The Pyramids are older than 2600 B.C.

reply to post by italkyoulisten

---

"Just" be a statue of a lion, very good use of the word

Regarding the head, one might argue that if it is an ancient statue that originally had a lion head (ie "just" a lion statue), why would the Egyptians deface it? Wouldnt they rather be impressed by the old lion and make many smaller versions to try to replicate its glory? Well they did. Except all of them are small sphinxes. That is, it probably had the head of a pharaoh to begin with.

[edit on 28-1-2008 by merka]

i agree that the whole theory that the pyramids were built as tombs as completely ridiculous - who - no matter how religious - would cut hundreds of thousand of huge rocks by thousand of workers hundreds of miles wit the most primitive of tools just to bury one person? i just cant fathom the logic there.
and the point is not about the shape but the grand size of the project
and to reply to the first post - i also agree they're much older and there is evidence of that with the sphinx that has been aged with water that doesnt correspond with the timeline given.
much more research should be devoted to the age of one of the last standing ancient wonders of the world.

Why is it so hard to fathom? History has seen it repeated many, many times. Religion doesnt even need to be involved.

This is not a personal theory or whatever you would call it either. Its fact.

The one in power can order other people to do anything he/she want.

Just look at the absolutely insane Roman emperors that followed Caesar as a radical example.

Or what about the Great Wall? Emperor Qin ordered that one built. Do you think the Chinese people liked slaving for its construction?

Sometimes though you're right. The logic pf leaders eludes even people at the time. That's why the previously mentioned Roman emperors didnt have a... happy... ending.

[edit on 8-3-2008 by merka]

no its not 100% fact - not much is known about the pyramids its just the common consensus.
i find it hard to fathom because of its use - a simple tomb
the romans were fighting for land and the chinese were protecting their land - thats a major difference. if there was more of a reason for the pyramids i might be able to believe it but the explanation just doesnt logically fit reason. i'm not saying i'm right - maybe they used the pyramids for another purpose for these gigantic monuments - but just to bury one person just doesnt add up to me and i am interested in finding new evidence to support either theory

reply to post by mamasita

---

You totally missed the entire meaning of my post.

Nevermind

That's what "alternative history" books and websites would love for you to believe. In fact, there's quite a bit known about them (including memos from work overseers about receiving the stones from the quaries.) Their names are known (the Great Pyramid's name is "Khufu's Ahket"), mummies have been found in them (including the ones on Giza), they had chapels placed in front of them dedicating them to specific rulers... and so on and so forth. There was a lot of writing in them and in the graveyards around them (they're always found in graveyards.)



The Romans didn't build pyramids.


Chinese pyramids also enclose the dead and are of a different structure than the Egyptian ones.



You're thinking like a modern person; not like someone with no education (only some of the nobles had any education) who was brought up to worship a set of gods that included the king as the emblem and person of the living god (this also occurred in Rome and elsewhere.) You are not thinking like the peasant farmer whose fields flood once a year (in a flood that lasts several months) who is given a chance to work for food during that time period if they work on construction projects for the god (king.)

It's an interesting field of study. One of my favorite sites to recommend to the beginner is the TourEgypt site, which has a nice summary of a lot of stuff.
www.touregypt.net/featurestories/pyramids.htm
www.touregypt.net/construction/
www.touregypt.net/cheops.htm
www.touregypt.net/kings.htm
www.touregypt.net/featurestories/material.htm

...and when you're done with those, I can recommend others.

Also... in your searches, please remember that every "ancient Egyptian" picture you see is like a cartoon and ALWAYS has hieroglyphic writing associated with it. Remember that we can and have translated this writing... so if you're shown something without the writing around it, start being suspicious that someone is pulling a "fast one." You can check the translations from many sources, but don't accept interpretations that ignore what's written on the item or on the picture.

mamasita,

Another good bit of reading, to add to Byrd's recommendations can be found here:

www.aeraweb.org...

It should be mentioned that Mark Lehrer started out as a believer in the fringe science surrounding the Great Pyramid and Giza Plateau only to find out for himself that there was no basis for said beliefs.

cormac

reply to post by Byrd

---

i never said that romans or the chinese built pyramids! we were talking about wars and walls!

reply to post by merka

---

yes, your basically saying that leaders do ludicrous things. My whole point is that yes they have come up with some crazy ideas but even the examples you gave have some logic that gained either land power or wealth.

thank you byrd and cormac for the sites - altho all the first ones did not work.

First of all i'm not saying that the egyptians didnt build the pyramids i'm just saying that from the information we've got so far alot doesn't add up to me. If it does to you then great but i'm still suspicious. I'm not forcing my beliefs onto anyone i'm simply stating my hypothesis.