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.
Originally posted by Scott Creighton
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.
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.
SC: The AE used a decimal system, yaddayaddayadda !! The AE did not, however, use decimal fractions.
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.
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.
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.
Originally posted by Scott Creighton
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: 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.
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.
Now in this island of Atlantis there was a great and wonderful empire which had rule over the whole island and several others, and over parts of the continent, and, furthermore, the men of Atlantis had subjected the parts of Libya within the columns of Heracles as far as Egypt, and of Europe as far as Tyrrhenia. This vast power, gathered into one, endeavoured to subdue at a blow our country and yours and the whole of the region within the straits; and then..
Moreover, they divided at the bridges the zones of land which parted the zones of sea, leaving room for a single trireme to pass out of one zone into another.
The docks were full of triremes and naval stores, and all things were quite ready for use.
The entire area was densely crowded with habitations; and the canal and the largest of the harbours were full of vessels and merchants coming from all parts,
The leader was required to furnish for the war the sixth portion of a war-chariot, so as to make up a total of ten thousand chariots; also two horses and riders for them, and a pair of chariot-horses without a seat, accompanied by a horseman who could fight on foot carrying a small shield, and having a charioteer who stood behind the man-at-arms to guide the two horses; also, he was bound to furnish two heavy armed soldiers, two slingers, three stone-shooters and three javelin-men, who were light-armed, and four sailors to make up the complement of twelve hundred ships.
Byrd: Decimal arithmetic isn't the highest form of math, you know. You're being a bit biased here.
Byrd: The 22/7ths is more correct than 3.14. The AE's and other ancient civilizations knew perfectly well what it was, but they all wrote it as fractions.
Byrd: But it doesn't work. In your drawings, the Orion belt stars make only a turn of 1/4th the circle instead of 1/2 of the circle (and your circle isn't a circle, you know.) You showed a full half-cycle precession with the belt stars ending up on different horizons, 180 degrees from each other. On the ground, they're 90 degrees.
Byrd: There's no time reference to 25,772 years and no way to derive it from your design.
Byrd: A clearly defined and immaculately crafted idea would have been able to convey this and show the position at any time point. Furthermore, as a "device" it's unusable. If I asked you to show me how you'd derive the place of Orion's belt in AD 505, I don't think you could do it with that. The orientation of the belt stars would't match what was in the sky.
SC: The AE used a decimal system, yaddayaddayadda !! The AE did not, however, use decimal fractions.
Byrd: They used a "base 10" system. That's not the same as a decimal system with decimal fractions.
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: Where are the drawings and references to it? Yes, you cited Aldred... can you point to the item online that he was pointing to? I'm not being mean, but you saw the photo on the page, and I really would like to check the translation. I haven't been able to google out any reference to Imhotep in that temple.
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 smooth-sided pyramid (using AE techniques)?
Byrd: Actually, it's fairly easy. What was hard was developing the idea of what they wanted and getting the angle right.
If they had the picture, then Imhotep or his successors would have quickly figured the whole thing out. All he had to do was set up the drawing and make a scale model. They had ways of measuring angles rather precisely, so it was a pretty simple thing to determine what the correct angle was. And they would have made models of the designs to study and make sure the placements were right.
They could have easily built it before, assuming they convinced the pharaohs that it was necessary. They could have placed it anywhere on the Nile... Giza was not the only spot. It's costly and labor intensive, but the people believed pharoah was God and if a series of Gods had decreed that this must be built, then they would build it.
They could have built it with much smaller pyramids, in fact. And if it was important to them, they would have put models of it in the pharaohs' tombs (they certainly had models of other things in the tombs.)
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.
You're underestimating them. Take a look at the monumental statues and temples they were doing (including balancing stacks of rock into columns). These people weren't barely able to make brickwork -- they had some highly sophisticated monumental works.
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.
Byrd: Then they wouldn't have transmitted it.
They did make wooden "tomb models" of temples and buildings and other things for the mausoleums and burial chambers of the pharoahs and nobles. If this design was important and if they were trying urgently to build it, then where are the tomb models that show it? Where are the models that show 314 in any form?
We do see them transmitting other instructions and knowledge and engineering principles in designs, in textbooks, in math scrols, and tomb models. In order to get a good proof, you have to show linkage with something like that.
After Imhotep, the plan would have had to go to the successive pharoahs. So why didn't they try to build it with their already good tech and why not in a convenient place like the cult centers at Tel El Armana or Bubastis or Mendes?
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?
Byrd: All of them.
Byrd: A REAL theory has to have support and has to have a falsifiability test.
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.
Byrd: All of them [impacts] could also have tilted the Earth.
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.
Byrd: He [Plato] made up fictional teaching stories all the time…
Originally posted by Scott Creighton
SC: If there is proof then it is not a theory – it’s a fact.
Does ‘String Theory’ have proof?
Does ‘General Relativity’ have proof?
SC: Is that like the theory that the pyramids of Giza were built solely as the burial tomb of the Pharaoh? Where’s the falsifiability test here then?
Unlike the ‘tomb’ theory, my own work is easily falsifiable. The precession clock either works in the manner I describe, or it doesn’t. It is easily tested with any good astronomy software.
Furthermore, the Pyramids as a Precession Clock predicts that there will be no ‘Queens Pyramids’ (i.e. structures comparable in size with the other 2 sets of ‘Queens’) found around Khafre’s ‘tomb’ in spite of him having 5 Queens. To find such would call into question the purpose of the other 2 sets of ‘Queens’ as start and end markers of the Orion precessional half-cycle.
In addition, the Pyramids as a Precession Clock predicts that there will be no other satellite pyramid structures of any size found on the Giza plateau. To find such would render the 3-1-4 ‘beacon’ untenable.
No – they could do so ONLY if they impacted the Earth at a particular angle and during a particular alignment of Earth, sun and moon. Read Dr Barbiero’s theory.
SC: Except the story of Atlantis was not made up by Plato. He was merely recalling Solon’s story and Solon was as real an historical person as Plato and Socrates. That Plato states about Solon’s Atlantis story, “this is true history” is good enough for me. You may doubt its authenticity, I see no compelling reason to do so.
Hans: The book I was referring to was Firestone, West and Warwick-Smith.
Hans: Your explanation of the importance of Orion's stars mises several key points.
When the three stars are superimposed over the pyramids do they match up? No they do not, if you align the center both of wings are out of alignment and vice versa.
Hans: Secondly the size of pyramids don't reflect the actual qualities of the stars themselves. Please explain the importance of the size of the pyramids to the actual Orion stars?
Hans: Please also explain why M was built with Red Granite? Also why the satellites don't reflect the alignment, size or pecularities of the actual stars?
Hans: The book I was referring to was Firestone, West and Warwick-Smith.
Hans: Your explanation of the importance of Orion's stars mises several key points.
When the three stars are superimposed over the pyramids do they match up? No they do not, if you align the center both of wings are out of alignment and vice versa.
Hans: Secondly the size of pyramids don't reflect the actual qualities of the stars themselves. Please explain the importance of the size of the pyramids to the actual Orion stars?
Hans: Please also explain why M was built with Red Granite? Also why the satellites don't reflect the alignment, size or pecularities of the actual stars?
Hans: This misalignment cast serious doubt that the Egyptians were trying to replica a sky they themselves couldn't see. If they were they got it wrong.
Hans: Another point Scott have you actually read Plato's Timaeus and Critias?
Hans: You seem to take everything Plato wrote as the truth…
SC: Does ‘String Theory’ have proof?
Byrd: No…
SC: Does ‘General Relativity’ have proof?
Byrd: No. In fact, it doesn't hold true at the subatomic level. That's why there's also a theory of special relativity.
SC: Is that like the theory that the pyramids of Giza were built solely as the burial tomb of the Pharaoh? Where’s the falsifiability test here then?
Byrd: That's not a theory... it's a statement of what's at the site.
Byrd: You haven't explained the discrepancy in the stars (why it's only a 90 degree turn instead of 180 and why the position of the pyramids doesn't match the position of the stars or what the signifcance of the fourth pyramid is. And you haven't shown how it's an accurate clock. It doesn't trace the path of the progression when seen from the ground.
SC: No – they could do so ONLY if they impacted the Earth at a particular angle and during a particular alignment of Earth, sun and moon. Read Dr Barbiero’s theory.
Byrd: May I counter with Newton and his laws (not theories)?
If you've ever played billiards or pool, you know that any impact/jolt that's not on the equator will tip a ball. They really ARE strong enough to disrupt the Earth.
SC: Except the story of Atlantis was not made up by Plato. He was merely recalling Solon’s story and Solon was as real an historical person as Plato and Socrates. That Plato states about Solon’s Atlantis story, “this is true history” is good enough for me. You may doubt its authenticity, I see no compelling reason to do so.
Byrd: He lived 200 years before Plato. He wrote extensively. He was a poet, and one of the most popular forms of poetry of the time was tragedy, with the them tragedy caused by hubris being the most popular. He wrote lots of poems about the deeds of Athens (and in the tale, Athens defeats Atlantis.) His poetry about Athens led him to be declared general for one of their wars. His contemporaries noted those poems.
But none of them noted a poem about Atlantis. Plutarch and Herodotus said he composed such a poem, but they are writing some 200-400 years after Solon lived.
Plato records other tales told by Socrates.
Byrd: ...what the signifcance of the fourth pyramid is.
Byrd: And you haven't shown how it's an accurate clock. It doesn't trace the path of the progression when seen from the ground.
Originally posted by Scott Creighton
reply to post by Byrd
Byrd: There's no time reference to 25,772 years and no way to derive it from your design.
SC: I beg to differ. A pyramid is a star, expressed by the AE as having 5 points.
The slope of the GP is 51.84. Expressed as 5184 we find the sqr root is 72. This is a value that is very close to our present precessional rate of 71.6 years per 1º shift.
72 x 5 = 360.
5184 x 5 = 25,920.
25,920/72 = 360.
SC: But again you miss the point. The PURPOSE of marking the start and end points is NOT to enable us to plot the movement of the belt stars. The PURPOSE of marking the start and end points like this is to enable us to KNOW WHICH 3 STARS the Designers were indicating with the 3 main pyramids.
And this would present us with a problem since we simply have to know the 3 stars the main pyramids represent since it is one of these 3 pyramdis that represents the star the ancients measured to set the start date of their clock.
The ancients realised this problem and ensured that they provided within their design a mechanism whereby we simply could not fail to select the correct triad of stars. They did this by marking the start and end points of the precessional motion of their chosen triad of stars. ONLY the Orion Belt stars precess across the sky in this manner and because of this we can be certain which stars the ancients are indicating to us in the main design i.e. the 3 main pyramids - Orion’s Belt.
Now that we know the correct triad of stars, what we have to then do is determine which of the 3 stars was used to set the clock’s start date. By ensuring Menkaure was significantly different (and indeed quite unique) from the other main pyramids it is logical to conclude that it is Menkaure’s alignment that was placed according to its celestial counterpart, Mintaka.
Ooookayy... we've gotten mightily off track, and I thought I'd do a summary rather than pick at details (which I can continue to do)
Byrd:
In a nutshell, your idea is:
* an ancient unnamed civilization existed (for which you have no proof)
Byrd:
* this unnamed civilization had a floor plan that supposedly described the precession of the equinoxes.
Byrd:
* the design includes the least correct form of Pi (3.14) and a circle and the belt stars of Orion tied with a structure on the ground, all done with pyramids.