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.

 

pre pyramid plateau

page: 6
15
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 19 2016 @ 01:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: username74
a reply to: Byrd


"...actually THREE things: He's convinced of an ancient global civilization (accepting the alternative history claims of evidence) and looking for proof of it. His conclusion on Yonaguni (a natural formation modified by humans) is equally badly done."
oh hi byrd, back are we,
HES not convinced of anything, least of all your rhetoric.
i ll adress your concerns promptly

Don't trouble yourself.

I never actually left, but I do recognize when someone's firmly convinced of their own ideas and is using a Gish Gallop deflection technique (usually unaware that they're doing it.) At some point in this type of discourse I decide it's not worth discussing because there's no discussion. I can, of course, trot out all my $5 words and bring up the mathematics and chemistry and physics --all of which I've actually taught however an in-depth discussion of these aren't that interesting to many readers and make me look like some sort of pedantic savant). In a Gish Gallop type thread it's not worth the effort.

If you recall, this started out because you wanted to insist that the GP interior design was actually a hydraulic pump and didn't want to actually study the culture and its engineering abilities or take a hard look at the math and physics behind what makes a workable hydraulic pump.

I realize this is new to you and you're excited and interested but most of the topics you've touched on have been discussed here in great depth (look at the material in the pinned posts at the top of the forum. Some links are out of date but you can get an idea of just how deep and detailed the discussions went.)




posted on Jun, 19 2016 @ 01:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: Harte
Schoch's date for the sphinx is based entirely on two things - subsurface (air contact) weathering of the bedrock and the assumption that the rear of the sphinx was carved during Khafre's reign.


...actually THREE things: He's convinced of an ancient global civilization (accepting the alternative history claims of evidence) and looking for proof of it.


Fabricating and misinterpreting the evidence. He's not convinced, he's just making money from the gullible like all the other charlatans

I am not recommending this book, its abysmal trash, but its what he does now, rather than real science.



originally posted by: username74
a reply to: Marduk
hmm
not looking to go that far down the rabbit hole marduk, is there something you would like to say marduk or just turning the broth?

Slow work day, not many new souls being admitted down here


True, that... however I did look up his current CV and he IS teaching at a community college and is well liked by his students. I don't see any papers or presentations at academic conferences in recent history, though.



posted on Jun, 19 2016 @ 01:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd

(sigh) i wish i knew me as well as you think you do



posted on Jun, 19 2016 @ 02:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: username74
a reply to: Byrd

(sigh) i wish i knew me as well as you think you do


I don't think I know you at all, actually.



posted on Jun, 19 2016 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd
and now i ve googled gish gallop, i hope you never will
bull# comes in many flavours



posted on Jun, 19 2016 @ 04:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: username74
a reply to: Harte
harte, thats just nihlistic!

Such speculation is itself utterly useless and, even if somehow proven, completely meaningless since any previous carving has been removed by the Egyptians.

There is absolutely nothing such a thing could tell us that we don't already know.

Harte



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 05:34 AM
link   
a reply to: username74
since the supported sources have been ignored yet again, here they are.
since you academic s seem to be caught in terrotoial disputes with the more solid sciences, and caught up in a whirl of personality cult you cant stop fixating on (such as schoch and hancock).
lets see how we go.

Colin Reader is an English geologist with an interest in Ancient Egypt and is also secretary of The Manchester Ancient Egypt Society.

His studies of the Sphinx have contributed to the controversial debate regarding a possible older dating of the monument. He suggested on the basis of weathering evidence that the Sphinx is older than its commonly accepted 4th dynastic date and instead it and two other buildings on the Giza Plaeau date to the early dynastic or late predynastic period.

Publications include A geomorphological study of the Giza necropolis with implications for the development of the site (Archaeometry 43: 1 (2001) pp149–165) (requested)

www.academia.edu...

link to google books, riddle of the sphinx
[url=http://]https://books.google.fr/books?id=W8VACwAAQBAJ&pg=PT102&lpg=PT102&dq=riddle+of+the+sphinx+journal+coxill&source=bl&ots=thNhZh2ciF&sig=Z0SW ZvgEAiYgewp03aU3g2PbGhs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj-gYqas7bNAhUpCsAKHZleACAQ6AEIKjAD#v=onepage&q=riddle%20of%20the%20sphinx%20journal%20coxill&f=false[/ur l]

edit on 20-6-2016 by username74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: username74
a reply to: username74
since the supported sources have been ignored yet again, here they are.
since you academic s seem to be caught in terrotoial disputes with the more solid sciences, and caught up in a whirl of personality cult you cant stop fixating on (such as schoch and hancock).
lets see how we go.

Colin Reader is an English geologist with an interest in Ancient Egypt and is also secretary of The Manchester Ancient Egypt Society.

His studies of the Sphinx have contributed to the controversial debate regarding a possible older dating of the monument. He suggested on the basis of weathering evidence that the Sphinx is older than its commonly accepted 4th dynastic date and instead it and two other buildings on the Giza Plaeau date to the early dynastic or late predynastic period.

Publications include A geomorphological study of the Giza necropolis with implications for the development of the site (Archaeometry 43: 1 (2001) pp149–165) (requested)

www.academia.edu...

link to google books, riddle of the sphinx
[url=http://]https://books.google.fr/books?id=W8VACwAAQBAJ&pg=PT102&lpg=PT102&dq=riddle+of+the+sphinx+journal+coxill&source=bl&ots=thNhZh2ciF&sig=Z0SW ZvgEAiYgewp03aU3g2PbGhs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj-gYqas7bNAhUpCsAKHZleACAQ6AEIKjAD#v=onepage&q=riddle%20of%20the%20sphinx%20journal%20coxill&f=false[/ur l]

I don't think anyone interested in the sphinx has ignored Reader here.
Personally, I read his hypothesis on this a decade ago.

Harte



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 06:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Harte

"I don't think anyone interested in the sphinx has ignored Reader here."

thats not the impression i was getting.
so its refuted?
coxill?



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 03:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: username74
a reply to: Harte

"I don't think anyone interested in the sphinx has ignored Reader here."

thats not the impression i was getting.
so its refuted?
coxill?


I don't know.
Reader's analysis leads to a sphinx only a few hundred years older. Not groundbreaking or outrageous enough for me to bother finding any direct counterarguments. Such things take time, even if the claim is outrageous, and Reader's is not, IMO.
The outrageous ones are the only ones that fire me up enough to get to looking.

I do know that Lehner's work with the Giza Mapping Project has some good arguments for the 4th Dynasty date though.

Harte



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 03:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Harte

ah, thank you harte, yes i have been reading lerners giza mapping. with the amount of action that cats seen since ww2 we are probably out of evidence one way or another. and i am not trying to push it back to the stone age either. just thought it wasnt garnering a solid timeline.
Reader's analysis leads to a sphinx only a few hundred years older. i think also , regarding your take on the organic evolution we will never know and it makes a lot more sense to date it close to the 4th dynasty and build on that, if neccesary.
edit on 20-6-2016 by username74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 03:21 PM
link   
Yeah, well, I brought up Lehner for the people that think the entire timeline is based solely on the idea that the face matches Khafre.

Lerner's points involve the architecture of the sphinx temple, built with stone shown to have been taken from the sphinx enclosure. Among other things.
It's more complicated than that, but I'm not up to going over it with a fine-toothed comb.

Harte



posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 12:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Harte

yeah , probably that makes two of us, refinement, refinement.



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 12:54 PM
link   
so not had the time for this lately, but heres something, the other way round to my supposition, interesting , a hydraulic engineers perspective of the sous chamberwww.youtube.com...=516.990812



posted on Jul, 30 2016 @ 05:17 PM
link   
a reply to: username74

S&F



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: username74

oooh,look what i've found!
i have no idea about this website, so earthmilk, yeah , i know, sounds nasty, but a photo is a photo, enjoy
earthmilkancientenergy.com...



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 06:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: username74
a reply to: username74

oooh,look what i've found!
i have no idea about this website, so earthmilk, yeah , i know, sounds nasty, but a photo is a photo, enjoy
earthmilkancientenergy.com...


(cue hysterical laughter from my side of the screen)

Those are the tombs of the nobles and elites.
See map with legend at this link

Here's some of the reports on them (Boston Museum)

Some of the tombs have curses on the lintels such as "let he who disturbs my tomb be attacked by lions, hippos, snakes, and scorpions."

There are literally hundreds of web pages on these tombs.

Research and excavation reports on these areas go backto 1848, and reports and so forth are available online and offline


edit on 5-8-2016 by Byrd because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd
Looks to me like the "south-west view from Cheops pyramid" is a picture of the quarry.

Am I wrong?

Harte



posted on Aug, 5 2016 @ 09:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Harte
a reply to: Byrd
Looks to me like the "south-west view from Cheops pyramid" is a picture of the quarry.

Am I wrong?

Harte



I think the picture's mislabeled. The 'necks' of the blocks in the quarry aren't that tall. Notice that the shadows aren't consistent with the directions claimed in those photos. The view appears to be of the northwest cemetery (Southwest of Khufu is the second of the three great pyramids, that of Khafre.)



posted on Aug, 6 2016 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Byrd

"(cue hysterical laughter from my side of the screen)"
well ok, if you must, but it should be noted that those passages are not for people, so can we make the massive leap that they may be for liquid?
as for the picture, i would say it is looking due west from the most northerly pyramid, whatever that implies?
thanks for the links tho



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join