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.
originally posted by: Marduk
a reply to: Tsurugi
Don't forget to also turn Orions belt upside down and that the constellations of the Zodiac originate from Mesopotamia and were completely unknown in Egypt until the much later Graeco-Roman era.
Oh and that it doesn't match at any time except, 10,000 bce isn't adding credibility, but taking it away. Since the Giza radiocarbon project conclusively proved that the pyramids were built approx. 2500bce, you'd have to imagine that the tribes who lived there before the Egyptians existed to notice the alignment, sat around for 8000 years before doing anything about something that must have been so important that the Egyptians themselves never mentioned it...
The alignment to that time does not necessarily mean the pyramids were constructed at that time.
The arc of the Ecliptic as seen from Giza, combined with precession, results in the standing up and laying down.
The ecliptic marks the path of the sun. It’s the projection of Earth’s orbit onto the sky. And it’s an essential part of any stargazer’s vocabulary.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Tsurugi
What "alignment", exactly?
The stars of Orion's belt form one of the most striking asterisms in the sky. I don't know if the pyramids were constructed as a (not very accurate) mirror of them or not but it wouldn't surprise me if they were. I just don't see any useful significance to it, aside from Hancock's broad assumptions.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Tsurugi
The arc of the Ecliptic as seen from Giza, combined with precession, results in the standing up and laying down.
False. Precession does not change the arc of the ecliptic because it does not change the path of the Earth around the Sun, which defines the ecliptic.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Tsurugi
Right, not a mirror. But it is "upside down."
You seem to think it would be helpful in providing a date for the construction of the pyramids, however.
As for significance? No clue. Who did it and why? No idea.
The alignment to that time does not necessarily mean the pyramids were constructed at that time. Anyone capable of constructing such an alignment would be able to point the alignment to any period they wanted, not just the one they were presently in…
There is also a time component. Roll the clock back to approx 10.5k BC, and the positions of the pyramids on the ground matches the positions of the belt stars in the sky while the nearby Nile matches the Milky Way.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Tsurugi
Then again, I will have to ask you to explain what you were getting at here (whether or not it was an accurate statement):
There is also a time component. Roll the clock back to approx 10.5k BC, and the positions of the pyramids on the ground matches the positions of the belt stars in the sky while the nearby Nile matches the Milky Way.
originally posted by: Tsurugi
originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Phage
I know that you know
I was just merely pointing it out for others members.
I remember seeing what orion would have looked like hundreds of thousands years ago but can't remember where. But it wasn't much of a difference from today.
Orion doesn't look different in terms of shape, but it does change orientation relative to the horizon over time--i.e., it "stands up" and "lies down", etc.
originally posted by: Tsurugi
]The alignment to that time does not necessarily mean the pyramids were constructed at that time. Anyone capable of constructing such an alignment would be able to point the alignment to any period they wanted, not just the one they were presently in.
originally posted by: IridiumFlareMadness
Archaeologists want to go postal over it because it would mean all those years in college were a waste of time.
originally posted by: seagull
These buildings, and I'll include European cathedrals in this, took lifetimes to build in some cases. A lifetime. The records are there to be read, in the case of cathedrals, and in found writings from the time of the Pharaohs.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Tsurugi
Ok. But that "time dimension" has nothing to do with the "alignment" of the stars of the belt, unless you can provide some indication that 10,500 years ago there was a better correlation with the positions of the stars of the belt than there is now.
originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
While it is more possible that the mainstream are correct, the fringe is still possible. Until proven...they are all theories.
originally posted by: Harte
Precession doesn't make any constellation stand up or lie down.
Orion would appear the same as today, only slightly lower in the sky 10,000 years ago. Approximately one degree lower, as precession moves everything North and then South in the sky by about 30 arc minutes every 4100 years. It doesn't turn anything sideways.
originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck
Here's an interesting article and academic review of that stuff that makes archaeologists want to go postal (or if you're in Ottawa, its 'go OC Transpo'...but I digress). Archaeologists don't live in a vacuum - they are fully aware of what popular culture likes to represent as alternatives to accepted truths of the day. Yes, scientific investigation is driven by challenging the status quo, but people, there's a lot of poop our there masquerading as revelation. Here's a revealing look at archaeology's take on it
There’s a popular meme that my archaeology friends have been circulating on social media lately: a picture of Giorgio Tsoukalos, a producer of the popular History Channel show Ancient Aliens, overlaid with the caption “I’m notsaying it was aliens, but it was aliens.”What Archaeologists Really Think About Ancient Aliens, Lost Colonies, And Fingerprints Of The Gods
Give it a read, then sashay over to the reviews. Gotta love a piece that reads:
Do me a favor. Go over to a window and look outside. I’ll wait. Okay, are you looking? See anything extraordinary? Yup, it is pigs flying. So many pigs. That should explain how a Graham Hancock book is being reviewed in American Antiquity. And it is about time. Since its publication in 1995, the book is estimated to have sold more than three million copies and has been published in 27 languages. As archaeologists, we ignore such a phenomenon at our peril.
TALKING TO THE GUY ON THE AIRPLANE