Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Sphinx and GP dates from 10 500 BC?


Big Bad Voodoo

Recommended Posts

Actually I'll have more to say about that but it will have to wait till I get home from work, when I have more time. It will be part of my next reply to Scott. For the moment I can simply say that Hassan was a good Egyptologist and a credible scholar.

I will be waiting for another long post.

Let's see: there is 100 percent evidence of burial chambers in the pyramids.

Conclusion: they were tombs! Duh!!!

Jesus, how moronic can some people be.

Exactly, especially when we know that they were not just tombs. :tu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aus you can say that for some orthodox hypothesis which they called theories. Some of them where never been proven yet they are well accepted.

And for good reason.

See, a "proven" theory is no longer a theory, it becomes a fact.

Suffice it to say that Egyptology consists of all three - hypotheses, theories and facts. However, as you pointed out, the very ideas you're referring to are still called "theories," owing to the very fact that they haven't been proven.

Harte

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Kmt

Although I like reading your long wide and great info posts this thread took you completly.

I miss old around Kmt. I was hoping that you will junp into Labirinths thread or in Purple people. Belive me, next time, I will be very carefull what Im posting. ^_^

Anyway, didnt read all yours and Scotts posts. But I will in sunday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Kmt

Although I like reading your long wide and great info posts this thread took you completly.

I miss old around Kmt. I was hoping that you will junp into Labirinths thread or in Purple people. Belive me, next time, I will be very carefull what Im posting. ^_^

Anyway, didnt read all yours and Scotts posts. But I will in sunday.

I'm not sure what you mean by "took you completely." If you mean all of my time, you're right. I'm very busy lately and don't have a lot of time to post, so I must be selective.

I've seen the other two discussions you mentioned and have skimmed through them, but right now I'm satisfied with this one. If I find more time, I'll certainly consider other discussions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what you mean by "took you completely." If you mean all of my time, you're right. I'm very busy lately and don't have a lot of time to post, so I must be selective.

I've seen the other two discussions you mentioned and have skimmed through them, but right now I'm satisfied with this one. If I find more time, I'll certainly consider other discussions.

Perhaps, to benefit your digestion, you should consider switching the bulk of your concentration into a different, un-Creightonized, thread?

Harte

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh gees thanks Swede for the copy and paste originality. However you left out fork carrying table begging, overbearing know it all orthodox has been amateur fat heads. That is English, just in case you missed it, and it should be at the TOP of the list. FYI

Your above response has already been addressed by other contributors. Nonetheless, to clarify:

1) On at least two occasions you have publicly referenced a lack of understanding regarding the definition of two words commonly utilized in the English language.

2) Concise definitions from credible sources were provided for your benefit. These definitions were taken directly from the source in order to significantly minimize any potential inaccuracies. Standard procedure in qualified settings.

3) The remaining elements of your response are of notably little consequence, nor do they add support to your credibility and/or technical acumen.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SC: Except the early, giant pyramids were NOT used for burial.

Best wishes,

SC

And your credible and supportable documentation for the above would be...?

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aus you can say that for some orthodox hypothesis which they called theories. Some of them where never been proven yet they are well accepted.

Also not nice how you called him based on his view. If someone have different view he gets label. If we all speak in one real forum Im betting that people like you would put band/tape around Scotts upper arm. Maybe its normal where you from but you must always keep in mind that it was legal to kill Jew in Nazi Germany.

Not trying to provoke you or others and not trying to put oil on fire or defending Scotts view. Personally I dont have clue about inventory or dream stele before this thread. But Im willing to hear both sides of story and decide on my own. To shut mouth of people is wrong.

I really wish you would have posted the entire post I made and consider it's context. I stand by what I wrote completely. If you read it I was also giving a positive comment on some archeology considered fringe yet was proven fact. I believe it was a very cordial post which Scot ignored with a realistic warning at how he could be percieved. If you took it wrong I apologize though please try to read it in its entirety and understand the context to which it was written.in the end that post sympathized with him and asked him to step forward and make a difference or remain just a fantasy writer and if he chose the latter and excepted the title/label I could actually respect some of the musings he presents and could see myself supporting his stories. Just not as fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And your credible and supportable documentation for the above would be...?

.

Uhmmm...non-existent?

Cheers,

Badeskov

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott I do want to thank you for one thing though... I was getting bored with my old member title and you inspired its change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott I do want to thank you for one thing though... I was getting bored with my old member title and you inspired its change.

LOL I like the new title, Aus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL I like the new title, Aus.

LOL I figure why not embrace and remove the empowerment felt by those using it to insult. I like it too! Apologists make me happy. Now pass me some of that p.o.o. I quite enjoy its flavor.

Edited by Aus Der Box Skeptisch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess what the way out theroists are saying is a 10,500 year old civilization came, built the sphinx leaving no bones or artifacts, that is really impossiable. like someone said you can`nt go to a.b.c. without the b :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess what the way out theroists are saying is a 10,500 year old civilization came, built the sphinx leaving no bones or artifacts, that is really impossiable. like someone said you can`nt go to a.b.c. without the b :)

That's easy to explain: those who built the pyramids had all fled from Atlantis, and the first thing they wanted to do is built as many pyramids as they could and a nice Sphinx too just for decoration. When done, they all left for Zeta Ridiculi in their flying saucers.

:rolleyes:

.

Edited by Abramelin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sphinx_of_Hetepheres_II_-_fourth_dynasty_of_Egypt.jpg

The frist Sphinx by Djedefre

My thoughts on the building of the Sphinx . Djedefre may have had it built in the image of his mother. Also built the boat to his father`s tomb Khufu. When Khufu died ,Khafre his brother with a different mother built his tomb pyramid and had the Sphinx recarved in his image, is why the head is so small compared to the body.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott I do want to thank you for one thing though... I was getting bored with my old member title and you inspired its change.

It's pleasing to see that my presence here is making a difference to peoples' lives - but I'll always think of you as 'Phone Guy'.

It would have been better though, imo, if you'd chosen 'Purveyor of P.O.O.' (propaganda of orthodoxy).

Best wishes,

SC

Edited by Scott Creighton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

well my title is apposite, and we're mostly happy with Aus', so how a out one for Scott?? Fringtastic perhaps?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Everyone,

Well, hasn't this been a ding-dong of a discussion? Alas the good times must come to a (temporary) end as other matters are now pressing for me. But do not fret, poodles, I will be back soon so you can limit your triumphant euphoria at this great news down to a small peep. I'll be back !

A couple of words, however, before I go.

If there is little of anything to link the Sphinx with Khafre and, indeed, if much of the actual empirical evidence we do have from a number of sources points us in a different direction, to a different conclusion from orthodoxy, then what are we to make of the insistence by Egyptology that they think their theory is probably the right one?

Well folks, that is all they have – they THINK they are correct. They BELIEVE they are correct. Unfortunately folks, ‘beliefs’ are no substitute for ‘truth’. The Egypt-apologists will come on to forums like this and parade their knowledge on the subject almost as if it is the final word on the matter, that the issue is settled and that they have all the answers. (It doesn’t dawn on them that they only have all the answers because they have never actually thought of or been asked all the questions).

But they do not have all the answers. Just because some of these Egypt-apologists happen to be well-read on the subject, does not make what they say any more correct than the lesser read. For one thing that is all-pervasive in the submissions of these Egypt-apologists is their propensity for showing you only what they want you to see i.e. they present to you only those little nuggets of information that happen to lend support to their own particular view of these monuments. They will rarely, if ever, present a balanced view that presents the additional evidence that happens to challenge their preconceptions. But even worse than this – when any of their co-dependent poodles presents a statement of alleged ‘fact’ that is blatantly wrong and untrue, if that untruth helps to bolster the Egypt-apologist position, you do not see the more educated among them feeling any need or compunction to correct that misleading fact and, indeed, are perfectly happy to allow such disinformation to go unchecked and spread. That should tell you something folks of the dark art of the Egypt-apologist poodles spreading their P.O.O. (propaganda of orthodoxy) on this board and elsewhere.

But if there is one truth to take from all of this discussion folks, it is this - the Egyptologists simply do not know with any certainty if their interpretation of the available evidence is correct. It is simply their best guess – their opinion. Always keep that in mind. And regardless of how they often like to portray their opinions as fact and delude themselves into thinking they have proven their case, there is simply no certainty in their opinions whatsoever. Indeed, as I hope I have demonstrated throughout this thread, notwithstanding the Egyptologists who have openly raised questions of their own narrative, there are many other experts from other fields of study who feel much more certain that the Egyptologists have it, at least in part, quite wrong.

Alas, however, when all is said and done, it is your call. Just keep an open mind folks but not so open that your brain falls out. But above all, always keep in mind that the Egypt-apologists in here (and elsewhere) have their own agenda to spread their own ‘truth’ – but the ‘truth’ they like to spread is not the whole story and is far from the truth.

The truth is – despite what the Egypt-apologists in here think - we may never actually find the truth of these ancient monuments. All we will ever have are theories though, admittedly, some better than others.

And the final word here must go to Egyptologist, Dr Selim Hassan, who generally supports the orthodox view but with reservation:

”… there is not one single contemporary inscription which connects the Sphinx with Khafre; so, sound as it may appear, we must treat the evidence as circumstantial, until such time as a lucky turn of the spade of the excavator will reveal to the world a definite reference to the erection of the Sphinx."

Best wishes,

SC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the final word here must go to Egyptologist, Dr Selim Hassan, who generally supports the orthodox view but with reservation:

”… there is not one single contemporary inscription which connects the Sphinx with Khafre; so, sound as it may appear, we must treat the evidence as circumstantial, until such time as a lucky turn of the spade of the excavator will reveal to the world a definite reference to the erection of the Sphinx."

How fortunate, then, that the majority of resepctable Egyptologists do not rely on inscriptions for associating Khafre as the builder of the Sphinx. As for the circumstantial evidence, we have...

1) The Sphinx and it's associated temples agree in alignment with Khafre's pyramid, not with Khufu's pyramid (or any other).

2) The stone quarried from the Sphinx quarry was used in the construction of the temples associated with it.

From 2 we can assume the Sphinx and it's temples were constructed around the same time. From 1 we can assume the Sphinx, and associated temple complex, was either not there when Khufu's pyramid was constructed, or the Sphinx was not important to Khufu; and that the Sphinx complex was there and important to Khafre. We can rule out the Sphinx being unimportant to the Pharaoh as being highly unlikely, given it's prominence in a royal necropolis, so that leaves us with the Sphinx not being present when Khufu's pyramid was built, but present when Khafre's was.

Which leaves us with only one reasonable explanation. Khafre had the Sphinx and it's associated temples constructed along with his pyramid as one 'complex'.

Edited by Leonardo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Qoute-The Sphinx and it's associated temples agree in alignment with Khafre's pyramid, not with Khufu's pyramid (or any other).

How do the Egyptologists know the causeway of Khafre`s pyramid wasn`t built connecting his pyamid to the sphinx until after Khufu `s pyramid was built? Djedefre would have made a sideway view of the sphinx in front of Khufu pyramid

mpl_2asat.jpg

Edited by docyabut2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sphinxs are all portrayed as sitting side ways of all the monumemts of egypt,inculing the dream stela.

Edited by docyabut2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

well my title is apposite, and we're mostly happy with Aus', so how a out one for Scott?? Fringtastic perhaps?

His one for you to wrap around your visor big guy. How about weese giggin horse headed fork brain?

Edited by Time Spy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know sensible, I like you, so I'll let that one slide. You can stick a name from a foreign language to whoever you please, and even like mysekf point a little humor back that way, so what. Nevertheless, you're calling the guy that's been helping his parents, remodeling their place, while rasing his only child by himself for the last 13 years while holding down a steady MANUAL labor job, daily, while managing to find time to talk to a bunch of hounds anyway, still taking care of his own place and paying every bill every step of the way WITHOUT the help of anyone or welfare, LAZY. Excuse me and excuse you for not knowing better. I was trying to laugh it off, I know what a cretin is and don't care. I wrote a history, science fiction novel while working nights about a device that could show video coverage of the space time continuum, anywhere, anyhow, anytime, no ifs ands or buts, all lies aside, so help me GOD. I WENT down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico and came back to check out my back yard right here in the home of the Great White Rivers. Trust me I know damn well what a cretin is/ Have YOU been to Louisiana?. I would be proud but I'm not, thanks for asking, or did you?

[media=]

[/media]

Prior to your post, I knew nothing of your life. I applaud what you have accomplished. That said, since I had no knowledge of your life I could not comment about you outside this board but was limited to the post you made and how it appeared to me. I did not see where it was an attempt to lighten things up and I accept that there I times I miss things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Prior to your post, I knew nothing of your life. I applaud what you have accomplished. That said, since I had no knowledge of your life I could not comment about you outside this board but was limited to the post you made and how it appeared to me. I did not see where it was an attempt to lighten things up and I accept that there I times I miss things.

Sensible, your'e something special. I told you for serious, that I like you. I read your posts every time, and at least always consider what I see/. Regardless of what you may think of me, thank you for saing so. It's hard to find an imparital realist in the environment surrounding us today. :-* May the gound rise up to meet, bl;ess and keep you safe, heatlhy and whole.

Link to comment
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.