Giza: A Warning From Antiquity - Part 2

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 9 2007 @ 06:40 PM
link   
Here is Part 2 of 5 of ‘The Pyramids of Giza: A Warning from Antiquity’. I have created a separate thread for each Part as they essentially deal with quite specific aspects of my work. Part 5 ‘The Cataclysm’ will be made available later.

Each Part is available as a Flash or Powerpoint download. The Flash version auto-runs so it may be preferable to download the Powerpoint version as this allows you to click through the presentation at your own pace.

Even if you are familiar with my work, I would urge that you take your time and work your way through each section before continuing to the next. This is important in order to fully grasp the ‘big picture’ of what my work presents.

‘The Pyramids of Giza: A Warning from Antiquity’

Part 2 – ‘The Clock of Ages’

Flash (8.5mb) – Running Time: 16 mins
www.scottcreighton.co.uk...

Powerpoint (29 mb)
www.scottcreighton.co.uk...

I look forward to all constructive comments and questions.

Best wishes,

Scott Creighton




posted on Oct, 15 2007 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Hello Scott Creighton, greetings to Scotland.

I watched all the slides. Good work, thank you. My question would be: How widely published is this information? Are you one of the first to discover and publish it? Id be genuinely surprised to learn that this hasnt been seen up to now.



posted on Oct, 15 2007 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 

Hello Skyfloating,


Skyfloating: I watched all the slides. Good work, thank you. My question would be: How widely published is this information? Are you one of the first to discover and publish it? Id be genuinely surprised to learn that this hasnt been seen up to now.


SC: It is not widely published at all - only in my first book, The Giza Oracle (no longer in print). Yes, it does seem somewhat obvious when someone has explained it to you. Indeed, you will not be the first person (nor, I venture, the last) that has seen my work and felt the need to make such a comment - I get this reaction to my work all the time, "How come no one has noticed this about the pyramids of Giza before - it is so obvious!?"

Who knows - perhaps others have noticed this but did not feel it important enough to publish. I know I discovered this myself and thought it very important and so published my early research in my first book, The Giza Oracle and have much more to come in my next book. If there is anything out there along the same lines I have never come across it and if there is I would be interested to see it.

Hope this answers your question.

Best wishes,

SC



posted on Oct, 15 2007 @ 06:35 PM
link   
I am not familiar with your work but I am very interested after looking at the slides, I always had the feeling that the pyramids has been build to tell us something about the past and the future and I always felt that it has to do with the skies.

But when somebody takes the time to explain as you has done it does makes more sense than just having feelings about what it all means.

Now I believe that is where you will be heading with your decoding.



posted on Oct, 27 2007 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by marg6043
 


Hello Marg,

Thanks for taking the time to post. Glad you found my work of interest to you.

Best wishes,

SC



posted on Oct, 27 2007 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Scott, if the pyramid complex are what you say they are, what do you make of the purpose of the inner chambers of the Great Pyramid? Why would they include those or do they have another story to tell?



posted on Oct, 27 2007 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by ben91069
 

Hello Ben,

Many thanks for your post.


Ben: Scott, if the pyramid complex are what you say they are, what do you make of the purpose of the inner chambers of the Great Pyramid? Why would they include those or do they have another story to tell?


SC: If the layout of the pyramids was indeed designed this way to warn future generations of 'dangerous times' c.2,500AD (as I propose), then it is perhaps possible that such chambers would have been built into the original design (model/template) to secure the rebirth of civilisation after the next cataclysm. These chambers were perhaps designed as ‘seed vaults’ to secure crops after the next cyclical event. This may also be why we find references to the 'storehouses of Egypt' being full of grain in the Book of Genesis. Not so much storehouses as pyramids and not so much grain as seeds.

Of course, this concept of ‘re-seeding’ the Earth after such an event was largely forgotten and corrupted over the Ages. The remnant of this idea, however, remained with the Pharaohs that the pyramids were somehow associated with their own rebirth into the Afterlife. I believe, however, that the idea of the pyramids securing such an ‘Afterlife’ was not (originally)solely limited to the Pharaoh’s afterlife but intended to secure an afterlife for mankind after a cyclical catastrophic event. The layout of the pyramids tell us the cycle.

The Great Pyramid possibly informs us what happened to the Earth during those days in 10,550BC and the various chambers were designed to serve as ‘seed vaults’ to secure future food supply – much in the same way we are ourselves (at this very moment) preparing for such an event:

news.bbc.co.uk...

Of course, it is also entirely possible that the Pharaoh’s simply hijacked the ancient idea that the pyramids were somehow linked with ‘ensuring an afterlife’ (the AEs of the 4th Dynasty did not see the deeper message of the groundplan) and decreed that chambers be built within the structures (i.e. they modified the design), thereby believing this would ensure an afterlife for themselves.

You may find this aspect of my work interesting which considers certain aspects of the chambers of the GP:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Best,

SC



posted on Jan, 8 2009 @ 08:05 PM
link   
maybe they stored DNA (seeds) in the pyramid like in Noah's Ark for future generations.

Yours



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 08:22 AM
link   
Here is the index, can't wait for a part 5, any plans on an excavation yet?
www.scottcreighton.co.uk...



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 10:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Scott Creighton
 


Scott I think you are right on, but I do see something you are not taking into account if I may submit humbly. If you have taken this into account forgive me for mentioning it. I don't have powerpoint so I was not able to see your full presentation, but my heart recognizes you are on the right path. Good work.

Clocks don't work unless they are "wound up". They also "wind down" Since the pyramid is a spiral, it would only make sense that time is proportional from the bottom to the top in the same way is it's rise and it's fall. Time condenses and expands, but all relative to the viewer, therefore time is perceived as constant, but is in fact proportional to the viewer in scale. Scale is the only constant, thus allowing us to grow.

Anyway, just thought I would interject that. Thank you, LTRU



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:20 AM
link   
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand
 

Hello LTRU,

Thank you for your post. You write:


LTRU: ...Clocks don't work unless they are "wound up". They also "wind down"


SC: The Giza star-clock uses the eternal, never-ending (apparent) motion of the stars as its timing mechanism. When the stars shift round (via precessional motion) and come into alignment with the Giza monuments (i.e. the so-called Queens' Pyramids) then we will have reached the time(s) set in the immovable stone monuments (the clock's 'alarm hand', so to speak).

From my analysis and understanding of the Giza star-clock its 'alarm hand' is set at 666 years after the culmination of the belt stars (minimum culmination AND maximum culmination) i.e. 666 years after the next max culmination year 2460CE (3126 CE). This is akin to saying a normal analog clock has been set to go off at 666 seconds after 12 noon.

Think of it this way - even a broken clock whose hands are stuck at 11 minutes after 12 will show the correct time twice per day!

Kind regards,

Scott Creighton

[edit on 8/8/2009 by Scott Creighton]



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 06:01 AM
link   
Veeery interesting to say the least.
Also the 666 years you mentioned are "quite" interesting.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 08:59 AM
link   
Hi Scott.
I have a question; is it not reasonable to assume that if the AE's were encoding a clock at Giza that they would also show the two sets of 'queens pyramids' in the same layout as the belt stars? This would then leave no room for assumption, in my opinion of course.





I do not doubt the Orion link, i'm just a little confused about the layout of the queens pyramids.

Much appreciated.
Stuart

[edit on 8-8-2009 by enduser]



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by enduser
 

Hello Enduser,

Thank you for your question.


Enduser: ... is it not reasonable to assume that if the AE's were encoding a clock at Giza that they would also show the two sets of 'queens pyramids' in the same layout as the belt stars?


SC: I am not quite sure exactly what you mean here.

The arrangement of the Menkaure (G3) Queens depict the belt stars as they set at minimum culmination c.10,500BCE.

The arrangement of the Khufu (G1) Queens depict the belt stars as they will rise at maximum culmination c.2,500CE i.e. perpendicular to the arrangement at their setting).

Together these two alignments then depict a precessional half-cycle of some 13,000 years - a star-clock.

I do not think it unreasonable to consider the 2 sets of 3 queens pyramids as representative of the 3 larger pyramid structures, their purpose to demonstrate the precessional cycle of the 3 larger structures (i.e. the belt stars). Interestingly, Khafre (G2) has no Queens pyramids despite having had more queens (5) than the other two Giza kings. This is easily explained within the context of precessional motion since there are only two culminations of the belt stars - min as depicted by G3 and max as depicted by G1. Placing such structures at G2 is unnecessary to demonstrate the precessional 'pendulum swing' and it would only have served to confuse the issue were such structures to have been placed beside G2.

The Giza-Orion Blueprint leaves little doubt that the design and placement of the pyramid structures at Giza was influenced by the belt stars of the Orion constellation.

Best wishes,

Scott Creighton

[edit on 8/8/2009 by Scott Creighton]



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Scott Creighton
 


Hi Scott, thank you for your response and I apologise for not being clearer. To clarify, from what I can make out, the two sets of queens pyramids have three pyramids in a straight row, unlike the three main pyramids which have the pyramid of menkaure being slightly offset (which reflects the layout of the belt stars).

Is it not reasonable to assume that if the AE's were encoding a clock at Giza that they would also show the two sets of 'queens pyramids' in the same layout as the belt stars (and main pyramids)?

I hope the above is a little clearer, if not, please let me know.
Thanks
Stuart



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Scott Creighton
 

Outstanding work Mr Creighton. S and F for you.
I have a question, what is the current time now if you were to place it on the Giza clock? And what does it mean?
One other thing i was woundering is if Stonehenge { i believe is a clock as well} if supper imposed onto the Giza Clock does it line up in anyway with it?
Thanks for your info.
Cheers,
Kitos



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by enduser
 

Hello Enduser,

Once again, thank you for your question.


Enduser: ...from what I can make out, the two sets of queens pyramids have three pyramids in a straight row, unlike the three main pyramids which have the pyramid of menkaure being slightly offset (which reflects the layout of the belt stars).

Is it not reasonable to assume that if the AE's were encoding a clock at Giza that they would also show the two sets of 'queens pyramids' in the same layout as the belt stars (and main pyramids)?


SC: Okay - now I understand your question.

My short answer is that I do not think it unreasonable to consider the 2 sets of 3 Queens pyramids as being symbolic of their larger counterparts i.e. the main Gizamids, especially so when they demonstrate for us the arrangement of those stars at their culminations.

I do, however, consider that the straightness of the 2 sets of queens pyramids serves a particular purpose. By merely observing the straightness of the 2 sets of Queens compared to the actual asterism with Mintaka slightly offset from the other two sets (like the main Gizamids), we are forced to ask the question - why should this be? Is there any particular reason for placing the queens structures in such a manner?

I think there is a purpose to this arrangement and it is simply to 'point' to the intersection point - the Akhet - with the other queens pyramids.



The Akhet - Intersection or mid point between two hills (pyramids).

Were the queens pyramids to have been placed to perfectly mimic the belt star asterism we would not realise that they are in fact 'pointing' to where they intersect. In other words, the very straightness of the 2 sets of Queens alludes to their intersection point i.e. one of the Giza star-clock 'hands'.

Best wishes,

Scott Creighton

[edit on 8/8/2009 by Scott Creighton]



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Scott Creighton
 


Thanks Scott, that does make a little more sense but surely the mere fact the queens pyramids are even there would raise questions as to their purpose?
Perhaps im being too cynical about the purpose of the queens pyramids, and not being from ancient egypt doesnt help matters
It just doesnt seem like a fool proof plan to me, but again, im not from those times.

Anyway, I will be keeping an eye on further developments and appreciate the work and effort you have put into unwavering the mysteries of the AE's.

With the kindest of regards,
Stuart



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by enduser
 

Hello Enduser,

Thanks again for your post. You write:


Enduser: ...surely the mere fact the queens pyramids are even there would raise questions as to their purpose?


SC: Yes indeed. The PRIMARY function of the queens pyramids at Giza is to present to us the arrangement of the belt stars at their 2 culminations. In this regard I think that the 2 sets of queens pyramids do this rather well. As I said - it is not unreasonable to consider that the 2 sets of 3 queens are symbolic representations of the 3 main Gizamids, symbolising the belt stars at their 2 culminations. The main Gizamids symbolise the belt stars whilst the 2 sets of queens pyramids symbolise the arrangement of the belt stars at their 2 culminations. Without showing us the culminations we simply could not unequivocally identify the main Gizamids with the belt stars. The queens pyramids as precessional culmination markers affords us this certainty. The ancients knew this. It's really that simple.

If you consider the 3 main Gizamids as being symbolic of the belt stars, then what else do you consider the two sets of 3 queens pyramids could be representing? Is it not simple common sense to conclude that these 2 sets of 3 pyramids represent some other attribute of the main pyramid structures i.e. some other aspect of the belt stars - such as the 2 culminations? Is this not the most logical conclusion to draw for these structures?

If not then tell me - what OTHER purpose might the 2 sets of queens pyramids have served? I'd be interested to know your own thoughts on this question.

Best wishes,

Scott Creighton

PS - Please keep in mind that no original burial of any queen has been confirmed in any of the queens pyramid structures.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Scott Creighton
 


Thanks for your response Scott.

Basically what I was thinking was that as the arm of the clock is cycling that the position of it's hand is following the "rise" of the pyramid itself. Starting at the base position of the sphinx, it would incrementally rise while also coming about, thus proportionally "shrinking" the interval of time with the rise and again "expanding" the interval of time with the fall after reaching the apex.

I think of the pendulum swing as it swings to the right or left it will hit a point where gravity begins to pull it in the opposite direction, thus slowing it's swing right before it begins to speed up again in the reverse direction hitting max velocity at the center. This is the same idea I am thinking of with the clock and it's arms so that the time intervals become proportionally shorter as it rises and longer as it falls. Like the Mayan calender behaves basically. I believe this would explain the "wobble" of the precession.

Sorry to explain it again, I just wanted to make sure I was clear.

Thanks again, ltru





new topics
top topics
 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join


ATS Live Reality Remix is on-air in 3 minutes.
ATS Live Radio Presents - Reality Remix Live SE6 EP6

atslive.com

hi-def

low-def