If you really want to know how the pyramids were aligned then forget everything you know concerning Robert Bauval's Orion's Belt 'Star Correlation' theory. This is absolutely NOT the underlying design mechanism the ancients used to lay out their pyramids - it is a Red Herring. The ancients used something much simpler and logical - basic maths. You can read this amazingly simple new theory in my new book, 'The Giza Oracle'. The first chapter which explains this new theory is free to read on the lulu site. If you would like to comment on this new theory please drop me a note. Best wishes.

Scott Creighton
Author, THE GIZA ORACLE

So as you are not accused of spamming why not give us a few tid bits from your book to initiate discussion.

And tell us where to find it. I finally found the book section but didn't know the category.

Dude - you need a marketing plan - bigtime. A Google on your name revealed nothing - even with the word pyramid. And denigrating someone else's work online will get you nowhere. A more respectful approach would be to say that your knowledge (I suspect it is much stronger than mere theory) is an alternative approach to Bauval's. Good luck anyhow though.

Does your theory involve the solstice?

Is there any explanation of the interior of the pyramids at Giza?

Apologies - you can read this new theory here:

-Edit-

Look forward to your thoughts.

S.C.

Apologies - you can read more about this new theory here:

-Edit-

As you will see when you read my work, I do not criticise Robert Bauval's theory - I merely put it into context of a much bigger picture. Indeed, Robert Bauval - as far as I am concerned - is an inspiration but I think he only saw a small part of a much bigger picture.

I look forward to your thoughts on this new theory.

Best wishes,

S.C.

Solstice - no.

Interior - partly. The full book explains the purpose of the Pyramid Shafts as a 'Horizon Map'. The pyramid shafts were designed to show how the skies above Giza shifted approxmately 4.7 degrees in ancient times. Of course, it was not the sky that shifted but the Earth's surface.

Best wishes,

S.C.

just read your article, looks intresting ill buy the book shortly.
but regarding the solicastes what do you think consedering there are buildings in Ireland Newgrange 500 years older than the egyptian pyramids that is aligned as is Stonehenge. South American pyramids. North American mounds, Canary island pyramids and many more sites.
Whats your take on that just conicendce that they are all aligned or more to it, i personally belive there is a message somewhere in the whole thing. what say you.

I'm not entirely sure about all the sites you list. However, my book explains why the ancients aligned the pyramid sites of Giza, Teotihuacan and Xi'an (White Pyramid) in a single straight line around the globe. The capped this by placing a Benben (capstone) at the site of Rosslyn Chapel in Scotland. The book explains exacyly why the ancients did this.

Hope you find it answers some of your questions.

Best wishes,

S.C.

Giza, I was wonderng if you know where a budding webmaster might acquire some royalty-free pictures of the great Pyramid for use in a website? I want to revamp them with Photoshop as well and perhaps even place these revamped images on t-shirts and such eventually. Any ideas? I placed a few ads where I said I was willing to pay cash for pictures along with a signed release form but no one has stepped up to the plate so far. I'll have a look at the link this PM.

not sure what u mean, newgrange is aligned, the pyramids in the canary islands are aligned, remote sites have been found in south america not just the major sites, the snake mound in ohio is aligned, stonehenge is aligned, carnac france is aligned,, so you feel that there is a bigger reason for all of this.
yeah ill read your book,

Here are a couple of pictures of Newgrange.

Been there, Irish. Fascinating place.

Thing is, I know it's 000's of years old, but it actually looks like it was built yesterday (until you get very close). I know it's well maintained but from afar it just doesn't look old. Going inside to see some of the ancient symbols on the interior is great. It's a very atmospheric place.

I have an old thread on the subject and have a lot of history studying them. For more pictures I have taken check out.....
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum...c=66477&hl=

I looked at the preview and still have a question.

What is your theory?


Also, what is the message?

Interesting theory but unfortunately it raises that rather tired idea of some very technologically advanced culture assisting the Egyptians to create their wonderful monuments. If this is so then why didnt they leave a much clearer message of who they were and how they got there? The Pyramids have stood without change for millenia so why not inscribe onto their walls and internal passages and rooms who the designers really where and what message they wanted to leave?
If the Egyptians had inherited their knowledge of mathematics then why didnt they record it in their history?
If you want to cite a building that carries a message for contemporary man then use the Parthenon. The mathematical genius that went into the construction of the Parthenon far exceeds that of the Pyramids

I'm glad to see somebody saying Bauval got it wrong, which he (of course) most certainly did. On the other hand, it saddens me to see yet another charlatan out there trying to scam money from the uneducated masses by pretending that there is some "Pyramid Alignment Mystery" that requires "explaining."

There is (also of course) no such mystery and hence there is no need for any explanation. Anyone buying this man's book should take it as fictional or just go ahead and admit that you are a dupe.

Harte

I don't see any reason to assume that either Bauval or Mr. Creighton here is anything other than sincere in proffering these theories. And I do find that the Giza necropolis raises a lot of interesting questions that have yet to be answered with much authority. Sure, I'd call them puzzles or mysteries.

I just don't know what the OP is getting at. It looks to me as if the chapter he posted is just a teaser for the book. If he has a theory about an important message for all mankind, I wish he'd come out and say what it is.

I'd also be interested in information about the author's scholarly background, and if his theory has not been submitted for peer review, then why not.

Edit: 3 days later and no answer. Another thread started by another drive-by poster. I'm not even going to bump this sorry thing.

Mr. Creighton,

I can't find your book at Lulu, and I can't make the animation work at either address (GOCT or the other). I'm very interested in the Queen's pyramids orientation and would like to see all the work.

Any help would be appreciated, or please write me.

Thanks,

Allan Spreen
nutrimd@gmail.com

Well in a way it was

Newgrange was considerably restored by Michael O'Kelly in the 1960s and 1970s. It was in quite a state prior to this - they took some of it to pieces and rebuilt it - they also refaced alot of the quartz on the front, and mended the broken kerbstones...

If you are interested he wrote a book called - Newgrange; Archaeology, art and legend, published in 1982 (Thames and Hudson) detailing the excavation and restoration of this amazing monument.

I'm hoping to see it sometime this year, time permitting.

Hey Allan,

I couldn't find it at lulu either but you can see it on this site
I found it interesting to say the least. I can see merit in what he is saying.

Hey you old debunker of Myth's,
Still at it I see.
Go to this site and at least try to understand what the man is saying before you try to debunk it.

Quoting Scott Creighton's conclusion:
"It is safe to say that just this cursory view of the Great Pyramid brings the fanatically accepted and widely disseminated orthodox doctrines of human builders into serious doubt. With blustery pomposity and callous disregard for glaring contradictions to their antiquated theories they draw a shadowy veil over the world’s largest enigma. And this is more serious than overprotective academic snobbery. This is the largest and possibly oldest building on earth. Considering the incredible engineering in this structure it makes no sense to tout a millenniums old hypothesis. Many attempts have been made to try and duplicate the original builder’s mysterious construction methods and have proven nothing. What is telling have been attempts recently to just move some of the blocks in the structure for renovation purposes. The blocks could not be shifted by any conventional techniques and had to be broken up into smaller pieces just to move them. Demolition would be out of the question. So what kind of an ego could insist that technologically ancient man could have built such a wonder when modern space age man can’t even tear it down? No, men did not build the Great Pyramid. Someone or something with knowledge and tools far beyond our understanding built it. All the doctorates, titles, publishing credits, and institutions in the world cannot and will not change that fact."

I happen to agree with this statement with the following reservation: Men did build the Pyramid, just far more advanced than we like to believe.

scott creightons work has been debunked at another forum
Robert Bauval also stated that he thought it contrived as the maps Scott used weren't good enough
Creighton at first said his alignment was extremely accurate and then when informed his map was inaccuarte changed his opinion to say that the alignment was symbolic
like most of these type of people the ultimate message that these apparently advanced high tech builders were trying to send was "buy scotts book"

Hey Creighton, using your formula for placing the blocks over a 20 year period and applying it to the quarrying of the blocks would mean a block would be cut every 2 mins as well. But if you had 10000 masons it would take 2 and a half years. Is this correct?
Also using your formula of 33 blocks being placed every hour, say you had 33 teams of 100 men (3300 men) working on the site, that would easily be possible given the size of it - then each team would place 1 block per hour coming to the same conclusion after 20 years.
I know that doesnt explain much about everything else but Im just looking at it from every angle.

Carlin Starlin

Ttry this gigantic endeavor on for size
Quote Wikipedia

"1978 by Technical Director Merle Booker of the Indiana Limestone Institute of America. Consisting of 33 quarries, the Institute is considered by many architects to be one of the world’s leading authorities on limestone. Using modern equipment, the study concludes:

“Utilizing the entire Indiana Limestone industry’s facilities as they now stand [for 33 quarries], and figuring on tripling present average production, it would take approximately 27 years to quarry, fabricate and ship the total requirements.”

Booker points out the time study assumes sufficient quantities of railroad cars would be available without delay or downtime during this 27 year period and does not factor in the increasing costs of completing the work".

Notice he said triple output for 27 years and there are 33 quarries

As far as I know there were only 3 quarry sites involved with the building of GP

Sorry it has een so long before responding to you.

I am not a scholar - I consider myself a free thinker. Scholars tend not to have that luxury.

MY work is entirely original and as such has no peer.

Here's a link explaining my theory in a bit more detail. (It's a 35mb Powerpoint Presentation). Thanks for looking.

http://www.thegizaoracle.co.uk/gc-totg.pps

Best wishes,

Scott Creighton

Sorry - but I think you are confusing my work with someone else's. I have never made any such claims.

Regards,

Scott Creighton

Sorry - I don't know where you have obtained this but it is not from anything I have written.

Regards,

Scott Creighton

I'd like to leave this thread open as it covers an interesting subject, however please avoid posting commercial links or links to sites selling books etc. as this constitutes unsolicited advertising. Links to sites on this area to provide more information are fine so long as they are not aimed at promoting or selling a product.

From our forum terms of service:


Thankyou.

My work has not been debunked although there have been many such attempts to do so. No doubt this will continue. Robert Bauval NEVER said my work was 'contrived'. He offered advice to use a more acceptable groundplan of Giza which I subsequently did. I updated my claim to state that the new map provides an error from centre of only 0.02% - I never said it was updated to being only 'symbolic'. See here:

http://www.thegizaoracle.co.uk/Flash/GPW-I...gent-Design.swf

The ultimate message of my work is NOT about 'book sales'. Indeed, my book is not even on sale. Here's the 'message' of my work (FOR FREE):

http://www.thegizaoracle.co.uk/gc-totg.pps

and here (FOR FREE):

http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/CreightonS2.php

Regards,

Scott Creighton

Hello Allan,

My book is no longer on sale. However, you can preview some of my work here:

http://www.thegizaoracle.co.uk/Flash/GPW-I...gent-Design.swf

http://www.thegizaoracle.co.uk/gc-totg.pps

http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/CreightonS2.php

Best wishes,

Scott Creighton

Hello SaruMan,

Thanks for keeping the thread open. Just to let you know, the links I have posted are for direct file downloads from my website (Flash and Powerpoint presentations of my work). My book is NOT for sale and cannot be purchased from my website, or indeed, any website.

Regards,

Scott Creighton

I am interested in your book and I hope it can be shipped to Brazil. Though I have one question? How this idea/theory came to you. Did you visit the pyramids? If yes, how many times? Did you make any researches while there?

Hello Feanor,

My book is presently offline. A new revised edition will be available in the near future.

I have never visited the pyamids at Giza although I will be doing so shortly. My ideas came to me through a simple study of the geometry of the site from analysing numerous groundplans. Also, I made an intriguing discovery at Rosslyn Chapel here in Scotland which set me on this path.

Best wishes,

Scott Creighton

Dear Mr. Creighton
Mr. bauval was correct concerning the star alignments of the kings chamber (alpha draconis and zeta orionis) in 2450 BC, his analisis of the queens chamber star shafts was wrong though. They too are pointed at the same two stars but at a diferrant time-10400BC.

Hello Gizaoracle,
I would be very interested (as a KT) to hear of this intriguing discovery you made at Rosslyn Chapel
Regards

I disagree with Badawy/Trimble/Bauval on this. I do not accept the purpose of these shafts as being star-shafts for the purposes of sending the King's soul to the stars. There are 4 of these shafts. How many souls does the King have? Why are these shafts unique to the GP? It is my opinion that these shafts serve an entirely different purpose altogether.

Regards,

SC

Hello SC
You are correct in that THE GREAT PYRAMID was not built as a tomb , it is a memmorial. The shafts are meant to mark the same two stars at two vastly differant times. The time the pyramid was built and 10400BC, the time of a major meteor impact.

Hello Joe,

The purpose of the GP shafts are explained in my book , 'The Giza Oracle'. This presents the GP shafts as being horizon indicators, demonstrating to us how the Earth's horizon shifted approximately 4.7* (at Giza) during the Earth cataclysm of around 12,500 years ago.

Regards,

Scott Creighton