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

#901    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,159 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 01 November 2012 - 02:45 PM

View PostScott Creighton, on 01 November 2012 - 02:40 PM, said:

SC: I have no interest in suing you. What an odd thing to say. Yes, you used two different means to come up with your concoction--a skewed satellite image and a poor resolution wireframe, computer-generated image of the Giza plateau that completely OMITS the Sphinx.  So, what do you have then? A skewed concoction of nothing at all.

Let me tell you again--the hi-res GPMP survey drawing I use is the best survey drawing currently within the public domain and, as such, presents our best hope of determining geometric aspects of the Giza site. The sooner you accept that simple fact the better for you and everyone else who applauds your hapless postings.

Until such time as the actual survey data is made available, the hi-res survey drawing showing the Sphinx sitting on the circle's perimeter stands. Unless, of course, you wish to tell Dr Lehner and the GPMP team that their survey drawing is in error. Good luck with that.

SC

Prove it's "hi-resolution". That's right, you can't. You can only make the claim as it's just a matter of belief on your part.

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

#902    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 01 November 2012 - 02:49 PM

View Postcormac mac airt, on 01 November 2012 - 02:45 PM, said:

Prove it's "hi-resolution". That's right, you can't. You can only make the claim as it's just a matter of belief on your part.

cormac

SC: Here's a link to it GPMP GIZA SURVEY DRAWING.  Have fun!

SC

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

#903    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,159 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 01 November 2012 - 03:11 PM

View PostScott Creighton, on 01 November 2012 - 02:49 PM, said:

SC: Here's a link to it GPMP GIZA SURVEY DRAWING.  Have fun!

SC

I already have it and it's not high-resolution, which really only applies to satellite/digital photos or CAD/Architectural drawings and not survey drawings, the latter of which shows no data on which to support it. So once again, it's a matter of what you want to believe.

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

#904    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 39,782 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

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

Posted 01 November 2012 - 03:15 PM

View PostScott Creighton, on 01 November 2012 - 02:49 PM, said:

SC: Here's a link to it GPMP GIZA SURVEY DRAWING.  Have fun!

SC

I wonder why it does not really look like the official survey map:

Posted Image

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

#905    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 01 November 2012 - 03:51 PM

View Postcormac mac airt, on 01 November 2012 - 03:11 PM, said:

I already have it and it's not high-resolution, which really only applies to satellite/digital photos or CAD/Architectural drawings and not survey drawings, the latter of which shows no data on which to support it. So once again, it's a matter of what you want to believe.

cormac

SC: It's certainly much higher resolution than your wireframe and allows us to obtain a good lock on the pyramid corners and the Sphinx rear.  Now, if you think the survey drawing is in error, then take it up with Dr Lehner and the GPMP team. Good luck. Until such time as Dr Lehner and/or the GPMP team confirms the survey drawing is in error, my premise stands.

Regards,

SC

Edited by Scott Creighton, 01 November 2012 - 03:53 PM.

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

#906    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,159 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 01 November 2012 - 07:29 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 01 November 2012 - 03:15 PM, said:

I wonder why it does not really look like the official survey map:

Posted Image


Because then he couldn't make it up, QM. The official survey map you provided matches both the Quickbird Satellite photo and the wireframe topographical map. Based on the distance from G2 peak to G1 northeast corner, here is what we see of the other points. Notice again, they don't match Scott's claim.

Official Giza Survey Map and points based on distance to NE GP corner.jpg

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

#907    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 01 November 2012 - 11:13 PM

View Postcormac mac airt, on 01 November 2012 - 07:29 PM, said:

Because then he couldn't make it up, QM. The official survey map you provided matches both the Quickbird Satellite photo and the wireframe topographical map. Based on the distance from G2 peak to G1 northeast corner, here is what we see of the other points. Notice again, they don't match Scott's claim.

Attachment Official Giza Survey Map and points based on distance to NE GP corner.jpg

cormac

SC: Still you insist in drawing comparisons with, by your own admission, a skewed satellite image and, as if that wasn't bad enough, to overlay this with a poor resolution wireframe image of Giza that doesn't even include the Sphinx. You then have the audacity to claim this matches an official Giza Survey Map!! You don't even stop to think how that could even be possible.

With me so far?  Okay, here's your latest schoolboy errors:

Look at your drawing above. Why are you drawing your lines from the centre of G2?  A circle extended out from the centre of G2 is not what I present and it most certainly will not touch all of the 4 points I present. The CORRECT circle is shown again below using QM's drawing.  Take note of the centre point.

Posted Image

Now try extending lines from the centre of the above circle to the 4 points and you will find they all match i.e. they all have the same radius.

And why this particular centre point?  Because it corresponds with the centre star of Orion's Belt, Al Nilam, thus:

Posted Image

How many more official survey drawings do you need to be presented with before you will finally accept the premise I present is perfectly valid? Or, is it simply the case that where I say white you feel compelled to automatically respond with black regardless of the truth of a particular issue? I have to say that this is not a very scientific approach. Accept the fact of the matter - my premise stands and your claims that it is flawed are completely baseless as the drawing using QM's image should clearly show you. You're wrong. Period. The premise stands.

SC

Edited by Scott Creighton, 01 November 2012 - 11:28 PM.

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

#908    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence.

  • Member
  • 11,489 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 02 November 2012 - 12:51 AM

It

View Postcormac mac airt, on 01 November 2012 - 07:29 PM, said:

Because then he couldn't make it up, QM. The official survey map you provided matches both the Quickbird Satellite photo and the wireframe topographical map. Based on the distance from G2 peak to G1 northeast corner, here is what we see of the other points. Notice again, they don't match Scott's claim.
cormac

It seems like Scott doesn't understand as much about a circle as even the Ancient Egyptians themselves did.

That is, why was the circle not centered on a pyramid?  There are only two things that a circle consists of - a center and a radius.

IOW, the center is extremely important in regards to any circle.  Yet he would have us believe that the entire place was laid out based on a circle, and the circle center doesn't even align with anything in the entire plateau?

I maintain that a silhouette of Mickey Mouse was used to lay it all out.  Give me a while and I, too, can "figure out" exactly where to place the silhouette in order to prove my claim and settle this once and for all.

Harte

Posted Image
See the new Harte Mark III
And the Mayan panoramas on my pyramid pajamas haven't helped my little problem. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Anybody like Coleridge?

#909    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,159 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 02 November 2012 - 12:58 AM

Quote

SC: Still you insist in drawing comparisons with, by your own admission, a skewed satellite image...

It's skewed to the north. Do you not know the difference between north and east?

Quote

...to overlay this with a poor resolution wireframe image of Giza that doesn't even include the Sphinx.

It doesn't need to include the Sphinx as it is west of the Sphinx Temple. Are you now telling me that you don't know where west is either?

Quote

Look at your drawing above. Why are you drawing your lines from the centre of G2?

I was trying to find an excuse for your being wrong. I failed.

Quote

You then have the audacity to claim this matches an official Giza Survey Map!! You don't even stop to think how that could even be possible.

You implied the wireframe map was effectively useless. Evidently it's not as useless as you'd like others to believe.

Even going from Al Nilam doesn't help you.


Another overlay.jpg

The lines are the exact same length and still they don't land on your circle. Nor, as you can see, does your position of the Sphinx match the actual position.

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

#910    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,159 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 02 November 2012 - 01:00 AM

View PostHarte, on 02 November 2012 - 12:51 AM, said:

It seems like Scott doesn't understand as much about a circle as even the Ancient Egyptians themselves did.

That is, why was the circle not centered on a pyramid? There are only two things that a circle consists of - a center and a radius.

IOW, the center is extremely important in regards to any circle.  Yet he would have us believe that the entire place was laid out based on a circle, and the circle center doesn't even align with anything in the entire plateau?

I maintain that a silhouette of Mickey Mouse was used to lay it all out.  Give me a while and I, too, can "figure out" exactly where to place the silhouette in order to prove my claim and settle this once and for all.

Harte

Harte, this is all part of his claim that the Giza Pyramids were laid out to match Orions Belt. Without offsetting the middle point from G2 peak to "Al Nilam" he's got nothing.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt, 02 November 2012 - 01:06 AM.

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

#911    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 02 November 2012 - 10:52 AM

View Postcormac mac airt, on 02 November 2012 - 01:00 AM, said:


Quote

Harte: It seems like Scott doesn't understand as much about a circle as even the Ancient Egyptians themselves did.

That is, why was the circle not centered on a pyramid? There are only two things that a circle consists of - a center and a radius.

IOW, the center is extremely important in regards to any circle.  Yet he would have us believe that the entire place was laid out based on a circle, and the circle center doesn't even align with anything in the entire plateau?

I maintain that a silhouette of Mickey Mouse was used to lay it all out.  Give me a while and I, too, can "figure out" exactly where to place the silhouette in order to prove my claim and settle this once and for all.

CMA: Harte, this is all part of his claim that the Giza Pyramids were laid out to match Orions Belt. Without offsetting the middle point from G2 peak to "Al Nilam" he's got nothing.

SC: Ah how the tone has changed, now the penny has dropped. How many posts now have you been fighting my premise that a circle circumscribing the three most outer pyramid corners of the Giza pyramid field will find the Sphinx sitting on said circle?  Three significant points circumscribed by a circle finds a fourth significant point right on the circle (pixel perfectionism aside). Having their collective objections silenced they then resort to ‘taking the Mickey’. Desperate indeed. Simply not big enough to concede the point initially being made. Says it all really.

Now, to find this outcome is remarkable indeed but, one can only assume in desperation, the naysayers now attempt to shift the argument away from the original contention by introducing a FIFTH point, namely the circle’s centre. Why, they ask, isn’t the four point circle “centered on a pyramid” (presumably the centre of G2) i.e. a fifth significant point?

Well, the first thing to observe here is that the circle’s centre is very close to the centre of G2.  Accepting the Giza pyramids as a symbolic representation of Orion’s Belt, G2 is represented by the middle star, Al Nilam. Now, when we overlay the Belt stars with G1 and G3 as Fulcrum (see image below), we find that the centre of the circumscribed circle sits almost perfectly upon Al Nilam. (One comes to learn that when you use words like “perfectly” on this Board, the pixel perfection practitioners tend to bust a gasket).

Posted Image

So, it seems that G2’s stellar counterpart, Al Nilam, corresponds with the circle’s centre so why not Al Nilam's terrestrial counterpart i.e. the pyramid (G2) when it was placed on the ground? Why the slight divergence of G2 from the plan?

Simple. The topography of the land around G2 made it impossible for the centre of this pyramid to be placed at the precise centre of the circle, the Al Nilam centre. This is shown in the diagrams below.
Posted Image

Posted Image

Source

Were the builders to have kept G2 in its precise planned location (red dot centre of Al Nilam in above image) then its southern and western flanks would have been built on top of a mound whilst its northern and eastern flanks would be upon the plateau. This would have made for an inherently unstable structure and it seems that the builders opted to take the safe option and fully enclose the mound within G2. In so doing they had to slightly compromise the planned location for G2, moving it further west and south from its planned location. There is physical evidence on the ground at Giza of such a relocation of G2. The builders were clearly in two minds as to how best to overcome the topographic problems that the mound presented.

With G2 in its present position we can see that the inter-quarter lines from G1 thru G2 to G3 find that G2 is slightly misplaced (image below) from the plan:

Posted Image

However, when we place G2 centre in the circle’s centre (i.e. Al Nilam centre) we find a much better agreement with the inter-quarter lines (image below):

Posted Image

We can see then that with two quite different and independent means (the circumscribed circle centre and the inter-quarter lines) that G2 was relocated from its planned position in the site plan. And we can explain in simple and logical terms this relocation i.e. why G2 centre misses the centre of the circle, the FIFTH point posited by the naysayers.

I rather doubt this will satisfy the naysayers for the simple reason that when I say white they automatically feel obligated to respond with black, regardless of the actual facts of the matter. Now that the FIFTH point - the circle centre has been explained - let's see them find a SIXTH point to argue over.

Giza is a unified plan. Period.

Regards,

SC

Edited by Scott Creighton, 02 November 2012 - 11:17 AM.

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

#912    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 39,782 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

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

Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:33 PM

Fact of the matter remains that, with an arbitrary radius and and arbitrary center, any circle will encompass exactly two arbitrary points, now if you could get the third point in there without having to adjust ten feet this or five feet that way (which is even evident from your own drawing) I might be impressed.

Until then, well as verosimile as claiming that the layout is based on a constellation the Egyptians did not even have a name for.

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

#913    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 02 November 2012 - 03:25 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 02 November 2012 - 02:33 PM, said:

Fact of the matter remains that, with an arbitrary radius and and arbitrary center, any circle will encompass exactly two arbitrary points, now if you could get the third point in there without having to adjust ten feet this or five feet that way (which is even evident from your own drawing) I might be impressed.

Until then, well as verosimile as claiming that the layout is based on a constellation the Egyptians did not even have a name for.

SC: I wouldn't waste my time trying to impress you. Two points? Try getting a circle to encompass FOUR random points. Trust me - you''ll be at it a very long time.And yet that is what we have presented to us at Giza. The radius of the circle is the star Al Nilam as the above post of mine clearly explains. And the Orion constellation WAS known to the ancient Egyptians as S3h (Sah).

SC

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

#914    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 39,782 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

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

Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:40 PM

View PostScott Creighton, on 02 November 2012 - 03:25 PM, said:

SC: I wouldn't waste my time trying to impress you. Two points? Try getting a circle to encompass FOUR random points. Trust me - you''ll be at it a very long time.And yet that is what we have presented to us at Giza. The radius of the circle is the star Al Nilam as the above post of mine clearly explains. And the Orion constellation WAS known to the ancient Egyptians as S3h (Sah).

SC

Right, as I see it you match two points the others are only a dozen meters off...

And yes, Sah was a Egyptian deity from the second intermediary period or the New Kingdom. You may confuse him with his consort Sopdet (deity since the 1st dynasty), but certainly not as constellation but a single star. Constellations are a very new concept in Egyptian mythology.

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

#915    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,159 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 02 November 2012 - 04:15 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 02 November 2012 - 02:33 PM, said:

Fact of the matter remains that, with an arbitrary radius and and arbitrary center, any circle will encompass exactly two arbitrary points, now if you could get the third point in there without having to adjust ten feet this or five feet that way (which is even evident from your own drawing) I might be impressed.

Until then, well as verosimile as claiming that the layout is based on a constellation the Egyptians did not even have a name for.

The most glaring error of which is placing the rear of the Sphinx some 96 feet further east than it actually is.

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




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users