530 replies to this topic

[Abramelin]

And Egyptian Lad, you never replied to this post of mine (maybe your color pallet was down for a sec?):

http://www.unexplain...4

[egyptian lad]

Abramelin, on 10 October 2012 - 07:29 PM, said:

Did you also see that big wedge-shaped knife at the top of the image, Egyptian Lad? What you think they used that for? Clip his toe nails?

And did you see the oil can on the top left (because that's what I think it is)?




.

Lets analyze this image and see if this was really mummification or not

Its a belt stripe rather a knife


I will answer you by images too,according to their brainwashing theory about mummification:

Mummification of the dead body



Wrapping the dead body by death sheets



Putting the mummy into the coffin



Close the coffin with its cover




In the image above: the coffin is closed by the front cover....So its impossible to run mummification while its closed, Try to focous on the image again



Ignore the first step of mummifying the dead body:


So a royal guy died..........then they wrapped him by sheets..........so they put him into the coffin.


So the conspiracy of archaeologists start:


They replaced the bones of dead royal king by anonymous unrotten dead body of guy they found in the graves and first got out the stomach....etc, then wrapped it and put in the coffin.


That exactly what happened!

They replaced the bones of royal kings from the coffins and put the so called mummies inside it to brainwash the humanity

[Abramelin]

Out of RESPECT of their dead king, they gave him a FACE instead of a banded head.



And the photo you posted looks VERY similar to what I posted.

But with the head of the king still on, in ceremonial style.

Out of RESPECT.

.

Edited by Abramelin, 10 October 2012 - 08:10 PM.

[egyptian lad]

Junior Chubb, on 10 October 2012 - 07:49 PM, said:

Sorry to poke my head in at this late stage, just had to question this. If we evolved from giants, who did the giants evolve from?

Giant humans were created from the clay or mud......( its abrahamic religion claim) and science already did confim it


Our body contains the same substances of mud or ground of earth,which means we created from it


Why you find the giants theory so far from the reality?


Since you from the uk, Well the stonehenges of uk are work of giants too

[Abramelin]

Canopic jar
http://en.wikipedia....iki/Canopic_jar

You will see these jars at the bottom of reliefs depicting the dead pharaoh.

What you think they really are, Egyptian Lad?

Containers for fish and chips in case dear ol' departed Pharaoh wants a snack?

Well, Egypologists are all liars, so what they tell us these jars are for must be a lie too, eh?

What do you think they are for?


+++++++

EDIT:

It must be half past midnight in Egypt now.

We'll have to wait for a quarter of a day before we see another scream in red fonts, lol.

.

Edited by Abramelin, 10 October 2012 - 08:37 PM.

[Mangoze]

egyptian lad, on 10 October 2012 - 07:35 PM, said:

really? So the so called dinasours were unable to lift their bodies??? SO the giraffe was unable to lift its own???


Because " Your biology sciences are all false" of course, they going to play in your mind, That Giant humans is impossible according to the science LOL



They were Giant Humans and they were  the real builders of most gigantic buildings over world


We evolved from The giants " thats the true evolution" not the ape theory of Mr.darwin


The dinasours skeletons are actually skeletons of Giant animals who lived in the same age of early giant humans, When there were Giant humans of 20 meter tall, There were giant animals close to the giant human size


They exaggerate about the age of fossils to millions of years, while its only some thousands of years

Egyptian Lad,

Have you ever noticed how big animals are in now way similar to small animal?

Take a look at this link http://dinosaurtheory.com/scaling.html, it explains what cladking was talking about.  In the second chapter they even discuss the dinosaur paradox.

[Arbitran]

Wow, what woodwork did this 'egyptian lad' fellow come out from? I leave this thread alone for a day, and suddenly we have some of the craziest nonsense I've ever seen, all up and down the page... lovely...

And as an evolutionary biologist, I of course take particular notice of the idiocy of "the ape theory of Mr. Darwin". Oy... even if there were giants in ancient Egypt (there almost certainly weren't; which is clear), evolutionary biology would be affected in no way, whatsoever. End of story.

[Mangoze]

@Egyptian Lad,

I forgot to ask this earlier - do you admit to believing in dinosaurs?

[Arbitran]

egyptian lad, on 10 October 2012 - 08:02 PM, said:

Lets analyze this image and see if this was really mummification or not

Its a belt stripe rather a knife


I will answer you by images too,according to their brainwashing theory about mummification:

Mummification of the dead body



Wrapping the dead body by death sheets



Putting the mummy into the coffin



Close the coffin with its cover




In the image above: the coffin is closed by the front cover....So its impossible to run mummification while its closed, Try to focous on the image again



Ignore the first step of mummifying the dead body:


So a royal guy died..........then they wrapped him by sheets..........so they put him into the coffin.


So the conspiracy of archaeologists start:


They replaced the bones of dead royal king by anonymous unrotten dead body of guy they found in the graves and first got out the stomach....etc, then wrapped it and put in the coffin.


That exactly what happened!

They replaced the bones of royal kings from the coffins and put the so called mummies inside it to brainwash the humanity

What bull****... So, everything is just a conspiracy to "brainwash the humanity" (um... for what purpose?), and things that we find have all just been tampered with by the evil archaeologists? Hmm... I have a strange suspicion that the words "Occam's Razor" won't go over so well with this one...

[Junior Chubb]

egyptian lad, on 10 October 2012 - 08:09 PM, said:

Giant humans were created from the clay or mud......( its abrahamic religion claim) and science already did confim it


Our body contains the same substances of mud or ground of earth,which means we created from it


Why you find the giants theory so far from the reality?


Since you from the uk, Well the stonehenges of uk are work of giants too

I was just interested, seeing as you used the word 'evolved' I was wondering what parts of evolution you adhered to within your giants argument.

There is no need for me to go into why I find the idea of Egyptian Giants being far from reality, there are plenty of good examples put forward in the thread already.

[Arbitran]

egyptian lad, on 10 October 2012 - 08:09 PM, said:

Giant humans were created from the clay or mud......( its abrahamic religion claim) and science already did confim it


Our body contains the same substances of mud or ground of earth,which means we created from it


Why you find the giants theory so far from the reality?


Since you from the uk, Well the stonehenges of uk are work of giants too

Our body happens to be based largely on carbon compounds, yes, as is every living thing on this planet. That doesn't mean that life was made from mud. Don't be absurd. The giants "theory" (which, incidentally, doesn't qualify as a theory at all) is far from reality because there isn't a scrap of evidence for it. It's as simple as that. And you can say that Stonehenge was the work of giants all you like; the fact is that you have yet to show us the extraordinary evidence which would needed to substantiate that claim.

Edited by Arbitran, 10 October 2012 - 08:45 PM.

[cormac mac airt]

Arbitran, on 10 October 2012 - 08:32 PM, said:

Wow, what woodwork did this 'egyptian lad' fellow come out from? I leave this thread alone for a day, and suddenly we have some of the craziest nonsense I've ever seen, all up and down the page... lovely...

And as an evolutionary biologist, I of course take particular notice of the idiocy of "the ape theory of Mr. Darwin". Oy... even if there were giants in ancient Egypt (there almost certainly weren't; which is clear), evolutionary biology would be affected in no way, whatsoever. End of story.

Well, he's apparently of the impression that large dinosaur and giant human structures would work the same way.   Evidently ignorance really is bliss. Not to mention the drastic mixing of timelines. Apparently he doesn't realize this isn't mix-n-match.

cormac

[Oniomancer]

egyptian lad, on 10 October 2012 - 07:11 PM, said:

The conspiracy of Mummification is very clear!

You just dont go against it cuz you blindly believe the dishonest People ( your archaeologists), LOL its funny that most mummies  were diseased OHHHHHHH yeah!! they have mummification science but on medicine what a poor backward guys.

Or maybe it takes a lot less expertise to preserve a body that's already dead than to keep one alive. Really, it's not much different than curing a ham.

Quote

The mummified animals were made by nature too.

I must say, Nature did a wonderful job wrapping them.

You'd practically need an army of archaeologists working overtime to account for all the things you're accusing them of. It prompts the question why.

Quote

On 1898: A mummy of human was found in area named Jabalin,on the red sea, After news spread over discovery of this mummy, The archaeologists rushed to put it in some coffin to claim it was mummy of KING SO!

Source citation please.

Quote

CHEATING over ancient egypt history



so,u speak as if mummification was something small then???  A mummification must be told in each tomb and details must be depicted by ancient egyptians, if they already had!


But look at the funerals of egyptians, let me provide images:






If there was a mummification action, They would tell it over all depictions of funerals....... THATS THE LOGIC!


The mummification supposedly was a unique action.......its not small thing to forget on the depictions

One would imagine Pharoah's first potty training was too. Where are the depictions of that? (watch Kmt show up now with exactly that)

You're falliong into a falicious line of reasoning here. Just because something was an important part of the process doesn't mean it was important enough or socially polite enough to be shown, with or without graphic detail.

[Arbitran]

cormac mac airt, on 10 October 2012 - 08:46 PM, said:

Well, he's apparently of the impression that large dinosaur and giant human structures would work the same way.   Evidently ignorance really is bliss. Not to mention the drastic mixing of timelines. Apparently he doesn't realize this isn't mix-n-match.

cormac

I see... Because, yeah, the structure of human muscles and ligaments wouldn't allow for easy movement at large sizes (like the asinine 20 metres he's suggesting...), human bones aren't strong enough, even scaled, to support the weight of such a large body, the human lungs, even scaled, would be insufficient to take in the necessary oxygen to sustain such a large man... The list goes on: 20-metre-high humans just aren't biologically possible.

[kmt_sesh]

egyptian lad, on 10 October 2012 - 08:02 PM, said:

Lets analyze this image and see if this was really mummification or not

Its a belt stripe rather a knife


I will answer you by images too,according to their brainwashing theory about mummification:

Mummification of the dead body



>>Snip<<

Egyptian lad, I am going to be frank. Perhaps more frank than I usually am. First, I am speaking as a poster at UM.

Your entire approach is painfully futile. You simply have no idea of what you're trying to argue. You've posted the same stuff numerous times at UM now, and you even followed me to my blog and posted it there, too (under the name nonesense). You've been wrong—stunningly wrong—each step of the way.

Your nonsense about mummification is what's pushing me over the edge. Your response is that modern doctors removed the organs and such, which is not even realistic. Unless the organs had been removed and embalmed in antiquity, they very rarely survived in the first place. The stomach, liver, intestines, and lungs are composed mostly of fluids with thin muscular membranes, so without some expert level of embalming, they don't usually last. So your suggestion that modern doctors cut into ancient corpses, removed the organs, and stuck them in jars is just silly. Did modern doctors make the canopic jars, too? Who inscribed the jars? These organ containers had been found with inscriptions long before hieroglyphs were even deciphered, so obviously they're not fakes.

What about the brains? Modern doctors certainly didn't remove them. It could only have happened immediately post-mortem. Brains were almost always removed through the left nostril by forcing a passage through the sinuses and the ethmoid bone and into the brain cavity. In other instances retrieval was accomplished through an eye orbit, through a passage drilled behind an ear, or through a passage drilled in the vicinity of the foramen magnum. Obviously none of this could be done on an ancient corpse and with desiccated brain tissue. Also, how do you explain the resins embalmers often poured up into the emptied brain cavity? It hardened inside the skulls millennia ago.

By the way, this image doesn't show a mummy inside a coffin. It shows a mummy being wrapped with strips of linen. On the mummy's head is a funerary mask.

Second, I am speaking as a Moderator at UM. I am tired of your approach. You've written dozens of posts containing nothing but random photos, your misinformed interpretations of them, and the casual dismissal of professional historical research and scientific investigation. My patience is wearing very thin. In essence all of the posts you've submitted are the same, only with different misinterpreted photos.

Many posters have called you on this. Your only response is "archaeologists have lied." This is a lazy copout, not an explanation.

If archaeologists have been so successful in hiding "the truth" from everyone, then how is it you alone know "the truth"? At this time I am officially advising that you explain yourself better. What are your sources and how do you know what you claim to know?

Please reply. At the present I am not sure how much longer this thread need go on. You have done nothing to address other posters' questions and challenges, and you have proved nothing of substance for your own claims.

Edited by kmt_sesh, 10 October 2012 - 10:46 PM.