Science Proofs: Sphinx is 800K year old

[T.U.M]

32 minutes ago, toast said:

There is esoteric. And there is science. But there is no esoteric science, never has been and never will be. Period.

In your opinions, buddy! In yours.

[toast]

Just now, T.U.M said:

In your opinions, buddy! In yours.

I didnt provided an opinion, buddy, I provided a fact.

[Khaemwaset]

14 hours ago, back to earth said:

They do !    It is sorta a fashion statement too ... like high heeled ugh boots   ( ugh ! )   .

But the good old Aussie is a dying breed amidst all this new fangled technology.

That only took 150 years to think up !     

Wait! I'm sure Joan Collins wore one of those on Dynasty in the 80's.  Did she.....never mind.

[back to earth]

54 minutes ago, Khaemwaset said:

Wait! I'm sure Joan Collins wore one of those on Dynasty in the 80's.  Did she.....never mind.

OMG   worst film ever !   yes they made a film of that here and got me to work on it - 'Dynasty Revisited' , how absolutely embarrassing !

 I remember  talking to props  girl ;   " What's that you got there ?  "

" A 'mobile'  phone .     "

 

 

Hopefully it never made it out the can ! 

(just checked , no listing ... thank god !  )

Edited June 15, 2017 by back to earth

[back to earth]

4 hours ago, T.U.M said:

 

Hi Tum, I  tried to watch your video up there but the beginning has  an old film countdown, the image kept pixelating , all sorts of interference seemed to be breaking up the picture and it started  switiching from one half formed image to another , so I had to turn it off.

You might want to fix that . 

[Kenemet]

8 hours ago, T.U.M said:

- Ancient astronauts: famous and used some esoteric science, missing facts to proof its right.
- Ancient races: from New age movement and 18th centuries scholars.

Btw, what's ever theories can prove. I think, there're truly the "old-one" before mankind.

These ideas do not explain the many species of humans that lived on the planet or the geological and archaeological evidence.

 

The only way they work is if they pretend that the evidence for ancient humans (Denisivonians, Neanderthals, Erectus, etc, etc) and ancient settlements do not exist.

[Hanslune]

4 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

These ideas do not explain the many species of humans that lived on the planet or the geological and archaeological evidence.

 

The only way they work is if they pretend that the evidence for ancient humans (Denisivonians, Neanderthals, Erectus, etc, etc) and ancient settlements do not exist.

Yeah well that is easy to do....snap they are gone!

[Jarocal]

37 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Yeah well that is easy to do....snap they are gone!

Or they were dead end experiments of the Annunaki that lead to failure and homo sapiens sapiens. 

[jaylemurph]

9 hours ago, toast said:

There is esoteric. And there is science. But there is no esoteric science, never has been and never will be. Period.

I have respectfully respectfully disagree. There certainly was esoteric science in the late 16th and early 17th Century. It ultimately wasn't particularly useful/predictive and so early in the Scientific Revolution it was dropped for better-working methodologies. 

The historian Frances Yates has several books on the effects of esoteric thought on the development of modern thought, should if you'd like specific sources.

 

--Jaylemurph

[Harte]

Semantics.

"Science" has a broader meaning than the process of conducting the scientific method.

I've got fried chicken down to a science, but I have no hypothesis, data or conclusion on it.

Harte

[kmt_sesh]

16 minutes ago, Harte said:

...

I've got fried chicken down to a science, but I have no hypothesis, data or conclusion on it.

Harte

That's because you just go buy it at Bojangles.

[ShadowSot]

Fried chicken is a mystery. You go to the holy temple and by some magic process they turn mundane chickens into artery clotting ambrosia. 

[back to earth]

I wonder what   souther fried sphinx is like ? 

 

 

[kmt_sesh]

Mmm, grilled Sphinx!

[ShadowSot]

Isn't that sort of quasi cannibalism? 

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

TUM... English might not be your native tongue, so FYI ... it's facts "prove" not "proof" and "pyramids were" not "was".

[jmccr8]

11 minutes ago, ShadowSot said:

Isn't that sort of quasi cannibalism? 

You getting worried 

jmccr8

[ShadowSot]

2 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

You getting worried 

jmccr8

Well... Just saying Kmt looks a bit peckish and has been staring. 

Edited June 16, 2017 by ShadowSot

[Emma_Acid]

4 hours ago, Harte said:

Semantics.

"Science" has a broader meaning than the process of conducting the scientific method.

I've got fried chicken down to a science, but I have no hypothesis, data or conclusion on it.

Harte

When you bringing some in for the rest of us?

[Windowpane]

On 6/14/2017 at 0:55 PM, Irna said:

Why Are So Many Interested Now in a 2008 Claim about the Sphinx's Age?

http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/why-are-so-many-interested-now-in-a-2008-claim-about-the-sphinxs-age

 

And this is a link to (what I think was) the original paper -

http://mgu.bg/geoarchmin/naterials/64Manichev.pdf

[Emma_Acid]

Can someone please sum up for me, without asking me to watch a video, what the scientific proof of this is?

[Essan]

31 minutes ago, Emma_Acid said:

Can someone please sum up for me, without asking me to watch a video, what the scientific proof of this is?

There isn't any.

2 Ukrainians think the Sphinx shows erosion features similar to those created by waves on coastal cliffs*.   Therefore, they argue, the Sphinx must have been on the coast.  And been subject to wave erosion.   The last time sea levels reached the Giza Plateau (possibly, I haven't checked if this is correct) was around 800,000 years ago.   Therefore, so their rather skewed logic goes, the Sphinx must be 800,000 years old**.

And that is it.


* no-one else agrees though

** actually it would have to be even older than 800,000 years. 
 

[Essan]

However ........


I was looking at some of the rocks around the Sphinx enclosure, and I am sure I saw what looked a little bit like some erosion from freeze-thaw action.  And maybe the odd mark left by a glacier.   This means that the Sphinx must have been subjected to glaciation.   The last time Egypt was under an ice sheet was during the Pre-Cambrian.  Therefore, the Sphinx must be at least 650 million years old.   QED.  

[Hanslune]

1 hour ago, Essan said:

However ........


I was looking at some of the rocks around the Sphinx enclosure, and I am sure I saw what looked a little bit like some erosion from freeze-thaw action.  And maybe the odd mark left by a glacier.   This means that the Sphinx must have been subjected to glaciation.   The last time Egypt was under an ice sheet was during the Pre-Cambrian.  Therefore, the Sphinx must be at least 650 million years old.   QED.  

Well, when I was last there I saw that some of the layers had no fossils in them meaning of course the Spinx is actually a rare limestone inverted fossilization of a pre-life form which I can firmly date to the Neoarchean period; 2.5 to 2.8 billion years ago.

[Windowpane]

1 hour ago, Essan said:

2 Ukrainians think the Sphinx shows erosion features similar to those created by waves on coastal cliffs*.   Therefore, they argue, the Sphinx must have been on the coast.  And been subject to wave erosion.   The last time sea levels reached the Giza Plateau (possibly, I haven't checked if this is correct) was around 800,000 years ago.   Therefore, so their rather skewed logic goes, the Sphinx must be 800,000 years old

 

But there are two elements to this question:

(a) the age of the stone; and

(b)  the epoch in which the stone was carved.

But, if the limestone from which the Sphinx is carved is nummulite limestone, that makes (at least some of) it ca. 44m. years old, doesn't it?  Not quite as old as your 650m., of course ...

But that doesn't answer the question of when the statue was carved.  Unless, of course, it was the work of Ancient Atlanteans fleeing from a different galaxy 40m. years ago who just happened to land at Giza on a refuelling stop ...