Much of this debate seems to have been sparked by a supposed error made by Herodotus (sp?) who claimed that slaves formed a certain percent of the work force.

There is not a great deal of technology necessary to build a pyramid when you think about it: a chisel and hammer to carve specific dimentions, labour force of animals and men combined with a wedge, rope, and log system to move the objects, and most importantly an architect to design and oversee the construction.

The architecture and engineering that went into the building of the various temples around Egypt actually required more advanced knowledge of mathematics and material science than that of the pyramids, due to the much higher physical forces acting on them. Fortunately, the Egyptians were well up to the task.

again i ask if it is so easy why has it not been duplicated ?

even with just a few dozen slabs to show it can be done

A few slabs? That's been done several times. Heck, just last year five workers hauled a five ton slab to my mother's backyard to make a fountain. They used a sled because they didn't have a forklift that wouldn't sink into the soft ground.

A single person can easily move a one or two ton boulder around, if they know the proper technique. Five people easily handled the five ton rock, which was the average pyramid stone, and they didn't even move things like that all that regularly. If you want something really impressive, check out that one guy who replicated the placing of the lentils of the Stonehenge monument. He had fifty coeds pulling this forty ton monolithic block up an earthen ramp and precisely into position on top of two others. The only blocks that heavy in the pyramid are the two making up the roofs of the two chambers.

In short, it's been duplicated. Why aren't the duplications more well known? Because moving stone is so relatively simple that the people who do it so regularly don't consider it anything out of the ordinary.

Its sad that certain people in these forums just look to put someones ideas down and turn the thread into a bs argument. You dont like the theory/idea? DONT POST.


Where there is a person with an idea, there in turn is someone there to say its wrong.

Just dont post.

Fact is someone may already have discovered the secret in the 50’s.

If you read Herodotus, the Greek historian, in 440 BC he described that the great pyramid had a wall around it and the whole construction site around the pyramid was filled with water. Herodotus further mentioned that there were two large pyramids built in a lake, and that there was as much of the pyramids above the surface of the lake as there was bellow.

And.
Edgar Cayce said that the discovery of how the great pyramid was built would be made in 1958.

That was the year Edward Kunkel was awarded the patent for his famous pump. Which he got the idea from the Gizeh plateau. After Kunkel observed networks of tunnels and concluded it was a pumping network system? for water to elevate? He Kunkel also made a speculation that the pyramids stone blocks themselves were such a tight fit and may have been possible for it too store water without leaking. So conclusion based on Kunkel they were built from inside and upwards within the pyramid, once the base was completed first…

More later. Have to get some sleep.

Mayan.

Then what would be the purpose of a public forum? Wouldn't it be just as fair to say that if you are going to post something that others are going to disagree with, then don't post? It would be just as fair, but it would also be just as wrong.

To be frank, I think many of the poster do like hearing opposing viewpoints. Arguing can be fun, done civily. If all you do is post any old thing you want and have a bunch of replys nodding happily and agreeing, wouldn't you get pretty bored in short order?

See?! There you go disagreeing again!

J/K! Aquatus is right, this is a forum, not a fan club. And debate is a valuable thing. It can help you strenthen your own beliefs by forcing you to defend them.

Thanks, Mayan, for the info, btw. I'll have to read Herodotus. I've skimmed his work some but never gone into it in the depth it deserves.

Incidentally, the ramp method is certainly feasible, and there is even some evidence to show how it could have been done, but not in the manner Egyptologists, lacking the engineering knowledge of the people they study, speculated. There is a very simple method to make the ramps to get the stones up the pyramid, and no mile long stretches or giant waterfilled moats are needed.

Shall I continue?

Yes

The poor ability of the tridimensional intellect to understand the reason why the pyramids were built allows it to speak abundantly with lack of direct knowledge or evidence of its construction. The tridimensional mind will never stop uttering innumerable theories or ideas due to a wrong comprehension attributable to a bad judgment or ignorance or inattention to multidimensional facts!

Among ignoramuses ignorance is always bold!

Please do! FWIW, though life took me in a different direction and I never used it, I have a BA in archaeology and Egypt and Rome were my better areas. (Sucked at Byzantine. All them there churches looked alike to me.)

So, anyway, this is something I'm interested in hearing. I've always puzzled over the fact that there are, as hotoke and some others have pointed out, paintings and written records detailing the ways in which the pyramids were built, and yet modern engineers keep saying it wouldn't have worked.

Why did you even ask? Now I have to wait to hear this and I'm anxious to hear it. I've read about the ramp theory and can't imagine how it could work without miles of ramp.

In mainstream, everyone is lacking the engineering knowledge of this. I wish they would publicise their ideas about this sort of thing more.

Can't wait to read it, aquatus1



Potholer

"Ramps theory" was built only in the mind of those who build contradictory theories that cannot truthfully decipher the purpose of the Pyramids.

"Ramps theory" is just a quick absurd solution from a gloomy understanding.

"Ramps theory" can only be conceived with a proper subset of false hypotheses, which must contradict the common sense, that, as somebody said, it should be the most common of the senses.

What shocks more about "ramps theory" from other contradictory theories is that they are used only by those who lack inner vision and that with a great rhetorical nonsense think they are right. Their contradictions always pass unnoticed by their intellect.

Blah, blah, blah. Maybe you need to look at it from a logical perspective, instead of an unrealistic one. The most likey explanation is generally the correct one.

The anxiety you show with your rhetorical blah, blah, blah shows the vulnerability and insecurity of your thoughts. Your mind should not need of the many in order for you to be confident of yourself!

Comprehend that vague unpleasant emotion that is shown in anticipation of some understanding of my post. Comprehension should exist in your mind without the absurdities of the many!

You sound like a fortune cookie!

Take my post to a Chinese restaurant; maybe the waiters will help your understanding!

Loge, stop trying to sound intelligent. It isn't working.

are you always this full of yourself ?

pretty handy having the Rogets close by ?

sorry im really not one to flame but you are too much

Intelligence is not related to a sound or to a quantity of posts that agree with your nonsensical intellect or a concept from one or many who sympathize with your way of reasoning.

Indeed, Intelligence consists of a set of relatively independent cognizant abilities of the Being and not the intellectual hypotheses of the mind!

I am the one who is not like you!




So, you contradict yourself; since you are telling me that I am not fully myself!



I have what you lack and you have what I lack!

Okay, the trick is to look at this from the point of view of the engineer. You have blocks of X weight that need to go up at Y angle, in order to avoid losing your workforce to hernia and the occasional slipped disk, or worse, slipped block.

The problem you are facing is that, as the pyramid is getting bigger, a straight ramp is no longer as feasible as it was for the first twenty feet of height. At this point, quantity of material and distance is becoming a serious concern (Of course, this is all being done long before actual construction begins. Picture the engineers sitting on the rocky outcrop that would soon be mined away into rectangular blocks, and later, into a cut-out for a Sphynx).

So what you need is a reliable ramp that doesn't go higher than twenty feet, doesn't exceed critical angle, and goes up as high as the pyramid is going to go. But the higher it goes, the more it will exceed twenty feet from ramp to earth, as well as requiring more and more material (which adds more and more weight until the ramp cannot support itself). What to do?

The answer is simple. Build the ramp on the pyramid.

Let me explain. The first twenty feet (incidentally, this is a number plucked from the air and based on the general construction rule of thumb that after twenty feet you need to start thinking about a working platform), you have a regular straight ramp pointing towards one end of the side of the pyramid. Wooden scaffolding, easily up to holding several tons, and at a gentle enough angle to get you to twenty feet up the pyramid. Now, the pyramid grows to twenty-five feet, and levering up blocks starts getting dangerous. Your ramp, coming in perpendicularly to the pyramid, to one end of it, makes a right angle and proceeds upwards built on top of the block below it. In other words, the ramp is no longer being built on the sand, but rather on the pyramid itself, and is winding around it as the pyramid grows, always keeping level with the construction area, and, quite likely, not as high as the straight ramp, making it safer, more stable, and requiring less material to make. All it needs to do is make the occasional right angle turn to climb up the next face.

The Egyptologists were right in that the ramp would be more than a mile long, however they failed to take into account that a mile does not have to be in a straight line, nor does the base have to go to ground level, but can slope upwards with the ramp as well.

Is there any evidence of this? I'm glad you asked. Here is a picture I found, of an ancient pyramid, with the scaffolding still in place, apparently cemented in place by error, and for some unexplained reason, abandoned in the middle of construction.

Proof positive? Hardly. But it is a cleverly simple solution to an engineer contracted to do it, and, frankly, necessary, since there were no helpful aliens around to magnetize the sand and float the stone blocks up through the air. I hope I explained it clearly enough.

Why ask why the Great Pyramid was built? Because it is the most massive building on the planet, at least twice the volume and thirty times the mass of the Empire State Building. Because it is aligned to the true cardinal points of the compass even though no compass is known to have existed at its time of construction. Because its masonry which weighsup to seventy tons is joined to the fiftieth of an inch. Because its casing stones were polished to the standard of modern optical work. Why was such an enormous undertaking, combined with such incredible accuracy, deemed necessary for the construction of a mere tomb and funerary ornament to a dead king who never occupied it?

It is an enormous undertaking for such a seemingly useless building - a building that is thought of by most to be a house for a dead pharaoh. But there are other reasons to question why the Great Pyramid and indeed why any of the thirty or so pyramids were built than simply because of its immense size, features, and effort that must have been involved in its construction. A large amount of theories exist that speculate about its "true" or other functions. Is the Great Pyramid an astronomical observatory, a huge public works project, the Bible written in solid stone, a prophetic work, or an energy collector? Who designed and built the Great Pyramid? God, Thoth, a past civilization, or space aliens? It is these questions that will be examined so that we can gain a better understanding of why such seemingly enormous undertakings of pyramid construction were ever carried out.

Why do some believe that the Great Pyramid (or the pyramid of the pharaoh Khufu or Cheops) at Ghiza was designed with clear mathematical links between the Pyramid's dimensions and the Earth's basic geophysical data and orbital astronomy? In 1865 Piazzi Smyth measured the Great Pyramid and synthesized many of John Taylor's ideas and theories presented in 1859 in The Great Pyramid, Why was It Built and Who Built It into his own theories (filling 600 pages of calculations) grounded in his measurements about extraordinary relationships between the Great Pyramid and the Earth and events supposedly prophesied in the measurements of the inner passages of the Great Pyramid (Mendelssohn 206). The basic unit of measurement (the pyramid inch) apparently used by the designer, turns out to be exactly the five-hundred-millionth part of the earth's polar radius. This is significant because the pyramid has five sides. The Pyramid's designed base square has a side measuring just 365.242 of these same units - a figure identical to the number of days in the solar tropical year - and the same figure can be found in other features of the design.

Further measurements appear to give exact figures for the eccentricity of the earth's orbit, for the mean distance of the earth from the sun, for the period of the earth's full precessional cycle (a period of over 25,000 years), as well as the mean density of the earth (Lemesurier 8). It also turns out that the ratio of height to its base-perimeter as a circle's radius to its circumference is 1/2 pi. Also present is phi - or the Golden Section ratio of 1 to 1.618 . . . (supposedly discovered by Pythagoros). If one wished to have an architectural symbol for the planet Earth itself one could scarcely do better than to take the Great Pyramid (Lemesurier 8).

All of these amazing facts seem to suggest that it is no mean feat for an ignorant, superstitious, semi-prehistoric architect to achieve by mere accident. There may be nothing accidental about it at all. The Great Pyramid's measurements may reflect an extraordinarily advanced level of knowledge in its designer -- a level rivaled only by the technology of its builders (Lemesurier 11). The Egyptians may have had a much greater knowledge of geometry than we may have supposed. Ptolemy measured the circumference of the earth to an amazing degree of accuracy. Did the Egyptians do the same before him?



http://wrt-intertext.syr.edu/I2/graeff.html

[quote=Loge,Feb 15 2005, 08:36 PM]
Why ask why the Great Pyramid was built? Because it is the most massive building on the planet, at least twice the volume and thirty times the mass of the Empire State Building. Because it is aligned to the true cardinal points of the compass even though no compass is known to have existed at its time of construction. Because its masonry which weighsup to seventy tons is joined to the fiftieth of an inch. Because its casing stones were polished to the standard of modern optical work. Why was such an enormous undertaking, combined with such incredible accuracy, deemed necessary for the construction of a mere tomb and funerary ornament to a dead king who never occupied it?


The important thing about the great pyramid, as far as this discussion is conscerned is "how was it built".
At Tiauanacho, Bolivia, (I may have spelled that wrong) there is a stone structure using stones weighing 400 tons, and it is built on top of a plateau where the air is so thin you could not have had a labor force of slaves to build it. Crops at that height can't produce food for such a labor force. The stones are also set to a small fraction of an inch.
There is evidence in these stone structures that there once was an advanced method of building, that we cannot duplicate today.
Ed Leedskalnin may have duplicated it with his experiments into electricity and magnetism.

Bringing up an opposing point of view is one thing.
On the other hand, to disagree with everything possible is just plain childish.

Onto the pyramids there are so many different things that prove and disprove each other. Almost seems intentional. These ancient civilizations knew alot more than we give credit for it seems.

Awesome post Antiaging.

Disagreeing with everything possible is childish, however, disagreeing with things that are improbable (since everything is possible) and showing how they are improbable is good science. You are quite right that we do not give the ancient civilizations enough credit. Look at the Egyptians: they were master craftsmen, architects, and engineers, and instead of giving them credit for that, people insist on blowing off their accomplishments and throwing in stories about floating rocks.

A 9 page thread, and the mysterey remains a mysterey.

better yet

3500 years and the mystery remains a mystery

That being said, I haven't heard any refutations of why it couldn't have been done as I explained, which requires no alien intervention, mysterious forces, or unexplained phenomena.

If it is only a mystery because a supported explanation is refused without reason, then it isn't too much of a mystery.

Well, Aquatus' explanation works for me. It's one of those things where you run around in circles looking for fantastic explanations while the answer stares you in the face. It reminds me of the old story about the semi (tractor trailer) that got stuck under an overpass. As the driver, state police, and assorted experts were standing around trying to figure out how to get it loose, a little boy in the crowd piped up, "Mommy, why don't they let the air out of the tires?" <g>

Also, Occam's razor gives this one to the winding-ramp theory. "If faced with more than one possiblitity, the simplest solution is probably correct."

Are you sure you are talking about Tiahuanaco? I've been there a few times, and it looks the same as any other of the ancient cities in the area (granted, it is considered to be the very first city). It was a city, and a thriving one, until a geologic catastrophy drained their water source, so I'm not sure what you are referring to in regards to a slave labor force (I'm pretty sure they were all one tribe, not slaves, but I would have to check). And the stones are set in pretty much the same way all the other stones in this region are set: Shaped, ground flat edges that interlock, and, occasionally, metal staples poured in situ to re-inforce a particular area.

If you have any questions about it, My father is from Peru and I spent quite a bit of time there.

Yes I am sure I am talking about Tiahwanako, Bolivia. I copied down the name as it was spoken of on the ufo files on the history channel just this week. The man said the air is too thin both for intense physical labor and crops.

I am not sure of this right now, but this might also be about the same site. They said the quarry for the stones is at ground level and needed to be transported up to the plateau to build it. All there is for that is a step footpath.
I saw that on another TV presentation about a stone structure in South America. It might not have been Tiahwanako, however.
The man said there is no explanation for how the heavy stones got up to the plateau level.

I can't say I have ever seen that spelling of it. Not even from the locals. In all cases, it was indeed a city, not a small village or town, and the air, while very thin indeed, is nowhere near debilitating, particularly if you are of hardy mountain stock. It's a little bit odd hearing it described as a mystery. It is as if we had found the ancient island of Manhatten, long abandoned, and someone claimed that it was far too close to ground level for anyone to have worked or raised crops there. There first remark to pop to mind is "Well, a whole lot of somebodys did."

A little bit odd, hearing it described as a mystery!!!
What primitive tool, can even move a 400 ton stone even if it was crawling with men around it? Think about it --400 TONS.

http://www.smg-authie.co.uk/egypt/cheops.htm

Tell you what, I've done my fair share of research on this thread here . I've spent quite a bit of time looking up info for your questions.

How bout this: Type in "Tiahuanaco", and "400" into your preferred search engine.

Out of all the sites that will pop up, I'll bet that you will be unable to locate a single credible (as in archeological or anthropological) site that talks about these massive slabs. Not a one. You will find the 400 referenced in two major and different ways, however.

Oh, they are out there, make no mistake. But I bet that you won't be able to find a credible source. Every single one talking about these monoliths will also be talking about impossible pyramids and aliens or magnets or some-such.

Do you think, perhaps, that the existence of so many non-credible sites repeating, often word for word, the same claim, and the incredible dearth of actual data, of academic study might mean something?

The purpose of this little challenge is to hopefully demonstrate how easy it is to simply accept a story, without support, without backing, as opposed to actually doing the work of verifying what you are espousing to be true and factual. It's nothing serious, but hey, maybe you could learn something new?

I wish you luck.

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/pyramidlifts.htm

Sorry to be the one to reveal the boring truth, folks, but the way they built the pyramids was from the top, down....

People now stand at the bottom of the pyramids and say "Wow! Aren't they so tall!!"

But at the time those Pharoah dudes built it - the sand level was where we now look up and see the top of the pyramids.

Are you following me so far... ?

All they ever did was slide those big blocks along the sandy ground surface to the blocks they had already put into place...

AND THEN..... all they did was REMOVE THE SAND AROUND WHERE THE BLOCKS WERE...

The great mistake people have made all these years in relation to figuring out how they LIFTED those giant blocks UP the pyramid sides... is that everyone has made the FALSE ASSUMPTION that the ground they are now standing on was always where it is today....

The genius who worked for those Pharoah dudes figured out it would be FAR easier to remove and scrape away sand - than it would be to lift HUGE blocks.

That is the ancient secret of how they did it. I should know. I was there.

Umm.. ok, so they put the first block... how did they put the next blocks if they had to brush off the sand to make the form? They'd have to lift the blocks either way...



Yeah yeah, bullshit.

I know how to build a pyramid.
First, you find at least 6 people to invest in your venture.
Then each one of those people, find six more people to do the same thing.
Keep coaching your team, recruiting more investors, creat weekly meetings and charge everyone who attends these meetings. Have plenty of material for them to buy; to help boost their incentive to keep on investing and recruiting. And before you know it, you will be financially independent.
Tip: If Pre-Paid Legal call... hang-up

I didn't see this mentioned on the recent program that I saw about Tiauanaco, but I think I remember it from a previous program about ancient stone structures. As I remember it, the stone gate, is all one stone and weighs about 400 tons. The recent program I saw may have used the word slabs, plural indicating more than one that big.
Even if that is the only one that big, it is still 400 tons.
Any way the guy on the history channel, this week, said 400 tons, and he said it was at Tiauanaco, Bolivia.

Yes, well, the telly does say a lot of things. Like I said, maybe you should put in a little work into what you present as evidence. Don't just believe it because you heard it on the T.V. Look it to it. Confirm it.

If the only people who are calling this a mystery are the same mystery mongers who talk about aliens and unknown technology and such, and all of the people who have actually trained, researched, and done the archeological and anthropological studies on these people do not consider it a mystery, then perhaps that means something.

So, like I said, before claiming a gate that weighs 400 tons, in a city that couldn't possibly have been built, perhaps you should research a bit and see if everything the man on the telly said was accurate .

Indeed, colleges and universities teach a lot of things that we must put to the test to see if it is indeed the exactness of evidence.

This present intellectual skeptical society that controls our education claims to have the knowledge of the universe stored within their universities; they allege to have the truth just because they were trained by other skeptical people like themselves and who under their authority gave them titles according to their narrow way of thinking.

They believe that only the research made with all of their materialistic testing systems is what counts in the end. They cannot accept that the pyramids were built with other systems that they are not able to detect with their five senses. They are convinced that any other test that is not of their hands is worthless.

This is, was and will always be the way they think this society must work. They never think that all of their testing systems of a materialistic type are useless for individuals that are not bottled up within their tiny tridimensional world.

We have to judiciously analyze what this present materialistic culture (that serves as a foundation for countries and nations) actually is. We must search for the origin of all this corruption and all this perversity. It is not possible for this humanity to continue being a victim of ignorant minds that cannot perceive beyond this tridimensional world of Euclid. To agree with all of these theoretical nonsensically written books by skeptical minds is one hundred percent absurd.

We need to go beyond this Euclidean way of thinking and to trace the fourth co-ordinate, a new type of tetra-dimensional geometry needs to be elaborated. It is easy to comprehend that upon this living foundation, a revolutionary knowledge with four dimensions can be created.

Indeed, contemporary education becomes regressive, retarded and reactionary. It is a worthless tridimensional knowledge that never gives a satisfactory answer onto the many mysteries of our world and it is also worthless for the conquest of space because it is antiquated and extemporaneous.

i dont care wot people say, STELLAR, YOUR A LEGEND!!
keep upda good work

Your nasty and discussting, I've never seen anyone act as rude as you on any forum. I wonder how the moderators let you hang around. I know the fire burns in
your chest when you hear my words -this is the hate you carry inside you and reflect to the world.

Gremlin you have written an interesting concept, I like to listen to anyone who doesn't behave like a human animal. Thank you for your post.

freshprince2005 - exercising respect is an act of maturity that some people lack as in several clear cases as you see here . There is a primitive way of acting like a baboom if you believe that your ancestor is a monkey, opposite to those who know they were created by God himself. This is a perfect illustration of this belief vs. knowing, I hope you are enjoying this as much as I am.

Aquatis - if you type my name in the search engine or Gods name of your name are you gonna find yourself there? ofcourse not because not everything can be prooven by PEOPLE. Do you agree?

Now here is some interesting stuff:

The Belt of Orion has been linked to the Great Pyramid of Egypt.

http://www.crystalinks.com/orion.html

This picture is especially interesting to me because the belt of the man
at the place where the human reason is said to reside -in the gut area - the belt of Orion wraps and aligns with the pyraminds.

This is another interesting site about the pyramids:
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/barada/...y/pyr-giza.html

I'm not sure what you mean by Gods name of my name (my Christian name?), but I would submit to you that, given your (real) name, a person who knows their way around the internet could indeed find you in many places, and provide a great deal of evidence to support your existence. Would this prove that you exist? No, it would not. But it would support the high probability of your existence, would you agree?

But that is neither here nor there. There are people here who have heard claims from strangers on the television and have decided that these claims are worthy of their support. My challenge to them was, quite simply, to seek alternate sources for these claims. Not to stop believing in them, not to believe everything I am saying, but simply to look for other sources of these claims that they are holding to be credible.

Contrary to popular opinion, I have no enmity against any ideas in particular. I really don't care a great deal about how unlikely or improbable any given notion may be. What I do care about, however, is how that person perceives it. If a person understands that we have documented evidence, pictures, text, and various other pieces of evidence that give a clear picture of how the pyramid was built, but instead chooses to believe aliens did it, then that is entirely up to them. That is a conscious decision they have made, having considered all available evidence and given it an open-minded evaluation. I don't agree with it, but my agreement is irrelevant. In this forum, there are a great many young people, whose fiery hearts and inquisitive intellects are at their peak as they search for a greater meaning in this whole world beyond themselves that they only so very recently realized existed. What I do, my purpose in posting in this website, is to show one method in which information can be analyzed, in which verifiability and credibility may be established. I do not espouse Truth; in fact, I do not even believe in it. My goal is to show the person who would unquestioningly believe a claim that something impossible happened, instead to go out and learn, and see whether it truly was impossible or not. The idea of a person limiting themselves like that, of a person believing that we simply don't have the capability to do things without the need of magic, of aliens, of unexplained phenomena, that idea is what I fight against.

This is what I am encouraging. Research. Looking into claims. Not accepting things at face value. If someone tells you the pyramid was made by aliens, check it out. If some tells you they were made by slaves, check it out. If someone tells you they were made by workers using ramps, sleds, and copper tools, check it out. Only by doing your own research will you slowly come to realize that some ideas have substantial support, others have less, and some have none at all.

I'm not asking him to find proof of his claims. I'm asking him to look into them. I'm asking him questions that would make him think, and consider. If he wishes to think it is impossible, that is all well and good, but prior to thinking something is impossible, wouldn't it be nice to see if it could actually be done? Why limit yourself simply because a total stranger on TV said it couldn't be done?

Lol.



Im tired of being told that their belief is "the truth" because they make some sort of outrageous and unsupported claim like he did. You want to talk about rude, adress him before you address me.



You mean to tell me I'm rude when you go around telling us your belief is fact?

Yes, I do, but I would have to be in your profession.


Agreed

My challenge to them was, quite simply, to seek alternate sources for these claims. Not to stop believing in them, not to believe everything I am saying, but simply to look for other sources of these claims that they are holding to be credible.
But these other sources come from other people too



I respect your opinion and I can say the same about my understanding that you already know, that I am able to travel out of my body like you do in your sleep and very real see the astral world that is as real to you as this physical world. Of course I cannot prove my dream or document it but in essence it is as real as the books that are written.
There are many people like me who have an overly developed sixth sense, some people call them psychic which I am not but it doesn’t mean that I cannot understand the same way, it only mean that I deal with the information in a different way. You do agree that we are not alone in the universe and that there are greater possibilities to the reality that man has always believed in don’t you?
Look at the way different cases are handled in court, evidence is presented of all sorts too but an innocest person is still sent to jail only to find out 20 yrs later of that the evidence was tampered with, is it not presented by people as well?


Respectfull, I support this 100%.



Agree