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

#1276    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 7,914 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 27 November 2012 - 06:29 PM

View Postcormac mac airt, on 27 November 2012 - 04:32 PM, said:

Still waiting on that IVth Dynasty textual citation. Did you lose it already?

Almost nothing survives from the 4th dynasty.

This pretty much leaves us to project later ideas backward onto them.  I choose
to project ideas that are nearly concurrent with their time rather than those from
thousands of years later.  I choose to try to deduce which of the ideas are actu-
ally applicable to the builders and might have actually written by the builders than
to simply assume there was no change in the "religion" for thousands of years to
justify the projection of much later ideas.

I greatly prefer theories about the great pyramids that excludes everything from later
times.  Skeptics often complain that alts view the great pyramids and G1 in a vacuum
but this might be why their theories adhere better to the evidence.  If there were mas-
sive changes in the "religion" or "nature" over the centuries then those theories (Egy-
ptology) that do the most projecting are likely to be the most wrong.

This is all in the hands of the people who scoff and mock everyone who isn't an Egy-
ptologist.  They can go out and use 21st century science to prove their contentions or
they can continue to appeal to emotions and the status quo.  When the science gets
done then their mocking might hurt but until then they have no clothes.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#1277    samspade

samspade

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 263 posts
  • Joined:28 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 November 2012 - 06:31 PM

View Postcladking, on 27 November 2012 - 06:17 PM, said:

I think it's all going to shake out in the next twenty years.  I think the truth
is going to shock almost everyone.  It's going to shock almost everyone
because we are all highly superstitious and set in our beliefs.  The truth
is not going to fit anyone's beliefs so we'll all have a lot to get used to. Al-
most everything will be directly affected and nothing moreso than our be-
liefs..

well for me i have long known the truth and the symbolism involved.
i understand  why Egyptology has a problem with understanding the truth.
Im really not at all impressive by Egyptology, but i am a trained professional and analyst they are not as well trained.
So the professional analyst can postively said yes its solved and fact, 100 percent.
But somehow i think do to certain other events i wonder about the sub-concious mind and certain other things that
have drawn me into this mystery,

Edited by samspade, 27 November 2012 - 06:35 PM.


#1278    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 7,914 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 27 November 2012 - 06:39 PM

View PostAtentutankh-pasheri, on 27 November 2012 - 06:18 PM, said:

Perhaps you did not understand the sense of my post, or the reason for it. If the pyramidiot in chief needs to resort to such obfuscation and blatant lies about one particular element of AE, then there is nothing about him to be believed. And not one fringe theory has been proved, and likely never will..... Hmm, except mine, in my blog :ph34r:


I don't see your blog.

I don't believe there is a head pyramidiot.  I believe we're all created equal and some are
more right than others.

A great deal of real knowledge exists in Egyptology outside their assumptions but every-
thing dependent on those assumptions is wrong.  I do not trust the methodology or con-
clusions of most of the pyramidiots but the methodology and metaphysics of Egyptology
is essentially sound.  It's merely their assumptions that are wrong.  Their main flaw is the
unwillingness to view new evidence outside their assumptions and their refusal to use
modern science and techniques to probe for answers.

What many skeptics forget is that a great deal of knowledge exists outside Egyptology
and within pyramidiocy.  There is almost no evidence but the individual pyramidiots bring
a great deal of relevant and experiential knowledge to the field.  They can also provide
a different perspective that is often independent of the four assumptions.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#1279    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 7,914 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 27 November 2012 - 06:44 PM

View Postsamspade, on 27 November 2012 - 06:31 PM, said:

But somehow i think do to certain other events i wonder about the sub-concious mind and certain other things that
have drawn me into this mystery,

There's more to the world and nature than only the great pyramids.

There are mysteries that will never be unwound though the pyramid isn't one of them.

We each seem to have gotten here by different means.  Some are led by the hand and
others stumble over the obvious.  Some routes are less direct and more cryptic.  Some
may be nearly as surprising as the answers we all seek.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#1280    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 9,056 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 27 November 2012 - 06:52 PM

View PostAtentutankh-pasheri, on 27 November 2012 - 04:03 PM, said:

Yet the erosion occured because it was buried. It was proved that water condenses under the top layer of sand, and over time this water, running downhill around the Sphinx, has caused the erosion within the timeline of the Sphinx being constructed approximately 4 500 years ago
You're both wrong.

The erosion in the sphinx enclosure and on the sphinx itelf is due to capillary action of dew on the stone.
The dew invades the stone through capillary action, dissolving the salts in the stone.  As the dew evaporates out during the day, it leaves behind crystals of salt that grow and cause the stone to seperate into flakes, which can be easily brushed off the stone by hand right now, if you have the nerve to visit Egypt these days.

The erosion looks like it comes from flowing water to the untrained eye.  What most people don't know or don't think of is that the shape of weathered limestone is determined by the makeup of the limestone itself more than any other factor.  Limestone is notoriously non-homogeneous.  Parts of the same piece of stone will erode at different rates for various reasons.

The gashes that can be seen in the enclosure might have been enlarged by flowing rainwater, as was already pointed out, but erosion similar in form would still be found on the stone even if not a single drop of rain had fallen since 2600 BC.

At any rate, nobody can date a statue by the amount of erosion that has occured.  The fact is, Robert Schoch did not use aboveground erosion appearing at the site for his bogus date for the sphinx.  He used subsurface weathering information taken from sonic data that someone else had previously collected for other reasons (IIRC.)  Even then, it is impossible to arrive at a date using that method.  Schoch tells us that he made the assumption that the rear of the sphinx was finished by Kaphre, and then he extrapolated backward from there, based on the difference in the depth of subsurface weathering between the front and the rear in the floor of the sphinx enclosure.

What Schoch mysteriously "forgot" to mention is that, using his own data and his own method that he used for the front/rear comparison, one will find that the enclosure floor along the sides of the sphinx would actually be older than the front or the back.

In what way, then, does this make any sense?

Harte

Edited by Harte, 27 November 2012 - 07:16 PM.

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#1281    samspade

samspade

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 263 posts
  • Joined:28 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 November 2012 - 06:55 PM

View Postcladking, on 27 November 2012 - 06:44 PM, said:

There's more to the world and nature than only the great pyramids.

There are mysteries that will never be unwound though the pyramid isn't one of them.


the mystery of the great pyramid and whats encoded there is the biggest and most interesting as far as i am concerned.

i guess i should be honour to be the first to rediscover its secrets of the truth since the ancient egyptians.
Perhaps its a sign to show mankind its on the path of the knowing more of the subconscious mind.and i say that because of other things that have happened in my life which got me to look into the mystery.



regards

Edited by samspade, 27 November 2012 - 07:21 PM.


#1282    Paracelse

Paracelse

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,074 posts
  • Joined:02 Mar 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:France

Posted 27 November 2012 - 06:57 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 26 May 2012 - 08:32 PM, said:

which falls under the chapter discussing with somebody with fingers in his ears squealing as loud as he can: lalala I can't hear you
And some people are so obtuse they couldn't recognize the truth no matter what

Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither Benjamin Franklin
République No.6
It's time for a sixth republic.

#1283    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,598 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 27 November 2012 - 07:17 PM

View Postcladking, on 27 November 2012 - 06:29 PM, said:

Almost nothing survives from the 4th dynasty.

This pretty much leaves us to project later ideas backward onto them.  I choose
to project ideas that are nearly concurrent with their time rather than those from
thousands of years later.  I choose to try to deduce which of the ideas are actu-
ally applicable to the builders and might have actually written by the builders than
to simply assume there was no change in the "religion" for thousands of years to
justify the projection of much later ideas.

I greatly prefer theories about the great pyramids that excludes everything from later
times.  Skeptics often complain that alts view the great pyramids and G1 in a vacuum
but this might be why their theories adhere better to the evidence.  If there were mas-
sive changes in the "religion" or "nature" over the centuries then those theories (Egy-
ptology) that do the most projecting are likely to be the most wrong.

This is all in the hands of the people who scoff and mock everyone who isn't an Egy-
ptologist.  They can go out and use 21st century science to prove their contentions or
they can continue to appeal to emotions and the status quo.  When the science gets
done then their mocking might hurt but until then they have no clothes.

A rather verbose way of saying you've got nothing, but okay.

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

#1284    lakeview rud

lakeview rud

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 242 posts
  • Joined:15 Oct 2009

Posted 27 November 2012 - 07:24 PM

Isn't it true that even though we are talking about 'sand' the stuff on the Giza plateau pretty rapidly hardens into a more clay-like substance? Wouldn't that prevent any water from reaching the lower levels? Is not that why it took so much time to excavate those tunnel-like tombs in the Valley of the Kings?  Wouldn't any theory about water or condensation trickling down from the top of a buried Sphinx have more erosion at the top than the bottom?  And why does the Sphinx HAVE to date to Khufu?  The face doesn't look like him, it looks more like a New Kingdom pharoah (Amenhotep IV, I think?).  The architecture of the Sphinx temple differs significantly from that of all the other structures attributed to the fourth dynasty.  Adding it all up there is very little evidence to place the Sphinx exactly to that time. Given its location nearest to the Nile it's likely that it predates the pyramid by a few hundred years but who knows?  Perhaps the Muslim Brotherhood will take explosives to it and then maybe we'll finally get some answers (Would be shame if they did...)


#1285    kmt_sesh

kmt_sesh

    Telekinetic

  • 7,657 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Illinois

Posted 27 November 2012 - 07:50 PM

View PostAtentutankh-pasheri, on 27 November 2012 - 05:32 PM, said:

Well, I will believe people who are properly trained and have spent their lives digging in the sand of Egypt.

Rightly so. You'd think this is simple common sense, yet there is a repeating pattern with fringies: "Egyptology has been wrong for two centuries but I alone know the truth!" When you see something like this, you intuitively know to dismiss the fringie. It's not only vainglorious on a comical level, it is a manifestation of delusions of grandeur. I'll take solid, hard-won, peer-reviewed research any day over delusions of grandeur.

Quote

Clearly you prefer this nonsense from "Breaking the Mirror of Heaven" by Robert Bauval and Ahmed Osman.
Quotes about the "murder" of Tutankhamun by being hanged by a mob

Their italics, and see now consensus has to prove a negative to satisfy these morons. And further..

High priest of Aten ????? in year ten of Tutankhamun ????? And this total garbage from one of the high priests of fantasy, the pyramidiot in chief. You believe this if you wish, I hold my nose while reading such (expletive deleted)

And by the way, the reason given for thinking that Tutankhamun was hung, is that his head was detached from his body. Oi! Oi! Oi!, these morons never even bothered to find out how Howard Carter managed to remove the golden mask. See, there is reality from egyptology, even when it is the brutal truth, and there is garbage (being very polite) from pyramidiots and alternaviks

Wow. Goodness. Damn. This is from a book co-authored by Bauval and Osman?

I didn't know they had written a book together. I'll agree with cladking that there really is no pyramidiot in chief, but there's a large tribe of pyramidiots and they all vie for the greatest amount of attention and acclaim in the half-baked ideas they present to their readers. As far as that goes, I personally don't understand how any thinking and reasoning person would take the likes of Bauval or Osman seriously. Still, they have not contributed to fringe whimsy nearly so much (and so damagingly) as either Sitchin or von Däniken. Von Däniken in particular has contributed to human stupidity on a vast scale.

Anyway, the above hypothesis has to be one of the most idiotic ever presented about Tutankhmaun (not the most idiotic, but it's up there). Gees. If anything this reveals how poor such fringe writers are at research, how out of touch they are with current research and theory, and in general how poorly informed they are. Few mummies have been studied as extensively as Tut's. Had he been hanged—which, by the way, was not a means of assassination or execution for the Egyptians to begin with—there would be evidence on his body. No, the cervical vertebrae might not be broken if the hanging was very slow and methodical so as to cause prolonged suffocation, but the delicate hyoid bone almost certainly would've been broken; this is common in strangulation deaths.

You caught the reality behind the accidental removal of Tut's head during his mummy's autopsy by Howard Carter's team, which reinforces how poor such charlatans are at basic research. Either that or they know the truth and are just trying to spin a lurid story to sell their book. How ridiculous.

You also caught the reality behind the "high priest of the Aten." Tut died ten years after his coronation, by which time there was no longer a high priest of the Aten. We know some of the Aten's estates were still functioning, and probably some people were still living at Akhetaten, but the governmental and religious infrastructure at the site was well defunct by that time. So, again, this reinforces how poor such charlatans are at basic research.

Did Bauval or Osman even mention the severe compound fracture to Tut's left distal femur? That was almost certainly the cause of death. Or did they just conveniently ignore this fact?

Like you said: Oi!

Posted Image
Words of wisdom from Richard Clopton:
For every credibility gap there is a gullibility fill.

Visit My Blog!

#1286    Tutankhaten-pasheri

Tutankhaten-pasheri

    Buratinologist

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

Posted 27 November 2012 - 08:32 PM

View Postkmt_sesh, on 27 November 2012 - 07:50 PM, said:

Did Bauval or Osman even mention the severe compound fracture to Tut's left distal femur? That was almost certainly the cause of death. Or did they just conveniently ignore this fact?

No mention of the fracture, but they cover this by saying he was tortured - before being hung - by the mob of enraged ordinary Egyptians - led by the high priest of Aten :wacko:
They also say that when his wrappings were being removed it became evident that his body had been dismembered before wrapping, and that all the injuries were the result of torture. So again, they have not read, or more likely, cynically ignored the reality of Carter's unwrapping and autopsy.

Published earlier this year. The book is clearly aimed at an audience that will not have too much knowledge, or any, of AE. The subtitle on the cover says "The conspiracy to supress the voice of ancient Egypt", clearly aimed at conspiracy fans. The supposed purpose of the book is to show how, mostly foreigners, have usurped AE for their own purposes over the millenia and constructed lies about "reality". Actually the real purpose of the book is to launch a sustained and vitriolic attack on Zahi Hawass and Mark Lehner, and partly against the modern Egyptian state founded by Nasser. I know Hawass doesn't have too many friends these days, and certainly there are issues around him, mostly his personality, but they make him to be some sort of Hitler, and Mark Lehner as, perhaps, a "useful idiot" to propagate and lend credency to Hawass. It is a deeply unpleasant book, full of false information and bitterness. For me it was only saved by the section on Tutankhamun, which is so bad that it is very funny...

Edited by Atentutankh-pasheri, 27 November 2012 - 08:33 PM.


#1287    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,598 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 27 November 2012 - 08:48 PM

View PostAtentutankh-pasheri, on 27 November 2012 - 08:32 PM, said:

No mention of the fracture, but they cover this by saying he was tortured - before being hung - by the mob of enraged ordinary Egyptians - led by the high priest of Aten :wacko:
They also say that when his wrappings were being removed it became evident that his body had been dismembered before wrapping, and that all the injuries were the result of torture. So again, they have not read, or more likely, cynically ignored the reality of Carter's unwrapping and autopsy.

Published earlier this year. The book is clearly aimed at an audience that will not have too much knowledge, or any, of AE. The subtitle on the cover says "The conspiracy to supress the voice of ancient Egypt", clearly aimed at conspiracy fans. The supposed purpose of the book is to show how, mostly foreigners, have usurped AE for their own purposes over the millenia and constructed lies about "reality". Actually the real purpose of the book is to launch a sustained and vitriolic attack on Zahi Hawass and Mark Lehner, and partly against the modern Egyptian state founded by Nasser. I know Hawass doesn't have too many friends these days, and certainly there are issues around him, mostly his personality, but they make him to be some sort of Hitler, and Mark Lehner as, perhaps, a "useful idiot" to propagate and lend credency to Hawass. It is a deeply unpleasant book, full of false information and bitterness. For me it was only saved by the section on Tutankhamun, which is so bad that it is very funny...

They obviously didn't do their homework. I actually have a copy of Howard Carter's "The Tomb of Tutankhamun" and nowhere in it is Tut described as having been dismembered prior to being wrapped in linen.

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

#1288    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 35,421 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

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

Posted 27 November 2012 - 08:58 PM

View Postcormac mac airt, on 27 November 2012 - 08:48 PM, said:

They obviously didn't do their homework. I actually have a copy of Howard Carter's "The Tomb of Tutankhamun" and nowhere in it is Tut described as having been dismembered prior to being wrapped in linen.

cormac

Not the worst one around here, 'bout a year back we had an expert here that did not even recognize the Great Gallery despite claiming having been in Egypt to "study" the pyramids.

Edited by questionmark, 27 November 2012 - 09:03 PM.

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

#1289    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 9,056 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 27 November 2012 - 09:02 PM

View Postlakeview rud, on 27 November 2012 - 07:24 PM, said:

Isn't it true that even though we are talking about 'sand' the stuff on the Giza plateau pretty rapidly hardens into a more clay-like substance? Wouldn't that prevent any water from reaching the lower levels? Is not that why it took so much time to excavate those tunnel-like tombs in the Valley of the Kings?  Wouldn't any theory about water or condensation trickling down from the top of a buried Sphinx have more erosion at the top than the bottom?

Please read this.

Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#1290    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,598 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 27 November 2012 - 09:02 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 27 November 2012 - 08:58 PM, said:

Not the worst one around here, 'bout a tear back we had an expert here that did not even recognize the Great Gallery despite claiming having been in Egypt to "study" the pyramids.

You have to laugh at what some consider research/study. It's quite often hilarious.

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




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users