Just got back to this and looked at your link, MS.... and... ARRRGH!!!
You see, I read hieroglyphics (badly, but I can read them.) That page is full of nonsense.
Originally posted by MemoryShock
Found the link I was originally referring to....got some good arguements on the technical arguments and other technological aspirations(i.e.
Okay... lemme 'splain what's going on here: It's speculation by people who see the pictures and come up with ideas about what it means. They
believe from their researches (and from others, who looked and interpreted the pcitures) that they have the RIGHT interpretation.
Take this one:
This image implies that something poured into the planet could cause spontaneous growth. The "pouring of water or an offering" and the outlandish
angles at which it is being done tends to make it one of countless scenes reinforcing the idea that such scenes are instead showing the migration or
transmission of electromagnetic forces. Every sacred symbol - linked to the gods - had a scientific as well as an esoteric purpose
So what's wrong with that? Well, tomb pictures are sort of like editorial cartoons. You have a picture, and then you have a caption about it.
Since I can read ancient Egyptian hieroglphs (you can, too... here's a starting place to learn them ... www.fnspo.cz...
This picture has a caption (only part of it shows.) On it are two cartouches. The one on the left reads "Thutmose" and the one on the right reads
"Menkephurere" and is the throne name of Thutmose IV.
(you can see the full cartouche here: www.specialtyinterests.net...
The tall, weird plant on the left is a stylized lotus (it's the big white and gold-ish thing right behind the pharaoh's shoulders and back).
That's the symbol for "thousand."
The "teepee" triangle (big triangle with little triangle inside it) on the top right and lower right are the symbols for "offering." Under the
eye on the right (next to the "plant") is the symbol for "offering/libation of water."
The whole thing is part of a forumla; the Pharaoh Thutmose IV is giving an offering to one of the gods (a thousand jars of oil, I believe, plus a
thousand items of some type of incense.) This is a standard "Middle Kingdom" tomb formula that shows the king is giving proper respects to the
gods. When he died, he had to go before the gods to declare that he had not harmed innocent people and that he a true believer and worthy of going to
So the panel is part of the painting of his ceremony of thanks to a god for something that was done. I can't find the original so I can't tell you
But -- this is how Bad Egyptology becomes Bad Miracle History. Someone looks at a painting and ignores the culture and the writing and comes up with
It's like having someone from 3035 walk up to the Lincoln Monument in Washington, DC, look at Lincoln, and declare that people who lived during the
Civil War were 45 feet tall. And all the women wore beards.
The "lightbulb" stuff, of course, follows Von Daniken and completely ignores the text on the walls (which says that they're pillars and not means
of shedding light and talks about the ceremonies where they are used.)
They get some of the metallurgy right, but what they get wrong are the dates (the Egyptians were stomped by the Assyrians, who had bronze. Their
metal technology was, in fact, somewhat behind that of everyone else in the area.)
Agh. I can't do a point by point critique of the whole thing, but some of it is right and some of it is very wrong.
I hope the rest of you with an interest in Egyptology will start learning the hieroglyphs and the next time someone points out a fragment of a panel
and makes somewild conclusion about it, that you can read enough of the panel to determine what's going on.
Best book for this stuff (available from Amazon... I swear by this one...) is HOW TO READ EGYPTIAN HIEROGLYPHICS by Collier and Manley)
[edit on 5-1-2005 by Byrd]