Sphinx and GP dates from 10 500 BC?

[Swede]

That's an outstanding point, Alcibiades. Everyone seems to have it figure out in their own little corrner of historical reality. Whereas the 'truth' in acutality is an everywidening assumption. Seems that anyone wtih access to practical video playback in universal fundamental sciences is mocked in consideration to what actually transpired in such given eras in time. It makes for better debate to go with the easy expalainable and widely accepted orthodox opinion, while of course not forgetting to poke fun at the inquiring mind.

Notice how noone has explained how the bottom side of these mutlitton boulders were crafted in precision. I forget who's question that was, but it was never adressed.

Though rather muddled in its presentation, this "claim" would appear to be in need of substantiation.

.

[samspade]

Talks of Ramps reminds me Houdin theory of a internal ramp using rollers here is link

National Geographic, Unlocking the Great Pyramid

http://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/national-geographic-channel/all-videos/av-9649-9983/ngc-unlocking-the-great-pyramid/

Also for those who may of missed earlier links to

Steven Myers who describes in his videos his theory of a process used to build the Great Pyramid using water locks,

barges and canals.

or at his website

http://www.thepump.org/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69&Itemid=18

But getting back to orginal thread talking about dates of the sphinx,

here is Bauval in Zep Ttepi Egyptian Creation Myths

[Harte]

I did spend awhile trying to find the Wiki page to which the image belongs but had no success. It's not on the standard Wiki page for Göbekli Tepe, but there are so many variations and permutations of Wiki at this point that it's hard to keep track. I just hate to see information presented in such a sloppy manner—but as we all know, Wiki pages are not created by professional scholars.

Wiki: Stele of the Vultures

Now, stop quoting Cladking and Timespy.

Harte

[cladking]

But getting back to orginal thread talking about dates of the sphinx,

here is Bauval in Zep Ttepi Egyptian Creation Myths

[media=]

[/media]

I disagree with Bauval on most points but there's no reason he can't be generally correct.

It seems quite obvious that the Sphinx faces east to face the rising sun of the equinoxes. The

pyramids are laid out according to the seasons as well. The Egyptians were oriented toward

the south because that's where the sun was. That they developed the calendar proves they

were familiar with the stars and some of this is mentioned in the PT.

There were older structures under G1 and probably G2. There's no reason to believe there

wasn't an older structure at the site of the Sphinx.

[Aus Der Box Skeptisch]

I believe you're missing the point.

I keep finding more corroborating evidence among the tiny bit that survives and you've

yet to really address the first points. I've actually managed to debunk ramps yet I've never

seen a refutation of it. The mere repetition of orthodoxy conclusions isn't an argument at

all. The claim that they must have used ramps in the face of overwhelming evidence that

ramps were not used is not even worth consideration. The vaccuous and wholly unsuppor-

ted claims of websites like touregypt that ramps have been found on G1 means no more than

any other unsupported and unsubstantiated claim. One can speculate about how ramps must

have been configured or how many angels can dance on the head of a pin for an eternity but

the fact is ramps are debunked. Before spending the few dollars they have available commis-

sioning studies to prove ramps are possible they should first rebunk ramps and this will require

evidence.

The same tired claim that ramps are the only possible means to lift stones using ancient tech-

nology can not legitimately be used to support the argument that they must have used ramps.

This is assuming the conclusion and it has no meaning in the real world. Rather than complain

about the facts why not just abandon the ludicrous and romanticv notion of men toiling to drag

stones up ramps. It didn't happen and has been debunked. It is facts and logic that almost al-

ways leads to truth. It is not and never has been appeals to orthodoxy or assumptions. Facts

say they used no ramps so why cling to them? Logic says ramps are the most difficult possible

means. The evidence does not support ramps.

I ask why even as more and more evidence stacks up against ramps why people still embrace

them. If you want to get frustrated with someone it's not the messenger you should be frustrated

with. It is those who refuse to gather the data that will show how they built the pyramids.

If they had been debunked I couldn't say there is evidence of ramps. Which there is. Its been posted many times for you. You have ignored the evidence not debunked the evidence. You haven't even shown us any evidence to the contrary... only musings and the occasional they are debunked. Well they are not. Good day

[Aus Der Box Skeptisch]

I disagree with Bauval on most points but there's no reason he can't be generally correct.

It seems quite obvious that the Sphinx faces east to face the rising sun of the equinoxes. The

pyramids are laid out according to the seasons as well. The Egyptians were oriented toward

the south because that's where the sun was. That they developed the calendar proves they

were familiar with the stars and some of this is mentioned in the PT.

There were older structures under G1 and probably G2. There's no reason to believe there

wasn't an older structure at the site of the Sphinx.

Just quoting you for Harte.

[kmt_sesh]

Wiki: Stele of the Vultures

Now, stop quoting Cladking and Timespy.

Harte

LOL I'm (mostly) innocent for once. I had been replying to Aus in this case. There's some web page (Wiki or otherwise) that presents the Stele of the Vultures as an artifact from Göbekli Tepe, and more than one poster has fallen victim to it. It was Aus this time. I was hoping to track down the web page.

I have replied to cladking a couple of times but posted nothing of substance. It's a tiresome debate that was settled years ago. I'll try to behave better.

Just quoting you for Harte.

Oh, my, you're a very bad boy. Do not incur the Wrath of Harte!

[Aus Der Box Skeptisch]

LOL I'm (mostly) innocent for once. I had been replying to Aus in this case. There's some web page (Wiki or otherwise) that presents the Stele of the Vultures as an artifact from Göbekli Tepe, and more than one poster has fallen victim to it. It was Aus this time. I was hoping to track down the web page.

I have replied to cladking a couple of times but posted nothing of substance. It's a tiresome debate that was settled years ago. I'll try to behave better.

Oh, my, you're a very bad boy. Do not incur the Wrath of Harte!

Oh come now where's the fun in that... besides after our last group hug with Harte I realized he's just a big softy... OK OK haven't ragged on Harte in a while so I had to throw a couple jabs out there so he knows we still care...

[samspade]

There's some web page (Wiki or otherwise) that presents the Stele of the Vultures as an artifact from Göbekli Tepe, and more than one poster has fallen victim to it.

Reminds me of vicitms that believed in the Orion Correlation Theory by R Bauval.

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

lol

But to be fair, he tryed.

lol

[Aus Der Box Skeptisch]

Reminds me of vicitms that believed in the Orion Correlation Theory by R Bauval.

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

lol

But to be fair, he tryed.

lol

Oh my. Don't let Scott see this post... LOL. He'll tell you why bauval is wrong and he is right and Orion was the predestined design plan... we are looking into Pandora's box this very moment. Quick close the lid. Lmao

[samspade]

Oh my. Don't let Scott see this post... LOL. He'll tell you why bauval is wrong and he is right and Orion was the predestined design plan... we are looking into Pandora's box this very moment. Quick close the lid. Lmao

People can say what they want, but in my opinion trying to relate the 3 belt stars of Orion to the 3 main pyramids at giza is a false one

Here's another video about the Spinx.

[thewatchman7]

People can say what they want, but in my opinion trying to relate the 3 belt stars of Orion to the 3 main pyramids at giza is a false one

i couldnt agree more.

[Big Bad Voodoo]

What do you think about ancient geodesy and in particular this picture below.

[Big Bad Voodoo]

To add something about fact, how everything is perfect so we could live here and perfect messures. Look at this golden ratio.

[kmt_sesh]

What do you think about ancient geodesy and in particular this picture below.

The Giza alignments to Heliopolis are well known but I'd forgotten about the same at Saqqara and Abusir. Now I remember reading about it years ago in a book about the development of the sun-god cult in the Old Kingdom. Yes, I suppose this is a good example of the principle you're describing.

[Big Bad Voodoo]

The Giza alignments to Heliopolis are well known but I'd forgotten about the same at Saqqara and Abusir. Now I remember reading about it years ago in a book about the development of the sun-god cult in the Old Kingdom. Yes, I suppose this is a good example of the principle you're describing.

But why? And more interesting how did they done it?

Sun god cult policy was that all aligments must have been to Heliopolis?

[samspade]

The Giza alignments to Heliopolis are well known but I'd forgotten about the same at Saqqara and Abusir. Now I remember reading about it years ago in a book about the development of the sun-god cult in the Old Kingdom. Yes, I suppose this is a good example of the principle you're describing.

The so-called "Giza diagonal" as a group of 3 does not really align exacty like shown in that image as

Lehner has mentioned the line misses the southeast corners of G3 by as much as 11 meters.

Yet people like Kate Spence, Magli ,Belmonte have mentioned such alignments.

[docyabut2]

Again all the Sphinxs were place facing side ways in the monumemts of egypt, not as in front of ,even the dream stela. Clearly the Sphinx was place side ways for khufu`s tomb.

[kmt_sesh]

But why? And more interesting how did they done it?

Sun god cult policy was that all aligments must have been to Heliopolis?

To be honest I can't remember which pyramids in particular are arranged like that at Saqqara and Abusir. These two sites combined contain many more pyramids than the graphic shows. I also doubt the alignment is as perfect as represented, but the intent is there.

The reason is the prominence of the sun-god cult at Heliopolis, especially in Dynasty 5 and Dynasty 6. Pyramids are solar symbols, among other things. They're aligned toward Heliopolis because of the prominence of the cult there, and the overriding resurrection theme the site represented.

[docyabut2]

[docyabut2]

[docyabut2]

[docyabut2]

[docyabut2]

[kmt_sesh]

Again all the Sphinxs were place facing side ways in the monumemts of egypt, not as in front of ,even the dream stela. Clearly the Sphinx was place side ways for khufu`s tomb.

"All" is a tricky word to use and, in my opinion, is often best avoided (depending on circumstances). Of most importance is the orientation of the monument where sphinxes were situated. At Giza the three pyramids—and mastaba tombs, for that matter—have an east-west orientation, east being the front. The Sphinx looks toward the east, the Egyptian direction of rebirth and resurrection. Moreover, the Sphinx has no real connection with the pyramid complex of Khufu, so it wouldn't be logical for him to have commissioned it. I'm not saying it's impossible, mind you, but the weight of archaeological evidence definitely associates the Sphinx with the pyramid complex of Khafre.

All of the images you posted subsequent to this one are of sphinxes and sphinx-related monuments dating to the New Kingdom and later. This was a millennium after the Great Sphinx was carved. In fact, some of the sphinx photos you posted of the Karnak and Luxor vicinity date to the Late Period, almost two millennia after the carving of the Great Sphinx. Note the obvious differences between the Old Kingdom and the New Kingdom and later: while the form of the sphinx always remained a guardian figure, in later periods they were considerably smaller so as to flank the processional ways of temples. These processional ways were the paths on which priests walked during important ritual events, traveling from temple to temple.

But the Sphinx of Giza stands alone. It doesn't flank or mark a processional way but looks out over one: the ancient quays now largely buried under Cairo suburban sprawl. It protects the land of the dead toward the west, behind it, and gazes into the land of resurrection and rebirth, toward the east. It is strictly a funerary monument; Giza was strictly a necropolis when the Sphinx was carved. The sphinxes in your photos, however, are on the grounds of the sacred precincts of temples, apart from burial grounds.

Clearly the form of the sphinx underwent changes in meaning as time went on. My apologies for droning on at such length, but I'm trying to explain this as best as I can. And that is, the Sphinx of Giza is rather different from the sphinxes in your photos (aside from the obvious size factor). By the weight of evidence, including how the Sphinx communicates with its surroundings both spatially and architecturally, it is Khafre's monument, not Khufu's.

I'm not sure if you know this, but the Dream Stela dates to the reign of Tuthmosis IV, in Dynasty 18, a millennium after the Sphinx was carved.

Editing to add: I nearly forgot an important point, but for the Sphinx of Giza to be similar to the sphinxes in your photo, docyabut2, it would need to be perpendicular to the pyramids. That is, it would need to face north with another like it toward the north facing south, flanking the pyramid complex of Khafre (or Khufu).

Edited June 30, 2012 by kmt_sesh