Great Pyramid Tells of Earth Tilt c.10,500BC, page 3


Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 25 times


reply posted on 14-8-2011 @ 10:45 AM by Scott Creighton
Originally posted by Logman
Scott,

Your presentations point to a date of 10500 for the axis tilt. And yet your new book out in February 2012:

Explains in detail how the angles and geometry of the Great Pyramid record a shift of the world’s axis in 3980 BCE and predict more to come


Why the sudden change in your hypothesis? Also, do you believe the Giza complex was actually built soon after 10,500 BC or way later and just points to that date?


Hello there, Logman,

Many thanks for your question.

The year c.10,500 BC still has a crucial role to play in my hypothesis. But when this hypothesis was first formulated in 2006, I had not yet discovered other aspects of the Giza-Orion Blueprint that would, in time, come to influence the hypothesis. At that time I saw only the 10,500 BC minimum culmination date but when I found the max culmination date of c.2,500 AD I then realised that what we had at Giza was much, much more. The structures were not built (as Bauval and Hancock believed) to mark the time of Zep Tepi c.10,500 BCE. They believed that because they only saw the remote 10,500 BC date - they did not see that that alignment is connected via the Lehner Line to the max culmination date of c.2,500 AD. In so doing the so-called 'Lehner Line' then becomes a simple Precessional Timeline and, quite remarkably, the Sphinx is aligned almost precisely to the midpoint of the line i.e. at c.3,980 BCE.

It does seem, however, that this 'linear clock' indicates THREE dates. The first date is very obvious - the aforementioned Sphinx aligned to the midpoint of the timeline giving the year c.3,980 BCE. The timeline may also be indicating a further two reasonably obvious points on the line - one at c.9,700 BC and another at c.2,012 AD. You can read more on this here:

Great Pyramids Indicate 2012

Are these dates significant? Certainly in c.9,700 BC significant Earth changes were taking place on the planet and the same occurred again around 6,000 years later in c.3,980 BC. Does this have any bearing on the final date in the precessional cycle - 2012 AD? I do not know. All I know is that the Giza precessional Timeline points to that date (or thereabouts). Whether it is entirely coincidental only time will tell.

It is worth pointing out here that I am categorically not implying that the Ancient Egyptians and Mayan civilisations were in any way contemporary or that they shared knowledge. It may be, however, that different civilisations may have discovered the same Earth cycles of their own accord. It is my view that the date c.3,980 BC is highly significant and pivotal in ancient Egyptian history, as my new book (to be released in January from Bear & Co) will hopefully show.

The short answer to your question is that my hypothesis has simply evolved as a result of new and more exciting discoveries at Giza and the implications and realisations of those.

Best wishes,

Scott Creighton
edit on 14/8/2011 by Scott Creighton because: Fix Typo.



reply posted on 14-8-2011 @ 11:01 AM by Lil Drummerboy
vimeo.com...
Scott,
In this video and as I have read on a few places on line that there may be some discrepancies as to the real date of the Mayan completion of the last cycle,..Is is possible that the information in this videos date could coincide with what the pyramid of Egypt might be foretelling?


reply posted on 16-8-2011 @ 04:59 PM by Scott Creighton
reply to post by Lil Drummerboy


Hello Lil Drummerboy,

Thank you for your question. My short answer is that the Giza Pyramids present to us three points (dates) within the precessional half-cycle of the Belt stars of the Orion constellation. They indicate - within the PRESENT half-cycle of 13,000 years - the dates ca. 9700 BCE, ca. 3980 BCE and ca. 2012 CE (next year). The first two dates saw significant earth-changing events occurring on the planet at those times. Will the third date do likewise? I do not know but my gut feeling is that it WON'T and I explain why it is unlikely in my forthcoming book.

The caveat here is, however, that it will do us no harm to make all necessary preparations should this 2012 date indeed be as calamatous a time as the two previous dates in the cycle have been shown to be. But in that regard, I think our civilization has already made put in place contingencies with, for example, the Svalbard Seed Vault and perhaps even with the Data Vault in Switzerland. It is good that we are doing this. It's my view that they will be completely unnecessary but I would rather such precautions were put in place than not. We simply do not know everything about this rock we live on that our forebears knew. Were they aware of a periodic and catastrophic cycle that our planet experiences that has since been lost to us? We simply do not know.

What can be said, however, is that these three dates within the Giza Precession Timeline do exist within this particular interpretation of the Giza pyramids and I can demonstrate them easily to anyone who may enquire. And since precession is cyclical then these dates are also cyclical. All that I am saying here is that the Giza Pyramids - if they do indeed represent a linear, precession clock - indicate three dates; three points within the precessional half-cycle of Orion's Belt. What these dates may mean I can only guess at and the Great Pyramid itself may give us a clue to that and I write about this extensively in my next book.

But these dates in the precession timeline at Giza may have relevance - or they may not. No one knows for sure. All I am saying to people is that the pyramids at Giza can be shown to present those three dates in a simple and effective way and that the dates presented are cyclical in nature, as is precession. Take from that what you wish as I do not really wish to speculate any further - I merely wish to deal with what I can factually demostrate and prove and that is that Giza is an astronomical clock and the next date this clock indicates is 2012 CE. The date is there - does it have anyt meaning or relevance? I am not saying it does - but only time will tell.

Best wishes,

Scott Creighton



reply posted on 16-8-2011 @ 08:33 PM by Rosha
Originally posted by Scott Creighton
Why are they showing us the precessional cycle of Orion's belt? Are they trying to warn us of a cylical event?

The physicist Dr Paul LaViolette in his book, Earth Under Fire has theorised that the core of our galaxy enters an explosive phase every 11.000 years or thereabouts. LaViolette theorises that the shockwave from these blasts will sometimes bring space debris (asteroids and the like) into a collision course with the Earth, sometimes not. We just don't know. However, the cycle of Galactic Core Explosions (GCEs) will always continue at the same regular interval. The bottom line - best that we prepare ourselves. Just incase.

Forewarned is forearmed.

Regards,

Scott Creighton


Pardon the slip into philosophy....

Have you considered the possibility that the 'cataclysm' being described in text and stars is relational not literal? What I mean is, is it possible that the events noted during these phases may have been scripted symbolically, that they describe and point to the internal mind-matter of human beings and not 'just' to an external or outer environmental event or process?

Stepping back I get the sense that these records of alignments mark more than geological or astronomical events. That they detail a period of internal pole shifting, individual and collective.
I agree on the subject of axis tilts physically occuring and do feel the evidence supports that, I just cant help but feel that these internal shifts matter more somehow - that they could be evidence of a ' turning of the stones' that occurs among human populations during these periods. Certainly the historical rise and fall of civillisations during these alignment epocs can be verified and spiritual records and religion both elude to this ' time of trouble'.
I wondered what you felt about the likelyhood of that correlation?

I ask as I am seeing some evidence for that process occuring here and now on our planet and have noted that its been 'speeding up' over the past ten years. More and more people are being affected and 'reversing' everything from their political ideology to their morality to thinking processes and spiritual belief systems etc.. Depending on their awareness level, they dont seem to see it themselves. Given the violence involved in internal pole shift, the drama of the literal process of mind collapse and the starkness of the reversals I am witnessesing, not to mention the upheaval that the result of that is creating internally to many individuals and externally to the collective of the species, I wondered if it couldnt be important to note.



R

edit on 16-8-2011 by Rosha because: typos


reply posted on 26-8-2011 @ 02:38 PM by Scott Creighton
reply to post by Logman


Hi Logman,

Snagging the book? Not quite sure what you mean here but if you mean including all my latest research and findings then I can tell you that has already been done.

Best wishes,

Scott Creighton


reply posted on 26-8-2011 @ 02:52 PM by Scott Creighton
reply to post by Rosha

Hello Rosha,

The short answer to your question is that I do not really have an opinion on 2012 and possible changing consciousness. My personal belief is that if there is anything to the whole 2012 date (and I am categorically NOT saying that there is) then it may be, in my view, a natural global event of a cyclical nature that may affect our planet in some way, causing our civilisation eventually to breakdown. A breakdown of civilisation would profoundly change the way many of us think and so in such physical adversity may indirectly change the way many of us behave so that could, in a sense, be likened to a change in consciousness.

The Giza Precession Clock is ticking but whilst it presents the 2012 date in a fairly straightforward manner, this is not the date that is most obviously encoded. I find it fascinating that the 2012 date can be found in the Giza Precession Clock - I cannot say why it is there or if it has any real meaning. All I can say is that the two OTHER dates encoded into the clock appear to have been times on Earth when significant Earth changes were taking place. Will 2012 see similar Earth changes? Alas, I do not have a crystal ball..... only time will tell.

Best wishes,

Scott Creighton


edit on 26/8/2011 by Scott Creighton because: Fix Typo.



reply posted on 26-8-2011 @ 03:11 PM by Julie Washington
reply to post by Scott Creighton


Scott,

I look forward to your book and will purchase it when it becomes available as I am also a huge fan of Graham Hancock.

My question to you is have you read the book The Keys of Enoch?

I just started it and states that the Pyramids ARE aligned with Orion. It also indicates there is some connection to the Pleiadies star cluster. Can't tell you what, because I'm not that far into the book yet.


reply posted on 28-8-2011 @ 05:13 AM by Scott Creighton
reply to post by Julie Washington

Hello Julie,

Very nice to hear from you as always. No, I haven't read the Keys of Encoch but it does not surprise me in the least that it makes the claim that the Gizamids are linked to the Orion constellation. The evidence for such that I have uncovered in recent years is simply way too much to be considered simple coincidence as has been the position of mainstream Egytpology ever since the publication of The Orion Mystery (Bauval and Gilbert, 1994). In the absence of written testimony there comes a point where coincidence must give way to conformity. Giza most certainly is the result of a preconceived, unified plan whose underlying design imperative were the Belt stars of the Orion constellation. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind about that and I am sure my confidence in this will be justly demonstrated in my forthcoming book. The crucial point here is, of course, that as a pre-conceived, unified plan, Giza simply COULD NOT have been designed for the purposes of burial since how, to give just one example, could the designer of the plan know that in approximately 100 years into the future the third king of the smallest pyramid would require three satellite pyramids to be built for his queens? Time machines notwithstanding, the designer of the plan simply could not know this and yet these structures are clearly part of the preconceived plan based upon Orion's belt. If he could not know how many queens pyramids to build for G3 100 or thereabout years into the future then he simply could NOT have been building these structures as tombs.The planners clearly had something else, some other purpose, for these giant pyramid structures. And they most certainly did.

The issue now really is WHY and WHY Orion? It seems to me that the American Egytologist, Dr Mark Lehner who first noticed the so-called 'Lehner Line' at Giza and independent researcher Robert Bauval noticed the layout of the Gizamids mimicking Orion's Belt, that these guys noticed individual pieces of the larger mystery that is Giza. My new book brings these pieces (and others) together in a very convincing fashion to explain WHY which, as you probably know, I have explained briefly elsewhere on my Forum here at ATS.

As for the Plaidies - I understand writers such as Wayne Herschel makes connections to that group of stars but I have not read his book so can't tell you any specifics.

Very best wishes,

Scott Creighton

edit on 28/8/2011 by Scott Creighton because: Fix Typo.




reply posted on 28-8-2011 @ 05:20 AM by Scott Creighton
reply to post by Logman

Hello Logman,

Ah, I see what you are saying. 'Snagging' here in the UK means to repair minor faults in a new or newly refurbished house.

Alas, it is really down to the publishers. The release date for my book was supposed to have been February 2012 and they have managed to bring it forward by 2 weeks so it is doubtful that they will be able to bring it forward any further. If anything changes, however, I will besure to let you know.

Best wishes,

Scott Creighton


reply posted on 28-8-2011 @ 12:09 PM by Julie Washington
Scott,

Thanks for your reply. There is no need convincing me of your theories as I am already on the same page and beyond.

I implore you to get the book The Keys of Enoch. This book written in textbook style originally published by JJ Hurtak talks about the alignment of the pyramids with Orion. The book originally came out in the 70's, so he was the first (that I know of) that connected the alignments to Orion.

Also, he discusses why Orion is important as that it is the seed of positive knowledge (or something like that). I'm only part way into the book (page 117 of 565). It is a very complicated read. I find myself rereading paragraphs in order to take it all in. Apparently, this book was the result of JJ Hurtak having a "visionary meeting" with Enoch. The amount of information in this book is mind boggling. There is no way one person could have all this knowledge as it covers, science, ancient knowledge, ancient texts and ties it all together with the Bible, The Pyramid Text, The Vedas, and on and on.

Here are a couple of quotes I picked out from page 75:

"These star shafts function as a theoretical mapping of the magnetohydrodynamic star channels connecting the magnetic and electromagnetic grid patterns of star alignment. The mixing arrangement is used to measure the geophysical cycles of change, polar wanderings, tectonic changes, and activates magnetic-gravitational wave codings for conciousness deliverance. Furthermore, the Great Pyramid was built before the last geophysical shift to instruct man in the awesome and regenerating architecture of cataclysmic geology"

"Orion must be understood as giving forth the positive sword of Light to cut through the Magnetic fields of biological limitation. We must understand the Lords of Light from Orion as giving us this consciousness model of the solar-sphnix to rise to a new-born creation beyond the negative energy of the immediate magnetic fields. Man must understand why the ancients regarded Orion, the region "Ihm-'sk" (Region of the imperishable stars, Orion), as the princely region among the stars. As it is said in the Pyramid Texts, "Orion, the Father of the Gods, has given a certificate of life creation as the greater power"

"The Great Pyramid is a geophysical computer showing the half-life of our local universe within the geophysical foundations of the Earth's biophysical geophysical and astrophysical meridians. Moreover, it is also an astrophysical life station showing how the geoid function of our planet is connected with Orion which is the region for positive progrmming in our universe."

"The Great Pyramid is an astrophysical eye between the larger positive and negative cycles of star evolution charted by the astrophysical star shafts. These star shafts contain the resonance patterns of magnetophydrodynamic actiivities and function as cosmological calculators."

He talks about why there are pyramids in other locations as well as on other planets and how they are connected to each other. As well as the energy grids that the pyramids sit atop.

I could go on an on, but I think you would find this book very valuable to your current book and research.

Best Wishes,
Jullie

edit on 28-8-2011 by Julie Washington because: (no reason given)
edit on 28-8-2011 by Julie Washington because: (no reason given)


reply posted on 28-8-2011 @ 01:36 PM by Scott Creighton
reply to post by Blue Shift

Hello Blue Shift,

Thank you for your post. You write:

Blue Shift: I don't know. I've never been to crazy about the notion that somehow pyramid shafts or alignment stones "target" certain stars in the sky, and that's how you can determine their age. A shaft or the top of a stone draws multiple parallel lines across the sky, and I think it's a bit of a stretch to say they're zeroing in on one specific bright star. During the course of one night, they cross numerous stars. Maybe those have significance, too?

Also, if the pyramids were somehow thrown out of alignment so long ago, then why does everybody say they are so perfectly aligned with the poles today and attribute the accuracy to aliens, or whatever?


SC: Two alignment stones can certainly mark the azimuth of a star (its position clockwise from north) on the horizon (either at rising or setting). As precession progresses, however, we will see that the alignment stones no longer align with the star. In approximately 716 years, the target star on the horizon will have shifted almost exactly 10 degrees from the original alignment. Knowing the rate of precession then allows us to back-project when the star would have last alignmed with the stone markers, thus giving us a date.

As for the shafts of the Great Pyramid. These are not aligning with ANY stars per-se. The mainstream view of these enigmatic features of the Great Pyramid is that the four shafts were targetting four stars that were of religious or cultic importance to the ancient Egyptians ca.2500 BCE in otder that the king's soul could ascend to these celestial regions.

This view is quite wrong in my opinion.

All four shafts of the Great Pyramid make reference to only ONE star - the star Al Nitak in Orion's belt. Note that I do not say they 'target' Al Nitak but 'make reference' to that star. There is a crucial and fundamental difference in this. We know these shafts are referencing Al Nitak simply because the Great Pyramid is this star's terrestrial counterpart. The inclination and orientation of these shafts can be likened to the altitude and right ascension of this one star (at different positions in the southern sky). The northern shafts merely represent the 'mirrored' points in the northern sky of the two southern positions. Taking all this information together, what we find is that the four shafts of the Great Pyramid - by referencing just ONE star, Al Nitak - show us how the Earth (as observed from the latitude of Giza) tilted approximately 6.5 degrees.

This is what the shafts tell us and you can see this in this presentation:The Great Pyramid and the Earth Tilt

The ancient Egyptians themselves tell us that the spirit of Osiris is to be identified with just ONE star, 'the star under the arm of Orion'.

This is all explained much more fully in my forthcoming book.

Best wishes,

Scott Creighton

edit on 28/8/2011 by Scott Creighton because: Fix Typo.



reply posted on 28-8-2011 @ 01:53 PM by Scott Creighton
reply to post by TheEnlightenedOne

Hello Enlightened One,

Many thanks indeed for you post and your kind words. It is always nice to hear that there are people out there who read and understand what I am presenting with my research. This is what makes it so worthwhile.

Thank you again.

Scott Creighton


reply posted on 28-8-2011 @ 02:05 PM by Scott Creighton
reply to post by Julie Washington

Hello Julie,

Thank you again. Yes, it looks like I shall have to procure a copy of this book. I believe Bauval and Hurtak have had some discussions about the Orion correlation but I think it is somewhat moot in any case since Maalesh Cocteau makes the same connection in his A Theatrical Tour in the Middle East (1949) as did Gerald Massey before him in his book, Ancient Egypt: Light of the World (1907)

Thanks for the extracts.

.Best wishes,

Scott Creighton
edit on 28/8/2011 by Scott Creighton because: Fix Typo.



reply posted on 23-11-2011 @ 07:34 PM by lostinspace
Hi Scott,

Do you believe the event that caused the earth to tilt was the same event that caused Uranus to fall over on its side?



Uranus has a 98 degree tilt which makes the planet appear to be on its side. Each pole experiences 42 years of daylight followed by 42 years of darkness. The only other planet to have this sort of extreme tilt is Pluto, which is 123 degrees. This type of tilt is not common among the other planets and so one is to believe these two planets possibly collided with another large body.

Here’s a different explanation that’s very interesting.
How Uranus got its tilt.

Uranus and Neptune begin much closer to the Sun than their current positions, at about 13 and 14 AU. They stay pretty comfortably in those positions for about 100,000 years. Then, quite suddenly, that 1:2 resonance is reached. Saturn and Jupiter don't change a lot initially, but the orbits of Uranus and Neptune go nuts. They get much more eccentric, so that their orbits cross; at times Uranus even gets very close to Saturn. After about a million years, the eccentricity dies down, and Uranus and Neptune are on their way out to more distant positions in the solar system, at the same time that Saturn begins to acquire its present orbit eccentricity.


Sounds like the solar system has periods where the ride is real bumpy.

What do you think?
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^