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
dreamland

Secret Caves under the Pyramids

969 posts in this topic

Dr Hawass specifically referred to "other unscientific theories on the net". This implies he was aware

of the theories on the net.

Until there is publkic pressure to do the science that should have been done 50 yearsa ago

it is unlikely anything will chjange.

I am very sensitive to the difficulties in Egypt and wish the people all the best but this has been

going on (or not going on) for half a century now. At some point there aren't any more excuses

and action is required. I'm also aware the new administration there has barely had time to unpack

their bags but this will very soon be their failure as well if they continue not to act.

This only implies that he may have been aware of some of the theories on the internet. There is no specificity as to what exactly those theories were, nor can it be known that your "theory" was among those he was aware of. Claiming yours, specifically, was known to him is more than a bit misleading.

cormac

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dr Hawass specifically referred to "other unscientific theories on the net". This implies he was aware

of the theories on the net.

I think you will find it would come from questions from certin crowds of people that refer to these theories as gospel..

I worked with a guy that did archology at the GP and area.. worked under Hawass.. he actually totally dislikes Hawass as a person.. but holds him in the greatest respect in regards to his love and urge for knowledge of his forfathers..

But as Sesh has said there are a lot of restraints there now.. funding from the egyptian government is not high.. prorities have shifted.. its a very unstable climate there now..

You cannot just go in and do what you want now.. its all permits.. paper work.. restrictions.. and time frames..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-SNIP- for irrelevance

I am very sensitive to the difficulties in Egypt and wish the people all the best but this has been

going on (or not going on) for half a century now. At some point there aren't any more excuses

and action is required. I'm also aware the new administration there has barely had time to unpack

their bags but this will very soon be their failure as well if they continue not to act.

Honestly Clad, I think the Egyptian government has something better to do right now. Like, trying heal the country from the upheavals, rebuild a sane and working economy, get rid of corruption at the highest and lowest levels. Trying to bring the country into a stable situation, where maybe, just maybe, democracy could be possible, without having to resolve to rioting and street demonstrations. Also trying to stop thieves from making off with all the artefacts, which are being stolen left, right and centre from museums and dig sites all over Egypt

When the important stuff is done, I'm sure they'll get to it. Seriously, sometimes it sounds like you have no idea what happens in the real world or what is happening in a given area. As much as I adore ancient history, I do see the need for restructuring in certain countries, even if it is detrimental to archaeology. It's called getting your priorities right..

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a great mystery how the Egyptian actually build there pyramid..But in History the pyramid was suppose to be a resting place for Pharaoh Khufu cause he believe that he will be Resurrected again as god and live among the gods..But how did they actually build it with such Perfect measurement without leaving any blueprints or evedence,..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You cannot just go in and do what you want now.. its all permits.. paper work.. restrictions.. and time frames..

This is exactly what's unacceptable. They've had 25 to 50 years to do a lot of this work

and it isn't even started. Are we going to wait half century to do infrared scanning that could

be done covertly by a tourist in common areas? Egyptologists are on the job NOW and there's

no reason they can't do some of the work NOW. Of course they have a good excuse right NOW

but what is the excuse for the billions squandered in the last 50 years?

If I believed they would do the work when things settled down I'd become more patient but, frankly,

there's still no indication anything is ever going to change. This stuff isn't rocket science. How hard

is it to get a little sample of that ben ben stone and send it off to be tested? Is there violence on the

plateau? Is it even safe to travel to Egypt?

I've been waiting 6 1/2 years and all I see is more desicration of graves, destruction of artefacts, trow-

eling for ramps, and counting how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is exactly what's unacceptable. They've had 25 to 50 years to do a lot of this work

and it isn't even started. Are we going to wait half century to do infrared scanning that could

be done covertly by a tourist in common areas? Egyptologists are on the job NOW and there's

no reason they can't do some of the work NOW. Of course they have a good excuse right NOW

but what is the excuse for the billions squandered in the last 50 years?

If I believed they would do the work when things settled down I'd become more patient but, frankly,

there's still no indication anything is ever going to change. This stuff isn't rocket science. How hard

is it to get a little sample of that ben ben stone and send it off to be tested? Is there violence on the

plateau? Is it even safe to travel to Egypt?

I've been waiting 6 1/2 years and all I see is more desicration of graves, destruction of artefacts, trow-

eling for ramps, and counting how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Methinks you'll be waiting a tad longer clad, the Foreign Office is advising against all but essential travel to Cairo, Alexandria, Luxor and Suez since about two years now (I checked about 3 months ago, so this might have changed). So we can presume that it's not safe to travel to Egypt just yet.

Not trying to be difficult here, but that's the state of affairs as it is, it can't be helped.

Edited by TheSearcher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How hard is it to get a little sample of that ben ben stone and send it off to be tested? Is there violence on the

plateau?

since the evidence is clear about the water table 15 feet below the sphinx, and changes in flow of the water since they built the dam many years ago which stop the usual flow of the inudation,they have been well aware of the flow and seepage of polluted water ,sewage water, dirty water, etc which has been occuring for many years.

what we are seeing is a smokng gun which ties in one of my old theories when one understands whats at play and the movement of the silt, and lack of movement of silt.

robert temple has now shown something which ties into one of my theories without a doubt.

while that is theory is just a theory and i wont mention the details, because i dont want a long debate, i do love this smoking gun which does supports my theory in a unbelievable way :)

i know some bash robert temple, but some good comes from him showing certain facts, and this seems to show a smoking gun which points my way.

clearly me being a analyst, i frown on all the egyptolists because they lack the problem solving skillset to understand at whats at play, even professional researchers i tend to look at as a joke in the same degree which they may look at some facts or find others good but they just simply dont have what it takes when it comes to problem solving as the skillset as i have, because of being a professional analyst and problem solver for so long.

there seems to be a great lack of understanding of the ancient egyptian culture based on my view on being a analyst and seeing whats at play. i know the if egyptologists ever come to understand the ancient egyptians on certain things to my level they will be forced to agree with me on certain conclusions i have maded because it is fact. i know they will eventually reach my the conclusion if they ever reach it, then they will more than likely omit something in their analyst, i just wait and smile at their stupidity.

once again, this stuff is great

Edited by samspade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so, uh, what are you trying to say? :unsure2:

"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."

A wise man would not disagree with this statement however a wise man also knows that all

true knowledge is visceral, however, he won't trust his guts to know very much at all.

And you know this, how?

We can't know something for sure without a time traveling machine, but archeology is all about linking together clues we find from the past to figure out a reasonable explanation of what happened. For instance, a small cave with a body inside and some pottery would be said to be a grave, becauce even though there is no ancient sign that says 'GRAVE' this is the most reasonable conclusion.

Same with the pyramids. When we find the graves of hundreds of workers, villages near the pyramids where they lived, records of workers and the amounts they were paid, a ramp on one side of the pyramid and chisel marks (not to mention having a good idea of the technique they used for cutting blocks, and we can do it today easily. also the progression of pyramids as they become more sophisticated).

The most reasonable conclusion from that evidence is that human workers made this monument by sawing stone with a water/sand technique.

There is no evidence (thats scientificaly sound) that shows its aliens, so we may as well say it was the dump a giant took thousands of years ago. When you have 0 evidence of one theory, and a rather impressive body of evidence for another, you tend to go with the second one.

We dont know everything, and there are still details we are hazy on about the construction or that there is no consensus on. We are always learning new things, even about the pyramids, but until we find a warp core in the center, the evidence is not pointing to 'alien'.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say the evidence for an internal ramp on this page-

.

http://archive.archa...tc/pyramid.html

.

was pretty conclusive.

...And when it's disproven over the next several years it will have no effect whatsoever on

the general belief they must have used ramps. People will simply say the ramps must have

taken some other route.

What you see as pretty conclusive evidence is actually virtual proof that the stones were pulled

straight up the side which would be easier and more logical than any sort of ramp. The evidence

suggests an answer to why there are caves under here. There's evidence for water everywhere

up here and while water would be a great aid to thirsty ramp workers it might also eliminate the

need for such work altogether and explain why the word "ramp" isn't even attested from this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...And when it's disproven over the next several years it will have no effect whatsoever on

the general belief they must have used ramps. People will simply say the ramps must have

taken some other route.

What you see as pretty conclusive evidence is actually virtual proof that the stones were pulled

straight up the side which would be easier and more logical than any sort of ramp. The evidence

suggests an answer to why there are caves under here.

.

are you for real or what?!

why on earth would it be disproven over the next few years?

there is evidence there, actual.

physical.

evidence.

and with further investigation, are you saying that that evidence, that

actual.

physical.

evidence.

will just evaporate??

how did you arrive at 'virtually proved they pulled rocks up the sides' from a microgravemetric photo showing an internal spiral pattern??

'there's evidence of water everywhere up here'

where??

where's your 'evidence'?!

what part of that page proves that there's water, water everywhere, and not a jot of 'think'?

truth is cladking, is that that evidence, that

actual.

physical.

evidence.

makes your theory null & void, so you just start spouting complete drivel.

at first, I had a small amount of respect for your dedication, but now, I just think you're completely delusional. what I saw as persistance is just dead-horse flogging. you constantly barrage this board with a graham hancockian theory based on your erronious interpretation of ancient texts, saying you're right, and hundreds of scholars' lives' work is wrong! that's egoism at its very worst.

you put absolutely no 'evidence' or 'proof' forward to justify your claims, and when someone offers evidence for something that doesn't fit your phallacy, you just ignore it and carry on sicking up your nonsense.

like the moderator you drove mad on the other website you did this to said, 'this ISN'T your personal blog'.

either back up your claims, or stop jumping in on this discussion with your rubbish.

we've all heard what you're saying dozens of times over, so stop repeating yourself and going round in circles.

Edited by shrooma
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I discovered that I am psychic .... I once predicted that I would become psychic ... my prediction must be .... true

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I discovered that I am psychic .... I once predicted that I would become psychic ... my prediction must be .... true

.

a self-fulfilling prophesy eh? I have those all the time!

'i prophesie that the evening shall be filled with beer'

lo and behold.....

:-)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why on earth would it be disproven over the next few years?

there is evidence there, actual.

you put absolutely no 'evidence' or 'proof' forward to justify your claims, and when someone offers evidence for something that doesn't fit your phallacy, you just ignore it and carry on sicking up your nonsense.

This is really quite simple. Evidence doesn't make a theory correct. If it did then every single theory

in the world from "my religion is the one true religion" to "my political party is the only one that can save

the country would be absolutely and demonstrably correct. This is impossible. It's impossible that con-

tradictory ideas can be both correct. Just as it's impossible for two objects to be in the same place at the

same time. Indeed the causes are even quite similar. You can get angry that the facts are pointed out but

they remain the facts and the amount of evidence for Houdin's theory is not very great and most of it is the

result of interpretation which I've already shown in this very thread to be poor interpretation. Rather than

address that at that time when it was actually relevant you have chosen instead to bring it back up when

it isn't. You do this because of a deep seated belief in ramps based on your understanding and interpre-

tation of evidence. This is an understanding that doesn't include more than a few facts and none of the

facts already relevant or mentioned in this thread such as the ben ben in the valley temple. Rather than

trying to adopt or consider new physical evidence or reconsider your interpretation of existing evidence you

have chosen another route.

I give Houdin a great deal of credit on several fronts because his theory is pure genius and has been built

around the evidence rather than beliefs like the other theories out there. Anytime you build a theory around

facts there is a greater chance it is accurate. But this hardly proves he is correct and I already know there is

a very low probability that he is right. Certainly he will be proven correct about a few things but not internal

ramps for reasons I've spelled out many times before. Since the probability of his being right is so low he will

be proven wrong in all probability because this is the nature of the definitions. When he is proven wrong

everyone will make excuses and say "well, we still know they must have used ramps" because this is the be-

lief and nothing will change it until the answer to the question is actually found and no one has even looked

for this answer in over a quarter century and has NEVER done a systematic enquiry with modern research

tools and methods (our "modern" and not Petrie's).

You say I have no proof for my theory but the fact of the matter is all the evidence pooints the same way. It

all points to the caves under the pyramids that Egyptology is scared to even look at. It all points to using wat-

er to build the pyramids. You can complain that the evidence is too shallow to establish this as fact and even

at this late date I can agree. But rather thanb cast off all the evidence wouldn't it make more sense to invest-

igate and get more facts than to ignore the relevant ones I post in a thread and instead insist it supports an

idea that is largely founded on a misinterpretation of that evidence and isn't relevant to "secret caves under

the pyramids"?

Everyone gets to believe what he wants and this is the way things are now days. But this applies to those few

who believe in geysers too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

clad, you're just going round in circles again, and please, don't try baffling me with bulls**t, I aren't stupid, so i'm immune.

'evidence doesn't make a theory correct'

doesn't it?

it does in my eyes.

it does in everyone elses eyes.

it does in the eyes of everyone WITH eyes!

except you of course.

'my religion is the one true religion' eh?

show me ONE shred of evidence of the existence of god.

there is non, which is why it's a matter of 'faith' and not 'science'.

again, you just dismiss 'evidence' as not true, or having a 'very low probability' of being right, saying that 'all the evidence points to geysers', when there is no EVIDENCE to back up your 'theory' whatsoever, and don't say 'look at the caves, LOOK AT THE CAVES!!' because all that would prove is the existence of caves, not some miraculous, physics-defying waterspout.

I have been investigating the facts, how do you think I posted the link, pretended it into reality?

how do you think I found out that your name is all over the 'net like a bad rash whenever this subject comes up?

I don't know why your definition of the word 'conclusive' differs from everyone elses, but after looking at the evidence, the internal ramp hypothesis seems the most plausable, with the best supporting evidence, and that allowed me to reach A CONCLUSION. the clue is in the word.....

houdin's ramp has evidence to back it up, evidence that you dismiss, whereas your theory has no facts, none, just personal interpretation and conjecture, nothing more, which is why I came to the conclusion that like religion, it is just a matter of belief, your belief, and therefore about as likely as god making the earth at 9am on sunday 23rd of october 4004bc.

no disrespect clad, but you really, REALLY need to get out more. go get drunk, have sex or something. you've wasted years of your life on this, years you ain't ever getting back, and who kows, having a bit of fun might give you a better perception of things, a different outlook.

repent, before it's too late so to speak.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The usual fringe claim concerning how many blocks per hour had to have been placed in the G.P. doesn't reflect well at all on the use of a geyser.

How many blocks can one geyser spray lift?

How often do CO2 geysers "go off?"

They'd still be building the damn thing today.

Harte

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It all points to using wat-

er to build the pyramids.

i created a fun theory as you may recall.

it was about how i believe rising water could aid in the rising of blocks during rising water table during annual flood period.

as you recall, i dont include geysers in my theory because i based it on rising waters in the annual flood nile.

i doubt egyptologists would even bother with my theory thinking it lacks evidence and

if they did, they would feel it could of only maded the egyptians a little more productive.

but that does not omit the fact it may of been done in the way i suggested.

im personally opened minded, i still dont rule out ramps .

Edited by samspade
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shrooma. Welcome to the Fight. Clad has been pushing pretty much the same idea for many years.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i created a fun theory as you may recall,,

it was about how i believe rising water aided in the rising of blocks during rising water table during annual flood period.

i dont include geysers in my theory because i based it on rising waters in the annual flood nile

i doubt egyptologists would even bother with my theory thinking it lacks evidence and

if they did would feel it could of only maded the egyptians a little more productive.

but that does not omit the fact it may of been done in the way i suggested.

im personally opened minded, i still dont rule out ramps .

I remember your water theory. It could have actually been used but would have

been a tiny fraction of the total lifting that was done. Truth to tell I believe these

people were far more resourceful than modern people and almost any way that

could have been used actually was in some small part. I don't believe they ever

wasted any effort or any opportunity.

I am not closed minded about ramps. My estimate of their probability has varied

from about .5% to 5%. Right now it's about 1%. I'm far more confident that if they

used ramps that it was either switchback ramps or internal ramps. This is based

on the actual evidence as I can determine it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The usual fringe claim concerning how many blocks per hour had to have been placed in the G.P. doesn't reflect well at all on the use of a geyser.

How many blocks can one geyser spray lift?

How often do CO2 geysers "go off?"

They'd still be building the damn thing today.

Harte

Based on a study performed of Crystal Geyser in Utah in 2005 it was estimated that it yielded, annually, about 12,000 tonnes of CO2. For the sake of argument, using a commensurate yield of water and taking into account the average block of the GP is 2.5 tons then we're only talking about 4800+ blocks per year. At that rate it would have taken about 520 years to build the GP. The duration of each eruption during the study was between 7 and 25 minutes with an average recharge time of about 6 hours.

https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/316304.pdf

cormac

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not closed minded about ramps. My estimate of their probability has varied

from about .5% to 5%. Right now it's about 1%.

.

....but not what you'd really call 'open-minded' either....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well.... the Great Pyramid is about 2.5 million cubic meters. And that crunches down to about 6.2 billion kg of limestone, depending on the density of the limestone and accounting for voids between stones. And over 30 years there are 263,000 hours. So that is about 24,000 kg per hour (24 hr per day, 365 days a year.). But if we assume that the workers only worked 12 hours, and that they only worked half the year, that is around 100,000 kg per hour. And to have a counterweight that moved quickly enough, we should probably increase that to 125,000 kg/hr or 150,000 kg per hour. If crank that down to seconds it is 39 kg per second. Which is quite a lot, but this would also imply that the geyser was operational for the entire 12 hours of work. If we assume a periodic flow, we get a number that is not supported by the geography or the idea behind a cold water geyser.

And if the flow was constant, or near constant, then it is actually no longer a geyser, as a geyser must be periodic.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many blocks can one geyser spray lift?

They could have achieved more than 250% efficiency. In other words for every pound of water

that sprayed to 81' 3" they could have lifted about 2.5 pounds of stones to 81' 3". This isn't "true"

efficiency of the nature that usually appears in the calculation but recognition of the fact that the

actual evidence says that after it fell 81' 3" lifting stones that it was reused in the cliff face counter-

weights that would lift stones another 225'. Over the course of the project when all this lifting wasn't

sufficient to current needs they could relift the same water using manual means such as a tem of

men standing on a step and pulling water up the side. There is evidence for lifting water manually.

How often do CO2 geysers "go off?"

Nobody today has ever tried to increase the height, force, or volume of water from a CO2 geyser so

we have no information whatsoever on what could be accomplished. The PT is littered with informa-

tion about how to control geysers. There are more than 25 lines related to this topic. They included

the addition of sugars and salts to the water to force eruptions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if we assume that the workers only worked 12 hours, and that they only worked half the year, that is around 100,000 kg per hour.

This number looks reasonable. I'm still working on their schedule but I believe they worked

only ten hour days (or less) for about nine months per year. This schedule probably varied

a little over the course of the project with longer days during the middle sections when water

storage was impossible. They had ten day "weeks" with the first day (probably) given over to

equipment maintenance only. There were numerous holidays with two weeks out of three hav-

ing at least one holiday.

100 metric tons per hour would be easily maintained with two counterweights in operation so

long as they had the ballast. These were just the main counterweights overseen by Isis and

serket but there were additional counterweights on the cliff face to keep these supplied and

probably an auxiallary counterweight for supplies and personnel. These maincounterweights

were loaded very rapidly with 4 to 7 stones dependent on size and unloaded even more rapid-

ly. There is a part of the loader still visible in the middle of the east side. This was a device

called the min that worked on the bouyancy of water to keep the "elevator" at the same level

as the men on the loading platform. This was like the plate dispenser in a restaurant that sinks

when you add more plates to it. This is not only in evidence physically but is even mentioned

on the Palermo Stone and a few times in the PT.

This was simply a very very easy way to build. Men sat in the shade and sipped perrier rather

than dragged stones up ramps. This is why the cemetery is littered with titles related to water

and handling water instead of ramps and stone dragging. This is where all the evidence, shal-

low as it may be, points; not some of the evidence but ALL of the evidence. And if you followed

that new ben ben stone back to its origin it would come out in one of the many caves still under

the plateau.

The fact that people are unhappy with the way I put the evidence together is irrelevant. All that

matters is they are afraid of the facts. They won't test the ben ben and they won';t excavate the

cave. They won't look at the facts with an eye to rearranging them because they don't like where

they'll come up. They refuse to even see the five step pyramid that virtually proves beyond ques-

tion that ramps were not used. Instead they choose to see spiral ramps and their faith can't be

shaken even when the proof finally rolls in that they are not spiral ramps. They will just imagine

that it mustta been some other sort of ramps. They would not have used ramps to build a five step

pyramid and there will never be any evidence that they did.

All you really need to do to prove me wrong is get your heroes at Giza to do a little simple testing.

It wouldn't cost $1.50 to prove that ben ben isn't calcium carbonate. A $200 chemical analysis of

the water in the Osiris Shaft should prove I'm wrong about geysers. When Hawass spoke of "other

unscientific theories on the net" he was dpown in the Osiris Shaft but couldn't be bothered to test the

water. He instead said he knows everything about the Giza Plateau. I wish I had gone to his school

where he could just glance at the water and know the percentages of all the different chjemicals in

it or wander into a cave he said didn't exist and see right through thousands of tons of bat guano.

Maybe he really was Superman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on a study performed of Crystal Geyser in Utah in 2005 it was estimated that it yielded, annually, about 12,000 tonnes of CO2. For the sake of argument, using a commensurate yield of water and taking into account the average block of the GP is 2.5 tons then we're only talking about 4800+ blocks per year. At that rate it would have taken about 520 years to build the GP. The duration of each eruption during the study was between 7 and 25 minutes with an average recharge time of about 6 hours.

https://e-reports-ex.../pdf/316304.pdf

cormac

Only 520 years?

Well, damn then. I guess I'll have to finally admit that I was wrong about something!

Harte

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.