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.


* * * * * 1 votes

Great Pyramid not built by Khufu?


  • Please log in to reply
592 replies to this topic

#211    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 28 September 2012 - 04:35 PM

View PostHarte, on 28 September 2012 - 03:34 PM, said:

I thought that this was your claim.

I don't think this.  I told you how they arrived at the golden rectangle.

Harte

What do you think how Dali and Leonardo got it?

Also what do you think about post 206 and 207?

Is Notre Dame built following golden ratio on purpose?

Edited by the L, 28 September 2012 - 04:38 PM.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#212    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 9,946 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 28 September 2012 - 05:23 PM

View Postthe L, on 28 September 2012 - 04:35 PM, said:

What do you think how Dali and Leonardo got it?
They both knew of it already, as did anyone that was interested.

View Postthe L, on 28 September 2012 - 04:35 PM, said:

Also what do you think about post 206 and 207?
I think that, if someone doesn't know which direction is north at Giza, then their measurements should probably also be suspect.

View Postthe L, on 28 September 2012 - 04:35 PM, said:

Is Notre Dame built following golden ratio on purpose?
I don't know enough about that cathedral to say.  But it wouldn't surprise me because of what I already mentioned about the persistence of the rectangle through each subdivision, representing immortality.

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
Anybody like Coleridge?

#213    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 28 September 2012 - 07:18 PM

View PostHarte, on 28 September 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

I think that, if someone doesn't know which direction is north at Giza, then their measurements should probably also be suspect.

Those are Chinese pyramids.

Why are we drawn to golden ratio? We like it. We like paintings which got it. We love architecture.

Edited by the L, 28 September 2012 - 07:26 PM.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#214    Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 65 posts
  • Joined:17 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • Man of The People

Posted 28 September 2012 - 09:33 PM

I Think that the guy who made the corral house in florida used the same process that whoever built the pyramids did.

"If you want to walk the Streets of Gold,you got to know the password, ROLL TIDE ROLL."
Paul "BEAR"Bryant

#215    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,060 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 28 September 2012 - 10:10 PM

View Postkmt_sesh, on 27 September 2012 - 11:26 PM, said:

You're falling prey to the modern attitude that "superstitious" is pejorative and must be taken as a negative label. That might be the modern take, but it is not valid in a proper historical study. All the word means is a belief in the supernatural affecting one's life. That's it. Nothing negative need be drawn from that. If you believe it has to be negative, then by extension you're also denigrating all Catholics and Protestants and Jews and Muslims and Hindus and everyone else who adheres to a doctrine of religious faith.

If you honestly believe the ancient Egyptians did not believe that the supernatural affected and influenced their lives, then you truly don't possess even a basic understanding of ancient Egypt. And you of course could not defend such a statement for even a moment.

I believe it's you falling prey to the modern perspective that anything you want to believe
is as good as anything else.  I believe ancient people would find this perspective to be highly
offensive and extremely dangerous.  This isn't to say there's anything wrong with being a Christian
or anything else until such time as you drive a bus loaded with kids in front of a train so the little
angels can get to heaven sooner or you burn people at the stake for not agreeing with you. People
are naturally superstoitious and naturally social.  We see what we expect to see so our beliefs are
always being confirmed and we seek the company of others.  An aware person will see plenty of
evidence that some higher power must be at work so all these things taken together makes relig-
ion quite natural.

But it's still a mild form of superstition.  Believing  that you talk   to your dead uncle Fred every night
or that you can conjure up a potion that makes you invisible is probably going to be a more serious
form of superstition.  Believing that superstitions can make you or anyone else stronger is another
serious affliction and type of superstition.  Certainly there exists a sort of "placebo effect" in everything
and this can contribute to successful outcomes but only where such outcomes were already really de-
termined.  Believing you can make the touchdown dramatically affects the odds relative to believing
it is impossible.

Superstition is always detrimental in the real world though can be determinative of successful out-
comes in spefic instances or for individuals.  Some people who might otherwise run amuk might be
productive citizens with a belief or a religion.  Some people can't handle the truth and the truth is
we're all stumbling blindly in the dark.   If holding onto a crucifix or a book of magic helps you "see"
then who am I to say you're wrong.  For all I know God really is a Christian or a Muslim so it's not
my function to steer people away from anything other than superstition and murder.

But the ancients aren't only painted as being highly religious and moribund by such beliefs but they
are also said to have believed in magic, spells, incantations, and potions. They are said to be ignor-
ant of basic math and to have had no assets, infrastructure, tools, or economy that can't be found
in a museum today.  In other words they are said to have endless superstitious beliefs, have nothing
but religious artefacts and to be ignorant of basic math.  This is rather surprising in light of the fact
they somehow managed to invent the calender and build the Great Pyramid but the facts remain the
same; they were highgly superstitious and quite ignorant.  Other than their ability to utilize brute force
to accomplish their goals they were like babes in arms.  How they invented agriculture and cities as
babes I don't know.

People today believe we know almost everything there is to know.  This is one of the most dangerous
superstitions ever held by the human race.  We adulterate our food with all manner of chemical and
biological processes and agents because we know they can't hurt us.  We change our enviroment
without ever even considering unintended consequences and don't even have a process to look for
them after the fact.  Science has taught us everything but there isn't even a discipline for understand-
ing science.  Ofcourse much of this isn't really relevant to the discussion except to the degree that
people don't seek answers any longer after they have been provided.  Egyptology tells everyone that
the great pyramids were tombs dragged up ramps by a changeless and superstitious people so most
of us walk away believing the mystery is solved.

It is not solved because one man can't build a pyramid.  This is the most absurd widely held supersti-
tion ever on the face of the earth. Bar none.  One man can't commission a great pyramid either.  In
order to build a great pyramid they had to figure out how.  This required at least hundreds of people
over many centuries and many thousands of skilled workers.  We can't know how many unskilled
workers because we don't know how they did it.  In other words this was a pyramid building society.
It was the society that both built the pyramids and installed the king.  But none of this says the people
were superstitious and logically superstition could have been no benefit to the builders. The belief that
they were religious and superstitious is interpretation of very sparse evidence.  That the pyramids
were tombs at all is interpretation.  The concept that the people never changed is the lynchpin of
Egyptological thought but is inconsistent with the translations of the Pyramid Texts, but more impor-
tantly it is highly illogical to claim something never changed if you have no start point.

Funny thing is, there would be no problem with taking the ancients as being superstitious except for
one thing; they were apparently far less superstitious than we are.  We know everything but they couldn't
even say the sun was round for fear of being wrong.  We won't hesitate to say it's a sphere because
we know everything.  We know it can't be other dimensional or some sort of projection because we
know everything.  We know its mass, gravity, composition, temperature and everything else. There
will never be anything new learned that can change everything.  It can't be hurtling through space at
the speed of light along with all the galaxies because we would know.

The most dangerous superstition is probably that superstion is OK and the second most dangerous is
the belief that we know everything.  I believe that the pyramid builders would cringe at the notion that
superstition is dandy and laugh at the idea they were superstitious.  Of course they'd laugh if it weren't
against their "religion" to laugh at such an accusation (which it probably was).

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#216    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,060 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 28 September 2012 - 10:13 PM

View Postthe L, on 28 September 2012 - 09:39 AM, said:

,
Im amazed too what stoneage people can do. But Aztecs and Maya where also stone age people.

Indeed.  But it's likely that all the megalithic "projects" were completed using brains rather than brawn.

They all used a motive force.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#217    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,060 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 28 September 2012 - 10:27 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 28 September 2012 - 02:15 PM, said:

See, in the world there are two types of postulates: Those you can demonstrate, which are also called facts and those you cannot, which we also call fantasy.

Science works with facts and occasionally tries to fill in the gaps with fantasy and calls that theory. And when there are conflicting theories it accept the one with the least buts and suppositions as most likely because that is how, as a rule, it pans out when the facts to fill the gap are found.

Now, there is another way to work this, instead of with a fact we start wit a supposition and there were we have a lack of fantasy we put in some facts. That is how the fringe works. And if there are conflicting fringe theories the one whose proponent screams loudest or sells most books becomes accepted as "fact".

Science is not always right, but to this day I have yet to find a fringe theory that had the slightest semblance of verosimility. And that is why I rather stay with the demonstrable instead of UFOs, Atlaenteans, Nibblers or farting Osirises.

And a very verbose, but contentless three page essay will not change that.

I could quibble with your terminolgy but I'm in general agreement so won't.

But you are greatly mistaken about a couple things.  Your implication that Egyptology is a science
is chief among them.  Perhaps the nuts and bolts of Egyptology can legitimately be called science
but the assumptions upon which they are appending the facts are not in the least scientific.  It is as
illogical as is possible to say that the Egyptians never changed when the start point is unknown. It
is illogic of the highest order to take the one thing known about the great pyramid builders and define
them by it after pronouncing it gobblety gook. When Petrie proposed a straight ramp to build the
tomb of Khufu this was low level science because the facts of the time were consistent with this and
it was completely logical.  It was an assumption but it was assumption based on all the known evi-
dence.  Today it is not logical because it doesn't fit any of the evidence since Petrie's time.

There is no science being done because Hawass thought no one who wasn't an Egyptologist could
possibly contribute to what's known about ancient Egypt and since then the country has been in
chaos.  We don't know if anything will ever change and whether or not Egyptology can dig its head
out of the 19th century.

You might call the other theories "fringe" but it will be the fringe theories that prove to be closer to
the real truth than orthodoxy.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#218    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 20,163 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 29 September 2012 - 05:21 AM

View Postcladking, on 28 September 2012 - 10:10 PM, said:

I believe it's you falling prey to the modern perspective that anything you want to believe is as good as anything else.

This should be always referenced back on Cladking. This indicates he MUST be as wrong as anyone else.

Pot meet Kettle.

Quote

Egyptology tells everyone that the great pyramids were tombs dragged up ramps by a changeless and superstitious people so most of us walk away believing the mystery is solved.

And why not, if the preponderance of evidence indicates it is true? Why should a handful of strange artifacts of unknown usage require the toss out of hundreds of years of understanding?

The Orthodox method of pyramid building has shown that it fits all the metrics. The construction method works within the timeframe indicated and was possible using the materials, technology and personnel of the time.

Quote

It is not solved because one man can't build a pyramid.  This is the most absurd widely held superstition ever on the face of the earth. Bar none.  One man can't commission a great pyramid either.  In order to build a great pyramid they had to figure out how.  This required at least hundreds of people over many centuries and many thousands of skilled workers.  We can't know how many unskilled workers because we don't know how they did it.  In other words this was a pyramid building society. It was the society that both built the pyramids and installed the king.

Huh? I thought the progression from small tomb pile of stones to mastaba to pyramid was well understood and that the various problems that were discovered during various constructions were also noted... such as building on anything but solid stone, building with mud bricks, building with too high an angle....

The building of the Great Pyramids at Giza was not born from a vacuum.

Quote

But none of this says the people were superstitious and logically superstition could have been no benefit to the builders. The belief that they were religious and superstitious is interpretation of very sparse evidence.  That the pyramids were tombs at all is interpretation.  

Maybe because evidence of every other civilization shows human minds worked the same. Every early civilization also had a very strong reglious quality to it. Point out an early civilization that did not??

The most obvious answer is usually the right one. You are looking for Zebras when the world is shown to be full of Horses.

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#219    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 20,163 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 29 September 2012 - 05:24 AM

View Postcladking, on 28 September 2012 - 10:27 PM, said:

But you are greatly mistaken about a couple things.  Your implication that Egyptology is a science
is chief among them.  Perhaps the nuts and bolts of Egyptology can legitimately be called science
but the assumptions upon which they are appending the facts are not in the least scientific.  

I thought it was a part of science to fit an idea (Such as the construction method of the Great Pyramids) to the available evidence? Clearly that is what Egyptology does. It fits the evidence into the ideas that fit that evidence best.

That is one of the very cores of Science.

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#220    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 36,258 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 08:12 AM

View Postcladking, on 28 September 2012 - 10:27 PM, said:

I could quibble with your terminolgy but I'm in general agreement so won't.

But you are greatly mistaken about a couple things.  Your implication that Egyptology is a science
is chief among them.  Perhaps the nuts and bolts of Egyptology can legitimately be called science
but the assumptions upon which they are appending the facts are not in the least scientific.  It is as
illogical as is possible to say that the Egyptians never changed when the start point is unknown. It
is illogic of the highest order to take the one thing known about the great pyramid builders and define
them by it after pronouncing it gobblety gook. When Petrie proposed a straight ramp to build the
tomb of Khufu this was low level science because the facts of the time were consistent with this and
it was completely logical.  It was an assumption but it was assumption based on all the known evi-
dence.  Today it is not logical because it doesn't fit any of the evidence since Petrie's time.

There is no science being done because Hawass thought no one who wasn't an Egyptologist could
possibly contribute to what's known about ancient Egypt and since then the country has been in
chaos.  We don't know if anything will ever change and whether or not Egyptology can dig its head
out of the 19th century.

You might call the other theories "fringe" but it will be the fringe theories that prove to be closer to
the real truth than orthodoxy.

give me a good example of recent Egyptology (We are not talking 1920 here) that is not "scientific".

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

#221    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,060 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 29 September 2012 - 02:27 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 29 September 2012 - 08:12 AM, said:

give me a good example of recent Egyptology (We are not talking 1920 here) that is not "scientific".

There are countless ways that they are unscientific.  Check your calender.  This is 2012
and they still haven't done simple testing to see how G1 absorbs or transmits heat.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#222    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 36,258 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 02:31 PM

View Postcladking, on 29 September 2012 - 02:27 PM, said:

There are countless ways that they are unscientific.  Check your calender.  This is 2012
and they still haven't done simple testing to see how G1 absorbs or transmits heat.

And that would change any Egyptology postulate because of...?

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

#223    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,060 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 29 September 2012 - 02:40 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 29 September 2012 - 02:31 PM, said:

And that would change any Egyptology postulate because of...?

Noone knows until the work is done.

But science is first and foremost about observation. "Observation" doesn't mean you just look
at something at jump to conclusions about how it came about and why it exists.  "Observation"
is almost more a state of mind where you try to size up things is accurately as possible and a
part of this means you measure it.

Anyone can jump to conclusions and say something like the earth us flat because a quick glance
says it looks fairly flat but if you want to be able to actually do things like make pyramids you need
actual knowledge and this is only gained through science and observation.  Man didn't domesticate
animals, build large cities or go to the moon by jumping to conclusions or not even making basic ob-
servation.  Imhotep was "Chief of Observers" but Petrie is dead.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#224    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 36,258 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

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

Posted 29 September 2012 - 02:57 PM

View Postcladking, on 29 September 2012 - 02:40 PM, said:

Noone knows until the work is done.

But science is first and foremost about observation. "Observation" doesn't mean you just look
at something at jump to conclusions about how it came about and why it exists.  "Observation"
is almost more a state of mind where you try to size up things is accurately as possible and a
part of this means you measure it.

Anyone can jump to conclusions and say something like the earth us flat because a quick glance
says it looks fairly flat but if you want to be able to actually do things like make pyramids you need
actual knowledge and this is only gained through science and observation.  Man didn't domesticate
animals, build large cities or go to the moon by jumping to conclusions or not even making basic ob-
servation.  Imhotep was "Chief of Observers" but Petrie is dead.

Well, the fringe has not brought any study about the radioactive decay in mosquito corpses within the great pyramid either, so its 2012 and I still don't get the relevance.

Edited by questionmark, 29 September 2012 - 03:32 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

#225    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,060 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 29 September 2012 - 11:10 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 29 September 2012 - 02:57 PM, said:

Well, the fringe has not brought any study about the radioactive decay in mosquito corpses within the great pyramid either, so its 2012 and I still don't get the relevance.

Really!?!

It's actually pretty simple.  Infrared will show the way heat is conducted through the pyramid
which will reveal innner structures and patterns.  Science is supposed to investigate anomalies.
It is through the observance of anomalies that most valid hypotheses arise.  It is the study of
things that are unknown by which most things are learned.  A caveman knew this but modern
people superstitiously believe we already know everything and learning about anomalies or learn-
ing new facts would only confuse us.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users