Secret Bottom Part of Great Pyramid

[M. Williams]

3 hours ago, third_eye said:

... look Haw ass may be the King of Pyramids to you, and your next pay cheque may be dependent on his benevolence on you being his favorite intellectual footstool...

 

 My next cheque is dependent on whether or not I can chisel and split stone in a rain storm all week. 

 

 

[SHaYap]

2 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

I am not a real fan of Hawass but we do have rules against defamation, and I ask that you stop writing his name that way. You can call him to task quite easily without resorting to silly insults.

Fine, but I take offense at it being a 'silly' insult. It ain't mine originally mine either, that's how he is referred to all over the internet and I happen to concur that it is quite apt, but hey, you're the boss

~

2 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

They need to bow to no one, you're right. But make no mistake. However you feel about Hawass, he has forgotten more about Egypt than those two clowns will ever learn. Their "profession" is to sell books based on badly researched, poorly supported fringe flop. (And that's how you can call someone to task.)

Too bad 'he' has also forgotten how not to behave like a clown

~

 

53 minutes ago, M. Williams said:

 My next cheque is dependent on whether or not I can chisel and split stone in a rain storm all week. 

 

 

Exactly, that's what I remembered from your previous contributions, I believe you won't appreciate also if someone high and mighty toitty tells you to stick with chisels and mallets and leave the concrete or cement to the 'experts' either.

~

[M. Williams]

29 minutes ago, third_eye said:

Exactly, that's what I remembered from your previous contributions, I believe you won't appreciate also if someone high and mighty toitty tells you to stick with chisels and mallets and leave the concrete or cement to the 'experts' either.

Well ,I've poured around $5 million in concrete...but that's besides the point. All Hancock does is piggyback off others real archaeological research such as the Younger Dryas, Gobekli Tepe, etc...his only contributions being attacks on archaeologists and wild extrapolations lacking not only evidence but common sense. He's a nice guy I guess ,but what is his actuall contribution ?

 

His catchphrase " everything keeps getting older" , like he's the only one that thinks we don't know everything. Why does he think archaeologists are digging ? BECAUSE THEY KNOW THERE IS MORE TO LEARN ABOUT THE PAST ! That whole Megalithomania / Foerster/Hancock thing is an affront to real archaeology .

[SHaYap]

Just now, M. Williams said:

Well ,I've poured around $5 million in concrete...but that's besides the point. All Hancock does is piggyback off others real archaeological research such as the Younger Dryas, Gobekli Tepe, etc...his only contributions being attacks on archaeologists and wild extrapolations lacking not only evidence but common sense. He's a nice guy I guess ,but what is his actuall contribution ?

He is an author, he is a writer. What else does he have to contribute? Which is also besides the point. If he is wrong or stupid, so what ? If people likes what he writes, so what ?

He asks questions, whats wrong with that ? What evidence does it require in order to ask questions ? People ask questions all the time ... Dr Kathleen Martinez asked some questions, she's no archeologist ... they told her everything that can be found has already been found, there is nothing left to find ... good luck to her ?

~

https://www.pbs.org/video/secrets-dead-kathleen-martinezs-quest-find-cleopatras-tomb-egypt/

~

 

Just now, M. Williams said:

 

His catchphrase " everything keeps getting older" , like he's the only one that thinks we don't know everything. Why does he think archaeologists are digging ? BECAUSE THEY KNOW THERE IS MORE TO LEARN ABOUT THE PAST ! That whole Megalithomania / Foerster/Hancock thing is an affront to real archaeology .

As long as archeologists don't and stop being be an affront to themselves, what can anyone do to real archeology ?

~

"Radar ? what is radar ? Radar never found anything, radar cannot find anything ..."  ?

~

~

 

[Wistman]

8 hours ago, third_eye said:

[...]

"Radar ? what is radar ? Radar never found anything, radar cannot find anything ..."  ?

That was ever so slightly jawdropping to hear him say.  I suppose some few high-profile failures to achieve meaningful results with radar have caused this reaction.  It would be much better if he weren't so emotional in responding to questions he doesn't like.

 

[SHaYap]

1 minute ago, The Wistman said:

It would be much better if he weren't so emotional in responding to questions he doesn't like.

It didn't surprise me any, he has been known to say much worse in the past, what I found despicable was the fact that he was shouting down at the woman who asked the question, he saw a victim and he preyed on her.

~

[M. Williams]

14 hours ago, third_eye said:

"Radar ? what is radar ? Radar never found anything, radar cannot find anything ..."  ?

Has a major discovery ever been made in Egypt using GPR ? I'm drawing a blank. Also, keep in mind this statement was made at a time when questionable data was being generated by the French scan team and Tut's tomb team and all the history that goes with that. So you see that statement but don't understand the history of questionable 'scans' behind it and the false news they generated. 

 

Attacking Dr. Hawass will not make Bauval and Hancock's work coherent. Nothing they say makes sense. Even Schoch's Sphinx weathering theory is fatally flawed. I think Hawass has done a great service to the world pushing back against this wave of pseudoscience. 

 

 

 

 

[Jarocal]

4 hours ago, M. Williams said:

Has a major discovery ever been made in Egypt using GPR ? I'm drawing a blank. Also, keep in mind this statement was made at a time when questionable data was being generated by the French scan team and Tut's tomb team and all the history that goes with that. So you see that statement but don't understand the history of questionable 'scans' behind it and the false news they generated. 

 

Attacking Dr. Hawass will not make Bauval and Hancock's work coherent. Nothing they say makes sense. Even Schoch's Sphinx weathering theory is fatally flawed. I think Hawass has done a great service to the world pushing back against this wave of pseudoscience. 

 

 

 

 

Except that mainstream academics often point to Colin Readers rebuttal of Schoch's assertions and Reader's dates still push the dating of the Sphynx back a century or two from previous Egyptilogical accepted timeframes. So I don't see Schoch's assertions as fatally flawed when even the rebuttal to his findings push the time frame on the Sphynx back further than was previously accepted.

[kmt_sesh]

5 hours ago, M. Williams said:

...

Attacking Dr. Hawass will not make Bauval and Hancock's work coherent. Nothing they say makes sense. Even Schoch's Sphinx weathering theory is fatally flawed. I think Hawass has done a great service to the world pushing back against this wave of pseudoscience. 

That is one thing I always liked about him. Most professional scholars simply ignore the fringe for the obvious reason that the fringe has nothing useful to offer. But it was always entertaining to see Hawass call them to task.

[kmt_sesh]

36 minutes ago, Jarocal said:

Except that mainstream academics often point to Colin Readers rebuttal of Schoch's assertions and Reader's dates still push the dating of the Sphynx back a century or two from previous Egyptilogical accepted timeframes. So I don't see Schoch's assertions as fatally flawed when even the rebuttal to his findings push the time frame on the Sphynx back further than was previously accepted.

No, Schoch is unmistakingly fatally flawed. Note how all these many years later, his theory has had exactly zero impact on professional scholarship.

Reader is perhaps somewhat better, but his conclusion is entertained no more than Schoch's in the field of Egyptology.

[cormac mac airt]

15 minutes ago, kmt_sesh said:

No, Schoch is unmistakingly fatally flawed. Note how all these many years later, his theory has had exactly zero impact on professional scholarship.

Reader is perhaps somewhat better, but his conclusion is entertained no more than Schoch's in the field of Egyptology.

And in both cases one is STILL constrained by the fact that without the excavation of material in the Sphinx Enclosure for the creation of the Valley Temples there is no Sphinx, as such. Just a knob for a head. 

cormac

[SHaYap]

6 hours ago, M. Williams said:

Attacking Dr. Hawass will not make Bauval and Hancock's work coherent. Nothing they say makes sense. Even Schoch's Sphinx weathering theory is fatally flawed. I think Hawass has done a great service to the world pushing back against this wave of pseudoscience. 

Attacking ? Doctor Hawass ?

Wow ...

~

[M. Williams]

1 hour ago, third_eye said:

Attacking ? Doctor Hawass ?

Wow ...

~

It's the truth.

[SHaYap]

Just now, M. Williams said:

It's the truth.

His own behavior and actions is beyond reproach you mean ?

You worship him all you want, I just find his behavior inexcusable is all, and he should be fully responsible and held accountable for it.

And that is the whole truth.

~

[kmt_sesh]

54 minutes ago, third_eye said:

His own behavior and actions is beyond reproach you mean ?

You worship him all you want, I just find his behavior inexcusable is all, and he should be fully responsible and held accountable for it.

And that is the whole truth.

~

You can't fool me, third_eye. Your walls are covered with Hawass posters. You have recordings of all of his 683,864 TV appearances. And you have a statue of him in your bedroom, and rub his belly every night for good luk. 

[SHaYap]

6 minutes ago, kmt_sesh said:

You can't fool me, third_eye. Your walls are covered with Hawass posters. You have recordings of all of his 683,864 TV appearances. And you have a statue of him in your bedroom, and rub his belly every night for good luk. 

 

You're only partly right there boss, his face on my toilet rolls and I've only seen a small portion of his TV appearances due to the fact that its almost unavoidable in the past. Now though. happily enough for me, he has taken somewhat a back seat to a lot of the documentaries.

As for statues, well I'm not much into idolatrous rituals but if I were, I would rub Nefertiti's bust over anything else ... I mean a bust of Nefertiti

~ 

[+Hammerclaw]

15 hours ago, third_eye said:

It didn't surprise me any, he has been known to say much worse in the past, what I found despicable was the fact that he was shouting down at the woman who asked the question, he saw a victim and he preyed on her.

~

You've never had a conversation up close with an Egyptian, have you? They crowd you too close because their idea of a proper speaking distance is much less than a Westerner's. Talking intensely and loud is normal for them in a public forum and from across the room, deafening. It's a cultural distinction.

[Bennu]

I haven't read all posts since I was last here, but just wanted to show an image of approximately how far out from the Great Pyramid's real bottom center the entrance tunnel would be if it was at the same angle as the regular descending passage. If in front of the pyramid, it would be in the Nile zone, but if they angled it then it could also be in the Sphinx Temple area. It's approximate, so might be more in the middle of the Sphinx Temple or maybe in front of it. Just seems interesting that it's a very similar distance.

Edited December 5, 2018 by Bennu

[SHaYap]

2 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

You've never had a conversation up close with an Egyptian, have you? They crowd you too close because their idea of a proper speaking distance is much less than a Westerner's. Talking intensely and loud is normal for them in a public forum and from across the room, deafening. It's a cultural distinction.

So what you are saying here is that he was being his charming self ?

~

Can't say that I have had a conversation up close with any Egyptian but I have met some before and have seen many more, I sincerely doubt this is anything cultural ... anyways ... I know of only one Egyptian King ...

~

 

 

[00.02:34]

~

 

 

[Jarocal]

8 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

No, Schoch is unmistakingly fatally flawed. Note how all these many years later, his theory has had exactly zero impact on professional scholarship.

Reader is perhaps somewhat better, but his conclusion is entertained no more than Schoch's in the field of Egyptology.

So the apex of professional scholarship in Egyptology merely ignore geological evidences that upset their predetermined conclusions?

I mean Horus forbid having a Sphynx and valley temples a few centuries older which received renovations during the reign of the pharaoh who built G1.

Edited December 5, 2018 by Jarocal

[Jarocal]

8 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

And in both cases one is STILL constrained by the fact that without the excavation of material in the Sphinx Enclosure for the creation of the Valley Temples there is no Sphinx, as such. Just a knob for a head. 

cormac

The Valley Temples could also be older. Perhaps even used in structures later repurposed into the existing valley temples at a date contemporary to the construction of G1.

Edited December 5, 2018 by Jarocal

[M. Williams]

9 hours ago, third_eye said:

His own behavior and actions is beyond reproach you mean ?

You worship him all you want, I just find his behavior inexcusable is all, and he should be fully responsible and held accountable for it.

And that is the whole truth.

~

Ya, you'd be the benchmark for "behavior". Should you be held "accountable" ?

 

Or, should Hancock @ Bauval just improve their theories and stop whining ?  I know that Hancocks soft voice is soothing, but he's using it to sell hogwash and slander a real Egyptologist. Then, when people question his work he's like " hey man, I'm just a writer". Well what is it , is he just a writer or does he have something real to contribute ? Because so far it's all made up baloney.

 

They've never had a good theory or solution that was evidenced based and accepted by Egyptology, so they don't know Egyptology is actually quite easy to influence. Maybe I should give classes .

[SHaYap]

3 minutes ago, M. Williams said:

Ya, you'd be the benchmark for "behavior". Should you be held "accountable" ?

By all accounts , quite affirmative and but of course. Shouldn't you ?

~

3 minutes ago, M. Williams said:

 

Or, should Hancock @ Bauval just improve their theories and stop whining ?  I know that Hancocks soft voice is soothing, but he's using it to sell hogwash and slander a real Egyptologist. Then, when people question his work he's like " hey man, I'm just a writer". Well what is it , is he just a writer or does he have something real to contribute ? Because so far it's all made up baloney.

Then why are you making such a big fuss over it ? So you dislike Hancock , that's more than apparent , maybe it will be better if you deal with your obsession with him in a more productive way , say ... go smash some boulders , or better yet , make a grand sculpture of your King ... maybe he'll present you with one of his special hats.

~

3 minutes ago, M. Williams said:

 

They've never had a good theory or solution that was evidenced based and accepted by Egyptology, so they don't know Egyptology is actually quite easy to influence. Maybe I should give classes .

I agree ... you obviously should give classes , you obviously believe you have got lots of class to give.

~

[M. Williams]

9 minutes ago, third_eye said:

By all accounts , quite affirmative and but of course. Shouldn't you ?

~

Then why are you making such a big fuss over it ? So you dislike Hancock , that's more than apparent , maybe it will be better if you deal with your obsession with him in a more productive way , say ... go smash some boulders , or better yet , make a grand sculpture of your King ... maybe he'll present you with one of his special hats.

~

I agree ... you obviously should give classes , you obviously believe you have got lots of class to give.

~

I'm afraid holding me accountable is way above your paygrade, and it was you that brought up Hawass/Hancock,iirc ? This is a forum designed for this very purpose mr. 30k posts .

Also, it speaks volumes that you think a hat that all proceeds benefit a children's hospital is a joke or that "smashing boulders" makes me somehow less qualified to speak on pyramid construction.

 

Seriously, focus on that baloney sandwich you guys call a theory and you'll do much better in the real world of Egyptology.

Off to smash boulders...

 

 

 

 

[SHaYap]

Just now, M. Williams said:

I'm afraid holding me accountable is way above your paygrade, and it was you that brought up Hawass/Hancock,iirc ? This is a forum designed for this very purpose mr. 30k posts .

Oh okay then Mr High and Mighty Class Above the rest , you learned well from your King

~

Just now, M. Williams said:

Also, it speaks volumes that you think a hat that all proceeds benefit a children's hospital is a joke or that "smashing boulders" makes me somehow less qualified to speak on pyramid construction.

Now you are going off the rails , if that's how you feel , feel free , but that's not what I said. You are as qualified as any non Archeologist or Egyptologist to speak on pyramid construction, just don't provoke the wrath of the Great One ... but then I guess you little to fear over that.

~

Just now, M. Williams said:

 

Seriously, focus on that baloney sandwich you guys call a theory and you'll do much better in the real world of Egyptology.

Off to smash boulders...

Good Luck !

~