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.


- - - - -

The Pyramid (Re)Genesis Plan

orion pyramid recovery vault

  • Please log in to reply
205 replies to this topic

#61    kmt_sesh

kmt_sesh

    Omnipotent Entity

  • 9,297 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Illinois

Posted 10 May 2012 - 01:50 AM

View Postcormac mac airt, on 10 May 2012 - 01:02 AM, said:

Considering that she's saying the current revised radiocarbon dates per Ramsey's team "fit well with the archeological evidence that we already have" it should be interesting to see how you twist those words to say something they don't. But then, I'd expect no less from you.

cormac

Ikram is a Pakistani Egyptologist. LOL She also happens to be a favorite of mine. She is one of the world's most respected and recognizable Egyptologists, due to her own efforts, intelligence, and highly regarded body of publishing. Let's look again at that quote:

“They fit well with the archeological evidence that we already have,” she said. “Of course, ten years from now, there might be an improvement in carbon-14 dating, and the current crop of dates will have to be revised. Hard science is helpful, but should always be contextualized and tested against other data."


All Ikram is saying is, archaeology has yielded evidence allowing researchers to establish both relative and absolute dates for artifacts and historical sites—and C14 dating as a tool has demonstrated more often than not, that archaeologists' relative and absolute dates have been correct all along. It's a form of science corroborating work in the field.

But we all know how skilled fringe writers are at misrepresenting evidence. Writers like Sitchin, von Däniken, and Bauval brought it to unimaginable heights to sell their sci-fi books. Never underestimate the fringe. They're crafty!

Posted Image
The evil overlord mummy moderator has spoken.

Visit My Blog!

#62    Swede

Swede

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,811 posts
  • Joined:30 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 10 May 2012 - 02:11 AM

Scotty - Have been quite busy and simply do not have the time to fully address the extent of your selective quotations/misunderstandings in regards to radiocarbon dating and the calibration methodologies currently in utilization.

For the benefit of others, one of Scotty's references:

http://www.centuries.co.uk/preface.htm

For those who would appreciate a more qualified and detailed understanding of the topic:

http://researchcommo...1FB6?sequence=1

For those who would wish to enter and calibrate their own raw data:

http://calib.qub.ac.uk/calib/download/

.


#63    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,152 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 10 May 2012 - 02:23 AM

Quote


Quote

"Not even in five thousand years could carbon dating help archaeology. We can use other kinds of methods like geoarchaeology, which is very important, or DNA, or laser scanning, but carbon dating is useless. This science will never develop. In archaeology, we consider carbon dating results imaginary." - Zahi Hawaass


Geoarchaeology is generally not a means of dating organic materials. DNA is not a dating method. Laser scanning is not a dating method. Forms of laser analysis are involved in some dating techniques, as I understand it, but you're clinging to one of the most absurd statements Hawass ever made. In stating "we consider" Hawass is in fact not speaking for all archaeologists but for a scant and perhaps misinformed minority.

Just to add to what kmt_sesh was saying, it wouldn't matter if DNA studies 'were' a dating method as they don't provide specific/absolute dates either. So Hawass has once again shot himself in the foot, figuratively speaking of course.

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

#64    kmt_sesh

kmt_sesh

    Omnipotent Entity

  • 9,297 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Illinois

Posted 10 May 2012 - 03:05 AM

View PostScott Creighton, on 09 May 2012 - 11:40 PM, said:

SC: I didn't bring a debate to you.  I put a paper up in the OP that posters here thought they could just kick around.  I tend to kick back.  I'm sure you've noticed.

Indeed I've noticed. You hang in there quite well. Still, you've been around UM a long time—longer than I have—so you know perfectly well what you were going to encounter. This isn't ATS or Atlantis Rising, where form what I've seen so many posters seem to lack the ability to apply critical thinking. Here at UM we bite. So if you were expecting all of us—or even most of us—to sit back and agree and pat you on the back, you were fooling yourself. We will address your paper in the manner it needs to be addressed.


Quote

SC: That's not why I posted them.  The comment made by 'Questionmark' was:


SC: I posted those images to show that his comment above was quite wrong.  There is more than a single Egyptian representation that contains Orion. And if you want a representation from the 4th dynasty, simply take a look at Giza.  It's pretty unmistakable.


SC: But nevertheless - the people of the 4th dynasty simply had to look up of a winter's evening and Orion is right there in front of them.

If that's the case questionmark and I would probably disagree, but we've done so more than once in the past. My point was that you cannot use a state of the religion from more than a millennium later to try to bolster your claims in the Old Kingdom. Where questionmark and I would most certainly agree, as would all of the others involved in this debate—and as would the academic world—is that you can't use Dynasty 4 to prove an Egyptian observance of Orion. And definitely not in the way you're arguing.

And bear in mind at all times: you've presented no evidence to date that proves your Orion argument about the Giza Plateau in the Old Kingdom. You've presented only your own personal belief about it. I've allowed others to dissect your astronomical arguments while keeping my distance from them because I am not well versed in archaeoastronomy, but I always chuckle over your lines and measurements based on drawings and images that are considerably less in precision than the sort of survey plats you actually need.

I've also noticed you tend to ignore many if not most of my own points based on archaeology and the culture and religion of pharaonic Egypt.


Quote

SC: Why is everything reduced to religion and cultic practices with you? The Giza-Orion concordance we find in the layout of the Giza pyramids is about TIME and NOT about religion.

Best wishes,

SC:

This goes to my previous sentence. The fact that you're incredulous about my approach to the argument, reveals your lack of fundamental familiarity with what Giza was about to the Egyptians. And that's the only thing that matters: to the Egyptians of Dynasty 4 the Giza Plateau was a royal necropolis, excepting a couple of interruptions, and to the Egyptians a royal necropolis was a particularly powerful place of religion. There is simply no possible way to ignore the hundreds of tombs and all of the temples erected for that very purpose.

View PostSwede, on 10 May 2012 - 02:11 AM, said:

Scotty - Have been quite busy and simply do not have the time to fully address the extent of your selective quotations/misunderstandings in regards to radiocarbon dating and the calibration methodologies currently in utilization.

For the benefit of others, one of Scotty's references:

http://www.centuries.co.uk/preface.htm

For those who would appreciate a more qualified and detailed understanding of the topic:

http://researchcommo...1FB6?sequence=1

For those who would wish to enter and calibrate their own raw data:

http://calib.qub.ac.uk/calib/download/

.

I've been waiting and hoping you'd pop in, Swede.

Thanks for shedding some reality on the situation. :w00t:

Posted Image
The evil overlord mummy moderator has spoken.

Visit My Blog!

#65    Leonardo

Leonardo

    Awake

  • Member
  • 18,400 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Hell is a guilty conscience

Posted 10 May 2012 - 07:24 AM

View PostScott Creighton, on 09 May 2012 - 11:19 PM, said:

SC: In my book "top" equates to "up". Top (up) was their south.

And this is what I have pointed out, it is "in your book" - i.e. your opinion, not established fact. The turn of phrase used in the (modern) quote is not evidence from any ancient Egyptian source.

When standing north of the Giza pyramid complex and looking south (as this would be the only way to view the asterism of Orion's belt and the pyramids at once) the asterism is higher in the west (Mintaka) and descends in a gentle parabolic curve towards the east (through Alnilam to Alnitak). The Giza pyramids, by contrast, would be 'higher' in the east (Khufu's pyramid) and 'descend' in an inverted parabolic curve to the west ( through Khafre's pyramid to Menkaure's).

No mental manipulation of the cardinal directions alters this discrepancy.

In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back. - Charlie Brown

"It is a profound and necessary truth that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them."  - J. Robert Oppenheimer; Scientific Director; The Manhattan Project

"talking bull**** is not a victimless crime" - Marina Hyde, author.

#66    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 39,692 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

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

Posted 10 May 2012 - 08:01 AM

View Postkmt_sesh, on 10 May 2012 - 03:05 AM, said:

If that's the case questionmark and I would probably disagree, but we've done so more than once in the past. My point was that you cannot use a state of the religion from more than a millennium later to try to bolster your claims in the Old Kingdom. Where questionmark and I would most certainly agree, as would all of the others involved in this debate—and as would the academic world—is that you can't use Dynasty 4 to prove an Egyptian observance of Orion. And definitely not in the way you're arguing.


"Strangely" we are in agreement, that statement is naturally valid for the time before the Hellenization of Egypt, which changed the whole religious and "supernatural (sic.)" outlook of the Egyptians. Both Greek and Egyptian mythology started to intermix, and so did the religion and the superstitions. But that has as much bearing on the 4th dynasty as the Greek mythology is influenced by modern religious practice.

Now, I did not expect the retort to be a under the belt punch in form of a 1st century drawing. I sure expected a little more solid evidence, at least relevant to the religious or agricultural practice of the 4th dynasty.

If we talk astronomy in the early agricultural periods we always talk calendar functions. While I disagree with the statement that Sirius was the "most" important star it was important to any agricultural society in the northern hemisphere until the introduction of the 365 day calendar because it showed the sowing and germination period of grain crops. For the ancient Egyptians its rise generally coincided with the flooding of the Nile, the fundamental requirement for a fertile crop.

If we go to the Orion belt we notice that its periodicity of more than 50,000 years makes it very unlikely that it could have any practical purpose nor does its short rise coincide with any important agricultural events therefore it is very unlikely that it had any relevance at all. Unless of course we can show that somebody lived long enough to record the whole cycle or complex mathematics knowledge in the 4th dynasty (yeh, right).

But in a way I was trying to build Mr. Creighton a bridge to show us his knowledge about the relevance of Orion, but so far I must say: We drew a blank.

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

#67    Scott Creighton

Scott Creighton

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 888 posts
  • Joined:22 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland, United Kingdom

  • Consensus opinion isn't fact.

Posted 10 May 2012 - 10:00 AM

Quote

SC: In my book "top" equates to "up". Top (up) was their south.

Leo: And this is what I have pointed out, it is "in your book" - i.e. your opinion, not established fact. The turn of phrase used in the (modern) quote is not evidence from any ancient Egyptian source.

SC: You have got to be kidding me, right? I have seen some desperate arguments in my day but yours – well, it really takes the biscuit. I am sure, Leo, in a more lucid moment you will actually find that it is an established fact in most of the planet that “top” (in whatever language) is regarded as equating to “up” , "upwards" or “uppermost”, "highest", "apex" etc, etc (in whatever language). You will also find that the academics who translate these texts tend to know what they are talking about.  This is not my "opinion" - these are the translations of scholars. Granted - they don't always get it right but if you can find out where they have gone wrong in their translations with regards to this particular question, then point it out to them and then let us all know.  The academics consider the AE south to be up, highest, apex, topmost etc, etc. Period.

  

Quote

top

[top] Show IPA ,noun, adjective, verb, topped, top·ping.
noun
1. the highest or loftiest point or part of anything; apex; summit. Synonyms: zenith, acme, peak, pinnacle, vertex. Antonyms: bottom, base, foot, lowest point.
2. the uppermost or upper part, surface, etc., of anything.
3. the higher end of anything on a slope.
4.
British .
a. a part considered as higher:

adjective
23. pertaining to, situated at, or forming the top; highest; uppermost; upper: the top shelf.
24. highest in degree; greatest: to pay top prices.
25. foremost, chief, or principal: to win top honors in a competition.

From here.

Are you trying to suggest that “top” somehow equates to “bottom” or “down” or “downwards” or “lowest”?  If this is the level your argument has descended to, essentially attempting to turn black into white, then there is little I am afraid I can do to help you.

I will be happy to continue this discussion but only when you start making sensible arguments.

The AEs regarded south as being “up”, “upwards” to the “top” – like this:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image


Quote

Leo:No mental manipulation of the cardinal directions alters this discrepancy.

SC: The only “discrepancy” going on here is your apparent insistence that “up” or “upwards” or “uppermost” or "highest" does not equate to being “top” or “topmost”. Truly unbelievable.

Until next time…..

Best wishes,

SC

Edited by Scott Creighton, 10 May 2012 - 10:14 AM.

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

#68    Leonardo

Leonardo

    Awake

  • Member
  • 18,400 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Hell is a guilty conscience

Posted 10 May 2012 - 10:15 AM

View PostScott Creighton, on 10 May 2012 - 10:00 AM, said:

SC: You have got to be kidding me, right? I have seen some desperate arguments in my day but yours – well, it really takes the biscuit. I am sure, Leo, in a more lucid moment you will actually find that it is an established fact in most of the planet that “top” is regarded as equating to “up” , "upwards" or “uppermost”, "highest", "apex" etc, etc. You will also find that the academics who translate these texts tend to know what they are talking about.  This is not my "opinion" - these are the translations of scholars. Granted - they don't always get it right but if you can find out where they have gone wrong in their translations then point it out to them and let us all know.

[b]  

Are you trying to suggest that “top” somehow equates to “bottom” or “down” or “downwards” or “lowest”?  If this is the level your argument has descended to, essentially attempting to turn black into white, then there is little I am afraid I can do to help you.

I will be happy to continue this discussion but only when you start making sensible arguments.

The AEs regarded south as being “up”, “upwards” to the “top” – like this:

Scott, I have to be brief as I am heading out. The word "top" was used in a modern context by the author you quoted. Similarly to how you have 'inserted' "south = up" into the ancient Egyptian lexicon, you (and that author) are now also inserting "south = top" - without any reference to actual ancient Egyptian sources.

I agree with the citations you posted which equated 'south' to 'front', because there is actual reference to AE sources to support that. I have stated this leads to the possibility that "top" or "up" are similarly associated with the direction south (because of the association with 'positive direction'), but without an AE source to verify that it remains only speculation.

As for the comparison of the Giza layout with Orion's belt you posted, if we are to continue with the 'positive' associations, then the first pyramid built should have been the upper, not the lower (which carries a 'negative association'.) This is not the case. Unless you are proposing the entire Giza complex was planned as it is at the very beginning of the construction?

Edited by Leonardo, 10 May 2012 - 10:19 AM.

In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back. - Charlie Brown

"It is a profound and necessary truth that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them."  - J. Robert Oppenheimer; Scientific Director; The Manhattan Project

"talking bull**** is not a victimless crime" - Marina Hyde, author.

#69    Scott Creighton

Scott Creighton

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 888 posts
  • Joined:22 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland, United Kingdom

  • Consensus opinion isn't fact.

Posted 10 May 2012 - 10:58 AM

View PostLeonardo, on 10 May 2012 - 10:15 AM, said:

Unless you are proposing the entire Giza complex was planned as it is at the very beginning of the construction?

SC: What do you think I have been presenting this past week or so?  Yes - there existed a plan that was prepared before a single block was set in place at Giza.  My paper in the OP shows the plan step-by-step. Obviously you didn't read it.  No surprise there.

Quote

"In the Egypto-centred universe, the definition of the four cardinal directions was originally conceived in relation to geographic and physiological indicators, as we have shown (See Fig.1, supra). Orienting themselves in their land from the direction of the Nile River's flow, the "top of the map" for the ancient Egyptian world view began from the south.

From this facing direction, body directional values were associated with the corresponding cardinal directions, which later took on symbolic, cultic and ritual dimensions as the reflection of the cosmos was extended to major aspects of Egyptian life (Brunner 1957: 617; O'Connor 1995: 274; Wilkinson 2000: 62 ff.) (See Fig. 2, supra). Thus, "west" was deemed as a "positive" direction linked with the right hand, while "east" was linked to the left hand, with a less favourable status, particularly in the New Kingdom (Morenz 1975: 281). The direction of "north" seems to have held a negative or ambivalent position in value, although it was relegated to the idea (following from the Egyptian southerly orientation of direction), as a direction behind a person's orienting perception (Frankfort, Frankfort et al. 1977 <1946>: 43). As Frankfort further notes, it should be taken as significant that elements for the phrase for "northernmost border," /pHww/ are also to be found in the expression of /Xr pHwi/, also has the meaning of "behind" and "subordinate," while the phrase /Hr pHwi/ carries the sense of being "behind one's head"

- (Frankfort, Frankfort et al. 1977 <1946>: 43; Hannig 2000: 914a, 633a and 633b, respectively). (Griffis 2002: 13-16)

SC: The AEs faced south. The 'face' is at the top or uppermost part of the body.  The left was to the east and the right was to the west.  These are completely opposite to our modern convention.  "Northernmost" was regared by the AEs as "subordinate". (emphasis mine).

So, if north is regarded by the AEs as "sub" i.e. beneath, below, under, down etc then, logically, south is atop, above, upper, top, highest etc, etc. I do not know why you continue to question this. But I guess you must since you must, at all costs, find some means of discrediting alternative theories - and I guess it doesn't really matter to you how ridiculous or spurious an argument you present.

Best wishes,

SC

Edited by Scott Creighton, 10 May 2012 - 11:40 AM.

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

#70    Kantzveldt

Kantzveldt

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Joined:10 Mar 2011

Posted 10 May 2012 - 11:10 AM

I've pointed out elsewhere to Scott, that the best and only case for an Orion related localized cult, for the Old Kingdom Period,  is that of a Sokar/Orion concern, which predates the Middle Kingdom association of Sokar with Osiris and Osiris with Sah. Saqqara takes it's name from Sokar, and this Deity is well attested at Giza, as well as being considered the tutelary Deity of this Necropolis also, in terms of Sokar of Rostau.


Interestingly given Sokars Earth/Underworld cultic associations (as in Sokar of the Amduat), then association with a constellation that spent much of the year beneath the horizon and didn't rise to any great height (he was God of onions...) would actualy be appropriate.


Amusingly Scott will always choose to entirely ignore this evidence, as he has already said it was an Osiris-Sah based cult, after Bauval, and he after Massey of the Theosophists, and they're not one's for admitting they were wrong, even though Sokar is the given for presiding over the whole blessed Necropolis..






This is the evidence then for what would have been related to this cult of Sokar-Orion from later periods, when seen as Sokar-Osiris




Quote

Thus, on Khoiak 26th, king Sokar-Osiris or the Ancient One can become the New Horus, "the one whose right eye is the sun and the left the moon". This second phase of resurrection proclaims a king identified to the creator guarantor of the maintenance of creation and its two cycles, diurnal and nocturnal. Moreover, the 26th of Khoiak corresponds roughly to Orion's entry of its 90 days of visibility in the west.

The agrarian calendar perfectly defines the liturgy: the onions planted at the end of September and picked at the end of October are heralding the arrival of the light and are going to be transplanted in the land to be ready to be chewed at the time of the festival of Bastet, February 5th, as all snakes come out of their hibernation and when the swallows begin to return announcing the summer sun. The small onions, early fruits and vegetables, inhaled to receive a new breath at the time of the ntryt-night, having germinated during the winter period, become witnesses to a source of rebirth to a chthonian life, with the image of a living Sokar in a cave and carrying the solar star in the Duat. The solarisation or light created the 25th and 26th of Khoiak leads to a stellar design (or darkness with appearance of the constellation of Orion). The festival of Bastet, at the end of the Sokarian cycle



http://www.osirisnet..._fete_sokar.htm



Quote




Sokar was undoubtedly originally a distinct deity of the Memphite necropolis: r3-sT3.w "Giza" (like the name of this List's server "Rostau" though I would have spelled if "Rosetjau") and pD.w "Saqqara", the modern name of which is believed to come from that of Sokar. There is a possibility that he was actually transplanted to the Memphite region from Busiris or some other Delta location. He represented the fertility that lies at the bottom of the underworld as well as the minerals and vegetal produce of the earth. He was carried on a boat known as the Henu-barque which had the form of a the crescent moon. His stellar manifestation was that of Orion.



http://www.rostau.or...ntroduction.htm




From the pyramid texts there is the identification of Sokar and the Henu barque in terms of 'the Ferryman' as seen in the ceiling of Senemut from the later period, as well as various lustration and resurection texts;



The premise then for what is sourced from the later Khoiak festival having probable basis dating back  at least to the pyramid texts, and given the numerous tomb shrine attestations to Sokar at the Giza necropolis dating to Dynasty 4 a not unreasonable case can be made for an Orion-Sokar cult at that time and place.



http://www.cintronic...ramid Texts.pdf







Quote

Faulkner: A ‘ferryman’ text

O Kherty of Nezat, ferryman of the ‘Ikht-bark which Khnum made, bring me this, for I am Sokar of Rostau (r.st3.w), I am bound for the place where dwells Sokar who presides over Pdw-s. This is our brother(?) who brings this for these ... of the desert.







Faulkner: A ‘lustration’ text

O Re, make the womb of Nut pregnant with the seed of the spirit which is in her. May the earth be high under my feet, may Tefenet grasp my hand. It is Sokar who will purify me, it is Re who will give me his hand. May I be pre-eminent at the head of the Ennead, may I take my place which is in the firmament. O Hnny, Hnny, O ‘Ip3ty, take me with you.







Faulkner: A ‘resurrection’ text

O earth, hear this which Geb said when he spiritualized Osiris as a god; the watchers of Pe install him, the watchers of Nekhen ennoble him as Sokar who presides over Pdw-s1, (as) Horus, Ha, and Hemen.

footnote 1 Cf. Komme (Sethe) ii, 228f; another instance Book of Hours, 2, 3


Edited by Kantzveldt, 10 May 2012 - 11:17 AM.


#71    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 39,692 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

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

Posted 10 May 2012 - 11:26 AM

View PostKantzveldt, on 10 May 2012 - 11:10 AM, said:

I've pointed out elsewhere to Scott, that the best and only case for an Orion related localized cult, for the Old Kingdom Period,  is that of a Sokar/Orion concern, which predates the Middle Kingdom association of Sokar with Osiris and Osiris with Sah. Saqqara takes it's name from Sokar, and this Deity is well attested at Giza, as well as being considered the tutelary Deity of this Necropolis also, in terms of Sokar of Rostau.

just a small spanner in the works, the underworld barge departed every night at sunset, no exceptions known, to the underworld, therefore it cannot be seen in "our world". But yes, that could be an explanation attempt until going into deeper scrutiny. And then, well it kind of fizzles.

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

#72    Kantzveldt

Kantzveldt

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Joined:10 Mar 2011

Posted 10 May 2012 - 11:30 AM

View Postquestionmark, on 10 May 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:

just a small spanner in the works, the underworld barge departed every night at sunset, no exceptions known, to the underworld, therefore it cannot be seen in "our world". But yes, that could be an explanation attempt until going into deeper scrutiny. And then, well it kind of fizzles.


That would be the solar barque you're thinking of, Henu barque differant form and function.   It can be added some see in it's basic form the crescent moon, ie a nocturnal barque.

Edited by Kantzveldt, 10 May 2012 - 11:36 AM.


#73    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 39,692 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

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

Posted 10 May 2012 - 11:37 AM

View PostKantzveldt, on 10 May 2012 - 11:30 AM, said:

That would be the solar barque you're thinking of, Henu barque differant form and function.

Henu always sailed to dawn or dusk, at least from the mythology of the times we know. That would imply, were it visible it would travel over the North at night. of which we know no star and certainly not Orion would do that, they all raise in the East and go down in the West. So it travels in the underworld to the point of dawn and is, therefore, not visible. All other would be cutting the puzzle piece until it fits.

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

#74    Kantzveldt

Kantzveldt

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Joined:10 Mar 2011

Posted 10 May 2012 - 12:18 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 10 May 2012 - 11:37 AM, said:

Henu always sailed to dawn or dusk, at least from the mythology of the times we know. That would imply, were it visible it would travel over the North at night. of which we know no star and certainly not Orion would do that, they all raise in the East and go down in the West. So it travels in the underworld to the point of dawn and is, therefore, not visible. All other would be cutting the puzzle piece until it fits.



I'd be needing the citations for anything concerning what the Henu barque did or didn't do, my basic consideration is that as the solar barque set in the West then the Henu barque could rise into the Eastern night sky, and sail on until the dawn

What was involved is complex, but seems to involve the astralization of the soul;


#75    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 39,692 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

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

Posted 10 May 2012 - 12:24 PM

View PostKantzveldt, on 10 May 2012 - 12:18 PM, said:

I'd be needing the citations for anything concerning what the Henu barque did or didn't do, my basic consideration is that as the solar barque set in the West then the Henu barque could rise into the Eastern night sky, and sail on until the dawn

What was involved is complex, but seems to involve the astralization of the soul;

Well, if it is the "astralization of the soul" you can pick whatever star you want, one fantasy is as good as the other. And even if the Henu bark traveled through the night it would still be first seen in the east, not sporadically in the west as Orion is. The only thing that could rise sporadically somewhere else is a demon out of the underworld. But the references of demons out of the underworld are not from the 4th dynasty nor from the first pyramid texts, that is a much more recent and mostly through Greek influence.

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




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users