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: 72
108
<< 69  70  71    73  74  75 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 06:31 PM
link   
Howdy Win 52



Taking all things into perspective, the construction of the pyramids would be monumental even using today's technology. It is not possible for people using bare hands, quarrying the stones, rope, and logs to construct that type of structure.


Hans: What do you base that on? Is this just an argument from incredulity?



It would have taken several lifetimes, hundreds of years just to build one.


Hans: How would you know that?




Look at what it took to build the great wall. We do have records of those hardships, a work which remains unfinished.


Hans: The great wall in many time in magnitude a greater task, the terrain more difficult, sometimes away from water and the basic resources to do it. While the Egyptians had everything they need (except granite) with a walking distance. Also the pyramids were never finished either.



I truly believe the pyramids were built using lost technology. This means we were more advanced than we are today, once upon a time.


Hans: But then why do sign of the crude technology show up in the construction and no sign of the “lost technology”/



That is the beauty of not being brainwashed, you can observe without preconceived notions. Merely use logic and life's lessons to differentiate between factual, impossible, and open for more thought on the subject. I find myself open to thought on other possibilities. This is a much more peaceful place to be.


Hans: I don’t mean to be mean Win 52, but I cannot pass up on that straight line you’ve offered above. My apologies in advance.

So is this blissful state of yours what we call, uneducated?

For penance for saying so I will lie in the back yard in a pit of itchy leaves all night.




posted on May, 31 2008 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by win 52
Taking all things into perspective, the construction of the pyramids would be monumental even using today's technology. It is not possible for people using bare hands, quarrying the stones, rope, and logs to construct that type of structure. It would have taken several lifetimes, hundreds of years just to build one.


Just over 20 years, according to most records... AND to the ancient records of the Egyptians themselves (at least, as reported to Heroditus.)


Look at what it took to build the great wall. We do have records of those hardships, a work which remains unfinished.

...and the same material exists in the workers' village on the outskirts of the pyramid temple complex (it's not just 3 pyramids that they built, but 9 minor ones plus a number of temples plus an avenue of sphynxes and so forth.)


I truly believe the pyramids were built using lost technology. This means we were more advanced than we are today, once upon a time.

One of the problems with this idea is that Egypt was in contact with other civilizations at the time. What we see repeatedly is that when one civilization gets a technology, the others that it trades with soon get it. For instance, the Egyptians got the horse and chariot from the Hyksos and Greeks.
www.liv.ac.uk...

Any successful technique or technology was soon grabbed by friends and competitors... so once one civilization in the Levant got bronze, it wasn't long before they all got bronze. If this unusual technique was being used for 60 years, it would have been learned by other civilizations in the area and we'd see them using it. Far from "being lost" it would be well known and used by everyone.

The hieroglyphic records and the quarries themselves don't show any unusual technologies... just hard work in the "off season" as well as labor by skilled craftsmen (like the quarry workers.) There's still unfinished blocks of stone lying around in the quarries (some of which have hieroglyphics on them ... sort of "ship to Memphis in care of the Priest of Isis" sort of things) and abandoned tools as well as graves there at Giza where the workers have been buried with their personal tools.

There's quite a lot to know about the site... much of it is never mentioned by those writing about "Giza was done by advanced technology" folks. For instance, they never mention that some of the pharaohs built more than one pyramid:
www.touregypt.net...



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 01:11 AM
link   
Howdy Byrd

The quarries, the "scars" that show the core and the worker's village are the items that drove home to me how and why the Egyptians did it. The materials. particularily from the tombs of workers were quite impressive - they were proud to be the builders.



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 01:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Inannamute
 

One must only read The Emerald Tablets of Thoth to understand why the Egyptologists have so feverishly (and quite successfully), squelched any theories contrary to "their own".
20,000 years ago, Thoth entrusted guardianship to a select few, whose descendents still hold those posts and guard the secrets to this day.
Those descendents are Hawass and others like him who fear the wrath of Thoth, when he returns............and it will be soon.

I am Rhond.



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 06:07 AM
link   
reply to post by spacevisitor
 



Hi cormac, I read the whole article of Electric Lights in Egypt by Frank Dörnenburg and this is my opinion about it.

Frank Dörnenburg sorely tries with this interesting article to proof that those reliefs claimed by some people as a sort of “electric” lamps weren’t some sort of “electric” lamps at all.
But despite his great effort and his undisputable evidence of all the soot traces on the walls and ceilings, it’s my opinion that he doesn’t succeed to proof undisputable that it aren’t some sort of “electric” lamps or even what the real meaning of those reliefs really are either.

If I am not mistaken it’s also possible that some of these soot traces good be formed by the oil lamps that were used to light the buildings from the moment people entered to examine those buildings from the moment they where discovered and opened.

Frank Dörnenburg said,
You might have noticed that I emphasized the word "two" in Garns comment. Why? Because "two" is the key word. Every "normal" lamp needs two electrodes to produce light, a simple light bulb or the Garn-construction.
"Well, and where is the problem?" you might ask. Simple. The problem is, that the "working" lamp picture in Dendera is only one of six. And from all six pictures this is the ONLY one where something reaches "into" the "bulb"!

That is a very good observation from him, but perhaps and I don't claim that it is a fact, when it is in a way some sort of a fluorescent type of lamp it isn’t always necessary to let both of the two electrodes reach deep "into" the "bulb"?

But I wonder the following myself, if it really was some sort of an “electric” lamp that was logical made of glass, why is it so big then in comparison with the figures?

But I think also that so far no one else was also capable to proof undisputable that those reliefs represent indeed some sort of “electric” lamps, even because they build a copy of it that looks very much the same and also worked as a real electric lamp.

But here is another possibility.
Perhaps are those reliefs in reality an Egyptian artist representation of an object that was logically not made or used by the Egyptians themselves to light those buildings during the moment they were build, but that it belong to some sort of other advanced non terrestrial group [the Atlanteans?] and that they only good observe or even hold in their hands.

And that is all I can say about it so far.



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 07:00 AM
link   
This really amazes me.
I asked myself the following question, how on Earth was it possible that around 820 AD Abdullah Al Mamun and his group were so “un earthly lucky” to makes that famous first opening that almost exactly comes out to the passageway which descended into the lowest chamber of the pyramid in one of those four absolute giant outside walls of the great pyramid and that was so very, very near the original entrance? Because how big, or better how very small is the chance to that?

Was it really nothing more then pure luck that he selects that particular spot to makes that opening, or good it be possible that he had some knowledge of where to look for it?

Has anyone an explanation for that?


After the Great Pyramid was initially sealed, it's original entrance was hidden and faced with smooth limestone. Because this blended in so well with the surrounding casing, the opening was invisible. Around 820 AD, Abdullah Al Mamun mobilized men to bore a tunnel into the pyramid to search for chambers and treasure. Due to the difficulty of the task of breaking up the hard rock, fires were built to heat the rock and then cold vinegar was poured over the heated rock. Battering rams were used to pound away the weakened rock and clear a tunnel. Eventually, a passageway was found which descended into the lowest chamber of the pyramid. Following this passageway back upward, the original entrance was finally located. In these pictures of the NORTH side you can see the intrusive entrance lower down, and the original entrance higher up flanked by angled stones:






guardians.net...


[edit on 1/6/08 by spacevisitor]



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by spacevisitor
 


Hi spacevisitor,

As with anything else, the hieroglyphs and reliefs can be interpreted any way one wants to interpret them. Even out of context.

Compelling arguments to me against the objects being "light bulbs" are from the article I linked to:




If the object is evacuated, a pressure of about 63 t (tonnes) would rest on a Dendera object. To withstand such an immense pressure, the object would have to be quite thick-walled, at least two to three centimeters thick. The weight of this bulb would be then approximately 750 kilograms.


Where is the evidence that Ancient Egyptians were capable of creating any sort of a vacuum, let alone one with a pressure of 63 tons?

Where is the evidence that Ancient Egyptians were capable of creating a glass tube 2 to 3 or more feet long and 2 to 3 centimeters thick?

How is it possible for any person, ancient or modern, to lift a "light bulb" weighing 750 kilograms (thats around 1650 pounds)?

Where is the evidence for any kind of electrical system capable of creating enough power to illuminate such an object?

So far, there is no evidence for any of this.

All of this is over and above the fact that the hieroglyphs had nothing to do with "light bulbs" but with celebrating the journey of the sun across the sky.

cormac



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 12:28 PM
link   
Not to forget. That this temple was built during a time of greater communication and discovery. It was built int he Greco-Roman period.

Not a word about this - if the Egyptian had this type of technology it would have shown up in superior weaponry. It didn't and Egypt came under foreign domination and alien religions flooded in.



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 12:40 PM
link   
True enough Hans,

My point being, regardless of time frame, there is no way the Ancient Egyptians or later Greco-Egyptians could have been as advanced as some would like to believe WITHOUT LEAVING ANY EVIDENCE to back it up.

cormac



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 12:44 PM
link   
Very correct

That type of technology requires an extensive infrastructure (which would also be used for weapon production). Machine shops, glass furnances, chemical works, etc. oh and a trash dump.

You would need a lot of trained people too and it would have taken some time to do all of this - there would be a trail.

Unless you believe in the "drop cloth" method of history. That people in the past were deliberately trying to hide stuff from the future......



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by cormac mac airt
reply to post by spacevisitor
 

As with anything else, the hieroglyphs and reliefs can be interpreted any way one wants to interpret them. Even out of context.


Hi cormac, that’s true of course but that counts in fact for all who try to interpret them.


Originally posted by cormac mac airt
If the object is evacuated, a pressure of about 63 t (tonnes) would rest on a Dendera object. To withstand such an immense pressure, the object would have to be quite thick-walled, at least two to three centimeters thick. The weight of this bulb would be then approximately 750 kilograms.



Originally posted by cormac mac airt
Where is the evidence that Ancient Egyptians were capable of creating any sort of a vacuum, let alone one with a pressure of 63 tons?

Where is the evidence that Ancient Egyptians were capable of creating a glass tube 2 to 3 or more feet long and 2 to 3 centimeters thick?

How is it possible for any person, ancient or modern, to lift a "light bulb" weighing 750 kilograms (thats around 1650 pounds)?

Where is the evidence for any kind of electrical system capable of creating enough power to illuminate such an object?

So far, there is no evidence for any of this.

All of this is over and above the fact that the hieroglyphs had nothing to do with "light bulbs" but with celebrating the journey of the sun across the sky.

cormac


I understand all those points you make here, but if it was some sort of a Gas discharge lamp or Fluorescent lamp it isn’t vacuum in my opinion.

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

But besides that all, I don’t think in any way that it was a pure AE Egyptian thing, that is why I makes that last remark.
I know that that is unacceptable for you of course, and I have no problem with that.
It are only my personal thoughts.


Originally posted by spacevisitor
But here is another possibility.
Perhaps are those reliefs in reality an Egyptian artist representation of an object that was logically not made or used by the Egyptians themselves to light those buildings during the moment they were build, but that it belong to some sort of other advanced non terrestrial group [the Atlanteans?] and that they only good observe or even hold in their hands.

And that is all I can say about it so far.



[edit on 1/6/08 by spacevisitor]


JbT

posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 01:28 PM
link   
Hello guys, just wanted to jump in for a second.

To me, its not the actual building of the Pyramids that is extraordinary.

Now Im quoting something that Scott Creighton had posted, but doesnt this statement strike anyone else as being the first clue as to where the mystery lies?


The AEs themselves tell us of the construction of their monuments, the following:

"They were built according to an architectural plan which was supposed to have been revealed in a codex that fell from the heavens at Saqqara in the days of Imhotep."

Inscription found on the collonade of the Temple of Horus at Edfu.

Aldred 'The Egyptians', P32


Scott goes on with his theory:


It would seem probable then that the AEs of the 4th Dynasty constructed the Giza monuments (most likely for their own cultural/religious ideas) but that the design for them came from another time and place - from another relatively advanced civilisation that is now lost to our history books. If we cannot credit the AEs with this level of advanced knowledge that is clearly on display, then we have to conclude that it came from some other source. We have to conclude that what we are looking at is evidence from a 'Lost Civilisation'.


See, if those facts are true about that inscription, we already 'know' that the time frames and methods used to BUILD the pyramids were at the very least, possible. Given enough man power and determination.

What to me is missed in many arguments is the PLANS, the so called CODEX that falls from the sky. The building of the pyramids could not even be started without this. Its has even greater implications if there is any fact to Scotts claims that this is a progressional calendar of sorts. Dealing with Heliocentrism is its design....

Which as you guys are saying, Heliocentrism should have been passed onto other nations of the time. But it wasnt untill Aristarchus of Samos who speculated on a Heliocentric solar system, some 2000-2500 years after the 'Codex' would have been in hand of the creators and pharoh of the Old Kingdom period. Not to mention the Geocentric model wasnt put aside untill the late 16th century.

Assuming my facts are correct, Im by no means a scolar. Ive just been looking into alot of this since seeing Scotts theorys. I guess the basis of my claim here is that Heliocentrism is in their design, and Im not sure what the so called "professional" opinion is on the AE's and understanding of Heliocentrism, at least to the point of tracking the stars in the Orion system.

Even so, they might not have truly understood this "Codex", but could at the very least interpret it enough to build the Giza Plateau. If Scotts theorys hold water... Someone knew and understood Heliocentrism. Thats the mystery to me.

Scott Creighton's The 'Lost Civilisation' - Compelling Evidence:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 1-6-2008 by JbT]



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 01:34 PM
link   
So where did the alleged codex come from?


JbT

posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
So where did the alleged codex come from?


Ill quote again.


"They were built according to an architectural plan which was supposed to have been revealed in a codex that fell from the heavens at Saqqara in the days of Imhotep."


...The Sky/Heavens...

I guess interpret for yourself. I have not looked into this in detail myself other than what Ive read from Scotts pages and a little of reading at The Hall of Maat.com

[edit on 1-6-2008 by JbT]



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 01:45 PM
link   
Sorry about that Jbt

I was writing a longer post and hit the enter by mistake.

I asked about that because Scott is trying as hard as he can to avoid bring up Atlantis or some other agency.

I would note that many ancient and modern people grant god(s) with there inspiration and success. I would suggest the same for the Egyptians.

The pyramids show a evolution from Mastabas to the apogee at Giza and a general decline- why decline, why earlier easier forms ? If they had a plan?

Plus in Scot's world view that document was sent so a message could be sent. He doesn't know from who or what the message was - but that is his view.

Many cultures worshipped the sun - it holds a rather dramatic part in the ife stage of a hunter-gathers/agriculturists.


JbT

posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 01:57 PM
link   
You bring up good points.

I was trying not to include Scotts theorys in my general question/statment because I relise that those theorys are his own, and not the accepted theory. Though I did want to give him credit from where I was getting some of my facts.

Still, to me, the inscription is something to work with as to what is more mysterious. If in fact it is there, and translated proper.

I have no idea who or where that Codex would have came from, but I do know that I dont usually find blue prints in sand, or revealed to me from heaven, when Im going to build a home as I do in real life(Arch.Draftsman). Hell that would be nice, save me hours of planning.... and Imhotep calls himself an Architect, bah! j/k


Wouldnt Imhotep, the great architect want to take credit for the whole thing. Nevermind the Gods? Why would he give credit for something that he did for a career to the gods (architecture/engineering)? Was this typical of him, I really have no idea?

What was the true meaning of that inscription. Is it meant to be taken literally? Why not?

As far as why the building got worse as they progressed, well, Im not sure. I guess they just got tired, moral was going down, ect, ect. I wouldnt expect a set of plans to help with that aspect. Thats what your general formen are for, keeping moral up, and then quality there. The plans just tell you how to get to the end. I really have no idea why they went from Mastabas to Pyramids and back.

Sorry, I dont mean to derail your above posts and conversation. If Iam and these are moot points, feel free to ignore them. No hard feelings.
Its a rainy sunday morning, and Im wating for baseball to start.

[edit on 1-6-2008 by JbT]

[edit on 1-6-2008 by JbT]

[edit on 1-6-2008 by JbT]



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 02:52 PM
link   


What was the true meaning of that inscription. Is it meant to be taken literally? Why not?


Like so many attributions to god or gods I don't see any reason to believe this was physical item.

I don't believe Scot was able to locate the inscription that inspired the source to state that. This was discussed in great detail at the Hall of Ma'at.

The evolution of pyramids went from: nothing to simple, to complex then declined.

This is similar to our building a one story building out of wood, then building a two story building out of steel reinforced wood, then a three story out of reinforced concrete with a wood shell, etc. If they were following a 'plan' it was an odd plan.

[edit on 1/6/08 by Hanslune]



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by spacevisitor
 





Hi cormac, that’s true of course but that counts in fact for all who try to interpret them.


No really when it comes to Egyptian hieroglyphics. That's why the Rosetta Stone was so useful. Archaeologists know what the Egyptians were writing about/saying.




I understand all those points you make here, but if it was some sort of a Gas discharge lamp or Fluorescent lamp it isn’t vacuum in my opinion.


But you are taking the reliefs out of context to what was being written. Makes about as much sense as having the instruction manual and parts for building an automobile and trying to convince others that the finished product should look like your house. I hope not.

cormac



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 08:43 AM
link   
reply to post by JbT
 


Your points are not moot at all, as I wont for a minute believe that "first there was nothing, then the pyramids" as Hanslune says.

Everything is based on something prior. What are the Pyramids based on? Obviously on something thats gone lost, on something we havent found yet.

I dont think the Pyramids are based on pottery or spears, so to speak.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 10:11 AM
link   
I know what popular theory about the construction in Giza says.

The Thomas in me, holds me back from taking the bait. Hawass, the guardian in a line going back 20,000 years, face the wrath of Toth who is coming back soon, what is up with that?

Does that mean the truth is kept secret?.... I say yes. That is the nature of humans. We are pompous #@##*&%$, liars, cheaters, thieves, as well as being drunk with our own stupidity. Is it no wonder I find it hard to trust anything I can't lay my hands on. I have no faith in the status quo, it has let me down too many times.

Twenty years to refurbish existing structures.
Tools left behind by the original builders, found and used in the renovations.
That is why it is hard to figure out and things don't match up. There are layers upon layers of civilization sharing the same ruins.



new topics

top topics



 
108
<< 69  70  71    73  74  75 >>

log in

join