Orion's Belt: perfect alignment with the Giza Pyramids or Coincidence ?

[Open Mind OG]

The scary thing about paternicity stuff, is that if you see a coincidence, and make the choice to suspect its intentional, then in that moment, you also have to become more open to more paternicity, because you are making the leap of presumption that ancient cultures are intentionally embedding secret messages in geometry everywhere.    Its a presumption that feeds and enables itself.   This makes me feel very cautious about this kind of thing.    I can most definitely see a segment of these discussions being driven by 'a type' that lust after these kinds of idea's.   (I'm not saying that about you Scott), but some people show a very predictable propensity towards these kinds of idea's, with the same enthusiasm as their weekend paper crossword puzzle. 

If you're right, we have to figure out why they made it so very difficult to confirm these things as they can be just as easily interpreted as coincidences, which requires a suspicion that the designers of these attempts to communicate to future civilizations, were not very bright taking such counter productive risks of vagueness, especially since these attempts were wasting massive expense, labor and resources.   

If the message intended for future people was important, then the plan to communicate it simply can't be too mysterious, or the purpose is defeated.   That is unless it was information that had to be done in secret because the powers of the time would consider it sacrilegious info, but that feels like too much of a leap at these scales. 

And if you're wrong, Its a lot of very addictive time spent chasing a red herring. 

Its always a tough sell for me, (and admittedly one of my 'not very Open Minded' positions). 

 

Edited June 24 by Open Mind OG

[Scott Creighton]

45 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Doesn't work, Scott.

You'd have to throw the 3 coins on the table and then look at a map of the sky and decide what constellation they mapped.

 

No, that's not what has been presented and that's not the experiment. Go and re-read.

SC

[Scott Creighton]

1 hour ago, Open Mind OG said:

 

If the message intended for future people was important, then the plan to communicate it simply can't be too mysterious, or the purpose is defeated.  

I get what you're saying and I readily accept this may be some quite remarkable fluke (the chances are mightily against that, however).

I don't think it's mysterious at all, tbh. (Because it was communicated in the language of mathematics (geometry) and astronomy, both of which are universal to any culture or civilisation (unlike language).

Lehner and Goedicke saw the Giza Diagonal in the 1980s. Believed it was probably made to align with Helipolis (about 30 Km away or thereabouts - and some people criticise the Giza Diagonal alignment and it's not even 1 km). But that's just their Egypological guess.

Cocteau, Badawy, Trimble and Bauval saw the Giza-Orion connection (in different ways). Krupp said Giza was upside-down for the correlation to properly work with the Belt stars.

Then in the mid-noughties, I saw this Great Giza Cricle.

Put the Giza Diagonal and the Great Giza Circle together and it shows you the Belt stars flipping 180 degrees. 

Krupp was right.

SC

PS - It's not just the 2 triads of satellites that demonstrate the Belt flipping. We observe the same phenomena within the GP's so-called 'star-shafts'. Have a look:

 

Edited June 24 by Scott Creighton

[Kenemet]

3 hours ago, Scott Creighton said:

 

No, that's not what has been presented and that's not the experiment. Go and re-read.

SC

I read and understood.  The thing is that the original takes three buildings (ignoring everything else) and force-fits them onto an idea of importance based on our beliefs and not the beliefs of the ancient Egyptians.  I've also seen people trying to force-fit them into Cygnus...and trying to force-fit the position of the pyramids all along the Nile (well, some of them) into other designs.

The original is not based on three random points but rather on three objects in a certain position.

We could also do your "alignment" with three cars in the parking lot or three hotels or three of anything in a reasonably straight line, including magpies hopping on the ground.

Tossing coins makes for an extremely poor example.

[Golden Duck]

This is the Eureka Stockade Flag.

It's supposedly based on Crux Australis.  It is, howevert, clearly a representation of the constellation of Orion.

Obviously the Giza workers were members of the CFMEU.

Edited June 25 by Golden Duck

[Scott Creighton]

7 hours ago, Kenemet said:

I read and understood.  The thing is that the original takes three buildings (ignoring everything else) and force-fits them onto an idea of importance based on our beliefs and not the beliefs of the ancient Egyptians.  I've also seen people trying to force-fit them into Cygnus...and trying to force-fit the position of the pyramids all along the Nile (well, some of them) into other designs.

The original is not based on three random points but rather on three objects in a certain position.

We could also do your "alignment" with three cars in the parking lot or three hotels or three of anything in a reasonably straight line, including magpies hopping on the ground.

Tossing coins makes for an extremely poor example.

No disrespect intended, but you're still not getting it.

SC

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

19 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

This is the Eureka Stockade Flag.

It's supposedly based on Crux Australis.  It is, howevert, clearly a representation of the constellation of Orion.

Obviously the Giza workers were members of the CFMEU.

Not likely, the pyramids actuslly got built. 

[Golden Duck]

1 hour ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Not likely, the pyramids actuslly got built. 

Scabs!

[Piney]

15 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

Scabs!

They do better work than some Teamsters I met. 

[WorldMysteries]

The alignment of the Egyptian pyramids with the stars has been a topic of fascination and debate. While some researchers have suggested that the Giza pyramids align with specific celestial patterns, the idea remains controversial. Here are a few points to consider:

1. Orion Correlation Theory:
   • In the 1980s, researcher Robert Bauval proposed the “Orion correlation theory.” He pointed out similarities between the layout of the three pyramids at Giza (the Great Pyramid of Khufu, the Pyramid of Khafre, and the Pyramid of Menkaure) and the relative separation between the three stars of Orion’s Belt in the constellation Orion.
   • According to this theory, the pyramids were intentionally designed as a gateway to the stars, with Orion playing a significant role.
   • However, this idea lacks physical evidence, and there are no Egyptian texts supporting intentional alignment with Orion.
2. Criticism and Pareidolia:
   • Critics argue that believers in the Orion correlation theory may be succumbing to pareidolia—the tendency to see patterns and meaning in objects even when no pattern exists.
   • The three pyramids were not all planned simultaneously. The Pyramid of Menkaure, smaller and farther away, appears to have been an afterthought.
   • Without concrete evidence, the alignment remains speculative.
3. Ancient Egyptian Beliefs:
   • The ancient Egyptians closely observed the night sky, naming constellations after their gods.
   • Some believe that the stars in Orion’s Belt—Alnitak, Alnilam, and Mintaka—were associated with important gods like Osiris and Isis.
   • The pyramids may have been oriented toward Orion to facilitate the pharaohs’ ascension to Osiris in the afterlife12.

In summary, while the alignment of the pyramids with Orion remains intriguing, it lacks definitive proof. The mystery endures, inviting wonder and speculation.

https://www.astronomy.com/space-exploration/are-the-egyptian-pyramids-aligned-with-the-stars/

https://blog.physics-astronomy.com/2023/10/the-enigma-of-alignment-of-pyramids-of.html

https://sentinelmission.org/astronomical-history-mythology-glossary/egyptian-pyramids-and-orions-belt/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_correlation_theory

 

 

[Scott Creighton]

2 hours ago, WorldMysteries said:

The alignment of the Egyptian pyramids with the stars has been a topic of fascination and debate. While some researchers have suggested that the Giza pyramids align with specific celestial patterns, the idea remains controversial. Here are a few points to consider:

1. Orion Correlation Theory:
   • In the 1980s, researcher Robert Bauval proposed the “Orion correlation theory.” He pointed out similarities between the layout of the three pyramids at Giza (the Great Pyramid of Khufu, the Pyramid of Khafre, and the Pyramid of Menkaure) and the relative separation between the three stars of Orion’s Belt in the constellation Orion.
   • According to this theory, the pyramids were intentionally designed as a gateway to the stars, with Orion playing a significant role.
   • However, this idea lacks physical evidence, and there are no Egyptian texts supporting intentional alignment with Orion.
2. Criticism and Pareidolia:
   • Critics argue that believers in the Orion correlation theory may be succumbing to pareidolia—the tendency to see patterns and meaning in objects even when no pattern exists.
   • The three pyramids were not all planned simultaneously. The Pyramid of Menkaure, smaller and farther away, appears to have been an afterthought.
   • Without concrete evidence, the alignment remains speculative.
3. Ancient Egyptian Beliefs:
   • The ancient Egyptians closely observed the night sky, naming constellations after their gods.
   • Some believe that the stars in Orion’s Belt—Alnitak, Alnilam, and Mintaka—were associated with important gods like Osiris and Isis.
   • The pyramids may have been oriented toward Orion to facilitate the pharaohs’ ascension to Osiris in the afterlife12.

In summary, while the alignment of the pyramids with Orion remains intriguing, it lacks definitive proof. The mystery endures, inviting wonder and speculation.

https://www.astronomy.com/space-exploration/are-the-egyptian-pyramids-aligned-with-the-stars/

https://blog.physics-astronomy.com/2023/10/the-enigma-of-alignment-of-pyramids-of.html

https://sentinelmission.org/astronomical-history-mythology-glossary/egyptian-pyramids-and-orions-belt/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_correlation_theory

 

 

IMO, there is considerable proof that the Orion's Belt stars were the underlying 'design template' for the base dimensions of the Giza pyramids.

Image 1: The Relative Base Dimensions of the Giza Pyramids can be Created Using Orion's Belt Asterism

Furthermore, the 2 triads of so-called queens pyramids essentially serve as the Belt in miniature, presenting to us the maximum and minimum precessional culmination points of the Belt asterism. By presenting these we then have a stellar clock, marking a specific moment within the precessional cycle of Orion's Belt.

Image 2: The 2 Triads of Satellite Pyramids at Giza Present the 2 Precessional Culminations of Orion's Belt

The image below clearly shows that Menkaure was not an "after thought":

Image 3: The above inter-quarter lines arise as an outcome of the design mechanism presented in the GIF in Image 1. As we can see, G2 was offset slightly from its planned Belt-star ground position.

However, when we move G2 onto its ground Belt Star posiiton, this happens:

Image 4: When we re-locate G2 centre to its Al Nilam Belt Star Centre, the inter-quarter lines lock into place. 

The above inter-quarter lines are no accident and arise as the natural outcome of the design process (Image 1 GIF).

This, imo, is compelling mathematical/astronomical evidence that Orion's Belt formed the underlying design template for the Giza pyramids.

SC

 

Edited June 30 by Scott Creighton

[Spiros]

On 6/24/2024 at 6:18 AM, Scott Creighton said:

As my GIF shows, it is possible, using the Belt stars of Orion in a simple and systematic fashion, to create the relative base dimensions of the Giza three to a very high degree of accuracy.

After the relative dimensions of the three had been created (using the Belt stars in the manner show in the GIF) and were subsequently being mapped onto the ground at Giza, G2 was slightly offset from its true Belt position (i.e. offset slightly from Al Nilam centre, see below):

                             The Giza Inter-Quarter Lines (G2 Offset from Al Nilam Centre)

When you relocate G2 centre onto its Orion's Belt counterpart centre (Al Nilam), we find this:

                                      G2 Recentred on its Stellar Counterpart (Al Nilam)

The slight misalignment of the Giza 3 with the Belt stars is not, as Bauval long believed due to G3 misplacement, but rather, G2 misplacement. And I suspect there was a very particular reason why G2 was slightly repositioned on the plateau. (Note: The original entrance to G2 bears witness to the fact that it has been repositioned i.e. offset from the original Belt plan. The diagrams above corroborate this slight offset of G2). The inter-quarter lines (shown above) are an artefact/effect of the design process (as shown in the GIF).

The fact remains, however - the relative base dimensions of the Giza three can be created using the Belt stars in a simple and systematic manner and nothing to do with star magnitudes as Bauval believed. Just simple geometry.

SC

This theory is base on the dimensions of Menkaure's as measured by  Maragioglio & Rinaldi. These values were published in Lehner's book, but in later books the Petrie values were used. No other surveyor has confirmed this parallelogram model. Also the geometry you present does not explain the size or direction of the G2 repositioning.

But lets look at something else.

take a look here:

 

https://heritageaction.wordpress.com/2022/01/26/orions-belt-the-british-view/

 

This adds two monuments that consist of a triad of prehistoric structures. The Thornborough Henges in England, and the Neolithic Orkney triad of Ring of Bookan, Ring of Brodgar, and Stones of Stenness in Scotland.

I used Google Earth to pinpoint the center position of these monuments and then compared the relative triangles to see if they are similar(have the same angles).

Since we have a large obtuse angle at the central monument, whether this is the Khafre pyramid or the Ring of Brodgar, I consider the ratio of relative distance between the central monument and the other ones. To compute the error of one triangle in relation the other I first scale it down to the size of the Giza pyramid triangle. I then find the difference between the outer monument distance in relation to that of Giza and then multiply it by the mean distance of the outer pyramids of Giza which is 470.4225 meters or 1,543.38 feet.

Another relation is that of the obtuse angle in question. I compute the difference for each triad in relation to that of Giza which is 168.536 degrees. I then find the ratio of this angle in relation to a whole circle (360 degrees) and multiply it by the perimeter of of a circle with a radius of 470.4225 meters or 1,543.38 feet. This is the angular error projected as a length expressed in meters on to an arc.

I finally compute a third error - divergence using a simplified hypotenuse of a right triangle with vertical sides equal to the previous two cases (distance and angular error).   

The results of my theories, plus Orion, plus Orkney, plus Thornborough Henges is here:

 

https://the-phaistos-disk.webnode.page/triangle-comparisons/

 

So the question that arises is, if the position of the center base of the three large pyramids of Giza forming an angle of 168.536 degrees at the Khafre pyramid was planned based on Orion and the size of the Giza bases, then how was it designed at Orkney?

Projected on to Giza the angular error of Orkney in relation to Giza is roughly 3.08 meters based on my measurements. Compare this to the 34.74 meters error of Orion. Were the ancients making a mistake? How can everybody make the same exact mistake instead of infinite different other ones?

Projected on to Giza the distance of Orkney in relation to Giza is roughly 0.75 meters based on my measurements. Compare this to the 42 meter error of Orion.

I agree that Orion is part of the picture, but what else is?

Why is Orkney a Giza look-alike?

 

[glorybebe]

On 6/22/2024 at 3:46 PM, Unusual Tournament said:

 

 

This was a theory back in the 90s

[Unusual Tournament]

23 minutes ago, glorybebe said:

This was a theory back in the 90s

After the 80’s the 90’s was my favourite decade. I’m bringing it back, babe

[Harte]

On 6/22/2024 at 7:53 PM, Unusual Tournament said:

The Orion correlation theory confirmed
 

https://www.dailynewsegypt.com/2013/04/01/fools-culture-the-orion-correlation-theory-confirmed/

Posted on April Fool's Day.

Harte

[Antigonos]

9 hours ago, glorybebe said:

This was a theory back in the 90s

It started in the 80s. Robert Bauval and Adrian Gilbert wrote The Orion Mystery in 1986 expanding on the work Alexander Badaway and Virginia Trimble did in the 60s. Later an Ancient Mysteries episode called Gateway to the Stars came out (Trimble had a brief appearance during the show) which was the first documentary to discuss it. (It was around the time that West and Schoch first went public about their theories on the Sphinx circa 1992. In 1993 their documentary The Mystery of the Sphinx aired live on tv for the first time).

The Orion Correlation Theory really became popularized in 1995/1996 when Hancock wrote Fingerprints and he and Bauval expanded on it when they cowrote The Message of the Sphinx and afterwards appeared on several documentaries together on TLC and Discovery.
I remember it all in real time. (Not the 60s stuff, I’m not that old. Yet).

Edited July 1 by Antigonos

[Spiros]

Megalithic mysteries in Britain with Orion and Giza pyramids. The relationship between the geographic position of the Thornborough Henges which depict the Orion belt stars and the Orkney monuments which depict the Giza pyramids. The encoding is done using the geocentric latitude of these sights. The best alignment occurs with the Stones of Stenness and the Northern Thornborough Henge. We also note the alignments of other geometric shapes (circle, square, equilateral triangle) with Galilee and Egypt.

 

Edited July 28 by Spiros