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

#1171    Alcibiades9

Alcibiades9

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 109 posts
  • Joined:07 Jun 2012

Posted 16 November 2012 - 05:25 PM

View PostAtentutankh-pasheri, on 15 November 2012 - 08:50 PM, said:

Beacons for starships
that will return
after the second great fracture,

also,

with the great light that shines
miles up into the sky,
as beacon
for the survivors to head for. Then

there is the question
of the lights from the obelisks,
the dark light
that is also bright.

Khonsu/Horus,
fracture,
death,
dark.

Was before,
now comes again.


Siberia is not high enough,
Midgard (Omsk) will drown........


Mesmerising.  Shades of TS Elliot's The Waste Land. :yes:

Edited by Alcibiades9, 16 November 2012 - 05:26 PM.


#1172    Quaentum

Quaentum

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,760 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 16 November 2012 - 05:27 PM

View Postcladking, on 15 November 2012 - 09:46 PM, said:

I don't believe anything about tiny pyramids has anything to do with great pyramids.

Because the size is different, they have nothing in common?  Maybe that can apply to small cars and tractor trailers or small and large planes or even small and large people.

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!

#1173    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,740 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 16 November 2012 - 05:31 PM

Quote

SC: Why wouldn’t it be? It is a theoretical model they present. Science, including Consensus Egyptology, does this all the time. Taking Consensus Egyptology as an example, it makes the assumption that once upon a time there were bodies inside the stone boxes that are in some of the early, giant pyramids (thus assumed to be sarcophagi) and voila, you have the Pyramid Tomb Theory (PTT). What’s your problem with assumptions as a basis to theorise?

Without the assumption/presumption of fact this theory proposes, the rest falls like a house of cards. And conveniently, none of it is verifiable. Might as well claim that Zeus did it.

Quote

SC: Not unlike your missing mummies then, eh?

Which has nothing to do with the earth's axial tilt.

Quote

SC: And once again you completely miss the point. Woelfi, et al present a theoretical model to explain the Ice Ages and as part of their model they put forward a theoretical model that can cause Rapid TPW that will not result in an Extinction Level Event i.e. a mass collision of the Earth with another planet which is how such a tilt was believed could only occur in Dodwell’s day. This theoretical model allows Dodwell’s data to stand and it is now incumbent upon science to revisit his results.

Hotspots, such as those that created the Hawaiian Islands chain (and others) would appear to work against this idea since they show the progression of the chain over millions of years in an ESE direction which isn't compatible with the "sudden" axial tilt that Woelfli's theory proposes.

Quote

Al 'Amarah is not the only possibility...

You brought it up as relevant. It's not.

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

#1174    Tutankhaten-pasheri

Tutankhaten-pasheri

    Buratinologist

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

Posted 16 November 2012 - 05:46 PM

View PostAlcibiades9, on 16 November 2012 - 05:25 PM, said:

Mesmerising.  Shades of TS Elliot's The Waste Land. :yes:
Ah, some perception here. Had thought I would be seen as mad, well,  slightly :)


#1175    Scott Creighton

Scott Creighton

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 802 posts
  • Joined:22 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland, United Kingdom

  • Consensus opinion isn't fact.

Posted 16 November 2012 - 05:48 PM

View PostAtentutankh-pasheri, on 16 November 2012 - 05:11 PM, said:

... I can imagine all manner of scenarios for the pyramids, though they remain idle fantasy until I see proof that they are not tombs.

SC: Something can only be disproved only when it is believed to have been proven. You cannot attempt to disprove something that has not been proven (or believed to have been proven). You present a logical fallacy. So, you might want to start by asking someone to FIRST prove to you that the early, giant pyramids WERE conceived and built as tombs. I have been asking that very question on this site for years and no one has yet come forward and presented any clear-cut evidence that will prove beyond reasonable doubt that these structures were as the Consensus Egyptologists claim, built as tombs.

Conversely there is much to contradict the premise.

Quote

AP: Most reasonable and educated people see the pyramids primary purpose as being a tomb.

SC: Really? So anyone that disagrees with the assumptions of Consensus Egyptology are unreasonable and not educated? I think you should quit with the snooty arrogance. Reasonable and educated people will demand convincing proof of the premise before ever accepting it as fact.

Quote

AP: This flood defence theory is not really about AE, but about our own times being incorrectly overlayed on the past, perhaps to "prove" the deeply cynical "global warming" hysteria.

SC: What complete and utter bunk. The AEs themselves had an end time flood myth that was to be sent by their God Thoth to drown all Egypt.  The early Arab Chroniclers tell us that the pyramids were built as protection against an anticipated flood after the heavens had changed its course. It can even be argued that the name of 'Khufu's Akhet' relates to the coming flood of Thoth.  This is ALL ancient material and has NOTHING to do with modern "global warming hysteria". It is about trying to understand the motivations of the ancients using their own words.

Modern "global warming hysteria" - what utter tripe.

SC

Edited by Scott Creighton, 16 November 2012 - 06:01 PM.

"The man o' independent mind... is king o' men, for a' that." - Robert Burns

#1176    Scott Creighton

Scott Creighton

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 802 posts
  • Joined:22 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland, United Kingdom

  • Consensus opinion isn't fact.

Posted 16 November 2012 - 05:54 PM

View Postcormac mac airt, on 16 November 2012 - 05:31 PM, said:

Without the assumption/presumption of fact this theory proposes, the rest falls like a house of cards. And conveniently, none of it is verifiable. Might as well claim that Zeus did it.

SC: Rubbish.



Quote

CMA: Which has nothing to do with the earth's axial tilt.

SC: More rubbish.

Quote

CMA: Hotspots, such as those that created the Hawaiian Islands chain (and others) would appear to work against this idea since they show the progression of the chain over millions of years in an ESE direction which isn't compatible with the "sudden" axial tilt that Woelfli's theory proposes.

SC: Even more rubbish.

Quote

CMA:You brought it up as relevant. It's not.

SC: And capped with utter rubbish.

SC

"The man o' independent mind... is king o' men, for a' that." - Robert Burns

#1177    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,740 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 16 November 2012 - 05:57 PM

Quote

SC: Rubbish.

Quote

SC: More rubbish.

Quote

SC: Even more rubbish.

Quote

SC: And capped with utter rubbish.

I agree, your entire premise qualifies explicitly.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt, 16 November 2012 - 05:58 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

#1178    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 36,198 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 16 November 2012 - 05:58 PM

View PostScott Creighton, on 16 November 2012 - 05:54 PM, said:

SC: Rubbish.





SC: More rubbish.



SC: Even more rubbish.



SC: And capped with utter rubbish.

SC

Wow, I think we really are misunderstanding what you want to tell us, so the GP was a refuse disposing unit?

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#1179    Scott Creighton

Scott Creighton

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 802 posts
  • Joined:22 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland, United Kingdom

  • Consensus opinion isn't fact.

Posted 16 November 2012 - 06:05 PM

View Postcormac mac airt, on 16 November 2012 - 05:57 PM, said:

I agree, your entire premise qualifies explicitly.

cormac

SC: Hmm... that the best you can do?  You need to try harder, dear boy. Good luck trying.

SC

View Postquestionmark, on 16 November 2012 - 05:58 PM, said:

Wow, I think we really are misunderstanding what you want to tell us, so the GP was a refuse disposing unit?


SC: Hmm... that the best you can do?  You need to try harder, dear boy. Good luck trying.

SC

"The man o' independent mind... is king o' men, for a' that." - Robert Burns

#1180    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 36,198 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 16 November 2012 - 06:08 PM

View PostScott Creighton, on 16 November 2012 - 06:05 PM, said:

SC: Hmm... that the best you can do?  You need to try harder, dear boy. Good luck trying.

SC




SC: Hmm... that the best you can do?  You need to try harder, dear boy. Good luck trying.

SC

Well dear boy, so far, and examining your intellectual diarrhea, that is the best anybody sane can come up with. Every time we show that we know in detail the angle you want to mislead us with we have "misunderstood you". Sorry does not fly...at least around here. But there are a few "oh my gosh aliens!" websites where you might have a little more luck.

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#1181    Scott Creighton

Scott Creighton

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 802 posts
  • Joined:22 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland, United Kingdom

  • Consensus opinion isn't fact.

Posted 16 November 2012 - 06:11 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 16 November 2012 - 06:08 PM, said:

Well dear boy, so far, and examining your intellectual diarrhea, that is the best anybody sane can come up with. Every time we show that we know in detail the angle you want to mislead us with we have "misunderstood you". Sorry does not fly...at least around here. But there are a few "oh my gosh aliens!" websites where you might have a little more luck.

SC: The flattery!

SC

"The man o' independent mind... is king o' men, for a' that." - Robert Burns

#1182    Tutankhaten-pasheri

Tutankhaten-pasheri

    Buratinologist

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

Posted 16 November 2012 - 07:20 PM

View PostScott Creighton, on 16 November 2012 - 05:48 PM, said:

SC: What complete and utter bunk. The AEs themselves had an end time flood myth that was to be sent by their God Thoth to drown all Egypt.  The early Arab Chroniclers tell us that the pyramids were built as protection against an anticipated flood after the heavens had changed its course. It can even be argued that the name of 'Khufu's Akhet' relates to the coming flood of Thoth.  This is ALL ancient material and has NOTHING to do with modern "global warming hysteria". It is about trying to understand the motivations of the ancients using their own words.

Modern "global warming hysteria" - what utter tripe.
Not know whether to laugh or cry at this. I had the patience to find your theory on the fantasy forum and read all of it. I posted here valid question and proposal, yet no answer, hmmm. You have the conceit to show yourself as some orthodoxy and holder of some truth, and that consensus is the weird and wacky alternative. You are an alternavik, a menshevik. It is you who bangs head against the brick wall of reality and say it is the fault of consensus when the blood pours in your eyes and blinds you to the massive edifice of reality. The onus to prove anything is entirely on you. Your hatred of Egyptology and consensus is odd and irrational, some chip on shoulder..... And I certainly do think you put modern conceptions on the ancient world, but then you are not the first to do that, and no doubt will not be the last. I think that like the Mensheviks, your theory will be consigned to the rubbish bin of history, and books by the likes of Bauval and Hancock consigned to the bonfire of the vanities.

Edited by Atentutankh-pasheri, 16 November 2012 - 07:43 PM.


#1183    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,053 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 16 November 2012 - 09:14 PM

View PostQuaentum, on 16 November 2012 - 05:27 PM, said:

Because the size is different, they have nothing in common?  Maybe that can apply to small cars and tractor trailers or small and large planes or even small and large people.

A car comparably sized to a tiny pyramid fits in a child's toy box with his other little trucks
and helicopters.  He certainly won't drive his car to grandma's house.

The Egyptians made all their pyramids in a brief time span and the first real pyramid was
only 2 1/2% of the "size" of the last.  The other rinky dink little things are not pyramids any
more than the oragami pyramid I'm making right now.

Calling these later things "pyramids" is merely a way for Egyptology to hide the facts.  The
fact is they don't have a clue how they were built or what they were for so they play pretend.
They pretend that the great pyramids are just an extension of what came later and despite
the absurdity of the arguments they rarely get called on it.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#1184    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,053 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 16 November 2012 - 09:29 PM

View PostScott Creighton, on 16 November 2012 - 05:48 PM, said:

SC: Something can only be disproved only when it is believed to have been proven. You cannot attempt to disprove something that has not been proven (or believed to have been proven). You present a logical fallacy. So, you might want to start by asking someone to FIRST prove to you that the early, giant pyramids WERE conceived and built as tombs. I have been asking that very question on this site for years and no one has yet come forward and presented any clear-cut evidence that will prove beyond reasonable doubt that these structures were as the Consensus Egyptologists claim, built as tombs.


There is no proof they were tombs.  Much more importantly than this lack of proof is the simple
fact that not even one shred of direct evidence exists that they were tombs.  When you think about
it this is truly remarkable that Egyptology maintains there's a mountain of evidence and they have
all the answers but they can't reach into that mountain of evidence and pull out even a shred to sup-
port their contention!!

The bottom line amounts to the real definition of Egyptology as the science of pounding a few known
facts into the assumptions that the great pyramids were tombs built with ramps by stinky footed bump-
kins who never changed.  What seems obvious to most of the alts seems to be nearly invisible to those
who accept the assumptions.  They see the circumstantial evidence to support their beliefs and can't
see past it.  They don't argue the facts because what they know is a part of the assumptions.

We all do this with almost all knowledge but we should be able to at least see that there are other ways
to view the facts.  With most religions there are a few points that are taken on faith and argument is ir-
relevant as well as futile.  You can't convince a Christian there was no Christ or an Egyptologist there
were no tombs.  You can't even get one to see that without a start point you can't know if the people ever
changed or not.

One thing which is well attested throughout Egyptian history is that the people cared a great deal about
past and future generations. They cared about truth and balance and, it would seem, still do.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#1185    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,053 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 16 November 2012 - 09:34 PM

View PostAtentutankh-pasheri, on 16 November 2012 - 05:11 PM, said:

They didn't need to build large numbers to get it right. There is clear progression from step pyramid, two unfinished pyramids, the failure at Meidum, then the Bent pyramid before getting it right with the Red Pyramid. Moving straight on to building G1 shows the AEs confidence in their own abilities. I don't have a closed mind to any possibilities, in fact I can imagine all manner of scenarios for the pyramids, though they remain idle fantasy until I see proof that they are not tombs. Dimensions, angles of shafts and purposes are all fascinating, and may forever be clouded in the mists of time for us. Yet the theories I see here are simply part of a mass of conflicting pyramidologist theories. There is nothing wrong with "conventional", by definition it is normal. Most reasonable and educated people see the pyramids primary purpose as being a tomb. To me the debate is about what was in the mind of the AEs, not our 21st century obsessions with UFOs and "global warming". This flood defence theory is not really about AE, but about our own times being incorrectly overlayed on the past, perhaps to "prove" the deeply cynical "global warming" hysteria.

My point is that the very first pyramid (Djoser's) was a great pyramid.  Yes, it's only 1/ 45th the effort
of G1 but it's far larger than their known technology could build.  We can either assume that this marks
the date the little green men landed or we can do science to figure out how they did it even if it really
did require alien help.

What are people so afraid of?  Why has there been almost no real science done at Giza since 1986
when it was essentially proven these were built with counterweights? Why have we been sitting on our
hands for a quarter of a century?

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users