530 replies to this topic

[Abramelin]

the L, on 24 September 2012 - 06:23 PM, said:

I believe that Giants existed.

Why is hard to imagine that Giants existed?! We have had giants animals in all area of the world. Giant penguins in Antartica for example. Its life adaptation. I think we must look for giant bones in areas that were once hard to found food.  Look at elaphant. His stomach is big because it was hard to him to find good nutrition food so to survive he must eat a lot of low quality food  that his stomach could choose best nutrition from it. So to become Giant we must first asumme that Darwin theory is right and give homo spieces enough time and area with low quality food and you will get Giants.

I'll tell you something.

Egyptians, and Mediterranean people (ancient Italians, Greek, Egyptians) in general were always rather small, in ancient times and many still are now.

And then there were the Nordics:  Scandinavians, Danes, Frisians, and so on.

The people living at the coasts of the Med thought of them as giants.

They were on avarage 6 feet tall, and some were a bit larger.

What would you have thought. of them, living there back then?

[egyptian lad]

People of our size whatever they are romans or pharohs or israelites or persians, were unable to re-build some crashed large stone wall:


View this image to see this fact:

 Egypt_1146_1024x1536sa.jpg   163.59K   31 downloads


Completed large stones wall by small muddy bricks( bricks like we use todays):

 muddy bricksdswss.jpg   72.27K   31 downloads

[the L]

Abramelin, on 24 September 2012 - 06:44 PM, said:

I'll tell you something.

Egyptians, and Mediterranean people (ancient Italians, Greek, Egyptians) in general were always rather small, in ancient times and many still are now.

And then there were the Nordics:  Scandinavians, Danes, Frisians, and so on.

The people living at the coasts of the Med thought of them as giants.

They were on avarage 6 feet tall, and some were a bit larger.

What would you have thought. of them, living there back then?

Nordics also have stories about Giants.

[Quaentum]

egyptian lad, on 24 September 2012 - 06:32 PM, said:

If we wanted to construct a building todays:

Machines:

1sws.jpg


small bricks:

23615_imgcachesqa2.jpg

Iron bars:

Thumbmail2012-03-13+11_21_27_9923.jpg

cement and other construction materials:

cement.jpg

But in ancient egypt:

Only lime mixture and large stone of granite and other solid rocks

36451170.jpg



In ancient egypt, the giants used those large stones because it was in their nature, the big stones were in their capacity....You can say: a large stone to us, was a small stone to them.


After giants era was over, people of our size came , they lived in homes of small muddy and sandy stones.


They even completed some large stones wall with small muddy stones they were unable to use large stones and re-build the wall front of temples by same substance of blocks

Most of the stones in the pyramids are sandstone and they could and were cut, moved and put in place by people of average size using pulleys and levers.

You should check out Coral Castle.  The average weight of most of the stones is 15 tons, 6 times the average weight of the stone blocks used in building the great pyramid.  It has larger stones up to 35 tons in weight.  It was built with simple machines (no cranes) by an average size man who weighed a mere 100 pounds.  He did it by himself with no others to help.

[cormac mac airt]

egyptian lad, on 24 September 2012 - 06:45 PM, said:

People of our size whatever they are romans or pharohs or israelites or persians, were unable to re-build some crashed large stone wall:


View this image to see this fact:

Egypt_1146_1024x1536sa.jpg


Completed large stones wall by small muddy bricks( bricks like we use todays):

muddy bricksdswss.jpg

As can be seen in the above the arch itself would be approximately 40 foot tall. The "small muddy bricks" that you claim are there, in your picture, would appear to actually be about 2 foot tall and show evidence of weathering. This does not support your claim in the least.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt, 24 September 2012 - 07:02 PM.

[egyptian lad]

Oniomancer, on 24 September 2012 - 05:46 PM, said:

King Tut must've been the family midget then .
Strange how if all these giant pharaohs are limited to the ancient pre-dynastic period that we should have depictions of Ramses, several Ramses,  as a giant, on New Kingdom period buildings...

http://en.wikipedia...._familjebok.png

http://riversfromede.../ramses3sea.jpg

...But a very normal-sized Ramses mummy.

http://en.wikipedia....messes_II#Mummy

The problem with you guys, u believe the archaeologists and egyptologists blindly


The mummification so called science actually never existed in ancient egypt or world wide.



Mummies were saved by Nature or god.


Some bacteria and heat,coldness,soil factors can save the dead bodies of some people unrotten with flesh


The british early archaeologists took some saved dead bodies of some people from different ages and put them into the pharaohs coffins and sarcophaguses, to create FAKE LEGEND and cheat over history that people had mummification science in the ancient times.



If you open the tombs and graves of modern people, You would find some saved dead bodies of modern people like what we call mummies.


I remember in my own city, news spread over dead guy who was buried in 1974, by the 90s people opened his tomb to put his dead father with him, they got shock and surprise by his saved body unrotten, they called the police called to come, the police rushed to surround the place of tombs and didnt allow any person to know what happen.


Of course, supersition was previaled in the city that this guy is angelic and connected to God and so.

Briefly, Some dead bodies of people be saved by nature or soil factors.



In ancient egypt: There is no record for mummifaction science.


The mad egyptologists suggested by depicted arts of Anubis the Dog God, god of afterlife and his check to the dead people in the coffin, That was mummification work.



Anubis the dog god and his check to the dead:

 anubis_mummification.jpg   20.85K   6 downloads


Is that mean a mummification??? No its rather a blessing spiritual action Not mummification.


As i said the early british archaeologists took some unrotten dead bodies for anonymous guys and put them in the coffin of pharaohs to claim it was king so and king so.


They created a myth.


Even now by their lies, they say: that stomach of mummies were brought out in some cups


SOME cheaters!


You may know mummies or unrotten dead bodies were found world wide, Not only egypt.

In mexico,persu,eithiopia,iran,china,north america,some european countries,egypt


Its all nature work, including the ones in egypt.



__________________________________________________

when i discuss with many guys about giants subject, they would say to me"  the pharaohs had sciences of mummification, so u think they were unable to lift those large stones".


The poor guys dont know that mummification was actually a mythy and one of biggest lies that archaeologists created over ancient egypt.





You also would find, The coffin face is different than the mummy facial features because those mummies were anonymous, not bodies of kings.

[egyptian lad]

Todays, we reached the farest advanced stage of medicine science, or to accurate " the western scientists" reached a stage that they play genes of creatures and went on surgeries to something could never happen.


So with all progress in the medicine field?? The western scientists still unable to mummify a guy for 100 or 200 years.


But according to the cheating archaeologists, the dishonest guys:

Pharaoh mummies were infected by malaria and other diseases But they reached a science , the west didnt reach it yet LOL


In the medical papyrus of Edwin smith:

You gonna find that the ancient egyptians were highly primitive and backward on their medicine.

So those backward ancient people on medicine would go for a science of mummification? No and never.

Its all archaeologists's game over ancient egypt history

[cormac mac airt]

Quote

Its all nature work, including the ones in egypt.

Nature didn't remove all the internal organs, apply natron to the body inside and out and then wrap it. Nor did nature remove the brain through an individuals nose. Nor did nature even leave embalming fluid within the skull of the deceased.

cormac

[egyptian lad]

Quaentum, on 24 September 2012 - 06:59 PM, said:

Most of the stones in the pyramids are sandstone and they could and were cut, moved and put in place by people of average size using pulleys and levers.

You should check out Coral Castle.  The average weight of most of the stones is 15 tons, 6 times the average weight of the stone blocks used in building the great pyramid.  It has larger stones up to 35 tons in weight.  It was built with simple machines (no cranes) by an average size man who weighed a mere 100 pounds.  He did it by himself with no others to help.

why you compare something in modern times regarding the construction after machine lifters were invented?



it seems you dont know much about  stones in ancient egypt, have you look at the size of stones at bases of pyramids? or stones around sphinx? or obelisks?


Even the solar ship woods were buried in a hole who covered by stones, each stone was 18 ton

sphinx stones, too massive stones:

 giza_sphinx02.jpg   36.24K   3 downloads

 Valley-Temple-2.jpg   58.01K   5 downloads

 block.jpg   90.26K   5 downloads


In the past, Technology was not invented yet.

[meryt-tetisheri]

egyptian lad, on 24 September 2012 - 06:04 PM, said:

By logic: if you are a king or queen in your country, you would make a statues by different people and say its your statues?

I may give you an example, of ex president of egypt Mubarak:

Mubarak statues were made to represent himself..................NOT OTHER PEOPLE!

mubarak statues56.jpg



But King Tut according to the hypocrite archaeologist, King tut had many various statues representing him, these statues were not for one person but multi different people, So why this contradictions?

Have we got a brain???? sorry for saying, Its idiotic people who would say these statues were figurative, why shall a king leave figurative statues, while he was about glory and to be memorized like his own lookings over history, So some people and next generation would come and say : This is king tut.......His features must be all ONE and Unique!

I do not know why you fail to accept or understand the symbolism of portraying the Pharaoh as a larger than life figure!

Since you brought up a comparison with modern Egypt, I will continue to use your example as an illustration of the concept (in a very loose sense). Do you remember when a few months before the revolution Mubarak visited the White House and the photograph was photoshopped by Ahram? They placed Mubarak ahead of Obama and all the others; their motive was to add to the 'stature' and 'status' of Mubarak by placing him ahead. Within the means available to the ancient sculptor using a 2 dimensional image, 'status' is expressed as physical stature: the royal figure is portrayed as much larger than his enemies or subordinates. That does not mean that he was actually, physically, a giant.

Take the Arabic language as an example, we say "el nas maqamat" denoting authority and social status, but the root of 'maqamat' is the same as 'qama' which literally means physical stature or height/size (the same applies to the English word 'stature'). Symbolism employed linguistically or artistically should not be interpreted literally or at face value.

Finally, the only way prove your hypothesis is to provide a giant human bone which can be tested for 'human' DNA

[egyptian lad]

cormac mac airt, on 24 September 2012 - 07:23 PM, said:

Nature didn't remove all the internal organs, apply natron to the body inside and out and then wrap it. Nor did nature remove the brain through an individuals nose. Nor did nature even leave embalming fluid within the skull of the deceased.

cormac

  cormac: its lies of archaeologists>>>>>>>>>> the internal organs were not removed.......it was removed by surgeons.

The natron>>>>>>>>was such something added.

The sheet wrap  was either work of some doctors.

it was a game made by the cheaters.

The nature saved them.


Even on 1884, its reported that some british divers found mummy in the red sea and after they had>>>>>> the archaeologists rushed to run their game over it and put in the coffin to claim king so and king so.



You speak as if people are that honest!   Hypocrisy and hishonesty is all the way in this field......Fame and Money is all the interest


I will show some mummies who were saved by nature in egypt too

[egyptian lad]

what do you think over thos rotten mummies?


the ancient egyptians forgot to wrap them into the sheets?



Many mummies are found in mountain caves and desert in egypt, and ethiopia too

 dafnat2sas.jpg   51.54K   25 downloads

 dafnat3.jpg   17.28K   29 downloads

[egyptian lad]

cormac mac airt, on 24 September 2012 - 07:00 PM, said:

As can be seen in the above the arch itself would be approximately 40 foot tall. The "small muddy bricks" that you claim are there, in your picture, would appear to actually be about 2 foot tall and show evidence of weathering. This does not support your claim in the least.

cormac

how come????


Did you see the giant portraits on wall? those were in the same size of large giants, the ones who lifted the obelisks by their hands

[meryt-tetisheri]

egyptian lad, on 24 September 2012 - 07:54 PM, said:

what do you think over thos rotten mummies?


the ancient egyptians forgot to wrap them into the sheets?



Many mummies are found in mountain caves and desert in egypt, and ethiopia too

dafnat2sas.jpg

dafnat3.jpg

Predynastic mummies, naturally desiccated by the arid hot climate & desert sands; probably what inspired the mummification process

[Quaentum]

egyptian lad, on 24 September 2012 - 07:41 PM, said:

why you compare something in modern times regarding the construction after machine lifters were invented?



it seems you dont know much about  stones in ancient egypt, have you look at the size of stones at bases of pyramids? or stones around sphinx? or obelisks?


Even the solar ship woods were buried in a hole who covered by stones, each stone was 18 ton

sphinx stones, too massive stones:

giza_sphinx02.jpg

Valley-Temple-2.jpg

block.jpg


In the past, Technology was not invented yet.

Your posts indicate that you don't think average sized humans could build the pyramids.  I gave an example of one average sized human building with blocks that were heavier on average than those in the pyramids.  I even indicated that no machine lifters were used and that only pulleys and levers were used in it's construction

The average weight of the pyramid blocks are 2 1/2 tons.  That is not the weight of each block but just the average weight.

You say that giants did all the work because the blocks were too big and heavy for average men to move and put in place.  I have showed where that conclusion is invalid with my comparison to Coral Castle.  However let us add one further thing.  The following image is a depiction of one of the large statues being moved by men of average height, and in the lower left one of the large pieces of stone being moved by average sized men.  So based on that we can see that average sized men did the work.