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 6
The Puzzler

Great Pyramid not built by Khufu?

593 posts in this topic

Exactly my point kmt, the only thing people can claim about those glyphs is that they had to have been put there by some individual while the Great Pyramid was being constructed and nobody else due to the impossibility of access. To call them Egyptian, or whatever for that matter, is wrong until at the point they are deciphered or corroborated in one way or another.

Although probably hard to do, would it not be possible scratch off a small sample of the 'paint' to carbon date them. Surely then at least there can be no argument as to when the whole thing was built as it will be in effect a 'clean' sample.

I can't see how they can be some numerical or engineering marks though, as surely there would be many other samples to compare them with. Personally I'd have thought more likely a mason or stone layer putting in a quick 'personal mark' for posterity before anybody notices i.e. painting rather than a chiseling a feature which would take time. Masons do this all the time and is nothing unusual tbh. Mine, my brothers, my mum and the Alfa Romeo embolom is hidden for posterity on many a famous and well known building for people to ponder and hypthesize over for many years to come in the distant future. :tsu::lol:

Edited to say - have just read Harte's link regarding carbon dating etc which he posted while I was writing this post. Surely if the marks are all over the place then they can work out the meaning then.

Can you gave us link ,photos of it. I never heard of it before. Thanks in advance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sesh the questions you put in the end of your post are only in context if you assume that the great pyramids(including the one you think built by Khafre) were built by khufu in 2500/2600 BC so if you wipe this assumption off the rest of your questions are already answered for.

And khufu using mortar to repair the exterior of the whole pyramid is not really an impossible act according to me.What objective proofs exist that it was only the muslim raiders who robbed or removed all the missing casing stones?Even if the pyramids are dated one year before the suspected reign period of Khufu it still could not have been built by him.

Other glaring inconsistencies in your suggested line of builders for the great pyramid is that why are there no ascending chambers passages etc in the so called Khafre pyramid?.Had the custom of building pyramid chambers changed so dramatically.Also why wouldn't khafre built his pyramid bigger then the one built by khufu since he had the advantage of being the second builder.How about radiocarbondating the second pyramid as well to give clues about the timeline of when it was built as this could solve a lot of mysteries surrounding who built/repaired/intruded them and at what time.

Already done, in addition to numerous other early Egyptian structures. Note the consistency of the dates in regards to currently understood timelines. Should you desire assistance in interpreting the data, do not hesitate to request such.

http://www.2dcode-r-...rbonproject.pdf

.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was suggested in the article that the Temple of Isis had been built over a previous Isis Temple, an earlier one. I'd find it hard to think they didn't have some kind of temple for her earlier than 1064BC, when she'd been around for so long.

Most Egyptian deities were first worshipped by very local cults, and they retained those local centres of worship even as their popularity spread, so that most major cities and towns in Egypt were known as the home of a particular deity. The origins of the cult of Isis are uncertain, but it is believed that she was originally an independent and popular deity in predynastic times, prior to 3100 BCE, at Sebennytos in the Nile delta

The first written references to Isis date back to the Fifth dynasty of Egypt. Based on the association of her name with the throne, some early Egyptologists believed that Isis's original function was that of throne-mother.[citation needed] However, more recent scholarship suggests that aspects of that role came later by association. In many African tribes, the throne is known as the mother of the king, and that concept fits well with either theory, possibly giving insight into the thinking of ancient Egyptians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isis

A fair point, Puzzler. On archaeological grounds (i.e., ceramics, architectural style) the existing temple to Isis dates to the Third Intermediate Period. There is no archaeological basis for supposing an earlier Isis temple occupied that site. Giza was never an important center of the veneration of this goddess. The archaeological ruins underlying the Isis temple do show the presence of a much older temple, but it was the little mortuary temple that had been erected in Dynasty 4 for the queen who had been buried in the small pyramid there (designated G1c).

I am not personally familiar with the Wiki article's reference to Sebennytos, which was near Sais. I can say that the goddess Isis, on Egyptological consensus, cannot be dated with any confidence prior to Dynasty 5. The Wiki article's reference is stating something as fact that is, actually, not a fact at all. There is no evident cult to Isis in Khufu's time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the subject of the Egyptians representing themselves in miniature or Colossal form here is one way to think about it. It relates to the ancient saying multum in parvo (much in small).

The famous miniature statue of Khufu compared to the colossi of Rameses says very much, because generally as time proceeded the civilisation of Egypt moved south along the Nile and with it one can trace the gradual degeneration. Rameses II was for example one of the most sexual of all the Pharaohs

Now compare the elephant to the ant. Which is the most efficient? It is said that the ant carries many times it's own body weight. The most potent energy of all is locked up in the tiny atom.

So I wonder if the later pharaohs really knew what they were doing portraying themselves as giants? Also in folklore isn't the giant represented as a cumbersome brute? Maybe it was the early Kings who knew what they were doing?

I'm not sure why the sexual prowess of Ramesses is relevant. All kings were symbols of virility. It's just that Ramesses preserved the names and images of his sons and daughters in much clearer terms than almost any other king did before or after his time.

As far as that goes, you seem to have the status of the Egyptian state backwards. While Khufu was certainly a powerful and wealthy king, Ramesses II was exponentially more so. Khufu ruled over a stable and prosperous state, while Ramesses II ruled over a vast empire. Ramesses lived toward the end of Egypt's empire period. And that's just Ramesses. If we can backtrack a dynasty and look at some of the kings of Dynasty 18—especially the likes of Amunhotep I, Tuthmosis I, Tuthmosis III, and Amunhotep III—Egypt held the status of an enormous and poweful empire the likes of which Khufu could only fantasize about. In the time of Tuthmosis III, Egypt solidly ruled everything from the fourth cataract of the Nile to northern Syria.

In other words, a thousand years after Khufu, when Egypt was entering its New Kingdom period, Egypt was significantly more powerful and wide-reaching than in Khufu's day.

I'm not demeaning Khufu in writing this stuff. I am merely stating facts. In Khufu's time Egypt was not an empire but a state, ruling all of the Nile Valley and Delta and controlling smaller peripheral areas in Nubia and the Sinai.

Your note on "moving south" is also off base. Yes, Egypt's center of power switched from Memphis in the north in the Old Kingdom to Thebes in the south in the Middle Kingdom. But in the New Kingdom Thebes was the religious capital while Memphis once again became the political capital. And since you brought up Ramesses II, he moved the capital to the city of Per-Ramesses in the Delta, well into the north. Ramesses built this city for this very purpose. Numerous avenues of evidence suggest Ramesses' family line hailed from the north, not the south. And following the New Kingdom, the capital remained in the Delta, switching between sites like Tanis and Sais.

The center of power was located wherever the dynastic ruling family lived, so obviously it tended to move around a lot. It's true Egypt experienced times of degeneration (the intermediate periods), but what can't be argued is that after the Old Kingdom, the more time went on the more powerful Egypt and its rulers became.

On a closing note, pertaining to the reason for showing some figures as very large against others shown very small, I recommend researching the practice of hierarchical scaling. This practice is amply demonstrated in the Giza necropolis of Dynasty 4, in the tombs surrounding Khufu's. The small statue of Khufu found at Abydos is somewhat immaterial when one considers the many large statues of the man which must have once stood in the temples adjacent to his pyramid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sesh the questions you put in the end of your post are only in context if you assume that the great pyramids(including the one you think built by Khafre) were built by khufu in 2500/2600 BC so if you wipe this assumption off the rest of your questions are already answered for.

And khufu using mortar to repair the exterior of the whole pyramid is not really an impossible act according to me.What objective proofs exist that it was only the muslim raiders who robbed or removed all the missing casing stones?Even if the pyramids are dated one year before the suspected reign period of Khufu it still could not have been built by him.

Other glaring inconsistencies in your suggested line of builders for the great pyramid is that why are there no ascending chambers passages etc in the so called Khafre pyramid?.Had the custom of building pyramid chambers changed so dramatically.Also why wouldn't khafre built his pyramid bigger then the one built by khufu since he had the advantage of being the second builder.How about radiocarbondating the second pyramid as well to give clues about the timeline of when it was built as this could solve a lot of mysteries surrounding who built/repaired/intruded them and at what time.

I recommend taking careful note of the document Swede linked to in Post 28. I should have posted this link myself, and I should have mentioned the wide-ranging nature of the carbon testing. Khufu's pyramid was only one of numerous Old Kingdom and Middle Kingdom monuments in the test. Errors of omission on my part. What's interesting is that across the board, the dating of these monuments based on their carbon samples reflects how accurate conventional relative dating has been all along.

The fact that Khufu's pyramid possesses an ascending passage is hardly a reason to suggest the pyramid wasn't built by Khufu. How familiar are you with the three pyramids built by Sneferu, prior to Khufu? I recommend spending some time researching them. They, too, possess unusual features, especially the Bent Pyramid. You will also find in the Red Pyramid numerous architectural features which Khufu would incorporate and expand on in the building of his own pyramid, including the corbeled vault. It's true that Khufu's pyramid possesses some unique features, but so do numerous other pyramids before and after his. Without a command in familiarity with all of these pyramids, you're trying to view the Great Pyramid as though it exists in an architectural and cultural vacuum. It certainly doesn't.

As for Khafre's pyramid, he didn't need to strive too hard to make it bigger than Khufu's monument. Khafre was savvy in selecting a spot in Giza that was already at higher elevation than the rest of the Plateau, so he allowed geography to do some of the work for him.

You should also delve into the workmen's graffiti inside the relieving chambers of the Great Pyramid. I am quite aware that oddballs like Zecharia Sitchin and Graham Hancock have tried to interpret this graffiti as a hoax, but their arguments in this direction are comically inept. There's a reason people don't take fringe authors seriously—and why in many book stores the books of fringe authors are located in some other section than the one for history (I've seen them located on the shelves in the New Age and occult sections, for example). The point is, anyone properly acquainted with the orthography and linguistic nature of this graffiti knows it to be unquestionably authentic. It could not have been a hoax. And the graffiti alone solidly ties the Great Pyramid to Khufu.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recommend taking careful note of the document Swede linked to in Post 28. I should have posted this link myself, and I should have mentioned the wide-ranging nature of the carbon testing. Khufu's pyramid was only one of numerous Old Kingdom and Middle Kingdom monuments in the test. Errors of omission on my part. What's interesting is that across the board, the dating of these monuments based on their carbon samples reflects how accurate conventional relative dating has been all along.

The fact that Khufu's pyramid possesses an ascending passage is hardly a reason to suggest the pyramid wasn't built by Khufu. How familiar are you with the three pyramids built by Sneferu, prior to Khufu? I recommend spending some time researching them. They, too, possess unusual features, especially the Bent Pyramid. You will also find in the Red Pyramid numerous architectural features which Khufu would incorporate and expand on in the building of his own pyramid, including the corbeled vault. It's true that Khufu's pyramid possesses some unique features, but so do numerous other pyramids before and after his. Without a command in familiarity with all of these pyramids, you're trying to view the Great Pyramid as though it exists in an architectural and cultural vacuum. It certainly doesn't.

As for Khafre's pyramid, he didn't need to strive too hard to make it bigger than Khufu's monument. Khafre was savvy in selecting a spot in Giza that was already at higher elevation than the rest of the Plateau, so he allowed geography to do some of the work for him.

You should also delve into the workmen's graffiti inside the relieving chambers of the Great Pyramid. I am quite aware that oddballs like Zecharia Sitchin and Graham Hancock have tried to interpret this graffiti as a hoax, but their arguments in this direction are comically inept. There's a reason people don't take fringe authors seriously—and why in many book stores the books of fringe authors are located in some other section than the one for history (I've seen them located on the shelves in the New Age and occult sections, for example). The point is, anyone properly acquainted with the orthography and linguistic nature of this graffiti knows it to be unquestionably authentic. It could not have been a hoax. And the graffiti alone solidly ties the Great Pyramid to Khufu.

I am aware of the bent pyramid and other half baked attempts of other egyptian pharoans at trying to replicate the great pyramids hence the doubt about khufu building the great pyramid gains more momentum in my mind.As you suggested yourself we cannot talk about the great pyramids in isolation,this is the premise on which my argument is based.Why isn't there any other pyramid which replicates the beauty and accuracy of the great pyramid,why aren't there heiroglyphics in the great pyramids as compared to these other pyramids including sneferu's pyramids which you state were made before the great pyramids?The ascending passage was blocked since the relatively modern explorations broke around it,can this be the reason the other pharoans never had ascending passages in their pyramids probably since they didn't know one existed?what does the present dillapitated conditions of the other pyramids when compared to the great pyramid tell you?If i write my name on one of the walls of the white house does it mean i built it?Did the art of pyramid building reach it's zenith during Khufu's time and was forgotten after two generations (which is highly unlikely)?Hence i agree with you when you say that the great pyramids cannot be studied in a cultural vaccum or in isolation.

Regarding carbon dating of the mortar i have already suggested that khufu could have carried out repairing work on the pyramid and the 'inventory stele' """can"""" be a documented proof for it.

Would you deny and explain away gravity if it's existence was stated by Sitchin and Hancock? When it comes to Sitchin a lot of his work and hypothesis is based on choosing between mainstream translations of sumerian tablets which according to me is not a very bad method.Also you might dislike their hypothesis as they are new and opposed to accepted knowledge and don't always have objective proof but so many things accepted by mainstream is not based on objective proof.This is evident as so many long standing notions held by the mainstream are revised from time to time

(but not without a lot of resistance and embarassment).Blanketing everything a person is saying because of your personal beliefs is not an objective technique according to me.

Michael Cremo gives an excellent example of this truth filteration that happens due to our existing Mainstream procedures in his book 'forbidden archeology'.Also if you consider human psychology you know that the 'power of suggestion' (often and forcibly invoked by mainstreamn academia through peer review)is almost hypnotic and also would impact mainstream archeologists and historians.Any institution of knowledge should indulge in giving credence to dissent to any generally accepted norm inorder to really strengthen it's credibility instead of crucifying the nay sayers.

Like i stated all new hypothesis or theory or facts are fringe when they are born(since they are not yet accepted by mainstream)so why not encourage fringe or how would you encourage new discoveries in any field?

PS- debating with you has always been a pleasure Sesh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You ignore the very real fact that there is a kink in the "air passage" that would prevent such a ridiculous thing from even being possible.

Are you aware of anything about the GP? If so, than tell me, how did Khufu even discover these passages? The "air shafts" were covered over and the relieving chambers were sealed off by solid rock - not as a door, but completely sealed off due to the construction technique itself.

We got in using black powder. How did Khufu blow these chambers open and then how did he repair them to a state undetectable from pristine?

Claiming Khufu could do such a thing is no different that claiming Khufu had the thing built in the first place.

You do know, don't you, that the writings in the relieving chambers list some of the names of the work gangs that built the thing, right? Are you aware that some of these same work gang names have been found in other records? Are you saying Khufu put those there too? How would he know to do that? Just so you could be right 4500 years later?

I swear, it certainly takes all kinds to make a world.

The next earthworm you see might be out to get you. So step on him.

Harte

So probably Vyse did actually do the forgery.Thanks for your reasoning i have narrowed down on this fact atleast.Also are those glyphs egyptian heiroglyphs as we know them? And by worker gangs do you mean guilds which probably could exist for long periods of time (1000's of year) before and after they were mentioned in the egyptian heiroglyphs?

And according to the facts you reveal about the glyphs all over the pyramid though i am still not clear wether the photo you posted was of glyph inside the air chamber you were talking about but neverthless probably it is these glyphs that hold the key to the original pyramid builders and a study of them in more depth could be very fruitful.

Also you took me literally when i was just suggesting an example.I would be thankfull if you can give me more details about the granite slab blocking the ascending passage.Is there no chance that it could have once been a collapsable door which was sealed later?

At present the mainstream argument about khufu building the great pyramid sounds very fragile and based only on one cartouche that most probably is a forgery and no other objective evidence.It sounds more like "Do you believe in God? if your answer is no then who wrote the bible?".

P.S.--The tone of your argument that Khufu could not have blasted open the ascending passage way and restored it back without leaving any trace is highlighting the same astonishment that people have in believing that a an old people without the aid of modern tools could build the epic structure to such a pristine extent.If you beleive Khufu could pull of the great pyramid then probably he was capable of such things and much more.

Edited by Harsh86_Patel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So probably Vyse did actually do the forgery.Thanks for your reasoning i have narrowed down on this fact atleast.Also are those glyphs egyptian heiroglyphs as we know them?

It is quite impossible that Vyse forged anything, for two reasons. First, the version of Khufu's name he found in a relieving chamber was unknown at the time (which led to the original questioning of his find - which Sitchin picked up and ran with over a hundred years later.) Second, the glyphs, clearly Egyptian, can be seen extending into cracks between blocks - on the actual surfaces of the stones, a foot or more deep into cracks no wider that a couple of inches at most. Vyse could not have painted these Egyptian characters between the stones. These cannot be seen without a good flashlight to shine into these cracks and thus no pictures of them exist. However, no less than fringe proponents Graham Hancock and John Anthony West have testified to seeing these glyphs in the cracks with their own eyes.

And by worker gangs do you mean guilds which probably could exist for long periods of time (1000's of year) before and after they were mentioned in the egyptian heiroglyphs?

No, individual work gangs that participated in the construction of the Great Pyramid and actually lived in the worker's village that has been (partially) unearthed right next to the pyramid complex.

And according to the facts you reveal about the glyphs all over the pyramid though i am still not clear wether the photo you posted was of glyph inside the air chamber you were talking about

Then you didn't read the quote, where you are told that the ochre painted glyph is associated with a different pyramid, hence my mention that you are correct that such marks would be found in every pyramid. They have been found in or around every pyramid where anyone has looked for them.

Also you took me literally when i was just suggesting an example.I would be thankfull if you can give me more details about the granite slab blocking the ascending passage.Is there no chance that it could have once been a collapsable door which was sealed later?

The ceiling of the King's Chamber is where all those humongous granite slabs that the fringe is so fond of claiming "couldn't have been placed by the Egyptians." How are you going to use an 80 ton slab in the ceiling as a door? And why would you even want a door into a "chamber" that is nothing more than a void that resulted from the weight distribution design employed above the King's Chamber? You can't even stand up in these so-called "chambers."

At present the mainstream argument about khufu building the great pyramid sounds very fragile and based only on one cartouche that most probably is a forgery and no other objective evidence.It sounds more like "Do you believe in God? if your answer is no then who wrote the bible?".

What is very fragile is the idea that the GP is attributed to Khufu by only some graffiti found in a sealed chamber.

Please look up the translation for the Ancient Egyptian name for the Great Pyramid.

What I'm trying to say here is that the Ancient Egyptians themselves claimed it. Do you think you know better than they do?

P.S.--The tone of your argument that Khufu could not have blasted open the ascending passage way and restored it back without leaving any trace is highlighting the same astonishment that people have in believing that a an old people without the aid of modern tools could build the epic structure to such a pristine extent.If you beleive Khufu could pull of the great pyramid then probably he was capable of such things and much more.

Because that is the only way Khufu could have gotten in, and then he would have had to repair it to, again, pristine condition, I was merely pointing out that such a thing is even harder to believe than the fact that Khufu had the thing built in the first place.

If you for some reason believe that the Great Pyramid is built to anything like today's architectural standards, then you either know very little about the Great Pyramid, or you know very little about architectural standards, or both.

Harte

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is quite impossible that Vyse forged anything, for two reasons. First, the version of Khufu's name he found in a relieving chamber was unknown at the time (which led to the original questioning of his find - which Sitchin picked up and ran with over a hundred years later.) Second, the glyphs, clearly Egyptian, can be seen extending into cracks between blocks - on the actual surfaces of the stones, a foot or more deep into cracks no wider that a couple of inches at most. Vyse could not have painted these Egyptian characters between the stones. These cannot be seen without a good flashlight to shine into these cracks and thus no pictures of them exist. However, no less than fringe proponents Graham Hancock and John Anthony West have testified to seeing these glyphs in the cracks with their own eyes.

No, individual work gangs that participated in the construction of the Great Pyramid and actually lived in the worker's village that has been (partially) unearthed right next to the pyramid complex.

Then you didn't read the quote, where you are told that the ochre painted glyph is associated with a different pyramid, hence my mention that you are correct that such marks would be found in every pyramid. They have been found in or around every pyramid where anyone has looked for them.

The ceiling of the King's Chamber is where all those humongous granite slabs that the fringe is so fond of claiming "couldn't have been placed by the Egyptians." How are you going to use an 80 ton slab in the ceiling as a door? And why would you even want a door into a "chamber" that is nothing more than a void that resulted from the weight distribution design employed above the King's Chamber? You can't even stand up in these so-called "chambers."

What is very fragile is the idea that the GP is attributed to Khufu by only some graffiti found in a sealed chamber.

Please look up the translation for the Ancient Egyptian name for the Great Pyramid.

What I'm trying to say here is that the Ancient Egyptians themselves claimed it. Do you think you know better than they do?

Because that is the only way Khufu could have gotten in, and then he would have had to repair it to, again, pristine condition, I was merely pointing out that such a thing is even harder to believe than the fact that Khufu had the thing built in the first place.

If you for some reason believe that the Great Pyramid is built to anything like today's architectural standards, then you either know very little about the Great Pyramid, or you know very little about architectural standards, or both.

Harte

I suggested that Vyse only painted the cartouche and not the glyphs.Also by names of worker gangs do you mean the names of individual workers or a single name representing the whole gang/guild?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hence i agree with you when you say that the great pyramids cannot be studied in a cultural vaccum or in isolation.

This is a concept that orthodoxy can not understand.

They've filled a vacuum of evidence with a culture from later times and then

flavored it with the sampling error of only things found in tombs. To orthodoxy

this looks like plenty of evidence to use as a weapon against anyone who would

dare to organize the meagher evidence in some other fashion.

There is no "cultural evidence" as defined by orthodoxy. There is only an appear-

ance that the people never changed because the Pyramid Texts has been inter-

preted and translated in terms of later works and the fact that the PT post-dates

the Great Pyramid and includes concepts not known before are ignored except when

it's convenient.

Very little is really excluded by "cultural evidence".

Hence i agree with you when you say that the great pyramids cannot be studied in a cultural vaccum or in isolation.

This is a concept that orthodoxy can not understand.

They've filled a vacuum of evidence with a culture from later times and then

flavored it with the sampling error of only things found in tombs. To orthodoxy

this looks like plenty of evidence to use as a weapon against anyone who would

dare to organize the meagher evidence in some other fashion.

There is no "cultural evidence" as defined by orthodoxy. There is only an appear-

ance that the people never changed because the Pyramid Texts has been inter-

preted and translated in terms of later works and the fact that the PT post-dates

the Great Pyramid and includes concepts not known before are ignored except when

it's convenient.

Very little is really excluded by "cultural evidence".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggested that Vyse only painted the cartouche and not the glyphs.Also by names of worker gangs do you mean the names of individual workers or a single name representing the whole gang/guild?

Why are you so convinced Vyse fabricated evidence?

Because it suits your fantasy about the GP being 10,000+ years old?

And what do you have to back that up? Schoch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you so convinced Vyse fabricated evidence?

Because it suits your fantasy about the GP being 10,000+ years old?

And what do you have to back that up? Schoch?

Schoch's the man when it comes to geology. He's totally convinced that it's much older. Who are we to argue and what better evidence is there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Schoch's the man when it comes to geology. He's totally convinced that it's much older. Who are we to argue and what better evidence is there?

Other geologists said he was wrong.

I am not a geologist, but when many of that tribe tell me he was wrong, I tend to believe them.

He is as human as we all are: despite his training, he COULD be wrong, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggested that Vyse only painted the cartouche and not the glyphs.Also by names of worker gangs do you mean the names of individual workers or a single name representing the whole gang/guild?

That cartouche is as fake as a 40 dollar bill and everyone knows it. Why isn't the pyramid adorned with more of Khufu's symbolism? Why only that example in only that place?

I'll tell you why; they pyramid belonged to a much earlier time before the well known examples of Egyptian art existed. Furthermore there is no need whatsoever to place inscriptions inside a machine where no man was ever intended to set foot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other geologists said he was wrong.

I am not a geologist, but when many of that tribe tell me he was wrong, I tend to believe them.

He is as human as we all are: despite his training, he COULD be wrong, right?

I've never come across a geological refutation of Schoch. Now you mention it I will look into it though. BRB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That cartouche is as fake as a 40 dollar bill and everyone knows it. Why isn't the pyramid adorned with more of Khufu's symbolism? Why only that example in only that place?

I'll tell you why; they pyramid belonged to a much earlier time before the well known examples of Egyptian art existed. Furthermore there is no need whatsoever to place inscriptions inside a machine where no man was ever intended to set foot.

Show proof.

"Why only that example in only that place?"

You believe in the Bagdad battery, right? Only one example?

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Show proof.

Show proof that it's real. The amateurish look of the writing inconsistent with the remainder of such a precise piece of work, written in a not obvious location found by an unscrupulous man, when nothing like it exists in any other pyramid must make the whole thing very moot.

In any case, I'm happy to admit that the pyramid was repaired in Khufu's time; something I have always believed. Maybe if it is real, that is what it alludes to. Has anyone considered that?

Just one more thought? Wouldn't we expect to see inscriptions inside the King's Chamber being the final resting place of a great king? Why does nobody question this?

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't make sense Abe that the pyramid is devoid of art. The Egyptians were always known to be highly demonstrative in matters of burial of important people, yet we see nothing of the sort. Why does this not raise alarm bells? What could be at play? The answer is that it wasn't built by the Egyptians that you or I know about. It belonged to their ancestors of a much earlier time.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is quite impossible that Vyse forged anything, for two reasons. First, the version of Khufu's name he found in a relieving chamber was unknown at the time (which led to the original questioning of his find - which Sitchin picked up and ran with over a hundred years later.) Second, the glyphs, clearly Egyptian, can be seen extending into cracks between blocks - on the actual surfaces of the stones, a foot or more deep into cracks no wider that a couple of inches at most. Vyse could not have painted these Egyptian characters between the stones. These cannot be seen without a good flashlight to shine into these cracks and thus no pictures of them exist. However, no less than fringe proponents Graham Hancock and John Anthony West have testified to seeing these glyphs in the cracks with their own eyes.

...

I think it was you, Harte, who first showed me Hancock's public retraction about the graffiti. I actually respected the man for admitting this point.

We should've known better, however. In some recent thread of Scott Creighton's, he posted a link where Hancock had decided to retract his retraction. Hancock determined that because we can't see all of the graffiti in the joins between the blocks and can't determine if Khufu's cartouche is back in there, too, we should therefore be skeptical of those areas of the blocks completely open to viewing. In other words, while the graffiti between the blocks must be authentic, there's nothing to "prove" Khufu's workmen did the graffiti with the cartouches on the unobstructed blocks.

As I would sum it up: once an idiot, always an idiot. It's a chronic condition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You believe in the Bagdad battery, right? Only one example?

I do. Why not? Mythbusters copied it and show us that is actualy working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Show proof that it's real. The amateurish look of the writing inconsistent with the remainder of such a precise piece of work, written in a not obvious location found by an unscrupulous man, when nothing like it exists in any other pyramid must make the whole thing very moot.

In any case, I'm happy to admit that the pyramid was repaired in Khufu's time; something I have always believed. Maybe if it is real, that is what it alludes to. Has anyone considered that?

Just one more thought? Wouldn't we expect to see inscriptions inside the King's Chamber being the final resting place of a great king? Why does nobody question this?

You are familiar with the nature of graffiti, are you not? "Amateurish look" is a fair description for graffiti, given that it is not written in any formal sense nor meant to be viewed by everyone.

Howard Vyse is the man you're calling unscrupulous. This charge against him goes back to some of Zecharia Sitchin's writings forty years ago. The truth is, the average C-average college student would have little trouble disproving almost everything Sitchin ever postulated.

I understand that you're not familiar with ancient Egyptian scripts, zoser, but that's your weak point in trying to argue the graffiti is fake. Anyone truly familiar with ancient Egyptian scripts, and anyone who possesses the training to translate the ancient writing, knows the graffiti to be unquestionably authentic.

All you're doing is parroting Sitchin, whether or not you realize it. Sitchin's arguments were absurdly inept and simple to disprove. I would deal with this head on and face the real evidence for what it is.

As far as that goes, Howard Vyse did not possess a command of the ancient writing. It would not have been possible for him to commit such a forgery. And numerous things about the graffiti and the nature of its writing were not even yet understood in the early nineteenth century. Arguably no one of that time could've forged the graffiti.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy to admit that the pyramid was repaired in Khufu's time;

repaired?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

repaired?

Yes. Many things allude to this. The well shaft, damage in the Kings Chamber, etc. But of course if one clings to the silly tomb theory then none of this will make a lot of sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are familiar with the nature of graffiti, are you not? "Amateurish look" is a fair description for graffiti, given that it is not written in any formal sense nor meant to be viewed by everyone.

Howard Vyse is the man you're calling unscrupulous. This charge against him goes back to some of Zecharia Sitchin's writings forty years ago. The truth is, the average C-average college student would have little trouble disproving almost everything Sitchin ever postulated.

I understand that you're not familiar with ancient Egyptian scripts, zoser, but that's your weak point in trying to argue the graffiti is fake. Anyone truly familiar with ancient Egyptian scripts, and anyone who possesses the training to translate the ancient writing, knows the graffiti to be unquestionably authentic.

All you're doing is parroting Sitchin, whether or not you realize it. Sitchin's arguments were absurdly inept and simple to disprove. I would deal with this head on and face the real evidence for what it is.

As far as that goes, Howard Vyse did not possess a command of the ancient writing. It would not have been possible for him to commit such a forgery. And numerous things about the graffiti and the nature of its writing were not even yet understood in the early nineteenth century. Arguably no one of that time could've forged the graffiti.

Many people still think that the Khufu cartouche in the GP is not accurate thus alluding to a forgery.

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 6

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.