Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Big Bad Voodoo

Sphinx and GP dates from 10 500 BC?

1,651 posts in this topic

I completey agree, but yet they do go on :0)The only fansinated thing about the great pyramid is why khafre had those shafts put in.

Oh, ye of little faith.

Everything is simple if you just assume the answers. If you trust wiki for answers

then everything that can be known is known. But when you dig into any topic what-

soever you'll find it is not so cut and dried. The Sphinx has yet to be positively dated

and no records survive from the time it was built.

Reality appears different from every perspective and no one can state positively

which perspective is the most accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

opps, khufu:)

LOL Good save.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SC: Indeed. Good to see you found the evidence without me having to cite it chapter and verse. Ready made storage/redistribution vessels. Why go to all the trouble of making such storage/distribution vessels from scratch when they already had a ready-made supply that could be recycled?

SC: Dream on. KMT_Sesh is hardly the fount of all knowledge and he certainly seems to have been unaware that the Ibis bird was revered in AE as the 'harbinger of the flood'. The Ibis ALSO symbolised the AE god, Thoth whom the AEs believed would send a great deluge to drown all of Egypt. And that is even before we begin to analyse the AE word for 'pyramid' (actually a Greek word) which in AE was 'm r'. I'll leave you to work that one out for yourself.

SC: Then by that standard it would be the worst possible place to inter a king whose body is supposed to remain intact and not to decay in a sodden tomb. Over and above which, the vast quantities of seeds recovered from under this pyramid complex showed no sign of water ingress. There was a reason they built the Recovery Vaults on high plateaus.

SC: Why would you expect it to still contain recovery goods? That was the point! Unlike the mummified remains of AE kings, the recovery goods stored in and around the pyramid complex were MEANT to be removed (when it was deemed necessary to do so). Mummies weren't meant to be removed. But we still have enough recovery items recovered from two of the eleven galleries under Djoser's pyramid and elsewhere in that pyramid complex to know what its purpose was. That is REAL HARD evidence supporting the RVT. Where's your mummies?

SC: See above. It was sealed (from the top) when the chambers were filled. There is good evidence to suggest that the three granite plugs at the bottom of the Ascending Passage of the GP were placed in-situ as the pyramid was being built layer by layer. Why seal the entrance when the king's coffin is supposed to pass through there? This makes perfect sense in terms of the RVT but absolutely not in terms of the PTT (Pyramid Tomb Theory).

SC: Alas for you, I actually have the recovery goods to support my theory. Where's your mummies?

SC: The Arab texts state both - flood first, then drought. So I will not disagree with you on that point.

SC

kmt_sesh may not be "the font of all knowledge" as you put it, yet I generally take the word of someone who has been involved or at least studied a subject for a number of years over someone who has put his own interpretation on an inscription who has far less time and experience with the same subject.

This article is of interest concerning the underground cavern: http://www.talkingpyramids.com/new-shaft-found-in-worlds-oldest-pyramid/

In particular this part of the article:

The rising water table is causing large salt deposits to form in the underground network of tunnels and galleries underneath the pyramid and deep cracks are forming in the walls. This is obviously a major concern as the rising water table continues to weaken the bedrock, increasing the risk of cave-ins.

The caverns would have been flooded during a catastrophic flood from the rising water table that evidently is not that far below the complex.

Where are the mummies? If memory serves, Djoser's mummy is buried in the center of the underground complex. There is no reason to bury a mummy in a recovery vault so that alone puts a dent in your assumption that it is.

Was the Great Pyramid a recovery vault?

  • The Great Pyramid, according to you, was a recovery vault to recover after a catastrophic flood.
  • There is no evidence in Djoser's underground complex to indicate a catastrophic flood occurred at any time since it's construction.
  • Since the flood had not occurred, the recovery materials inside the Great pyramid would have remained undisturbed as they were not needed.
  • The plugs and seals in the Great Pyramid were not meant to be opened once sealed and would have required the destruction of those seals to reach the inside.
  • The seals were untouched at the time the Arabs drilled a hole in the side of the pyramid.
  • The Arabs found nothing inside the Great Pyramid.

Since there was nothing inside the pyramid and no indication of any entry before the Arabs broke in, IMO it shows the Great Pyramid was not a recovery vault.

Alas for you, you have what you believe to be recovery goods, but have yet to explain why there was a mummy in the supposed recovery vault in Djoser's Pyramid, nor where all the supposed recovery materials vanished to that should have been in the Great Pyramid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where are the mummies? If memory serves, Djoser's mummy is buried in the center of the underground complex. There is no reason to bury a mummy in a recovery vault so that alone puts a dent in your assumption that it is.

There is no known burial in any great pyramid. This is assumption.

The builders repeatedly said the pyramid was the ka of the king and his grave was in the sky.

Here's something written in a more modern lnguage that agrees precisely with what the Pyramid

Texts says. It is Borghouts 10(4, 1).

...I will annihilate his corpse on the day of the Sokar Festival, I will root out his ba on the five additional days of the year, I will set fire to him at the beginning of the great season.

He was also called "flame-in-his-face".

Orthodox interpretations do not fit the evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The seals were untouched at the time the Arabs drilled a hole in the side of the pyramid.

The granite blocking stones are not "seals" per se because they were built in place in

all probability. Anything sealed inside was sealed inside as it was being built. This is

far more consistent with the concept of a recovery vault than it is with a burial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no known burial in any great pyramid. This is assumption.

The builders repeatedly said the pyramid was the ka of the king and his grave was in the sky.

Here's something written in a more modern lnguage that agrees precisely with what the Pyramid

Texts says. It is Borghouts 10(4, 1).

He was also called "flame-in-his-face".

Orthodox interpretations do not fit the evidence.

Actually cladking, it's not. The wooden coffin and body of a boy aged 8 to 10 was found under Djoser's pyramid along with a partial pelvis of a 18-19 year old girl.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually cladking, it's not. The wooden coffin and body of a boy aged 8 to 10 was found under Djoser's pyramid along with a partial pelvis of a 18-19 year old girl.

I meant there is no proven burial of any Egyptian king in any great pyramid.

Indeed, there is no proof that there was any burial that took place in the great

pyramids at the the time they were built. If there is no burial then they might

have not been tombs just as the "builders" said.

If they were not tombs then our job becomes to discover what they really were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant there is no proven burial of any Egyptian king in any great pyramid.

Indeed, there is no proof that there was any burial that took place in the great

pyramids at the the time they were built. If there is no burial then they might

have not been tombs just as the "builders" said.

If they were not tombs then our job becomes to discover what they really were.

So you've finally found a 4th dynasty text then, mentioning the Giza Pyramids? Good, since I've been waiting on a valid citation.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes the dating of a body found in an Old Kingdom pyramid has shown it to be an intrusive, later burial, such as the mummy found in the pyramid of Menkaure (among others). Sometimes it's not clear to which period a body might belong. In other cases there's no real reason to doubt that a mummy (or part thereof) dates to some later period. I believe the remains of the boy and perhaps the teenage girl found below the Step Pyramid have been questioned as to time of origin, but not really the mummified foot found in the burial chamber of the Step Pyramid. There's no overt or obvious reason to doubt that this is what's left of Djoser.

Wanting it not to be Djoser so that one's fringe beliefs can live another day, is not a valid reason. It's clear the Egyptians themselves regarded the pyramids as tombs, or they would not have used them for burials at later times. Why should one question the Egyptians? I think they were perfectly capable of recognizing a cemetery for a cemetery. If it's that obvious to us modern folks, it was even more so to them.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Khufu would not allow his workers "potty breaks" when working on the pyramid. This angered his workers, who, after consuming their evening ration of beer, would sneak down to the Sphinx (Khufu's image) and express themselves in a most inappropriate manner by climbing the Sphinx and urinarting down the sides. The most intrepid of the workers would climb to the very top of the monument and, grabbing the head of the snake, point to the rising sun in the East and let loose. The resulting liquid flow (over the many years of construction) resulted in the fissures seen on the sides of the Sphinx as well a the reduction in the size of the Sphinx's head in relation to the body. It also led to the expression "pxxx off!"

Yes, I'm being facetious, but this actually has more scientific merit than erosion by 'fine sand'. At least the urine has acid in it to hasten the erosion. Anyone who's sandblasted anything knows theres just an overall reduction in image. Sand somehow cascading down the sides of the monument might produce the effect, but the enclosure would fill long before the wear was there. Claiming that somehow the monument eroded after it was buried in sand is ludicrous beyond belief. Rather than stick your head in the 'fine sand' why not come up with a water erosion scenario that fits your timeline. How many acid rain events (volcanic eruptions?) would it take to produce the efffect? Could the AE's have regularly have washed down the monument to remove sand when it was an active site? Why not get the Egyptians to remove some of the early repairs to compare erosion patterns?(if the patterns are the same than the erosion happened very long ago). Just declaring water erosion impossible without proof is just plain lazy science!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The granite blocking stones are not "seals" per se because they were built in place in

all probability. Anything sealed inside was sealed inside as it was being built. This is

far more consistent with the concept of a recovery vault than it is with a burial.

I referred to the granite blocks as seals since they effectively sealed the pyramid making access impossible without the destruction of those blocks.

A recovery vault, while protecting the materials inside would have been made so those knowing how, could enter and retrieve what was needed and then closed again for reuse. The Great Pyramid was made so once sealed it would have required the destruction of the stone blocks to gain entry. It would have been quite difficult to replace those blocks showing that it would have been a single use recovery vault. Now do you seriously think they would have built such a structure as a recovery vault to be used but once?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I referred to the granite blocks as seals since they effectively sealed the pyramid making access impossible without the destruction of those blocks.

A recovery vault, while protecting the materials inside would have been made so those knowing how, could enter and retrieve what was needed and then closed again for reuse. The Great Pyramid was made so once sealed it would have required the destruction of the stone blocks to gain entry. It would have been quite difficult to replace those blocks showing that it would have been a single use recovery vault. Now do you seriously think they would have built such a structure as a recovery vault to be used but once?

And for a flood that never happened?

A better question would be, why put a Recovery Vault so close to the Nile when there are better, higher places in Egypt to place one.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claiming that somehow the monument eroded after it was buried in sand is ludicrous beyond belief

Yet the erosion occured because it was buried. It was proved that water condenses under the top layer of sand, and over time this water, running downhill around the Sphinx, has caused the erosion within the timeline of the Sphinx being constructed approximately 4 500 years ago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I referred to the granite blocks as seals since they effectively sealed the pyramid making access impossible without the destruction of those blocks.

A recovery vault, while protecting the materials inside would have been made so those knowing how, could enter and retrieve what was needed and then closed again for reuse. The Great Pyramid was made so once sealed it would have required the destruction of the stone blocks to gain entry. It would have been quite difficult to replace those blocks showing that it would have been a single use recovery vault. Now do you seriously think they would have built such a structure as a recovery vault to be used but once?

On the one hand (in this specific instance), we have the concept the pyramid was designed

and intended to save the enture Egyptian country from starvation and on the other we have

the idea that the pyramid's sole function was to serve as a tomb. I believe "tomb" loses this

particular argument.

I personally am just looking at the probabilities of the various ideas based upon the extent

evidence. There is so little evidence it can be difficult to even assign the absolute probabil-

ities so one is left comparing the various theories to one another. I believe orthodoxy loses

in almost every single case and the truth will prove to be an amalgam of various alternative

ideas. The evidence against the pyramid being a tomb just keeps stacking higher. We will

find when science gets a say that the builders were not like we picture them. We have crea-

ted a frankensteins monster out of the little evidence that exists but this monster can't be real

because it fails to obey the laws of nature or to match most of the evidence.

I can't prove the pyramid wasn't a tomb but I can show the ancients said it wasn't. I can show

the illogic of the paradigm that holds it was a tomb and question why the science that could

prove it was a tomb isn't being carried out. I can point out that no one can prove it was a

tomb or find any direct supporting evidence from the era it was built. All things considered

it seems the odds that it was built as a tomb are low (<20%). It seems perfectly reasonable

to speculate or argue about what its function was intended to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, so just how can alternaviks say they are correct and "consensus/orthodoxy" is wrong, when there so many bizarre and conflicting alternavik theories. There can only be one truth, one reality. It is ridiculous to say that alternaviks are correct, because it is impossible that they are all correct. Though in the Alice through the looking glass world of fantasy and DELIBERATE FRAUD of the alternaviks, anything is possible

Edited by Atentutankh-pasheri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just declaring water erosion impossible without proof is just plain lazy science!

To a very real extent "science" is merely an explanation for what is seen. We expect nature to behave

the same way in the labratory as it behaves everywhere but it is observation that defines the very nature

of nature. You are expecting too much of science since we can't transport the Sphinx into the lab and

undo time or clone it to have a control. This isn't to say the lessons of science are unreal so much as

to point out that if nature behaved a little differently then we'd still have a glib explanatyion for why things

are the way they are. We still wouldn't really know how to apply our knowledge to the complexities of the

real world where long times and small scales can throw off all our calculations. We still can't apply the

tiny amount we know against the huge amount we don't know.

Anything said about the cause of erosion of the Sphinx is apparently largely opinion. Certainly the ex-

perts' opinion should carry more weight than the uninfomed or crackpots but we do not at this time have

the knowledge or data to solve this question. We don't even really know all the facts that apply to the

questions of what caused the erosion.

It might not be relevant since my knowledge is so limited here but I tend to side with the majority opinion

a little bit here except where they claim significant erosion after burial and where there is a pretense of

having all the facts at hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, so just how can alternaviks say they are correct and "consensus/orthodoxy" is wrong, when there so many bizarre and conflicting alternavik theories. There can only be one truth, one reality. It is ridiculous to say that alternaviks are correct, because it is impossible that they are all correct. Though in the Alice through the looking glass world of fantasy and DELIBERATE FRAUD of the alternaviks, anything is possible

Nobody can be completely wrong about anything (except for Congress).

The simple fact is we eacgh see a unique perspective and oftiomes we are describing the same elephant

from a different viewpoint and other times we are describing very similar things from other angles.

Of course orthodoxy isn't truly "wrong" about everything related to the great pyramid builders, but to a very

real extent all orthodox opinion about the great pyramid are founded on four basic assumptions that are

each wrong. This doesn't mean that Egyptologists can't be expert on the subjects or even that every in-

dividual orthodox expert is wrong about anything. It merely means that all Egyptological thought founded

on the erroneous assumptions is wrong. Meanwhile "alternaviks" have been doing the same thing Egypto-

logists do; deducing the facts based on little evidence. Most of these alt theories are not dependent on the

four big assumptions or all of these assumptions so they have a higher probability of being correct. Every

levitation ray theory doesn't necessarily have even a grain of truth but people should pay more attention

to them anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the one hand (in this specific instance), we have the concept the pyramid was designed

and intended to save the enture Egyptian country from starvation and on the other we have

the idea that the pyramid's sole function was to serve as a tomb. I believe "tomb" loses this

particular argument.

I personally am just looking at the probabilities of the various ideas based upon the extent

evidence. There is so little evidence it can be difficult to even assign the absolute probabil-

ities so one is left comparing the various theories to one another. I believe orthodoxy loses

in almost every single case and the truth will prove to be an amalgam of various alternative

ideas. The evidence against the pyramid being a tomb just keeps stacking higher. We will

find when science gets a say that the builders were not like we picture them. We have crea-

ted a frankensteins monster out of the little evidence that exists but this monster can't be real

because it fails to obey the laws of nature or to match most of the evidence.

I can't prove the pyramid wasn't a tomb but I can show the ancients said it wasn't. I can show

the illogic of the paradigm that holds it was a tomb and question why the science that could

prove it was a tomb isn't being carried out. I can point out that no one can prove it was a

tomb or find any direct supporting evidence from the era it was built. All things considered

it seems the odds that it was built as a tomb are low (<20%). It seems perfectly reasonable

to speculate or argue about what its function was intended to be.

Still waiting on that IVth Dynasty textual citation. Did you lose it already?

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of these alt theories are not dependent on the

four big assumptions or all of these assumptions so they have a higher probability of being correct. Every

levitation ray theory doesn't necessarily have even a grain of truth but people should pay more attention

to them anyway.

Well, I will believe people who are properly trained and have spent their lives digging in the sand of Egypt. Clearly you prefer this nonsense from "Breaking the Mirror of Heaven" by Robert Bauval and Ahmed Osman.

Quotes about the "murder" of Tutankhamun by being hanged by a mob

If Tut was hanged by a group of ordinary people who wanted him to suffer as much as possible by not dropping him (but rather by letting him dangle till he died), his skull and neck would not break. He would die of suffocation. The evidence of X-ray and CT scan cannot disprove that.

Their italics, and see now consensus has to prove a negative to satisfy these morons. And further..

But I remain convinced that Tutankhamun was indeed murdered, or to be more precise, he was brutally executed by slow suffocation through hanging for political reasons -- almost certainly by the orders of the high priest of Aten, who, in my opinion, had the strongest motive for this regicide.

High priest of Aten ????? in year ten of Tutankhamun ????? And this total garbage from one of the high priests of fantasy, the pyramidiot in chief. You believe this if you wish, I hold my nose while reading such (expletive deleted)

And by the way, the reason given for thinking that Tutankhamun was hung, is that his head was detached from his body. Oi! Oi! Oi!, these morons never even bothered to find out how Howard Carter managed to remove the golden mask. See, there is reality from egyptology, even when it is the brutal truth, and there is garbage (being very polite) from pyramidiots and alternaviks

Edited by Atentutankh-pasheri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the one hand (in this specific instance), we have the concept the pyramid was designed

and intended to save the enture Egyptian country from starvation and on the other we have

the idea that the pyramid's sole function was to serve as a tomb.

who is the nut case to suggest the pyramid was designed to save the entire Egyptian country ?

Clearly when one understands that with the evidence i have, that even Egyptology would be force to admit that my understanding of the pyramid is much more accurate and correct.

And even afther that if Egyptology were realistic that there is a small chance of me fulfilling a prophency regarding the great pyramid and the rejected stone of the builders that jesus talked about and placed on the ground.

For the time being, i will remain silent, not that i am in any occult or group, as the freemasons, but i was ask to remain silent. Definite some wild things in my life had led to the mystery and certain things made me respect the silent at this point.

regards

Edited by samspade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I will believe people who are properly trained and have spent their lives digging in the sand of Egypt. Clearly you prefer this nonsense from "Breaking the Mirror of Heaven" by Robert Bauval and Ahmed Osman.

Quotes about the "murder" of Tutankhamun by being hanged by a mob

Bauval can be essentially right while being completely wrong about the air shafts pointing

at Orion's belt. If these shafts were intended to point at stars it matters little exactly to which

stars they point. If aliens helped the builders align the shafts then Hancock or even Sitchen

might have a lot of basis in their ideas. If the stones that comprise the shafts were lifed by

means of locks then Steven Myers can be essentially correct as well. But if any of these

theorists are right about almost anything at all then Egyptology is wrong about almost every-

thing.

I believe the evidence supports almost all the alternative theories better than it does mainstream

thought. I believe each of the assumptions underlying mainstream is incorrect. I believe the

weight of the evidence against the assumptions is far greater than the weight of the evidence

that supports them. This in no way to build a theory about the great pyramids or their builders. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This in no way to build a theory about the great pyramids or their builders. ;)

we can correcty state any theory which counterdicts mine about the GP is wrong ;)

Edited by samspade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

who is the nut case to suggest the pyramid was designed to save the entire Egyptian country ?

Clearly when one understands that with the evidence i have, that even Egyptology would be force to admit that my understanding of the pyramid is much more accurate and correct.

And even afther that if Egyptology were realistic that there is a small chance of me fulfilling a prophency regarding the great pyramid and the rejected stone of the builders that jesus talked about and placed on the ground.

For the time being, i will remain silent, not that i am in any occult or group, as the freemasons, but i was ask to remain silent. Definite some wild things in my life had led to the mystery and certain things made me respect the silent at this point.

I think it's all going to shake out in the next twenty years. I think the truth

is going to shock almost everyone. It's going to shock almost everyone

because we are all highly superstitious and set in our beliefs. The truth

is not going to fit anyone's beliefs so we'll all have a lot to get used to. Al-

most everything will be directly affected and nothing moreso than our be-

liefs.

At this point I'm not discounting anything but the assumptions that have

created orthodoxy and our world. This isn't as much to say the assump-

tions can't be true so much as that they aren't. Primarily, it's to say that

150 years of science has flown in the face of these assumptions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if any of these

theorists are right about almost anything at all then Egyptology is wrong about almost every-

thing.

Perhaps you did not understand the sense of my post, or the reason for it. If the pyramidiot in chief needs to resort to such obfuscation and blatant lies about one particular element of AE, then there is nothing about him to be believed. And not one fringe theory has been proved, and likely never will..... Hmm, except mine, in my blog :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.