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.

 

Pyramids at Giza were there BEFORE the Egyptians got there.

page: 13
3
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 05:56 AM
link   
---------Still here? Don't you have anything better to do?---------------

Besides, the stone cutters could be building up a supply to ship out while other workers at the pyramid site were working at leveling & smoothing the bedrock foundation.


Originally posted by zorgon
Can you show me a picture that there are no UFO's? Can you show me that God does not exist? No of course not, al you have is testimony of "expert" and accepted science yet how many times in history has that been knocked down?

According to your logic, a picture that disproves UFO's would be a blank picture. Same with proof that God doesn't exist. If you feel the need to ignore real evidence, then that's your problem. Personally, I merely amuse myself for a moment (only a moment, mind you) wondering how long before such a close-minded person wins a Dawin Award.


Originally posted by OuterSpaceMaster
So of you read some material and think you know the truth of the matter, but you really don't. Just because an Egyptologist says soemthing is true doesn't mean that it is. Just because these 'experts' are the only show in town doesn't make them right.

What I've seen here is that you & few others have only postulated from wild, "new age" sources or constantly refer to the Bible, whereas myself Hearte, Byrd a others have quoted even more numerous sources for every one of your arguments.
None of the "new age" or biblical sources offer a single scrap of real, logical evidence or any scholarly approach to find any other sources of info for the truth behind the matter. The thread's been highjacked away from "how old are the pyramids" into "how were they built".

Still, the burden of proof has not held up to the scientific & expert evidence that's been presented against the title of this thread. IMHO, this thread was high-jacked by illogical & close-minded people who refuse to "deny ignorance". If you still want to discuss "New Age" or Bible-based theories, ATS does have other forums that would be more to your liking; most of them would be found at Below Top Secret.

Everything else Byrd has researched & I haven't commented or added to, is correct...Others have posted good research & I haven't commented on those either, but give kudos for their work (especially Labtop, who really went that extra mile). Those who have been wrong, but already corrected, I won't bore you with more correction. To the good researchers here; I agree, as to the best of my own knowledge (& personal library about Egypt
)

---------All done. Feel free to collapse at your convenience; I sure will----------




posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 06:25 AM
link   


According to your logic, a picture that disproves UFO's would be a blank picture.


That's assuming quite a bit. Perhaps exaggeration isn't in order here.



posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 12:43 PM
link   
i think U.F.O.s exist. thats not in question
www.geocities.com...
its the mother ships from alpha centauri with the little grey aliens that I'm sceptical about
and as you know Beth
theres no credible evidence that they ever visitied us in the past
unless you've found a buried star destroyer lately
til then.........




posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Marduk
i think U.F.O.s exist. thats not in question
www.geocities.com...
its the mother ships from alpha centauri with the little grey aliens that I'm sceptical about
and as you know Beth
theres no credible evidence that they ever visitied us in the past
unless you've found a buried star destroyer lately
til then.........



Artifacts don't count? Cave paintings don't count? Hundreds, perhaps thousands of ancient texts talking of these beings coming down from the sky, don't count? What, only modern day people tell the truth?



posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 03:44 PM
link   
show me any ancient text that says specifically aliens came down from the sky ?
show me any ancient art that shows specifically an alien space ship ?
show me any cave art that shows specifically an alien space ship ?


undo you are undone again




posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo



According to your logic, a picture that disproves UFO's would be a blank picture.


That's assuming quite a bit. Perhaps exaggeration isn't in order here.


Undo,

Hold on a minute. MidnightDestroyer is absolutely correct. Here's the silly statement he was responding to:

Can you show me a picture that there are no UFO's?


What sort of "picture" can show "that there are no ufos..."?

The entire premise of this absurd question is itself completely beneath comment but, of course, I couldn't help myself!

Harte



posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Marduk
show me any ancient text that says specifically aliens came down from the sky ?

How about "The Spaceships of Ezekiel"? Authored by an Aeronautics Engineer from NASA who studied Ezekiel's writings with a mind to debunk them & found out he couldn't? Of course, Ezekiel wrote his texts with a "religious spin" on them & originally thought that they were gods or angels (in his later writings, he seems to be "cooling down" from his initial awe from the experience & seemed more reluctant to think of them as "divine"), but his descriptions of their aircrafts fit in so well with what the author knew of aerodymics.
I suggest you pick up a copy...I find that book to be much better written than any of von Dankien's "work" (I use that term loosely).

It doesn't take much of a "next step" in logic to figure that most such artworks & writings that you ask about are quite likely to be expressed in religious terms anyway. If you came from a background firmly rooted in religion & had no knowledge of technology, what would you think, hmmmmm?



posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 09:15 PM
link   


1 Now it came to pass in the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, in the fifth day of the month, as I was among the captives by the river Chebar that the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God. 2 In the fifth day of the month, which was the fifth year of king Jehoiachin's captivity, 3 the word of the LORD came expressly unto Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi, in the land of the Chaldeans by the river Chebar; and the hand of the LORD was there upon him. 4 And I looked, and, behold, a stormy wind came out of the north, a great cloud, with a fire flashing up, so that a brightness was round about it; and out of the midst thereof as the colour of electrum, out of the midst of the fire. 5 And out of the midst thereof came the likeness of four living creatures. And this was their appearance: they had the likeness of a man. 6 And every one had four faces, and every one of them had four wings. 7 And their feet were straight feet; and the sole of their feet was like the sole of a calf's foot; and they sparkled like the colour of burnished brass. 8 And they had the hands of a man under their wings on their four sides; and as for the faces and wings of them four, 9 their wings were joined one to another; they turned not when they went; they went every one straight forward. 10 As for the likeness of their faces, they had the face of a man; and they four had the face of a lion on the right side; and they four had the face of an ox on the left side; they four had also the face of an eagle. 11 Thus were their faces; and their wings were stretched upward; two wings of every one were joined one to another, and two covered their bodies. 12 And they went every one straight forward; whither the spirit was to go, they went; they turned not when they went. 13 As for the likeness of the living creatures, their appearance was like coals of fire, burning like the appearance of torches; it flashed up and down among the living creatures; and there was brightness to the fire, and out of the fire went forth lightning. 14 And the living creatures ran and returned as the appearance of a flash of lightning.

you mean this nonsense
its a description of the egyptian Zodiac which originated in Chaldea (common knowledge)

which was commonly depicted as a wheel within a wheel

you'll find all the characters in Ezekiels narrative on the ceiling at Dendera

I thought everyone knew that
oh wait hang on a minute
you've been influenced by Von Daniken seek medical help immediately
Josef F. Blumrich who wrote it was heavily influenced by Von Daniken before anyone realised he was a nutter and that book is the result. Von Daniken originally made that particular claim
if you actually think about it rationally how much sense does an interplanetary helicopter actually make

gawd blimey
next you'll be telling me the egyptians had light bulbs and the horse of troy was an armoured personell carrier (oops no sorry thats Sitchin)


you don't really want to stand up and be counted as a danikenite do you MDS
retract now while you still have your reputation intact
and anyway
where does it say Aliens came down from the sky that text ?


show me any ancient text that says specifically aliens came down from the sky

this was the actual request remember ?



posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Excellent demonstration of

OWNED!!



posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 10:11 PM
link   
As far as I know, the ancient zodiac didn't flash across the sky, from one horizon to the other, as fast as a bolt of lightning. It couldn't lower to the viewer, and raise back up again. This is a thread about pyramids, and I have alot of documentation to prove my point that has only marginal connection to this particular pyramid (the GP). So if you'd like to continue this discussion in a thread specificially designed for the subject, that'd be fantastic! Create one, give it an appropriate name, and give the linkage here, if you'd be so kind.

[edit on 2-9-2006 by undo]



posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 10:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by donk_316
Excellent demonstration of

OWNED!!


An excellent demonstration of not actually reading the whole thing - a sort of selective amnesia. Kinda like the idea that the ancient Abzu was an underground water source, when there are many other descriptions for it besides that particular one, that are all relevant to understanding what it was. Selective amnesia, we all have it to one degree or another, but let's at least try to be so out of personal understanding of the subject matter and not out of what someone else told us to believe. In short, be and think for yourself, be original, you'll enjoy it, and it's probably going to be alot closer to the truth than what you're told to believe.



posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Marduk
which was commonly depicted as a wheel within a wheel

you'll find all the characters in Ezekiels narrative on the ceiling at Dendera

I thought everyone knew that

Nope...The author of the book fully describes the "wheel-in-a-wheel" & it's got nothing to do with the zodiac. Since it's a source from an actual book, I can't provide any links or engineering sketches. Looks like you'll actually have to visit a library or a bookstore...

...What's that you say? What's a book? An archaic form of writing that involves paper & ink. It's a lot more prevalent than finding weblinks...Once it's printed, the Government can't change it any d_mn time they feel like it!



Originally posted by Marduk
oh wait hang on a minute
you've been influenced by Von Daniken seek medical help immediately


Originally posted by Marduk
you don't really want to stand up and be counted as a danikenite do you MDS
retract now while you still have your reputation intact

I never said that I was influenced by von Daniken...I only said that I've read him. I just don't like to discount anything that may present legitimate evidence. Once I read von Daniken is when I discount his outlandish theories. You're the only one to imply that von Daniken had any influence on me whatsoever (other than to discount his "work"). And if you actually read the "Spaceships" book I mentioned, the author discounts von Daniken too.


I'm tired of entertaining only one net-troll here. Come up with something plausable before I reply to you anymore. From her on out, I'm only going to reply to posts that actually stick with the topic.

[edit on 2-9-2006 by MidnightDStroyer]



posted on Sep, 3 2006 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo
This is a thread about pyramids, and I have alot of documentation to prove my point that has only marginal connection to this particular pyramid (the GP).


Undo,
I can't see exactly what "point" it is that you refer to here.

I haven't seen any such documentation in this thread from you.
When will it be forthcoming?

Regarding the subject of the thread, the original post had been refute by page 3 or 4. Should the thread be closed? Others here have brought up a wide range of non-pyramid subjects, yourself included, with your parroting of Hancock et al. regarding the supposed antiquity of the Osireion.

So what?

Harte



posted on Sep, 3 2006 @ 11:53 AM
link   


What's that you say? What's a book

actually if you check i think you'll find its the Bible
are you saying that Ezekiel met aliens and it was allowed to stay in
thats a bit of an oversight on the writers part don't you think
creatures not created by YHWH whatever next

the rest of your post was so much baloney
you seem to think that a description that matches the Zodiac which originated in the same place that the account was written is not as plausible as aliens because Von Daniken said thats what it was first and also at the same time you claim that he had no influence over your belief

some people just don't have a clue do they




posted on Sep, 3 2006 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by undo
This is a thread about pyramids, and I have alot of documentation to prove my point that has only marginal connection to this particular pyramid (the GP).


Undo,
I can't see exactly what "point" it is that you refer to here.

I haven't seen any such documentation in this thread from you.
When will it be forthcoming?

Regarding the subject of the thread, the original post had been refute by page 3 or 4. Should the thread be closed? Others here have brought up a wide range of non-pyramid subjects, yourself included, with your parroting of Hancock et al. regarding the supposed antiquity of the Osireion.

So what?

Harte


Actually, the information on the age of the Osirieon is from this site:
www.phouka.com... Apparently these people toured Egypt and went to Abydos and saw the Osirieon. First hand. It really is undecorated, with the exception of Seti I's glyph in the corner. There's also several unanswered questions, that truly can only be answered by assigning it a much earlier construction than Seti I's temple, such as the size of the stones used, the type of stone used, and the layout. There's several other reasons as well. You're a victim of the political correctness era, where archaeological facts were ignored in order to give the third world countries a sense of personal power and history, a heritage they could be proud of - anything that attempts to detract from that, is poo-poo'ed as incorrect, no matter how much evidence there may be to the contrary.



posted on Sep, 3 2006 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo

Originally posted by Harte
Undo,
I can't see exactly what "point" it is that you refer to here.

I haven't seen any such documentation in this thread from you.
When will it be forthcoming?

Harte


Actually, the information on the age of the Osirieon is from this site:
www.phouka.com... Apparently these people toured Egypt and went to Abydos and saw the Osirieon. First hand. It really is undecorated, with the exception of Seti I's glyph in the corner.


Is the Osireion info the "point" you claim to have documentation for?

Nice pics, but not exactly supporting anything about the controversial dates for the Osireion that the fringers like to give.

And there is more than one glyph to support it's attribution to Seti I:

Strabo visited the Osireion in the first century B.C. He wrote:

Above this city [Ptolemaïs] lies Abydus, where is the Memnonium, a royal building, which is a remarkable structure built of solid stone, and of the same workmanship as that which I ascribed to the Labyrinth, though not multiplex; and also a fountain which lies at a great depth, so that one descends to it down vaulted galleries made of monoliths of surprising size and workmanship. [Geography, 17.1.42]

Strabo identified the builder as Ismandes, or Mandes (Amenemhet III), under whom the Labyrinth was constructed. Naville, who excavated the site in 1913-14, saw similarities between Khafre's Valley Temple at Giza and the Osireion, and concluded that they were of the same Old Kingdom era. Both are stark and megalithic, and the style of the Osireion is noticeably different than that of the Temple of Seti I. It is also situated some fifty feet lower and thus generally flooded with water.

In time, more clues were discovered. Frankfort found the cartouche of Seti I in a granite dovetail joint. Another tenon bearing the king's cartouche was exposed when part of the sandstone wall blocks broke away (blocks that were once clad in granite), indicating its presence in the original construction. There are astronomical scenes, also made by Seti, on the ceiling of the northern transverse chamber. Other decorations were made by the king's grandson, Merenptah. Sandstone was used in the original construction (for central court wall-cladding and for the base of the island), a material used mainly beginning in the 11th Dynasty.
(My emphasis.) Source - The Excellent Catchpenny's Mysteries of Ancient Egypt site

All of the above can of course be attributed to Seti coming in behind some other Pharoah and making a few changes, except for the cartouche found inside a dovetail joint tenon when part of a wall gave way. That is, I doubt Seti I's workers removed a tenon from a dovetail joint to replace it with one carved with Seti's cartouche. Much easier to just carve the cartouche on the outside of the joint.


Originally posted by undoThere's also several unanswered questions, that truly can only be answered by assigning it a much earlier construction than Seti I's temple, such as the size of the stones used, the type of stone used, and the layout. There's several other reasons as well.

"...only be answered.."? I don't think so.
The Osireion is constructed of sandstone, faced with granite. The size of the stones is indeed much larger, but hey, it was supposed to be Osiris' tomb, remember? (one of many such "Tombs of Osiris" in Egypt.) The layout itself differs little from any other temple from the period:


Some authors pay particular attention to the layout of the Temple of Seti II. In The Traveler's Key to Ancient Egypt, John Anthony West (EDIT - This is no doubt the "A. West" mentioned at the site you linked - Harte) wrote, "The curious and unique L shape of the main temple could well be explained as a result of initial groundwork in Seti's time uncovering the hitherto buried older temple, necessitating a change of plan." (p. 391) The problem with this scenario is that the location of the Osireion is fully integrated into the plan of the temple complex as a whole (see plan below). The axis of the Osireion is north-northeast, matching exactly the axis of the temple complex. Such uniformity could hardly be accidental. It becomes clear, then, that the site is comprised of a mortuary temple in front of the tomb (or in this case, cenotaph, dedicated to Osiris) in the classical arrangement.
same source
Here's the "plan below" referred to above:




Originally posted by undoYou're a victim of the political correctness era, where archaeological facts were ignored in order to give the third world countries a sense of personal power and history, a heritage they could be proud of - anything that attempts to detract from that, is poo-poo'ed as incorrect, no matter how much evidence there may be to the contrary.


Please, let me assure you, I'm not a victim of anything. Not any more. I once was bamboozled by the pseudoarchaeologists. In my fervor to find out more, I actually found out I had been had. Hadn't set out to arrive at that end, it's just where the evidence led me.

Also, what you are saying about "third world countries" seems pretty elitist to me. There are many, many monuments in Egypt whose provenance is absolutely not in question. There is no need for Egypt to make any unsubstantiated claims on the Osireion to feed their pride. I'd certainly be happy to hear of any of these so called "archaeological facts" that have been "ignored" out of some namby-pamby sensitivity toward some nationalistic self image. The dating of the Osireion was arrived at in 1930, after all. Hardly an era known for it's "political correctness," and certainly not an era where anyone but Egyptians cared about Egypt.

Harte



posted on Sep, 3 2006 @ 11:59 PM
link   
The problem is, the Osirieon doesn't have a roof nor sandstone walls. What they are doing is attributing work in the tunnel that connected the Osirieon to Seti I's temple, to be part of the Osirieon. But it isn't, wasn't, never was.

In addition, the pharaohs before Seti I were also looking for the burial chamber of Osiris in Abydos. They knew it was there, but couldn't find it. The clues were on the Shabaka Stone, which was purported to have been copied from information that pre-dated the Pyramid texts. The stone describes Osiris burial chamber at Abydos, as being in the north of the land to which he came -- which was Abydos (Egyptian Abdju pronounced "Abzu") - et.al, the Osirieon was a copy of the sumerian Enki's subterranean "Abzu" chamber and had been built in the North of Abydos (Abydos is the greek word for egyptian Abdju, which is pronounced "Abzu", the "dj" having the "Z" sound, like Djoser is pronounced "Zoser").



I'd certainly be happy to hear of any of these so called "archaeological facts" that have been "ignored" out of some namby-pamby sensitivity toward some nationalistic self image.


Naqada. The Falcon Tribe was from Shinar (mesopotamia), and they were the predynastic progenitors of the whole Osiris movement in the first place.



[edit on 4-9-2006 by undo]



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 12:34 AM
link   
Getting back to the Pyramids, one documentary mentioned a stone weighing 70 tons, & being several stories up. Ropes & logs? Umm, seems a stretch.

& the water testing of the Sphinx wasn't done by newagers. It's obviously much older than current science thinks. Which is symptomatic of wanting to "be right"-osis, vs objectivity. There is much we don't know yet, & nationalism does play a part in the Egyptian view about the Pyramids. They refused to let a mini cam on a remote controlled car to be used to investigate the Sphynx.



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by lostinspace
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.


Close but how did they build them??

The Ancient Egyptians were descendents of Atlantis and they had advanced technology. The pyramids were cosmic energy collectors errected to resemble orions belt the home worlds of the master lizard race that initially seeded humans on earth.



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 01:01 AM
link   


The Ancient Egyptians were descendents of Atlantis and they had advanced technology. The pyramids were cosmic energy collectors errected to resemble orions belt the home worlds of the master lizard race that initially seeded humans on earth.

and the moon is made from green cheese



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join