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
egyptian lad

The Giants of ancient egypt are fact

531 posts in this topic

Giant humans were created from the clay or mud......( its abrahamic religion claim) and science already did confim it

Our body contains the same substances of mud or ground of earth,which means we created from it

Why you find the giants theory so far from the reality?

Since you from the uk, Well the stonehenges of uk are work of giants too

Our body happens to be based largely on carbon compounds, yes, as is every living thing on this planet. That doesn't mean that life was made from mud. Don't be absurd. The giants "theory" (which, incidentally, doesn't qualify as a theory at all) is far from reality because there isn't a scrap of evidence for it. It's as simple as that. And you can say that Stonehenge was the work of giants all you like; the fact is that you have yet to show us the extraordinary evidence which would needed to substantiate that claim.

Edited by Arbitran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, what woodwork did this 'egyptian lad' fellow come out from? I leave this thread alone for a day, and suddenly we have some of the craziest nonsense I've ever seen, all up and down the page... lovely...

And as an evolutionary biologist, I of course take particular notice of the idiocy of "the ape theory of Mr. Darwin". Oy... even if there were giants in ancient Egypt (there almost certainly weren't; which is clear), evolutionary biology would be affected in no way, whatsoever. End of story.

Well, he's apparently of the impression that large dinosaur and giant human structures would work the same way. :rolleyes: Evidently ignorance really is bliss. Not to mention the drastic mixing of timelines. Apparently he doesn't realize this isn't mix-n-match.

cormac

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The conspiracy of Mummification is very clear!

You just dont go against it cuz you blindly believe the dishonest People ( your archaeologists), LOL its funny that most mummies were diseased OHHHHHHH yeah!! they have mummification science but on medicine what a poor backward guys.

Or maybe it takes a lot less expertise to preserve a body that's already dead than to keep one alive. Really, it's not much different than curing a ham.

The mummified animals were made by nature too.

I must say, Nature did a wonderful job wrapping them.

You'd practically need an army of archaeologists working overtime to account for all the things you're accusing them of. It prompts the question why.

On 1898: A mummy of human was found in area named Jabalin,on the red sea, After news spread over discovery of this mummy, The archaeologists rushed to put it in some coffin to claim it was mummy of KING SO!

Source citation please.

CHEATING over ancient egypt history

so,u speak as if mummification was something small then??? A mummification must be told in each tomb and details must be depicted by ancient egyptians, if they already had!

But look at the funerals of egyptians, let me provide images:

25qu1px.jpg

If there was a mummification action, They would tell it over all depictions of funerals....... THATS THE LOGIC!

The mummification supposedly was a unique action.......its not small thing to forget on the depictions

One would imagine Pharoah's first potty training was too. Where are the depictions of that? (watch Kmt show up now with exactly that)

You're falliong into a falicious line of reasoning here. Just because something was an important part of the process doesn't mean it was important enough or socially polite enough to be shown, with or without graphic detail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, he's apparently of the impression that large dinosaur and giant human structures would work the same way. :rolleyes: Evidently ignorance really is bliss. Not to mention the drastic mixing of timelines. Apparently he doesn't realize this isn't mix-n-match.

cormac

I see... Because, yeah, the structure of human muscles and ligaments wouldn't allow for easy movement at large sizes (like the asinine 20 metres he's suggesting...), human bones aren't strong enough, even scaled, to support the weight of such a large body, the human lungs, even scaled, would be insufficient to take in the necessary oxygen to sustain such a large man... The list goes on: 20-metre-high humans just aren't biologically possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets analyze this image and see if this was really mummification or not

Its a belt stripe rather a knife

I will answer you by images too,according to their brainwashing theory about mummification:

Mummification of the dead body

1zf3bcm.jpg

>>Snip<<

Egyptian lad, I am going to be frank. Perhaps more frank than I usually am. First, I am speaking as a poster at UM.

Your entire approach is painfully futile. You simply have no idea of what you're trying to argue. You've posted the same stuff numerous times at UM now, and you even followed me to my blog and posted it there, too (under the name nonesense). You've been wrong—stunningly wrong—each step of the way.

Your nonsense about mummification is what's pushing me over the edge. Your response is that modern doctors removed the organs and such, which is not even realistic. Unless the organs had been removed and embalmed in antiquity, they very rarely survived in the first place. The stomach, liver, intestines, and lungs are composed mostly of fluids with thin muscular membranes, so without some expert level of embalming, they don't usually last. So your suggestion that modern doctors cut into ancient corpses, removed the organs, and stuck them in jars is just silly. Did modern doctors make the canopic jars, too? Who inscribed the jars? These organ containers had been found with inscriptions long before hieroglyphs were even deciphered, so obviously they're not fakes.

What about the brains? Modern doctors certainly didn't remove them. It could only have happened immediately post-mortem. Brains were almost always removed through the left nostril by forcing a passage through the sinuses and the ethmoid bone and into the brain cavity. In other instances retrieval was accomplished through an eye orbit, through a passage drilled behind an ear, or through a passage drilled in the vicinity of the foramen magnum. Obviously none of this could be done on an ancient corpse and with desiccated brain tissue. Also, how do you explain the resins embalmers often poured up into the emptied brain cavity? It hardened inside the skulls millennia ago.

By the way, this image doesn't show a mummy inside a coffin. It shows a mummy being wrapped with strips of linen. On the mummy's head is a funerary mask.

Second, I am speaking as a Moderator at UM. I am tired of your approach. You've written dozens of posts containing nothing but random photos, your misinformed interpretations of them, and the casual dismissal of professional historical research and scientific investigation. My patience is wearing very thin. In essence all of the posts you've submitted are the same, only with different misinterpreted photos.

Many posters have called you on this. Your only response is "archaeologists have lied." This is a lazy copout, not an explanation.

If archaeologists have been so successful in hiding "the truth" from everyone, then how is it you alone know "the truth"? At this time I am officially advising that you explain yourself better. What are your sources and how do you know what you claim to know?

Please reply. At the present I am not sure how much longer this thread need go on. You have done nothing to address other posters' questions and challenges, and you have proved nothing of substance for your own claims.

Edited by kmt_sesh
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

first i didnt finish my assumptions to you

You posted twice more after the post I replied to and neither of them were continuations of that post so yes you were done.

See this image, comparison between rekmire art Vs djehuthotep art

ibgubp.jpg

the statue in djehuthotep art......its sitting on chair and holds a sign of Power in his hand

The statue in rekhmire art, its a statue sitting on stone, it clearly shows its the colossal seated statues of ancient egypt

There has never been a doubt about the enormous statues carved by the Ancient Egyptians

" we find it takes 4 to reach from the base to the top of the statue, making those supposed giants a bit over 5 ft in height. In other words, average humans not giants."

I didnt make things up, I just put a comparison with memon colossal seated statues

Again look plz at the size of people compared to the legs:

2d9d3ko.jpg

http://images1.bonha...0&dt=zoom_image

The other comparison was the crashed colossal statue in temple of sohag, they claimed its ramses II statue:

http://www.jhu.edu/e...es/061412-4.jpg

The pictures doesnt lie,so dont say" kmt_sesh" provided me some info

If i go by the mentality of Kmt_sesh, How he knew that the statue in this art was 22 feet tall???? assumption based on his delusion?

No one knows what height of this seated statue in djehutehotep tomb depiction

What you call kmt_sesh delusion is fact based information. Had you actually visited the link he provided you would know that. Here is the link again http://www.osirisnet.net/tombes/el_bersheh/djehoutyhotep/e_djehoutyhotep_02.htm If you scoll down you find a translation of the inscription on the wall and the first part says:

Following a statue of 13 cubits of stone of Hatnub.

That makes the statue about 21 ft 8 in high so yes there is knowledge of the height of the statue. Because we know the height and using the wall releif of the moving of the statue we can determine they were average sized humans doing the moving.

Another thing that i wanted to show from this comparison too:

That u and kmt_sesh take in conisderation the image of djehuthotep tomb art , But u ignore the art of rekhmire tomb

Rekhmire tomb arts were all about the giants of early ancient egypt, It tells with details how ancient egypt was built

In rekhmire tomb too" You find many deocrations are distorted, Some guys deliberately distored it to hide lot of ancient egypt's secrets".

It's not about anything that I or kmt_sesh ignore but what you have yet to realize. In many cases the oversize images weren't made that way to indicate height but to indicate stature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

On 1898: A mummy of human was found in area named Jabalin,on the red sea, After news spread over discovery of this mummy, The archaeologists rushed to put it in some coffin to claim it was mummy of KING SO!

...

This is for everyone's benefit, not just egyptian lad's. Egyptian lad found my blog at WordPress and posted a lot of the same stuff there that he's posted here, so it would seem he likes to be wrong in many different places on the internet. In any case the above quote is also something he posted at my blog, and it was something I'd not seen before so I did some digging. Turns out this "Jabalain mummy" is popular on lots of web pages devoted to Muslim studies. I don't know how it originated as such but the information, not surprisingly, is incorrect.

Many Muslims (and biblical scholars, for that matter) see Ramesses II as the Pharaoh of Exodus. The "Jabalain mummy" is supposed to be Ramesses II. However, as is well known, Ramesses II's mummy certainly wasn't found at Jabalain. It was one of numerous royal mummies buried in the secondary burial cache and Third Intermediate Period tomb designated DB320 (or TT320). This tomb was officially cleared in 1881 by Émile Brugsch, who was worried that nearby villagers would plunder the tomb if he didn't work fast. He worked very fast. Taking few notes and recording little, Brugsch and his team cleared the tomb and sent all of the mummies and burial goods north to Cairo.

There is no such thing as the "Jabalain mummy."

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

What you call kmt_sesh delusion is fact based information. Had you actually visited the link he provided you would know that. Here is the link again http://www.osirisnet...utyhotep_02.htm If you scoll down you find a translation of the inscription on the wall and the first part says:

That makes the statue about 21 ft 8 in high so yes there is knowledge of the height of the statue. Because we know the height and using the wall releif of the moving of the statue we can determine they were average sized humans doing the moving.

...

Bravo!

See what happens when you actually dig into it and do a bit of research? (That's aimed more at egyptian lad than you, Quaentum.)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see... Because, yeah, the structure of human muscles and ligaments wouldn't allow for easy movement at large sizes (like the asinine 20 metres he's suggesting...), human bones aren't strong enough, even scaled, to support the weight of such a large body, the human lungs, even scaled, would be insufficient to take in the necessary oxygen to sustain such a large man... The list goes on: 20-metre-high humans just aren't biologically possible.

True, and egyptian lad doesn't seem to understand that a 20 meter/65.6 foot tall human being (hypothetically speaking of course) would weigh in at the upper limits of quadripedal dinosaurs such as Argentinosaurus. No bipedal dinosaur ever made it to such great weights and size.

cormac

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

E. Lad

It is becoming increasingly clear that you are trying to validate religious beliefs by the giant tale: the concept of giants itself, your use of the term ‘pharaonic’ Egyptians in earlier posts, God destroying evil giants with storms, man created from mud…etc.all point to the origin of your concept of giants. In the process you tried to push aside any obstacle that stands in the way of your giants, be it historical facts, the integrity of Egyptologists, or different sciences from archaeology to genetics, passing by biology, physiology, climatology, geology…Religion and science do not mix well!

Are you serious about the electrical storms? When did you ever witness in Egypt a thunderstorm of any magnitude resembling the pictures you posted?

As for the ‘older Alexandria’ which was destroyed, you are confusing Alexandria with Menouthis and Herakleion which were destroyed by tsunamis and liquefaction of the sea floor following earthquakes. Only parts of Alexandria were destroyed between 200 and 600 AD:

“On August 21, in A.D. 365, the sea suddenly drained out of the harbor, ships keeled over, fish flopped in the sand. Townspeople wandered into the weirdly emptied space. Then, a massive tsunami surged into the city, flinging water and ships over the tops of Alexandria’s houses, according to a contemporaneous description by Ammianus Marcellinus based on eyewitness accounts. That disaster, which may have killed 50,000 people in Alexandria alone, ushered in a two-century period of seismic activity and rising sea levels that radically altered the Egyptian coastline”. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Raising-Alexandria.html#ixzz28vPve6at

As for the unfinished statues etc, you are assuming that they were all abandoned at the same time and for the same reason, though they date back to totally different epochs, another grasp at straw!

As for the outer casing of the pyramids at Giza, the stones were used to build Cairo; actually Mohammed Ali considered using the stones of the pyramids to build barrages on the Nile in 1834. Only the enormous cost entailed dissuaded him from using them. No giants were around when either Cairo or the barrages were built.

One last thing, maybe a funny aside, but I have serious doubts that you are Egyptian, aside from your disdain and disregard to the history of 'your' country, any Egyptian seeing the curved knife in the illustration posted by Abramelin would not have thought ‘belt’, it is almost identical to the curved knife used to chop herbs and ‘meloukheyya’, our national dish!

Edited by meryt-tetisheri
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its you who are wrong, There is an entire history of ancient egypt lost

When the giants of egypt turned evil, enslaving and beating,destroying people everywhere,God did punish them in egypt " their capital", Ancient egypt was destroyed by Sandy and Electrical storms such like the these storms:

sandstorm-riyadh3.jpg

lightning.jpg

lightning-volcano2.jpg

Destructive killer storms did destroy the giants of Egypt and Many monuments from their civilization were saved, maybe a sign from God

If you want proof for the storms that hit ancient egypt:

Well, The area of Giza pyramid hill was covered by sands,.....The sphinx and its temple were all covered by sands, Even the lower body of pyramids were covered by sands too and giza quarries were also under the sands.either the quarries of aswan, unfinished obelisk and obelisks cutting place were all covered by sands.....addition for many other monuments.

That means" Egypt was under a killer storms that made many things became under the sands".

Statues have been covered by the sands:

2011-634341591846764785-676.jpg

Plus: The alexanderia city ( which existed on the days of giants and was their harbor to mediterranaon sea), many ancient egyptian monuments were drown on the coasts:

alexfi3.jpg

Cleopatra9.jpg

How do you explain that " Many unfinished works were left from ancient egypt too"?

Isnt that mean" ancient egyptians were suddenly stopped" which refers to their destruction and people of our size inherited egypt after them, They had no power to deal with the left unfinished stuff

Unfinished obelisk been covered by sands:

2hh1x6b.jpg

Unfinished statue head:

2r7bpcm.jpg

Unfinished pyramids

there are many unfinished pyramids in these areas:

Abu rawash

Abu sir

Saqqara

mediam

my suggestion for removing the cover of pyramids:

First suggestion: the cover of great pyramids of giza were not all completed, Giants were destroyed while they were working on it, So millions of white limestones were left around the giza pyramids

Second suggestion: the storms did hit the pyramids and most cover were fallen.

Third suggestion: They claimed that some strong earthquakes hit ancient egypt and so stones were fallen down.

People from ancient times did go up to the pyramid to grab the casing stones out, they did use the falling stones around pyramids and cut them into smaller stones, and so romans,arabs,turks done.

"There are online Youtube videos showing a handful of people pulling 6 ton stones under controlled conditions. You're just Wrong!!!"

Oh yeah pulling 6 ton stones in some days they would move it some meters right?

How would they put a rope under the stone???? you find it so easy???

How would they lift the large stone and put on the wood holder??? easy to do??

How would they move the stone to put on the angle they want??? easy??

what about the lifting for 140 meter??? oh they pulled it to 140 meter height? like suggestion of sick guys LOL what a joke

Dude, The construction of pyramids>>>>> Only giant humans were able to do like what the ancient egyptians recorded

U should know there are millions of large stones in egypt, not couple of thousands.....its millions....The number its self is a shock

Ummm...... Statues got buried by the... Wind??? There is no need of super storms when there is thousands of years of wind involved to bury stuff.

And your whole post does nothing to answer the question you quoted. Which is. "How did the Arabs tear down the cladding stones and move them to Cairo if only Giants could have done the initial work? All the Arabs had was men and camels.

Pulling a stone of several tons up 10 feet or 10000 feet is the same amount of work per foot. It is only the time needed that is a variable. If you lift a stone up one course and then slide it and lift it again up the next course the Work needed for each course does not Magically increase. You don't need 5 men for the lowest step and 2000 for the highest. It does not work that way. And using ramps, the ancients would have spread that work per course over a long distance and it would have been a fraction of the effort needed to lift a stone straight up.

I am assuming you have no physics or other practical training or you would already know this. I'm also assuming you've never done a day of physical labor in your life, or again, you'd know what an average human can drag and lift.

So what training do you have?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

E. Lad

** SNIP**

One last thing, maybe a funny aside, but I have serious doubts that you are Egyptian, aside from your disdain and disregard to the history of 'your' country, any Egyptian seeing the curved knife in the illustration posted by Abramelin would not have thought ‘belt’, it is almost identical to the curved knife used to chop herbs and ‘meloukheyya’, our national dish!

So it wasn't used in the mummification process, like some 'surgical knife'?

But it was a nice way of saying I was wrong, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it wasn't used in the mummification process, like some 'surgical knife'?

But it was a nice way of saying I was wrong, lol.

No, I am not saying you're wrong. An efficient knife model may find new functions. The curved shaped knife once used for mummification is now used for chopping herbs. Now that sounds terribly wrong, but Egyptians were always practical people! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chopped "herbs" were used in the mummification process as well.

Harte

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I am not saying you're wrong. An efficient knife model may find new functions. The curved shaped knife once used for mummification is now used for chopping herbs. Now that sounds terribly wrong, but Egyptians were always practical people! :)

Here is a woman demonstrating how to prepare that dish I dare not pronounce (Molokhia according to this video, but I saw like 5 other spellings):

Egyptian_vegetable_knife.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4220fThLPrE&feature=related

And it's a big step from mummification to preparing a meal that makes my mouth water, lol.

.

Edited by Abramelin
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why has this thread continued to 28 pages...

Is there a reason for posting in bold font as a standard posting procedure Egyptian lad?

Is there a lick of evidence of these fantastical stories you present? You seem to fall short on some of the basic facts of Egyptology, so one might ask, are you even knowledgable enough on what you are presenting to even put forward an argument you can support?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One last thing, maybe a funny aside, but I have serious doubts that you are Egyptian, aside from your disdain and disregard to the history of 'your' country, any Egyptian seeing the curved knife in the illustration posted by Abramelin would not have thought ‘belt’, it is almost identical to the curved knife used to chop herbs and ‘meloukheyya’, our national dish!

I was wondering about that myself. He seems not to be aware you have regular sandstorms there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chopped "herbs" were used in the mummification process as well.

Harte

And that wedge shaped blade looks kind of unpractical for cutting a body open.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why has this thread continued to 28 pages...

Is there a reason for posting in bold font as a standard posting procedure Egyptian lad?

Is there a lick of evidence of these fantastical stories you present? You seem to fall short on some of the basic facts of Egyptology, so one might ask, are you even knowledgable enough on what you are presenting to even put forward an argument you can support?

But didn't you know that all Egyptologists are liars??

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And that wedge shaped blade looks kind of unpractical for cutting a body open.

I swear I've seen something like that displayed as an autopsy knife somewhere (unless it was that picture) but it was probably in a movie, in which case I've seen mole traps used as prop medical instruments before too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I swear I've seen something like that displayed as an autopsy knife somewhere (unless it was that picture) but it was probably in a movie, in which case I've seen mole traps used as prop medical instruments before too.

Must have been in "SAW".

I think surgeons once used it to cut open a breastbone, and forensic pathologists/investigators (or what's the name) maybe for autopsy . But the breastbone of a dead pharaoh wasn't cut open as far as I know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of the old trepanning knives.

http://www.worldmuse...y.php?item=1144

Damn. that's it: I have one (a copy of course) from Peru, Incan style.

++++

EDIT:

I just made a scan of the thing:

Peru_Incan_surgical_knife.jpg

Edited by Abramelin
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a woman demonstrating how to prepare that dish I dare not pronounce (Molokhia according to this video, but I saw like 5 other spellings):

Egyptian_vegetable_knife.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4220fThLPrE&feature=related

And it's a big step from mummification to preparing a meal that makes my mouth water, lol.

.

Transliterating Arabic is kind of flexible, but molokhia/ moloukheyya should be easy for you to pronounce, the Dutch language has 'kh' sound already. Imagine how a French speaker would fare ;)

The origin of the name, its root, is 'meloukia' or royal, because it is one gooey but absolutely delicious soup!

Frankly I can't imagine how exactly a curved knife could be used in mummification, or on which part of the body; but I can imagine a clever woman once looked at the curved knife and had a 'moment of inspiration' and decided the shape saves time and effort in chopping a large quantity of herb leaves :/ (enough of that I would like to be able to continue enjoying molokhia) :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chopped "herbs" were used in the mummification process as well.

Harte

That might be the missing link between mummification and meloukia!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.