Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Carbon Dating Egypt's Oldest Pyramids


WVK

Recommended Posts

The idea of dating the pyramids using the C14 radiocarbon test goes always the way back to the invention of this science. Two broad studies of Old Kingdom pyramids using carbon testing have taken place, but they are incomplete. There is enormous opportunity to date the pyramids more precisely by combining C14 testing and dendrochronology, the science of analyzing tree rings. But Egyptology doesn't show much interest in this science, and it only ever conducted carbon testing on pyramids due to outside pressure. This video explores the knowns and unknowns of dating Egypt's pyramids, and the controversies and conflicts of interest for putting the physical science into the public messaging.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B80QPGNkzkg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

deleted

 

 

Edited by Hanslune
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I quite enjoy the videos on the 'History for Granite' channel.

There's some interesting comments being presented in this one.

MDagger

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's certainly a very interesting video making some interesting assertions, to say the least. Clearly there is scope for some argument on the content, but I'll address the point he makes about a severe lack of radiocarbon data in "Giza and the Pyramids" by Hawass and Lehner. This is true, but he makes it seem as if there is either no decent data, or results are being "hidden" to maintain an air of mystery to entice "mystery tourists" to Egypt. So, here is a link to a paper with data radiocarbon dates for the OK and MK Two of the eight authors are Hawass and Lehner, and why not, but for sceptics, I'll also refer to the data presented by Sturt W. Manning in a number of books by him or in which he is a contributor. How any of the data is interpreted is up to individuals, I'm just making the point that there is in fact plenty of data and nothing is being "hidden".

And as an edit I'll acknowledge that the science has moved on from 2001 when this paper was published and there have been adjustments, but as I said, it's the fact of there being data that is salient.

Edited by Wepwawet
  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

It's certainly a very interesting video making some interesting assertions, to say the least. Clearly there is scope for some argument on the content, but I'll address the point he makes about a severe lack of radiocarbon data in "Giza and the Pyramids" by Hawass and Lehner. This is true, but he makes it seem as if there is either no decent data, or results are being "hidden" to maintain an air of mystery to entice "mystery tourists" to Egypt. So, here is a link to a paper with data radiocarbon dates for the OK and MK Two of the eight authors are Hawass and Lehner, and why not, but for sceptics,

This is the published paper from the 1995-1996 study which the video refers to extensively beginning at 10:23. Also referenced by Lehner (AERA). 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

This is the published paper from the 1995-1996 study which the video refers to extensively beginning at 10:23. Also referenced by Lehner (AERA). 

Yeah, I managed to spot the extensive references to this paper, difficult not to actually. However, my post was about the comments made about "Giza and the Pyramids". These comments were designed to make it seem that Egyptology was presenting one story to the public while the "truth" was being kept for the cognoscenti, as he further banged on about with his example of two lectures given by Lehner. His video does in fact address my point that the information is out there, but it is clear to me that he does not think it good enough, or in sufficient quantity, and that Egyptologists do not put this information in their works to "maintain a sense of mystery". The video is in fact yet another attack on Egyptology and on Hawass and Lehner in particular.

Edited by Wepwawet
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

Yeah, I managed to spot the extensive references to this paper, difficult not to actually. However, my post was about the comments made about "Giza and the Pyramids". These comments were designed to make it seem that Egyptology was presenting one story to the public while the "truth" was being kept for the cognoscenti, as he further banged on about with his example of two lectures given by Lehner. His video does in fact address my point that the information is out there, but it is clear to me that he does not think it good enough, or in sufficient quantity, and that Egyptologists do not put this information in their works to "maintain a sense of mystery". The video is in fact yet another attack on Egyptology and on Hawass and Lehner in particular.

Wasn’t Lehner once associated with Edgar  Cayce?  
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, WVK said:

Wasn’t Lehner once associated with Edgar  Cayce?  
 

Yep but exposure to hard reality made him change his mind. He wrote this in 1974 - I don't quite recall what it said however.

51wLzBPi8pL._SX348_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

Yeah, I managed to spot the extensive references to this paper, difficult not to actually. However, my post was about the comments made about "Giza and the Pyramids". These comments were designed to make it seem that Egyptology was presenting one story to the public while the "truth" was being kept for the cognoscenti, as he further banged on about with his example of two lectures given by Lehner. His video does in fact address my point that the information is out there, but it is clear to me that he does not think it good enough, or in sufficient quantity, and that Egyptologists do not put this information in their works to "maintain a sense of mystery". The video is in fact yet another attack on Egyptology and on Hawass and Lehner in particular.

Unless there is something that I don’t know,  an Egyptian archaeologist who claims no interest in the newly discovered voids in GP is worthy of criticism.

https://phys.org/news/2017-11-egypt-archaeologist-criticises-pyramid-void.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, WVK said:

Unless there is something that I don’t know,  an Egyptian archaeologist who claims no interest in the newly discovered voids in GP is worthy of criticism.

https://phys.org/news/2017-11-egypt-archaeologist-criticises-pyramid-void.html

Quote

But Zahi Hawass, who heads the ScanPyramids science committee overseeing the project, said there was no new "discovery".

He said he had met other scientists from ScanPyramids who "showed us their conclusions, and we informed them this is not a discovery," he told AFP.

"The pyramid is full of voids and that does not mean there is a secret chamber or a new discovery," he said.

In a statement on Friday, the head of the government's antiquities council Mustafa Waziri also criticised the announcement.

"The project has to proceed in a scientific way that follows the steps of scientific research and its discussion before publication,"

Where does he claim 'no interest' in a news article 6 years ago? He says the project is to proceed - but then he's not head of the Egyptian Archaeology is he? You are also forgetting he has a big ego and if he doesn't find something himself and get credit for it he, gets a bit huffy. I can find numerous fringe who disagree or ignore other fringe 'finds' all the time.

Other views

On November 4, Khaled al-Anany, Egyptian Minister of Antiquities said, during a press conference, that the void space found inside the Great Pyramid of Khufu by the ScanPyramids project is a new revelation that brought the world's attention to Egypt. He added “What was discovered is new and larger than the known cavities, and we’ll continue in our scientific steps

Other Egyptologists have welcomed the discovery. Yukinori Kawae told National Geographic “This is definitely the discovery of the century...There have been many hypotheses about the pyramid, but no one even imagined that such a big void is located above the Grand Gallery.

Edited by Hanslune
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, WVK said:

Wasn’t Lehner once associated with Edgar  Cayce?  
 

When we were younger we could believe in all manner of nonsense, until we realize we are being taken for fools. I once read a book, name forgotten, that stated that the Grand Gallery of G1 contained a timeline from the past to the future. It looked good to me at the time, but it was just trash, the same as all the more modern pyramidiot books, for example "Giza Power Plant". I even know about "Ra Ta", and ta ta to that load of bull, as Lehner has done. The fringe seem to demand a high level of "purity" from Egyptology, but they themselves are a mess of ignorance, contradictions and bizarre fantasy engaging in mental projection.

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hanslune said:

Where does he claim 'no interest' in a news article 6 years ago? He says the project is to proceed - but then he's not head of the Egyptian Archaeology is he? You are also forgetting he has a big ego and if he doesn't find something himself and get credit for it he, gets a bit huffy. I can find numerous fringe who disagree or ignore other fringe 'finds' all the time.

Other views

On November 4, Khaled al-Anany, Egyptian Minister of Antiquities said, during a press conference, that the void space found inside the Great Pyramid of Khufu by the ScanPyramids project is a new revelation that brought the world's attention to Egypt. He added “What was discovered is new and larger than the known cavities, and we’ll continue in our scientific steps

Other Egyptologists have welcomed the discovery. Yukinori Kawae told National Geographic “This is definitely the discovery of the century...There have been many hypotheses about the pyramid, but no one even imagined that such a big void is located above the Grand Gallery.

There was something Ididn’t know .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WVK said:

Unless there is something that I don’t know,  an Egyptian archaeologist who claims no interest in the newly discovered voids in GP is worthy of criticism.

https://phys.org/news/2017-11-egypt-archaeologist-criticises-pyramid-void.html

Lots of Egyptologists have no interests in the voids in the GP.   I'm not an Egyptologist though I have an undergraduate degree in it, and I can tell you that I have little beyond a cursory interest in it.

Demons and magical knives, yes.  Gizamids, no.  

The Great Pyramid is not the only thing in Egypt, though fans tend to act as though it is.  

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Lots of Egyptologists have no interests in the voids in the GP.   I'm not an Egyptologist though I have an undergraduate degree in it, and I can tell you that I have little beyond a cursory interest in it.

Demons and magical knives, yes.  Gizamids, no.  

The Great Pyramid is not the only thing in Egypt, though fans tend to act as though it is.  

There’s that and the fact that by modern construction standards it’s rather sloppily built. 
 

cormac

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cormac mac airt said:

There’s that and the fact that by modern construction standards it’s rather sloppily built. 
 

cormac

Build quality aside has anyone produced a detailed explanation of how it was constructed?  Unless they winged it, the  builder knew how to build it in advance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, WVK said:

Build quality aside has anyone produced a detailed explanation of how it was constructed?  Unless they winged it, the  builder knew how to build it in advance. 

There’s no one-off theory nor would one need to exist as the Egyptians had some 600 years to perfect their techniques, starting with small mastabas and such and working their way up. 

 

cormac

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

There’s no one-off theory nor would one need to exist as the Egyptians had some 600 years to perfect their techniques, starting with small mastabas and such and working their way up. 

 

cormac

 600 years or a 1,000,000 there are only so many ways to do it when restricted to incline plain, rope, lever,  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, WVK said:

 600 years or a 1,000,000 there are only so many ways to do it when restricted to incline plain, rope, lever,  

And more than enough manpower to do so. After all the Pharaoh was considered a god incarnate. Throw enough time, money, manpower and experience at something and many things are possible. 
 

cormac

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

And more than enough manpower to do so. After all the Pharaoh was considered a god incarnate. Throw enough time, money, manpower and experience at something and many things are possible. 
 

cormac

None of that works without a MOP. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

When we were younger we could believe in all manner of nonsense, until we realize we are being taken for fools. I once read a book, name forgotten, that stated that the Grand Gallery of G1 contained a timeline from the past to the future. It looked good to me at the time, but it was just trash, the same as all the more modern pyramidiot books, for example "Giza Power Plant". I even know about "Ra Ta", and ta ta to that load of bull, as Lehner has done. The fringe seem to demand a high level of "purity" from Egyptology, but they themselves are a mess of ignorance, contradictions and bizarre fantasy engaging in mental projection.

The greatest weakness of the fringe is their inability to come to common conclusion and support that theory against orthodoxy. About the only thing they agree on is that mainstream 'ideas' are wrong but not what the 'correct answers are'.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WVK said:

 600 years or a 1,000,000 there are only so many ways to do it when restricted to incline plain, rope, lever,  

 

3 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

There’s no one-off theory nor would one need to exist as the Egyptians had some 600 years to perfect their techniques, starting with small mastabas and such and working their way up. 

 

cormac

They demonstrated also that they would make a LOT of mistakes and just kept on trying. While many say the GP was the best I believe Khafre's was (I think Khufu was a religious nut and kept making up new demands for his tomb which is why its such a mishmash).

Khafre's is the finest Egyptian pyramid tomb.

 

Edited by Hanslune
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WVK said:

Build quality aside has anyone produced a detailed explanation of how it was constructed?  Unless they winged it, the  builder knew how to build it in advance. 

All we can do is speculate. Their is no way to 'prove' any theory over another. I think they used four different methods - Direct drag, long ramps then smaller ramps or direct draw up the sides of a step pyramid then lifting stones with sadoof type devices on the upper tiers - can we 'prove' that? Nope.The only hope is that somewhere there is an elite tomb of one the gentlemen who supervised its constructions and who left illustrations of how it was done - in his tomb. We can hope.

Like someone else noted - the pyramids isn't the main aspect of the ancient Egyptian culture - they are tiny part of it...and very over done.

Edited by Hanslune
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Hanslune said:

 

They demonstrated also that they would make a LOT of mistakes and just kept on trying. While many say the GP was the best I believe Khafre's was (I think Khufu was a religious nut and kept making up new demands for his tomb which is why its such a mishmash).

Khafre's is the finest Egyptian pyramid tomb.

 

Maybe. Wouldn’t the construction of the Kings chamber high in the pyramid make itthe most technically challenging ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Hanslune said:

All we can do is speculate. Their is no way to 'prove' any theory over another. I think they used four different methods - Direct drag, long ramps then smaller ramps or direct draw up the sides of a step pyramid then lifting stones with sadoof type devices on the upper tiers - can we 'prove' that? Nope.The only hope is that somewhere there is an elite tomb of one the gentlemen who supervised its constructions and who left illustrations of how it was done - in his tomb. We can hope.

Like someone else noted - the pyramids isn't the main aspect of the ancient Egyptian culture - they are tiny part of it...and very over done.

Can a reasonable procedure by described If a sadoof is added to the toolbox ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Hanslune said:

The greatest weakness of the fringe is their inability to come to common conclusion and support that theory against orthodoxy. About the only thing they agree on is that mainstream 'ideas' are wrong but not what the 'correct answers are'.

Orthodoxy has not produced a specific method conclusions either.  I believe this is because their was more in the toolbox. If additional tools can be considered what would the be (according to Occam’s razor). 

Link to comment
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.