Update on Scan Pyramid project Oct 2016

[Windowpane]

19 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

the pyramids are not well positioned for the recovery or distribution of anything.  The entrances to them were often low and the burial chamber (as others have noted) is actually below the level of the surface... in case of flood or other event, the pyramid entrance is very easily lost/covered up. 

Not that I'm acting as an apologist for Scott's theories ... but wasn't his argument that the seeds/grains were supposed to be safely stored for a long time, perhaps centuries, and then recovered later on by some succeeding generation, who then replanted them ... ?  (Sorry, it's been some time since I last looked at this, and I don't remember it too well ... )

[mstower]

19 minutes ago, Windowpane said:

Not that I'm acting as an apologist for Scott's theories ... but wasn't his argument that the seeds/grains were supposed to be safely stored for a long time, perhaps centuries, and then recovered later on by some succeeding generation, who then replanted them ... ?  (Sorry, it's been some time since I last looked at this, and I don't remember it too well ... )

There is the small question of how this generation would get by from planting to first crop.  It seems there would need to be subsistence rations adequate to support a nontrivially large population for the scheme to work, otherwise the seeds/grains would more likely get eaten than planted.  This put me in mind of the point:

http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?1,1124656,1125372#msg-1125372

“But of course, with ravenous (hungry) folk lookin’ for a meal, it [the pyramid] would be a great place to hide the vital ingredients required to kick start agricultural pursuits?”

M.

[Kenemet]

2 hours ago, Windowpane said:

Not that I'm acting as an apologist for Scott's theories ... but wasn't his argument that the seeds/grains were supposed to be safely stored for a long time, perhaps centuries, and then recovered later on by some succeeding generation, who then replanted them ... ?  (Sorry, it's been some time since I last looked at this, and I don't remember it too well ... )

If they didn't know they were "recovery vaults" and these places didn't have managers and obvious entrances... how would any future person know what was in there and how to get in there?  There would have to be some sort of "IN CASE OF EMERGENCY, DIG HERE" sign. 

Additionally, it would take months of pounding and digging at the rock to open with Egyptian technology.  And what would you do if all your tools were washed away. - no chisels, no hamamers, etc?  How long would it take to open the thing if you just had big rocks and your hands?  IF you got to the place in the first place, that is (the locations aren't easily accessible.)

[Scott Creighton]

16 hours ago, Kenemet said:

 

Kenemet: First of all, the interior structure is not consistent with the design of existing Egyptian storehouses. 

SC: These weren’t granary stores. And they weren’t designed to merely store grain/seeds. They would store anything the AEs believed would be necessary to reboot their civilisation after the waters of the deluge had abated.

Kenemet: They are, however, consistent (in size and shape) with the development and evolution of passages and rooms within mastaba tombs. 

SC: Now try that the other way around. The first 16/19 pyramids are waaaay older than the mastaba tombs that sprung up around the pyramids.

Kenemet: I mention this to point out that the pyramids's "hallways" and rooms are very small (interior dimensions) and would have held less grain and supplies than the average nome temple, which distributed grain and cloth and similar goods on a yearly basis. 

SC: We’re not talking about a granary designed to distribute grain – they’re ‘Recovery Vauts’ not unlike our own ‘Recovery Vault’ in Svalbard.. They store only enough seeds to reboot the kingdom. But they would store other things like tools, knowledge, storage vessels possibly even weapons etc. (The kind of items that we have actually recovered from one of them i.e. the Step Pyramid). The combined volume of storage space in these first 16/19 pyramids is far greater than our own Svalbard seed vault. And if the massive underground ‘galleries’ to the west of G2 were also used as some form of storage then the overall storage capacity becomes truly enormous, possibly even providing the surviving population with enough immediate use supplies. Each pyramid, however, would keep a small store of recovery items safe within its walls.

Kenemet: In addition, once something was inside one of the pyramids (such as the Great Pyramid), getting anything OUT of there so it could be used is very problematic.  As you probably know if you've been inside the GP (I have), hauling a 20 lb sack of grain up the long passageway in the dark (or taking it down) would be extremely difficult.  It would take a lot of time to empty those vaults... anything down there is not accessible.  

SC: Not as difficult as hauling a 12 stone body up there. If yout hink they can do that, why do you think it would be difficult to carry much smaller, lighter items out? Over and above which, most of the galleries and ‘magazines’ under the Step Pyramid were found empty with the exception of .two that had, apparently, collapsed in antiquity. These two were found to contain some 40,000 vessels of various descriptions, the passages covered with vast quantities of grain.

Kenemet: Unlike Nome temples, the area around the pyramids is not well suited for distribution or for getting information on what and how much needed to be placed in the structure. 

SC: They likely weren’t expecting many to survive this deluge. But, nevertheless, they did what they could to ensure they at least had a chance of rebirth (of the kingdom). Doing nothing would only have ensured its permanent destruction.

Kenemet: The economic activity at these temples would have given every pharaoh (or vizir) an accurate idea of just how much material would be needed to help the local people recover from a disaster in their area.  

SC: See above.

Kenemet: Second, the pyramids are not well positioned for the recovery or distribution of anything.  The entrances to them were often low …

SC: Well you wouldn’t want to place the entrance too far up the pyramid – the further up the structure you place the entrance, the more difficult it becomes to access. I can understand why they might do that for the burial of a king – make it as hard as possible for the tomb raiders – but not for a Recovery Vault. But neither do you make it too easy to access – were that the case then the RVs might even have been robbed of their recovery goods. Much easier to nip down the local market to get a sack or pot of grain or some tools than exert considerable effort breaking into the Recovery Vault for these..

Kenemet: …and the burial chamber (as others have noted) is actually below the level of the surface... in case of flood or other event, the pyramid entrance is very easily lost/covered up.  That means all the material that you indicated would be placed in there would be unavailable to help anyone in case of a disaster. LIke the pyramid of Menkaure:  Tiny rooms, low entrance:

SC: Small storage space x 16/19. These 16/19 vaults were NOT about feeding a surviving population although the massive underground galleries to the west of G2 may have served such a function. And, as outlined above, the recovery chambers (or the pyramid entrance) don’t need to be high up. The key objective of the pyramid is that it is high enough to be seen from a considerable distance in all directions, marking the location of each cache of recovery goods like a massive cairn.  This objective is helped by placing the pyramids, not down in the Nile Valley, but up on the high plateaus where they will be more visible and easier to find (not something you would actually desire for your average king’s tomb). But neither do you want to place the pyramids on ground that is too high. Remember – they were anticipating a flood that would drown the entire country. EVERY place would be under water. This is to say that there would have been higher ground but the sites they chose were a compromise – not too low, not to high. The higher you go the more difficult in terms of supply chains (food, water, work force, stones from Tura, Aswan etc) it becomes to actually build the pyramids. So, if your anticipate that your ENTIRE WORLD will be underwater, it matters not if you place your pyramids on the highest ground – they’ll still be under water so there is no real benefit to placing them in such places.

Kenemet: or the pyramid of Sekhemkhet (unfinished, that you said was "part of Osiris" – equally unsuitable 

Pyramid of Khaba (also on your list) is in even worse shape and has even smaller rooms

SC: All a learning curve. They got better at building the vaults over time. You can store an awful lot of seed in a stone vase let alone a small room.

Kenemet: And how would anyone have known that these abandoned structures, buried under sand, were pyramids?  

SC: That is how they are now. They were likely in much better condition in antiquity.

Kenemet: Let's contrast that with the Nome Temples, which WERE used as points of  recovery and distribution, particularly in disasters.  Nome Temples were placed in every nome of the land and their "arms" were the smaller local temples.... unlike the pyramids which you say are "recovery vaults" that are clustered in a few locations.  Nome temples were continually repaired and expanded by successive pharaohs... unlike the pyramids.  Nome temples and ordinary temples are accessible by those in need.  They had storehouses (much larger than the pyramid interiors) and they also housed libraries... and copies of the scrolls were put in more than one library.  They also had the continuous economic support of the pharaohs through donations (mentioned in many temples) and land grants.

SC: These pyramids were designed not for a local or domestic crisis but for what we might describe today as an ‘extinction level event’ – the end of the world, as far as the AEs believed. The pyramids were built specifically to withstand the power of the deluge. I rather doubt the AEs believed a granary attached to a temple could withstand what they believed was heading their way in a few centuries. They built immovable mountains for a specific purpose – in the hope that they would withstand the great deluge.

Kenemet: None of this is true of the pyramids.

SC: See above.

Kenemet: Your statement that the cemeteries "grew up" around the pyramids is incorrect.  The pyramids were placed in existing graveyards.

SC: Really? And your proof of that is?

Kenemet: If they didn't know they were "recovery vaults" and these places didn't have managers and obvious entrances... how would any future person know what was in there and how to get in there?  There would have to be some sort of "IN CASE OF EMERGENCY, DIG HERE" sign. 

SC: But the would know the pyramids were ‘recovery vaults’ because that information would have been passed down from generation to generation that the pyramids were ‘instruments of rebirth’. We even know that today, thousands of years later. And if the pyramids are anything, they are big markers that scream: "IN CASE OF EMERGENCY, DIG HERE". Not something, though, you want people doing in the tomb of a king.

Kenemet: Additionally, it would take months of pounding and digging at the rock to open with Egyptian technology.  And what would you do if all your tools were washed away. - no chisels, no hamamers, etc?  How long would it take to open the thing if you just had big rocks and your hands?  IF you got to the place in the first place, that is (the locations aren't easily accessible.)

SC: Strabo suggests that the original entrance to the GP was a stone on the face of the entrance to the Descending Passage that pivoted allowing instant access to the Subterranean Chamber. I suggest that it was THIS chamber that probably contained the tools that provided the means to access the other sealed chambers. We are told from a ancient texts that the pyramid’s casing stones were once covered in writing. This pivot stone Starbo describes may have had the word ‘ENTRANCE’ inscribed on it. Or it may have been painted a different colour from the rest of the pyramid in order to stand out. That the Descending Passage was never blocked is, for the supposed tomb of a king, simply beyond stupid. It is inviting intruders, inviting trouble, inviting potential desecration. The builders simply would NEVER have left this passage so easily accessible UNLESS they actually WANTED to invite people into the Subterranean Chamber to access therein something important – I suggest tools or whatever else was needed to gain further access to the recovery cache of the various pyramids.

SC

Edited December 1, 2017 by Scott Creighton

[Scott Creighton]

On 11/28/2017 at 11:38 PM, Jarocal said:

Do you have an article or concise summation of the video?

I'm not a big fan of YouTube videos...

AR #127 (from p.42 - sampler only). 

SC

[mstower]

5 minutes ago, Scott Creighton said:

Kenemet: First of all, the interior structure is not consistent with the design of existing Egyptian storehouses. 

SC: These weren’t granary stores. And they weren’t designed to merely store grain/seeds. They would store anything the AEs believed would be necessary to reboot their civilisation after the waters of the deluge had abated.

As asked above, how would they survive in the interim, without there being (somewhere) adequate subsistence rations?

Given what we know about ancient Egyptian agriculture, diet and actual, real-life provision for times of famine, there would need to be, precisely, granary stores.

M.

[mstower]

I (for one) find Creighton’s persistence in posting these fantasies baffling.

M.

[stereologist]

21 minutes ago, Scott Creighton said:

SC: Now try that the other way around. The first 16/19 pyramids are waaaay older than the mastaba tombs that sprung up around the pyramids.

This appears to be a delusional fantasy of yours which the evidence points out to be wrong.

[mstower]

How it played out in real life:

https://www.rbth.com/blogs/2014/05/12/the_men_who_starved_to_death_to_save_the_worlds_seeds_35135

M.

[stereologist]

45 minutes ago, Scott Creighton said:

SC: Small storage space x 16/19. These 16/19 vaults were NOT about feeding a surviving population although the massive underground galleries to the west of G2 may have served such a function. And, as outlined above, the recovery chambers (or the pyramid entrance) don’t need to be high up. The key objective of the pyramid is that it is high enough to be seen from a considerable distance in all directions, marking the location of each cache of recovery goods like a massive cairn.  This objective is helped by placing the pyramids, not down in the Nile Valley, but up on the high plateaus where they will be more visible and easier to find (not something you would actually desire for your average king’s tomb). But neither do you want to place the pyramids on ground that is too high. Remember – they were anticipating a flood that would drown the entire country. EVERY place would be under water. This is to say that there would have been higher ground but the sites they chose were a compromise – not too low, not to high. The higher you go the more difficult in terms of supply chains (food, water, work force, stones from Tura, Aswan etc) it becomes to actually build the pyramids. So, if your anticipate that your ENTIRE WORLD will be underwater, it matters not if you place your pyramids on the highest ground – they’ll still be under water so there is no real benefit to placing them in such places.uses (much larger than the pyramid interiors) and they also housed libraries... and copies of the scrolls were put in more than one library.  They also had the continuous economic support of the pharaohs through donations (mentioned in many temples) and land grants.

 

SC: These pyramids were designed not for a local or domestic crisis but for what we might describe today as an ‘extinction level event’ – the end of the world, as far as the AEs believed. The pyramids were built specifically to withstand the power of the deluge. I rather doubt the AEs believed a granary attached to a temple could withstand what they believed was heading their way in a few centuries. They built immovable mountains for a specific purpose – in the hope that they would withstand the great deluge.

The pyramids are not positioned for a "great deluge" as you state. They are not even placed on a locally high point. There is a high next to t he pyramids that is higher. Across the valley to the east is a nearby area higher than the tops of the pyramids. Clearly, the pyramids are not built to deal with a "great deluge". Where are any containers sufficient to withstand inundation that covers the "ENTIRE WORLD". Show us a single container. 

Here is a dubious statement: "But neither do you want to place the pyramids on ground that is too high." That makes no sense at all. Besides, the pyramids could have been built on the 300m+ area just east of Cairo. There they would have been more visible. They would  be visible from a far greater distance. They would be less likely to  be buried in sands as other structures were.

So far no evidence has been presented that the AE expected "a flood that would drown the entire country". You can post it all you want but it makes no more sense than your unsupported claims of the age of the pyramids.

The pyramids are more work than is needed for a recovery vault. A recovery vault would require a much smaller structure placed on a high point.

The recovery vault idea is even more ludicrous than the claims of a pole shift.

 

[stereologist]

SC would like us to think that the pyramids are recovery vaults when an anticipated country wide flood inundates the area.

Turns out that the pyramids are not visible from any distance. Being built in a low lying spot along the Nile the pyramids are prominent only from Giza and from the eastern hills along the edge of Cairo. Had the builders wanted people to see it from someplace other than along the Nile area they would have been the pyramids in a place where it would be seen from places other than where the people lived.

If you want people to find it this statement becomes a laughable comment "But neither do you want to place the pyramids on ground that is too high."  This is a feeble effort to cover up a mistake. The following statement is clearly wrong "And if the pyramids are anything, they are big markers that scream: "IN CASE OF EMERGENCY, DIG HERE"." Had the pyramids been recovery vaults then they would be placed in a prominent location. Instead, they are prominent only to the residents.

Then comes another whopping failure, "But the would know the pyramids were ‘recovery vaults’ because that information would have been passed down from generation to generation that the pyramids were ‘instruments of rebirth’." Where are these stories that have been passed down? You have not posted anything at all.

[cormac mac airt]

Looking through my files on Magnetic Excursions I have to wonder how SC has determined, specifically, that the conveniently unnamed and alleged axial tilt of 11,500 BP in his video can be distinguished from known events such as the Tianchi Excursion:  17,100 BP; the Gothenburg Geomagnetic Excursion:  12,400 C14-years BP or even the more recent Pichincha Magnetic Excursion:  10,500 BP?

cormac

[Hanslune]

2 hours ago, mstower said:

I (for one) find Creighton’s persistence in posting these fantasies baffling.

M.

He has become a devotee of the Cladking methodology; make up stuff and keep repeating it until everyone gives us replying to it.

Additionally many fringe folks acknowledge that their ideas will never be accepted and are outside rational thought so they get 'revenge' on skeptics by taking up continual denial and pretending their fantastical ideas are real.

Edited December 1, 2017 by Hanslune

[Hanslune]

2 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Looking through my files on Magnetic Excursions I have to wonder how SC has determined, specifically,

cormac

Magical and wishful thinking?

[Hanslune]

2 hours ago, stereologist said:

This appears to be a delusional fantasy of yours which the evidence points out to be wrong.

In regards to what Scot wrote:
 

Quote

SC: Now try that the other way around. The first 16/19 pyramids are waaaay older than the mastaba tombs that sprung up around the pyramids.

It certainly isn't based on any evidence we know of. Its not an uncommon fringe/woo tactic to 'support' one idea by making up something else then pretending it is 'fact'.

[Gaden]

3 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

He has become a devotee of the Cladking methodology; make up stuff and keep repeating it until everyone gives us replying to it.

 It has worked for others, at least, in their mind.

[Hanslune]

1 minute ago, Gaden said:

 It has worked for others, at least, in their mind.

In a way it does work, the real professionals quickly determine the person is off base and ignore them while usually a few die hards continue to slug it out with them until they too get bored with it. You can see that clearly at the Hall of Ma'at.

When a new idea is posted the professionals answer but if the replies are clearly delusional they quickly bail out.

[stereologist]

4 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

In regards to what Scot wrote:
 

It certainly isn't based on any evidence we know of. Its not an uncommon fringe/woo tactic to 'support' one idea by making up something else then pretending it is 'fact'.

In that ridiculous slide show SC notes that some star does not align with a feature. Instead of deciding that the star alignment is a bad idea he decides to invoke a pole shift. It's as asinine a decision as deciding bigfoot is an interdimensional traveler or planets move on fixed tracks to explain how a planet could regularly interfere with the Earth.

I already suggested in this thread that SC should use the low and not widely visible position of the GP as evidence of geotectonic activity in the area.

Edited December 1, 2017 by stereologist

[Hanslune]

Just now, stereologist said:

In that ridiculous slide show SC notes that some star does not align with a feature. Instead of deciding that the star alignment is a bad idea he decides to invoke a pole shift. It's as asinine a decision as deciding bigfoot is an interdimensional traveler or planets move on fixed tracks to explain how a planet could regularly interfere with the Earth.

He gets a brownie point for imagination. There are tons of such intellectually sloppy ideas about dots in the sky above the pyramids and dots on the ground around them. All manner of great 'discoveries' have been made using them....and they keep coming.

[stereologist]

Surprised that some arrangement of features in Egypt are not claimed to be evidence of the AE knowing genetic markers and the structure of DNA. Makes as much sense as placing dots from a map on an AE image and warping that arrangement to meet some preconceived delusional notion.

[Hanslune]

Just now, stereologist said:

Surprised that some arrangement of features in Egypt are not claimed to be evidence of the AE knowing genetic markers and the structure of DNA. Makes as much sense as placing dots from a map on an AE image and warping that arrangement to meet some preconceived delusional notion.

Now there is an a plot for a fringe book. I am sure there are enough dots around that one could make up a representation of DNA. Great fringe book idea there!

[kmt_sesh]

Posters, you've been warned before: attack the position, not the poster. Do not use ridicule or insults.

If this persists, we shall have to lock the thread.

[cormac mac airt]

21 minutes ago, kmt_sesh said:

Posters, you've been warned before: attack the position, not the poster. Do not use ridicule or insults.

If this persists, we shall have to lock the thread.

As I'm one of the posters and SC has used an assumption by Wolfli, et al. I think my questioning same is valid. The assumption by Wolfli and others is without verifiable scientific evidence within the geological/geomagnetic record and fails completely to take into consideration the previously mentioned Magnetic Excursions which actually ARE on record as valid events yet did not happen when claimed in the video.

cormac

[Hanslune]

1 hour ago, kmt_sesh said:

Posters, you've been warned before: attack the position, not the poster. Do not use ridicule or insults.

If this persists, we shall have to lock the thread.

Well there is a problem here the 'position' comes from a person and the sole source of evidence for said position is that person. That person states there opinion as fact. That persons imagination is the source.

We cannot question the 'evidence' or the source without questioning the person because he IS the evidence.

What is the evidence for the pyramids being build circa 13,000 years ago? Something that the presenter created based on their opinion. So how do we question that if they insist it is a fact and they use that fact to dismiss actual evidence?

However, I understand the position one side is talking evidence and one 'feelings' so its hard to hard to discuss that in an impartial way.

 

[kmt_sesh]

3 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

...

What is the evidence for the pyramids being build circa 13,000 years ago? Something that the presenter created based on their opinion. So how do we question that if they insist it is a fact and they use that fact to dismiss actual evidence?

...

Your evidence can speak for itself. The scientific evidence for dating the pyramids and related monuments to c. 2550 BCE is on very solid ground, so go with that. I know Scott disagrees with it, but that doesn't affect our overall scientific understanding of the facts. In other words, the scientific approach is not overturned by how Scott sees things. However, the gist of my warning is ridicule. There's been too much of that here. Inferring that Scott lied or deceived does not present a solid argument in favor of orthodox understanding. It's merely ridicule.

Everyone here has good arguments. The best example, in my opinion, for confronting Scott's views has been Kenemet.