Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Pyramids at Giza were there BEFORE the Egyptians got there.

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 14 2006 @ 07:16 AM
link   
The Great Pyramid is unique, not only was it encased in limestone but:

1. Its the only pyramid to be built with concave sides, the curvature of which matches the radius of the earth.
2. Its the only pyramid to have chambers above ground.
3. Of all the pyramids only the Great Pyramid has "air shafts"
4. There is no writings or hieroglyphics in or on the Great Pyramid. (At least not in the way the other pyramids are decorated, Im taking the handful writings that were found with a grain of salt)
5. The 3 major pyramids are aligned with orions belt.
6. The Great Pyramid is the most accuratly aligned structure in existence.
7. The Great Pyramid is at the center of the land mass of the earth.

Clearly the Egyptians found this great site and settled there. They tried building other pyramids in the image of the Great Pyramid. This explains why mines are found in egypt. Well this pretty much expains EVERYTHING!Egyptologist ALWAYS want to proove the Egyptians built the Great Pyramid by showing that rocks were mined nearby.

Im sure this has been studied before, who else here shares these thoughts, and where can I do more research on this subject?




posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 07:55 AM
link   
Fantastic claims require fantastic evidence. When actual fantastic evidence does not exist, it is often 'created' to support said fantastic claims.

The list you gave is repeated on the web in many places in support of alternative pyramid theories. They have been discussed here and in other places, and most shown to be either partially presented/misrepresented facts, or just plain incorrect.

Starting with an easy one...

10. The great pyramid is NOT at the center of the earths land mass.

The earth is a sphere, not a flat plane, therefore the center of the earths land mass is somewhere near the center of the earth itself.

This is the diagram usually given in support of the claim...



This is NOT a 100% correct representation of the earths land masses... it is a projection. Try peeling an orange and laying the skin out flat. You won’t get a nice neat square, like a map. The ONLY way to represent the surface of a sphere on a FLAT surface is to distort some areas. Look at Greenland on the image above, it is nearly as wide as North America.

Here is some info on map projections, the one above looks like a Behrmann cylindrical projection, look at the distance between the equator and the 30' latitude line, then between the 60' and 90' lines. This is NOT an accurate depiction of the entire earth's land mass.

Furthermore, the ONLY reason lower Egypt appears near the hypothetical 'land mass center' on this map is that the projection is CENTERED on Egypt's meridian. Take another projection centered on any number of different latitude and longitude combinations and you will get a different 'land mass center' each time.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 08:34 AM
link   
On top of which, where's Antarctica? There is considerably more land to the south of Giza than there is north of it. Probably in the region of twice as much....



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Scolecite
6. The Great Pyramid is the most accuratly aligned structure in existence.

I guess they beat our technology to accuratly place small buildings like oil rigs or 50,000 ton underwater tunnel segments on an exact spot with millimeter precision.

Those egyptians had some badass GPS system if they could do it on micrometers.

[edit on 15-4-2006 by merka]



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Scolecite
The Great Pyramid is unique, not only was it encased in limestone but:

Other buildings were encased in limestone.


1. Its the only pyramid to be built with concave sides, the curvature of which matches the radius of the earth.

No. The Bent Pyramid is a more extreme example.

And the "curvature" does not "match the radius of the Earth" (do the math for yourself.)


2. Its the only pyramid to have chambers above ground.
3. Of all the pyramids only the Great Pyramid has "air shafts"

Not true.


4. There is no writings or hieroglyphics in or on the Great Pyramid. (At least not in the way the other pyramids are decorated, Im taking the handful writings that were found with a grain of salt)


Why? They match the evidence on the workers' buildings on the site.


5. The 3 major pyramids are aligned with orions belt.

No they aren't. They're a mirror image and they "fit" only if you monkey with stuff and ignore other stuff.


6. The Great Pyramid is the most accuratly aligned structure in existence.


Which makes the other pyramids that are aligned with it... what? Misaligned? Figments of the imagination? And aligned with what? To what degree of accuracy?


7. The Great Pyramid is at the center of the land mass of the earth.

Only if you really distort the map, ignore Antarctica, and tweak stuff.


Clearly the Egyptians found this great site and settled there. They tried building other pyramids in the image of the Great Pyramid.

But doesn't explain the other, older pyramids. And the cruder forms that come from still earlier. If they had a model, it's no great trick for people who can build the statues at Aswan and the temples and Luxor and other places to turn out a simple pyramid shape.


This explains why mines are found in egypt.

Mines are found all over the world. In fact, there are even ancient mines here in North American (resources mined by the American Indians.)

I'm not sure what you mean by "mines", either.


Well this pretty much expains EVERYTHING!Egyptologist ALWAYS want to proove the Egyptians built the Great Pyramid by showing that rocks were mined nearby.


Oh. QUARRIED. Well, they did come from nearby quarries. You can tell where a rock comes from by running chemical tests on it. Rocks from different areas have slightly different chemestries.


where can I do more research on this subject?


Start with the Wikipedia articles on pyramids and use their references.



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 01:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by Scolecite
The Great Pyramid is unique, not only was it encased in limestone but:

Other buildings were encased in limestone.


1. Its the only pyramid to be built with concave sides, the curvature of which matches the radius of the earth.

No. The Bent Pyramid is a more extreme example.

And the "curvature" does not "match the radius of the Earth" (do the math for yourself.)


2. Its the only pyramid to have chambers above ground.
3. Of all the pyramids only the Great Pyramid has "air shafts"

Not true.


4. There is no writings or hieroglyphics in or on the Great Pyramid. (At least not in the way the other pyramids are decorated, Im taking the handful writings that were found with a grain of salt)


Why? They match the evidence on the workers' buildings on the site.


5. The 3 major pyramids are aligned with orions belt.

No they aren't. They're a mirror image and they "fit" only if you monkey with stuff and ignore other stuff.


6. The Great Pyramid is the most accuratly aligned structure in existence.


Which makes the other pyramids that are aligned with it... what? Misaligned? Figments of the imagination? And aligned with what? To what degree of accuracy?


7. The Great Pyramid is at the center of the land mass of the earth.

Only if you really distort the map, ignore Antarctica, and tweak stuff.


Clearly the Egyptians found this great site and settled there. They tried building other pyramids in the image of the Great Pyramid.

But doesn't explain the other, older pyramids. And the cruder forms that come from still earlier. If they had a model, it's no great trick for people who can build the statues at Aswan and the temples and Luxor and other places to turn out a simple pyramid shape.


This explains why mines are found in egypt.

Mines are found all over the world. In fact, there are even ancient mines here in North American (resources mined by the American Indians.)

I'm not sure what you mean by "mines", either.


Well this pretty much expains EVERYTHING!Egyptologist ALWAYS want to proove the Egyptians built the Great Pyramid by showing that rocks were mined nearby.


Oh. QUARRIED. Well, they did come from nearby quarries. You can tell where a rock comes from by running chemical tests on it. Rocks from different areas have slightly different chemestries.


where can I do more research on this subject?


Start with the Wikipedia articles on pyramids and use their references.


Byrd do you think the Giza Pyramids pre-dates Egyptian civilization?

If the Egyptians did build something as complex as the Pyramids with exact (or near exact) standards...then why is the head on the sphinx too small for its body?
www.science-frontiers.com...



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 01:14 AM
link   
Here's a theory to sink your teeth into:


The father of the ancient Egyptians and the African race was known as Ham from the Hebrew legends. Ham could have been known as Chamu Chufu to the Egyptians. Ham was possibly an expert in the field of astronomy until the day of his death. I have reason to believe that the three pyramids of Egypt were built to his wishes, aligned with Orion's Belt, but not according to the "Belt" we see today. The three pyramids are markers aligned with Orion's Belt as they were positioned before the Great Deluge. The planet changed its axis while the world was over flowing with rain. The reason why the axis had to change was because the solar system lost one primary planet next door to Earth.



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 01:23 AM
link   
hey lostinspace, i would like to hear more of this theory of yours, you have piqued my interest!!



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 01:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by lostinspace

The planet changed its axis while the world was over flowing with rain. The reason why the axis had to change was because the solar system lost one primary planet next door to Earth.


This is the first time I heard of such a theory. You have any links to it? Are you referring to the asteroid belt? Of course that doesn't sound next door to me so feel free to U2U me or post a link. I'm curious. I suppose this is still on topic if you factor in the position of the 3 pyramids may have been aligned to the former position of Orion's belt thousands of years ago instead of more recently.

However I would have thought the stars in Orion's belt would be in the same relative position with very little difference no matter where it was viewed from within our solar system at any given time. Of course if you allow stars to move over thousands of years, the star positions would appear to change.

To clarify the above for anyone new, the stars are so far away from our solar system that it would be like seeing the moon at the same spot in the sky anywhere in the same city. If you talk to a friend on the other side of town, the moon will appear in roughly the same spot overhead at the same time. This is just my example comparing a city to our solar system when viewing distant objects.



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 01:50 AM
link   
Perhaps the pyramids aren't aligned with Orion's Belt...

But I've got a documentary sitting around somewhere about the KGB UFO files etc, Roger Moore hosted it.... I'm sure many of you are familiar with it, as it's been brought up on ATS before.

Anyway, in the documentary they showed the night-sky as it is now, over the three pyramids. Then, they shifted it around... arranged it so that it fit what they think the night-sky looked like, thousands upon thousands of years ago. And according to them, the pyramids WERE aligned with the belt, at one point in history.

Can anyone else confirm this, aside from using the documentary as evidence?



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 02:13 AM
link   
I've read parts of Graham Hancock's books, "Message of the Sphinx" and "Fingerprints of the Gods" to know there are theories out there that the three pyramids were aligned with Orion's Belt around 10,500 B.C. I thought nothing special about his theories on this subject until I read an old fantasy story written by a woman in the late 1800's. This author gave a detailed account of the events that transpired before the Flood. This is when I started thinking about the pyramids of Egypt being aligment markers after she wrote this from Ham's point of view right before the rains began:

"I have been engaged all night", said the astrologer, "in watching the heavens. Their appearance is extraordinary and alarming. I have carefully consulted the records of Seth, and find nothing similar. Never have the stars been in like position, and they were two drops of the clepsydra late in rising and setting. But most unnatural of all, is the disappearance of many stars and of the great comet, which four days since spread its vast wings across the sky. Its nowhere to be seen."


I got the Egyptian name of Ham , Chamu Chufu, from the book called "The Photo Drama of Creation".



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 02:19 AM
link   
The book you speak of that was written in the 1800's... what is that called and who was the author?



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 02:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by firebat
The book you speak of that was written in the 1800's... what is that called and who was the author?


The author is Anne Eliza Smith and the novel she wrote is titled Seola, published in 1878.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by orionthehunter

Originally posted by lostinspace

The planet changed its axis while the world was over flowing with rain. The reason why the axis had to change was because the solar system lost one primary planet next door to Earth.


This is the first time I heard of such a theory. You have any links to it? Are you referring to the asteroid belt? Of course that doesn't sound next door to me so feel free to U2U me or post a link. I'm curious.



I have no links, just a theory of my own and of a woman who has been dead since 1905.
I do mean to include the asteroid belt as an end result of a planetary disaster. I have reason to believe that Mars was once a moon of this lost planet and that there was a shuffling of planets and moons in order to satify the lost charge within the solar system.



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 02:58 AM
link   
The pyramids were built by the remnants of Atlantis civilization which died off and become the Egyptians. I'm not sure why that happened but that is what is believed. The pyramids are MUCH older than archeologists currently believe and the height of Egyptian culture could not have built them.

The fallen step pyramids were the lame attempts of real Egyptians to mimic the pyramids of the Atlantean descendents.



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 04:48 AM
link   
Hrmm.. Interesting topic. I shall keep my eyes on this, to see how it develops. I'd like to know though, how'd this author get the information that she had, and from where?

TheBorg

P.S. Oh, and j619pinoy. The reason the Sphinx's head seems smaller than the rest of it's body is due to the long-held belief that it was originally a lion's head, but the later finders (Egyptians?) of this monument desecrated it by turning it's head into that of a human.



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 07:16 AM
link   
What has always confused me is the fact that the Egyptians were so thorough in depicting everything they did regarding the way they dressed and their way of life by their engravings and pictograms on the various buildings and monuments scattered throughout Egypt but nowhere is there to be seen any evidence as to how the pyramids were built. I find this totally out of character as such fantastic achievements would have surely been depicted somewhere, which perhaps encourages the theory that they were already there.
I agree with the member who said that the theory regarding the sphynx is that it originally had a lions head comensurate in size to the body we see today and this was resculptured at a later date. It makes sense.
Graham Hancocks book and various TV Documentaries have indeed confirmed that the 'Orions Belt' theory is a hard one to discredit as the evidence is very conclusive.
The great argument of course is that if the Egyptians did build the pyramids (one of, if not THE, greatest constructive achievements of mankind) then why did they then go backwards in their technology as, by comparison, it would be like Henry Ford designing and manufacturing the T Model Ford and then abandoning it and going in for Donkey Breeding Farms instead. It simply doesn't make sense.
There will no doubt be more and more theories and questions regarding these magnificent monuments ove the years but so far nobody has come up with a theory as to HOW they were built (except for Gordon Pipes and his lever system which is a very powerful and solid explanation) or as to how they were 'faced' and to WHY they were built.
I too will follow this thread with great interest.



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by j619pinoyByrd do you think the Giza Pyramids pre-dates Egyptian civilization?

I'm sure it does NOT.

I'll answer the rest of your question in a second message, but let me address the first one here. I'll bet that your sources left you thinking that the Nile valley was this deserted Eden until about 5,000 years ago when a pack of people suddenly show up there.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

There's been people (and villages and so forth) in and around that area for more than 700,000 years. That means it's been settled since the time of the rise of homo sapiens from homo erectus and that there are traces of homo erectus and earlier human ancestors in the area.

There's a wealth of material that's not seen by people focusing solely on the pyramid argument... it includes stone circle astronomical observatories (crude ones by our standards, but you could use them to track the sunrise and sunset and some of the planets and the motion of the constellations through the sky.) It includes rock art carvings and drawings. It includes pottery (and wonderful jars shaped like birds and plants and people and animals) and includes slabs of carved stone (pallets) showing a high degree of skill that goes back to nearly 6,000 BC:
xoomer.virgilio.it...

There's no pyramids, though there are important gods and kings and so forth in this material. That's quite an oversight -- if the symbol was that important, then it would have been transmitted.

Consider, also, the other pyramids:
www.touregypt.net...

There's over a hundred of them, some can be dated because they were tombs, the earliest mention of pyramids and construction is during the time of Djoser (about 3000 BC) and these are not real pyramids but rather mastabas.

If they had the pyramid form and it was so important, then why didn't they just recreate it?

The "advanced engineering" bit doesn't hold water because they were moving and creating complex statues and temples (including the very difficult egineering feat of maneuvering a block of stone weighing several tons to become the roof of a temple.) There is nothing complicated about stacking stones or any other substance into a pyramid shape.

Try it for yourself. Go to the beach, make a pyramid of sand.

NOW... make a temple (with roof and walls and long hallways and columns) out of sand.

Which was harder?

You can do the same thing with building blocks, with pieces of wood, ice cubes, etc, etc. If you stop to question the statement, you will find out just how easy it is to build a pyramid compared with other things (like building the Roman viaducts.

So the "it was there for a long time and mystified the Egyptians" really doesn't hold sand. Or water. Try it for yourself and see.

Crystallinks (surprisingly) does a fairly good job at talking about pyramid construction and mentions the honest fact that the Great Pyramid is off by an inch and more in several areas:
www.crystalinks.com...



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by j619pinoy
If the Egyptians did build something as complex as the Pyramids with exact (or near exact) standards...then why is the head on the sphinx too small for its body?
www.science-frontiers.com...


Any number of reasons, including "the head was recarved" and "it was done in rather bad stone and bits of it fell off causing the head to need recarving. The texture of the layers of stone there is not consistant and sections of the Sphynx are more eroded than others because of this problem.



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by lostinspace
Here's a theory to sink your teeth into:

Okay, but you won't like my teeth. Can I suggest that you look at the links about the history of Egypt before you get much further in your thinking?


The father of the ancient Egyptians and the African race was known as Ham from the Hebrew legends. Ham could have been known as Chamu Chufu to the Egyptians.

Sadly for the Bible literalists, the African race is much older than the Caucasian race. And sadly for your timeline, Khufu was a 4th dynasty king who ruled in 2500-something BC:
www.touregypt.net...

We have royal records showing the kings back farther than that.

[quote[Ham was possibly an expert in the field of astronomy until the day of his death.
Not according to the Bible.


I have reason to believe that the three pyramids of Egypt were built to his wishes, aligned with Orion's Belt, but not according to the "Belt" we see today. The three pyramids are markers aligned with Orion's Belt as they were positioned before the Great Deluge.


There was no worldwide Deluge. The records (grain shipments, wine making, treaties, etc, etc) start around 5,000 BC and continue onward. There's no thousand year gap and an "Ohmygods! We got flooded out and EVERYONE died!" statement. Furthermore, the languge and the writing didn't suddenly change (as though all the people died and a new group came in.)

We have good astronomy software that calculates the position of the stars over time. And I'm afraid that Orion's belt was NEVER in the opposite configuarion (the one that would make it actually match the alignment of the pyramids.)


The planet changed its axis while the world was over flowing with rain. The reason why the axis had to change was because the solar system lost one primary planet next door to Earth.


Have you read some of the astronomy posts by CommanderKeenKid, who does alot of writing about it? The earth never flopped over in its orbit (the magnetic poles did, but that didn't change the Earth's orientation) and there wasn't a planet where the asteroid belt is (there's not enough material there to account for a planet... even one the size of the moon.)

Hang out on the science topic -- CKK and others who are into astronomy can tell you some interesting facts about the solar system!





new topics




 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join