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.

 

Temple at Abydos have hieroglyphics depicting modern-day aircraft.

page: 3
7
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 06:29 PM
link   
a reply to: skybolt

The shafts don't look to the sky. They come to an abrupt stop around 20 feet before reaching the exterior of the pyramid, and would have been even more when the casing stones were still in place.




posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 09:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: admirethedistance
a reply to: skybolt

The shafts don't look to the sky. They come to an abrupt stop around 20 feet before reaching the exterior of the pyramid, and would have been even more when the casing stones were still in place.


Which makes it even more baffling. I can imagine the contractor on site telling his workers that the Pharaoh wants us to build this great pyramid, he wants it perfectly aligned to the nearest 1/2" and wants the inner chamber where he'll rest to be constructed with huge granite blocks. He also wants us to build a 3' wide shaft going up the structure at an angle so his soul can escape into the heavens. However, what he doesn't know is that we'll block off the last 20 ft and trap him, since he made us build this damn thing in the first place. Seriously though, I'm not suggesting that an explanation does not exist, but making the structure grave robber proof does not justify all these shafts leading to nowhere.



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 09:47 AM
link   


Let me answer your questions with a question
Do you assume that the Kings at Giza and the Kings buried in the Valley of the Kings followed the same religion ?


Fair enough and a good point. You are right, the beliefs could have changed over a thousand year period. I can buy that. However, I'm still stumped as to why their design and construction techniques declined so much over a thousand year period. Apparently they spent several hundred years perfecting pyramid construction (via the step pyramids and so forth), but then went completely downhill again after the Great Pyramids were built. What's so special about workers and contractors in the 25th and 26th century BC that weren't able to be replicated before and after that time? It's a legitimate question and cannot be answered by saying future generations knew how to do this work but decided not to because they didn't feel like it. If they completely went away from building pyramids I'd understand, but they continued building smaller ones that look like child's play compared to their predecessors. If I was a pharaoh in the new kingdom I'd be embarrassed with these mini shoddy pyramids, especially if I knew my people had the technology to do way way better.



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 02:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Harte
Gobekli Tepi is large, but it's no massive structure like the GP.

It got big because the buried it and rebuilt overit for years, creating the hill that contains it.

It's mostly dirt.

Hardly ground shaking. What is interesting about it is that people had to have been there for long time periods during an era when most people were nomads.

This is, of course, explained by the fact that the area was loaded with food sources.

Regarding the development of skills with stone. you need to understand that even the species preceding us was working with stone.

It's in our blood.

Or, will you posit no progress in stone working after 200,000 years of practice?

Harte


Since only 5% to 10% of Gobekli Tepe has been excavated thus far it's enormity has yet to be realized, but for me it's still very impressive for hunter gatherers from 11,000 years ago. It's also interesting how similar it looks to the structures in Malta, which brings up the question of whether or not they were constructed at the same time. Let's put it this way, if Gobekli Tepe had been exposed for all these millennia would carbon dating have shown that it was constructed over 11,000 years ago or much later? By the way, I do agree that it comes nowhere close to other sites such as in Giza or Puma Punku with its complexity.

Also, when you mention that our predecessors have been working with stone for the past 200,000 years, which specific sites are you referring to? Thus far we have beautifully cut 20 ft high pillars with various animals sculpted to protrude from the surface at Gobekli Tepe from 11,000 years ago, but nothing remotely close to that sophistication from before that time. For instance, even lesser shaped dolman type structures are all dated after Gobekli Tepe. I guess there is potential in some of the 200,000 year old circles spotted in South Africa, but there's really no evidence left there anymore to know what type of structures stood there once. Now if those structures used to look anything like Gobekli Tepe, I would be floored.

Thanks again Harte for you input. The more information I can gather to satisfy my curiosity the closer I'll get to reaching an overall opinion (I'm not even close yet, just throwing mud at the wall to see if it'll stick).



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 03:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: skybolt
Since only 5% to 10% of Gobekli Tepe has been excavated thus far it's enormity has yet to be realized, but for me it's still very impressive for hunter gatherers from 11,000 years ago. It's also interesting how similar it looks to the structures in Malta, which brings up the question of whether or not they were constructed at the same time. Let's put it this way, if Gobekli Tepe had been exposed for all these millennia would carbon dating have shown that it was constructed over 11,000 years ago or much later?

C14 dating is not affected by exposure.


originally posted by: skyboltAlso, when you mention that our predecessors have been working with stone for the past 200,000 years, which specific sites are you referring to?

Earlier species of Homo:


These points were made by a version of Homo Erectus.

The points range in age from about 1.75 million years old to about 0.75 million years old. In other words, the youngest point in the pic predates Homo Sapiens by over half a million years.
They all come from the same general area and, to the experienced (not me, I should add,) display the evolution of stone working at the site.


originally posted by: skyboltThus far we have beautifully cut 20 ft high pillars with various animals sculpted to protrude from the surface at Gobekli Tepe from 11,000 years ago, but nothing remotely close to that sophistication from before that time.


Therefore, most of the buildings of layer II again can
be identified as sanctuaries. But it was not only the
scale of the architecture that was reduced – the
numbers and size of the pillars are much smaller
now. The average height of the pillars in layer III
is 3.5m, while in layer II, it is only about 1.5m.

Klaus Schmidt

originally posted by: skybolt
For instance, even lesser shaped dolman type structures are all dated after Gobekli Tepe. I guess there is potential in some of the 200,000 year old circles spotted in South Africa, but there's really no evidence left there anymore to know what type of structures stood there once. Now if those structures used to look anything like Gobekli Tepe, I would be floored.

Several pillars standing in dirt? I'm not astonished.

Some are fairly large. Plenty are smaller. IMO, the value in the site is the large number of other artifacts found there, not a few big stones that were shaped and stood to hold a skin roof or whatever.

Harte



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Fair enough. I think we can both agree that the ancients were just as smart us and their stone work capabilities improved over hundreds of thousands of years. Makes sense. However, my question is that how did they go from shaping rocks for hunting and other means into building a complex like Gobekli Tepe. Again, I'm not questioning whether or not people at that time could've constructed these multiple stone circles, but why can't we see a similar progression between that time period and about 6,500 years ago? Did these people construct this site, bury it a thousand years later (perhaps a later tribe did that), and then build nothing else of significance until apparently thousands of years later? Also, the construction of this site might not compare to a modern day skyscraper, but it is significant nonetheless from an engineering standpoint. Not only did the builders carve these flatly cut 20 ton stones with the animals perturbing the surface, but they have to have known something about foundation design and soil pressures as well to not only hoist these structures into place, but to also keep them in place (with a makeshift roof on top). I read somewhere that during excavation, archeologist had to brace these structures into place so they wouldn't topple over.

Perhaps over time we will find other comparable sites dated to the same time period or slightly before so we can see the progression. However, until that happens there are a lot of questions in mind and inconsistencies that can't be resolved by the evidence we've unearthed thus far or the data we have to date these sites. For instance, I keep scratching my head as to why all over the world construction techniques seem to significantly get worse over time. I look at the Great Pyramids vs. the mini unsophisticated earth mound ones built by pharaohs of the new kingdom and am left to wonder what happened to all their technology? When I read that the Aymara Indians constructed Puma Punk and were able to drill holes through large stone at the exact same depth, have interlocking mechanisms for the multi-ton stones, but then supposedly a few hundred years later people in that region are back to building with mud bricks, I become even more baffled. When I look at stone circles in Malta that look very similar to Gobekli Tepe, but supposedly constructed several thousand years later, or statues from all over the world with hands pointing to the navel area, or pyramids constructed all everywhere, something just doesn't add up!

If we take each stone work or site on its own, then the explanations currently given make more sense. However, when we combine everything we've unearthed over the past couple of hundreds of years, the picture becomes a lot murkier. If there was no C-14 dating (or we took into consideration that the organic material could be polluted by future inhabitants), then what perhaps makes more sense is that a civilization may have existed long ago that had some technology (not to our level of course), but were thrown back to the stone age during a major cataclysm (s). Then thousands of years later the survivors began inhabiting these sites and calling them their own. Now does adequate evidence exist to say this is what happened, I would say no. However, I can't just close the book to this possibility until future technology is able to image everything lying below our sands, rainforests and ocean bottoms.

As a Civil Engineer I've been trained to think that people build things a certain way out of necessity. I can't convince myself that Pharaohs during only a very short period of time were that adamant about building structures to this precision, while using massive weights and taking earthquake design into consideration? If on the other hand we factor in a world in turmoil with massive floods, tsunamis, earthquakes, then building structures using multi-ton blocks with no spaces between the blocks to keep water from seeping thru sort of makes sense.

Again Harte it's been a pleasure talking to you, and I by no means have ruled out the possibility that everything we think we know about the past 12,000 years did actually occur. I just need more evidence via further education (or future findings) to satisfy all my questions and curiosity.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 09:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: skybolt I just need more evidence via further education (or future findings) to satisfy all my questions and curiosity.

You don't seem to have even a basic grasp of the subject. I agree you need more evidence via further education
You don't need to rely on future findings when the truth is already available



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 11:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: skybolt I just need more evidence via further education (or future findings) to satisfy all my questions and curiosity.

You don't seem to have even a basic grasp of the subject. I agree you need more evidence via further education
You don't need to rely on future findings when the truth is already available


Then enlighten me with a more detailed explanation to my questions.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 02:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: skybolt

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: skybolt I just need more evidence via further education (or future findings) to satisfy all my questions and curiosity.

You don't seem to have even a basic grasp of the subject. I agree you need more evidence via further education
You don't need to rely on future findings when the truth is already available


Then enlighten me with a more detailed explanation to my questions.


Shall we start with this claim ?
"Great Pyramids vs. the mini unsophisticated earth mound ones built by pharaohs of the new kingdom "
1. Tombs in the New Kingdom were cut into solid rock, not earth. Tunneling is just as technical as building.
2. Pyramids proved susceptible to tomb robbers, which destroyed the whole point of their construction, namely ensuring the King had all he needed in the afterlife with copious amounts of grave goods. Its all well and good marvelling at his power in this life to see his magnificent monument, but meanwhile in the afterlife, all his furniture has been stolen.

I'm not going to answer the rest of your questions in this thread, though they all have simple explanations, because the mods will delete posts if they are off topic
So if you really want answers, start a thread on it, that's what internet forums like this are for





posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I kind of doubt the actual hieroglyphs are "retouched". Alterations would likely be painfully obvious.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 02:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blazemore2000
a reply to: Phage

I kind of doubt the actual hieroglyphs are "retouched". Alterations would likely be painfully obvious.

They are painfully obvious, that's the point, the only people here who can't see that are the ones who know nothing about Egyptian culture, or in other words, the people least qualified to comment



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 02:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: skybolt

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: skybolt I just need more evidence via further education (or future findings) to satisfy all my questions and curiosity.

You don't seem to have even a basic grasp of the subject. I agree you need more evidence via further education
You don't need to rely on future findings when the truth is already available


Then enlighten me with a more detailed explanation to my questions.


Shall we start with this claim ?
"Great Pyramids vs. the mini unsophisticated earth mound ones built by pharaohs of the new kingdom "
1. Tombs in the New Kingdom were cut into solid rock, not earth. Tunneling is just as technical as building.
2. Pyramids proved susceptible to tomb robbers, which destroyed the whole point of their construction, namely ensuring the King had all he needed in the afterlife with copious amounts of grave goods. Its all well and good marvelling at his power in this life to see his magnificent monument, but meanwhile in the afterlife, all his furniture has been stolen.

I'm not going to answer the rest of your questions in this thread, though they all have simple explanations, because the mods will delete posts if they are off topic
So if you really want answers, start a thread on it, that's what internet forums like this are for




Yeah, I sort of derailed this thread a bit, but will take your advice and start a new one in the future once I do a bit more research. Good day to you sir!


P.S., I still don't like the grave robber idea for pharaohs not wanting to build pyramids anymore. There are pyramids all over the world that would require similar explanation. Anyway, back to reading more about this fascinating subject.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 04:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: skybolt
P.S., I still don't like the grave robber idea for pharaohs not wanting to build pyramids anymore. There are pyramids all over the world that would require similar explanation. Anyway, back to reading more about this fascinating subject.

Pyramids got more complex in their passageways before they stopped building them. Why would this be?

Also, there's this:

According to the so-called "Strike Papyrus" preserved in the Egyptian Museum in Turin, an attempt was made by two individuals to enter the tomb of Ramesses II during the 20th Dynasty, in Year 29 of Ramesses III. They stripped stones from above the tomb entrance. One robber named in the papyrus as Kenena, son of Ruta, made a similar attempt on the tomb at KV5, the tomb believed now to hold the sons of Ramesses II.

Read more: www.touregypt.net...


From the above-mentioned "strike" papyrus (AKA the Judicial Papyrus of Turin):

Year 29, first month of summer, day 16.
Declaration by the workman Penanuke to the scribe Amennakhte and the foreman Khonsu: "You are my superiors, and you are the administrators of the Tomb. Pharaoh, my good lord, has made me swear an oath of fealty saying: 'I will not hear anything. I will not see any damage in the great and deep places and conceal it.' Now, Weserhat and Pentaweret have stripped stones from the top of the tomb shaft of Osiris King Wesermaatre-setepenre, the great god. And he took away an ox branded with the brand of the temple of Wesermaatre-setepenre, and it is standing in his stable. And he had intercourse with three married women: the lady Menat when she was living with Qenna, the lady Taiunes when she was living with Nakhtamun and the lady Tawerethetepti when she was living with Pentaweret. Now, you have seen the attitude of the vizier Hori concerning the taking away of stones, which was reported to him: 'The foreman Peneb' - my father - 'put men to take off stones from it, (he did) just that.' And Qenna, son of Ruta, did it in exactly the same way from the top of the tomb shaft of the royal children of King Osiris Wesermaatre-setepenre, the great god. Let me see what you will do to them, or I will report them to Pharaoh, my lord, and to the vizier, my superior."
He said: "Weserhat made plans for robbing his tomb and implemented them in the Valley of the Queens."

"Strike" papyrus

You see, we know the Egyptians themselves wrote about robberies they discovered. But what they didn't write about, but some Egyptologists infer, is that there were times when the priesthood itself, in cahoots with the current pharaoh, were the ones that did some of the robbing.

Harte



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Harte
You see, we know the Egyptians themselves wrote about robberies they discovered. But what they didn't write about, but some Egyptologists infer, is that there were times when the priesthood itself, in cahoots with the current pharaoh, were the ones that did some of the robbing.

I wouldn't doubt it. The people in charge of the dead even today often have a much less devout attitude toward death and expensive rituals. They know that once somebody is dead, even if they're a Pharaoh, nobody's going to care for very long what happens to them or their valuables.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join