Update on Scan Pyramid project Oct 2016

[Hanslune]

1 hour ago, Silver_Lyre said:

...so correct me if I'm wrong, but from my googling and quick once over of your link, the new scans have revealed what might possibly be rooms or cavities between the rock-work that would seem to me to be pro-fringe. My question is how is this a victory for the anti-fringe establishment?

https://www.google.com.au/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3839645/amp/Experts-discover-cavities-Egypts-Great-Pyramid.html?client=safari

It isn't a victory over the fringe. It just science doing it regular thing. The fringe however will take the notification of still unknown contextual voids as meaning something-and applying it as proof of this and that. One can see our own Cladking seeing this as verification of his own ideas and claims he predicted these. While in fact he did not and they don't.Additional our good fellow Cladking spent a year or so screaming and ranting that the evil the Egyptologist would hide everything and not report the results so in fact this pronouncement shows he was wrong about that, but even that is not a 'victory'. Egyptology proceeds along quite nicely and does what it always does it and gnerally ignores the fringe - unless they publish evidence in accordance to the scientific methodology.

Edited October 18, 2016 by Hanslune

[back to earth]

Oh damn .... I thought the fringe had him on the ropes for a moment there .... but ........

 

 

[Unusual Tournament]

3 hours ago, Hanslune said:

It isn't a victory over the fringe. It just science doing it regular thing. The fringe however will take the notification of still unknown contextual voids as meaning something-and applying it as proof of this and that. One can see our own Cladking seeing this as verification of his own ideas and claims he predicted these. While in fact he did not and they don't.Additional our good fellow Cladking spent a year or so screaming and ranting that the evil the Egyptologist would hide everything and not report the results so in fact this pronouncement shows he was wrong about that, but even that is not a 'victory'. Egyptology proceeds along quite nicely and does what it always does it and gnerally ignores the fringe - unless they publish evidence in accordance to the scientific methodology.

Yes it certainly is science. Science that has also found that one of the cavities/rooms has a chevron type roof over the empty space in question. Blocks of stone masonry, assembled in a chevron pattern, acting as a load barring roof for what ever is underneath it. Now chances are that its no accident or fallen masonry that has created this empty space.Or that it has a roof. So i can understand the "fringe" getting excited. In fact, everyone should be except those that subscribe to an unyielding view point. So for arguments sake... imagine if they do find something to suggest that the pyramid is something other than a tomb, or even a tomb inside these cavities. How does Egyptology proceed along unaltered? What does that say about Egyptology or CladKing's "wacky" theories? 

[Unusual Tournament]

3 hours ago, ShadowSot said:

It isn't a victory of the fringe, but they will capitalize on it for any of their crazy craziness. 

 Hall of Records, Lost Library, energy chambers, alien stuff, what ever. 

 

Well from here on in the Egyptology establishment has a lot more to loss. 

[ShadowSot]

Eh? How so?

[ShadowSot]

6 minutes ago, Silver_Lyre said:

Yes it certainly is science. Science that has also found that one of the cavities/rooms has a chevron type roof over the empty space in question. Blocks of stone masonry, assembled in a chevron pattern, acting as a load barring roof for what ever is underneath it. Now chances are that its no accident or fallen masonry that has created this empty space.Or that it has a roof. So i can understand the "fringe" getting excited. In fact, everyone should be except those that subscribe to an unyielding view point. So for arguments sake... imagine if they do find something to suggest that the pyramid is something other than a tomb, or even a tomb inside these cavities. How does Egyptology proceed along unaltered? What does that say about Egyptology or CladKing's "wacky" theories? 

You do know Egyptologists were the ones who wanted it done right?

 Egyptology will adjust to new evidence as it comes on, it's a science. That's what it does. Providing there is actually something there. 

 Keep in mind the big deal about the possible secret room in Tut's tomb ended up being nothing. 

 Currently while the evidence suggests a void, we have no idea of the size or specific location of it. The chevrons themselves are part of the already known passageway into the pyramid. Not tied to the void.

 And it isn't unknown that there are voids and empty spaces and areas of backfill in the pyramids, though this is a new one. 

 It goes no way towards supporting Cladking's claims about cold geysers, or about aliens building the pyramids, or Cayce's hall of records.

[Unusual Tournament]

11 minutes ago, ShadowSot said:

 Currently while the evidence suggests a void, we have no idea of the size or specific location of it. The chevrons themselves are part of the already known passageway into the pyramid. Not tied to the void.

 And it isn't unknown that there are voids and empty spaces and areas of backfill in the pyramids, though this is a new one. 

 

I would like to see your source for your 'chevron has no connection to the void.' 

Here is my source...

What makes this new space even more intriguing is that, according to thermal readings, the space seems to be in a chevron shape. Chevrons are normally used in Egyptian pyramids and burial places as a way to keep the burial chambers clear and open in the event that the structure collapses. The shape is not normally used otherwise.

http://comicbook.com/popculturenow/2016/10/18/scientists-find-mysterious-cavity-in-the-great-pyramid-of-giza/

[Unusual Tournament]

14 minutes ago, ShadowSot said:

You do know Egyptologists were the ones who wanted it done right?

 Egyptology will adjust to new evidence as it comes on, it's a science. That's what it does. Providing there is actually something there. 

Well that's debatable. The Egyptian Egyptologists need funds and public exposure to boost their budgets and bring in tourists. They have the final say it what gets excavated and where it all leeds. So anything they find is not necessarily acted upon. As for you belittling the effects of a new burial chamber being located for something else... ask yourself what excuses will Egyptologists and academics make about their current theories when they have to re-write the history books? 

If they can get one thing wrong...

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

2 minutes ago, Silver_Lyre said:

Well that's debatable. The Egyptian Egyptologists need funds and public exposure to boost their budgets and bring in tourists. They have the final say it what gets excavated and where it all leeds. So anything they find is not necessarily acted upon. As for you belittling the effects of a new burial chamber being located for something else... ask yourself what excuses will Egyptologists and academics make about their current theories when they have to re-write the history books? 

If they can get one thing wrong...

GOOD GOD YES.

if they can be wrong about one thing, ANYTHING is possible. I mean, aliens with whips forcing thr Jews to build the pyramids using Giza Geiser power generated by captured water benders brought from Australia by the Phoenicians using space craft from Atlantis might just be true if the Archaelogists are wrong about one little thing!

[SHaYap]

The Giza Pyramids just 'evolved' ... and its most fortunate that I am alive here to witness it ...

~

[stereologist]

I always find it interesting that supporters of the fringe bring up money when that appears to be the goal of the fringies. The fringie publishes books for the gullible to suck in  mndlessly. When the mindless nature of the fringe author is exposed, a number of issues are tried such as the money angle and science has been wrong before and science doesn't know everything.

Science is external to the researchers. I believe this is the property that the fringie exploits. They too can test the conclusions of science. Of course, they don't test their own gibberish. Rewriting history books is the norm even though history is not a science. Archaeology on the other hand is a science and is always looking for more data as well as reanalyzing what data is known in the light of new information. An error does not mean everything needs to reworked. The people adjusting their or the theory of other researchers do not make excuses. They fix and adjust. The excuses are the realm of the fringie that makes patch after patch as the evidence against their nonsense piles up.

[Calibeliever]

Can we all pause for a moment and appreciate the immense awesomeness of this word: Muography.

That's some next level, science fiction s*** right there. 

[Eye of Giza]

i wonder what happened to the void in king tuts tomb, seems all quiet in the kings room

[stereologist]

Just now, Eye of Giza said:

i wonder what happened to the void in king tuts tomb, seems all quiet in the kings room

Maybe the aliens that had a workshop back there have moved on to more secret surroundings.

[cladking]

I not only predicted this void but have a name for it; "mn-canal".

This was the head of the "winding watercourse" that connected the upper eye of horus to the Lake of the Jackal.  This was critical infrastructure in construction so the gables were built over it to protect it from falling stones.  These gables are far above the descending passage and the canal is directly below it.

[stereologist]

21 minutes ago, cladking said:

I not only predicted this void but have a name for it; "mn-canal".

This was the head of the "winding watercourse" that connected the upper eye of horus to the Lake of the Jackal.  This was critical infrastructure in construction so the gables were built over it to protect it from falling stones.  These gables are far above the descending passage and the canal is directly below it.

If you predicted it then please provide something substantial other than a vague claim of a successful prediction. Post a drawing illustrating the shape, dimensions, and all other relevant information to support your claim.

The most successful predictions are the ones that are made after the event has occurred. So please show us what is there before the information is released to the public to show that your story is not another of those lame after the fact predictions.

[Why not]

In my professional opinion, it's the garage where Khufu parked his helicopter.

[cladking]

There's an old thread from '13;

[Calibeliever]

11 minutes ago, Why not said:

In my professional opinion, it's the garage where Khufu parked his helicopter.

Which he used to transport grain from the storage area?

[Why not]

5 minutes ago, Calibeliever said:

Which he used to transport grain from the storage area?

Yes, and to fly his girlfriends around.

[stereologist]

Now you have a prediction that can be checked. So far we have no idea if there actually is a void. If there is a void will it match up to your diagram? Claiming any sort of success at this point is rather odd.

[Hanslune]

6 hours ago, Silver_Lyre said:

Yes it certainly is science. Science that has also found that one of the cavities/rooms has a chevron type roof over the empty space in question. Blocks of stone masonry, assembled in a chevron pattern, acting as a load barring roof for what ever is underneath it. Now chances are that its no accident or fallen masonry that has created this empty space.Or that it has a roof. So i can understand the "fringe" getting excited. In fact, everyone should be except those that subscribe to an unyielding view point. So for arguments sake... imagine if they do find something to suggest that the pyramid is something other than a tomb, or even a tomb inside these cavities. How does Egyptology proceed along unaltered? What does that say about Egyptology or CladKing's "wacky" theories? 

Simple if something is found it will be incorporated into the body of orthodox knowledge of course they are looking for just such things, just like most other outliers. It says that Egyptology is science and Cladking makes stuff up. He made up his stuff before there was a hint of a void there. He never predicted that particular void. Of course we'll have to wait and see what is actually there. At present Cladking (on other websites) is proclaiming that it is a corridor leading to a heat source and the Madfet something statue or others and or it is a mn' canal...... We shall see shan't we? Tell us SL what you find compelling about Cladking's ideas?

[Hanslune]

5 hours ago, Silver_Lyre said:

Well that's debatable. The Egyptian Egyptologists need funds and public exposure to boost their budgets and bring in tourists. They have the final say it what gets excavated and where it all leeds. So anything they find is not necessarily acted upon. As for you belittling the effects of a new burial chamber being located for something else... ask yourself what excuses will Egyptologists and academics make about their current theories when they have to re-write the history books? 

If they can get one thing wrong...

They love re-writing history books- which usually occurs on a 18-24 month cycle- they get paid to do so. Remember THEY the evil Egyptologists are doing the science not the fringe. Science theories change all the time as does the full body of knowledge that is Egyptology.

[Hanslune]

2 hours ago, Eye of Giza said:

i wonder what happened to the void in king tuts tomb, seems all quiet in the kings room

It was found to be nothing

[Hanslune]

1 hour ago, cladking said:

I not only predicted this void but have a name for it; "mn-canal".

This was the head of the "winding watercourse" that connected the upper eye of horus to the Lake of the Jackal.  This was critical infrastructure in construction so the gables were built over it to protect it from falling stones.  These gables are far above the descending passage and the canal is directly below it.

Sorry no Cladking you did not predict we both know you are making this up. However, if you DID predict why don't you link to this brilliant prediciton?

We'll wait

lol