It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Showing how the first pyramids of ancient Egypt may be 19,000 years old

page: 5
98
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 05:48 AM
link   
a reply to: bluetrees

And I was talking about losing culture (language, writing, history) so I have no idea why you come up with technology?


Let me remind you my post you quoted before this technology derail of yours:


What I would like to know about such theories about "previous human races", advanced in technologies and destroyed by cataclysms, is how they forgot how to write, how to draw, etc... ?

If someone can enlighten me?


If a civilization was destroyed in a recent past, where is its cultural heritage?
edit on 1-4-2015 by Develo because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 05:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Develo


Devolo: Let's set the Great Pyramids aside for a second. There is a long and documented tradition of pyramid building in Egypt.


SC: Indeed. Around 138 in total I believe. I am concerned only with the first 16 completed pyramids built by the ancient Egyptians which I hypothesise were constructed for an entirely different, non-funerary, reason to all other pyramids that came thereafter.


Devolo: We can see the evolution of the architectural styles and techniques.


SC: Just because structures take a similar form does not necessarily mean they each served the same function. This is not to say, however, that these first 16 pyramids could not have been repurposed as tombs afterwards—that’s entirely possible.


Devolo: We can see the traces of the quarry sites or where the workers were living. We have documents about the accounting regarding pyramids construction and we can fit all these findings into the timeline of the different dynasties.


SC: Indeed. Someone had to build them originally. And, if they are as old as I propose then, by the time of the 4th dynasty, they would have been very old to the Egyptians of this period and, most likely, in need of some considerable repair if they were to be repurposed as tombs. The Inventory Stela, largely ignored by Egyptologists, tells us quite clearly that Khufu made considerable repairs to a number of monuments at Giza.


Devolo: How does all that fit into your theory? Why is it OK for Egyptians to build more than a hundred pyramids around 2500-2000 BCE, but not the Great Pyramids?


SC: The Egyptians did not “build more than a hundred pyramids around 2500-2000 BCE”. But this misses the point. Where have I said that the Egyptians did not build the Great Pyramids? I have said, repeatedly, that the ancient Egyptians were the builders of these first, giant pyramids but that they did so much earlier in their history. Remember, we have a number of AE sources that tell us that the ancient Egyptians civilization was tens of thousands of years older than Egyptologists accept.


Devolo: Also why would an advanced early civilization …


SC: What “advanced, early civilization”? I am talking about the ancient Egyptians or, rather, the Very Ancient Egyptians (VAE).


Devolo:… build the great pyramid as merely a pile of rubble covered by massive stones. Surely if they were advanced they could build an all-stone pyramid, which would be much more solid.


SC: I think it is abundantly clear that the VAE were better builders than the AE of the dynastic period. For example, have a look at the pyramid at Meidum which is attributed to Sneferu by mainstream Egyptologists. It has a stepped pyramid core with finishing casing stones. In other words, this pyramid was finished as a step pyramid. It was apparently converted to a true pyramid by Sneferu but collapsed shortly after its completion. It collapsed because Sneferu, unlike the VAE builders, built his conversion on sand and not solid bedrock. The VAE knew what they were doing, Sneferu clearly didn’t.


Devolo: Finally, where are the remains of the cities of that civilization?


SC: Egypt. The pioneering work of Egyptologist, Dr Sarak Parcak using infra-red satellite imagery is uncovering lost cities under the sands all over Egypt. We just have to keep digging ever deeper.


Devolo: We can find things as insignificant as a campsite from neolithic hunters, but we are unable to find even one city from that supposed civilization?


SC: Within archaeology it’s usually called a lucky turn of the spade. We found Gobekli Tepe in 1963 (excavated in 1996). We have no idea of the civilization that built it. A lost civilization. It happens.


Devolo: Are you suggesting archaeologists are so incompetent they can only find cities when they are less than 10.000 years old...


SC: See above. How many archaeologists have excavated Doggerland or similar known human settlements that are now under the sea?


Devolo: …but then how come they have no problems finding small clay items from 30.000 years ago but not a single city?


SC: How come they have yet to produce tools that could have carved the massive granite boxes of the Serapeum at Saqqara? Copper chisels and stone pounders simply will not achieve that level of craftsmanship on granite. I think we have to dig deeper below the sands of Egypt to find these tools as the copper ones being found at the upper levels are from the AE civilization and not the earlier VAE civilization.


Develo: Even if you assume some kind of cataclysm, if such a cataclysm did not even destroy the sphinx or pyramids, surely it wouldn't completely wipe out a city neither. Where is the 19.000 year old city that existed close to the pyramids?


SC: I’m not sure why you think there would be a 19,000 year old city near to the pyramids?


Develo: You have to admit your claims are a bit crazy to a critical mind


SC: Not at all: Project Osiris. (Note: This is a WMV movie file download 55Mb).

And I think a truly critical mind would actually question much more ruthlessly much of what mainstream Egyptology presents as ‘fact’.

Regards,

SC



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 06:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Scott Creighton
SC: Within archaeology it’s usually called a lucky turn of the spade. We found Gobekli Tepe in 1963 (excavated in 1996). We have no idea of the civilization that built it. A lost civilization. It happens.


Actually I believe it is not assumed to be from a civilization, but more of a pilgrimage/sacred site for the various tribes and camps all around the place. If it was from a "civilization" we would find more than a temple. We would find cities.

Like I expect the same from the civilization who built the pyramids.



SC: See above. How many archaeologists have excavated Doggerland or similar known human settlements that are now under the sea?


We don't have to excavate Doggerland because we have access to other nearby sites which are not submerged.


Thank you for your answers. I won't you convinced me but you helped clarify a few misunderstandings



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 06:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Develo

me, right now.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 09:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Domo1


Why do I have to download it? Put it on YouTube.


He took the time to put it together and do all that work. You're complaining why he didn't put in on youtube? Seriously?



edit on 1-4-2015 by Telos because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Develo



If there was a technologically advanced civilization during this ancient history, we would inevitably find traces of it.




According to Life After People, No. Within a very short span of time (geologically speaking) every trace of human activity disappear and nature takes over. Considering 4 billion + existence of this planet you wouldn't be able to find squat.

p.s. You have registered fairly recently. Scott has been honored with his own forum in this board. Which means is highly regarded and has done some great work over the years. Maybe you can take a look and see what he says on the subject in a greater length.

p.p.s. A very friendly advice: You might wanna drop that arrogance you show in almost every post.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 10:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Telos
According to Life After People, No. Within a very short span of time (geologically speaking) every trace of human activity disappear and nature takes over. Considering 4 billion + existence of this planet you wouldn't be able to find squat.

That is a TV show. It excludes a myriad of things, specifically because it would ruin the narrative.

They will be digging up buried fibre optic cables a million years from now, unless we willingly remove it first, as one example.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Telos

You have to read my posts better. What is actually claimed and what I disagree with is that such an ancient civilization was wiped out relatively "recently" in regard to human history.


What I'm saying we can trace back hominids to more than 2 billions years, and we have never found any trace of old civilizations among all the other fossils of hominid during that period.

If your claim is that such a human civilization existed way before that, before we even have traces of hominids, then I have nothing to say about it.

But it's not what is often claimed.

What is often claimed (in this thread too) is that a very recent Atlantean civilization was destroyed by a cataclysmic flood around the end of the last Ice age.

We are not talking 2 billions years. We are talking less than 20.000 years.


There are no traces of such a civilization. Sorry.


I'm also really sorry you mistake my aversion for such BS theory as arrogance.

I love alternative history and science, I'm quite open minded, but there is a huge difference between being open minded and being gullible up to the point of claiming a technologically advanced civ existed less than 20.000 years ago.

We are talking creationism-level of crazy here.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 10:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Develo

You certainly are entitled to your opinion and since I consider myself civilized and educated, I respect your opinion. I just cannot help but consider arrogance calling an idea/opinion/discussion as BS only because I don't share the same belief.

Anyway, let's not derail the thread.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 10:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: Telos
According to Life After People, No. Within a very short span of time (geologically speaking) every trace of human activity disappear and nature takes over. Considering 4 billion + existence of this planet you wouldn't be able to find squat.

That is a TV show. It excludes a myriad of things, specifically because it would ruin the narrative.

They will be digging up buried fibre optic cables a million years from now, unless we willingly remove it first, as one example.


I agree, it is a TV show. But is based largely in science in its commentary. The shows narrative deals with Life After people, not all the traces of civilization disappear after people. Whatever comes up in that context is just data analysis and science.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 11:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Telos
I agree, it is a TV show. But is based largely in science in its commentary. The shows narrative deals with Life After people, not all the traces of civilization disappear after people. Whatever comes up in that context is just data analysis and science.

Your rebuttal to Develo was that all traces of human activity vanish, per the show. That claim is incorrect.

As is the claim that that show is based on science.

I would love to ask the 'scientists' that took part in the 'analysis' one simple question:

What happened to all of the glass?



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Telos

When it comes to archaeological findings and human history I never deal in beliefs.

I reserve beliefs for other fields than science.

Sorry if I sounded arrogant though.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 11:16 AM
link   
The Sphinx originally was a lion. Which makes sense.. since 12,600 years ago we were entering the ago of Leo. The 3 main pyramids in Gaza align with Orion about 10,500BC.. which ... would you look at that. = 12,500 years ago.

I don't see how any more cut and dry it could be. The ice caps were melting. The entire area was a lot wetter and more tropical. This accounts for the erosion we see on the sphinx. The alignments of the pyramids and finally the fact the sphinx WAS a lion originally and was built during the Age of Leo.. A lion.

Any questions



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 11:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: Telos
I agree, it is a TV show. But is based largely in science in its commentary. The shows narrative deals with Life After people, not all the traces of civilization disappear after people. Whatever comes up in that context is just data analysis and science.

Your rebuttal to Develo was that all traces of human activity vanish, per the show. That claim is incorrect.

As is the claim that that show is based on science.

I would love to ask the 'scientists' that took part in the 'analysis' one simple question:

What happened to all of the glass?


Yes, my rebuttal was based in an example from the show without implying that the show is about longevity of human traces on the planet. So I was correct.

As I am correct when I say that the show had a lot of scientific facts in it. A lot of professionals, engineers. architects, environmental experts, geologists etc were part of it, interviewed, participated with their scientific explanations making possible of people to understand what will happen with time if there is no presence of humans on Earth. So despite the narrative that was about a pure conjecture, science was part of explaining the outcome.

As for the glass, I guess you can still address that question.
edit on 1-4-2015 by Telos because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Triton1128
The Sphinx originally was a lion. Which makes sense.. since 12,600 years ago we were entering the ago of Leo. The 3 main pyramids in Gaza align with Orion about 10,500BC.. which ... would you look at that. = 12,500 years ago.

I don't see how any more cut and dry it could be. The ice caps were melting. The entire area was a lot wetter and more tropical. This accounts for the erosion we see on the sphinx. The alignments of the pyramids and finally the fact the sphinx WAS a lion originally and was built during the Age of Leo.. A lion.

Any questions



Mayans were known to build their monuments by making reference to very ancient dates which were significant for their astronomical calendar.


What if Egyptians simply did the same?


It would absolutely not surprise me if they made reference to the time when their ancestors first started to "record time by looking at the sky", maybe 12.500 years ago.

The pyramids would be modern monuments, but making reference to the origins of their astronomical science.

Exactly like the Mayans did too.



How plausible is this? I mean compared to saying they build them 12.500 years ago?



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Scott Creighton

Doesn't work, for three reasons
1. Ice age maximum at 19 000 bc
2. our first houses were round and earlies 9 000 bc
3. Earth was still in the last days of her "wild phase"


20,000 BC
Wild barley and other grass seeds were being milled for bread by the Sea of Galilee in Israel.
19,000 BC
This date is given to what is termed the Ice Age Maximum, with few humans north of Southern France.
18,000 BC
First signs of Goats domesticated in North Africa. Areas suitable for man far more limited than today
14,000 to 10,500 BC
Supernova event - arrival of the debris cloud - Radiocarbon again decreased to near normal levels up until that time, when a third sharp increase occurred.
10,860 BC and 10,740 BC
Two dramatic rises in temperature, following major debris impacts. Mass extinctions, worst for 3.5 million years, followed by a plunge in temperatures. World wide geological ash zone 15 - 35mm in depth, making barrier between Clovis and Fulsom peoples in North America. - Tectonic uplift and great floods causing Lake Victoria to discharge into the Nile. This led to a massive extension of the high level lakes and a surplus of water into the semi arid Sahel, and the Sahara region. It is suggested that the Earth's atmosphere and that of Mars was severely damaged and depleted by impacts from this debris cloud around this time.
....
9,000 BC Göbekli Tepe an early Neolithic site in south eastern Turkey. The houses are round megalithic buildings. The walls are made of un-worked dry stone and include numerous T-shaped monolithic roof supports of limestone, that are up to 3 m high, together with a bigger pair of pillars in the centre of the structures.


Everything between 19 000 and very much after 9000 bc is next to bs.
But we can maybe talk about around 3500. Wait that's the agreed on time isn't it? Why? Because with the bigger picture in mind, everything else doesn't make much sense.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 12:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: Scott Creighton

Doesn't work, for three reasons
1. Ice age maximum at 19 000 bc
2. our first houses were round and earlies 9 000 bc
3. Earth was still in the last days of her "wild phase"


20,000 BC
Wild barley and other grass seeds were being milled for bread by the Sea of Galilee in Israel.
19,000 BC
This date is given to what is termed the Ice Age Maximum, with few humans north of Southern France.
18,000 BC
First signs of Goats domesticated in North Africa. Areas suitable for man far more limited than today
14,000 to 10,500 BC
Supernova event - arrival of the debris cloud - Radiocarbon again decreased to near normal levels up until that time, when a third sharp increase occurred.
10,860 BC and 10,740 BC
Two dramatic rises in temperature, following major debris impacts. Mass extinctions, worst for 3.5 million years, followed by a plunge in temperatures. World wide geological ash zone 15 - 35mm in depth, making barrier between Clovis and Fulsom peoples in North America. - Tectonic uplift and great floods causing Lake Victoria to discharge into the Nile. This led to a massive extension of the high level lakes and a surplus of water into the semi arid Sahel, and the Sahara region. It is suggested that the Earth's atmosphere and that of Mars was severely damaged and depleted by impacts from this debris cloud around this time.
....
9,000 BC Göbekli Tepe an early Neolithic site in south eastern Turkey. The houses are round megalithic buildings. The walls are made of un-worked dry stone and include numerous T-shaped monolithic roof supports of limestone, that are up to 3 m high, together with a bigger pair of pillars in the centre of the structures.


Everything between 19 000 and very much after 9000 bc is next to bs.
But we can maybe talk about around 3500. Wait that's the agreed on time isn't it? Why? Because with the bigger picture in mind, everything else doesn't make much sense.


Do you have a link for what is quoted?



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

Well i found it composed, here

more detailed, here



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Develo

Hello Develo,


Develo: It would absolutely not surprise me if they made reference to the time when their ancestors first started to "record time by looking at the sky", maybe 12.500 years ago.


SC: The date that the Giza monuments make reference to, according to my own hypothesis, is ca. 19,000 years ago. Texts that have come down to us tell us that the structures were built in order to store in them everything that was of "esteem" to nsure the rebirth of the kingdom after an anticipated deluge. The ancient Egyptians believed this deluge would come to pass after having observed that the stars in the heavens have moved from their normal course.

The work of physicists Wolfli & Baltensperger present a number of papers arguing that the Earth's pole shifted from a former location in Central Greenland to its present location in the Arctic Sea ca.20,000 years ago. You can read their paper here: An additional planet as a model for the Pleistocene Ice Age. This represents an absolute shift of around 17-18 degrees. At Giza, however, the shift would have been around only 6 degrees. It is my view that this 6 degree shift of the northern and southern skies at Giza is presented to us in the angles of the four so-called 'star-shafts' of the Great Pyramid. These shafts register for us the former and post shift altitudes of the star Al Nitak (the GP's stellar counterpart in Orion's Belt).

You can see this here: The Great Pyramid Shafts Indicates Pole Shift. (Flash).

Here is an image showing this:



The 'cross-over' in the above image is important for without it we would not know the direction of the shift.







So, while the Earth's poles may have migrated some 18 degrees, at the latitude of Giza the effect is only around a 6 degree shift (as indicated by the two sets of shafts). With a Central Greenland pole, Giza is approximately geographically located at around 36*N. After the pole migrates to its present location in the Arctic Sea, Giza is relocated southwards by around 6 degrees (further away from the new pole) to 30*N. Thus the four shafts of the Great Pyramid may indicate a 6 degree (or thereabouts) shift of the southern Giza meridian which equates approximately to an 18 degree shift of the Earth's northern pole from Central Greenland to the Arctic Sea.

All in all, I think the shafts of the Great Pyramid are 'recording' the events of around 19,000 years ago in the heavens at Giza and its construction, we are told, (along with the other early pyramids) was as a result of the heavens changing, the stars moving out of their normal course--they were anticipating a deluge that would destroy their kingdom.

Regards,

SC

edit on 1/4/2015 by Scott Creighton because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 12:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Scott Creighton
a reply to: Develo

Hello Develo,


Develo: It would absolutely not surprise me if they made reference to the time when their ancestors first started to "record time by looking at the sky", maybe 12.500 years ago.


SC: The date that the Giza monuments make reference to, according to my own hypothesis, is ca. 19,000 years ago. Texts that have come down to us tell us that the structures were built in order to store in them everything that was of "esteem" to nsure the rebirth of the kingdom after an anticipated deluge. The ancient Egyptians believed this deluge would come to pass after having observed that the stars in the heavens have moved from their normal course.

The work of physicists Wolfli & Baltensperger present a number of papers arguing that the Earth's pole shifted from a former location in Central Greenland to its present location in the Arctic Sea ca.20,000 years ago. You can read their paper here: An additional planet as a model for the Pleistocene Ice Age. This represents an absolute shift of around 17-18 degrees. At Giza, however, the shift would have been around only 6 degrees. It is my view that this 6 degree shift of the northern and southern skies at Giza is presented to us in the angles of the four so-called 'star-shafts' of the Great Pyramid. These shafts register for us the former and post shift altitudes of the star Al Nitak (the GP's stellar counterpart in Orion's Belt).

You can see this here: The Great Pyramid Shafts Indicates Pole Shift. (Flash).

Here is an image showing this:



The 'cross-over' in the above image is important for without it we would not know the direction of the shift.







So, while the Earth's poles may have migrated some 18 degrees, at the latitude of Giza the effect is only around a 6 degree shift (as indicated by the two sets of shafts). With a Central Greenland pole, Giza is approximately geographically located at around 36*N. After the pole migrates to its present location in the Arctic Sea, Giza is relocated southwards by around 6 degrees (further away from the new pole) to 30*N. Thus the four shafts of the Great Pyramid may indicate a 6 degree (or thereabouts) shift of the southern Giza meridian which equates approximately to an 18 degree shift of the Earth's northern pole from Central Greenland to the Arctic Sea.

All in all, I think the shafts of the Great Pyramid are 'recording' the events of around 19,000 years ago in the heavens at Giza and its construction, we are told, (along with the other early pyramids) was as a result of the heavens changing, the stars moving out of their normal course--they were anticipating a deluge that would destroy their kingdom.

Regards,

SC



Interesting...So...forgive my ignorance here, Why didn't the planet shift uniformly? What you are talking about would be a shift in the rotational axis, which, would see to shift the whole uniformly, and apparently it didn't. So I have to ask; "Why?"



new topics

top topics



 
98
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join