A lone geologist is taking on all of Egyptology with his claim that the Great Sphinx in Egypt is centuries - perhaps even millennia - older than the accepted dating. Robert Schoch, speaking in the free 'world-mysteries' PDF magazine Sub Rosa , claims that the movement of rain water on the famous Giza Plateau provides solid evidence for his claim."The majority of water run-off, affecting the western and southern walls of the Sphinx enclosure, ended with the quarrying work that took place during the construction of the Great Pyramid, circa 2550 B.C.," Schoch says. The implication of this simple evidence is devastating to the orthodox dating of the enigmatic structure: "This means that the earliest portions of the Great Sphinx must predate the Great Pyramid."

Schoch, the author of a new book titled "Pyramid Quest", thinks it is time that the focus of the Sphinx redating debate was shifted. "The question is not whether the Great Sphinx is older than the traditional dating, but how much older," he says."I believe that the oldest portions of the Sphinx must date back to pre-dynastic times," Schoch reveals. The complete interview with Robert Schoch is available from the "Sub Rosa" website (http://subrosa.dailygrail.com).

View: Full Article | Source: Daily Grail Sub Rosa

Oh looky here! Another site with Free Down loads. I want the one named" Virus". I love them pesky little things! Joking.

I have heard this argument before, but the erosion can not be proved to be made with rain water. I think I will need more evidence than what is shown by running water over simular models.

^I agree, he needs far, far moer evidence than this to disprove history that many would rather see remain even if it isn`t the true history, he does indeed face an uphill battle!

Read Marduk's forum entry on the robert snooch forum. He has a very interesting and believable theory on the sumerians, and if you are interested in this, the article will most certainly be worth a read.

I'm all for this. About time someone figured that out.

I think its halarious that the generally accepted origins of the sphinx needs to be disproved when it has never even been proved in the first place!

I'm glad someone is taking up the plight. Discoveries are often made by a lone individual with determination and drive and scoft by others who are close minded to their theories and ideas.

If he does have good evidence, then I can't wait to see it, however I do recall reading some of his earlier work, and it did contain some rather grave errors. Of course, that was two decades ago, and it is entirely possible that he has better material now.

The prime questions that I would want answers on would be:

1) If the Sphynx was built after the Great Pyramid, how does that explain the blocks of stone that have been matched to the outcropping that used to be above the enclosure of the Sphynx?

2) Why does the westward wall angle to conform to the walkway of the pyramid, instead of being a normal, rectangular wall, like the other two. Why does it follow the path of a walkway that presumably wasn't built until after the Sphynx was?

3) Why isn't the erosion pattern on the Sphynx replicated on other structures made of similar materials and of similar origins.

I think it safe to say the Egyptians built around the Sphinx to conform with its alignment, which was already established with the stars.

But that completely ignores the questions I posed.

If the pyramids were built around the Sphynx, why are some of the pyramid stones geologically identical to the stone from the outcropping that the Sphynx is in (meaning they used to be what filled in the hole that the Sphynx currently occupies)?

If the pyramid walkway was built after the Sphynx, why is the wall of the Sphynx enclosure angled to the walkway? Would the wall be a normal, straight wall, and the walkway be angled to follow it?

The Sphinx was probably built as a lone structure, perhaps to house something, why would there be a chamber underneath it? Who knows. No walkways were built towards it. They were build afterwards.

Chamber? Are you talking about that Cayce thing?

The pyramid walkway goes from the pyramid towards the plain in front of the Sphynx. The final stretch of it runs along the border of the Sphynx enclosure. The walkway is not paralled to the enclosure, but at a slight angle, so the final product is that the straight walkway is at a slight angle to the straight, 90 degree East wall of the Sphynx enclosure. Now, the Sphynx enclosure has an East wall, a back wall, and a West wall. The East wall and the back wall make a rectangular enclosure, and if the Sphynx was built independently of anything else, then we should expect the West wall to be identical, meaning that the enclosure would be a normal rectangular shape. If it was like this, then all the pyramid walkway would need is to continue running along the existing rock, however, this is not the case. The West wall is not rectangular, it is cut away at the same angle as the Pyramid walkway. In other words, if the enclosure wall had been cut into a proper rectangle, the pyramid walkway would have been undercut and would have collapsed. The only reason I can think of why this would be the case is that the walkway existed before the Sphynx did. If the Sphynx had existed before the walkway, then what would have been the purpose for the angled west wall?

About the only two causes for the erosion are wind and rain. There is considerable difference in the results of each. I tend to agree, this erosion dicidedly was caused by running water, not wind. If it was caused by running water, and if sufficient rain hasn't fallen to cause this erosion since the Great Pyramid was supposedly constructed, then either the time period of the construction of the Great Pyramid is wrong, the Sphinx was made before the Great Pyramid, or the rainfall estimates are wrong. All of the rest is moot. It is not possible to date stones like this any way that I know of.

The question is, however, how much water caused the erosion. There are those who claim that the amount of erosion is consistant with the regular rainfall filtering through the sand (remember that the Sphynx is in an enclosure built into the rock supporting the pyramids. It would work in the same way as the dimple in a measuring cup works, funnelling the water into the plains).

wasn't the sphinx built with the Great pyramid? they were both built for the same guy some pharoah starting with a K. and i think its really stupid that people refer to things as being prehistoric. how can something b before history. everything that has happened in the past is history.

Everything we do is history.

No one is sure about the story of the sphinx, but there is some speculation that the head/face has been manipulated over time to look like whatever pharoah was in power at that time.

And by prehistoric it is meant ' before recorded history'. Until man developed a language, there was (obviously) no way to pass on information.

Written language

Oh, not necessarily. There were oral histories before cunieform, although they were of course more subject to change and evolution.

I just meant in the sense that 'prehistory' generally means before 'written history' - I'm sure our ancestors were busy telling tall tales round the camp fire 50,000 years ago or more

word-of-mouth

the theory is that they found the body and gave it a new head. The problem with that, though, is where is the rest of the civilization? Did they wake up one morning and decide to build a lion statue? Isn't just finding a statue that size a bit like finding the Statue of Liberty, but no New York?