1650 replies to this topic

[Quaentum]

Scott Creighton, on 29 November 2012 - 11:14 PM, said:

SC: Perhaps start with Murtadi, Saurid.

Searching for Murtadi, the only reference I found outside of fringe sites going back to about 2008 was the book "The natural genesis: or second part of a book of the beginnings" by Gerald Massey published in 1883.  Reading the appropriate part of the book and comparing it to the fringe sites, I find problems with the story.  Saurid is supposedly Khufu who lived 300 years before the flood but used the Great Pyramid as his abode alongside Noah during the flood.  The pyramids were to contain, among other things, the bodies of the kings and were to be engraved with all things told him (Khufu) by the wise men.

When you look at what has been found so far about what Murtadi supposedly wrote, you find contradictions and elements of the story that are just plain false, and it pretty much shows the writings to be a story but not a historical account.    If the 1672 translation could be found and the story were different, lacking the problems of what has been found, then perhaps it might support the theory.  As it stands now though, it does not support the recovery vault theory.

Scott Creighton said:

SC: But catastrophe *did* occur. The Old Kingdom collapsed and it is becoming clearer that this resulted from sudden and dramatic climate change. The pyramids were breached and what had been contained therein was removed. The AEs tell us they did this in their own words.

SC: Nope. When the kingdom collapsed along with the rest of the Near East cultures, the pyramid contents would become vital. Why do you think that these other cultures faded from history after this collapse and yet the AEs were able to revivicate their civilisation and continue, not as the identical kingdom, but very close to what had been before the collapse?  What did the AE do differently from their neighbours that allowed them to restart their civilisation after the catastrophic collapse?

The major drought in the 22nd century BCE was a large part of the reason for the collapse but not the only reason.  The long reign of Pepi II caused problems for the succession of the throne and ruling families of the various provinces had grown resulting in intense rivalries and warfare.

Their reunification was not due to any materials in a recovery vault but because of an invasion of Upper Egypt in the 11th dynasty.

If the catastrophe was a bad as believed and the materials in the supposed recovery vaults was necessary, why did they not touch what was stored below Djoser's Pyramid?

Scott Creighton said:

SC: In which case, why bother with the Ascending Passage and why bother plug it with three granite blocks? The point here is that re-entry was needed and anticipated in the RVT but *not* the tomb theory.  If you were hauling the king’s body up the Well Shaft there was no need to create the AP or to plug it.

As I said it was just a guess.  However, you would not expect to haul every bit of treasure and royal goods that was to be buried with the king up the well shaft.  Since the other pyramids had no AP, it is my guess that it was created to keep grave robbers from thinking of looking for one.  They would have concentrated on the LP as that was common in all the pyramids before the Great Pyramid.  A way to hide the king in plain site so to speak.

Scott Creighton said:

SC: Okay, I think something has gone awry here. The bull bones were found by Belzoni in the stone box of G2, not in G1. Belzoni sent them to London to be checked. Some Arab legends describe a dark pitch-like substance having been all that was found in the granite box in the KC of the GP. When earth, grain and water are mixed and left for decades/centuries/millennia, the grain will decay into the earth, turning into a dark pitch-like substance thus suggesting that the granite box did indeed serve as an archetype ‘Osiris Bed’.

I think I got mixed up as youtr post concerned both G1 and G2 but I somehow saw it referring to G1 only.  Having read Belzoni's book online, he does not indicate that he shipped the bones anywhere only that he saw they were the bones of a bull.  The arid conditions of the area would have dried out the dirt long before it could become a pitch like substance.

Scott Creighton said:

SC: You are quite unfamiliar with the wider RVT.  Bull bones found in the stone box of G2 do indeed support the RVT.

SC: Exactly. You might want to have a read over this thread, The Birth of Osiris.

Yes the bones do support a possible ritual but not a recovery vault.  The bones were never checked in any way to even get a rough idea of their age so they could have been placed in there well after the ontents of the pyramid were taken.

Scott Creighton said:

SC: It’s there. As I said before – better you do your own research than have me spoon-feed it to you.

I almost always do a thorough search which is how I can find things like Belzoni's book online and why I can say the only references to Osiris Beds I found were from the New Kingdom and later.  Instead of making comments like spoon feeding, perhaps you would like to post a link to something that backs up your claim that they were used prior to that period.

Scott Creighton said:

SC: The ‘Osiris Bed’ with seed and earth (stated in some legends to have been found in G1 by al-Mamun) contained the Ka of the ‘pyramid body’.  As Cladking has oft told us – the Pyramid is the Ka of the King.  The bull bones found within the granite box of G2 (another part of the dismembered ‘body of Osiris’) would have been placed there as the Ba within the ‘body of Osiris’ i.e. the pyramids. As the Pyramid Texts clearly state: ‘This pyramid is Osiris… this construction is Osiris.’  The granite boxes within ‘the body of Osiris’ contained the soul aspects of Ka and Ba – imo.

The KA was the vital essence that distinguished the difference between a living and dead person and I don't believe had anything to do with the pyramid itself.  The BA was the soul and personality of the person that which made it unique.  This could also have applied to inanimate objects that could be considered having the Ba of their owner.  In the case of G1 it could have the BA of Khufu but would not have a KA as it was not a living thing.

[PHFATY]

Until we the alternative historians can conclusively rule out that modern carbon dating methods are valid and do in fact work, we should remain skeptics.  The science behind carbon dating although plausible contains wide margins of error.  So until we come up with a better and more accurate way, I will remain a skeptic of the validity of its claims.  The Earth afterall is much older than what carbon dating can accurately or apporiximately imagine.

[questionmark]

PHFATY, on 01 December 2012 - 07:28 AM, said:

Until we the alternative historians can conclusively rule out that modern carbon dating methods are valid and do in fact work, we should remain skeptics.  The science behind carbon dating although plausible contains wide margins of error.  So until we come up with a better and more accurate way, I will remain a skeptic of the validity of its claims.  The Earth afterall is much older than what carbon dating can accurately or apporiximately imagine.

We are coming up with more accurate methods, like calibrating according to sediments in moors and lake that have been undisturbed for thousands of years, we know how old the sediments are by layering, we just have to see the margin of error in the carbon. By doing that at half a dozen locations all around the world the margin of error comes down to a few decades instead of a few centuries.

[Scott Creighton]

cormac mac airt, on 30 November 2012 - 09:28 PM, said:

SC: But catastrophe *did* occur. The Old Kingdom collapsed and it is becoming clearer that this resulted from sudden and dramatic climate change. The pyramids were breached and what had been contained therein was removed. The AEs tell us they did this in their own words.

CMA: Care to try again? The Ancient Egyptians, meaning those of the 4th Dynasty who actually built the Giza Pyramids, tell us no such thing.

SC: Once again you plod into this discussion with your big banana feet and completely misrepresent what has been said.  Where do I say in my statement above that it was the AEs of the 4th Dynasty that breached the pyramids?  The Old Kingdom did *not* collapse with the 4th dynasty. Why would the people of the 4th dynasty breach the pyramids they were building that they believed would be required around 300 years in their future?

Read what I write and *not* what you think I have written and *stop* misrepresenting my statements.

SC

[Scott Creighton]

Quaentum, on 30 November 2012 - 09:57 PM, said:

Quote

SC: Perhaps start with Murtadi, Saurid.

Q: Searching for Murtadi, the only reference I found outside of fringe sites going back to about 2008 was the book "The natural genesis: or second part of a book of the beginnings" by Gerald Massey published in 1883.  Reading the appropriate part of the book and comparing it to the fringe sites, I find problems with the story.  Saurid is supposedly Khufu who lived 300 years before the flood but used the Great Pyramid as his abode alongside Noah during the flood.  The pyramids were to contain, among other things, the bodies of the kings and were to be engraved with all things told him (Khufu) by the wise men.

When you look at what has been found so far about what Murtadi supposedly wrote, you find contradictions and elements of the story that are just plain false, and it pretty much shows the writings to be a story but not a historical account. If the 1672 translation could be found and the story were different, lacking the problems of what has been found, then perhaps it might support the theory.  As it stands now though, it does not support the recovery vault theory.

SC: Well, to be honest, I would not expect you to say anything else since it seems to me that your mind has been made up even before you entered into this discussion. The fact remains, whether you agree or not, we have texts from Arab chroniclers claimed to be from the Ancient Egyptian builders of the early, giant pyramids.  These texts state that the pyramids were constructed to store all that was “of esteem in the king’s treasury” (i.e. important recovery items) to ensure the kingdom might be reborn.  The catalyst event for the decision to construct the pyramid recovery vaults was the observation that the stars in the heavens had changed their course.  There is much in the Arab chronicles that cannot be externally corroborated but there are two essential elements that can.  We have scientific evidence that the Earth’s axis was disturbed around the time of the early pyramid-building age. A disturbance of the Earth’s axis would, of course, appear to the ancients that the stars had changed their course.  Another part of the story that we have independent corroboratory evidence of is their use to store all “that was of esteem in the kingdom”. This would, naturally, include all manner of seed types, storage/distribution vessels and the remnant cache of such recovery items were found in massive quantities in and under Djoser’s pyramid complex.

So, far from being “plain false”, there are key elements of the Arab chronicles that can be independently corroborated.  I rather imagine that if the tomb-theorists had such corroborative evidence they wouldn’t be slow to ram it down everyone’s throat as proof-positive of the tomb theory. Alas for them, however, they simply do not have such corroboration. If it s evidence that we judge a theory by then any person of reasonable mind can see that the RVT is better evidenced than the PTT (Pyramid Tomb Theory).

Quote

SC: But catastrophe *did* occur. The Old Kingdom collapsed and it is becoming clearer that this resulted from sudden and dramatic climate change. The pyramids were breached and what had been contained therein was removed. The AEs tell us they did this in their own words...  When the kingdom collapsed along with the rest of the Near East cultures, the pyramid contents would become vital. Why do you think that these other cultures faded from history after this collapse and yet the AEs were able to revivicate their civilisation and continue, not as the identical kingdom, but very close to what had been before the collapse?  What did the AE do differently from their neighbours that allowed them to restart their civilisation after the catastrophic collapse?

Q: The major drought in the 22nd century BCE was a large part of the reason for the collapse but not the only reason.  The long reign of Pepi II caused problems for the succession of the throne and ruling families of the various provinces had grown resulting in intense rivalries and warfare.

Their reunification was not due to any materials in a recovery vault but because of an invasion of Upper Egypt in the 11th dynasty.

If the catastrophe was a bad as believed and the materials in the supposed recovery vaults was necessary, why did they not touch what was stored below Djoser's Pyramid?

SC: They did. There were 11 shafts leading to numerous underground galleries.  Only 2 of these 11 underground galleries were found to have large quantities of various seed type, including tens of thousands of storage/distribution vessels. So, the other galleries were emptied (as were the other pyramids) of their recovery items. We could spend all year speculating as to why 2 out of the 11 galleries under the Step Pyramid were not emptied but it is fortunate indeed that they weren’t otherwise we would not have the evidence to show what they were used for – the storage of large quantities of various seed type and distribution vessels.

Quote

SC: In which case, why bother with the Ascending Passage and why bother plug it with three granite blocks? The point here is that re-entry was needed and anticipated in the RVT but *not* the tomb theory.  If you were hauling the king’s body up the Well Shaft there was no need to create the AP or to plug it.

Q: As I said it was just a guess.  However, you would not expect to haul every bit of treasure and royal goods that was to be buried with the king up the well shaft.  Since the other pyramids had no AP, it is my guess that it was created to keep grave robbers from thinking of looking for one.  They would have concentrated on the LP as that was common in all the pyramids before the Great Pyramid.  A way to hide the king in plain site so to speak.

SC: Sorry, but I simply do not follow your logic here. Are you now trying to suggest that the king was buried somewhere else in the pyramid and that the AP was a decoy of some kind? If so, then think carefully before you reply.

Quote

SC: Okay, I think something has gone awry here. The bull bones were found by Belzoni in the stone box of G2, not in G1. Belzoni sent them to London to be checked. Some Arab legends describe a dark pitch-like substance having been all that was found in the granite box in the KC of the GP. When earth, grain and water are mixed and left for decades/centuries/millennia, the grain will decay into the earth, turning into a dark pitch-like substance thus suggesting that the granite box did indeed serve as an archetype ‘Osiris Bed’.

Q: I think I got mixed up as your post concerned both G1 and G2 but I somehow saw it referring to G1 only.  Having read Belzoni's book online, he does not indicate that he shipped the bones anywhere only that he saw they were the bones of a bull.  The arid conditions of the area would have dried out the dirt long before it could become a pitch like substance.

SC: It’s not important but Belzoni’s book *does* state the bull bones found in G2’s granite box were sent to London to be verified. The pitch-like substance was not in G2 (this is where the bull bones were found).  The pitch-like substance is one of the many things that were supposedly found by al-Mamun in the stone box of G1. Mixed with potable water, earth and grain would, after a long period of time, decay into a dark, pitch-like substance. The germinating grain placed on the earth in the archetype ‘Osiris Bed’ symbolized the invisible life-force of the Ka. It is not unreasonable then to suggest that, given the early, giant pyramids as symbolizing the dismembered body parts of Osiris (as per the Myth of Osiris), the germinating grain in the archetype ‘Osiris Bed’ symblised the Ka within the allegorical body of Osiris i.e. the pyramid(s). The bull bones in the second pyramid at Giza would then symbolize the ba of Osiris within the allegorical 'body of Osiris'.

Quote

SC: You are quite unfamiliar with the wider RVT.  Bull bones found in the stone box of G2 do indeed support the RVT.

SC: Exactly. You might want to have a read over this thread, The Birth of Osiris.

Q: Yes the bones do support a possible ritual but not a recovery vault.  The bones were never checked in any way to even get a rough idea of their age so they could have been placed in there well after the ontents of the pyramid were taken.

SC: No, the bull bones were not dated because it was simply assumed by Lehner and Hawass that they MUST have been some bizarre intrusive burial from later times since this granite box, in their opinion, was the sarcophagus of a king. They cavalerely dismiss actual in-situ evidence because they cannot explain it within their tomb paradigm and they do not stop to think that another paradigm might actually offer an explanation for this in-situ evidence. The RVT explains these bull bones.

The Ka and the Ba together make manifest the Akh, ‘one that is effective’. As recovery vaults storing all that would be essential for the kingdom to recover, the kingdom would be raised up through the agency of the ‘body of Osiris’ (in the form of the pyramids as his allegorical body). “This pyramid is Osiris… this construction is Osiris” – PTs. Certainly these were symbolic aspects but they symbolized that the kingdom would be reborn through the (allegorical) ‘body of Osiris’. The allegorical body would require aspects of the soul to be placed within the body and this is what these archetype ‘Osiris Beds’ present.

Quote

SC: It’s there. As I said before – better you do your own research than have me spoon-feed it to you.

I almost always do a thorough search which is how I can find things like Belzoni's book online and why I can say the only references to Osiris Beds I found were from the New Kingdom and later.  Instead of making comments like spoon feeding, perhaps you would like to post a link to something that backs up your claim that they were used prior to that period.

SC: It’s there. I won't say something unless I can back it up.

Quote

SC: The ‘Osiris Bed’ with seed and earth (stated in some legends to have been found in G1 by al-Mamun) contained the Ka of the ‘pyramid body’.  As Cladking has oft told us – the Pyramid is the Ka of the King.  The bull bones found within the granite box of G2 (another part of the dismembered ‘body of Osiris’) would have been placed there as the Ba within the ‘body of Osiris’ i.e. the pyramids. As the Pyramid Texts clearly state: ‘This pyramid is Osiris… this construction is Osiris.’  The granite boxes within ‘the body of Osiris’ contained the soul aspects of Ka and Ba – imo.

Q: The KA was the vital essence that distinguished the difference between a living and dead person and I don't believe had anything to do with the pyramid itself.  The BA was the soul and personality of the person that which made it unique.  This could also have applied to inanimate objects that could be considered having the Ba of their owner.  In the case of G1 it could have the BA of Khufu but would not have a KA as it was not a living thing.

SC: See above. “This pyramid is Osiris… this construction is Osiris.” The pyramid is personified as Osiris. As such it makes perfect sense that the AEs would symbolically place the Ka and the Ba within the allegorical ‘body’. How could the kingdom be reborn if the allegorical body had no allegorical ‘soul’?

Bottom line here - there is another paradigm that is better supported by the available evidence and which simply does not dismiss evidence. I really do not care whether you accept this more rational paradigm or not - you are obviously convinced of the unevidenced pyramid tomb theory. That's entirely your choice - just do not expect me to share your view. Most rational, thinking people actually demand good, compelling evidence before accepting the veracity of a theory. Sheeple accept an unevidenced theory on blind faith.


SC

Edited by Scott Creighton, 01 December 2012 - 01:01 PM.

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

Scott Creighton, on 01 December 2012 - 12:40 PM, said:

Most rational, thinking people actually demand good, compelling evidence before accepting the veracity of a theory. Sheeple follow it on blind faith.

So, hear ye the voice of the "sheeple" (you really need to improve your PR and learn to laugh mister SC)
However, as regards the quote about rational thinking people, I refer you to these words..

Quote

We are confronted with a civilization where it seems sophisticated knowledge of the motions of the stars -- precession -- was understood. This is knowledge far in excess of that generally attributed to the ancient Egyptians of the dynastic period and may indicate a more sophisticated hand in the design and construction of the giant pyramids from an earlier time in ancient Egypt.

These words are from your book "The Giza Prophecy" and are to be found in chapter 3 "The Orion Key" on page 131. So, even though on this thread you have not once mentioned aliens, (to avoid ridicule?) in your book you are not so circumspect. Even though you have not said "aliens", any rational thinking people will see that is what you mean. So, ladies and gentlemen, here you have it, yet another aliens built the pyramids pyramidiot, though on this forum disguising himself under a blizzard of smoke and mirrors in the guise of spurious diagrams and mathematical formulae. By the way, the book is full of such, and makes what could be an entertaining book rather boring, though it's worth laughing at the photo of SC with arch-pyramidiot Bauval, looking rather like some sinister cartoon villain (page 99)

Still no responses about your theory of first intermediate period lasting two thousand years, or more........

Edited by Atentutankh-pasheri, 01 December 2012 - 02:03 PM.

[cormac mac airt]

Scott Creighton, on 01 December 2012 - 10:52 AM, said:

SC: Once again you plod into this discussion with your big banana feet and completely misrepresent what has been said.  Where do I say in my statement above that it was the AEs of the 4th Dynasty that breached the pyramids?  The Old Kingdom did *not* collapse with the 4th dynasty. Why would the people of the 4th dynasty breach the pyramids they were building that they believed would be required around 300 years in their future?

Read what I write and *not* what you think I have written and *stop* misrepresenting my statements.

SC

I know exactly what you've claimed and it's another fabrication on your part. The only timeframe that's relevant to the Giza Pyramids is the period in which they were built, and sealed, which is the 4th Dynasty. Even extending it to the 11th Dynasty doesn't help your claim. Any texts/stela that some claim may have originated in some way from that timeframe have not been verified as having done so and are misrepresented by you to mean something they don't. That you pat yourself on the back for this puts you in the same category as Zechariah Sitchin IMO. Also, since it would have taken an incredible amount of crops over the 20+ years the Great Pyramid was built just to feed the people constructing it, as well as everyone else in the country, there likely wouldn't have been enough (if any) excess in which to deposit in the GP in any case. On top of the fact that since there's no evidence for a "Great Flood" in Egypt, particularly between the 4th and 11th Dynasties, then there would have been no reason to "recover" anything within the GP. And since there appears to be some suggestion that the GP was entered prior to al-Mamun and tomb-robbers were only interested in gold and other such valuables there should still be some evidence of these seed deposits within the structure. That there's not even the slightest hint of seed remains works against you.

cormac

[cladking]

cormac mac airt, on 01 December 2012 - 03:20 PM, said:

I know exactly what you've claimed and it's another fabrication on your part. The only timeframe that's relevant to the Giza Pyramids is the period in which they were built, and sealed, which is the 4th Dynasty. Even extending it to the 11th Dynasty doesn't help your claim. Any texts/stela that some claim may have originated in some way from that timeframe have not been verified as having done so and are misrepresented by you to mean something they don't.

Egyptology is nothing but smoke and mirrors.  They interpret the evidence to fit
their beliefs and beat everyone on the head with the quality of their methodology
and the ability to hold numerous conflicting beliefs simultaneously.

Not everything changed after the 4th dynasty.  Even a child could understand the
simple fact that men die.

Utterance 491.

1055a. To say: When N. dies [his] ka will gain power ---------

This line is simply invisible to most until they first learn how to discount it.  There is
no support for the assumptions and believers can't argue the facts without the assu-
mptions.

[cormac mac airt]

cladking, on 01 December 2012 - 03:59 PM, said:

Egyptology is nothing but smoke and mirrors.  They interpret the evidence to fit
their beliefs and beat everyone on the head with the quality of their methodology
and the ability to hold numerous conflicting beliefs simultaneously.

Not everything changed after the 4th dynasty.  Even a child could understand the
simple fact that men die.

Utterance 491.

1055a. To say: When N. dies [his] ka will gain power ---------

This line is simply invisible to most until they first learn how to discount it.  There is
no support for the assumptions and believers can't argue the facts without the assu-
mptions.

Still mangling and reinterpreting what the AE wrote 150+ years after the GP, I see.

cormac

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

SC says on this forum that there was no flood and the "recovery vaults" were not needed, yet in his book claims that the first intermediate period lasted two thousand years or more, and that because of what was stored in the "recovery vaults" enabled the AEs to get their civilization back on track after two thousand years while other peoples were struggling to recover from? this is not explained properly. So, as I already exposed, there is what SC says here, and there is what he says in his book. These contradictions have an explanation? The mirrors will stop flashing, the smoke blown away?

[Scott Creighton]

cormac mac airt, on 01 December 2012 - 03:20 PM, said:

Quote

SC: Once again you plod into this discussion with your big banana feet and completely misrepresent what has been said.  Where do I say in my statement above that it was the AEs of the 4th Dynasty that breached the pyramids?  The Old Kingdom did *not* collapse with the 4th dynasty. Why would the people of the 4th dynasty breach the pyramids they were building that they believed would be required around 300 years in their future?

Read what I write and *not* what you think I have written and *stop* misrepresenting my statements.

CMA: I know exactly what you've claimed and it's another fabrication on your part. The only timeframe that's relevant to the Giza Pyramids is the period in which they were built, and sealed, which is the 4th Dynasty.

SC: Let us take a couple of steps back here, shall we.

Quote

SC: But catastrophe *did* occur. The Old Kingdom collapsed and it is becoming clearer that this resulted from sudden and dramatic climate change. The pyramids were breached and what had been contained therein was removed. The AEs tell us they did this in their own words.

CMA: Care to try again? The Ancient Egyptians, meaning those of the 4th Dynasty who actually built the Giza Pyramids, tell us no such thing.

Demonstrate to this Board where, in my statement above, I claim that the breaching and emptying of the pyramids was made by the AEs of the 4^th Dynasty. That is what you have claimed I said so back it up. Put up or shut up. You will *not* be able to find such because it is not what I said – it is but *your* little fabrication. I will tell you again - *stop* misrepresenting what I have written.

Quote

CMA: Even extending it to the 11th Dynasty doesn't help your claim. Any texts/stela that some claim may have originated in some way from that timeframe have not been verified as having done so and are misrepresented by you to mean something they don't.

SC: Oh yes – the same texts that the Egypt-apologists attempt to use to prop up their defunct pyramid tomb theory. What’s good for the goose, dear boy…..

[snip – irrelevant]

Quote

CMA: Also, since it would have taken an incredible amount of crops over the 20+ years the Great Pyramid was built just to feed the people constructing it, as well as everyone else in the country, there likely wouldn't have been enough (if any) excess in which to deposit in the GP in any case.

SC: Yes – you just keep thinking that if it helps to soothe your anxieties whilst completely ignoring the large quantities of such that HAVE ALREADY BEEN FOUND.

Quote

CMA: On top of the fact that since there's no evidence for a "Great Flood" in Egypt, particularly between the 4th and 11th Dynasties, then there would have been no reason to "recover" anything within the GP.

SC: The Old Kingdom collapsed. The builders of the GP believed this would be caused by a great deluge, followed by drought.  Drought very often follows flood. But it doesn’t matter if what the builders believed actually came to pass – it is what they *believed* that was their impetus for building the structures i.e. that their kingdom was destined to be destroyed. It doesn’t matter if the builders were right or wrong in their prediction and their motivation. The fact of the matter is that the pyramids were built and the builders tell us it was done to assist the recovery of the kingdom after an environmental catastrophe they *believed* was imminent. When the Old Kingdom *did* collapse, the pyramids were there (fortunately) to help reboot the civilization.

Quote

CMA: And since there appears to be some suggestion that the GP was entered prior to al-Mamun and tomb-robbers were only interested in gold and other such valuables there should still be some evidence of these seed deposits within the structure. That there's not even the slightest hint of seed remains works against you.

SC:  And tomb-robbers wouldn’t be interested in pyramid recovery vaults. And you’d be really surprised at the amount of different seed types that have been found in the early pyramids. Suggest you do more research. And, suffice to say, not a single mummified king was ever found.

SC

Edited by Scott Creighton, 01 December 2012 - 04:41 PM.

[cormac mac airt]

Quote

Demonstrate to this Board where, in my statement above, I claim that the breaching and emptying of the pyramids was made by the AEs of the 4^th Dynasty. That is what you have claimed I said so back it up. Put up or shut up. You will *not* be able to find such because it is not what I said – it is but *your* little fabrication. I will tell you again - *stop* misrepresenting what I have written.

Demonstrate where the Ancient Egyptians of the 4th Dynasty actually wrote and described the construction of the Great Pyramid for the purposes of being a 'Recovery Vault', because THAT'S the only timeframe relevant to same. That it's located in a necropolis with the layout of a tomb certainly doesn't support your conclusion. Stories written afterward, in texts or stela that can't be verified as originating in the 4th dynasty also don't support your conclusion. There's no evidence in the entirety of AE civilization that they were as forward thinking as to do something, expecting no results for centuries. Indeed, they were dependent on a yearly basis for what the Nile provided and at best could only hope for a few years or so good harvest at a time. They'd have no way to even know their civilization would even exist 300 years into the future.

Quote

The builders of the GP believed this would be caused by a great deluge, followed by drought.

You have an actual, verified 4th Dynasty text to support that claim?

Quote

And you’d be really surprised at the amount of different seed types that have been found in the early pyramids.

So then you have evidence of seed types found in the Great Pyramid then?

cormac

[Scott Creighton]

cormac mac airt, on 01 December 2012 - 04:56 PM, said:

Quote

SC: Demonstrate to this Board where, in my statement above, I claim that the breaching and emptying of the pyramids was made by the AEs of the 4th Dynasty. That is what you have claimed I said so back it up. Put up or shut up. You will *not* be able to find such because it is not what I said – it is but *your* little fabrication. I will tell you again - *stop* misrepresenting what I have written.

CMA: Demonstrate where the Ancient Egyptians of the 4th Dynasty actually wrote and described the construction of the Great Pyramid for the purposes of being a 'Recovery Vault', because THAT'S the only timeframe relevant to same.

SC: So, when cornered, you try to shift the goalposts. You claimed that I stated that the AEs of the 4^th dynasty breached and emptied the pyramids they built.  Demonstrate where I said that. Let’s see it. A bigger person with a shred of integrity would simply withdraw the comment and apologise.

“The only time frame that is relevant to same.”  Really? But when you want to use the Dream Stele and/or the Inventory Stele (and other non-contemporary evidence), both of which were written thousands of years after the pyramid-building age we are discussing, as evidence to support consensus Egyptology you are quite happy to do so. Are we then to dismiss those pieces of non-contemporary evidence since they were not of the relevant time-frame? Your double-standards here belie your desperation.  It’s okay for the Egypt-apologists to use evidence from much later times that they believe suggest a funerary nature to these structures but when anyone that is not an Egypt-apologist does likewise then it is not permitted.

Don’t be so ridiculous.

Quote

CMA: That it's located in a necropolis with the layout of a tomb certainly doesn't support your conclusion.

SC: On that basis the attic in my house should be a tomb. And on that basis also, a church is the largest tomb in a graveyard.

Quote

CMA: Stories written afterward, in texts or stela that can't be verified as originating in the 4th dynasty also don't support your conclusion.

SC: If you want to start debarring all evidence not of the timeframe in question then I suggest you are on very dangerous ground since you will, on that basis, be debarring all evidence that Consensus Egyptology uses to try and prop up its pyramid tomb theory. I really don’t think you should go there.

Quote

CMA: There's no evidence in the entirety of AE civilization that they were as forward thinking as to do something, expecting no results for centuries.

SC: So what!  What does that prove?  The Arab texts that have comedown to us state that this was the reason the AEs built their pyramids. You don’t want to accept them.  That’s your choice. But there is good scientific evidence that supports these Arab texts. You don’t want to accept that either.  You want to bury your head in a sarcophagus. Good for you. This was a one-off event and I rather suspect if we were confronted by such in our time then our government would be making contingencies to ensure food production in the future. Think Svalbard. And what was their choice – do nothing?

Quote

CMA: Indeed, they were dependent on a yearly basis for what the Nile provided and at best could only hope for a few years or so good harvest at a time. They'd have no way to even know their civilization would even exist 300 years into the future.

SC: See above. Think Svalbard. What was their choice – do nothing?

Quote

SC: The builders of the GP believed this would be caused by a great deluge, followed by drought.

CMA: You have an actual, verified 4th Dynasty text to support that claim?

SC: There you go again. It can only be valid evidence only if it is contemporary with the period being discussed. Don’t be so ridiculous. On that basis then you want to start debarring all evidence that is not contemporary with particular periods that consensus Egyptology relies on. Consensus Egyptology has little at present upon which to hang their tomb theory but if we are then to adopt your methodology then you will quickly find that you have a big fat zero upon which to base the tomb theory. You really don’t want to go down that road but I can see why you need to do it – you have to do something, anything to render inadmissible the evidence I present. But on the basis you are trying to use then you make the scant evidence of consensus Egyptology inadmissible also.

Quote

SC: And you’d be really surprised at the amount of different seed types that have been found in the early pyramids.

CMA: So then you have evidence of seed types found in the Great Pyramid then?

SC: Do your own research. So, because we find large quantities of various seed types and tens of thousands of other recovery artifacts in one pyramid, just because we don’t find the same quantities in other pyramids means these other pyramids could not have been built for the same purpose – is that your argument?  So, by your logic, an old-style fire-engine with all its hoses, ladders, and tanks of water can’t possible have the same function as a modern fire-engine because, although the modern fire-engine has all the hoses and ladders, its water tanks are empty. The recovery items were INTENDED to be removed which is why, in most cases, they were.

SC

Edited by Scott Creighton, 01 December 2012 - 05:52 PM.

[cormac mac airt]

Quote

SC: So, when cornered, you try to shift the goalposts. You claimed that I stated that the AEs of the 4^th dynasty breached and emptied the pyramids they built. Demonstrate where I said that. Let’s see it. A bigger person with a shred of integrity would simply withdraw the comment and apologise.

I said the peoples of the 4th Dynasty said no such thing and they're the only one's whose statements matter. Not yours and certainly not something written over 1000 years later.

Quote

Really? But when you want to use the Dream Stele and/or the Inventory Stele (and other non-contemporary evidence), both of which were written thousands of years after the pyramid-building age we are discussing, as evidence to support consensus Egyptology you are quite happy to do so. Are we then to dismiss those pieces of non-contemporary evidence since they were not of the relevant time-frame? Your double-standards here belie your desperation. It’s okay for the Egypt-apologists to use evidence from much later times that they believe suggest a funerary nature to these structures but when anyone that is not an Egypt-apologist does likewise then it is not permitted.

I've never used the Dream Stele or Inventory Stele to support an anachronistic belief, that's been your position, so now who's fabricating what's been said? YOU.

Quote

The Arab texts that have comedown to us state that this was the reason the AEs built their pyramids.

Who gives a damn about what the Arabs said nearly 3000 years later? Trying actually showing verifiable evidence from the 4th to 11th Dynasty supporting your fiction, because that's what it'll take.

cormac

[cladking]

cormac mac airt, on 01 December 2012 - 04:56 PM, said:

Demonstrate where the Ancient Egyptians of the 4th Dynasty actually wrote and described the construction of the Great Pyramid for the purposes of being a 'Recovery Vault', because THAT'S the only timeframe relevant to same.

Why don't you show where they said it was a tomb?

Why don't you show where they said anything that supports Egyptological beliefs?