Forbidden Egyptology

reply to post by Skyfloating


Hi Skyfloating, indeed interesting, but in my opinion and if I make no mistake here, is the angle he edit by the G3 star definitely no 47º but 90º

The 2 main axis of the Giza-Orion Design Theory.

47º [in my opinion 90º] + 43º= 90º

Perhaps I did not understand it correct, so what is your opinion on this?

[edit on 7/3/08 by spacevisitor]

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Is it about his death or is it about his ascension?

Really...there is an alternative interpretation to all these "ascension" myths.

No, it's about his death. He's falling down the World Tree into the mouth of Xibalba, the Underworld. The translated inscriptions on this and other similar items (and around his temple) confirm the "falling into the underworld" interpetation.
www.tomgidwitz.com...

I find that many "non-mainstream" authors play fast and loose with facts, cherry picking items (or showing pieces of them out of context) and either pretending that the writing is just decoration or not showing the full item or not presenting the whole area or culture:

The Falling Into the Underworld can also be found here (from course on Mayans):
web.ku.edu...

And here (interesting title for a paper -- "Cosmic Jaws: we eat the gods and the gods eat us". Requires academic subscription to read full text)
jaar.oxfordjournals.org...

...and in a bunch of other books and papers written about the Mayan civilization by people who have dug the sites, examined the bones, and can read the language's inscriptions.

[edit on 7-3-2008 by Byrd]

reply to post by spacevisitor


I dont know. I posted it because Harte is not only a mainstreamer but also a maths-teacher. Id be interested in hearing his view.

reply to post by Byrd


Thanks for the info, accepted. People were missing your skeptical input to the ancient civilizations forum. Welcome back. I will try making it difficult for you to maintain some of your orthodox views.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by spacevisitor

 

I dont know. I posted it because Harte is not only a mainstreamer but also a maths-teacher. Id be interested in hearing his view.

It is already corrected in 90º.

reply to post by spacevisitor


Yes, Id still love Hartes opinion on it though, since he´s the one that keeps saying that Orion and Giza are not aligned "at all".

Starred and flagged; the entire thread is a good read regardless of one's own belief. I enjoy reading everyone's theories. Great job.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by spacevisitor

 

Yes, Id still love Hartes opinion on it though, since he´s the one that keeps saying that Orion and Giza are not aligned "at all".

I'm not saying it's not true, I'm personally not sure either way, whatsoever - BUT, that's the first time I've heard that one. Again, my knowledge is *very* limited on the subject, so alas I really have no clue if it's correct or not.

Originally posted by CyberSm0ke

I'm not saying it's not true, I'm personally not sure either way, whatsoever - BUT, that's the first time I've heard that one. Again, my knowledge is *very* limited on the subject, so alas I really have no clue if it's correct or not.

The theory is that the pyramids and the orion star constellation match in distances from each other and that the pyramids were therefore built to align with or symbolize those stars.

This is wildly refuted by mainstream egyptology and vehemently defended by fringe egyptology. The abovementioned thread adds some new info on the topic.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by spacevisitor

 

Yes, Id still love Hartes opinion on it though, since he´s the one that keeps saying that Orion and Giza are not aligned "at all".

That's correct. They aren't.

You have to "fudge" the belt stars quite a bit to get them to match... for one thing, you have to turn the map of Egypt upside down to get the pyramids going in the same direction as the belt stars. You also have to give them a bigger radius so they'll "hit" the right positions. Finally, you also have to ignore the 8 other pyramids that are right there with them (sitting right in front of them, in fact.)

...and ignore all the writing that's found on the plateau of Giza as well as the temple walks, the boat ramps, and everything else.

Pick any major city, and I can find three buildings that are in alignment with the belt stars of Orion (or the belt stars as they existed 2500 years ago or as they existed 10,000 years and 20,000 years ago.) I can do it with cars on the parking lot, too or even Lunar craters (there's a series of craters on the east side of this sector of the moon that "matches" the belt of Orion: www.lunarrepublic.com... and a perfect group of tiny craters in the middle of this picture: www.lunarrepublic.com... -- and so forth. You can find "Orion Alignment" meteor strikes all over the place).

There's more, but I'll leave it for Harte to finish up.

reply to post by Byrd


Hmmmmmmmmmmm...

alright, makes sense.



If there are any readers out there who are pro Giza-Orion, I´d love to read your response to this. My position is undecided.

I wander, is their a correlation between the real size of the Orion belt stars, and the size of the three great Giza pyramids?
Just a thought.

And another question,

Originally posted by Byrd
You have to "fudge" the belt stars quite a bit to get them to match... for one thing, you have to turn the map of Egypt upside down to get the pyramids going in the same direction as the belt stars.

I thought, you must look at it this way, that when you look down from out a plane and see the pyramids laying on the Giza plateau in relation with the river Nile, and you look than up to the sky, you see the belt stars laying exactly the same way in relation with the milky way.

Originally posted by Byrd
...and ignore all the writing that's found on the plateau of Giza as well as the temple walks, the boat ramps, and everything else.

Byrd, why is it that the mainstream Egyptologists ignore the total absence of writing at all in the great pyramid?
And also the fact that mainstream Egyptologists says, He is famous for building the Great Pyramid at Giza, one of the seven wonders of the world, but apart from this, we know very little about him. His only surviving statue is, ironically, the smallest piece of Egyptian royal sculpture ever discovered: a 7.5 cm- (3 inch-) high ivory statue found at Abydos.

www.bbc.co.uk...

An empty sarcophagus is located in the King's Chamber inside the pyramid though it is unclear if it had ever been used for such a purpose as burial. While his mummy has never been recovered

en.wikipedia.org...

So, what is in your eyes the indisputable evidence that the great pyramid was indeed build by Pharaoh Khufu?



[edit on 9/3/08 by spacevisitor]

reply to post by spacevisitor

Since when did the argument shift to whether Khufu specifically built the Great Pyramid?

IMO that is irrelevant. Khufu may or may not have built it, in terms of "forbidden" egyptology it doesnt matter what pharaoh built it.

The argument here is obviously whether it was built before the Egyptians even existed as a people or not.

reply to post by merka


Well, its a little bit relevant: If egyptologists can clearly assign the building of the Pyramid to Kuhfu, they can shut us up...


...and can continue promoting the faulty logic of "Since these pyramids are standing in egypt they must have been built by the egyptians".

Originally posted by merka
reply to post by spacevisitor

 

Since when did the argument shift to whether Khufu specifically built the Great Pyramid?

For me personally it has never shifted, because that is an important issue in relation whether it was built before the Egyptians even existed as a people or not..

Originally posted by merka
IMO that is irrelevant. Khufu may or may not have built it, in terms of "forbidden" Egyptology it doesnt matter what pharaoh built it.

It is absolute not irrelevant, because “Mainstream” Egyptology claims that it was definitely Pharaoh Khufu who is the builder of the great pyramid.
But the proof for that claim is for many a matter of dispute.
Then there are other new arguments that even strengthen that impression of dispute.
But “Mainstream” Egyptology would not even take a look or make a study of those new arguments; they simply wipe it of the table.
Like happens with archaeological findings that don’t fit in the view of the “mainstream” archaeologists.
And there you have "forbidden" Egyptology, nothing wrong with that.

I hope I make my point understandable.

Originally posted by merka
The argument here is obviously whether it was built before the Egyptians even existed as a people or not.

Right.

Originally posted by spacevisitor
I wander, is their a correlation between the real size of the Orion belt stars, and the size of the three great Giza pyramids?

None at all. That was one of many problems with the original idea.

I thought, you must look at it this way, that when you look down from out a plane and see the pyramids laying on the Giza plateau in relation with the river Nile, and you look than up to the sky, you see the belt stars laying exactly the same way in relation with the milky way.

Actually, you don't. The stars of Orion's belt are parallel to the Milky Way. The line of 3 pyramids points away from the Nile. All 11 pyramids on the Giza plateau can't be plotted into any sort of relationship with the Nile or Orion.

Byrd, why is it that the mainstream Egyptologists ignore the total absence of writing at all in the great pyramid?

Uhm... because you've been told that they ignore it?

In fact, they don't ignore it. There are a few pieces of writing inside the pyramid (the names of the teams that hauled the stones. In the Egyptological journals there's quite a bit of scholarly publication on the lack of text inside, the apparently unfinished sarcophagus, and the history of the time -- discussions that go back to the late 1800's.

Two recent discoveries include an inscription with "the 17th year of Khufu's reigh"inside the pyramid. This inscription had been seen by Petrie in the 1800's and then was not seen until recent explorations:
en.wikipedia.org...

So, what is in your eyes the indisputable evidence that the great pyramid was indeed build by Pharaoh Khufu?

Many things, including the whole plateau. When an Egyptologist or archaeologist or anthropologist looks at a structure like that, they assess it in relationship to its surroundings. Are there other clues about what's going on? What else is there (in this case, a bunch of sphynxes including the Great Sphynx, piles of ostrika (shards with receipts on them), tombs of the workers, tombs of favored nobles, temples, solar boat pits, and 10 other pyramids (some of which have associated funerary temples) as well as ancient walls and other things.)

The pyramid has always been known as Khufu's pyramid (Khufu's Akhet -- Khufu of the Horizon). Even Herodotus records this. Given the ancient references PLUS the name of Khufu on one of the blocks inside the pyramid, as well as his mortuary temple (now partly covered up by an encroaching town: www.bbc.co.uk... )

His son's pyramid is one of the three large pyramids. His mother is/was apparently buried in one of the smaller pyramids at the foot of the Great Pyramid.

And it's only his likeness that is lost. Khufu appears as a sort of folk here in tales (the Westcar Manuscript, for instance.) The worship of Khufu was continued by a lineage of priests for over a thousand years (into Roman times) -- and was associated with the pyramid. So we have a thousand year chain of evidence saying that it was his.

All of which is more convincing that ascribing the pyramid to, say, Alexander the Great.

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by spacevisitor
Byrd, why is it that the mainstream Egyptologists ignore the total absence of writing at all in the great pyramid?

Uhm... because you've been told that they ignore it?

Thank you for your answer Byrd.
But that it is absolute not the reason at all, it is the following.

Hieroglyphic was one of the first complete scripts to be used in ancient Egypt. The ancient Egyptians used it for over 3500 years to record important information.

www.ancientegypt.co.uk...

So, if it was really build under the command of as said the “cruel and ruthless” Pharaoh Khufu, who reigned for about 23 years, which is the number ascribed to him by the Turin King List, or even much longer as claimed by others.

The biggest and technological most impressive Pyramid of all, obviously build to honour himself, and as claimed by “mainstream” Egyptology for his last resting place, then would he not order his builders to decorate every inch of every wall, every ceiling, in all the chambers and the immense grand gallery with all his “great” and “good” deeds and “magnificent” war acts?
Instead of the unthinkable decision, to let it just by some graffiti — believed to have been made by the workers on the stones before they were assembled?

How comes, that the building of such a marvellous peace of architecture wasn’t important enough to record in any way?
That is for me absolute understandable.

Then the following.

He is famous for building the Great Pyramid at Giza, one of the seven wonders of the world, but apart from this, we know very little about him. His only surviving statue is, ironically, the smallest piece of Egyptian royal sculpture ever discovered: a 7.5 cm- (3 inch-) high ivory statue found at Abydos.

www.bbc.co.uk...

An empty sarcophagus is located in the King's Chamber inside the pyramid though it is unclear if it had ever been used for such a purpose as burial.

Isn’t that to say at least, very strange indeed?

Originally posted by Byrd
So we have a thousand year chain of evidence saying that it was his.

That is a matter of opinion.

Originally posted by Byrd
All of which is more convincing that ascribing the pyramid to, say, Alexander the Great.

And what is your purpose to make a remark like this?



[edit on 10/3/08 by spacevisitor]

Originally posted by spacevisitor

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by spacevisitor
Byrd, why is it that the mainstream Egyptologists ignore the total absence of writing at all in the great pyramid?

Uhm... because you've been told that they ignore it?

Thank you for your answer Byrd.
But that it is absolute not the reason at all, it is the following.

Hieroglyphic was one of the first complete scripts to be used in ancient Egypt. The ancient Egyptians used it for over 3500 years to record important information.

www.ancientegypt.co.uk...

So, if it was really build under the command of as said the “cruel and ruthless” Pharaoh Khufu, who reigned for about 23 years, which is the number ascribed to him by the Turin King List, or even much longer as claimed by others.

The biggest and technological most impressive Pyramid of all, obviously build to honour himself, and as claimed by “mainstream” Egyptology for his last resting place, then would he not order his builders to decorate every inch of every wall, every ceiling, in all the chambers and the immense grand gallery with all his “great” and “good” deeds and “magnificent” war acts?
Instead of the unthinkable decision, to let it just by some graffiti — believed to have been made by the workers on the stones before they were assembled?

One would need to "explain" why no major structure built prior to the 5th Dynasty was "decorated" as well, then?

I mean, given that the other structures were not decorated, then you'd be pointing out the anomaly here if the G.P. was festooned with writings and art on the inside, wouldn't you?

Either case, then, your argument would be equivalent and thus moot.

Originally posted by spacevisitorHow comes, that the building of such a marvellous peace of architecture wasn’t important enough to record in any way?
That is for me absolute understandable.

Why do you think nothing concerning the building of the structure was recorded in any way?

It seems that with one breath people here demand that "we don't know everything" and with another they pretend every ancient record made by the Egyptians has somehow been found and the records are lacking in documentation concerning the construction of the G.P.

There is no reason to think that nothing was ever recorded concerning this construction. Perhaps we've just not found it yet.

Harte

I have to go see a man about a dinosaur (yes, really... I am a volunteer fossil preparator), but in the mean time this page will give you an overview of SOME of the hieroglyphic material located in the workers' village beside the pyramid of Giza. Note the starting dates (4th year of reign of Khufu) and ending dates (completion date of last pyramid on plateau):
guardians.net...

..as well as the notes about the health of the workers, types of tombs, etc, etc. Remember this is only a 2,000 word summary of things that have been presented at over 100 conferences and in over 1400 books and articles and tv programs and news items on the subject:
scholar.google.com...

scholar.google.com...

Nearly 4,000 news items on the subject:
news.google.com...

Over 600 news items in recent archives on Khufu:
news.google.com...

There is a constant stream of news on the discoveries... unless you've got this stuff on an RSS feed there's really no way you'd be aware of everything that's been found or is going on. And only real Egyptology geeks have that kind of "I have no life" news feed going on!

Me, I just hang out with folks like that. I have a life-- honest!

Harte and Byrd, you must give me some time to answer, not because I can’t or will, but because as you know by now I suppose, my difficulty with the language.
You have no idea how much time that cost me.
But I will answer them.

Harte, you are in my opinion right about the fact that Antarctica is not visible on the map of Piri Reis.