Secret Caves under the Pyramids

[cormac mac airt]

Technically you are totally correct.

technically about the sole thing they ever said that actually survives is "Nefermaat is he

who makes his gods in words that can not be erased.". Obviously from this it's safe to deduce

they were superstitious and so primitive that the only possible means to lift a stone is to use

a ramp. Nevermind that it's a five step pyramid and denies the possibility of ramps and virtually

proves stones were dragged up the side because "Nefermaat is hewho makes his gods in words

that can not be erased.".

I believe that it makes more sense to work with the words they actually chiseled into pyramids and

those words say that they used a henu boat to lift the stones. The words in the cemeteries support

this and also virtually proves they did not use ramps.

So we all bask in the certainty that they mustta used ramps right up until they open this cave and

actually start doing their jobs.

You can try to reinterpret it all you want, but the fact is that your henu boat still resides in a cradle ON A SLED. This is not something that would go up the side of a pyramid. That much should be obvious.

cormac

[kmt_sesh]

I think people are forgetting a few vwery obvious facts. No, it's not that this boat

has all the defining characteristics of a device to lift stones but that the Egyptians

said that the gods built the pyramids and they defined how they did so. They said

"let this boat be brought for the "bridge girderers" of the desert". They said that Osir-

is towed the earth in his name of Seker by means of balance and they said that Osir-

is became Seker in this boat. They even carved these words in stone... ....where?...

...you guessed it, right into a pyramid.

I don't need to comprehend how people see ramps that aren't there and are blind

to the words, culture, and physical evidence of a five step pyramid assembled by

pulling stones up a level at a time. All I need to do is keep seeking the proof to what

is actually rather obvious to anyone who's willling to look at the facts. The fact that

everyone is to cowardly to investigate this cave is also supportive but the important

point is that it exists. The important point is that the news is, has been, and will con-

tinue to support thew fact that water was used to build these structures. The import-

ant point is that the cave is still there as proof of concept even when Egyptology can't

bring itself to investigate any of the basic facts because they already know everything.

I can defend the argument far better than this but experience tells me that everyone

will simply dismiss it and instead tell me what their INTERPRETATION of the evidence

is. When I point out that their interpretation ignores a lot of evidence they'll just claim

that evidence is a red herring and has no bearing on ramps. Meanwhile I can under-

stand more and more of the PT and the ancient science.

Expecting something frpom 1300 years after the pyramids were built to actually reflect

reality in all ways is unreasonable. If there were other depictions of the []nw-boat (henu

boat) I'd certainly use them but there aren't because this was a later invention. However,

anyone can look at the more ancient art and see numerous boats built on sleds and even

boats suspended in mid-air on a column of water.

I would suggest that Egyptology simply misunderstands the entire culture. Rather than

investigate facts they just ignore them or put gates up to make sure no ever knows.

No, the only fact is that you misidentified a Dynasty 20 wall relief from deep in southern Egypt as something to do with Old Kingdom pyramids. And in this long post you completely evaded that fact. If I seem put off at times, it is because of your grandiose belief that two centuries of Egyptological scholarship has somehow "misunderstood" the culture while your own level of research is limited to the Great Pyramid involving outdated translations of the Pyramid Texts and an inability to translate the source language or interpret its meanings in any way relevant to the culture itself. In short, you've apparently investigated much less than 1/2 of 1% of the relevant research material available to you.

As I always stress to other posters and people in general, when they hear someone say all of professional scholarship is wrong while only he or she knows the "truth," then you can be certain this individual is quite clearly the one who's wrong. It is not only unrealistic to think such a thing, it comes across as mentally unsound. Such a person is not and never will be taken seriously, so you're advised to avoid doing this sort of thing.

I do apologize for being harsh, but I don't deal well with people who toss mud at Egyptology who at the same time don't understand Egyptological methodology. It's like a creationist insisting the world was created in 4004 BCE because they do not understand science and, due to their fixed and rigid loyalty to their own assumptions, do not even wish to try to learn the science.

Now I've begun to ramble, a habit too common for me. The above post of yours which I quoted goes into a number of things that have nothing to do with the points I brought up in my own Post 218, which was a comment on your Post 211 and its illustration from the shrine at Medinet Habu. Do you wish to reply to it so you can address the points I brought up?

Here's a little something a few people might find interesting;

http://www.egyptolog...sis_PTs_vs1.pdf

It's not just the forward that attracted my attention but this scholar is using my methodology

to at least a limited extent to understand the PT. I'm not sure his work is any better than Allen's

because I have no expertise to judge it and believe Allen diverted this work from the intended

meaning.

Your grandiose tendencies are showing even here. Are you sure you read the forward to this paper? I already had this PDF in my files and have perused it. Shmakov would not even recognize or understand your methodology because it follows no recognizable protocols. It seems you clearly missed it but Shmakov praises James Allen in his forward and in fact is following Allen's methodology in addressing the Pyramid Texts. He even employs some of Allen's research into the more arcane forms of sDm.f verb forms. I am not extensively familiar with Shmakov but I've encountered some of his work on the EEF postings, as well as this and other texts he's written for review. This person is soundly academic and highly professional, and I'm reasonably certain he's not even a professional historian. Even so, I am quite confident he's forgotten more about hieroglyphs in the past week than I'll learn the rest of my life.

That's the gist of it. Shmakov is using hieroglyphic transcriptions to analyze the Pyramid Texts—he's employing the source language. Your own manner of personal assumptive interpretations is absent from the work of someone such as Shmakov. Also, note that Shmakov is one of many who plainly states that Allen's translations have become the standard. I know how much that drives you nuts, but it's the pain you suffer for insisting on sticking with very outdated and incomplete translations.

[kmt_sesh]

You can try to reinterpret it all you want, but the fact is that your henu boat still resides in a cradle ON A SLED. This is not something that would go up the side of a pyramid. That much should be obvious.

cormac

Not to mention the fact that extant wall reliefs depicting such apparatuses show that they were carried in procession by around eight to ten priests. These boats were small. Given that the average pyramid stone weighs around 2.5 tons, placing one stone on top of or within such a boat would've promptly crushed the boat.

This is a classic and clear sample of someone's whimsical, personal interpretation of ancient art. It is not grounded in evidence, nor is it logical. It did not happen.

I cannot recall the earliest attestation for Henu Boats of Sokar, but the workmen's cemetery at Giza yielded the burial of someone who built such boats for the cultic processions of Neith, whose cult center was in the Delta. This at least tells us that such processional boats were being made in the Old Kingdom—but absolutely not for building purposes. No evidence even remotely suggests it. Such valuable cultic devices were not wasted as construction tools.

[Swede]

Not to mention the fact that extant wall reliefs depicting such apparatuses show that they were carried in procession by around eight to ten priests. These boats were small. Given that the average pyramid stone weighs around 2.5 tons, placing one stone on top of or within such a boat would've promptly crushed the boat.

This is a classic and clear sample of someone's whimsical, personal interpretation of ancient art. It is not grounded in evidence, nor is it logical. It did not happen.

I cannot recall the earliest attestation for Henu Boats of Sokar, but the workmen's cemetery at Giza yielded the burial of someone who built such boats for the cultic processions of Neith, whose cult center was in the Delta. This at least tells us that such processional boats were being made in the Old Kingdom—but absolutely not for building purposes. No evidence even remotely suggests it. Such valuable cultic devices were not wasted as construction tools.

Kmt - To add to your list - Am unsure of the specific Sokar association, but the recent funerary boat recovery by Tristant at Abu Rawash is dated to the First Dynasty (2950 BC).

.

[cormac mac airt]

Kmt - To add to your list - Am unsure of the specific Sokar association, but the recent funerary boat recovery by Tristant at Abu Rawash is dated to the First Dynasty (2950 BC).

.

Just to add to this Swede it should be pointed out that at approximately 19.6 feet long and 4.9 feet wide and seamed together the way it is, such a boat (or something similar) would be practically useless for moving even one block. Let alone several. And with it resting in a cradle on top of a sled the level of ridiculousness intensifies. The quantity of seams/eyelets alone would call into question its durability for such a usage IMO.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2178839/5-000-year-old-wooden-boat-used-pharaohs-discovered-French-archaeologists.html

cormac

[Swede]

Just to add to this Swede it should be pointed out that at approximately 19.6 feet long and 4.9 feet wide and seamed together the way it is, such a boat (or something similar) would be practically useless for moving even one block. Let alone several. And with it resting in a cradle on top of a sled the level of ridiculousness intensifies. The quantity of seams/eyelets alone would call into question its durability for such a usage IMO.

http://www.dailymail...aeologists.html

cormac

Agreed!

.

[cladking]

I don't supppose people are trying to miss the point but can't imagine how they

could possibly miss the point any more than they are. It is Egyptological assumption

that the people of Egypt never changed. I know for a fact, on a visceral level, that this

is an impossibility. But it doesn't matter what I "know" any more than what Egyptology

"knows" because all that really matters is the evidence. All we have are the metaphy-

sics for understanding and the measurements and experimental results. Everything

says Egyptology is wrong and this is the bottom line.

Curiously enough the Egyptians are even speaking from the grave to say egyptology

is dead wrong. They are saying they were not primitive bumpkins and that Egyptology

went wrong because of sampling error and assumption. It is probably impossible to un-

derstand a people by analyzing their graves.

But more curiously is that they say exactly how they built the pyramids inscribed right

into the stone of which they are made yet Egyptologists never bothered to read their

own translations. In the Hymn to Osiris they said that in his name of Seker that he tows

the earth by means of balance. They said downward makes the earth high under the sky.

They said that a boat was needed to build the "bridge in the desert" and it was needed

by Seker (you remember Seker, it was he who towed the earth using balance);

445c. N. is on the way to the place of Seker, chief of Pdw-š.

445d. It is our brother who is bringing this (boat) for these bridge-girderers (?) of the desert.

Which boat do they need?

494a. bring this (boat) to N. Which boat shall I bring to thee, O N.?

494b. Bring to N. that which flies up and alights.

Why bring a boat for Seker?

1968a. Let then Seker of pdw come,...

...1970a. Wherewith shall N. be caused to fly?

1970b (N. 758-759). Then let there be brought to thee ------ ḥnw-boat, built by Mw-ḥn,

1970c. that thou mayest fly therewith, that thou mayest fly therewith,

"Hnw-boat" is the henu boat.

This is all to assemble Horus who is the dead king as the pyramid;

1965c. and how shall he be assembled?

1966a. Then let this copper be brought ------ the ḥnw-boat --- with it.

I could go on and on and on because this is what the dead people of Egypt say and they

say it all consistently without contradiction. It is internally consistent because this is what it

means. They say that the water comes up from under Giza from caves and fills the boat

known as "the Bull of Heaven" thereby causing stones to fly like the fledglings of swallows.

There is tremendous detail provided in their words of this bull and each of its constituent

parts. These details are consistent with each other and the laws of physics (as we under-

stand them).

It's not only the consistency of the words and science but it's also the consistency with the

actual physical evidence as well as the ability of this paradigm to explain and predict. Pre-

diction is the root cause to invent any science in the fiorst place. If knowledge weren't use-

ful in making predictions then there would be no science. I just learned this morning that

pyramid sites employed two "prophets". Obviously these were the chief scientists who dir-

ected the work right under the chief architect known as "anubis".

We translate all these words wrong because the people did change. No one can show that

this is untrue because there is no cultural context because nothing survives. This is what the

true cultural context was; highly scientific people causing stones to fly with henu boats using

water that comes out of caves right on the Giza Plateau. We can't even investigate this be-

cause we are superstitious bumpkins moribound by our belefs and the status quo. This is

the reality.

[cladking]

Here's what dead people sound like when they speak;

[media=]

[/media]

They make many sounds actually but this is the sound they make when describing the

heavy wooden timbers of the "henu boat" rubbing against the "ladder of heaven" which

was right on the side of the growing pyramid as utterance #538;

1302a. To say: Back, thou lowing ox.

1302b. Thy head is in the hand of Horus; thy tail is in the hand of Isis;

1302c. the fingers of Atum are at thy horns.

This isn't a threat to a bull or a bunch of gods conspiring to tame it. Such an interpretation

is simple absurdity. But it does meanb exactly what it says. Horus is the stones that com-

prised the pyramid who has no feet and no arms.

1964d. as Isis said to Nun:

1965a. "I have given birth to him for thee; I have deposited him for thee; 1 have certainly spit him out for thee."

1965b. He has no feet; he has no arms,

But he has hands which are the ability of a natural phenomenon to manipulate. He sits on

the head of the bull of heaven on his own hands.

The tail of the bull is in the hand of Isis to oversees the counterweight. She is the phenomenon

of the falling weight lifting another weight. The fingers of Atum are on the horns of the bull.

So we can see and hear the bull being too far forward on the loading platform and the men having

to wait for the automatic leveling device (the Min) and the counterweight to restore the head of the

bull to the proper position.

Of course it's improbable that the ascender looked exactly like this, or the henu boat exactly like;

1772b. (for) he came forth with the dorsal carapace of a grasshopper,

But these are the general shapes which are consistent with the work needed to be done. There's

plenty more detail but none of it has anything to do with ramps.

Perhaps we'll one day find out that it's far more complicated than just water shooting out of the earth

from caves but for now we have the evidence we have and that's it. You can't make up stuff about

ramps or anything without real evidence and expect it to last forever.

Edited December 30, 2012 by cladking

[+DieChecker]

I am one of relatively few who don't much jump to conclusions. I jump ahead to the answer by means of intuition and this answer may well be entirely wrong but I don't jump to conclusions because I've never reached a conclusion. I strive to be perfectly ignorant and should I live long enough I might yet achieve it.

You should put this disclaimer in all your posts Cladking...

Others seek for Truth, but you are striving to be ignorant.

[cladking]

Others seek for Truth, but you are striving to be ignorant.

This might be one of the most ironic statements ever made in 40,000 years of "intell-

igent" life on earth. The Egyptian word that meant "balance" (ma'at) is usually mis-

translated as 'truth". "Balance" is about weighing the evidence more than it is about

reaching conclusions or even knowledge.

This isn't why I liked your post but it's part of the reason. I do like to remind peo-

ple once in a while that I have no problem with the concept of being wrong. Everybody

always has been anyway.

edited for typos.

Edited December 31, 2012 by cladking

[dreamland]

WE first started talking on the subject of this topic which is " caves under the pyramids,then we moved into ramps and end up with " Here's what dead people sound like when they speak;". Any new more subjects?

Edited December 31, 2012 by dreamland

[DingoLingo]

WE first started talking on the subject of this topic which is " caves under the pyramids,then we moved into ramps and end up with " Here's what dead people sound like when they speak;". Any new more subjects?

Mango's..

[kmt_sesh]

Kmt - To add to your list - Am unsure of the specific Sokar association, but the recent funerary boat recovery by Tristant at Abu Rawash is dated to the First Dynasty (2950 BC).

.

That was an exciting an unexpected find, Swede. I've been unable to come across sufficient detail on it yet, but it was probably buried for the tomb of a nobleman. The Early Dynastic Period is unique in pharaonic history for the actual boat burials of noblemen—boat burials for all of pharaonic history are very rare, for that matter, but in all later periods they were for kings. Counting the remains of the fourteen Abydos boats dating to Dynasty 1, the Early Dynastic Period probably contains more boat burials than all of the rest of pharaonic history combined.

Cormac provided the dimensions for the Abu Rawash boat, which is reflective of a small riverine boat. The processional boats for such deities as Sokar were a lot smaller, so I doubt the example at Abu Rawash is related to that ritual practice. But as cormac also stated, none of these boats—large or small—would've been used to lift stones and bang against the sides of pyramids. They would've crumbled like a child's toy. It is a plainly unrealistic (not to mention unevidenced) premise.

It's easy to use one's imagination to dream up all kind of fanciful ideas, but quite another thing to commit one's self to legitimate historical research. Many people at UM, it would seem, prefer the easy approach. Tsk tsk.

[Golden Duck]

Mango's..

Huh?

[Swede]

That was an exciting an unexpected find, Swede. I've been unable to come across sufficient detail on it yet, but it was probably buried for the tomb of a nobleman. The Early Dynastic Period is unique in pharaonic history for the actual boat burials of noblemen—boat burials for all of pharaonic history are very rare, for that matter, but in all later periods they were for kings. Counting the remains of the fourteen Abydos boats dating to Dynasty 1, the Early Dynastic Period probably contains more boat burials than all of the rest of pharaonic history combined.

Cormac provided the dimensions for the Abu Rawash boat, which is reflective of a small riverine boat. The processional boats for such deities as Sokar were a lot smaller, so I doubt the example at Abu Rawash is related to that ritual practice. But as cormac also stated, none of these boats—large or small—would've been used to lift stones and bang against the sides of pyramids. They would've crumbled like a child's toy. It is a plainly unrealistic (not to mention unevidenced) premise.

It's easy to use one's imagination to dream up all kind of fanciful ideas, but quite another thing to commit one's self to legitimate historical research. Many people at UM, it would seem, prefer the easy approach. Tsk tsk.

Kmt - Have also not yet encountered a full report. The brief AIA article attributes the burial to a "high ranking official", which is rather synonymous.

Edit: Punctuation.

Edited January 1, 2013 by Swede

[designer]

To the idea of caves under the pyramids, I just saw a map of the hollow earth and it showed an entrance to one of the inner earth realms coming from Giza. That would be hidden caves.

[Harte]

Yeah. No doubt about it.

We do need us some "advanced races."

Harte

[LRW]

there's better evidence for the existence of aliens than there is for most

of the quaint Egyptological assumptions. "The past" is a very long time and suggesting there

couldn't have been any alien contact during those tens of thousands of years is pretty presump-

tuous.

Yes it is presumptous, and also quite ignorant. They don't seem to understand what extraterrestrial activity implies.

Think of the earth and its universe as a radio station being set on a certain frequency, then think of other frequencies and other radio stations that don't exist on the same plane that earth exists on and the universe that earth resides in. Think of the other radio stations (universes, dimensions etc) on different frequencies as being entirely different universes to the one that earth is on. Think of them as being different branches on the same tree, but in entirely different places (different spheres of existence). Think of the other frequencies or branches as being different planes of existence, with beings that are entirely more advanced than humanity, both in a technological sense and a spiritual sense. Their technology is not of machines as you know them to be, their technology leaves no traces. Think of the beings that inhabit the other frequencies or other branches as being able to easily tune in to earths frequency or and the universe it resides in. Since they can easily tune in, then think of them being observers of humanity, think of them as watchers, some good, some bad.

Think of the good ones as being friendly to humanity, think of the good ones as wanting to progress humanities potential and spirituality, so they can exist on higher planes of existence, so their souls can connect with other planes and exist on them. The ancients tried to achieve that on earth in the past through ritual and ceremony and astounding monuments of stone connected with the cosmos deliberately. They knew more about the universe than modern masses know about it. Think of the good watchers transmitting signals to those ancients brains, think of the signals as being forms of electrical energy that can be converted into knowledge and spirituality. Think of a time where those electrical signals were thriving in the ancient world, think of those signals being broadcasted. Then think of what the accomplishments were through connecting with those signals, think of all the new advanced technology that man learned about, thinking of the mathematical excellence they recieved from those signals through the connection they opened. Then think of how they achieved astounding feats of architecture of which there is no real true genuine explanation for. Think of the good watchers as getting fulfillment and nourishment through advancing humanities potential.

Then think of the bad watchers/observers, and their utter disgust for humanity, their utter hatred for them, think of the bad ones as wanting to consistently deride humanities attempts of achieving higher spirituaity and knowledge. Think of the bad ones as wanting to destroy humanity and any efforts for them to exist on a higher more spiritual form of existence, think of them sending the most horrible of electric signals from other frequencies that influenced humanity to resort to committing great atrocity and suppression of knowledge and spirituality, if it meant they could keep it all for themselves whilst under the control of dark forces. Think of the dark forces as getting their nourishment and fullfillment through atrocity and destruction of humanity and the planet they exist on.

Think of humanity being on earth in a universe on one of those planes seen in the picture. Then think of higher beings existing on higher planes in different universes, think of them as being higher forms of conciousness than humanity. Think of those beings that can transcend the boundaries of their own planes spiritually, and enter the plane that humanity exists on, they can interfere with earths fauna both positively or negatively. They don't possess a physical body as you know it, say flesh and blood, those beings are made up of something else, they are made of different energy, they will sometimes appear as a shining white light. When you hear of the "Shining Ones" from history, thats them. The higher forms of conciousness existing on different planes of existence to humanity.

Why do people jump all over orthodox assumptions as givens even when they're illogical

but dismiss everything else even when evidence exists?

All the orthodox can do is assume and make assumptions, the same as anyone else, but given the enormous monopoly they hold over museums and public insititutions, then its not surprising to expect enormous support for their ridiculous theories.

They still can not accurately translate the hieroglpyhics in my opinion, all they can do is assume and misinterpret. Take for instance the rosetta stone, in my opinion it looks like an absolute fake. The same stone is regarded as being a gateway to understanding the so called ancient egyptian hieroglyphics, it bizarrely was a convenient find that popped out of nowhere and looks dodgy to say the least.

They assume the ancient symbols was a written language that they can decipher. They decipher it wrong, because they try to match up the symbols to conveniently suit their own modern languages and ideology. Its not a language that can be accurately deciphered by them, based on a fake stone i.e. the rosetta stone. The hieroglyphic language was a symbolic language that uses symbols for communication and created for the purpose of achieving greater accuracy and understanding of the culture. Since modern "egyptologists" were never initiated into such a culture, they could not possibly fully understand it or even begin to comprehend what the symbols really mean. Their so called translations of the hieroglyphs is comedy gold.

Egyptology is based heavily around christianity, therefore everything the "egyptologists" say about it is based on micky mouse and his adventures in wonderland, it is epically wrong, because all the mainstream leading museums and institutions related to the study of the culture, have been heavily indoctrinated through the teachings of monotheist religons like christianity, their mind was closed minded since the start of their so called studies.

Its all wrong, the translations, the theory on how it was built, the theory the pyramids were tombs etc, its all epically wrong.

Everything they say, should be disregarded and thrown in the garbage can, because its wrong, just like christianity is wrong.

There are no answers to be found in egyptology, by listening to them, you will never get the answers you seek.

[kmt_sesh]

...

Egyptology is based heavily around christianity...

This is the one statement on which I care to comment for the moment. Stop a moment and think about it carefully. Do you not see the obvious error in this statement?

By the time Christianity was starting to emerge in the late first century CE, easily 99.99% of ancient Egyptian history had already transpired. Egypt was just another vassal state of Rome. Nearly all of the monuments for which Egypt is famous had already been built many centuries before. Nearly all of the historical events that have come down to us from the time of the pharaohs had occurred many centuries before. All of the great kings for whom Egypt is known had been dead for many centuries. Even the hieroglyphic script was dying out by the time Christianity was emerging.

Christianity, in other words, is not even relevant to 99.99% of the history of ancient Egypt.

Egyptology is about ancient Egypt. That much is obvious to even the most novice of students.

Think about it. Enough said.

[TheSearcher]

And of course you have proof, in order to back all that little story you just gave us up, right LRW? Cladking, as misguided as he may be, at least tries to give us something he considers evidence (and I use the term loosely).

Edit : PS : Hey Clad, still up to your old stories I see?

Edited January 3, 2013 by TheSearcher

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

Egyptology is based heavily around christianity

I noticed that it is not unusual here for the real meaning and sense of what is written to be lost in translation.....

However, does this quote say that it is not Ancient Egypt that is based heavily around Christianity, which is clearly 100% incorrect, but it is egyptologists misinterpreting AE because they are viewing AE through a mind that is "contaminated" by 2 000 years of Christianity?. I have high regard for John Romer, though he does see the past through the lens of his Christian faith, though he does not hide this. Is this what you mean to say? that AE is seen through eyes clouded by Christianity and not a product of Christianity?

[LRW]

I noticed that it is not unusual here for the real meaning and sense of what is written to be lost in translation.....

they are viewing AE through a mind that is "contaminated" by 2 000 years of Christianity?. I have high regard for John Romer, though he does see the past through the lens of his Christian faith, though he does not hide this. Is this what you mean to say? that AE is seen through eyes clouded by Christianity and not a product of Christianity?

When the ancient world is seen through the eyes of people whose society and education platform has been so thoroughly indoctrinated by christianity and islam, then you will get pretty much a fictitious rendition on the past, mainly due to indoctrinated christian eyes trying to percieve a culture they could not possibly understand or even begin to comprehend, unless they sever all ties with christian colleges and institutions promoting history and a chronology extremely and heavily based around monotheist religon and its dogma around the bible and the ancient world in general. AD/BC, BCE/CE, they are all chistian inventions. Even another term that CE is known as is "Christian Era". Roman catholicism is only a recent invention, perhaps around 1000 to 1500 years old.

You must remember who are the institutions and museums, what society do they come from? they come from a modern society where billions of the worlds population have been indoctrinated by monotheist religons like christianity and islam etc. The indoctrination starts quite young, and it will remain part of the society that "egyptologists" spring from, thus in effect what you are dealing with is people who have been influenced and educated by colleges, schools etc with an inherent christian bias, also many of those colleges were founded on core christian ethos especially in the west. What you are getting is a christian monotheist bias. It clouds their judgement, it makes them less aware of other cultures who did not place such an emphasis on christianity. You can notice it in their speech, Hawass for instance, is one such example where you can hear the monotheist bias stemming from his beliefs, he says the word "God a lot implying he has been indoctrinated by monotheist institutions. He just seems like a stooge for them. He recieved a PhD degree from the university of pennsylvania.

Look at the symbol for the university of pennsylvania. Again, blatant latin, and blatant glorification of roman catholicism. Its a christian institution.

A lot of Christian teachings and other monotheist teachings, say islam aswell, sever the connections to the ancient world, because modern mainstream history is built and established by christian institutions and colleges and their students that eventually become the so called leaders in the academia surrounding the ancient world. They have the monopoly over the information being pumped out to their very own colleges and institutions, a lot of the leading ones are christian in their ethos. The religons of the ancient world were a rival to the founders of christianity, so they wanted them destroyed.

Does their vast wealth make them the most credible on the topic? if anything it would make you think otherwise.

Consider the sources who pump out the so called information.

As the old saying goes "You Will Know Them by Their Fruits"

Their fruits are their symbols and latin inscriptions seen on their colleges, latin comes from chistendom. "Egyptologists" come from chistendom, the bias is already there from the very beginning of their so called research. If they go against the grain, they would be scorned as outcasts, fringe, pseudo archaeologists etc.

Edited January 3, 2013 by LRW

[cladking]

I agree that this bias heavily influences everything today but even more pernicious

is the influence of science and technology. Christian/ Muslem influence is heaviest

in the soft "sciences" like Egyptology but what Egyptologists don't understand in terms

of monotheism they tend to understand in terms of science which givesa the illusion of

complete knowledge by means of technology. This illusion is so strong that we can't

even see the results of the tiny amount of scientific testing that has actually been com-

pleted. If C14 readings don't match accepted dogma then invent excuses. If real science

shows a five step pyramid then interpret the evidence for immediate needs.

Certainly the effects of religions is impeding progress but so too the modern day religion

of Science. Science pronounces us the pinnacle of creation and technology the proof

so it simplyu follows people who lived in the past mustta been superstitious bumpkins.

Case closed! This means anything that doesn't have direct evidence to support it is cast

aside as nonsense despite the fact that all the Egypytological assumptions are essentially

founded and the result of religious belief of one sort or another. The attitude has become,

"do as I say not as I do".

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

LRW

Your post will be seen as attack on innocent people going about their work in the way they have been taught. However, I see beyond the broad brushstroke you have used and am in general agreement with what you have written. It is a matter of casting off shackles that should have rusted away a long time ago. It is not a matter of being against facts, but of interpretation, of trying see through eyes of the ancients.

Edited January 3, 2013 by Atentutankh-pasheri

[cladking]

I noticed that it is not unusual here for the real meaning and sense of what is written to be lost in translation.....

However, does this quote say that it is not Ancient Egypt that is based heavily around Christianity, which is clearly 100% incorrect, but it is egyptologists misinterpreting AE because they are viewing AE through a mind that is "contaminated" by 2 000 years of Christianity?. I have high regard for John Romer, though he does see the past through the lens of his Christian faith, though he does not hide this. Is this what you mean to say? that AE is seen through eyes clouded by Christianity and not a product of Christianity?

I don't disagree but the way I see it is that every individual is unique to his time and place. No

ancient Egyptian was ever born in Kansas and never will be. Much of what makes up the indi-

viduals born in Kansas today are religious ideas from Christianity. Even athiests in Topeka all

share many of these ideas, traits, and beliefs because they saturate society. The church accepts

science now days which is even more dangerous in practice than religion since it has no moral

code. It affects more minds with more superstitions than religion. Of course this isn't so much a

fault of science as it is the means by which it is taught.