It’s Official: Tut’s Tomb Has No Hidden Chambers

NatGeo sponsored this project,

The third radar scan of the pharaoh's burial site conclusively shows that no additional mysteries lurk immediately behind its walls.



By Kristin Romey
PUBLISHED MAY 6, 2018

Recent radar scans of Tutankhamun's tomb conclusively prove that there are no additional chambers or passages behind the walls of the famed pharaoh's burial chamber in the Valley of the Kings, Egyptian officials announced today.

A statement was released today on behalf of Mostafa Waziri, Secretary General of the Supreme Council of Antiquities, during the fourth annual International Tutankhamun GEM Conference, held at the Grand Egyptian Museum (GEM) in Giza.

The announcement brings to a disappointing end an investigation that began three years ago, when Egyptologist and National Geographic grantee Nicholas Reeves theorized that the tomb of legendary 18th-Dynasty queen Nefertiti may be hidden behind the walls of Tut's 3,300-year-old tomb.

Two previous tests of Reeves' theory, using ground-penetrating radar (GPR) to search for hidden chambers or passages, were inconclusive.

NatGeo article

The first scan suggested that there was a possible cavity, the second one showed no cavity. This created a real scholarly row and so a tie-breaking scan was ordered. The results say "no other rooms."

This is not particularly surprising. Nefertiti was the enemy of the priests of Amun. There is no way the priests would have let her be buried in a valley dedicated to the god, Amun (nor would she have wanted to be buried there.)

The hunt for her tomb will go on, though. It will be quite a feather in someone's cap to find where she's really buried.

Not really surprising, but it is a little disappointing. Oh well.

There is still that labyrinth that is supposed to be underneath or in front of the feet of the sphinx.

a reply to: stormcell

And the giant pool of mercury that powers the Stargate for the Reptilians!

a reply to: Byrd

Did Hawass have anything to do with this scan. I call everything into question if that goober is involved.

Just because its official doesnt mean its true.

I trust the Egyptian antiquities board about as much as I trust politicians, you can put Nat Geo in that group as well

a reply to: Byrd

You think we wouldn't notice the advertisement you snuck in there?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Byrd

You think we wouldn't notice the advertisement you snuck in there?

Eeek! Edited out!

originally posted by: olaru12
a reply to: Byrd

Did Hawass have anything to do with this scan. I call everything into question if that goober is involved.

Nope. He thought it was a waste of time, but he had nothing to do with it. The Director of Antiquities who started the whole scanning project was one of his successors - a businessman, actually (not an Egyptologist) who really wanted to increase tourism to Egypt. He was responsible for a number of over-the-top announcements.

The man who replaced him as Director of Antiquities is a real Egyptologist, who knows a lot about conservation of antiquities and who has some credible research.

Hawass is a has-been, reduced now to doing the occasional gig on TV and doing guest spots for tour groups.

a reply to: Byrd
My ex just got back from one of those tours.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Byrd
My ex just got back from one of those tours.

He was a speaker on the tour that I took as well.

If I remember correctly, they were pretty sure that something was behind the wall. Many tests were done and they were debating whether to open it up.
I find it highly strange that now suddenly nothing is there. So all the instruments were wrong then?

Maybe the thought of destroying an Ancient tomb wasn't something they were willing to risk.

I find this annoucement very odd.

a reply to: Byrd

Not too surprising. Kinda disappointing though...

a reply to: Byrd

The first scan suggested that there was a possible cavity, the second one showed no cavity.

you see...I dont get that. It appears as if...such scans are subject to interpretation ? Shouldnt such results be clear cut ? not ambiguous at all ?

originally posted by: IkNOwSTuff
Just because its official doesnt mean its true.

I trust the Egyptian antiquities board about as much as I trust politicians, you can put Nat Geo in that group as well

I was thinking the same thing

Remember when (yes he is gone but not the attitude) hawass pronounced that there was no secret chamber in the sphinx.

then an american (I think may be wrong, if ANYONE knows please say) who did a search and "SURPRISE" found one.
Then that blowhard said it was up to him to check...well golly he claimed nothing was found and when pressed allowed a tv show to follow him into ONE CHAMBER (remember he "expertly stated" didn't exist) BRIEFLY then claimed "nothing here" and stopped further independent investigation.

then claimed there was no "hall of secrets" under and/or under area of sphinx.

Well that same researcher did ground penetrating radar and "big surprise" found an area that indicates underground complex.

That same blowhard who again claimed that something "cant be there" was PROVEN WRONG.
Also AGAIN REFUSED to allow anyone to investigate...Said he and his department would handle the investigation...
but in this case DIDNT DO A DAMN THING.

There is another thread on how a cave system (if I remember right) was found that the same department put a gate on, armed guards and stated they would investigate it themselves.

So color be plaid that I DONT BELIEVE A DAMN THING THAT THE "DEPT OF ANTIQUITY" SAYS on subjects like this..

fool me once , shame on you
fool me twice, shame on me
try the same line on me third time....YOUR FULL OF FECES

Scrounger

Sensing what lies behind stone is a seriously difficult task. There are a few novel approaches, using isotopes or cosmic rays, but it's not like you can just x ray it. "Ground penetrating radar" is a joke. Radar cannot really penetrate stone in any meaningful sense.

Can't just send a radio or sonar signal in there and let it bounce back, because you don't even know what it is bouncing back off of. If your signal is able to pass through one substance, it may then go on to pass through another also, or get reflected, or not come back at all. Any result you get from that process is just a guess.

The only "final word" on the matter would be if they actually dig.

a reply to: Byrd

thank you Byrd for bringing another excellent thread to ats. you always have something interesting to post and I've enjoyed following your threads. I found this one interesting and even used it to start up a great conversation with my mom who visited Egypt in the early 70s and got to see many of the places. she retold a lot of wonderful adventures of her times there seeing the ruins. thank you again for being the catalyst

....and not least that NatGeo is now owned by Rupert Murdoch.....

Rainbows
Jane