

The mud brick ramps had their surface hardened with plaster.

"If they consistently raised the ramp course by course as the teams dragged their blocks up, they could have gotten them into place fairly easily. At least one such ramp still exists. I usually show the skeptic a picture of 20 of my workers at an archaeological dig site pulling up a two-and-a-half ton granite block. I know it's possible because I was on the ropes too," said Redford.

Additionally the Egyptians left stele relating to this, meaning they actually left an account of how they achieved this feat!

Egyptologists have long claimed that no records exist which describe how the Pyramids were built. A stone stele is engraved on a rock at the island Sehel, near Elephantine, Egypt, north of Aswan. It was discovered in 1889 by C.E. Wilbour and was deciphered by various egyptologists: Brugsch (1891), Pleyte (1891), Morgan (1894), Sethe (1901), Barguet (1953) and Lichtheim (1973). This stela features three of the most renowned characters of the Egyptian civilization:

Pharaoh Zoser, around 2,750 BC, built the first pyramid, the Step Pyramid at Saqqara. This monument is claimed to illustrate the invention of building with stone.
Imhotep, scribe and architect of Zoser’s pyramid, who has been honored and deified for having invented the building with stone.
God Khnum, the potter who, as in the Bible, is fashioning the bodies of humans and gods with the Nile silt, with clay, in other words processing minerals.
Called The Famine Stele, it was engraved during a recent epoch, under the Ptolemees (200 BC), but certain reliable clues have led egyptologists to believe that, in an amplified form it had already become an authentic document by the beginning of the Old Kingdom (2,750 BC).

Yet, the most controversial aspect of this text resides in the fact that to build temples, pyramids and other sacred buildings, Khnum’s instructions and Imhotep’s revelations do not mention any contructional stone, such as limestone or sandstone or granite blocks. These materials are not found in the list. In Zoser’s dream (col. 19) Khnum is giving minerals and “since former times nobody ever worked with them to build the temples of the gods..”. To build monuments, Zoser was given a list of minerals and ores whose hieroglyphic names have not been translated so far. This is the reason why we started an in-depth study of each hieroglyphic word, in order to determine the technical key-words, those which are obviously difficult to translate.

Technical Key-words not translated by previous authors:

Word ‘aa’: This word is translated “pyramid” by Brugsch, “tombs for kings” by Sethe and Barguet, and “palaces for kings” by Lichtheim. All translations relate to the hieroglyphic word ‘aa’ and the determinative for pyramid. According to Sethe and Barguet, this word ‘aa’ is an archaism from the Old Kingdom.

Key-word ARI KAT: This verb occurs three times. In col. 13 and 19, associated with minerals, it has been translated by: “to work with”; in col. 20, the god Khnum “fashions” or “creates” humanity (with clay). The first part of the verb, ARI, means to make, to create, to form, to fashion, to beget; the second part, KAT and the ideograph “man”, means the work done by man. The adjective, ARI, designates an artificial material, for example synthetic lapis-lazuli. The best meaning for the verb, ARI- KAT, could be to process, to synthesize, to manufacture.

Key-word ideograph RWD: Found in col. 11, this ideograph is part of a sentence which qualifies the materials employed for building temples and pyramids (col. 11 and 12).

Translated by Barguet as hard stone, RWD has been thoroughly discussed by Harris (1961) who states (p.23) that ”…in all events, there can be little doubt that RWDT is a term for hard stone in general, though which stone would come into the category it is difficult to say, especially in view of the reference to alabaster as RWDT”.

Yet, generally, the element RWD refers to Egyptian sandstone (INR RWDT not listed here), more precisely the stone material found in the quarries of Southern Egypt, and used to built the temples of the New Kingdom and Late Periods at Karnak, Luxor, Edfu, Esne, Denderah, Abu-Simbel. This material, Egyptian sandstone is a soft material, which, in some cases can be easily scratched by the fingernail (Rozière, 1801). It is the contrary of a hard stone. It is two times softer than Giza limestone, four times softer than Carrara Marmor or eight times softer than Aswan granite. It becomes obvious that the element RWD does not mean hard stone.

On the other hand, the ideograph RWD also means: germinate, grow, and the causative verb, S-RWD, to make solid or to tie strongly. Gravel and pebble contain also the ideograph RWD. Finally, sandstone, quartzite, in some cases granite, and other stones qualified with RWD, are the natural solid stones resulting from the geological solidification of aggregates, such as sand or quartz particles.

Key-word AAT: Col. 16 gives the different names of AAT. According to Harris (p.21) AAT is to be regarded as a word for minerals, and refers to ores. In col. 19, these ores are processed for the first time, yielding the invention of building with stone materials.

Key-word TESH: The composite word AAT NEB RWD UTESHAU, at the end of col. 11 is of particular interest. Barguet translates: ‘matières precieuses et pierres dures des carrières’, but states in a note that his reading may be doubtful due to the strange writing of this word, in hieroglyph. Instead of TESHAU, Barguet reads SHETI.

The root TESH has the general meaning of: crush, separate, split, and the verb BETESH indicates the action of dissolving, disaggregation. A stone which is crusched, or disaggregated, or split, is called an aggregate.

This leads us to conclude that the word RWD UTESHAU indicates any natural aggregate, or naturally split material, such as weathered and naturally disaggregated material. RWD could be extrapolated as being the ideograph describing agglomeration, here at the beginning of the word, or of agglomerated stone (geologically or man-made) when put at the end.

If our assumption is right, the stony materials listed in col.15 should be in a loose form, or easy to disaggregate. Two names contain the root TESH, four names do not.

The BEKHEN stone has been found in inscriptions located in the Wadi-el Hammamat, in the desert South-East of Aswan, and is referred to as being either black basalt, or diorite, or sandy skist, or porphyry, or greywacke, or psammite gneiss (Lucas and Rowe, 1938; Morgan, 1894). Yet, according to the Hammamat Inscriptions (Couyat-Montet), quarrying of BEKHEN at the Wadi-Hammamat was carried out in a very primitive way. The chosen blocks were generally thrown down to the bottom of the mountain where they arrived split into numerous lumps.

The MTHAY stone is more interesting to discuss. This name seems to contain the root of the word MAT which means granite. Harris (p.72) agrees with Barguet when he notes that it is strange that granite is not otherwise mentioned in the text. Since it was the most typical stone of this region, it is therefore the more likely that this remarkable form of writing conceals MAT, i.e. granite. However, except for the peculiar hieroglyphic orthography which occurs in the Famine Stele, the referenced writings for granite always contain the same hieroglyph, the sickle MA, with different adjectives. In col. 15, the letter ME is not the sickle, but a denuded bird, without wings and feathers. This way of writing the letter ME is to be found in the word MUT, to kill himself. The word METH also means to die. On the other hand, the granite MAT is often written with the ideogram heart, life, suggesting the idea of living granite. Assuming that the writer of the Famine Stele wanted to stress, in a condense form, that the granite is a weathered, loose, disaggregated material found in some geological outcrops, he could have tried to emphasize the idea of dead granite.

Key-word AIN: Col. 15 begins with: Learn the names of AIN (stone). The hieroglyphic word for solid stone, constructional stone and block, is AINR. The majority of solid rocks is called AINR, with an adjective. Harris makes no distinction between AIN and AINR, the coptic word for stone, ONE, being very similar to AIN. However AINR is essentially applied to stone used in building. AIN should be recognized as a generic word for stone, as a substance, i.e. a stony material, in opposition to other materials like wood or metal.

Key-word ideograpgh: The phonetic value of this ideograph is not known; from the dictionary, it is a determinative for smell and odor, but is not associated with perfumes. It essentially relates to substances which give out smells, effluxes or emanations. Yet, these odors are not necessarily bad, and it does not mean to stink. Sometimes this ideograph has been associated with the notion of pleasure.

Found in Col. 12, it is for Brugsch a word for unguent (in German “salbe”). Barguet and Lichtheim do not translate it using the general term “products” in connection with those cited in col. 11, ‘aat nb rwd uts3u’ the minerals and stones.

The ideograph could represent a bladder or a vase containing a liquid, which gives out an odor, but is not a perfume. In other words it could be the determinative for chemical product. The majority of chemicals have a characteristic smell, and chemists have learned how to detect, recognize and associate any peculiar odor. According to col. 11 and 12, those products which smell are the ores and stone materials which are essential for the building of temples and pyramids.

Lexicographs studying ancient minerals make the assumption that their names should derive from their color. They rely on the fact that, in ancient Greek, various gem names are closely associated with a color, for example the semi-precious stones containing the root chryso, yellow. The minerals, ores and stone materials, featured in Barguet’s, Harris’ and Lichtheim’s translations of the Famine Stele, demonstrate that this type of lexicographical research is not successful. The majority of hieroglyphic names has not found any contemporary equivalence. We think that, by introducing the concept of odor, and perhaps later that of taste, we are simply following the ancient and classical methods of characterization of chemicals, namely the determination of their color, odor and taste.

Products having an odor are to be found in a text related to the Great Pyramids. In his Book II, Euterpe, the Greek historian Herodotus relates what priests at Memphis told him on the pyramid of Cheops: “Engraved on the pyramid in Egyptian characters is the amount spent on the workers in horseradish, onions and garlic; and the person who interpreted these inscriptions for me told me, as I remember well, that this expense came to sixteen hundred talents of silver. (more than 100 Million Euro of 2001)”. Popular imagery is found in this description and the workers are described as stinking of garlic and onions.

We have claimed (Davidovits, 1978, 1982) (see also books from J. Davidovits ) that this description relates to the cost of the expeditions undertaken for collecting minerals of the arsenate types, located in the turquoise and copper mines of the Sinai. A simple method in petrography for the identification of natural minerals and ores is to heat them with a small blow lamp. If they immediatly release a smell of garlic, they belong to the arsenate family (arsenate of copper or of iron).

We looked at the hieroglyphic names of minerals and ores which could contain the meaning of onion, garlic, radish. We found a representative for each of these 3 odors:

The onion-stone: in col. 15 the “uteshi stone” ends with an ideograph which has been the subject of discussion. Brugsch reads HEDSH, and gives the meaning white, whilst Barguet reads differently, and does not translate, whereas Harris states from the photograph that the reading must remain in doubt. Our reading from the photograph is HEDSH, but our translation is onion. The uteshi stone could be the stone which smells like onion.

The garlic stone: Garlic has been suggested for HUTEM and TAAM, i.e. the root word TEM. In col. 16, the ore TEM-IKR could represent the garlic stone, the prefix KR meaning weak, i.e. the stone which has a weak smell of garlic.

The radish stone: Radish corresponds to KAU and KA-T. In col. 16, the ore KA-Y could mean ‘ore with a smell of radish’.

UTESHUI HEDSH (onion , left), TEM (garlic, center), KA-Y (radish, right)

The translation introduces the elements discussed above:

(Col. 11): There is a mountain massif in its eastern region (of Elephantine) containing all the ores, all the crushed (weathered) stones (aggregates suitable for agglomeration), all the products
(Col. 12) sought for building the temples of the gods of the North and South, the stalls for sacred animals, the pyramid for the king, all statues that stand in temples and in sanctuaries. Moreover, all these chemical products are set before the face of Khnum and around him.
(Col. 13)…there is in the midst of the river a place of relaxation for every man who processes the ores on its two sides.
(Col. 15) Learn the names of the stony materials which are to be found…bekhen, dead (weathered) granite, mhtbt, r’qs, uteshi-hedsh (onion stone),… prdny, teshy.
(Col. 16) Learn the names of the rare ores located upstream…gold, silver, copper, iron, lapis-lazuli, turquoise, thnt (chrysocolla), jasper, Ka-y (radish stone), menu, esmerald, temikr (garlic stone), more over, neshemet, ta- mehy, hemaget, ibehet, bekes-ankh, green make up, black antimony, red ochre…
(Col.18).. .I found the god standing.. .he spoke to me: “I am Khnum, your creator, My arms are around you, to steady your body, to
(Col. 19) safeguard your limbs. I bestow on you rare ores upon rare ores… since creation nobody ever processed them (to make stone) for building the temples of the gods or rebuilding the ruined temples…”

The Famine Stele describes the invention of building with stone attributed to Zoser and Imhotep, builders of the first pyramid, the Step Pyramid at Saqqara (2,750 BC). According to the text, this invention of building with stone occurs through processing different minerals and ores which could be chemicals involved in the fabrication of man-made stone, or a type of concrete.

Dogman

19th April 2014, 05:45 PM

ban her Neuro your a mod For what , disagreeing? Having other convictions? Does not conform to the pack mentality?

mick silver

19th April 2014, 05:47 PM

just kidding dog , laugh enjoy have some funny

Neuro

19th April 2014, 06:03 PM

ban her Neuro your a mod
I know you meant it as a joke, but I wouldn't ban anyone for pointing out something I disagree with...

Horn

19th April 2014, 06:53 PM

Where do you get the idea that no one knows how the pyramids were built?

lol!

This one is crafty I might say, he's got the shine on him...

6282

singular_me

19th April 2014, 10:29 PM

aeondaze
Where do you get the idea that no one knows how the pyramids were built?

when you see the maths involved at that level, and considering the knowledge the egyptians left behind, especially the Valley of the Kings (pictures: http://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images;_ylt=A0LEVxBXPFNTO14AWRBXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTBx Z3BrOGd2BHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkAzI3Nl8x?_adv_ prop=image&fr=chrf-yff25&va=valley+of+the+kings+egypt ) , and other temples, all of which seem to indicate that the pyramids are alien to the egyptian culture.

see bold: ROFLOL .. Still a hot debate... ie: they still do not have a clue.

Raising the blocks

Some times rocky outcrop was used as the core of the pyramid to save the work.The inner chambers and passages would have been constructed independently and the actual pyramid built around them. Some of the royal pyramid builders seem to have changed their minds about their preferred location of the burial chambers. The inner pyramid would then be built of limestone cut from the desert plateau. When the main structure was finished, the pyramid was completed by encasing it in blocks of finely cut and dressed limestone from Tura. Sometimes granite was used for the lower courses.

The precise method of raising the pyramids is not known. Pulleys were not invented until Roman times. However, the Greek historian Herodotus tells of levers being used to raise the blocks from one level to the next. It has also been suggest that workers operating in teams used ramp to haul the blocks into position. As the pyramid grew in size so the ramp would have been raised to enable the workers to reach the next level. The main problem with this is that the ramp would eventually have been huge as the pyramid itself and would have reached an immense distance into the desert.
No trace of such a structure has definitely been identified at any of the various pyramid sites. Another idea is that the ramp would around the pyramid and was dismantled when the pyramid was completed. Construction methods are still hotly debated. http://www.memphistours.com/Egypt/WikiTravel/Pyramids-Egypt/wiki/pyramids

singular_me

19th April 2014, 10:50 PM

no, you more or less twist it again... I said either or... advanced civilization existing before a huge cataclysm... or aliens did it...

at this stage, a cataclysm is more likely... but aliens DO exist, so I leave the door open once again. Only a flexible mind will always be proven right in the long run. The more rigid it is, the harder the brick wall is :)

You do not address anything I say either because you blindly believe in mainstream academia, in which case I have to admit that I cannot satisfy your inquiries. But claiming that I didnt address your questions is not genuine SINCE you wont accept "rogue opinions and research". Physicist Nassim Haramein would for sure do a lot better than I, but you dont have youtube. This thread offers at least 10 hours of video worth watching but you cannot view them... so the weakneness is on your end and you should take responsibility. I am sorry you live in Turkey.

Mainstream Academia: sorry folks we didnt get it right - again.

Every time they found themselves proven wrong, they call it a **breakthrough**... pathetic. What they should say to college students: please go wild because sciences is not set in stone, do not take what you learn for granted since every theory will go bust at some point. Meanwhile Phds perpetrates the status quo for the sake of scientific glamour, sure they dont want to lose their jobs, so much fiat money involved in that field.

example: Apr 14, 2014
Large Hadron Collider Discovers 4-Quark Exotic Particle, Challenging Physics
"We've confirmed the unambiguous observation of a very exotic state-something that looks like a particle composed of two quarks and two anti-quarks," said Tomasz Skwarnicki, one of the resrearchers, in a news release. "The discovery certainly doesn't fit the traditional quark model. It may give us a new way of looking at strong-interaction physics." http://www.scienceworldreport.com/articles/13996/20140414/large-hadron-collider-discovers-4-quark-exotic-particle-challenging-physics.htm

I did debunk it, read my posts in this thread. You didn't deal with any of the objections I put forward, you never presented any evidence for 10,500 BC claim. Believe in your Orion alien fairy tale. Funny how you think this is resisting NWO though, surely you heard of project blue beam? Belief in advanced alien civilizations among the masses is a pre-requisite for it to be successful! Ever thought of that?

Neuro

19th April 2014, 11:55 PM

"We've confirmed the unambiguous observation of a very exotic state-something that looks like a particle composed of two quarks and two anti-quarks," said Tomasz Skwarnicki, one of the resrearchers, in a news release. "The discovery certainly doesn't fit the traditional quark model. It may give us a new way of looking at strong-interaction physics." http://www.scienceworldreport.com/ar...ng-physics.htm
This is just standard fare in the fairy-tale world of quantum mechanics, in most cases they have no ficking clue as to what they are observing, and they have to invent new models and theories every time something doesn't follow what their previously fantasized model/phenomena predicted. Did you notice the extremely vague language? It means they have no clue of what they are talking about...

This is the thing re Quantum Mechanics, singular, NO-ONE has any idea about how it works or even if any of the models have any validity, but you have a few number crunchers/math wizzes who act in a convincing way, which convinces the general public that they can never understand physics, so they don't bother even to understand the so called "outdated" Newtonian physics, where results are predictable, models are correct, and it has great practical use. Quantum Mechanics is an assault on common sense by the New World Order, to get people into a state of magical thinking, where they could be lied to without them being able to understand and grasp that!

An example would be the collapse of WTC 7, people that doesn't understand Newtonian physics but are prone to magical thinking can believe that a building can collapse symetrically at free fall acceleration from office fires and debris damage. Most people still haven't heard of the WTC 7 collapse, why do you think that is? There are still a few people who understand Newtonian physics, who can decipher the official lies re WTC 7 in particular. It is IMPOSSIBLE for it to have collapsed the way it did without aid of the conspirators, IOW it was set up for (semi-)controlled demolition. Now if you have a quantum magical lala mindset, pretty much anything is possible, isn't it?

aeondaze

20th April 2014, 12:03 AM

Lol you and your hot debate, there is no debate, except supposedly with you and your marginalised ideas.

What don't you understand about "they even left detailed descriptions on how they were built" even with little Egyptian dudes, not aliens or some hitherto unknown advanced race of humans, but Egyptians. How much more clear does it need to get?

Tell me then why do you reject this, when it is clearly written down how they constructed the structures and exactly who built them?

What is it that makes you reject what they themselves have said? I really need to understand your thinking on this. Don't give us any more youtubes videos or links, in your own words explain to us mainstream NWO supporting, planet destroying baby murderers exactly why you reject the Egyptians very own explanations of how they built these structures.

Also do you know how many times you avoid answering question or defending your argument by changeling the subject completely or bringing up other subjects that have little relevance to the debate at hand? It is a very bad weakness of yours, that destroys confidence in those that you wish to convince, just saying.

You've done it to both me and neuro and it is obvious when it happens, it's doesn't do you any justice...:)

aeondaze

20th April 2014, 12:12 AM

Horn

20th April 2014, 12:17 AM

What don't you understand about "they even left detailed descriptions on how they were built" even with little Egyptian dudes, not aliens or some hitherto unknown advanced race of humans, but Egyptians. How much more clear does it need to get?

Tell me then why do you reject this, when it is clearly written down how they constructed the structures and exactly who built them?

Unadulterated bologna,

"But the process of building pyramids, while complicated, was not as colossal an undertaking as many of us believe," said Redford.

It seems that the largest pyramid required 20,000 and 30,000 laborers, who ended it in less than 23 years. Many European monuments took much longer. Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris was completed in two centuries.

Construction theories

Main article: Egyptian pyramid construction techniques (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_pyramid_construction_techniques)

Many alternative, often contradictory, theories have been proposed regarding the pyramid's construction techniques.[23] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza#cite_note-23) Many disagree on whether the blocks were dragged, lifted, or even rolled into place. The Greeks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greeks) believed that slave labour was used, but modern discoveries made at nearby workers' camps associated with construction at Giza suggest it was built instead by tens of thousands of skilled workers. Verner posited that the labour was organized into a hierarchy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarchy), consisting of two gangs of 100,000 men, divided into five zaa or phyle of 20,000 men each, which may have been further divided according to the skills of the workers.[24] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza#cite_note-24)

One mystery of the pyramid's construction is its planning. John Romer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Romer_%28Egyptologist%29) suggests that they used the same method that had been used for earlier and later constructions, laying out parts of the plan on the ground at a 1-to-1 scale. He writes that "such a working diagram would also serve to generate the architecture of the pyramid with precision unmatched by any other means."[25] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza#cite_note-25) He also argues for a 14-year time span for its construction.[26] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza#cite_note-Romer81-26)

A modern construction management study, in association with Mark Lehner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Lehner) and other Egyptologists, estimated that the total project required an average workforce of 14,567 people and a peak workforce of 40,000. Without the use of pulleys, wheels, or iron tools, they used critical path analysis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_path_analysis) to suggest the Great Pyramid was completed from start to finish in approximately 10 years.[27] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza#cite_note-civilengineer-27)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza

Mainstream academia hasn't the faintest clue how the pyramids were built. The level of exactness and orientation can hardly (if at all) be achieved today, so how could they possibly even begin to scheme.

Buncha hooligans playing guessing games, but hey they're Archeologists so givem a break on the engineering side.

Neuro

20th April 2014, 12:24 AM

Horn what exactness? The stars of Orions belt doesn't fit pyramids exactly, the angulation differs by a few degrees...

Horn

20th April 2014, 12:46 AM

The accuracy of the pyramid's workmanship is such that the four sides of the base have an average error of only 58 millimetres in length. The base is horizontal and flat to within ±15 mm (0.6 in).The sides of the square base are closely aligned to the four cardinal compass points (within four minutes of arc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minute_of_arc))[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza#cite_note-11) based on true north (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_north), not magnetic north (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_north), and the finished base was squared to a mean corner error of only 12 seconds of arc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_of_arc). The completed design dimensions, as suggested by Petrie's survey and subsequent studies, are estimated to have originally been 280 cubits (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cubits) high by 440 cubits long at each of the four sides of its base. The ratio of the perimeter to height of 1760/280 cubits equates to 2π (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi) to an accuracy of better than 0.05% (corresponding to the well-known approximation of π as 22/7)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza

A 200 man fleet today armed with latest laser levels and the latest in stone pulverizing and leveling machinery technology would probably take more or less 5 years to complete a base that large and exact, that's if the wind did not blow or it rained in the meantime, if it were even possible with the base substrate of what they were working on. Don't even get into settling after stone placement.

How they would hold those lines to true north is also beyond amazing, and with 2.3 million blocks plowed over top in what is said to be 20 years, that truly is the mind blowing part of this thread.

The fact that the part of history is held so tightly by mainstream, and appears to have some rather large holes in its progression upto, lends me to believe something is being hidden very deeply in anals.

aeondaze

20th April 2014, 01:04 AM

Here is a great thorough debunking of these crazy ideas.

It has always pained me a great deal that so many people all over the world are genuinely fascinated by ancient Egypt and yet they are so woefully misinformed by sensationalist media, so-called documentaries based in pseudoscience, and the fantasy world of Hollywood. No other ancient civilization is so universally recognized and yet so thoroughly misunderstood. Sadly, Egyptologists are often so frustrated by this that they want nothing to do with the situation; it’s not just a matter of educating people, it’s completely reeducating them—trying to reverse the damage caused by ‘The Mummy’ and even the Discovery Channel.

When I tell people that I’m studying Egyptology, people always assume that this means pyramids and mummies, the only things they know about Egypt. In fact these areas are so popular that they are overrun by untrained theorists and most Egyptologists shun them rather than tackling all of the misinformation. Sometimes I can hardly blame them—even as a lowly student, I was once approached at a conference by a man who wanted to show me the home experiments that he’d carried out, pulling miniature pyramid blocks in his backyard! The sad thing though is that many people prefer madcap theories to the truth, especially when genuine research is presented in dry academic speak rather than the exciting Indiana Jones-style of tv.

Once I was actually asked in all seriousness for my professional opinion on whether alien build the pyramids. The man said: ‘There’s so much discussion of the alien theory that there must be something to it, right?’. Well, my short answer would be, ‘No. There isn’t anything to it at all.’ My longer answer will follow, with a thorough dissection of the central arguments of the alien theory and why they are wrong. I think the main reason the theory is so popular is that people like to believe in things, things that are much bigger than themselves, whether it’s god or aliens. But often people also want proof and they seek to find it in the pyramids and other ancient monuments. It’s no wonder that the pyramids are incredible enough that they inspire people to believe the unbelievable. I myself don’t think there’s anything wrong with postulating that there might be other life out there in the universe, but I also don’t believe in robbing humanity of pride in its achievements.

I think it’s rather more inspiring to think that human beings, our own ancestors, created such spectacular monumental achievements. However, some people see the concept of civilization as progressive, that humans only continue to improve upon the past, so they think that just because we are uncertain about how the pyramids were built and we ourselves would struggle to replicate their achievement, it is impossible that humans of the past could have done it.

They say that since the pyramids of Giza were built about 4500 years ago, people back then couldn’t have been skilled enough to do it. However, we’re ignoring that numerous remarkable developments were happening all those millennia ago. There are many things that were discovered in the distant past that still serve us today. The Egyptians made many brilliant innovations (something I will have to write more about in another post)—simple things that we still use today, which have barely changed over the millennia since they first conceived, from the earliest forms of paper and ink, to the 24 hour day.

People say that since we wouldn’t be able to build pyramids today, that the Egyptians couldn’t have done it, but it’s not just building of the pyramids that couldn’t be replicated today. It’s hard to imagine ever being able to pull together the resources, power, money, skilled craftsmen, and architects needed to build one of the great gothic cathedrals in this day and age. It just couldn’t happen. This isn’t something to be ashamed of though, we simply use different technologies and have different priorities these days. While we couldn’t build another Notre Dame Cathedral or Great Pyramid, modern structures like the Eiffel Tower or the Gherkin wouldn’t have been possible back then either. Pyramids were possible simply because the entire economy, resources, and population of the Egyptian civilization was under the control of a single omnipotent ruler, who could mobilize them all into a monumental building project.

To argue that just because we don’t know every detail about how the pyramids were built would be a logical fallacy—an argument from ignorance—and does not prove that aliens must have built them. We have so much evidence that strongly indicates that the Egyptians themselves were responsible for building the pyramids. We have archaeological evidence of their construction—remains of the quarries, roads, tools, records of the workers and the towns in which they lived. We know why they built them and we can even observe their lengthy and imperfect evolution before they reached their architectural peak with the Great Pyramid.

To properly address the issues out there, I will cite from a number of websites that support the theory that aliens built the pyramids and some of the comments that individuals have posted there, and explain why they are incorrect. I randomly chose a number of sites from the top Google search hits for aliens and pyramids. I don’t want to single anyone out or anything, so I won’t use any names attached to the comments. The various websites from which they derive are listed at the end of this post.

I am no great pyramid expert myself, so I must acknowledge an enormous debt to the work of Mark Lehner and Dieter Arnold, from whom most of my information derives, along with other Egyptological sources, all of which are also listed at the end. I’d recommend Lehner’s ‘The Complete Pyramids’ as the best general book on the subject if you want to learn more. It is very readable with lots of illustrations and diagrams.

Why were the pyramids built?

Referring to the alien theory, someone states: ‘It’s the most sensible theory. Why would ancient Egyptians build such monstrosities just to bury their kings?’ Alien theorists say that it’s a mystery why the Egyptians or other ancient people would build such immense monuments. Therefore, it must have been aliens. But why on earth would the aliens want to build these monuments? And on earth? That makes even less sense. We definitely know the purpose behind the building of the pyramids.

They were used as tombs for the ancient Egyptian kings, but they represented much more than just a grave. They were iconic symbols of the supreme power of the ruler; what better way of showing your subjects who’s boss, than conscripting them to build you a monolith that dominates the entire landscape? Above all, they were monuments to divine Egyptian kingship, the place where the king would be transformed into a god. One of the most important Egyptian myths tells how an ancient king named Osiris was murdered by his evil usurping brother, who in turn was eventually defeated by the rightful heir to the throne, Osiris’ son Horus. In death, Egyptian kings were thought to take on the role of Osiris, the ruler of the underworld, while their son assumed the role of Horus and the kingship. And although deceased, the former king would join the eternal cycle of life to be reborn everyday with the sun god. The pyramid was thought to facilitate this. This also legitimized the rule of the successor to the throne, since the pyramid was a symbol of his father’s new divinity.

There are a number of reasons why these tombs were built in a pyramidal form. First of all, they developed out of an older form of monumental royal tombs called mastabas, which were flat-roofed rectangular buildings, that an enterprising architect named Imhotep then decided to adapt by stacking one on top of the other into a step pyramid form. Also, the pyramid was intended as a place of rebirth. An Egyptian creation myth tells of the birth of the world as a primeval mound rising out of the waters of chaos. The pyramid is a stylized mound.

In a country where the sun is always shining, the sun god Re was the supreme deity, and the king aspired to join him in being reborn every dawn. The pyramid form echoed the rays of the sun and its staircase like form allowed it to serve as an instrument of ascension. Each of the pyramids was capped with a pyramidal stone block, or pyramidion, and the carvings on the one from Amenemhat III’s pyramid at Dashur confirm its celestial role for the king; it is inscribed with a pair of eyes looking up at the sundisk and hieroglyphs that read ‘Amenemhat beholds the perfection of Re’.

The ancient names for the pyramids themselves reveal a great deal about their purpose as royal monuments and symbolic locations for the king’s divine transformation and journey to heaven. The Great Pyramid is called ‘Khufu’s horizon’, and the other two Giza pyramids are called ‘Great is Khafre’ and ‘Menkaure is Divine’. Other pyramid names include ‘Djedefre is a Sehed-Star’ and Sahure’s ‘Rising of the Ba-Spirit’. Just because the Egyptians were interested in the celestial aspect of the afterlife though, doesn’t mean they had to be inspired by aliens. People throughout history have been fascinated by the stars, and I don’t think anyone’s calling Galileo an alien.

The pyramids themselves were clearly part of Egyptian religious tradition, forming the focal point for the worship of the deceased king. Some of the rituals involved cleaning, dressing, and offering food and drink to statues of the king, who was undoubtedly human rather than green or tentacled. We actually have records of the day-to-day activities centred around the pyramids. The Abusir papyri preserve detailed records of the daily activities at the pyramids and of the people who worked there, including schedules of priest and guard duties; inventories of pyramid temple equipment; financial accounts; lists of goods supplied and stored; and records of architectural inspections.

The Egyptians had strong cultural, religious, and political reasons for building the pyramids and there is no reason to question their purpose.

Some internet sites claim that the pyramids were never used as tombs, perhaps because they now lie empty.

This is because they were robbed in antiquity for the treasures that would have been buried with the king. There are still huge stone sarcophagi in many of the pyramids that were clearly used to hold the royal mummy. Funerary texts are also written inside the burial chambers of pyramids built after the Giza ones. The temples attached to the pyramids were used for mortuary rituals at the funeral.

Alien theorists often say that the pyramids couldn’t have been built by such ‘primitive’ ancient people and it’s strange that the pyramids suddenly just appeared out of nowhere

The main idea that most people use to support the theory of alien pyramid builders is—and I quote—that ancient man was ‘primitive’, ‘living in mud huts’, and too ‘stupid’ to build such sophisticated constructions. One website states: ‘In the period 2500 BC man did not have the tools or knowledge necessary to build the pyramids, so only aliens could have done it. The angle of the slope of the sides is so precise only aliens could achieve this. The blocks are so heavy and the pyramid so tall only aliens could achieve this. How the aliens built the pyramids is not known, but they would have employed the use of advanced construction equipment.’

First of all, these ancient peoples were nowhere near as stupid as the people who make such statements. While we may have accumulated knowledge over the centuries, our species’ brains haven’t changed at all in the past few thousand years and ancient people were just as intelligent as we are today.

Before the pyramids were built, the Egyptians had developed agriculture, writing, religion, astronomy, mathematics, metal-working and semi-precious stones, sophisticated artwork and monumental stone architecture, and had managed to unite the various people throughout the country under the rule of one king. This was a true civilization, not a motley band of savages. The pyramids of Giza were incredible achievements for the time—expert Mark Lehner calculates that 9 million tonnes of limestone were quarried between the reigns of Sneferu and Menkaure alone.

When you really learn enough about them, it’s not difficult at all to imagine that the Egyptians were capable of such architectural sophistication. They had a certain expertise in stone working that we lack today. By the time of the pyramids, a corps of craftsmen had been developing their quarrying and building skills since the Early Dynastic Period. We have evidence to support the Egyptians’ responsibility for all the construction stages of the pyramids.

A similar claim for the sudden appearance of the pyramids from nowhere, out of the supposed dark ages that proceeded civilization, is made in a Discovery channel programme about the alien theory (!) in which the voiceover states: ‘For two and a half million years our prehistoric ancestors had been living in caves, passing the time by bashing stones together, when suddenly everything changed and people began to build huge monuments all over the planet. But how? And why?’
They blatantly ignore the fact that we have clear evidence for the evolution of the form and building process of the pyramids. These perfections of architectural engineering did not just appear from nowhere and the Egyptians actually got it wrong in a number of early pyramids before they were able to create the Giza masterpieces.

The first pyramid ever built, the Step Pyramid at Saqqara, started off as a completely different style of building. Originally, a traditional mastaba was built for the Third Dynasty king Djoser. The architect Imhotep then began to make innovative changes by enlarging the basic structure to be a square and then building a smaller mastaba-like square on top. But he didn’t stop there; inspired, Imhotep expanded the building once again and added a fourth, fifth, and sixth level to eventually form the Step Pyramid.

A remarkable structure with an extensive surrounding complex and subterranean palace, it was still not a true pyramid with smooth sides. After a few other stepped pyramid projects were abandoned by short-lived kings, the first attempt at a true pyramid finally developed out of the stepped pyramid of King Sneferu at Meidum.

The Meidum pyramid was originally intended to be a 7-step pyramid and was then expanded to 8-steps and completed in the 14th year of Sneferu’s reign. In his 28th or 29th year though, the workers were sent back again to fill out the rest of it into a true pyramid. Stripped of its outer casing, the remains of the pyramid stand in three large steps. Before he did that though, the ambitious builder Sneferu began building another pyramid at the site of Dashur that was the first pyramid intended to be a true pyramid right from the start. Unaccustomed to building such a structure though, construction began at too steep an angle, a slope of 60°. When severe structural problems were noticed, the architects took emergency measures and altered it to 55°. Still having problems though, they changed it again to a more gradual gradient of 44°, resulting in a rather odd looking pyramid, which has appropriately been dubbed the Bent Pyramid.

Some alien advocates actually try to use this pyramid to support their theory by claiming that the Bent Pyramid was just a shoddy imitation built by humans to copy the aliens who build the Giza pyramids. However, the pyramid is very conclusively dated to years 15-30 of Sneferu’s reign. This first attempt at a true pyramid was so problematic though that Sneferu abandoned it too, and started another pyramid at Meidum. Learning from previous mistakes, the North pyramid continued to build on the developments of Sneferu’s previous efforts, resulting in the first truly successful and magnificent true pyramid.

Pyramids did not suddenly appear out of nowhere, beamed in by alien technology. Only after all of these less successful attempts, and all the experience gained by architects and workers, could the stage be set for the construction of the greatest of world wonders.

How did the ancient Egyptians build the Pyramids?

Pyramid building was a long and complex process that took many different stages and and an amazing amount of resources, but was well within ancient Egyptian capabilities.

The Great Pyramid is composed of roughly 2,300,000 blocks and was likely built in 23 years or less (the length of its builder King Khufu’s reign according to the Turin papyrus). Stadelmann has calculated that to do this, the builders had to lay c. 340 blocks a day. The general figure suggested for the annual workforce is in the range of 20-30,000. Although it needed a great deal of stone, the bulk of it would have been more easily moved as it would have gone into the base of the pyramid, and even though the Great Pyramid was the best constructed, the core itself was also rather sloppier than the exterior, including many irregular stones and debris fill.
I will break down my discussion of the building process into the various stages:

Planning

The Egyptians were careful and precise architectural planners. Even buildings much older than the pyramids were laid out using an exact measuring system based on a unit called a cubit (about 52.5 cm, which could be further divided into smaller units called palms). Representations of foundation ceremonies for temples show this measuring process, called the ‘stretching of the cord’, being done using ropes tied to wooden pegs pounded into the ground. Many round holes that may have been for measuring pegs have been found cut into the bedrock around the foundations of pyramids and their temples.

The angle of inclination (seqed in Egyptian) for the sloped faces of the pyramids was clearly calculated by the Egyptians using a simple and precise method. The Rhind Mathematical Papyrus shows that seqed was defined as the relation between the horizontal setback of the wall and the vertical rise of 1 cubit. Pyramid alignment is further discussed below. There is also evidence that they produced miniature architect’s models, much like is done today, as part of the planning. Rainer Stadlemann found a small limestone architect’s model for the innovative substructure of Amenemhat III’s Hawara pyramid.

Quarrying

We know that local limestone was used for the pyramid cores and the mortuary and valley temples, while finer limestone and granite were brought along river from Tura and Aswan to use for the smooth outer casing.

The quarry used for Khufu’s pyramid is located on the plateau itself, 300m south of the Great Pyramid, a huge horseshoe shaped chunk out of the plateau, dug up to 30m below the original surface. Khafre’s quarry gives a good example of how the blocks were actually quarried. In the open limestone quarry just north of his pyramid, there are still the stumps of 3x3m blocks that were removed thousands of years ago with trenches in between them where the stonecutters would have worked.

Stone tools were used for quarrying. Blocks were cut by pounding channels into the limestone using hammer stones to separate them from bedrock and then detached using large wooden levers. Traces of these channels remain and there are still a number of unfinished quarry blocks that lie almost detached from the bedrock not far from the Sphinx, and in Menkaure’s quarry, where huge lever sockets are also visible.

In an interview with NOVA, Mark Lehner explains the strongly human and flawed side to these monuments:‘A pyramid is basically, most basically, two separate constructions: it’s an outer shell of very fine polished limestone with great accuracy in its joints…and the other construction is the inner core, which filled in this shell….The core was made with a substantial slop factor, as my friend who is a mechanic likes to say about certain automobiles. That is, they didn’t join the stones very accurately. You have great spaces between the stones…. And so they’d jam down pebbles and cobbles and some broken stones, and slop big quantities of gypsum mortar in there….

We saw in many places, even on the giant pyramids of Giza, the first pyramid and the second pyramid and the third one, fragments of tools, bits of pottery that are clearly characteristic of the Old Kingdom…. So you see the pyramids are very human monuments. And the evidence of the people who built them, their material culture is embedded right into the very fabric of the pyramids. And I think I could take just about any interested person and show them this kind of material embedded in the pyramids as well as tool marks in the stones and say, hey, folks, these weren’t lasers. These were chisels and hammers and you know, people who were really out there.’

Workers

There is actually a lot of evidence left of the ordinary people who performed the strenuous building work, who weren’t aliens, but most definitely Egyptian. While the total number of the workforce is speculative, we do know about the division of the work force and the size of these groups. The work force was organized by crews, each of roughly 2000 conscripted peasants, comprising two gangs of 1000. Each gang was divided into five groups of 200 men called zaa, also known by the Greek name ‘phyle’. Within each phyle were ten divisions of twenty men. The gangs seems to have been competitive and had names relating to the reigning king, for example ‘Friends of Khufu’ or ‘Drunkards of Menkaure’, and they actually graffitied their names on the buildings!

The stones from some of the Middle Kingdom pyramids have rough hieroglyphs inscribed on them as notes for either scribes or controllers. These notes consist of the date of transport, the workmen in charge of the block, and the stage of transport. Some state ‘brought from the quarry’ or ‘removal from the quarry’, delivered at the mereyt (harbour or embankment), ‘brought from the embankment’ and delivered to ‘storage enclosures’. Other notes records that they were ‘brought’ or ‘dragged’ to the pyramid, or ‘delivered to the ramp’. Herdsmen are also mentioned, who may have been responsible for driving oxen pulling the stone.

The stones also have team marks written on them to record the name of the team responsible for them. They may have been written and read by the basically illiterate workmen themselves, since some involve true hieroglyphs and others invented signs. Felix Arnold believes that the signs related to the worker’s hometowns—which weren’t in outer space.

There are also written documents that deal with the pyramid builders. Several of the Lahun papyri from the town associated with the pyramid builders of Senwosret II document the dragging of stone blocks by groups of workers.

Transport

The Nile River was the highway of Egypt and any finer stone that was quarried from further away was transported to the pyramid site by boats. Most of the stone was quarried nearby though, and wooden sledges were probably used to transport the blocks over land. A 4.2m long sledge was found by the pyramid of Senwosret III. At least some of these sledges would have been drawn by oxen. A number of tomb and temple wall paintings depict the transportation of stones by water and by sledges drawn by men or oxen.

Roads and tracks were made to pave the way for these sledges. Worn wooden beams were reused like ‘railway sleepers in tracks’ for dragging heavy stones on sledges overland. Such tracks have been found at Lisht near the Twelfth Dynasty pyramids of Amenemhat I and Senwosret I. Transport roads, which also survive at Lisht, measure up to 36 ft in width. They were made with a foundation consisting of a fill of limestone chips and mortar with wooden beams inserted, over which a layer of limestone chips and white gypsum was used to provide a smooth, solid surface. Water used as a lubricant for the ground to make it easier to pull the sledges.

Transporting immense quantities of stone was not an impossible task that would have required space ships, but well within the ancient Egyptians’ capabilities.

Laying the blocks

When the stone blocks were finally being moved into place, to preserve the precise alignment of the walls, corner blocks would be set first and then other blocks would be brought in on rollers but only levermoved into their precise final placement using levers. For example, one of the casing blocks of Khufu’s pyramid shows a lever hole in the base of the block that was then filled in with plaster. But lacking in ‘alien perfection’, sometimes since there were different teams working to lay blocks from each of the pyramid’s corners, they could end up with a gap in the middle, which would need to be filled with smaller blocks, as is the case with the pyramid of Meidum.

It is generally thought that ramps were used to move the blocks to the higher levels of the pyramids. Certainly some of the proto-pyramids, the step mastabas of the Third Dynasty show evidence of having had building ramps on all sides. For true pyramids, using such ramps blocks could have been towed to a height of 30-50 m, and at least 50% of blocks could have been lifted that way. The Meidum pyramid shows traces that indicate a steep ramp was applied to the outer casing. These ramps would not have been difficult to build or dismantle since they would have been made from an amalgam of limestone chip, tafla, and gypsum, rather than stone blocks.

All sorts of ramps have been proposed, from single or multiple straight ones to ones that would wrap around the structure or zigzag up the face or even internal ramps. Just because we don’t know for certain how the upper reaches of the pyramids were built, doesn’t automatically mean that they couldn’t have been built and are therefore alien constructions. There are a number of different ways it could have been done, but sadly we aren’t just able to ask the Egyptians which one is right. There probably isn’t even one simple answer—a number of different methods could have been used.

But…pyramids would have been really hard to build!

A lot of website comments display a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of pyramids. One states: ‘There is no way that primitive man built the pyramids. Even with modern equipment (i.e. cranes) we could not duplicate that feat, those are megaton (1million ton) rocks. You could surround the entire rock with men and it wouldn’t budge 1″. There’s no way with simple ropes & pulleys that they moved those stones… absolutely NO WAY.’

While, yes, the pyramids would have been incredibly difficult to build and required incredible expertise, they are not miracle structures. People seem to think that you’d practically need magic to build them! They’re amazing feats of engineering, but they’re certainly not inconceivable as human creations. The blocks were certainly not a million tonnes each! On average, they weighed about 2.5 tonnes. And the suggestion of lifting the entire weight of the blocks with cranes would probably actually be more difficult than the Egyptian approach, which was to drag the stones over wooden rollers or slippery mud lined surfaces. We even have the remains of the smoothed roads that they built to move them. Just think about it—while I can barely lift my suitcase when it’s stuffed to the brim and weighing almost 30 kg, it’s relatively easy to move when it’s on wheels! By surrounding the blocks with teams of men, it wouldn’t have been that difficult to move them, and the Egyptians often used cattle to help as well. The NOVA pyramid-building experiment found that 20 men could easily pull a two-tonne block along lubricated tracks. Building the pyramids would have been difficult, but people can be pretty clever when it comes to making work easier.

aeondaze

20th April 2014, 01:11 AM

And the rest...

What about the pyramids’ extraordinarily accurate alignment?

Precision, according to one website, is only possible if you come from another planet: ‘The pyramids are so accurately aligned with the points of the compass that only aliens could have achieved this all those thousands of years ago.It wasn’t visitors from space, but rather the observation of it that allowed for the Egyptians’ great accuracy in orienting the sides of thepyramids. Amazing precision could be achieved just by watching the stars. There was actually a whole institution within temples with priests devoted to star gazing. The theory suggested by I.E.S. Edwards is that using a horizontal circular wall, a person standing within could mark a star’s rising and setting points on the top of the wall, with North identifiable as the bisection of these. A more recent theory advocated by Kate Spence suggests that the architects of the Great Pyramid sighted on two stars (b-Ursae Minoris and z-Ursae Majoris), rotating around the North Pole, which would have been in alignment when Khufu’s pyramid was constructed. Supporting this theory is the fact that inaccuracies in the orientations of earlier and later pyramids can be closely correlated with the degree to which the alignment of these two stars deviates from true north.

The perfect right angles of the pyramid were likely achieved using either a set square, of which ancient specimens are preserved, or using a ‘Pythagorean’ triangle, which was known to the Egyptians before the Greeks. They also used specialized surveying tools called the merkhet (basically a plumb bob) and the bay, a sighting tool made from the central rib of a palm leaf. Examples of such precision tools have actually been excavated are square levels with plumb bobs, set squares, and vertical plumb rods, and there are depictions of them being used by the Egyptians. After each of the four corners of the building had been plotted, the Egyptians would align the straight sides by stretching a rope between each of the corners in a ceremony called ‘stretching the cord’. This method was in use for decades before the first pyramid was ever built, and was first depicted in the reign of the Second Dynasty king, Khasekhemwy.

But then why don’t we build pyramids?

Again, misinformation makes people assume that since we aren’t building pyramids ourselves, the Egyptians couldn’t possibly have. As one person states: ‘How about the fact that a group of modern scientists attempted to build a pyramid out next to the real one using modern technologies, and after something like 100 days, succeeded in building one about 1/40 of the size of the real one????’

Well, again a classic example of wilful ignorance. I’m sure there have been a number of experiments like these, but the major one that I’m aware of, the NOVA pyramid-building experiment took 40 days to build a pyramid measuring 20ft high. However, they attempted to use mainly ancient technologies, they only had a team of 44 workmen, a short time period, and a total lack of experience in pyramid building. And it was just an experiment—they weren’t trying to build a real pyramid! Egypt had a state-controlled system capable of acquiring and organizing the necessary people and resources. The Egyptians would have used thousands of workers and taken many years to build a proper pyramid, and just because we aren’t building them too doesn’t prove that it was humanely impossible.

The pyramids of Giza form the belt of Orion

A theory proposed by Robert Bauval and Adrian Gilbert, notes that the pattern formed by the layout of the pyramids is virtually identical to the three belt stars of the constellation Orion. If one considers the details of the Orion correlation it seems likely that it is pure coincidence. Orion’s belt is a famous star formation partly because of the natural simplicity of its layout. The arrangement of the Giza pyramids in that pattern was probably simply because it offered the best sight lines. Basically the pyramids are laid out in a diagonal line, rather than blocking each other. Khafre built his pyramid after his father Khufu built the Great Pyramid and very cleverly situated his smaller pyramid on the higher part of the plateau so as to actually make his appear bigger than his father’s!

Bauval and Gilbert further pressed the Orion comparison by using computer software to pinpoint the date in ancient history when the alignment of the pyramids would have exactly mirrored the constellation Orion in the sky. They claim this conjunction occurred precisely in 10,450 BC and therefore this is the true date of the building of the pyramids by aliens, before the rise of Egyptian civilization. However, there is absolutely no evidence that the pyramids existed before the Egyptians did. There is overwhelming evidence that they are the cultural, religious, and political products of the early Egyptian state. The Giza pyramids were built during the 4th dynasty, which probably dates to around 2575-2450 BC.

Radiocarbon dating, which is unfortunately not always that accurate, was done on the Great Pyramid several times in the 1980s and 90s, (initially funded by the Edgar Cayce Foundation, another group that wanted the pyramids to date to 10,500 BC, believing them to be remnants of Atlantean society!). The radiocarbon dates for the Great Pyramid ranged from 2660 to 3809 BC, slightly older than the historical dates previously assumed. Also, the great cedar boat found buried beside the Great Pyramid was radiocarbon dated to about 2,600 BC. So the pyramids certainly do not date from 10,500 BC!

So yes, the Egyptians, not aliens, built the pyramids!

Pyramid building became a great cultural tradition of the Egyptian and about 30 key pyramids were built, not including all the accompanying satellite or queens’ pyramids, over a span of more than 800 years—remarkable monuments, for which the Egyptians deserve the credit.

The theory that aliens built the pyramids is built on fanciful notions, misinformation, and a wilful ignorance that completely disregards any scholarly research that contradicts the theory. Alien theorists have barely anything to support their idea other than the tactic of attacking the uncertainty of Egyptologists over the details of the building process. They prey on the people who find inspiration in the concepts of the pyramids and alien life and use them to fuel publicity for their sensationalist books and television programmes. Both ‘Is there Life elsewhere in the universe?’ and ‘How were the pyramids built?’ are questions worthy of being asked, but they belong to separate spheres of research and different periods of history, and should be kept that way. Zahi Hawass, the head of the Supreme Council of Antiquities in Egypt and the Director of the Giza Pyramids Excavation, says of the people who believe in alien theories, ‘People like to dream. If you meet someone who is not an archaeologist, they love to dream…but you have to know a little bit about reality.’ While reality might not involve conspiracy theories or UFOs, it can still be thrilling to learn about the real people behind their creation.

We shouldn’t rob ourselves of feeling pride in the pyramids as a human achievement. In building these monumentally inspiring constructions, our ancestors built the foundations of civilization. We shouldn’t betray their ingenuity with our ignorance, but celebrate it by continuing to build upon the intellectual developments and inventions that made the pyramids possible.

http://www.eloquentpeasant.com/2007/08/24/why-the-aliens-did-not-build-the-pyramids/comment-page-4/

singular_me

20th April 2014, 05:56 AM

This is just standard fare in the fairy-tale world of quantum mechanics, in most cases they have no ficking clue as to what they are observing, and they have to invent new models and theories every time something doesn't follow what their previously fantasized model/phenomena predicted. Did you notice the extremely vague language? It means they have no clue of what they are talking about...

okay you didnt get it... mainstream sciences always use the word **breakthrough** when they realize an error, no matter which field. The earth was flat theory went too bust after a breakthrough. I posted this article as an example.

exactly what I was saying regarding this article: they have no clue. But scientific realm will remain more or less clueless as long as it focuses on the effects more than the prime cause.

that is why we are in this endless debate, you want rational evidence while history is distorted and corrupt on purpose. Do sociology and history teach the Rockefellers and Co true story? , so why do we have to trust the history cartel about ancient egypt? This is a very rational question, I am afraid, and which you have eluded so far.

This is the thing re Quantum Mechanics, singular, NO-ONE has any idea about how it works or even if any of the models have any validity, but you have a few number crunchers/math wizzes who act in a convincing way, which convinces the general public that they can never understand physics, so they don't bother even to understand the so called "outdated" Newtonian physics, where results are predictable, models are correct, and it has great practical use. Quantum Mechanics is an assault on common sense by the New World Order, to get people into a state of magical thinking, where they could be lied to without them being able to understand and grasp that!

I cant defend quantum theories as I am not an physicist, BUT I can tell you that the *All That Is* is as much ruled by the Visible as the Invisible. And those discarding the Invisible for the sake of rationality, our 3D reality, will always be proven wrong. There will always be things we cannot see (and know), regardless how hard we look into them.

An example would be the collapse of WTC 7, people that doesn't understand Newtonian physics but are prone to magical thinking can believe that a building can collapse symetrically at free fall acceleration from office fires and debris damage. Most people still haven't heard of the WTC 7 collapse, why do you think that is? There are still a few people who understand Newtonian physics, who can decipher the official lies re WTC 7 in particular. It is IMPOSSIBLE for it to have collapsed the way it did without aid of the conspirators, IOW it was set up for (semi-)controlled demolition. Now if you have a quantum magical lala mindset, pretty much anything is possible, isn't it?

Thats the mainstream theory to deceive people, most of the scientists involved there are either lying up to their teeth to help the cover-up, or too brainwashed by their so-called colleges degrees.

Most people still haven't heard of the WTC 7 collapse? This is because mainstream media is too helping cover up. Simple.

I think you shoot yourself in the foot here Neuro, because I am fully aware of the 911 conspiracy and will not trust one single mainstream sources. Okay, I see where you are coming from. But comparing 911 and quantum physics is pretty far fetched.

And maybe didnt I choose well the article to illustrate my point either. I do reckon that... but you definitely seem to have a problem with topics that cannot be explained with conventional-mainstream means and theories. That ancient egyptians in this case, were astro-theology worshipers and knew a lot more about outer space that we are told by mainstream education. And that the same astro-theology worshipping is still actively practiced by the NWO masons and kaballists... of course since you wont go there, what can I say ??? This is the Invisible part of our Reality and whether one likes it or not, it is here to stay... and the NWO by the same extend... until we sort it all out. The problem here is that looking into it is a major threat to ALL societies because the day we understand the hidden/concealed history of ancient egypt (and other mysterious ruins throughout the world), society as we know it will crumble down.

singular_me

20th April 2014, 06:24 AM

90% of the time, the more people believe in the same theory the more wrong the theory is... sorry only the fringe, explorers, rogue scientists, and pioneers help new theories surface.

look at the state of our water, air and food, geopolitics, the scam that is alopathy, vaccines, keynesian economics, dumbing down education system, etc.... the list is LONG.

and you want me to embrace what mainstream education says about ancient egyptians, sumerians, vedics, etc?

nobody is going to be sidetracked here, it is the absolute status quo. I only hope that people watching/reading this thread have a better idea of the stakes and will start doing some homework... to make up their own minds.

watch Nassim Haramein explaining with *hard maths* the architectural design of the pyramids when you get a chance. Thank you.

Lol you and your hot debate, there is no debate, except supposedly with you and your marginalised ideas.

aeondaze

20th April 2014, 08:16 AM

Firstly, most of what science is investigating doesn't have any perceivable monetary value. Only a small percentage of what is actually researched has any direct benefit financially, which is why there is no grand conspiracy within scientific institutions to cover up the so called truth.

Most scientific research is spent exploring dead ends. FACT. Basically there is a huge level of redundancy within scientific institutions. Most scientific research is not beholdant to any overarching body which directs what is or isn't researched because the administrators have little control over the faculty in this regard. Why? Because the faculty is free to investigate whatever they want provided it is within their financial means and the cost of this research is negligible because the facilities are freely available as often times the cost centres for equipment are shared amongst faculties and schools and so it's merely a matter of booking time. The labor costs are also negligible because of the never ending supply of student labour. Essentially a lot of the time it doesn't cost the faculty staff anything to investigate their pet areas and therefore it makes it nearly impossible to directly control and influence their work. FACT.

What you see as a great elaborate conspiracy to cover up is essentially uncontrollable chaos. For the most part the decision of what gets investigated is based on wether anyone has done it before, not what value does this have.

If you ever saw it first hand there is no way you could come to the conclusion that it is as nearly contrived as the world of finance or politics and In fact it's completely the opposite. The exception comes when there is a distinct possibility that the research is going to offer an advantage, then the knives come out, corporations vie for the rights to the technology and faculties are persuaded to offer up technology with huge injections of cash, but this is the exception to the norm. Rarely is any influence placed on researchers because for the most part there is no advantage to be had. FACT.

And so the question that begs asking is if there is a grand conspiracy to cover up Egypt's past, what advantage do they hope gain, where is the motive?

singular_me

20th April 2014, 12:01 PM

What you see as a great elaborate conspiracy to cover up is essentially uncontrollable chaos. For the most part the decision of what gets investigated is based on wether anyone has done it before, not what value does this have.

thats why the world is in this (deadly) impasse: linear thinking is a pitfall in the sense that solutions will never be found in linear thinking, but opening the door to the Unthinkable. That is why the Unthinkable is always controversial and always meets a resistance, then is ridiculed, until it is more broadly accepted.

The Invisible is relative because we can only see what we are aware of in the end. 911 is a good example, many geopolitical events arent reported as they should to start with and mainstream education doesnt teach critical thinking. So the majority trust the official version.

Unfortunately the fact that there have been several advanced civilizations on earth before the last cataclysm is still seen as "crazy", but thats the only explanation out there to explain mysterious ruins popping out of nowhere, such as

the Japanese ancient structures Under water, estimated to be anywhere from 2000-5000+ years old.

Graham Hancock explains his initial interest in prehistoric underwater archaeology in chapter 28 of Underworld, entitled “Maps of Japan and Taiwan 13,000 Years Ago?” In the earliest times, the prehistoric inhabitants of Japan, the Jomon, developed a sophisticated material culture. The Jomon were not of typical East Asian descent; they were proto-Caucasoids, fair-skinned with prominent noses and full, light-colored beards. Many other similarities link them to other primitive people in the Americas and ancient Northern Europe. Although their society was primitive by the standards of later times, they were the first culture on Earth to develop pottery, according to mainstream theorists. Examples of this technology date back to 16,000 BCE. This was a time when many of the submerged structures of Yonaguni would have been above water, and if they were in fact built by human hands, this would have been the time that their construction was underway. Some of the figurines from later in the Jomon period depict what appear to be humanoid creatures with space suits, including helmets, or even, in some cases, underwater breathing apparatuses. http://redicecreations.com/article.php?id=21958

http://i2.wp.com/listverse.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Screen-Shot-2013-06-16-at-4.16.41-PM.jpg?resize=632%2C376

http://www.s8int.com/images/underjapan.jpg

more
https://www.google.com/search?q=japanese+ruins+under+water&rlz=1T4AURU_enUS528US577&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=SgRUU4otyofIBIf_gdAL&ved=0CDMQ7Ak&biw=868&bih=363&dpr=2.19#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=ZilCOjTkJNU1IM%253A%3BQzaJt4CQKZNigM%3Bhttp% 253A%252F%252Fwww.ancient-atlantis.com%252Fwp-content%252Fuploads%252F2014%252F04%252Fatlantis-yonugani.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.ancient-atlantis.com%252Fa-gallery-of-ancient-underwater-ruins%252F%3B750%3B489

A 7000 Year Old Temple in Mallesvaram
(oct 2001)
According to residents living nearby, the temple was completely buried and the land above it was a flat stretch. "Three years ago, a politician tried to sell this plot. But people objected on the grounds that the land should first be dug through to see if they could find something," says the priest, Ravi Shankar Bhatt. And so when they started digging up the land, they found buried underneath, this temple. It was in perfect condition, preserved by the thick layers of soil.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bangalore-times/7000-year-old-temple-in-Malleswaram/articleshow/129602326.cms

these are just mere examples, but there are many out there.

My assumption is that the pyramids real age is concealed because of religious matters (Abrahamic religions) as all of them must make match the Genesis texts to their teachings.

Some interesting headlines on Google:
Freemasonry: Ancient Egypt and the Islamic Destiny
Archaeologist: Egyptian religion forms the roots of Jewish ...
The History of Religion in Egypt: Ancient, Coptic Christianity & Islam
Ancient Egyptian Religious Influence On Modern Religions ...
Qur'anic Accuracy Vs. Biblical Error: The Kings & Pharaohs
Ancient egyptian hieroglyphs testifies Quran

so yes, I am almost sure that society as we know it, would fall apart if the true age of the pyramids was revealed. It is also political as we can see today... but this for another thread. :)

I also think that it is very important for the world elites, all races and cultures, that we do NOT know when the next cataclysm will occur... the elites will preserve themselves, so after the natureal disaster, they will rule again. And it is very likely that the next cataclysm is written in the stars. Hence the worshiping of astro-theology worldwide, in myths and religions alike.

Horn

20th April 2014, 03:34 PM

An elder advanced civilization is a fairly common thought(Plato), and could hardly be called radical thinking. Reasons to bury it would be obvious, if we would learn how it functioned we could then possibly achieve things without the Pharaoh God and his archaeologist crypto-disciples.

aeondaze

20th April 2014, 04:49 PM

Firstly It is freely admitted that no specific date has been confirmed for this Indian temple, so proponents that claim it to be 7000 years old have no data to back up this claim.

Secondly the oldest Vedas are only dated to 1500 BC so it is illogical to think that this temple is any older than that. Even the Harappan civilization only dates to 3000 BC and it's architecture is much more simplistic in form than the elaborate temple that you mentioned. So I think there is ample evidence that this temple is nowhere near as archaic as is claimed.

Also in regard to Indian archaeology, the powerful Hindu class have so many vested interests in misrepresenting finds that there is a huge amount of scepticism in the west over the methodology used and conclusions reached by Indian researchers. It is quite an issue.

In the case of the structures off the coast of Japan, the very cliff faces that surround it are made up of the same geological formations as evidenced below.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/readers/2009/04/13/naturalrocks_1.jpg

Were these natural formations adapted by man, that is a possibility but the formation itself is geologically natural. There is no cover up.

Why would they coverup these finds yet freely admit the archaic nature of Gobekli Tepe? This is an important question.

Horn

20th April 2014, 06:28 PM

6287

The Great Pyramid also has a relationship to Pi

There is another interesting aspect of this pyramid. Construct a circle with a circumference of 8, the same as the perimeter of this pyramid with its base width of 2. Then fold the arc of the semi-circle at a right angle, as illustrated below in “Revelation of the Pyramids”. The height of the semi-circle will be the radius of the circle, which is 8/pi/2 or 1.273.

This is less than 1/10th of a percent different than the height of 1.272 computed above using the Golden Triangle. Applying this to the 146.5 meter height of the pyramid would result in a difference in height between the two methods of only 0.14 meters (5.5 inches).

Its near perfect alignment to due north shows that little was left to chance

Some say that the relationships of the Great Pyramid’s dimensions to phi and pi either do not exist or happened by chance. Would a civilization with the technological skill and knowledge to align the pyramid to within 1/15th of a degree to true north leave the dimensions of the pyramid to chance? If they didn’t intend the precise 51.83 degree angle of a golden triangle, why would they have not used another simpler angle found in divisions of a circle such as 30, 45, 54 or 60 degrees? If the dimensions of the pyramid were not based on both phi and pi, would it not be most reasonable to assume that phi was used since it is based on the visible base of the pyramid and not an invisible circle with the same circumference as that base?

http://www.goldennumber.net/phi-pi-great-pyramid-egypt/

Horn

20th April 2014, 06:41 PM

http://www.theglobaleducationproject.org/egypt/studyguide/jpgs/pi_diagram.jpg
http://www.theglobaleducationproject.org/egypt/studyguide/jpgs/phi_diagram.jpg
http://www.theglobaleducationproject.org/egypt/studyguide/jpgs/kingschamberdim.jpg

http://www.theglobaleducationproject.org/egypt/studyguide/gpmath.php

Horn

20th April 2014, 06:47 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zs2bQHpy7uk

aeondaze

20th April 2014, 06:50 PM

Why would they coverup these finds yet freely admit the archaic nature of Gobekli Tepe? This is an important question.

Still can't answer this simple question. It's your pet theory that there is a cover up, so surely you can explain this. The truth is, Gobeklie Tepe by its very existence shatters your absurd claims.

mick silver

20th April 2014, 08:13 PM

there still no moon it a light they use from space

Horn

20th April 2014, 08:50 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Qr6CG19tyY

singular_me

20th April 2014, 09:13 PM

most dates of ancient ruins/contrustctions must maintain the stautus quo... and the fact that we argue about it makes it clear.

I dont believe that the age of the Hindu temple is that old but it is old enough to make one wonder.

Your picture and mine (japan ruins under water) are very different.

Firstly It is freely admitted that no specific date has been confirmed for this Indian temple, so proponents that claim it to be 7000 years old have no data to back up this claim.

Secondly the oldest Vedas are only dated to 1500 BC so it is illogical to think that this temple is any older than that. Even the Harappan civilization only dates to 3000 BC and it's architecture is much more simplistic in form than the elaborate temple that you mentioned. So I think there is ample evidence that this temple is nowhere near as archaic as is claimed.

Also in regard to Indian archaeology, the powerful Hindu class have so many vested interests in misrepresenting finds that there is a huge amount of scepticism in the west over the methodology used and conclusions reached by Indian researchers. It is quite an issue.

In the case of the structures off the coast of Japan, the very cliff faces that surround it are made up of the same geological formations as evidenced below.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/readers/2009/04/13/naturalrocks_1.jpg

Were these natural formations adapted by man, that is a possibility but the formation itself is geologically natural. There is no cover up.

Why would they coverup these finds yet freely admit the archaic nature of Gobekli Tepe? This is an important question.

singular_me

20th April 2014, 09:18 PM

Horn, thanks for posting that but I dont think many realize the importance of geometry in whole Universe... everything **is** where it has to be... and that is why astro-theology is so powerful among the elites as they understand the conflicting and harmonious patterns. And there is no surprise if we find those patterns in pyramids mirroring Orion. :) the only bottom line question here is HOW did they know?

http://www.theglobaleducationproject.org/egypt/studyguide/jpgs/pi_diagram.jpg
http://www.theglobaleducationproject.org/egypt/studyguide/jpgs/phi_diagram.jpg
http://www.theglobaleducationproject.org/egypt/studyguide/jpgs/kingschamberdim.jpg

http://www.theglobaleducationproject.org/egypt/studyguide/gpmath.php

aeondaze

21st April 2014, 05:36 AM

Why would they coverup these finds yet freely admit the archaic nature of Gobekli Tepe?

Can you at least attempt to answer this question because your lack of explanation destroys any argument that you might make.

You claim that there is a cover-up about the age of the pyramids and they date to 10,000 BC.

Why would they cover up the pyramids age but not a site like Gobekli Tepe?

7th trump

21st April 2014, 07:08 AM

The Egyptian pyramids date back to before lucifers revolt causing God to wipe out earth as it existed then. They were constructed during the 1st earth age before God destroyed the 1st earth bringing in the age of "flesh" (the second earth age).

The Egyptians then (as in all the humans at that time) were primitive....they were incapable of building large pyramids.....heck they ate out of bowls made of mud and used pictures as a language to communicate.
Anybody stupid enough to beleive they built the pyramids while communicating with pictures, eating out of mud bowls and engaging in slavery deserves the deception they're caught up in.

chad

21st April 2014, 07:15 AM

Horn

21st April 2014, 07:16 AM

Can you at least attempt to answer this question because your lack of explanation destroys any argument that you might make.

You claim that there is a cover-up about the age of the pyramids and they date to 10,000 BC.

Why would they cover up the pyramids age but not a site like Gobekli Tepe?

Maybe Gobekli Tepe is part of project Blue Beam.

Horn

21st April 2014, 07:27 AM

i believe this as well.

I can make a foundation like that for your wine cellars, chad.

call me.

Santa

21st April 2014, 07:35 AM

in the whole Universe... everything **is** where it has to be...

True.... And it's a truth that comforts me. I'd call it a positive truth..., though many don't and rack their minds trying to improve the Nature of the Universe.

We fall because of the desire for the (pursuit) of the knowledge of good and evil.

So falling is our human condition. We fall according to the Nature of the Universe.

Once in a while someone will become enlightened and it appears as if they're ascending,

but are only falling at a different rate. Like leaves from a great tree.

If anything, we take our selves too seriously.

Santa

21st April 2014, 07:45 AM

Horn

21st April 2014, 07:53 AM

We fall because of the desire for the (pursuit) of the knowledge of good and evil.

At least once the word of, in what appears to be out of place in the universe in the sentence above.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aT-nS_ESpbM