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 5
Harsh86_Patel

Great Pyramids VS Egyptian Pyramids

580 posts in this topic

Existence of Khufu is not being questioned,The dating is highly dubious.

Do you doubt the various satellite burials of relatives? Do you doubt the dates found for all these sites and that they all line up? There logical conclusion is that Khufu and the Great Pyramid existed at the same time. I'll go along and say that the dates may be off some, but that Khufu was pharoah when the pyramid was built should not be really in doubt.

We were debating whether the bath tub in the GP is a sarcophagus or not.If the bath tub is to be considered a sarcophagus,some evidence for the same has to be there.

I'm gong to agree with the other posters that there is bountiful evidence of similar sarcophogi, but is there a single remaining AE bathtub to compare it too? Who is dealing from evidence and whom from imagination?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Al-Khitat of Al-Maqrizi (1364-1442 CE):

Source

This book is the only record we have of what Caliph Al-Ma'mun and his crew, the first people in historic times to enter the Great Pyramid, found.

From the same link...

When the caliph Al-Ma'mun came to Egypt, he gave the order to open one of the pyramids. They tackled one of those facing Fustat, and after untold hardships and considerable fatigue, they arrived inside the pyramid and found strewn about wells and arduous ramps. The passage was perilous, and finally at the end was a room about 8 cubic cubits. In the middle of the room was a marble basin with a lid that closed. This was removed, and within the basin they found a corpse corrupted by the length of the centuries. Al-Ma'mun then ordered that no longer should any pyramid be opened, for the expenditure involved in the opening a breach in just this one had been so extraordinarily large.

This quote says that the sarcophogus had a lid and a corpse in it...

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The alternate explaination you speak about is Holoclasty,now to attribute the errossion patterns observed by Scoch to haloclasty would be wrong as then the errossion would be much for uniform through out the base of the sphinx. The vertical errosion marks observed are difficult to explain by any other source then rain errossion.

I never stated that haloclasty was the sole means of erosion. You would be quite mistaken to suggest that haloclasty results in uniform erosion. Is that something you made up, or did you read it someplace?

Let me assist you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haloclasty

Haloclasty is a type of physical weathering caused by the growth of salt crystals. The process is first started when saline water seeps into cracks and evaporates depositing salt crystals, when the rocks are then heated, the crystals will expand putting pressure on the surrounding rock which will over time splinter the stone into fragments.

It matters where the salts are deposited and dried.

Scoch and quite a few other geologists have investigated these marks and many have reached the same conclusion as Scoch ,independently.

You are correct. Very few people have joined Schoch. Most experts think otherwise. But the general lack of support for Schoch's idea has no bearing on whether or not it is true. So far we see that the geological evidence proposed by Schoch has not overturned conventional thinking about the Sphinx and there is no supporting archaeological evidence for the creation of the Sphinx at an earlier time period.

As I stated earlier this is a simple time-rate-distance problem. Clearly, the date set by Schoch is wrong. That date is not supported by any other evidence. Thus it must be that the rate proposed by Schoch, which is a very uncertain value, must be wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This quote says that the sarcophogus had a lid and a corpse in it...

The stories of this Caliph are somewhat unreliable, but it does say that, and more.

Harte

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you doubt the various satellite burials of relatives? Do you doubt the dates found for all these sites and that they all line up? There logical conclusion is that Khufu and the Great Pyramid existed at the same time. I'll go along and say that the dates may be off some, but that Khufu was pharoah when the pyramid was built should not be really in doubt.

I'm gong to agree with the other posters that there is bountiful evidence of similar sarcophogi, but is there a single remaining AE bathtub to compare it too? Who is dealing from evidence and whom from imagination?

I am doubting the date and the builder of the GP. I don't think it was built by Khufu or the AE who built the other pyramids, as emultations of the GP.

Like i said please post pictures of such bare sarcophagii if there are any others, also there was no lid found and neither are there any indications that there was a lid for the bath tub in the GP.

I know it is human tendency to fit things in to establish a scheme of things,but it is not always the correct interpretation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never stated that haloclasty was the sole means of erosion. You would be quite mistaken to suggest that haloclasty results in uniform erosion. Is that something you made up, or did you read it someplace?

Let me assist you.

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Haloclasty

It matters where the salts are deposited and dried.

You are correct. Very few people have joined Schoch. Most experts think otherwise. But the general lack of support for Schoch's idea has no bearing on whether or not it is true. So far we see that the geological evidence proposed by Schoch has not overturned conventional thinking about the Sphinx and there is no supporting archaeological evidence for the creation of the Sphinx at an earlier time period.

As I stated earlier this is a simple time-rate-distance problem. Clearly, the date set by Schoch is wrong. That date is not supported by any other evidence. Thus it must be that the rate proposed by Schoch, which is a very uncertain value, must be wrong.

Like i said most people not supporting Scoch are not geologists.

Have already linked a article and an excerpt where Scoch comments on why these marks couldn't be due to haloclasty.

Again, here the LEO astrological correlation with the sphinx in 10500 BC seems very interesting.

"Monk" had linked a very good article where it was talked how the constellation in which the sun rose and moved through due to precission, governed the Gods worshipped in those times. i.e Bull was considered holy and a sacrificed by the Sumerians and other when the Sun was rising in Taurus, also the interesting part is that the sun shifted into Pisces around the time Christianity was found by Jesus who was often depicted by a fish symbol.The sun used to rise in Leo around 10500 B.C.

After Gobekli Tepe we know that people as far as 8000 BC, could organize and build grand structure using huge stones. I guess that people could have also built the sphinx in 10500 B.C. or a few centuries later then that to commemorate the Sun rising in LEO.

Worship of the Sun and it's path through the different constellations and the sky in General seems like a universal common cultural element found through out most of the ancient cultures in the world. Also is the case of the Serpent of Earthly wisdom.

http://www.edwardcarpenter.net/ecpcc3.htm

Edited by Harsh86_Patel
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are numerous things tying this pyramid to someone we know as "Khufu". Most

of these pieces of evidence are open to some interpretation but some are higher grade.

The best, in my opinion, is a mastaba near the SE corner containing Khufu's brother with

a note they he wanted to be buried near "Khufu's Horizon" which is the ancient name of G1

(presumably).

Khufu's brother put a note on his small Masataba, but Khufu himself doesn't bother to put a note after building the great pyramid!.. :blush:

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really does not matter. The point remains. Claiming that the Egyptians MUST have continued their giant pyramid building is simply idiotic. No other culture has continuously increased the size of their tombs/monuments/temples. So making grand claims that the Egyptians would have done so, and so that their not doing so is Proof of some link to gods, aliens, or atlantis is just rubbish.

Sorry, for example, we are doing it in our present day culture, as I mentioned before about the sky scrappers. Forget about the size, at least the quality of the pyramids should have increased with time over thousands of years! In fact the later pyramids couldn't even withstand with time!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one even thought of that possibility, including me.

It's so simple that it can't be true, right?

It's much more interesting to think of some ancient very technological advanced people, than tho think of some stupid reason why there are no hieroglyphs or paintings inside the GP.

Occam's Razor is getting blunt.

The great pyramid being unfinished makes little sense to me, as the monumental task of building it and the chambers and passages on the inside seem like a completed project, decorating the inside or atleast putting some more details on the reason why such a monumental task was undertaken and completed only makes sense.

The absence of these indications cannot be explained by the GP being unfinished in my opinion.

Forget about the inside of the GP, but the reasons behind building such a huge project was not even mentioned in any ancient egyptian texts that we know of.Nor did any of Khufu's sucessors ever credited Khufu with Building such magnificent and awe inspiring structure anywhere else.I feel if their ancestor had built the great Pyramids then the succesors would have definitley sung praises of them somehwere.

The razor is still sharp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am doubting the date and the builder of the GP. I don't think it was built by Khufu or the AE who built the other pyramids, as emultations of the GP.

Like i said please post pictures of such bare sarcophagii if there are any others, also there was no lid found and neither are there any indications that there was a lid for the bath tub in the GP.

I know it is human tendency to fit things in to establish a scheme of things,but it is not always the correct interpretation.

But the pyramid is surrounded by the burials of his court and relatives.... If it was not built by him, perhaps it was finished by him or conscripted by him. Who preceeding him could have made such a pyramid happen? And then wouldn't the previously build pyramids... red pyramid, bent pyramid, step pyramid... have to be pushed out too? What about all the evidence and satillite burials related to those pyramids?? You basically have to denigh a lot of evidence and alter the timelines completely... And based on nothing but a hunch...

Sometimes the obvious answer is not the right one, but in the greater proportion of the time... it is Correct.

I'll go look for blank sarcophagi if you find me any fragment of a AE bathtub...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, for example, we are doing it in our present day culture, as I mentioned before about the sky scrappers. Forget about the size, at least the quality of the pyramids should have increased with time over thousands of years! In fact the later pyramids couldn't even withstand with time!

Look at modern homes. Many homes built in the 19th century are still standing in cities around the world, yet homes built 5 years ago often need to be knocked down due to lack of upkeep and shoddy construction. Craftsmanship is the answer. Just because they had the ability does not mean they used their full skill. Later pharoahs built with mud brick and their pyramids fell down. The reality is probably time and money were involved. And when time and money and contractors are involved corners are going to be cut.

Lack of follow on quality on later projects does not mean that previous work required aliens, anti-gravity, atlanteans or magic.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The stories of this Caliph are somewhat unreliable, but it does say that, and more.

Harte

The original has been translated with greater Middle East scholastic academia interest recently ? Mr HArte ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at modern homes. Many homes built in the 19th century are still standing in cities around the world, yet homes built 5 years ago often need to be knocked down due to lack of upkeep and shoddy construction. Craftsmanship is the answer. Just because they had the ability does not mean they used their full skill. Later pharoahs built with mud brick and their pyramids fell down. The reality is probably time and money were involved. And when time and money and contractors are involved corners are going to be cut.

Lack of follow on quality on later projects does not mean that previous work required aliens, anti-gravity, atlanteans or magic.

We are talking here about monuments, not houses. Even normal houses have seen evolutions, but their purpose is different than a monument. We build monument to keep a memory for forever and when it comes to tomb it is more relevant.

I am not talking about aliens here, but were they same people? Egyptologists cite a path of Pyramid evolution, starting from mastabas. From Bent pyramid to the GP, it took not even a century. They evolved so much in such a small period, but then during thousands of years they couldn't evolve at all. According to the Egyptologists, during one century not only they built the largest pyramids, but the also the largest monolithic statue, the Sphinx. What was it that stopped their fast evolution later? GP is not only about size, but also about it's precision, quality, amazing architecture and with so many puzzles (like the Osiris shaft). They learnt astronomy, mathematics, construction, transportation in couple of centuries..And then no progress for thousands of years??

Edited by abhijit_b
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Usually after some shock, societies are widely known to suddenly turn utterly conservative and inward, death oriented. We also saw that in China.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I always wonder is whether it escapes the pyramidologists that the Giza plateau (all surrounding the pyramids) has been used as burial ground since the late stone age. Why would a super advanced culture go and build a super advanced trinket on a cemetery with bronze chisels for crying out loud?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We know the early dynasties has evidence of sculptures and carved, chiseled decoration images ... some painted too in the mastabas and 'pyramids' If I'm not wrong. Pottery shards shows a highly developed form of symbolism.

But this three on the gizamids is empty except for 'quarry' marks, even the Sphinx is decorated. From recent discoveries we know that papyrus 'writing' is as common as daily used in some places. So we know they can but they chose not too.

maybe its something to do with the beliefs of the times ... it was forbidden : kinda like

Aniconism in Judaism covers a number of areas. The portrayal of the deity in any kind of human or concrete form is absolutely forbidden, and there is a strong tradition of avoiding sculpture, especially if large and free-standing, of all types and in all contexts, but especially religious sculpture. Two-dimensional images, including those of religious subjects, are often regarded as acceptable, especially if on a small scale, such as book illustrations, the concern always being to avoid anything approaching idolatry.

wiki link

Aniconism in Islam is a proscription in Islam against the creation of images of sentient living beings. The most absolute proscription is of images of God in Islam, followed by depictions of Muhammad, and then Islamic prophets and the relatives of Muhammad, but the depiction of all humans and animals is discouraged in the hadith and by the long tradition of Islamic authorities, especially Sunni ones. This has led to Islamic art being dominated by Islamic geometric patterns, calligraphy and the barely representational foliage patterns of the arabesque; but figurative art still has a strong tradition, especially on a small scale in private works for the home or palace. The proliferation of photographic and filmed images today has led to controversy, with some religious authorities stating, for example, that all television is un-Islamic; but this is not a widely held position.

wiki link

or just

Aniconism is the practice of or belief in the avoiding or shunning of images of divine beings, prophets or other respected religious figures, or in different manifestations, any human beings or living creatures. The term aniconic may be used to describe the absence of graphic representations in a particular belief system, regardless of whether an injunction against them exists. The word itself derives from Greek εικων 'image' with the negative prefix an- (Greek privative alpha) and the suffix -ism (Greek -ισμος).

wiki link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The original has been translated with greater Middle East scholastic academia interest recently ? Mr HArte ?

Are you asking me this, or telling me this?

Harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I always wonder is whether it escapes the pyramidologists that the Giza plateau (all surrounding the pyramids) has been used as burial ground since the late stone age. Why would a super advanced culture go and build a super advanced trinket on a cemetery with bronze chisels for crying out loud?

You have a link for this (see bolded)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have a link for this (see bolded)?

Not off hand, but even Wikipedia tells you that some of the tombs in the South field are from the first two dynasties (~3100-2800 BC or the transitional time between ancient Egypt's Stone age and the Bronze age), the best source for all the data of Giza is http://www.gizapyramids.org/code/emuseum.asp?newpage=authors_list If I am not mistaken the first to excavate the neolithic tombs was L. Dow Covington.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not off hand, but even Wikipedia tells you that some of the tombs in the South field are from the first two dynasties (~3100-2800 BC or the transitional time between ancient Egypt's Stone age and the Bronze age), the best source for all the data of Giza is http://www.gizapyram...ge=authors_list If I am not mistaken the first to excavate the neolithic tombs was L. Dow Covington.

That would be this one:

http://www.gizapyram...simpson1996.pdf

Thanks.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Like i said most people not supporting Scoch are not geologists.

You say many things that are nothing more than you opinion. Schoch has almost no support, geologist or otherwise. Another example of your opinion that was wrong was the statement that haloclasty is uniform.

Have already linked a article and an excerpt where Scoch comments on why these marks couldn't be due to haloclasty.

Have you read where geologists state that Schoch is wrong? They do. You are relying on a single point of view and disregarding other points of view. Schoch does not state that salt exfoliation is not an important process. In fact, Schoch agrees that salt exfoliation is happening. You seem to be a bit off on understanding Schoch. You should read and not just say "Schoch is right" without considering the material carefully.

Again, here the LEO astrological correlation with the sphinx in 10500 BC seems very interesting.

Maybe interesting to someone grasping at straws, but not evidence.

After Gobekli Tepe we know that people as far as 8000 BC, could organize and build grand structure using huge stones. I guess that people could have also built the sphinx in 10500 B.C. or a few centuries later then that to commemorate the Sun rising in LEO.

Are you again willfully avoiding the issue that there is no evidence of such a group at the time you list?

You responded to my post and addressed only 1 of your claims with more opinion, an opinion which is incorrect. Schoch is only supported by a few experts. Schoch uses a rate which is highly uncertain. There is no archaeological evidence to support Schoch.

You should realize that the apparent movement of the Sun through the signs of the zodiac happens all year long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be this one:

http://www.gizapyram...simpson1996.pdf

Thanks.

.

Covington's Tomb was from the 3d dynasty, if I am not mistaken, but there were also some 1st and 2nd dynasty tombs excavated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You say many things that are nothing more than you opinion. Schoch has almost no support, geologist or otherwise. Another example of your opinion that was wrong was the statement that haloclasty is uniform.

Have you read where geologists state that Schoch is wrong? They do. You are relying on a single point of view and disregarding other points of view. Schoch does not state that salt exfoliation is not an important process. In fact, Schoch agrees that salt exfoliation is happening. You seem to be a bit off on understanding Schoch. You should read and not just say "Schoch is right" without considering the material carefully.

You may probably want to refer to one of my old post in this thread. I have listed all the geologists and their opinions in this matter. We need to understand that Schoch's hypothesis is not based on Sohinx,s but it's enclosure. The salt exfoliation is happening today also, but every geologists would agree the round erosion pattern on the Sphinx's enclosure is not due to salt exfoliation.

The egyptologists always try to fit the face of Sphinx to Khufu or Khafre, just to fit to their timeline. But the face doesn't match the racial attributes of Khafre or Khufu, forget other features. This was confirmed by the work of Detective Frank Domingo, a senior forensic artist for the New York City Police Department, who compared the face on the Sphinx with the face on the statue of Khafra in the Cairo Museum. Domingo determined that the face on the Sphinx was not the face of Khafra; the Sphinx had a prognathic jaw more typical of an African from farther south. But Egyptologists have more forensic knowledge than an expert!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you asking me this, or telling me this?

Harte

Errr sorry .... asking ... I'll tone down on the sexy secretary impressions in the future ///

I miss my old secretary ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't see this link posted before, I don't know. Well it is up to date and looks at various evidence, including the documentary by Colin Reader in 2008, though it does not draw any conclusions. It mentions at the bottom of the page about the features of the Sphinx and mentions that nobody has yet come forward to challenge Domingo about it being Bantu, for that is what he means when he uses this catch all word "African". Probably people look at the hate about this on places like youtube, and political correctness from politicians and media, and keep quiet for fear of being accused of rascism. I don't know, simply an observation. Such a strange world we live in.......

http://www.davidpbillington.net/sphinx10.html

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 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.