279 replies to this topic

[the L]

Abramelin, on 12 September 2012 - 07:49 PM, said:

You believe in the Bagdad battery, right? Only one example?

I do. Why not? Mythbusters copied it and show us that is actualy working.

[kmt_sesh]

zoser, on 12 September 2012 - 08:00 PM, said:

Show proof that it's real.  The amateurish look of the writing inconsistent with the remainder of such a precise piece of work, written in a not obvious location found by an unscrupulous man, when nothing like it exists in any other pyramid must make the whole thing very moot.

In any case, I'm happy to admit that the pyramid was repaired in Khufu's time; something I have always believed.  Maybe if it is real, that is what it alludes to.  Has anyone considered that?

Just one more thought?  Wouldn't we expect to see inscriptions inside the King's Chamber being the final resting place of a great king?  Why does nobody question this?

You are familiar with the nature of graffiti, are you not? "Amateurish look" is a fair description for graffiti, given that it is not written in any formal sense nor meant to be viewed by everyone.

Howard Vyse is the man you're calling unscrupulous. This charge against him goes back to some of Zecharia Sitchin's writings forty years ago. The truth is, the average C-average college student would have little trouble disproving almost everything Sitchin ever postulated.

I understand that you're not familiar with ancient Egyptian scripts, zoser, but that's your weak point in trying to argue the graffiti is fake. Anyone truly familiar with ancient Egyptian scripts, and anyone who possesses the training to translate the ancient writing, knows the graffiti to be unquestionably authentic.

All you're doing is parroting Sitchin, whether or not you realize it. Sitchin's arguments were absurdly inept and simple to disprove. I would deal with this head on and face the real evidence for what it is.

As far as that goes, Howard Vyse did not possess a command of the ancient writing. It would not have been possible for him to commit such a forgery. And numerous things about the graffiti and the nature of its writing were not even yet understood in the early nineteenth century. Arguably no one of that time could've forged the graffiti.

[the L]

zoser, on 12 September 2012 - 08:00 PM, said:

I'm happy to admit that the pyramid was repaired in Khufu's time;

repaired?

[zoser]

the L, on 12 September 2012 - 08:20 PM, said:

repaired?

Yes.  Many things allude to this.  The well shaft, damage in the Kings Chamber, etc.  But of course if one clings to the silly tomb theory then none of this will make a lot of sense.

[zoser]

kmt_sesh, on 12 September 2012 - 08:18 PM, said:

You are familiar with the nature of graffiti, are you not? "Amateurish look" is a fair description for graffiti, given that it is not written in any formal sense nor meant to be viewed by everyone.

Howard Vyse is the man you're calling unscrupulous. This charge against him goes back to some of Zecharia Sitchin's writings forty years ago. The truth is, the average C-average college student would have little trouble disproving almost everything Sitchin ever postulated.

I understand that you're not familiar with ancient Egyptian scripts, zoser, but that's your weak point in trying to argue the graffiti is fake. Anyone truly familiar with ancient Egyptian scripts, and anyone who possesses the training to translate the ancient writing, knows the graffiti to be unquestionably authentic.

All you're doing is parroting Sitchin, whether or not you realize it. Sitchin's arguments were absurdly inept and simple to disprove. I would deal with this head on and face the real evidence for what it is.

As far as that goes, Howard Vyse did not possess a command of the ancient writing. It would not have been possible for him to commit such a forgery. And numerous things about the graffiti and the nature of its writing were not even yet understood in the early nineteenth century. Arguably no one of that time could've forged the graffiti.

Many people still think that the Khufu cartouche in the GP is not accurate thus alluding to a forgery.

[the L]

zoser, on 12 September 2012 - 08:28 PM, said:

Many things allude to this.

Can you devloped that please.

[kmt_sesh]

Harsh86_Patel, on 12 September 2012 - 06:13 PM, said:

I suggested that Vyse only painted the cartouche  and not the glyphs.Also by names of worker gangs do you mean the names of individual workers or a single name representing the whole gang/guild?

I'll come back to your reply to my earlier post, Harsh, but it may have to wait till later today. For now I wanted to comment on the above, which you had addressed to Harte.

The cartouches and Khufu's Horus name are an integral part of a lot of the graffiti. It's not that Khufu's names were just indiscriminately slapped onto the blocks—they're part of sentences and phrases. So what you're suggesting is that workmen 4,500 years ago painted all of the graffiti but the names, leaving those spots blank—and then Vyse came along in the 1830s and filled them in, in the empty spaces.

It doesn't work, does it?

The names of the work gangs refer to the specific gangs, not to individual workers. Such graffiti is evident on other pyramids, Khafre's included.

[zoser]

kmt_sesh, on 12 September 2012 - 08:36 PM, said:

I'll come back to your reply to my earlier post, Harsh, but it may have to wait till later today. For now I wanted to comment on the above, which you had addressed to Harte.

The cartouches and Khufu's Horus name are an integral part of a lot of the graffiti. It's not that Khufu's names were just indiscriminately slapped onto the blocks—they're part of sentences and phrases. So what you're suggesting is that workmen 4,500 years ago painted all of the graffiti but the names, leaving those spots blank—and then Vyse came along in the 1830s and filled them in, in the empty spaces.

It doesn't work, does it?

The names of the work gangs refer to the specific gangs, not to individual workers. Such graffiti is evident on other pyramids, Khafre's included.

I just did a search for 3rd and 4th dynasty art.  The skills clearly did exist in that time.  Why none in the GP?  Unless this is answered effectively and convincingly the whole question of Khufu, tombs, 2550BC will be in doubt, because it is severely contradictory to the customs of that time.  I'm not trying to catch you out KMT but this is one of the major hinge points of the argument.  I just don't see that it can be explained away.  Off to bed now but back tomorrow I promise.

[zoser]

the L, on 12 September 2012 - 08:33 PM, said:

Can you devloped that please.

I will just leave you with this for now.

http://www.world-mys...com/mpl_2_4.htm

[kmt_sesh]

zoser, on 12 September 2012 - 08:29 PM, said:

Many people still think that the Khufu cartouche in the GP is not accurate thus alluding to a forgery.

Many in the fringe camp do, yes. But almost no one in fringe circles has any practical training in or familiarity with ancient Egyptian scripts. For example, the case you cite originates (again) with Zecharia Sitchin, and involves the way the Aa1 glyph is drawn. I needn't go into a detailed explanation of it here because I've already done so. See the opening post in this discussion.

[the L]

zoser, on 12 September 2012 - 08:45 PM, said:

I will just leave you with this for now.

http://www.world-mys...com/mpl_2_4.htm

I quick scaned and saw Edgar Cayce.   But Im gonna read text before it.

[Abramelin]

zoser, on 12 September 2012 - 07:48 PM, said:

I've never come across a geological refutation of Schoch.  Now you mention it I will look into it though.  BRB

You got it yet?

[kmt_sesh]

zoser, on 12 September 2012 - 07:48 PM, said:

I've never come across a geological refutation of Schoch.  Now you mention it I will look into it though.  BRB

Review this article by James Harrell. Harrell is a geologist and archaeogeologist with wide expertise in Egypt. Schoch is a properly trained geologist, but his understanding of ancient Egyptian archaeology and site development are exceedingly minimal. I've read a number of papers by geologists and other specialists who've refuted Schoch, but the short of it is, I've never read a paper by another geologist who supports Schoch.

His theory is simply not supported by either his own colleagues or by the evidence on the ground. In essence Schoch was looking at one, narrow approach while simultaneously ignoring all other associated evidence.

[Scott Creighton]

Here is an interesting artifact from the Nubian Museum.  It is an ostrich eggshell that dates from the Naqada I period (ca.4,400-3,000 BCE).  This then is an artifact that has been archaeologically dated to between 500-1900 years older than the Giza Pyramids.  And yet this artifact could easily be seen to represent a drawing of the Giza Pyramids far in advance of when these structures were supposed to have existed.







Of course, this is not proof that these are in fact the Giza pyramids being depicted--but it is interesting nevertheless.

From here: http://www.numibia.n...s.asp?p_Numb=40


SC

Edited by Scott Creighton, 12 September 2012 - 11:40 PM.

[Swede]

Harsh86_Patel, on 12 September 2012 - 06:44 AM, said:

I am aware of the bent pyramid and other half baked attempts of other egyptian pharoans at trying to replicate the great pyramids hence the doubt about khufu building the great pyramid gains more momentum in my mind.As you suggested yourself we cannot talk about the great pyramids in isolation,this is the premise on which my argument is based.Why isn't there any other pyramid which replicates the beauty and accuracy of the great pyramid,why aren't there heiroglyphics in the great pyramids as compared to these other pyramids including sneferu's pyramids which you state were made before the great pyramids?The ascending passage was blocked since the relatively modern explorations broke around it,can this be the reason the other pharoans never had ascending passages in their pyramids probably since they didn't know one existed?what does the present dillapitated conditions of the other pyramids when compared to the great pyramid tell you?If i write my name on one of the walls of the white house does it mean i built it?Did the art of pyramid building reach it's zenith during Khufu's time and was forgotten after two generations (which is highly unlikely)?Hence i agree with you when you say that the great pyramids cannot be studied in a cultural vaccum or in isolation.


Regarding carbon dating of the mortar i have already suggested that khufu could have carried out repairing work on the pyramid and the 'inventory stele' """can"""" be a documented proof for it.

Would you deny and explain away gravity if it's existence was stated by Sitchin and Hancock? When it comes to Sitchin a lot of his work and hypothesis is based on choosing between mainstream translations of sumerian tablets which according to me is not a very bad method.Also you might dislike their hypothesis as they are new and opposed to accepted knowledge and don't always have objective proof but so many things accepted by mainstream is not based on objective proof.This is evident as so many long standing notions held by the mainstream are revised from time to time
(but not without a lot of resistance and embarassment).Blanketing everything a person is saying because of your personal beliefs is not an objective technique according to me.

Michael Cremo gives an excellent example of this truth filteration that happens due to our existing Mainstream procedures in his book 'forbidden archeology'.Also if you consider human psychology you know that the 'power of suggestion' (often and forcibly invoked by mainstreamn academia through peer review)is almost hypnotic and also would impact mainstream archeologists and historians.Any institution of knowledge should indulge in giving credence to dissent to any generally accepted norm inorder to really strengthen it's credibility instead of crucifying the nay sayers.

Like i stated all new hypothesis or theory or facts are fringe when they are born(since they are not yet accepted by mainstream)so why not encourage fringe or how would you encourage new discoveries in any field?

PS- debating with you has always been a pleasure Sesh.

Have you taken the time to actually study the research by Bonani, et. al. (2001)?

Or would you be suggesting that Khufu "modified" some 29 early Egyptian constructions dating from the 1st through the 12th Dynasties with carefully derived and surprisingly accurate radiocarbon samples?

.