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 14
Alphamale06

The Ancient Alien Theory Is True

10,149 posts in this topic

is it possible that they were rombs, but had everything - even the murals - removed when the king's body was moved to the Valley of the Kings? So there evidence of removal from the pyramids?

heres a good read ABOUT BONES FOUND IN THE MIDS... bolded for zoser tho probably a complete waste of my time

"Another reason why Egyptologists believe that pyramids were tombs is because the ancient Egyptian record explicitly states as much. For example, the Papyrus Abbott describes the inspection of "sepulchers of former kings" under Ramesses IX. The pyramid of 17th Dynasty Sobekemsaf II was inspected:

It was found, that the thieves had broken into it by mining work through the base of its pyramid, from the outer chamber of the tomb of the overseer of the granary of King Menkheperre (Thutmose III), L.P.H., Nebamon. The burial-place of the king was found void of its lord, L.P.H., as well as the burial-place of the great king's-wife, Nubkhas, L.P.H., his royal wife; the thieves having laid their hand upon them. The vizier, the nobles, and the inspectors made an examination of it, and the manner in which the thieves had laid their hands upon this king and his royal wife, was ascertained. [breasted,
Ancient Records of Egypt
, IV.517]

Mummies

"Much has been made of the fact that of all the pyramids of Egypt that have ever been explored, never once has the mummy of a pharaoh been found within.

Mummy parts have been found in pyramids. Such discoveries include part of a mummified foot in the pyramid of Djoser; a right arm, skull fragments, and various other bones in the pyramid of Unas; an arm and shoulder in the pyramid of Teti; fragments of a mummy in the pyramid of Pepi I; mummy wrappings in the pyramid of Pepy II, and charred bones in the pyramid of Amenemhet III. In the center satellite pyramid of Menkaure, Perring and Vyse found a skeleton of a young woman in the sarcophagus within.

( wasnt there even a time the europeans used mummy powder in concoctions? wonder where they got them from seeder)

They also found, in the main pyramid, part of a wooden coffin believed to be Menkaure's along with some mummy fragments. But never has an extant mummy been found in any pyramid, nor have any parts of a mummy been identified with certainty as those of a king.

(parts of mummies works for me!! seeder)

Lastly:

"The absence of mummies has invited all manner of odd theories about the pyramids' function. It has been claimed that they served as power plants, water pumps, astronomical observatories, sources of ill-defined "pyramid power" energy vortices, guidance beacons for alien spacecraft, and sites of mystery initiation ceremonies. In order to hold such a view, however, it is necessary to ignore the provenance of the pyramid and its place in the context of the overall pyramid complex and necropolis.

"To suppose that the pyramid's only function in ancient Egypt was as a royal tomb," wrote Miroslav Verner, "would be an oversimplification." (The Pyramids, p. 45) Alexander Badawy observed that "The main incentive in the evolution of the tomb was the fear from plunderers." (A History of Egyptian Architecture, p. 37)

It is notable that some kings had more than one tomb; indeed, some had more than one pyramid. Amenemhet III, for example, had two pyramids built for himself, one at Dahshur (containing his granite sarcophagus) and one at Hawara (containing his quartzite sarcophagus).

There is a type of tomb called a cenotaph (from the Greek kenotaphion, or literally, "empty tomb"), a symbolic false tomb never intended to be a repository for the king's actual material body. The cenotaph served every function as a real tomb, and also provided an additional location for the perpetuity of the king's funerary cult. Taking all these factors into consideration, one might be tempted to conclude that, if the pyramids were not meant to be the literal tombs of the pharaohs, they were meant to be cenotaphs, and the king's mummy was buried elsewhere.

In any case, that the pyramids were tombs is clear, and to deny this observation is to ignore a substantial body of corroborating evidence.

http://www.catchpenn...g/whybuilt.html

hehe I love posting long posts and text only links as I know zoser cant concentrate on reams of text, only videos for him.

Edited by seeder
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the "pieces only" evidence supports the idea that the pyramids were emptied of their dead in order to move them to the Valley of the Kings.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the "pieces only" evidence supports the idea that the pyramids were emptied of their dead in order to move them to the Valley of the Kings.

Precisely! Or plundered and trashed in the process. :tu:

Had they been robbers or dead slaves, would they have been to the trouble to mummify them in the first place? and allow them to be buried in the mids? nah!

course not...

Edited by seeder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is it possible that they were tombs, but had everything - even the murals - removed when the king's body was moved to the Valley of the Kings? So there evidence of removal from the pyramids?

Man, you show to have an 'open mind'.

Meaning: you seek for common explanations that need some brain work, not easy unsubstantiated far out fantasies.

:tu:

.

Edited by Abramelin
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and it sort of "pops a hole" irrespective on the tomb-y use of the pyramids on their being generators of power for dendra lights - you'd hardly leave behind bits and pieces of important peoples bodies (especially if your theology says "you body in the mortal kingdom is reflected by the your body in the spiritual one") if you've a great big lamp lighting the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man! I cant believe I missed pasting the very first paragraph from my prev link, :blush: ...so here it is -

"In about 450 B.C. the ancient historian Herodotus reported that there were underground chambers beneath the Great Pyramid at Giza. "These chambers," he wrote, "King Cheops [Khufu] made as burial chambers for himself ..." (History, 2:124).

Diodorus (c.80-20 B.C.) added more detail:

"And though the two kings [i.e. Khufu and Khafre] built the pyramids to serve as their tombs, in the event neither of them was buried in them; for the multitudes, because of the hardships which they had endured in the building of them and the many cruel and violent acts of these kings, were filled with anger against those who had caused their sufferings and openly threatened to tear their bodies asunder and cast them in despite out of their tombs. Consequently each ruler when dying enjoined upon his kinsmen to bury his body secretly in an unmarked place.
[
Library of History
, 1:64]

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Herotodus has two epithets - father of history and father of lies.

I'd take anything he writes with a pinch of salt, he's as reliable as Pliny "stick a dead pidgeon on a snake bite to suck out the venom" the Elder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Herotodus has two epithets - father of history and father of lies.

I'd take anything he writes with a pinch of salt, he's as reliable as Pliny "stick a dead pidgeon on a snake bite to suck out the venom" the Elder.

I posted in another thread in another forum here:

Herodotus didn't lie, he just gobbled up and wrote down what people told him.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted in another thread in another forum here:

Herodotus didn't lie, he just gobbled up and wrote down what people told him.

and what of the other sources within the text? Herodotus according to wiki... seems to be like a hungry journalist, and if so..

wouldn't pyramid power by granite or lazer beams be the better story?

Edited by seeder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

heres a good read ABOUT BONES FOUND IN THE MIDS... bolded for zoser tho probably a complete waste of my time

"Another reason why Egyptologists believe that pyramids were tombs is because the ancient Egyptian record explicitly states as much. For example, the Papyrus Abbott describes the inspection of "sepulchers of former kings" under Ramesses IX. The pyramid of 17th Dynasty Sobekemsaf II was inspected:

(Snip).

In any case, that the pyramids were tombs is clear, and to deny this observation is to ignore a substantial body of corroborating evidence.

http://www.catchpenn...g/whybuilt.html

hehe I love posting long posts and text only links as I know zoser cant concentrate on reams of text, only videos for him.

And to re-post this from 20 pages back, since it got brushed aside:

http://egyptian-mysteries.com/?q=node/18

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And to re-post this from 20 pages back, since it got brushed aside:

http://egyptian-myst....com/?q=node/18

it all gets brushed aside. I dont think many get the real reason zoser persists to rotate his claims... he just comes to occupy himself regardless of efforts put in by others to educate him... he's a space vampire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and what of the other sources within the text? Herodotus according to wiki... seems to be like a hungry journalist, and if so..

wouldn't pyramid power by granite or lazer beams be the better story?

Hungry journalist he was, yes, but I never read about him reporting about 'pyramid power', lol.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The granite box shows no evidence of construction error. It rings to a specific note when struck. Acoustically tuned.

Zoser98_zps839effe7.jpg

The Upper Chamber

Zoser97_zps0d936262.jpg

Maybe you think that's a mistake. Some may think otherwise.

Keep trying.

http://www.ancient-w...rchitecture.htm

really?

"The Egyptians had a variety of ways to cut granite, mostly involving copper and sand.[11] There are plenty of saw marks on granite stones in Egypt, such as at the granite quarries, as well as notable ones like the famous granite sarcophagus in the Great Pyramid.[12]

The person who was doing the sawing on the sarcophagus sawed, for a while, at the incorrect angle before realizing his mistake and going in the right direction. This left us a pretty large mark to study"

the part about it being sawed wrong.. comes in at around 2:56

so you wont have to watch the whole thing since I know it bugs you that it shoots a lot of wholes into the AA theory..

http://ancientaliensdebunked.com/references-and-transcripts/the-pyramids/#_ednref7

seeder.. Hats.. Guys

I figured it out.. I know the explanation to the bits of mummies.. thinking long and hard about it.. they are remains of the high priests/workers of the pyramid power station.. it must have had a resonance power cascade failure.. during the course of it.. they were blown up and were mummified in the process of the failure.. now the reason why this tech was lost.. is all the people who knew how to basically fix and run it.. died in the accident..

This would also then explain why you would find soot inside the pyramid.. after the power grid went down.. the batteries ran out so now more electric lighting.. no one to get it all running.. they had to go back to using oil lamps etc..

all the machine that were originally inside the pyramid were basically broken apart for the metal etc inside of them.. thats why we cant find anything left today..

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

really?

"The Egyptians had a variety of ways to cut granite, mostly involving copper and sand.[11] There are plenty of saw marks on granite stones in Egypt, such as at the granite quarries, as well as notable ones like the famous granite sarcophagus in the Great Pyramid.[12]

The person who was doing the sawing on the sarcophagus sawed, for a while, at the incorrect angle before realizing his mistake and going in the right direction. This left us a pretty large mark to study"

the part about it being sawed wrong.. comes in at around 2:56

so you wont have to watch the whole thing since I know it bugs you that it shoots a lot of wholes into the AA theory..

http://ancientaliens...amids/#_ednref7

seeder.. Hats.. Guys

I figured it out.. I know the explanation to the bits of mummies.. thinking long and hard about it.. they are remains of the high priests/workers of the pyramid power station.. it must have had a resonance power cascade failure.. during the course of it.. they were blown up and were mummified in the process of the failure.. now the reason why this tech was lost.. is all the people who knew how to basically fix and run it.. died in the accident..

This would also then explain why you would find soot inside the pyramid.. after the power grid went down.. the batteries ran out so now more electric lighting.. no one to get it all running.. they had to go back to using oil lamps etc..

all the machine that were originally inside the pyramid were basically broken apart for the metal etc inside of them.. thats why we cant find anything left today..

:tu: of course thats what happened! I was hoping someone would figure it out as I did. Thats also why there was no capstone, it got blown off into space with the explosion... :w00t: , geez I thought everyone knew that ....

plus the capstone should have landed on mars by now coz thats what the pyramid was pointing at - on just that day!!

anyhoo on tv now is

http://www.radiotime...-investigations

can be found online with clever searching... worth a watch!

but still crap IMO!

.

Edited by seeder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted in another thread in another forum here:

Herodotus didn't lie, he just gobbled up and wrote down what people told him.

Chinese whispers. The people he spoke to knew no more than he did. The real esoteric and unknown Egypt had long disappeared by then. The people he spoke to (circa 450BC) were no more Egyptian than he was.

It's a bit like us today trying to understand the Maya. Yet most of modern archaeological understanding is built on this kind of misinformation and Chinese whispers.

Shocking really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

heres a good read ABOUT BONES FOUND IN THE MIDS... bolded for zoser tho probably a complete waste of my time

"Another reason why Egyptologists believe that pyramids were tombs is because the ancient Egyptian record explicitly states as much.

I love your honesty but that word really says it all. I credit you with honesty if not common sense.

Can I just offer one simple challenge to your attempt?

Let's talk about the Kings whom the pyramids were actually supposed to be for. Where are they? Where are the three Kings who supposedly built the Giza pyramids? What evidence actually is there that they were the builders? What evidence is there that they were actually ever in there after they died?

Egyptology is so amateurish and evasive that they will point to a king who lived much later who happened to be placed in an ancient pyramid and claim that this is why they were originally built.

Sorry to pin you to the wall again. Unless the issues and questions are precise the misinformation just perpetuates.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man! I cant believe I missed pasting the very first paragraph from my prev link, :blush: ...so here it is -

Diodorus (c.80-20 B.C.) added more detail:

"And though the two kings [i.e. Khufu and Khafre] built the pyramids to serve as their tombs, in the event neither of them was buried in them; for the multitudes, because of the hardships which they had endured in the building of them and the many cruel and violent acts of these kings, were filled with anger against those who had caused their sufferings and openly threatened to tear their bodies asunder and cast them in despite out of their tombs. Consequently each ruler when dying enjoined upon his kinsmen to bury his body secretly in an unmarked place.
[
Library of History
, 1:64]

How on earth do you suppose that people living over 2000 years after the event (conservative estimate based on Egyptologists dates not real dates which places the GP as much older) are likely to know anything about how and why the pyramids were built?

How much of Egypt do you suppose was left by then?

This is stretching stupidity to the extreme in a time when written information was poor to say the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well there's sod all of Rome left now, and we know tonnes about it.

You have to remember, the second Library of Alexandria existed then, it was probbly chock-a-block with stuff about the big pointly buildings in the desert.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the "pieces only" evidence supports the idea that the pyramids were emptied of their dead in order to move them to the Valley of the Kings.

Except there is nothing to support the idea. No original mummies were ever found. It's really very simple. Where did the idea first some from that the GP was a tomb? That's what you need to look at. What was the supporting evidence? I would suggest there is no real evidence just hearsay.

The controversial cartouche even if genuine is not evidence that it was Khufu's tomb. Something much more is needed.

There is nothing. The whole of the tomb theory rests on Chinese whispers and fanciful ideas.

People with greater insight in the last 40 years have applied themselves to the problem and by looking at the construction evidence have come to the overwhelming conclusion that it was a power generator.

This writer and researcher puts it very well:

In the last decade scientists have started to doubt the age and purpose of the Great Pyramid. Gradually as the Great Pyramid reveals more of its secrets, the tomb theory becomes less acceptable. Indications are that the Great Pyramid must have been built by a highly intelligent civilisation that must have had a scientific understanding and access to techniques even beyond our own.

In fact attempts have been made to prove that the pyramid could be constructed using the known ancient Egyptian tools and methods. Egyptologist Mark Lehner has made an attempt with a large group of people but failed to even create a 6 m scale model of the pyramid. He had to call in the help of a truck with a winch to get the blocks out of the quarry. In the late seventies a Japanese team funded by Nissan made another attempt to create an 18 m high scale model using the same primitive ancient Egyptian tools such as chisels and hammers.

The once so proud Japanese team returned home disillusioned and embarrassed, since they had to use jackhammers to cut the hard stone, were unable to get the stones across the Nile and eventually had to use bulldozers, a truck and even a helicopter to get the blocks stacked to a pile that remotely resembled a pyramid. In both attempts made to reconstruct the pyramid, only small blocks were carved from the quarry but remember that the real pyramid contains blocks with the weight of a steam engine locomotive!

http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/SODA_chapter8.html

Says it all really.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well there's sod all of Rome left now, and we know tonnes about it.

You have to remember, the second Library of Alexandria existed then, it was probbly chock-a-block with stuff about the big pointly buildings in the desert.

Still no evidence that what was written there was accurate. Or that it could be correctly interpreted.

We can identify with the Romans. We can understand their architecture, culture, language and writing because until quite recently in the UK school boys had to study it.

Not so true with ancient Egypt.

If it was how come we have struggled to interpret Hieroglyphics and as yet still not fully decoded the GP.

This is a very key issue and says a very great deal indeed.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well no. Given that a Caesar and later a Sultan burnt the damn thing to the ground we can never tell what was written there.

But "they had the world's best library to call on" does reinforce the idea that thr ancients may very well have known what we now do not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still no evidence that what was written there was accurate. Or that it could be correctly interpreted.

We can identify with the Romans. We can understand their architecture, culture, language and writing because until quite recently in the UK school boys had to study it.

Not so true with ancient Egypt.

If it was how come we have struggled to interpret Hieroglyphics and as yet still not fully decoded the GP.

This is a very key issue and says a very great deal indeed.

there is no credible evidence at all to the claims you sprout.. none..

let me ask you a question.. why is it.. we have art .. artifacts.. tools.. food.. wines.. stories.. all that stuff about the every day life of ancient Egypt..

yet we have nothing at all that shows about what your talking about..

oh of course you will bring up the 'egypt light bulb carving' which is actually the lotus flower.. fact

you may want to actually take a look at the egyptian legends about the creation of the universe.. it might open your eyes a little.. since you work at the museum.. it shouldnt be to hard to find out.. ask a work mate..

the AA crowd say there was no soot there.. myth

what was said when they cleaned and uncovered brightly colored reliefs on the ceiling.. I will quote them directly, they said the ceiling was covered with “hundreds of years of black soot” have to admit that is rather interesting fact

so.. if they had electric lights.. why the soot? please explain zoser.. I am sure you have a explanation..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so.. if they had electric lights.. why the soot? please explain zoser.. I am sure you have a explanation..

Well one must ask the obvious first. Recent soot or ancient soot?

Then there is the big challenge to the burning torch idea. How did they achieve that quality of work under such poor light conditions? This is not one of the most fascinating issues to me by any means. The GP is a much deeper mystery.

Since you raise it however I would make these obvious challenges.

Edited by zoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But "they had the world's best library to call on" does reinforce the idea that thr ancients may very well have known what we now do not.

Or they may not have known. Depends on how they were able to interpret what they read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well one must ask the obvious first. Recent soot or ancient soot?

Then there is the big challenge to the burning torch idea. How did they achieve that quality of work under such poor light conditions? This is not one of the most fascinating issues to me by any means. The GP is a much deeper mystery.

Since you raise it however I would make these obvious challenges.

ancient soot zoser.. why would it be anything but?

and if it was not.. why is there no recording anywhere of them having electric lights? you would think it would be a important fact for them..

seriously.. dont get me wrong I would love it it was true.. that the GP is a giant generator.. but its not..

Edited by DingoLingo

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 14

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.