Giza Pyramid construction

[Vaz]

3 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

It ain't there yet. Okay show evidence they 'repaired it' at the same time you show evidence they didn't build it. Any evidence of any kind that would tell us that the IC existed let along decided to build two enormous pyramids at Giza? Anything?

The Meyer papyrus is the best evidence you now have that Khufu was involved in the GP in some way.  It certainly isn't evidence of original build thats for sure.  

[Hanslune]

4 minutes ago, Vaz said:

The Meyer papyrus is the best evidence you now have that Khufu was involved in the GP in some way.  It certainly isn't evidence of original build thats for sure.  

Your mean Merer's diary I guess. The best evidence we have for the AE building the pyramids is by the dating of the materials found within it and the tens of millions of pieces of evidence that the AE existed in that place at that time. The evidence for the IC - zilch.

Edited November 2, 2019 by Hanslune

[Hanslune]

6 minutes ago, Vaz said:

Not sure what you mean by IC.

Your straw arguments aren't evidence either.

Invisible Civilization - you know that civilization you say built the pyramids but for which you have no evidence so you keep trying to tear down the evidence for the AE

Question repeated:

So explain how the IC worked granite and which quarry did they take it out of?

Edited November 2, 2019 by Hanslune

[Vaz]

9 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Your mean Merer's diary I guess. The best evidence we have the AE building the pyramids is by the dating of the materials found within it and the tens of millions of pieces of evidence that the AE existed. The evidence for the IC - zilch.

Yet no one else has seen this 'evidence'?

The reason why we are in this discussion is as follows:

You all seem to feel here that the GP is some random thrown together monument with little more significance than say a roman amphitheatre.  You talk about stacking rocks.  You make up silly claims about wandering land masses.  You make silly claims about copper cutting granite.  Drunken gangs,

Never will we see eye to eye until you see that pyramid for what it truly is.

I can't help you there.  You have to do this for yourself.  Although why I can't imagine because the information has been there for a very long time.

Could there be a more significant ulterior motive for your dismissal?  Are you a devotee to the superior achievements of modern man by any chance?  Dismissing all else that came before.

Edited November 2, 2019 by Vaz

[Vaz]

9 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Invisible Civilization - you know that civilization you say built the pyramids but for which you have no evidence so you keep trying to tear down the evidence for the AE

Question repeated:

So explain how the IC worked granite and which quarry did they take it out of?

I've already gone through this.  Different atmospherics, combined with thorough understanding of how to utilise natural energy.  Sound and light.  What else is there?

Edited November 2, 2019 by Vaz

[Hanslune]

 

Quote

You all seem to feel here that the GP is some random thrown together monument with little more significance than say a roman amphitheatre.  You talk about stacking rocks.  You make up silly claims about wandering land masses.  You make silly claims about copper cutting granite.  Drunken gangs,

Nope its a tomb built by stacking up rock - and a good pile it is. I would suggest you look up something called plate tectonics..... no one claims that copper cuts granite - sand cuts granite impelled by a bronze saw....The AE wrote about drunken gangs - take it up with them...lol

 

Quote

Dismissing all else that came before.

Well you see you never tell us what this is - remember only YOU can see the Invisible Civilization - lay on us all that evidence that it existed and built the pyramids at Giza

[Hanslune]

3 minutes ago, Vaz said:

I've already gone through this.  Different atmospherics, combined with thorough understanding of how to utilise natural energy.  Sound and light.  What else is there?

Evidence that any of this is true.

Please show us evidence for the Invisible Civilization that is not your personal opinion. Like where are the IC habitations? Work sites? Pottery? Burials? Etc.etc.

[Kenemet]

6 hours ago, Vaz said:

It's  in the quality of the so called Cartouche.  It's the only smoking gun you need.  It doesn't correlate with the amazing construction feat the GP is.  No further proof required.

It's a classic case of people just believing what they want to believe because it is convenient.  

It's the equivalent of the modern-day "Sam's crew moves this one."  It wasn't intended to be seen.

They're not going to waste time and energy carving "this side up" on things when they've got other jobs to do.  And it's consistent with the rough look of that area (relieving chambers that distribute weight and are not intended as a burial chamber.)

MODERN standards would make the workers finish off everything.  But to ancient cultures, if you couldn't see it, it didn't need to be perfect.

[Kenemet]

26 minutes ago, Vaz said:

The Meyer papyrus is the best evidence you now have that Khufu was involved in the GP in some way.  It certainly isn't evidence of original build thats for sure.  

Well, no.  There's the temple, the boat pits, various inscriptions, the queens tombs, etc, etc.  

[cormac mac airt]

37 minutes ago, Vaz said:

I quite agree which is why I assert that it wasnt the AE that built it.  They repaired it.  So the GP just happens to have ceased it's 'oddysey' landing exactly on 30 N.

Well,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,hmm...........

Nope, it's NOT on 30N. In fact at 29 58 45N it's approximately 1.44 miles SOUTH of that Latitude. And even taking into account tectonic movement the African Plate HAS NOT moved that far in the last 4500 years, nor even in that specific direction. 

cormac

[Hanslune]

2 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Nope, it's NOT on 30N. In fact at 29 58 45N it's approximately 1.44 miles SOUTH of that Latitude. And even taking into account tectonic movement the African Plate HAS NOT moved that far in the last 4500 years, nor even in that specific direction. 

cormac

Yeah I disabused him of that notion some days ago - he was trying to revisit it.

[Scott Creighton]

11 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

It wasn't intended to be seen.

Not even by the King's soul that could pass through stone?

SC

[Hanslune]

10 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Well, no.  There's the temple, the boat pits, various inscriptions, the queens tombs, etc, etc.  

Vaz is the guy who didn't seem to realize that Khafre's tomb was right next to the Great Pyramid - so context isn't a big thing for him.....lol

[cormac mac airt]

1 minute ago, Hanslune said:

Yeah I disabused him of that notion some days ago - he was trying to revisit it.

And yet, stupidity revisited is STILL stupidity. 

cormac

[Hanslune]

Just now, cormac mac airt said:

And yet, stupidity revisited is STILL stupidity. 

cormac

Well yes - just look at the last few pages - Classic Cladking with Sitchin touch of: "endless repetition of failed ideas".....

[cormac mac airt]

And the argument about the GPs alleged "perfection" DOES NOT take into account that even Petrie found that it IS NOT in perfect alignment with the cardinal points as well as it has a slight counter-clockwise twist in its construction from bottom to top of which the cladding was utilized to correct that error. Hmm, not so perfect now is it? 

cormac

[kmt_sesh]

2 hours ago, Vaz said:

Not a supportable hypothesis based on the immense technical achievement and craftsmanship that the GP is.  

Let common sense prevail, not more straw upon straw.

See there? You're still doing it and hoping repeating a mistake will correct it. You need to study the culture on which you're commenting. What you consider "common sense"  might well be completely irrelevant to someone growing up in the third millennium BCE along the Nile. If you really want to comment on an ancient people and their works, you are obligated to do so from their point of view.

Sorry, but that's strike two.

[Harte]

2 hours ago, Vaz said:

Are you seriously trying to sell the idea that the Pyramid builders were drunkards?  Really? Maybe for those piles of rubble that collapsed.  

If you can make the idea stick for the GP then please take the floor...................

Dude, they wrote it themselves. That was one of the gang names for Menkaure's pyramid at Giza. Found in Menkaure's pyramid.

Same "scrawled" script.

Why do you think I said to check it out?

Do you think Menkaure's pyramid is "collapsed?"

Harte

[Hanslune]

Just now, Harte said:

Dude, they wrote it themselves. That was one of the gang names for Menkaure's pyramid at Giza. Found in Menkaure's pyramid.

Same "scrawled" script.

Why do you think I said to check it out?

Do you think Menkaure's pyramid is "collapsed?"

Harte

It shrank after they left it in the Pyramid dryer to long - sad

[Harte]

2 hours ago, Vaz said:

Not a supportable hypothesis based on the immense technical achievement and craftsmanship that the GP is.  

Let common sense prevail, not more straw upon straw.

So, completely ignore what the Ancient Egyptians themselves wrote at the time, in favor of your unevidenced claims?

No thanks. Unlike you, I have no preference for life in a state of self-imposed ignorance.

Harte

[Harte]

2 hours ago, Vaz said:

I see where you are going with the argument.  Vyse could not have made the inscriptions in the air shaft that's a given.  The red ochre paint seen here on first glance would appear to resemble the quarry marks but we have only a tiny amount of markings to actually tell.   I still contest that there is enough information to now say for certainty that Vyse perpetrated the fraudulant marks in the relieving chambers.  The air shaft markings are I would guess the work of a repairer (Khufu and his drunkards).  I've seen or heard nothing to suggest otherwise.

Repairs inside an 8x8 inch shaft?

That was one long paintbrush handle, wasn't it.

Harte

[Windowpane]

2 hours ago, Scott Creighton said:

... The prince was the first person (not Sitchin) to put into a publication his suspicions that the marks found by Vyse within the Great Pyramid were recent additions i.e. fraudulently placed there:

Source: https://archive.org/details/egyptundermehem00vongoog/page/n274

 

 

(Your source: Egypt under Mehemet Ali, Volumes 1-2, Hermann Pückler-Muskau (Fürst von), H. Colburn, 1845)

 

My co-author tells me, however, that, some 23 years ago, he came across correspondence published by Pückler-Muskau six years before this, in 1839.  From this earlier correspondence, it becomes abundantly clear that the Prince was not at all suggesting that "the marks found by Vyse within the Great Pyramid were ... fraudulently placed there."

 

In 1839, Pückler-Muskau wrote that: 

 

Quote

. . . The hieroglyphics discovered by Colonel Vyse in the interior of the great pyramid, are not cut in the stone, but put on, as if with a finger dipped in some colour, - probably at a period comparatively recent; and it is far from impossible that the low and narrow passages through which one can scarcely creep on one's hands and knees, so disproportionate to such enormous masses of stone, have been broken out for their own purposes by the priests long after their erection, . . . (The Athenaeum, No. 621. London, Saturday, September 21, 1839;Letters on Egypt by Prince Puckler Muskau: 724.)

 

There are several points worth noting:

 

1)  In the 1845 work to which you linked, Pückler-Muskau's comment anyway appears only in a footnote.

 

2)  As a close reading of the texts reveals, Pückler-Muskau was under the confused misapprehension that the tunnels were the work of later priests (1839: 724;1845: 246).  His comments about "comparatively recent" refer to this belief, and not to the late 1830s.

 

3) When Pückler-Muskau made his comments, in 1839 and 1845, no one appears to have taken them as an accusation that Vyse had committed forgery.  Had they done so, there would have been a monstrous scandal - rather like one gentleman accusing another of cheating at cards.

 

[Harte]

1 hour ago, Vaz said:

How do you suppose that a group of people, just out of the stone age managed to do that?  Mainstreamers fail to account for the maths,the architectural complexity, the planning, the tools, the man power and just about everything.  It's an old argument but perfectly valid.

"Just out of the Stone Age?"

Let me ask you, when did the "stone age" end in Egypt?

Answer - the oldest evidence for copper smelting in North Africa dates to 2500 years before the Great Pyramid date, and isn't crude enough to indicate it is the oldest.

Harte

[Harte]

1 hour ago, Vaz said:

No doubt they did.  Not to the exactitude and complexity of the GP though.  They would not have been able to work granite to that precision either. 

Cataclysms, floods, over epochs.  Easy.  Where do you suppose the legend of Atlantis came from?  It's endured.

There is no "legend" of Atlantis. No previous mention before Plato.

Harte

[cormac mac airt]

49 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

And the argument about the GPs alleged "perfection" DOES NOT take into account that even Petrie found that it IS NOT in perfect alignment with the cardinal points as well as it has a slight counter-clockwise twist in its construction from bottom to top of which the cladding was utilized to correct that error. Hmm, not so perfect now is it? 

cormac

Too late to edit so I'll add that the tectonic movement of Africa within the last circa 4500 years has been generally northEAST which, using modern latitude/longitude assignments, would place the center of the Great Pyramid approximately on a line DUE WEST of the southern side of the smallest of the three Giza Pyramids, that of Pharaoh Menkaure. Its centerpoint would therefore be thusly: 

cormac