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.

 

Are the Pyramids of Giza a 'Precession Clock' pointing to the past and future?

page: 2
18
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 07:58 AM
link   
Howdy Scott

I’m not really sure why you are going on and on about the Sumerians. They are not part of your idea nor do they predate the Egyptian to the point that they would have been the ‘advanced’ civilization you need for your idea to be realized. Nor were they 'advanced' enough to have provided the information you think was provided to the Egyptians. So why are you going on about it? LOL

We are still waiting for you to explain Concavities, I read your materials once before, that was more than enough for me to understand your methodology and the basics of the idea. I find no need to dig thru to discover explanation for things that you yourself cannot explain. As I have said before you have a history of avoiding discussing weak areas of your idea.

You mean you TRIED to debunk the upside down stars, if you read the entire thread you'll find people just as skeptical as before.

Quote from Scott:


"I will say this once - I have no intention of discussing my work here with individuals who do not familiarise themselves with it or the arguments I am making."


Actually you will Scott for if you don’t I may just have to subject you to excessive wit and mockery if you don’t (the purpose of the discussion board is to discuss this kinda of stuff) so one must question why you are here and …what happened to JimmyProphet?





posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scott Creighton
SC: I have no intention of "putting down" anyone. And I am certainly not asking anyone to run out and buy my book. Just so that we are clear, my work is freely available fromt the links I posted in this thread - these are not links to buy a book. Indeed, my book is not even available for anyone to buy.


Please accept my apologies, Scott. I see that I was mistaken -- you're not trying to sell a book.



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Scott Creighton
 


Greetings, Scott Creighton! I look forward to spending some time digesting your work. My interests have usually kept me in Abydos at the Osirion and among the pyramids in the Sudan. The Osirion itself is certainly a candidate for consideration as something "prior to the Ancient Egyptians".

I often remind myself that the Dogon had knowledge of Sirius A and Sirius B long before our current scientific civilisation could identify the second star. The clues and hints around the planet point to a Mystery with a capitalised "M" and positing a lost civilisation or civilised period that fell into utter ruin is perhaps not so difficult to imagine ... especially if we all live to watch our own civilisation fall and become lost from weakness within and from the forces of nature without.



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 01:24 PM
link   
Just a point or two before I totter off to class...



Originally posted by Scott Creighton
The Sumerian civilisation is not, however, the civilisation I am indicating in my work. Who this civilisation was I cannot tell you because they have disappeared leaving only their knowledge in the layout of the Pyramids of Giza.


Then how do you know they really existed?

How do you know they left the knowledge rather than it being something the AE Pharoahs decided based on how much they had to spend and how the whole plateau appeared when viewed from their palace at Giza?



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by PellevoisinI often remind myself that the Dogon had knowledge of Sirius A and Sirius B long before our current scientific civilisation could identify the second star.


That was a hoax perpetrated by (much to my shame) a fellow anthropologist named Marcel Griaule in the 1960's. The Dogon have no such knowledge. Anthropologists who later went back to study the Sirius matter found that the tribes didn't have any special knowledge about Sirius (these were anthropologists who had been there for a long time and were adopted into the tribe.)

You can confirm it easily enough by looking at the presumed diagrams of the Sirius system and then looking at the real art (look at the pictographs (rock art) of the Dogon.) None of those symbols show up in the rock art, although other sacred symbols do.

Here's what their art looks like:
www.astrosurf.com...

Here's the references on Griaule and the Dogon hoax:
www.philipcoppens.com...

skepdic.com...

www.csicop.org...



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


Hello Hans,

I am working on getting some new images together to better explain the purpose of the "concavities" of Khufu and Menkaure. I can only surmise you did not understand this from my presentation. I will get back to you as soon as the images are ready.

Regards,

Scott

PS - I don't have a clue as tow what happened to JimmyProphet. Don't even know who s/he is. Perhaps s/he will come back with some further comments on the ongoing discussion here.



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 



Byrd: Please accept my apologies, Scott.


SC: No problem. I understand how you must be sick to the back teeth of individuals who come here simply to promote their work rather than explain and discuss it.

Regards,

Scott



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 



Byrd: Then how do you know they really existed?...How do you know they left the knowledge rather than it being something the AE Pharoahs decided based on how much they had to spend and how the whole plateau appeared when viewed from their palace at Giza?


SC: Did the AEs understand the Pi constant as a decimal fraction?

www.scottcreighton.co.uk...

SC: Did the AEs understand precession and were they able to calculate and project the precessional motion of the Orion Belt stars across 13,000 years?

www.scottcreighton.co.uk...

SC: Did the AEs understand a circle of 360* ?

I think the answer to all of these questions is an emphatic "No!" But someone clearly knew all these things. So, by a process of elimination, I can only conclude that this knowledge came from a more advanced civilisation that predated the AEs but which is now lost to us. Why they are lost to us I can only speculate but it does seem that they existed before c.10,500BC around the time a great Earth cataclysm took place because this is the date they indicate in the GOCT / GPW.

observer.guardian.co.uk...

Regards,

Scott

PS - I will be putting together a post which explains the 'concavities' of Khufu and Menkaure since you are having problems opening my original link.



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Pellevoisin
 


Hello Pellevoison,


I look forward to spending some time digesting your work.


SC: I look forward to discussing it with you. Some others have had problems opening some of the links so if you have such problems pleae let me know.

Regards,

Scott Creighton



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 

The pyramids at Giza represent a ‘Precession Clock’ which registers past and future dates. The indicator or ‘beacon’ that the pyramids at Giza represent a clock is presented to us with the arrangement of the satellite pyramids, thus:

www.scottcreighton.co.uk...

The arrangement of the satellite pyramids indicates the first 3 digits of the Pi constant (3-1-4). In turn, Pi indicates a circle. So, we circumscribe the pyramids with a circle whereby the circle touches the three most extreme pyramid corners. When we do this we find some interesting aspects of this circle, namely:

a) Its centre is almost in perfect alignment with the centre of G2 (error 0.02%)
b) We find the Sphinx sits precisely on the outside edge of the circle.

www.scottcreighton.co.uk...

Thus we have delineated the ‘clock-face’. Every clock needs a unique reference point from where all other times are determined with respect to this point. It would make perfect sense that such a point was very striking but NOT a pyramid. I propose this unique marker is given to us in the form of the Sphinx. This is the “12 O’Clock” position on the precession clock.

www.scottcreighton.co.uk...

Now that the clock has been defined and its start point (Zep Tepi) determined, we now need to determine the date the clock has been set to. Only by knowing the clock’s start date can we determine the other dates indicated in the clock. The ancients used the universal motion of the stars to fix this date.

The designers used the alignment of ONE STAR to fix the start date of the precession clock. But which star? Well the designers present 3 stars to us in their design – the stars of Orion’s Belt. How do we know these pyramids symbolise the Orion Belt stars and not some other star triad? Because the designers tell us the max and min culmination of these 3 stars – no other triad of stars move across the heavens in this manner:

www.scottcreighton.co.uk...

And this rather neatly explains why Khafre, a Pharaoh with 5 Queens has no Queens Pyramids. This is because we need see only the start and end of the half-cycle.

But which of these 3 stars did the designers use to record the precession clock’s date? Well, we must ask ourselves which of these 3 stars stands out? Given that Menkaure is much smaller and ‘misaligned’ from the other 2 then it seems that this pyramid is symbolic of the star the ancients recorded. The celestial equivalent of Menkaure is the ‘misaligned’ star Mintaka in Orion’s Belt.

When we measure the azimuth of Menkaure from the centre of G2 we find it measures 212°.

www.scottcreighton.co.uk...

What is also important to note is how the Queens of Menkaure are aligned horizontally on the SW horizon thus mimicking the stars of Orion’s Belt circa 10,550BC.

www.scottcreighton.co.uk...

Remarkably, we find ALSO at this time, that the azimuth of the star Mintaka (Menkaure’s celestial counterpart) is 212°!

Mintaka, however, passes through 212° every day due to the Earth’s rotation. So, to determine the precise date we MUST know the PRECISE TIME of day the Designers recorded their azimuth measurement of Mintaka. The Designers found an ingenious way of providing this information, by using the setting of the Orion Belt stars. More precisely, the setting of the CENTRE star (Al Nilam).

www.scottcreighton.co.uk...

And the setting of Al Nilam is indicated by the lack of concavities in in terrestrial counterpart, Khafre. Unlike Khufu and Menkaure, Khafre has no concavities, thus indicating it has set.

Hope this explains the concavities.

SC



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Scott CreightonSC: Did the AEs understand the Pi constant as a decimal fraction?

www.scottcreighton.co.uk...


That doesn't prove it, I'm afraid. I can find lots of things with a 3 and a 1 and a 4 in it. For example, I could argue that this hopscotch grid shows ancient transmission of 314 because there's 1 grid, 3 sets of 2, and 4 singleton tiles:
www.mocah.org...

In order to have a decimal fraction, they need a sign for zero (so they can have decimal fractions like .01) To prove your point, you have to show from material that "314" had some sort of significance and is shown (as the number) and referenced in texts (like an offering of 314 cattle and an offering of 314 incense cones and an offering of 314 loaves of bread to the gods.)

So what external proof are you using to show that "314" was an important set of digits to them?


SC: Did the AEs understand precession and were they able to calculate and project the precessional motion of the Orion Belt stars across 13,000 years?

Then why aren't there intermediate steps and why does the sky cycle show them at opposite ends of the horizon while Giza shows an extra "star" and shows only a 90 degree change?

Understanding the precession requires detailed and accurate maps of the sky. You need to show that very early on they had the kind of detail that the Mayans later did (who did know about the precession of the equinoxes and it shows very clearly in their calendars and astronomical observatories and in other artifacts.)

You need to show a similar range of examples in the Egyptians to eliminate the "coincidence" factor.


SC: Did the AEs understand a circle of 360* ?

I think the answer to all of these questions is an emphatic "No!"

Err... you mean you're dismissing all your answers above? That you now believe the "314" is simply coincidence and that they didn't know about precession of the equinox?


But someone clearly knew all these things. So, by a process of elimination, I can only conclude that this knowledge came from a more advanced civilisation that predated the AEs but which is now lost to us.


You need proof of this.


Why they are lost to us I can only speculate but it does seem that they existed before c.10,500BC around the time a great Earth cataclysm took place because this is the date they indicate in the GOCT / GPW.

observer.guardian.co.uk...

Actually, that's only a theory and it's already being dismissed because it requires ICBM-type fireballs that miss most of the flora and fauna of the planet and selectively wipe out certain species around the globe while leaving other animals of the same size in the same vicinity untouched. In other words, it kills off the sabertoothed cats while leaving the cougars untouched. It kills the marsupial lions and carnivorous kangaroos in Australia while leaving kangaroos and tazmanian tigers alive.

And you'll note that it only (supposedly) wipes out stone age cultures. Their evidence (quite weak) is that the Clovis point gets replaced at that time by other points. The current (stronger) theory is that the megaflauna dies off and the huge Clovis points are abandoned because they're not very good for hunting rabbits and birds with. So humans adopted a new type of spearhead to match the quarry they were hunting instead of sticking with an older, huge, slower spear (they hadn't discovered bows yet though they did have atlatls.)

So... even though it's not a good supporting piece of evidence for you, it also says that there's only stone age cultures before and after that time.

(by the way, there was no population "bottleneck" at that time... a further lack of support for the comet theory.)

[edit on 21-9-2007 by Byrd]



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by Scott CreightonSC: Did the AEs understand the Pi constant as a decimal fraction?

www.scottcreighton.co.uk...

byrd: That doesn't prove it, I'm afraid. I can find lots of things with a 3 and a 1 and a 4 in it. For example, I could argue that this hopscotch grid shows ancient transmission of 314 because there's 1 grid, 3 sets of 2, and 4 singleton tiles


SC: Unlike Pi (314), Hopscotch does not imply a circle. When we apply this 'instruction' and circumscribe a circle around the 3 extreme corners of the Gizamids, that's when we see the significance of the 3-1-4 'beacon'. (I explain this in my thread to Hans above).


Byrd: You need to show a similar range of examples in the Egyptians to eliminate the "coincidence" factor.


SC: I don't think you quite follow what I am saying here. Although the AEs received the 'design' from an earlier, more advanced civilisation I am not saying the AEs fully understood the content, the 'knowledge' built into the layout. Certainly it was sacred to them (and the Pharaoh) which is why they went to the trouble of implementing it. If I were to select a 'beacon' a 'calling card' an arrangement of . . . / . / . . . . would be high on my list. This is abstract knowledge which requires a 'high intelligence' to understand it.


Err... you mean you're dismissing all your answers above? That you now believe the "314" is simply coincidence and that they didn't know about precession of the equinox?


SC: NO! I am saying the AEs did NOT understand or were even aware of the advanced math/astronomy 'encoded' into the design that was passed down to them. Nevertheless, they built the structures because the plan had become 'sacred'. They built from a plan - they tell us this themselves. Now you can perhaps copy a painting by Poussin but be completely oblivious to the intricate meaning within Poussin's work.


SC: But someone clearly knew all these things. So, by a process of elimination, I can only conclude that this knowledge came from a more advanced civilisation that predated the AEs but which is now lost to us.

Byrd: You need proof of this.


SC: My proof is in my interpretation of the Gizamids. The references to Orion in my work, the GOCT (which supports Bauval's earlier OCT) is simply too compelling to be dismissed. The evidence of the pyramids supports my theory.


Actually, that's only a theory and it's already being dismissed...


SC: Firestone, West and Warwick-Smith are not the only scientists making this claim. See here:

www.physorg.com...

The fact is, a cataclysmic event took place on the Earth around 13,000 years ago, most likely an asteroid impact. How this then impacted upon life here, i.e. the chain of events that brought about the various extinctions, is anyone's guess. But a traumatic event DID take place.


Byrd: And you'll note that it only (supposedly) wipes out stone age cultures.


SC: Not accroding to Plato and not according to the evidence I have presented through my interpretation of the Gizamids. Only the prevailing model of our prehistory supports this view. Certainly after such an impact, any high civilisations that may have existed would have quickly reverted to a very primitive existence. But not before the enlightened survivors managed to create the granite model for the Gizaplex which their descendents - some 8,000 years later - would construct.

Regards,

SC

PS - Even in our 21st Century we have some fairly primitive tribes living in rainforests and deserts around the world.



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Howdy Scott

I just finished reading the book in question yesterday. Although interesting it has a great number of gaps - a number of which Byrds had mentioned. We might want to start a separate thread just on that topic/book.

"My proof is in my interpretation of the Gizamids. The references to Orion in my work, the GOCT (which supports Bauval's earlier OCT) is simply too compelling to be dismissed. The evidence of the pyramids supports my theory."

Scott I think the three weakest links for your idea are:

1. No advance civilization to do this
2. A maybe iffy reason to do this at all and the problem of transmission
3. The inaccuracy of the pyramids in relation to Orion's belt

1. Is easy to deal with, there just isn't one that we've found. I hate to be crass but you really need to find that civilization to breath life into this idea

2. I think we need a separate discussion on the idea brought up in the book but that a civilization would leave a message about this is a bit odd

3. Something we can tangle with

Scott If you superimpose the arrangement of the stars in Orion's belt onto the pyramids are they a match?

Now of course they are not but you counter that x thousands of years ago there were. Yes?

So do they match exactly? Considering the accuracy of the placement and alignment of the pyramids one would expect a similar accuracy in the representation of Orion's belt. Yes?

How do they match up?

Another question why don't the pyramids reflect the characteristics of the actual stars, which are different from one another but those differences are not reflected in the pyramids - why is that?

Why are the satellites also not reflective of the arrangement of Orion's belt?

Why would an 'advance civilization use a western style clock face that goes in the same direction as we do it----a bit ethnocentric don't you think?


[edit on 21-9-2007 by Hanslune]



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


Hello Hans,


Hans: I just finished reading the book in question...


SC: I am not sure here which book you are referring to. My own book has not been available to buy online for several months and still isn't. It's with a mainstream publisher at present. Can you clarify this please?


Hans: 1. No advance civilization to do this ... easy to deal with, there just isn't one that we've found. I hate to be crass but you really need to find that civilization to breath life into this idea


SC: Plato says there was. My interpretation of the available evidence (i.e. the Gizamids) says there was. If a catastrophe overtook the inhabitants of the Earth around the end of the Younger Dryas and coastlines all over the world were relatively quickly submerged under hundreds of feet of water, it is quite unlikely that we will find the artifacts of this civilisation. The enlightened survivors, however, managed to pass on their 'message' before their civilisation decended to a complete primitive existence.


2. A maybe iffy reason to do this at all and the problem of transmission... I think we need a separate discussion on the idea brought up in the book but that a civilization would leave a message about this is a bit odd.


SC: Why would these enlightened individuals not wish to ensure that if anything is passed on to future generations it is the knowledge of what happened to their civilisation, when it happened but most crucially of all - when it is likely to HAPPEN AGAIN? This is avery human instinct. Why is our own civilisation attempting to reduce carbon emissions? Because we want a world fit for our children and our children's children to live in. To be honest, creating and passing down such an 'early warning system' is hardly "iffy" as you suggest - it is very noble and - personally - I think we owe it to them to take this interpretation I have made with some seriousness. It might just be right.


Hans: Scott If you superimpose the arrangement of the stars in Orion's belt onto the pyramids are they a match?


SC: Yes - but what you have to understand is that Menkaure is the key, it is this pyramid that is aligned to its celestial counterpart, Mintaka. Menkaure is 212* azimuth. It matches Mintaka's azimuth at 212* c.10,550BC. And, by some remarkable coincidence, all 3 stars are aligned horizontal on the SW horizon thus mimicked by the 3 Queens of Menkaure which just happen to be aligned in this manner also. Bauval's alignment of the 3 stars and pyramids at meridian is (IMO) quite wrong and is NOT how I am aligning the Gizamids with their celestial counterparts. You really have to understand this highly significant difference. With the terrestrial and celestial azimuths aligning we can date the design using JUST ONE pyramid, not all 3 as Bauval does. Furthermore, this technique FORCES Menkaure's Pyramid to be in the south (212* from north) in order to align with its celestial counterpart, Mintaka. Thus Krupp is rebutted.


Hans: So do they match exactly?


SC: 212* terrestrial with 212* celestial - that's a fairly good match.

Continued on next post.



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 02:34 PM
link   
...still waiting for the hall of records to be dug up



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


Continued from previous reply:


Another question why don't the pyramids reflect the characteristics of the actual stars, which are different from one another but those differences are not reflected in the pyramids - why is that?


SC: I can only explain certain characteristics. The Pyramid of Menkaure has been made significantly smaller and misaligned because it had to 'stand out' as the chosen structure i.e. the structure whose azimuth was set according to its celestial equivalent. Also, the characteristics of the concavities of Khufu and Menkaure combine to give us the precise time of day the alignment of 212* degrees was made - this is absolutely vital to dating the complex. And that is when the centre star (Al Nilam) has set below the horizon but the other two stars are still shining above the horizon. I believe the concavities of Khufu and Menkaure have been designed in this way to give us this vital information.

www.scottcreighton.co.uk...
www.scottcreighton.co.uk...


Why are the satellites also not reflective of the arrangement of Orion's belt?


SC: They are. C.10,500BC they are arranged (at sunset) horizontally on the SW horizon therebv corresponding with the horizontal array of the 3 Queens of Menkaure (max culmination point). They are also rotated 90* and placed on the eastern horizon at khufu's 'tomb' thus mimicking the Belt Stars in c.2,500AD when they reach minimum culmination.


Why would an 'advance civilization use a western style clock face that goes in the same direction as we do it----a bit ethnocentric don't you think?


SC: Eh, no. The motion of the precession clock is governed by the precessional motion of the stars which precess west to east i.e. retrograde. If they could control the motion of the stars then I'm sure they could design their clock any which way they desired.

Regards,

Scott



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scott Creighton
SC: Unlike Pi (314), Hopscotch does not imply a circle. When we apply this 'instruction' and circumscribe a circle around the 3 extreme corners of the Gizamids, that's when we see the significance of the 3-1-4 'beacon'. (I explain this in my thread to Hans above).

When you circumscribe a circle around ANYTHING, you get pi. Only those with a decimal system see it as "3.14yaddayaddayadda". The question here is whether the AE's did that -- particularly since thier math never included decimal points. The other parts of the Giza plain (temples, and so forth) indicate that perhaps they didn't.


SC: I don't think you quite follow what I am saying here. Although the AEs received the 'design' from an earlier, more advanced civilisation I am not saying the AEs fully understood the content, the 'knowledge' built into the layout. Certainly it was sacred to them (and the Pharaoh) which is why they went to the trouble of implementing it. If I were to select a 'beacon' a 'calling card' an arrangement of . . . / . / . . . . would be high on my list. This is abstract knowledge which requires a 'high intelligence' to understand it.

I don't think you quite follow what I'm saying here. In order for knowledge to be transferred through a culture, it has to be of high importance to someone. In ancient times, this meant preserving it through chants/references/art/etc.

You haven't shown that:
* a sacred design existed before Narmer.
* why Imhotep, with a sacred design in front of him, couldn't replicate a rather simple feat and layout in any/some/all of his designs. Pyramids ain't that hard to do.
* references to 314 in any subsequent art.


SC: NO! I am saying the AEs did NOT understand or were even aware of the advanced math/astronomy 'encoded' into the design that was passed down to them. Nevertheless, they built the structures because the plan had become 'sacred'.

Then why not build it earlier? They had the manpower and the technology. And why didn't they duplicate it afterwards?



SC: My proof is in my interpretation of the Gizamids. The references to Orion in my work, the GOCT (which supports Bauval's earlier OCT) is simply too compelling to be dismissed. The evidence of the pyramids supports my theory.

You need EXTERNAL proof. Saying "the proof is in my writings" is not sufficient proof. I could say "The Flying Spaghetti Monster ordered the pharoahs to build Giza to that plan and the proof is in MY writings." This doesn't make it true.


SC: Firestone, West and Warwick-Smith are not the only scientists making this claim.


Yes, that one was also discussed. The evidence really isn't compelling -- nor is there evidence that all the AmerInds died out at that time. The explosion from the proposed asteroid is simply too small.


SC: Not accroding to Plato

Plato's teaching tale of Atlantis puts his fictional civilization (which had their heads handed to them by Athens in a war) at 9,600 BC.


Certainly after such an impact, any high civilisations that may have existed would have quickly reverted to a very primitive existence.

They didn't before.

Larger explosions took place when Krakatoa erupted (and the Earth didn't sink into oblivion in the 1800's) and Tungaska (Siberia didn't sink back to the stone age) and so on and so forth. Past history indicates humans keep their technology after a largescale natural disaster (erruption that destroyed Creteian civilization, etc, etc.)

[edit on 21-9-2007 by Byrd]



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 07:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 



Byrd: When you circumscribe a circle around ANYTHING, you get pi.


SC: No – you get a circle. Understanding the relationship of that circle’s diameter to its circumference and being able to express this in decimal form is a way of explicitly demonstrating abstract knowledge. If the Designers had constructed a stone circle it would be just that – a stone circle. It tells us nothing of their understanding of higher mathematics. That the Pi ratio is being PLAINLY pointed out to us serves as a ‘beacon’, inviting us to investigate further, inviting us to circumscribe Giza with a circle. When we do this we begin to uncover the precession wheel encoded into the design. This would most likely have gone unnoticed were it not for the 3-1-4 ‘beacon’ instructing us to “draw a circle”. And this precession wheel is not a concoction of my own imagination – all the components required for a functioning astronomical clock are presented, are clearly defined and immaculately crafted. Indeed, the design of this clock is truly quite ingenious.


Byrd: Only those with a decimal system see it as "3.14yaddayaddayadda".


SC: The AE used a decimal system, yaddayaddayadda !! The AE did not, however, use decimal fractions. Which is precisely my point! Pi is expressed through the satellite pyramids as a decimal fraction so could not have been the design or intention of the AE. This knowledge, crafted possibly in a scaled granite model, was passed down to the AE from another civilisation that used the decimal system.


Byrd: I don't think you quite follow what I'm saying here. In order for knowledge to be transferred through a culture, it has to be of high importance to someone. In ancient times, this meant preserving it through chants/references/art/etc.


SC: Mathematical knowledge, expressed through a granite model, can be easily transferred through a culture – no chanting required. The culture in question need not necessarily understand the deeper levels of knowledge in the model’s design but this does not mean the model would not have been important to their culture. We are told that it came from the “heavens” afterall.


Byrd: You haven't shown that:
* a sacred design existed before Narmer.

SC: The AE themselves tell us this. I don’t need the plan.


* why Imhotep, with a sacred design in front of him, couldn't replicate a rather simple feat and layout in any/some/all of his designs. Pyramids ain't that hard to do.


SC:A smooth-sided pyramid might be relatively easy for our civilisation to construct (??). Imhotep, however, initiating the plan had nothing to go on, just a finished model of the Gizaplex. Before him there had never been such a thing as a pyramid and would have been a very daunting task. How exactly do you build a smoth-sided pyramid (using AE techniques)? Clearly there would have been a long and difficult learning curve involved. Many mistakes would have been made and new innovations introduced until they had perfected the craft. Only when the AE were confident enough of building perfect pyramids did they feel ready to implement the building of their sacred plan at Giza. I think you underestimate the task Imhotep initiated.


Byrd: * references to 314 in any subsequent art.

SC: As I have already stated, the AE did not realise the significance of the 314 beacon because they did not understand decimal fractions. They simply did not see this knowledge – unfortunately.


SC: NO! I am saying the AEs did NOT understand or were even aware of the advanced math/astronomy 'encoded' into the design that was passed down to them. Nevertheless, they built the structures because the plan had become 'sacred'.

Byrd: Then why not build it earlier? They had the manpower and the technology. And why didn't they duplicate it afterwards?


More to follow:



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 07:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 


Continued from previous….

SC: They simply could not attempt to build the plan until they felt confident enough, until they felt they had mastered the building of the perfect pyramid, until they had the resources (human and financial) and the political will of the Pharaoh. This would take some considerable time. Would you attempt to build your own house without first undertaking some extensive construction training courses.


You need EXTERNAL proof. Saying "the proof is in my writings" is not sufficient proof. I could say "The Flying Spaghetti Monster ordered the pharoahs to build Giza to that plan and the proof is in MY writings." This doesn't make it true.


SC: I present a theory. A new interpretation of the Gizaplex based on the relative arrangement of the pyramids there. A theory – nothing more, nothing less. How many theories do you know of that have external proof?

SC: Firestone, West and Warwick-Smith are not the only scientists making this claim.

Byrd: Yes, that one was also discussed. The evidence really isn't compelling -- nor is there evidence that all the AmerInds died out at that time. The explosion from the proposed asteroid is simply too small.


SC: And it only takes a very small asteroid to impact the Earth at the right location, at the correct angle to knock the Earth off its axis of rotation. This would cause the Earth to effectively tilt. What effects do you think such a tilt might have on the inhabitants of the Earth? All caused by a very small asteroid.

www.grahamhancock.com...


SC: Not according to Plato
Byrd: Plato's teaching tale of Atlantis puts his fictional civilization (which had their heads handed to them by Athens in a war) at 9,600 BC.


SC: Plato explicitly tells us, in recalling Solon’s story, that ‘this is true history’. Socrates also states this. I have no reason to doubt that when Plato explicitly tells us something is true, it was indeed true. Plato knew the ground rules of his discussions and would not contradict them in such a way.


SC: Certainly after such an impact, any high civilisations that may have existed would have quickly reverted to a very primitive existence.
Byrd: They didn't before. Larger explosions took place when Krakatoa erupted (and the Earth didn't sink into oblivion in the 1800's) and Tungaska (Siberia didn't sink back to the stone age) and so on and so forth. Past history indicates humans keep their technology after a largescale natural disaster (erruption that destroyed Creteian civilization, etc, etc.)

SC: Try imagining a shift of the Earth’s axis caused by a relatively small asteroid impact.

www.scottcreighton.co.uk...

Regards,

SC



posted on Sep, 22 2007 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 


Continued from previous….

SC: They simply could not attempt to build the plan until they felt confident enough, until they felt they had mastered the building of the perfect pyramid, until they had the resources (human and financial) and the political will of the Pharaoh. This would take some considerable time. Would you attempt to build your own house without first undertaking some extensive construction training courses.


You need EXTERNAL proof. Saying "the proof is in my writings" is not sufficient proof. I could say "The Flying Spaghetti Monster ordered the pharoahs to build Giza to that plan and the proof is in MY writings." This doesn't make it true.


SC: I present a theory. A new interpretation of the Gizaplex based on the relative arrangement of the pyramids there. A theory – nothing more, nothing less. How many theories do you know of that have external proof?

SC: Firestone, West and Warwick-Smith are not the only scientists making this claim.

Byrd: Yes, that one was also discussed. The evidence really isn't compelling -- nor is there evidence that all the AmerInds died out at that time. The explosion from the proposed asteroid is simply too small.


SC: And it only takes a very small asteroid to impact the Earth at the right location, at the correct angle to knock the Earth off its axis of rotation. This would cause the Earth to effectively tilt. What effects do you think such a tilt might have on the inhabitants of the Earth? All caused by a very small asteroid.

www.grahamhancock.com...


SC: Not according to Plato
Byrd: Plato's teaching tale of Atlantis puts his fictional civilization (which had their heads handed to them by Athens in a war) at 9,600 BC.


SC: Plato explicitly tells us, in recalling Solon’s story, that ‘this is true history’. Socrates also states this. I have no reason to doubt that when Plato explicitly tells us something is true, it was indeed true. Plato knew the ground rules of his discussions and would not contradict them in such a way.


SC: Certainly after such an impact, any high civilisations that may have existed would have quickly reverted to a very primitive existence.
Byrd: They didn't before. Larger explosions took place when Krakatoa erupted (and the Earth didn't sink into oblivion in the 1800's) and Tungaska (Siberia didn't sink back to the stone age) and so on and so forth. Past history indicates humans keep their technology after a largescale natural disaster (erruption that destroyed Creteian civilization, etc, etc.)

SC: Try imagining a shift of the Earth’s axis caused by a relatively small asteroid impact.

www.scottcreighton.co.uk...

Regards,

SC



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join