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.

 

Forbidden Egyptology

page: 49
108
<< 46  47  48    50  51  52 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 13 2008 @ 05:39 AM
link   
reply to post by spacevisitor
 


yes, the egyptian story of the serpent in a beautiful garden reminds me of something too. But you know what the debunkers say? They say "Thats a coincidence".

Why am I not surprised?


[edit on 13-4-2008 by Skyfloating]




posted on Apr, 13 2008 @ 07:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune


Why do you stick up for Hawass, Hanslune?


Someone has too! I understand what he is trying to do and applaude his efforts. `


Hi Hanslune, I really respect your support for him, but don’t you think there is a possibility that Hawass is in a way bound and restricted in his doing by certain forced rules of the as Dr Mohammed Ibrahim Bakr said in an interview “official "mafia" whose aim is to impede the archaeological work for their own purposes”.


In an even more bizarre twist to the tale, two months later the man responsible for sacking Dr Hawass at the time of the discovery of the slab, Dr Mohammed Ibrahim Bakr, was himself dismissed. But unlike Dr Hawass, he did not go quietly. In an interview with Egypt's daily newspaper Al-Ahram, Dr Bakr said he had been brought down by an official "mafia" whose aim was to impede the archaeological work for their own purposes. He also claimed that the Giza Plateau had suffered widespread thefts of antiquities and financial malpractice's. "I wanted these practices reported to the prosecution authorities but my request was refused"


www.towers-online.co.uk...


Originally posted by Hanslune
There is not one single piece of evidence for aliens or advanced humans doing the work for them.


I have a question I like to ask you in relation with that if you don’t mind, but you’re free to answer of course.
If you won’t I absolute respect that.

I don’t know your view on the Extraterrestrial matter, and with that I mean that planet Earth is visited now and as more and more turn out also for a very long time in Earth history.
So perhaps you heard of the ongoing appeal for official Disclosure of this reality.
If so, then this is my question.
If that official Disclosure eventually take place, as expected between now and some 15 years or so, would that not change your opinion dramatically about the who build the Giza pyramid discussion and some more archaeological mysteries?



posted on Apr, 13 2008 @ 12:28 PM
link   


If that official Disclosure eventually take place, as expected between now and some 15 years or so, would that not change your opinion dramatically about the who build the Giza pyramid discussion and some more archaeological mysteries?


"Disclosure" has been in discussion by the fring for nearly 60 years, I suspect it will never happen as there may be nothing to disclose.

Aliens = pyramids - nope unless they were some spectacularly technologically backwards aliens who wanted to built a tomb for a pharoah and spent several human generations on earth to take the Egyptians thru the steps to build them and left no trace of there being here AND the Egyptians didn't notice them.

Egyptian politics, you might want to take that question to the Egyptologists over at the Hall of Ma'at. I would suspect they Mohammed is miffed about not getting official credit nor bakshesh for the investigation, or he was blamed for giving Gantenbrink the permission to do so when an institution should have been. I for one would like the exploration of the "doors" continued.

Zahi

[edit on 13/4/08 by Hanslune]



posted on Apr, 13 2008 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


Hey Hanslune,

Originally posted by Hanslune

Someone has too! I understand what he is trying to do and applaude his efforts. However he is a media hound and a bit of schmuck but then so many people are. But his professional stands I can agree with.


Although I acknowledge that Hawass has invested much time and effort into the study of Giza and other Ancient Egyptian sites, it is my contention that he's not been entirely forthcoming and honest in his divulgence of certain (important) pieces of information.


Because all the evidence gathered in the last two-hundred years all points to the Egyptians doing it all. There is not one single piece of evidence for aliens or advanced humans doing the work for them.


Then I must be looking at the wrong evidence. Even Petrie was quite confused by a lot of what he saw at Giza. If you could point me to the evidence that locks it up for you, I'd be very interested to study it.

And I don't necessarily agree with the alien theory, but an advanced culture or civilization, or some other (heavy) outside influence, yes I'm open to those ideas.


Besides finding some evidence to support the idea that someone else did it you then have to discredit/disprove all the evidence that Egyptians did do it. That might be tough. You have a better chance in trying to prove the Germans weren't actually in WWI


Do what? Build the Giza pyramids? Might be tough, but will certainly be easier than proving the Germans weren't involved in WWI.



You want a short answers for a massive question? See the answer above.


I'd actually prefer the long answer.


Originally posted by Photoneffect
Please, as a scholar, answer me these questions!



Originally posted by Hanslune
Answered but I assume you won't like them.


No, not answered actually.

Cheers.

[edit on 13-4-2008 by PhotonEffect]



posted on Apr, 13 2008 @ 06:57 PM
link   
Howdy Photon

That the Egyptians were responsible for Egyptian culture without assistance from "advanced humans" or Aliens - they may have had mutual assistance from other same period historical cultures.

Lets use an analogy; lets say that all of the knowledge we have about the Egyptians could be concentrated into 1,000 facts or bullet points (this is an example the actual data is well over millions of pages of data.

In those 1,000 bullet points we have 975 that are clear cut with little or no disagreement on what they mean or don't mean.

The next twenty four are a puzzle, people disagree as to what they are, how they relate, how they were made, whether they are Egyptian or what.

One, we have one item that contracts the items above (I don't know what this would be this is illustrative).

So MS Egyptologists taken the 975 items, digest them and say - this is the frame work of Egyptian civiilization.

Fringe takes the 24 items and the "1" and say no this is the frame work.

So tell me what you find uncompelling about the present data? What pray tell is your "one"?



posted on Apr, 13 2008 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
Lets use an analogy;

No offense but this appears to be more posturing and less what I was looking for, but ok, let's.


In those 1,000 bullet points we have 975 that are clear cut with little or no disagreement on what they mean or don't mean.

Clear cut? This is where I disagree.

Little or no disagreement? Between MS Egyptologists you must mean? Of course there wouldn't be, it's not like Lehner and Hawass would ever disagree on anything...


The next twenty four are a puzzle, people disagree as to what they are, how they relate, how they were made, whether they are Egyptian or what.

And these are the ones that blow apart the other 975. It's quality not quantity that matters.


So MS Egyptologists taken the 975 items, digest them and say - this is the frame work of Egyptian civiilization.

IOW, this is what they want us all to believe is factual, when mostly it's based on circumstantial and speculative evidence (take the c14 dating as an example).


Fringe takes the 24 items and the "1" and say no this is the frame work.

Bingo.


So tell me what you find uncompelling about the present data? What pray tell is your "one"?

I believe I've already presented more than enough arguments and questions in this thread which directly challenge the mainstream paradigm. These of course have yet to be addressed by you et al, which is typical...

[edit on 13-4-2008 by PhotonEffect]



posted on Apr, 13 2008 @ 11:58 PM
link   
Howdy Proton

I think you misunderstand the example. the "twenty-four" cannot "blow away" the other data - that data never goes away. That is a common fringe misconception (and why I use that analogy). The fringe belief is that if they can find one anomaly then all the other data ceases to exist. It doesn't, you have to explain/place all the data in your theory.

C-14 is factual, if you challenge that you challenge the basics of physics.

Lets try this, give me three key things that you believe disprove the conventional view of Egyptian culture or civilization (This is a long thread and I don't recall everything you've written). However if your argument is solely from personal disbelief in 'x' and not factual/evidence based. I'm not sure I can help you.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 02:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
Howdy Proton

I think you misunderstand the example. the "twenty-four" cannot "blow away" the other data - that data never goes away. That is a common fringe misconception (and why I use that analogy). The fringe belief is that if they can find one anomaly then all the other data ceases to exist. It doesn't, you have to explain/place all the data in your theory.


sorry this is wrong. Even a SINGLE verifiable phenomena that does not fit with a current scientific model is enough to invalidate that model if no explanation can be found/way to fit it in. Thats not to say that that model might not still be useful (eg newtonian physics is still pretty useful in everyday life...), just that it is not the "full story"

eg: a SINGLE verifiable alien artifact found undisturbed in an egyptian pyramid would open a whole big can of worms about the factual or not status of egyptian god "myths" etc.

also: on one side you have mainstream egyptology, plus anyone trying to fake small artifacts for money would likely try to fit them in this framework, plus 95% of people looking are looking for things that fit in this framework.


on the other you have the fringe, and a possible cover up of relics and downplaying of ones that cant be covered up (ahem GP, sphinx(*)), plus items found may not be recognized as being associated due to not being associated according to official framework.

so which one is going to have more "proof" on their side? the mainstream one of course. What does this completely prove? NOTHING MUCH(unfortunately).

that said, I agree, for those not believing in conspiracy, some variant of the mainstream view is probably the most logical one...



C-14 is factual, if you challenge that you challenge the basics of physics.


yes but its a lot harder to prove the said tested item was not placed there at a later date (crazy example: the pole we were talking about previously: whos to say that was not placed by a royal Egyptian expedition into the GP to find out how it was built/who built it.

there is also the matter of calibration based on "known dated" objects (although this IMO even if wrong shouldn't throw it off by all that much, unless there was something quite radioactive in the vicinity of either item for a while)



Lets try this, give me three key things that you believe disprove the conventional view of Egyptian culture or civilization (This is a long thread and I don't recall everything you've written). However if your argument is solely from personal disbelief in 'x' and not factual/evidence based. I'm not sure I can help you.

(heres my quick rough version of the three. And I dont know that I need "help" in the manner implied....
. But then admitting you need help is the first step hehe)

sphinx water erosion (I think you tentatively agreed with that one in one of these threads) (plus the temple? associated with it, similar thing if I remember right)

GP not having hieroglyphs through it like other Egyptian sites (plus the rest of the weird things about it previously mentioned and discussed)

"pyramids" all round the world. No they are mostly not true pyramids. Yes they seem to be based on the same Idea/copying/influenced by each other. You will probably say this is coincidence, I don't believe so.

(*) not saying they are alien, just older than thought (IMHO)



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
Zahi


Interesting article indeed, but it gives me only more and more the absolute certainty that all that is claimed by the mainstream Egyptologists in relation with the great pyramid and Khufu is based on nothing more then assuming this and assuming that, believing this and believing that.

And the reason for that is that they don’t have the disposal of solid undisputable evidence.


From a point partway along the descending passage, a second passage leads upward to a horizontal passage which leads in turn to a second chamber, misnamed the Queen’s Chamber in fact, it was certainly not for any of Khufu’s queens, who had their own small pyramids.



to a third chamber, the “King’s Chamber”, where the granite sarcophagus of Khufu was found, empty.



Scholarly discussion about the building sequence and purpose of these corridors and chambers is ongoing: many Egyptologists believe that the three chambers represent three changes in the interior plan, reflecting changes in Khufu’s cult,but others believe that all three chambers were part of the original plan.




The presence of these doors in the Great Pyramid raises many questions. One idea is that the doors are challenges that the king must face during his journey to the afterlife. It is written in the Pyramid Texts that the king will face bolts before he travels; perhaps this is a reference to the doors’ copper handles. Yet if this is true, why is Khufu’s pyramid the only one with such doors?



Also, why are there no doors in the shafts of the third chamber? Logically, they should be where the king’s body was buried.



It is possible that these doors are evidence that Khufu’s actual burial chamber might be hidden somewhere inside of his pyramid. An ancient story from the Westcar Papyrus tells of how Khufu searched for the secret documents of the god Thoth in order to design the chambers of his pyramid; we are still trying to understand the complex he and his architects left behind.




[edit on 14/4/08 by spacevisitor]



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 07:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by diablomonic
reply to post by Hanslune
 


actually no, that sounds fairly conclusive...
ah well. guess thats it for that one. (unless we come up with more accurate GPR methods or something, or someone comes out to say they were lying)


If only that were true.

2 years ago this same info appeared right here at ATS, yet here we are having to rehash it.

Count on it. It won't be three weeks before somebody else makes the claim that Hawass is keeping us from finding the Atlantean library under the Sphinx.

Harte



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


I didn't misunderstand anything Hanslune. Maybe you misunderstood, because I asked you for your incontrovertible evidence and received an analogy instead. And you expect me to be satisfied with that when what I've actually asked for directly from you was met with another postulate answer. What is all this evidence that can't be denied? School me. I asked you in my last post to point me in the right direction. You still haven't.

C14 is factual, fine, and in no way am I challenging the basis of physics here. What I'm challenging are the anomalous results from those tests which get conveniently pushed to the side or not mentioned at all ( The GP results). They get averaged in to make them disappear, and because they can't be readily explained they are no good.

You presented a chart in this thread which showed the distribution of results from the dating of various sites around Egypt. Of course this showed a nice and neat plotting of dates right where the mainstream likes them...I directly challenged you as to where the anomalous dates on that distribution were...I have gotten nothing, which is typical.

Yet you ask me to present my evidence which is the sole basis of me being here in the first place posting in this thread. At least 50% of my posts have been direct challenges to or questions about your view on this entire matter and I've gotten nothing that will shut me up.

So now here's your chance Hanslune... and in do time I'll present my side (again).



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 11:59 AM
link   
Howdy Diablomonic

Nope sorry dude, the data never disappears it always remains and must always be considered. If an alien artifact showed up it would become part of the data, not replace it. You seem to be talking about conclusions while I'm talking about the actual data - those two things are different.

Yes Harte, fringe things never die they just keep coming up, mainly due to fringe writers re-using the same arguements.

Interesting factoid: about 80% of believers in Atlantis have never read the original Plato documents of T & C. They base their belief of Atlantis on books and webpages.








[edit on 14/4/08 by Hanslune]



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


" www.redmoonrising.com...
The url above posted by Undo in the Divine Counsil thread here at ATS.
But I'm sure you know it ,, and what the authors content,,,
My question ,,is so where did the Sumerians get their technology,, and that leads us back to Green men with fangs and scales,,

Why are there conspiracy theories,, we know our governments lie to the public to avoid disclosure. The Egypyian government is no different, whether the Great HAll of Records is ever found who can say,,
I dont believe the findings in the post presented by Hanslume concerning the exploration under the Sphinx paws is accurate, discoveries have been made and with held,,I'm sure that the piece of that wood found in the Giza pryamid has been tested and the results known by a select few.
Egypt would have a lot to loose if it was made clear that native Egyptians were not the designers,,, construction engineers of the Giza pryamid, it is unique,,with a 52 o Angle slope to its sides..
I suspect that it was built from the inside out,,but thats me,,thinking outside the "sandbox".
I remember the Glider that was first presented by Van Dankien I believe and reproduced in some later periodicals ,,,it found in some antiquities musem was it from the Giza pryamid,,
It dimensons.. and design were prefect for a unpowered glide ratio, i.e. the wings to tail and the shape of the wings ..prefect,, was that ever debunked, sure didnt belong in a pryamid,, along with the siloutte of a sykorski Blackhawk helicopter (there is nothing in nature that remotely resembles that side shot,, not to mention what appears to be a sub,, and possible a disc shaped UFO. To many questions for me to turn my head away.
Osterich Archeology,,,I cant see it ,,ergo it doesnt exist,,



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


2 years ago this same info appeared right here at ATS, yet here we are having to rehash it.

Count on it. It won't be three weeks before somebody else makes the claim that Hawass is keeping us from finding the Atlantean library under the Sphinx.

Where would we be if quit asking questions,, challeneging accepted paradigms,,, Og has fire!...



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by jbmitch
reply to post by Harte
 


2 years ago this same info appeared right here at ATS, yet here we are having to rehash it.

Count on it. It won't be three weeks before somebody else makes the claim that Hawass is keeping us from finding the Atlantean library under the Sphinx.

Where would we be if quit asking questions,, challeneging accepted paradigms,,, Og has fire!...


Exactly.

And where would Og be if after the third or fourth time he was burned by his fire, he continued to stick his hand in it anyway, "just in case it might be different this time?"

Harte



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 05:51 PM
link   


My question ,,is so where did the Sumerians get their technology,, and that leads us back to Green men with fangs and scales


>>> from themselves, the Ubaidians they conquered/combined with and other near them.



Why are there conspiracy theories,, we know our governments lie to the public to avoid disclosure.


>>>Governments usually lie about stuff that is very important to them, it also has a tendency to leak anyway



The Egypyian government is no different, whether the Great HAll of Records is ever found who can say


>>>It is extremely rare for any government to get involved in archaeology, the great “hall of records” is just a myth made up by a guy who got lots of things/predictions wrong




I dont believe the findings in the post presented by Hanslume concerning the exploration under the Sphinx paws is accurate, discoveries have been made and with held,,I'm sure that the piece of that wood found in the Giza pryamid has been tested and the results known by a select few.


>>>No actually they haven’t but then feel free to believe anything you want.




Egypt would have a lot to loose if it was made clear that native Egyptians were not the designers,,, construction engineers of the Giza pryamid, it is unique,,with a 52 o Angle slope to its sides..


>>>Yes once people heard aliens or Atlanteans were involved in early Egyptian culture they’d all stop coming…......




I remember the Glider that was first presented by Van Dankien I believe and reproduced in some later periodicals was that ever debunked, sure didnt belong in a pryamid


>>>I presume you are talking about the Saqqara model which was found in a tomb dated to 2000BP

Here is a link to a discussion on it. Some think it was used as mast head.

Link to Saqqara



along with the siloutte of a sykorski Blackhawk helicopter (there is nothing in nature that remotely resembles that side shot,, not to mention what appears to be a sub,, and possible a disc shaped UFO.


>>> Abydos already covered here extensively



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Howdy Photon

I went back and read some more of your older posts and your discussion with Scott about C-14 date of the pyramids.

Concerning C-14, I have no more to add to what Scott said, except for one statement of his I'm checking on.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 05:59 PM
link   
Howdy Diablomonic:

The three (oh that message was for Photon but your input is welcome)



sphinx water erosion (I think you tentatively agreed with that one in one of these threads) (plus the temple? associated with it, similar thing if I remember right)


I think the enclosure could be older and that an earlier version of the Sphinx may have existed prior to the present version and before the pyramids. As to its age - unknown, although I favor salt erosion more than water. A lack of data on this one.



GP not having hieroglyphs through it like other Egyptian sites (plus the rest of the weird things about it previously mentioned and discussed)


I believe they were on wooden panels which were lost to looting, there was probably painting on the outer limestone shell also - but again lost. However there are some hieroglyphs, the workers marks

Info here:

Niches, Slots, Grooves and Stains: Internal Frameworks in the Khufu Pyramid,Mark Lehner shows that wooden sections were originally installed in the sarcophagus chamber of Khufu.

Niches, Slots, Grooves and Stains : Internal Frameworks in the Khufu Pyramid ?", in : Stationen : Beitrage zur Kulturgeschichte Ägyptens. Rainer Stadelmann gewidmet (= Fs Stadelmann), Philipp von Zabern, Main am Rhein, 1998, pp. 101-113.

Another document talking about the use of wooden panels in mastaba

www.case.edu...



"pyramids" all round the world. No they are mostly not true pyramids. Yes they seem to be based on the same Idea/copying/influenced by each other. You will probably say this is coincidence, I don't believe so.


If you want to have a raised platform you are limited to only a few designs that will not collaspe, the easiest one is a mound (if using dirt) if using stone it's a pyramid. Spears, knifes and other tools are very similar around the world - common solution or common ancestory?


[edit on 14/4/08 by Hanslune]

[edit on 14/4/08 by Hanslune]



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 06:05 PM
link   
A humorous description I saw today




To write a popular alternative book on the pyramids of Egypt ideally requires three essential qualities:

1. a total disdain for Egyptologists;

2. a passing knowledge of the subject concerned; and

3. an alternative theory that verges on the incredible.


Quote from



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 05:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


"No actually they haven’t but then feel free to believe anything you want."

And you know this for a fact,, it irrefutable that one one has retrieved a piece of the sample of wood and done C-14 testing or are you going on Hiwaase's word?



new topics

top topics



 
108
<< 46  47  48    50  51  52 >>

log in

join