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 -

AE Nuclear Industry


Recommended Posts

Hello , 

I have a short hypothesis on AE, maybe a 30 minute read and lots of pictures. I explain why I believe they were mining and refining uranium at Giza. The hypothesis starts with a partial non standard translation and then I explain the conclusions I've drawn from that. 

The purpose of this post is to share the information and to try and come up with ideas on how to prove or disprove the notion. Although proof is sought all thoughts relating to this are welcome. 

The hypothesis is here Revelations of the Gatekeeper 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Mark_C said:

Hello , 

I have a short hypothesis on AE, maybe a 30 minute read and lots of pictures. I explain why I believe they were mining and refining uranium at Giza. The hypothesis starts with a partial non standard translation and then I explain the conclusions I've drawn from that. 

The purpose of this post is to share the information and to try and come up with ideas on how to prove or disprove the notion. Although proof is sought all thoughts relating to this are welcome. 

The hypothesis is here Revelations of the Gatekeeper 

Care to use this discussion forum to discuss your ideas and not just dump a google doc?

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Giza plateau is primarily limestone, and there is no evidence of any of the various mineral forms of Uranium being present there.  In all ancient workings, there are large heaps of tailings left over, and trace materials mined are invariably found in them.  No tests of excavations in the area have ever revealed uranium or any related nuclear material.  While there is also some granite present in the Giza plateau, there is nothing to suggest that it was mined, let alone mined for uranium.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Care to use this discussion forum to discuss your ideas and not just dump a google doc?

Hello, yes I want to discuss the ideas. I think its easier to link the whole document than to reproduce it in its entirety. 

24 minutes ago, Alchopwn said:

The Giza plateau is primarily limestone, and there is no evidence of any of the various mineral forms of Uranium being present there.  In all ancient workings, there are large heaps of tailings left over, and trace materials mined are invariably found in them.  No tests of excavations in the area have ever revealed uranium or any related nuclear material.  While there is also some granite present in the Giza plateau, there is nothing to suggest that it was mined, let alone mined for uranium.

Hello,  I suspect they were getting the uranium from the subterranean aquifer using a solution mining technique. See page 15 of the hypothesis 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Mark_C said:

Hello, yes I want to discuss the ideas. I think its easier to link the whole document than to reproduce it in its entirety. 

Hello,  I suspect they were getting the uranium from the subterranean aquifer using a solution mining technique. See page 15 of the hypothesis 

If you have water running through a uranium vein it would start a reaction. Google "natural nuclear reactor". 

You would also have a lot lingering radiation in the area, which there isn't. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Piney said:

If you have water running through a uranium vein it would start a reaction. Google "natural nuclear reactor". 

You would also have a lot lingering radiation in the area, which there isn't. 

Hello , the solution mining method I describe is the method we use today to recover uranium, open cast mining isn't so prevalent anymore. The majority of our uranium today also comes from subterranean aquifers.

Elevated radiation levels have been found inside the stone boxes in the Osiris shaft and at 6 places at Saqqara.  Just for comparison the background radiation levels at Hiroshima and Nagasaki  are the same as they are everywhere else.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mark_C said:

Hello , the solution mining method I describe is the method we use today to recover uranium, open cast mining isn't so prevalent anymore. The majority of our uranium today also comes from subterranean aquifers.

Elevated radiation levels have been found inside the stone boxes in the Osiris shaft and at 6 places at Saqqara.  Just for comparison the background radiation levels at Hiroshima and Nagasaki  are the same as they are everywhere else.    

Granite and quartz both give off small amounts of radiation. 

Then there should be "cancer clusters" like the ones on the Navajo Nation on top of the fact that no AE PPE was ever found.

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Piney said:

Granite and quartz both give off small amounts of radiation. 

Then there should be "cancer clusters" like the ones on the Navajo Nation on top of the fact that no AE PPE was ever found.

 

Theres a massive cluster of radiation linked cancers in people who have worked on excavations in Egypt and in those who live there today and in ancient times. I think its related though to uranium rather than granite or quartz.

Heres a recent study that focuses on that and presents the evidence. The Pharaohs Curse by Ross Fellowes. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, Mark_C said:

Heres a recent study that focuses on that and presents the evidence. The Pharaohs Curse by Ross Fellowes.

On a quick glance through this paper I see many issues, primarily of misinterpretation, which I may address, or not as it is just so far out there. Anyway, one part is easy to deal with. He includes two photos of pits filled with pots at Abydos and states that they must be for storage, not offerings. This is just a manipulation of reality to suit his purpose, for under the photos he uses I have posted another one showing a large number of pots, which, according to Fellowes, must be for storage and not offerings, well, I wonder if that is the case....

 

pots.jpg

Ibis.jpg

Edited by Wepwawet
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wepwawet said:

On a quick glance through this paper I see many issues, primarily of misinterpretation, which I may address, or not as it is just so far out there. Anyway, one part is easy to deal with. He includes two photos of pits filled with pots at Abydos and states that they must be for storage, not offerings. This is just a manipulation of reality to suit his purpose, for under the photos he uses I have posted another one showing a large number of pots, which, according to Fellowes, must be for storage and not offerings, well, I wonder if that is the case....

 

pots.jpg

I agree with his interpretation of the top two photos.  They're crammed in without any care. It's subjective , perhaps if we knew what was in them we'd have a better chance of guessing. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mark_C said:

Hello , 

I have a short hypothesis on AE, maybe a 30 minute read and lots of pictures. I explain why I believe they were mining and refining uranium at Giza. The hypothesis starts with a partial non standard translation and then I explain the conclusions I've drawn from that. 

The purpose of this post is to share the information and to try and come up with ideas on how to prove or disprove the notion. Although proof is sought all thoughts relating to this are welcome. 

The hypothesis is here Revelations of the Gatekeeper 

First, what is AE?   Can you use actual words in your introduction of your topic, some of us are curious but don't know the "lingo" or acronyms.

And I agree, it would be more interesting if you stated your understanding and what you want to discuss than to just provide a link that most of us will not click on.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

First, what is AE?   Can you use actual words in your introduction of your topic, some of us are curious but don't know the "lingo" or acronyms.

And I agree, it would be more interesting if you stated your understanding and what you want to discuss than to just provide a link that most of us will not click on.

 

Ancient Egyptians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Piney said:

Ancient Egyptians.

Ah, ok.  Thanks.  I hate acronyms and you have probably seen many of my posts asking for words to define them.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

Ah, ok.  Thanks.  I hate acronyms and you have probably seen many of my posts asking for words to define them.

I know pretty much all of them so just ask. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, Mark_C said:

I agree with his interpretation of the top two photos.  They're crammed in without any care. It's subjective , perhaps if we knew what was in them we'd have a better chance of guessing.

No guessing involved, they contained primarily wine, a high status symbol at that time, others contained beer. How is this known, labels.

If when you say "they are crammed in without any care" you are refering to the photo I posted, then the answer is that they are in a broken heap due to human interference in modern times, originally they would have been packed in tightly like the ones at Abydos.

Edited by Wepwawet
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This will be a tough one to prove, but there is certainly alot of emphasis on containment with stone mass, that does happen to satisfy the need to block energetic waves.    An inference from that alone is quite a leap, but those stories about death by all the markers of radiation poisoning is a distractedly encouraging factor.   Add those archeologist cancer deaths and it seems worthy of some brave sole looking into it. I say brave, because this forum describes these idea's as "The sweet sweet milk from the woo teet".   You have people salivating here...

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mark_C said:

Hello,  I suspect they were getting the uranium from the subterranean aquifer using a solution mining technique. See page 15 of the hypothesis 

If that were the case, then the aquifer would have been dangerously polluted and people and livestock would have exhibited traces of radioactive material i.e. uranium in their bones.  There is no evidence to support this.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Open Mind OG said:

This will be a tough one to prove, but there is certainly alot of emphasis on containment with stone mass, that does happen to satisfy the need to block energetic waves.    An inference from that alone is quite a leap, but those stories about death by all the markers of radiation poisoning is a distractedly encouraging factor.   Add those archeologist cancer deaths and it seems worthy of some brave sole looking into it. I say brave, because this forum describes these idea's as "The sweet sweet milk from the woo teet".   You have people salivating here...

Apparently Zahi Hawaas is making a statement on the 4th of june regarding the recent excavations in the queen's chamber of the great pyramid. 

Maybe we'll get some answers, then maybe people will allow themselves to wonder.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, Alchopwn said:

If that were the case, then the aquifer would have been dangerously polluted and people and livestock would have exhibited traces of radioactive material i.e. uranium in their bones.  There is no evidence to support this.

They removed uranium from the aquifer so if everything went according to plan they would have left it cleaner than they found it.

There is evidence that the ancient people did suffer from the effects of exposure. Ross Fellowes addressed that in the first paragraph of his paper which I linked above. 

 

Edited to add, they would have had to dig monitoring Wells to make sure the mining solution wasn't contaminating other ground water sources beyond the aquifer they were leeching from. This explains the many well shafts at giza .

Edited by Mark_C
To add exxtra info
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Mark_C said:

Hello , 

I have a short hypothesis on AE, maybe a 30 minute read and lots of pictures. I explain why I believe they were mining and refining uranium at Giza. The hypothesis starts with a partial non standard translation and then I explain the conclusions I've drawn from that. 

The purpose of this post is to share the information and to try and come up with ideas on how to prove or disprove the notion. Although proof is sought all thoughts relating to this are welcome. 

The hypothesis is here Revelations of the Gatekeeper 

Significant deposits of uranium are found along the areas of Egypt that border the Red Sea - but none are found near Giza (see https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321392399_URANIUM_RESOURCES_AND_RESERVES_IN_EGYPT)

In addition, uranium has a half life of 4.5 billion years.  If there had been any there at Giza (wrong kinds of formations), the area would be notably reactive after all this time -- so reactive that they would have discovered it long before this and would be putting out warnings.

Your interpretation of the stele does not actually match the text on this stele or any other offering stele.  Those aren't just pretty pictures... instead, it's similar to a modern political cartoon or illustrated story book.  And labeling bread as an atom really doesn't work.

Yes, those are loaves of bread.

And Maati is a man, not a woman.  It very CLEARLY shows him as a man and the pronouns on the stele are 'his'/'him'/'he'.  The text to the right of the offering scene is part of his biography.

The band of text that you're trying to rework is actually the standard offering to the dead.  It's called "htp-di-nswt" and is one of the first things you learn to read when you're learning hieroglyphs because this text is found EVERYWHERE (well... in graveyards, but most of our material comes from graves... so...)  It reads (quite literally) "an offering that the king gives to Anubis who is on his mountain..."  This is something you can find out for yourself by reading books on hieroglyphs. 

It is SO common that even beginners at hieroglyphs can translate it for others: (https://www.reddit.com/r/ancientegypt/comments/mrlga7/has_anyone_got_a_direct_translation_for_the_stela/

This particular group of hieroglyphs is written right-to-left (you can tell by the way the signs/animals/people are facing.  They always face toward the beginning of the sentence.)

The "description of a subatomic particle" is part of the phrase "everything good and pure."  This phrase occurs even more frequently than the "htp-di-nswt" - they add it to pharaoh's titles (Ramesses II, and your 'Lord of Everything' title, I'm looking at you)  and to titles of deities.

The "vial" is actually the sign "nefer" (as in "Nefertiti") and means "beautiful" or "perfect" or "pure." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nefer)

The "stream of particles" is another common sign, "wab" and means "pure" and in addition shows up in the title of certain priests who are empowered to do offerings ("wab-priests"... you can look them up if you're curious.)

The "release of energy and stream of particles" is actually the phrase "in the house of purification"; i.e., the place where funeral rites are done.

Many of these same symbols show up in the famous Rosetta Stone, where you have a text that's repeated three times (and two of these translations are in languages that everyone knew at the time of Champollion.)

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Mark_C said:

Theres a massive cluster of radiation linked cancers in people who have worked on excavations in Egypt and in those who live there today and in ancient times. I think its related though to uranium rather than granite or quartz.

Heres a recent study that focuses on that and presents the evidence. The Pharaohs Curse by Ross Fellowes. 

That's a really poor choice of papers.

He's cherry picked data and is doing a lot of hand-wavium to make his point.  There were thousands upon thousands of people who excavated at Giza and there's no elevated risk of cancer in the group.  Yes, they will die of tropical diseases because... Egypt is tropical and has tropical diseases and this was a common problem before modern vaccinations.  Heart attack is a very common cause of death, even today. (etc, etc.)

And the "yellow cake uranium" is absurd.  We have some of those cones (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_cone#:~:text=Head cones%2C also known as,to research published in 2019.) - composed of wax and a perfume - and yes, they've been chemically analyzed and they're not radioactive (remember that uranium has a half-life of 4.5 billion years, so if they'd been radioactive then this would have been widely known already) 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Mark_C said:

They removed uranium from the aquifer so if everything went according to plan they would have left it cleaner than they found it.

But it would not have removed the evidence from downstream in the aquifer or elsewhere. 

If you have water flowing through a radioactive area, it picks up some of the radioactive minerals and re-deposits them in the direction of the flow of the aquifer.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Ken 

What Im suggesting is that they fully exploited the deposit at Giza then decommissioned the pyramid and used it as an above ground near surface disposal facility.  The paper you linked doesn't seem to mention Giza so we have no reason to suspect that they looked there and never found any, however.  The lack of uranium there today might be the best chance of proving that it was once exploited.

Someone who's trained to search for deposits might be able to estimate how much uranium there should be in an aquifer at that location. My guess is that the aquifer will contain a small amount of uranium, an amount that could accumulate in 4000 years.

 

Im willing to stand by my translation but I don't need to, every symbol I've translated comes with a full explanation of why I translated it as such. I thought about challenging someone to a debate, a sort of mine versus yours one symbol at a time but I realised they'd have no working out to show, just letters placed next to symbols. Im actually in that thread you linked on reddit from a few years back trying to initiate such a challenge.  At the end of the day translations aren't proof of anything, they just provide us with a better idea of where to look for proof and what to look for.

2 hours ago, Kenemet said:

But it would not have removed the evidence from downstream in the aquifer or elsewhere. 

If you have water flowing through a radioactive area, it picks up some of the radioactive minerals and re-deposits them in the direction of the flow of the aquifer.

The solution mining method I've described is identical to the most common method we still use today. The water picks up radioactive materials like you said, then you have an extraction pump downstream. The extraction pump is more powerful than the flow towards it. This prevents contamination downstream, all the water is pumped out and they separate the minerals. Often the first stage of separation takes place below ground. This might explain some of the side tunnels going off from the Osiris shaft. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Ken, 

You said of the top line of the translation " because this text is found EVERYWHERE" . I've been keeping my eye out for it but haven't seen it anywhere else yet.  Can you show me it somewhere else .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
42 minutes ago, Mark_C said:

Hello Ken, 

You said of the top line of the translation " because this text is found EVERYWHERE" . I've been keeping my eye out for it but haven't seen it anywhere else yet.  Can you show me it somewhere else .

She, is not here right now, so I'll answer. It is indeed the standard offering formula, there's even a wiki here and you'll notice that there are a number of variations, not all mentioning Anubis. You may also take note of the illustration in the wiki, see that the deceased is sitting by a table with various offerings on it. The type of offerings can vary, but not so much that they can not be seen for what they are. Here's another similar scene below from TT340, the tomb of Amenemhat, a variant of the offering text, this one reads "Prayer to Osiris lord of the West, so that he grants all good and pure things to the ka of Amenemhat, true of voice", but not so much in the actual offerings seen with Maati in the illustration in your link

amn340_a10.jpg

Edited by Wepwawet
  • Like 3
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.