Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * - 2 votes

Sphinx and GP dates from 10 500 BC?


  • Please log in to reply
1650 replies to this topic

#1261    lakeview rud

lakeview rud

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 242 posts
  • Joined:15 Oct 2009

Posted 27 November 2012 - 03:30 PM

Khufu would not allow his workers "potty breaks" when working on the pyramid.  This angered his workers, who, after consuming their evening ration of beer, would sneak down to the Sphinx (Khufu's image) and express themselves in a most inappropriate manner by climbing the Sphinx and urinarting down the sides.  The most intrepid of the workers would climb to the very top of the monument and, grabbing the head of the snake, point to the rising sun in the East and let loose.  The resulting liquid flow (over the many years of construction) resulted in the fissures seen on the sides of the Sphinx as well a the reduction in the size of the Sphinx's head in relation to the body.  It also led to the expression "pxxx off!"

Yes, I'm being facetious, but this actually has more scientific merit than erosion by 'fine sand'.  At least the urine has acid in it to hasten the erosion. Anyone who's sandblasted anything knows theres just an overall reduction in image.  Sand somehow cascading down the sides of the monument might produce the effect, but the enclosure would fill long before the wear was there.  Claiming that somehow the monument eroded after it was buried in sand is ludicrous beyond belief.  Rather than stick your head in the 'fine sand' why not come up with a water erosion scenario that fits your timeline.  How many acid rain events (volcanic eruptions?) would it take to produce the efffect?  Could the AE's have regularly have washed down the monument to remove sand when it was an active site? Why not get the Egyptians to remove some of the early repairs to compare erosion patterns?(if the patterns are the same than the erosion happened very long ago).  Just declaring water erosion  impossible without proof is just plain lazy science!


#1262    Quaentum

Quaentum

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,526 posts
  • Joined:03 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The number of fringe believers is inversely proportional to what is left to discover in our world.

Posted 27 November 2012 - 03:32 PM

View Postcladking, on 26 November 2012 - 10:09 PM, said:

The granite blocking stones are not "seals" per se because they were built in place in
all probability.  Anything sealed inside was sealed inside as it was being built.  This is
far more consistent with the concept of a recovery vault than it is with a burial.

I referred to the granite blocks as seals since they effectively sealed the pyramid making access impossible without the destruction of those blocks.

A recovery vault, while protecting the materials inside would have been made so those knowing how, could enter and retrieve what was needed and then closed again for reuse.  The Great Pyramid was made so once sealed it would have required the destruction of the stone blocks to gain entry.  It would have been quite difficult to replace those blocks showing that it would have been a single use recovery vault.  Now do you seriously think they would have built such a structure as a recovery vault to be used but once?

AA LOGIC
They didn't use thousands of workers - oops forgot about the work camps
There's no evidence for ramps - You found one?...Bummer
Well we know they didn't use ancient tools to cut and shape the stones - Chisel marks?  Craps
I still say aliens built them!

#1263    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,524 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 27 November 2012 - 03:41 PM

View PostQuaentum, on 27 November 2012 - 03:32 PM, said:

I referred to the granite blocks as seals since they effectively sealed the pyramid making access impossible without the destruction of those blocks.

A recovery vault, while protecting the materials inside would have been made so those knowing how, could enter and retrieve what was needed and then closed again for reuse.  The Great Pyramid was made so once sealed it would have required the destruction of the stone blocks to gain entry.  It would have been quite difficult to replace those blocks showing that it would have been a single use recovery vault.  Now do you seriously think they would have built such a structure as a recovery vault to be used but once?

And for a flood that never happened?

A better question would be, why put a Recovery Vault so close to the Nile when there are better, higher places in Egypt to place one.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt, 27 November 2012 - 03:59 PM.

The city and citizens, which you yesterday described to us in fiction, we will now transfer to the world of reality. It shall be the ancient city of Athens, and we will suppose that the citizens whom you imagined, were our veritable ancestors, of whom the priest spoke; they will perfectly harmonise, and there will be no inconsistency in saying that the citizens of your republic are these ancient Athenians. --  Plato's Timaeus

#1264    Tutankhaten-pasheri

Tutankhaten-pasheri

    Buratinologist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,637 posts
  • Joined:22 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:страна дураков

Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:03 PM

View Postlakeview rud, on 27 November 2012 - 03:30 PM, said:

Claiming that somehow the monument eroded after it was buried in sand is ludicrous beyond belief
Yet the erosion occured because it was buried. It was proved that water condenses under the top layer of sand, and over time this water, running downhill around the Sphinx, has caused the erosion within the timeline of the Sphinx being constructed approximately 4 500 years ago


#1265    cladking

cladking

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,676 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:03 PM

View PostQuaentum, on 27 November 2012 - 03:32 PM, said:


I referred to the granite blocks as seals since they effectively sealed the pyramid making access impossible without the destruction of those blocks.

A recovery vault, while protecting the materials inside would have been made so those knowing how, could enter and retrieve what was needed and then closed again for reuse.  The Great Pyramid was made so once sealed it would have required the destruction of the stone blocks to gain entry.  It would have been quite difficult to replace those blocks showing that it would have been a single use recovery vault.  Now do you seriously think they would have built such a structure as a recovery vault to be used but once?

On the one hand (in this specific instance),  we have the concept the pyramid was designed
and intended to save the enture Egyptian country from starvation and on the other we have
the idea that the pyramid's sole function was to serve as a tomb.  I believe "tomb" loses this
particular argument.

I personally am just looking at the probabilities of the various ideas based upon the extent
evidence.  There is so little evidence it can be difficult to even assign the absolute probabil-
ities so one is left comparing the various theories to one another. I believe orthodoxy loses
in almost every single case and the truth will prove to be an amalgam of various alternative
ideas.  The evidence against the pyramid being a tomb just keeps stacking higher.  We will
find when science gets a say that the builders were not like we picture them.  We have crea-
ted a frankensteins monster out of the little evidence that exists but this monster can't be real
because it fails to obey the laws of nature or to match most of the evidence.

I can't prove the pyramid wasn't a tomb but I can show the ancients said it wasn't.  I can show
the illogic of the paradigm that holds it was a tomb and question why the science that could
prove it was a tomb isn't being carried out.  I can point out that no one can prove it was a
tomb or find any direct supporting evidence from the era it was built.  All things considered
it seems the odds that it was built as a tomb are low (<20%).  It seems perfectly reasonable
to speculate or argue about what its function was intended to be.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#1266    Tutankhaten-pasheri

Tutankhaten-pasheri

    Buratinologist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,637 posts
  • Joined:22 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:страна дураков

Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:16 PM

Hmmm, so just how can alternaviks say they are correct and "consensus/orthodoxy" is wrong, when there so many bizarre and conflicting alternavik theories. There can only be one truth, one reality. It is ridiculous to say that alternaviks are correct, because it is impossible that they are all correct. Though in the Alice through the looking glass world of fantasy and DELIBERATE FRAUD of the alternaviks, anything is possible

Edited by Atentutankh-pasheri, 27 November 2012 - 04:17 PM.


#1267    cladking

cladking

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,676 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:19 PM

View Postlakeview rud, on 27 November 2012 - 03:30 PM, said:

  Just declaring water erosion  impossible without proof is just plain lazy science!

To a very real extent "science" is merely an explanation for what is seen.  We expect nature to behave
the same way in the labratory as it behaves everywhere but it is observation that defines the very nature
of nature.  You are expecting too much of science since we can't transport the Sphinx into the lab and
undo time or clone it to have a control.  This isn't to say the lessons of science are unreal so much as
to point out that if nature behaved a little differently then we'd still have a glib explanatyion for why things
are the way they are.  We still wouldn't really know how to apply our knowledge to the complexities of the
real world where long times and small scales can throw off all our calculations.  We still can't apply the
tiny amount we know against the huge amount we don't know.

Anything said about the cause of erosion of the Sphinx is apparently largely opinion.  Certainly the ex-
perts' opinion should carry more weight than the uninfomed or crackpots but we do not at this time have
the knowledge or data to solve this question.  We don't even really know all the facts that apply to the
questions of what caused the erosion.

It might not be relevant since my knowledge is so limited here but I tend to side with the majority opinion
a little bit here except where they claim significant erosion after burial and where there is a pretense of
having all the facts at hand.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#1268    cladking

cladking

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,676 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:27 PM

View PostAtentutankh-pasheri, on 27 November 2012 - 04:16 PM, said:

Hmmm, so just how can alternaviks say they are correct and "consensus/orthodoxy" is wrong, when there so many bizarre and conflicting alternavik theories. There can only be one truth, one reality. It is ridiculous to say that alternaviks are correct, because it is impossible that they are all correct. Though in the Alice through the looking glass world of fantasy and DELIBERATE FRAUD of the alternaviks, anything is possible

Nobody can be completely wrong about anything (except for Congress).

The simple fact is we eacgh see a unique perspective and oftiomes we are describing the same elephant
from a different viewpoint and other times we are describing very similar things from other angles.

Of course orthodoxy isn't truly "wrong" about everything related to the great pyramid builders, but to a very
real extent all orthodox opinion about the great pyramid are founded on four basic assumptions that are
each wrong.  This doesn't mean that Egyptologists can't be expert on the subjects or even that every in-
dividual orthodox expert is wrong about anything.  It merely means that all Egyptological thought founded
on the erroneous assumptions is wrong.  Meanwhile "alternaviks" have been doing the same thing Egypto-
logists do; deducing the facts based on little evidence.  Most of these alt theories are not dependent on the
four big assumptions or all of these assumptions so they have a higher probability of being correct.  Every
levitation ray theory doesn't necessarily have even a grain of truth but people should pay more attention
to them anyway.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#1269    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,524 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:32 PM

View Postcladking, on 27 November 2012 - 04:03 PM, said:

On the one hand (in this specific instance),  we have the concept the pyramid was designed
and intended to save the enture Egyptian country from starvation and on the other we have
the idea that the pyramid's sole function was to serve as a tomb.  I believe "tomb" loses this
particular argument.

I personally am just looking at the probabilities of the various ideas based upon the extent
evidence.  There is so little evidence it can be difficult to even assign the absolute probabil-
ities so one is left comparing the various theories to one another. I believe orthodoxy loses
in almost every single case and the truth will prove to be an amalgam of various alternative
ideas.  The evidence against the pyramid being a tomb just keeps stacking higher.  We will
find when science gets a say that the builders were not like we picture them.  We have crea-
ted a frankensteins monster out of the little evidence that exists but this monster can't be real
because it fails to obey the laws of nature or to match most of the evidence.

I can't prove the pyramid wasn't a tomb but I can show the ancients said it wasn't. I can show
the illogic of the paradigm that holds it was a tomb and question why the science that could
prove it was a tomb isn't being carried out.  I can point out that no one can prove it was a
tomb or find any direct supporting evidence from the era it was built.  All things considered
it seems the odds that it was built as a tomb are low (<20%).  It seems perfectly reasonable
to speculate or argue about what its function was intended to be.

Still waiting on that IVth Dynasty textual citation. Did you lose it already?

cormac

The city and citizens, which you yesterday described to us in fiction, we will now transfer to the world of reality. It shall be the ancient city of Athens, and we will suppose that the citizens whom you imagined, were our veritable ancestors, of whom the priest spoke; they will perfectly harmonise, and there will be no inconsistency in saying that the citizens of your republic are these ancient Athenians. --  Plato's Timaeus

#1270    Tutankhaten-pasheri

Tutankhaten-pasheri

    Buratinologist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,637 posts
  • Joined:22 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:страна дураков

Posted 27 November 2012 - 05:32 PM

View Postcladking, on 27 November 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

Most of these alt theories are not dependent on the
four big assumptions or all of these assumptions so they have a higher probability of being correct.  Every
levitation ray theory doesn't necessarily have even a grain of truth but people should pay more attention
to them anyway.

Well, I will believe people who are properly trained and have spent their lives digging in the sand of Egypt. Clearly you prefer this nonsense from "Breaking the Mirror of Heaven" by Robert Bauval and Ahmed Osman.
Quotes about the "murder" of Tutankhamun by being hanged by a mob

Quote

If Tut was hanged by a group of ordinary people who wanted him to suffer as much as possible by not dropping him (but rather by letting him dangle till he died), his skull and neck would not break. He would die of suffocation. The evidence of X-ray and CT scan cannot disprove that.
Their italics, and see now consensus has to prove a negative to satisfy these morons. And further..

Quote

But I remain convinced that Tutankhamun was indeed murdered, or to be more precise, he was brutally executed by slow suffocation through hanging for political reasons -- almost certainly by the orders of the high priest of Aten, who, in my opinion, had the strongest motive for this regicide.
High priest of Aten ????? in year ten of Tutankhamun ????? And this total garbage from one of the high priests of fantasy, the pyramidiot in chief. You believe this if you wish, I hold my nose while reading such (expletive deleted)

And by the way, the reason given for thinking that Tutankhamun was hung, is that his head was detached from his body. Oi! Oi! Oi!, these morons never even bothered to find out how Howard Carter managed to remove the golden mask. See, there is reality from egyptology, even when it is the brutal truth, and there is garbage (being very polite) from pyramidiots and alternaviks

Edited by Atentutankh-pasheri, 27 November 2012 - 05:57 PM.


#1271    samspade

samspade

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 263 posts
  • Joined:28 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 November 2012 - 05:33 PM

View Postcladking, on 27 November 2012 - 04:03 PM, said:

On the one hand (in this specific instance),  we have the concept the pyramid was designed
and intended to save the enture Egyptian country from starvation and on the other we have
the idea that the pyramid's sole function was to serve as a tomb.

who is the nut case to suggest the pyramid was designed to save the entire Egyptian country ?

Clearly when one understands that with the evidence i have, that even Egyptology would be force to admit that my understanding of the pyramid is much more accurate and correct.

And even afther that if Egyptology  were realistic that there is a small chance of me fulfilling a prophency regarding the great pyramid and the rejected stone of the builders that jesus talked about and placed on the ground.

For the time being, i will remain silent, not that i am in any occult or group, as the freemasons, but i was ask to remain silent. Definite some wild things in my life had led to the mystery and certain things made me respect the silent at this point.


regards

Edited by samspade, 27 November 2012 - 06:07 PM.


#1272    cladking

cladking

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,676 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 27 November 2012 - 06:07 PM

View PostAtentutankh-pasheri, on 27 November 2012 - 05:32 PM, said:

Well, I will believe people who are properly trained and have spent their lives digging in the sand of Egypt. Clearly you prefer this nonsense from "Breaking the Mirror of Heaven" by Robert Bauval and Ahmed Osman.
Quotes about the "murder" of Tutankhamun by being hanged by a mob

Bauval can be essentially right while being completely wrong about the air shafts pointing
at Orion's belt.  If these shafts were intended to point at stars it matters little exactly to which
stars they point.  If aliens helped the builders align the shafts then Hancock or even Sitchen
might have a lot of basis in their ideas.  If the stones that comprise the shafts were lifed by
means of locks then Steven Myers can be essentially correct as well.  But if any of these
theorists are right about almost anything at all then Egyptology is wrong about almost every-
thing.

I believe the evidence supports almost all the alternative theories better than it does mainstream
thought.  I believe each of the assumptions underlying mainstream is incorrect.  I believe the
weight of the evidence against the assumptions is far greater than the weight of the evidence
that supports them.  This in no way to build a theory about the great pyramids or their builders.  ;)

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#1273    samspade

samspade

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 263 posts
  • Joined:28 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 November 2012 - 06:14 PM

View Postcladking, on 27 November 2012 - 06:07 PM, said:

  This in no way to build a theory about the great pyramids or their builders.  ;)

we can correcty state any theory which counterdicts mine about the GP is wrong ;)

Edited by samspade, 27 November 2012 - 06:18 PM.


#1274    cladking

cladking

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,676 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 27 November 2012 - 06:17 PM

View Postsamspade, on 27 November 2012 - 05:33 PM, said:

who is the nut case to suggest the pyramid was designed to save the entire Egyptian country ?

Clearly when one understands that with the evidence i have, that even Egyptology would be force to admit that my understanding of the pyramid is much more accurate and correct.

And even afther that if Egyptology  were realistic that there is a small chance of me fulfilling a prophency regarding the great pyramid and the rejected stone of the builders that jesus talked about and placed on the ground.

For the time being, i will remain silent, not that i am in any occult or group, as the freemasons, but i was ask to remain silent. Definite some wild things in my life had led to the mystery and certain things made me respect the silent at this point.

I think it's all going to shake out in the next twenty years.  I think the truth
is going to shock almost everyone.  It's going to shock almost everyone
because we are all highly superstitious and set in our beliefs.  The truth
is not going to fit anyone's beliefs so we'll all have a lot to get used to. Al-
most everything will be directly affected and nothing moreso than our be-
liefs.

At this point I'm not discounting anything but the assumptions that have
created orthodoxy and our world.  This isn't as much to say the assump-
tions can't be true so much as that they aren't.  Primarily, it's to say that
150 years of science has flown in the face of these assumptions.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#1275    Tutankhaten-pasheri

Tutankhaten-pasheri

    Buratinologist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,637 posts
  • Joined:22 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:страна дураков

Posted 27 November 2012 - 06:18 PM

View Postcladking, on 27 November 2012 - 06:07 PM, said:

But if any of these
theorists are right about almost anything at all then Egyptology is wrong about almost every-
thing.

Perhaps you did not understand the sense of my post, or the reason for it. If the pyramidiot in chief needs to resort to such obfuscation and blatant lies about one particular element of AE, then there is nothing about him to be believed. And not one fringe theory has been proved, and likely never will..... Hmm, except mine, in my blog :ph34r:





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users