That underground room near the paw of Sphinx, page 5

privacy

Pages: << 2 3 4 5 6 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 6 times

reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 04:42 PM by Nohup

Sounds like a public toilet. After all, all those priests and workers had to go to the bathroom somewhere. The left paw is "MEN" and the right paw is "WOMEN."

reply posted on 18-1-2009 @ 12:14 AM by thomas_

reply to post by bronwyn82

Edgard Cayce is good as a pointer, but he doesn't put what he said in more dense context.

Add what Cayce predicted with the research done by James Churchward on Mu and you may have something.

If that chamber really exists it's certainly not made by Egyptians or Egyptians alone.

One thing we already know, the Sphinx is older than the pyramids, and that alone already means something.

I really hope that the chamber exists and that one day what's in there sees light of the day again so we can start to understand the real story of the Earth and it's civilizations.

James Churchward in my opinion made a really good work at connecting the dots between all ancient civilizations and the origins of all of the current religions.

The truth is that even archeologists and scientists know very little about our real past. In part (to be nice and kinda fair) you can blame Darwin and his monkey theory for holding us back.

reply posted on 18-1-2009 @ 12:37 AM by Hanslune

reply to post by thomas_

Howdy Thomas

A few comments:

James Churchward's Mu theory has ceased to be believed for a long time, since the second half of the twentieth century, more knowledge has been gained in Oceanography, and in particular seafloor spreading and Plate Tectonics have left no scientific basis for geologically recent lost continents such as Mu. People who believe in Mu do so from a religious point of view as it is against scientific evidence.

The Sphinx may predate the pyramids but the issue is still in debate.

Darwin? The poor guy has been blamed for alot but holding back archaeological knowledge? No, the allegation is a bit silly if anything his theory has greatly increased what is known in particularly about early man. Prior to that the dogma of the bible choked off and limited research in that area.

reply posted on 18-1-2009 @ 12:56 AM by Mozzy

i like the fringe as much as teh next guy but i have to say. i doubt that atlantis was all that great, if it was even real. i'm sure it'd be a lot like troy when it was discovered. if i remember correctly the original "layer" of troy was just a small area and not too impressive by today's standards. same with buddhas home castle in kapilavastu.

when we think of castles we think of walt disney or shrek or something. if atlantis was real it was probably a lot less exciting than people are making it seem to be. after all, if people survived atlantis, why didn't they go and dig up the hall(s) of records themselves and at least make copies? how could their advanced civilizations be surpassed by the newcomers we now consider as mainstream history?

where did the atlantic ocean get it's name anyway?

reply posted on 18-1-2009 @ 01:37 AM by Drexl

Originally posted by Hollywood11
It's not a Hoax, it's indisputable that the chambers, and especially the so called "Hall of Records", are there. It was found by ground penetrating radar by highly reputable experts. The problem is that the Egyptians won't let anyone in, and the egyptians themselves may even be unable to open it.

Well, they know from the Iraqi's experience , if you have something valuable underground , best not to let americans anywhere near it , else it's gone .

reply posted on 18-1-2009 @ 11:40 AM by Hanslune

Originally posted by Drexl

Well, they know from the Iraqi's experience , if you have something valuable underground , best not to let americans anywhere near it , else it's gone .

Hmmm do you mean in an explosive manner or something else? Please explain or is this comment based on the "Americans-stealing-Annunaki-stuff" CT?

reply posted on 18-1-2009 @ 05:08 PM by thomas_

reply to post by Hanslune

Hey Hanslune,

I agree that James Churchward works is indeed outdated nowadays at scientific levels, but Mu isn't the point here but the possibility of ancient civilizations communicating in way that we can't even imagine.

But science can't explain a lot of things, at best they only wish they could.

For instance how do you explain the Phoenician inscriptions found in the Gávea Stone in Rio de Janeiro?

Phoenicians lived around 1500-300 B.C. while that country was only discovered by outsiders according to history in 1500 A.C.

But it seems that to answer that they would have to redo some of the stuff they already granted as "absolute truth" so they simply "skip it", it's easier that way.

Why we can clearly see drawings about mens from space and flying soccers in ancient temples and science simply chooses to neglect or simply ignore their existence. Granting them the status of fantasy.

Spielberg wasn't alive by that time and they didn't had outside sources like films and what a knots to influence them in that way.

To be honest I find science too much contradictory and way too much pretentious at times. They credited something today to discredited the very same thing tomorrow. They have their part and and they do find some great stuff but they do not hold the absolute truth.

Scientists for instance say that the Bimini road is a natural formation. I really don't know but I never saw anything done (created) by nature which is both symmetrically aligned with repeated shapes with the exact same dimensions spread in that way.

As for Darwin, I have my issues with his theories. First and foremost for me any scientist that like to think it's the holder of the absolute truth is a bit idiot. Second his theory about the evolution is incredibly full of holes to be taken that seriously and not questioned. The same is kinda valid for Newton and is his law of gravity that should still be considered a work in progress or a partial explanation since it doesn't really explain gravity for A+B.

I ask you why in the hell only the humans had an evolution at this level?

And why just a single specie of monkey and not all?

Why it didn't happened to other animals that were already tired to be here when the very first monkey came around?

These are questions that any 5 year old would ask and most scientists (to not say all) don't have an definitive answer to them.

So in my opinion anything that prevents further questioning while not answering all the main and related questions in the first place holds progress back.

Anyway... sorry for going off-topic.

Cheers,
thomas

reply posted on 18-1-2009 @ 07:28 PM by Hanslune

Howdy Thomas

Hans: I’m aware of those and other claimed inscriptions – the problem is there is no collaborating evidence of Phoenicians being in Brazil and we have repeated evidence of modern forgeries of ancient languages being done in the Americas and elsewhere. If the Phoes were in Brazil they left no trace.

But it seems that to answer that they would have to redo some of the stuff they already granted as "absolute truth" so they simply "skip it", it's easier that way.

Hans: I don’t think you’re going to find any reputable scientist who would say they have the absolute truth. That claim is used by fringe writers to discredit real scientists.

Why we can clearly see drawings about mens from space and flying soccers in ancient temples and science simply chooses to neglect or simply ignore their existence. Granting them the status of fantasy.

Hans: That is how some interpret it, but most others do not. Again no collaborating evidence.

Spielberg wasn't alive by that time and they didn't had outside sources like films and what a knots to influence them in that way.

Hans??

To be honest I find science too much contradictory and way too much pretentious at times. They credited something today to discredited the very same thing tomorrow.

Hans: That is how science works, as new evidence comes in positions are changed and new theories formed. I’d be very concerned if that DIDN’T happen.

They have their part and and they do find some great stuff but they do not hold the absolute truth.

Hans: I think most of them know that - but they continue to search

Scientists for instance say that the Bimini road is a natural formation. I really don't know but I never saw anything done (created) by nature which is both symmetrically aligned with repeated shapes with the exact same dimensions spread in that way.

Hans: Yet it is natural despite the repeated attempts of Cayce followers to make people believe it is artificial. The evidence speaks louder than their claims.

As for Darwin,

Hans: his theory has overwhelming evidence to support it, and no falsification of the theory has been shown. No other theory has any standing at this time against it.

I ask you why in the hell only the humans had an evolution at this level?

Hans: Not really sure what your point is here – if you mean multiple hominids?

Why it didn't happened to other animals that were already tired to be here when the very first monkey came around?

Hans: Unknown, but evolutionary pressure allowed humans to gain an upright posture and then gain greater intelligence which in turn made them more survivable – are ability to make tools gave us an edge in beating animals for resources.

So in my opinion anything that prevents further questioning while not answering all the main and related questions in the first place holds progress back.

Hans: So what prevents you from asking? I think what you mean is that you ask and you get answers you don’t like?

Anyway... sorry for going off-topic

Hans: Yes we have gone off topic. For causing this you must tell Harte that you believe in Atlantis and ask him to prove you wrong. That should be punishment enough.

reply posted on 18-1-2009 @ 09:38 PM by thomas_

Hans: I’m aware of those and other claimed inscriptions – the problem is there is no collaborating evidence of Phoenicians being in Brazil and we have repeated evidence of modern forgeries of ancient languages being done in the Americas and elsewhere. If the Phoes were in Brazil they left no trace.

Aside those inscriptions nothing else was really left. All we know is that those were there when the Portuguese's got there. There are documents about Dom Pedro research on those inscriptions. So they are for sure before 1500 A.C.

Hans: I don’t think you’re going to find any reputable scientist who would say they have the absolute truth. That claim is used by fringe writers to discredit real scientists.

Agreed, but some of do have that posture and talk like if they had a final absolute answer. Which more than often isn't the case.

Hans: That is how some interpret it, but most others do not. Again no collaborating evidence.

I agree, but at the same time there is no evidence to prove the opposite.

Hans??

What I meant is that different than our generation that has science fiction books and films to draw ideas from, ancient civilizations (as far as we know) didn't had access to any sort of "global" communication (media). So the chances of the same thing being reported at different places at different ages by people that didn't talk a common language and didn't shared the same views of the world are pretty much thin to not say inexistent.

This leads me to believe that it's something there that people are simply finding it easier to grant as "just silly drawings that don't make any sense".

Hans: That is how science works, as new evidence comes in positions are changed and new theories formed. I’d be very concerned if that DIDN’T happen.

I get that and I would be worried too. That doesn't happen for every new theory nor for every scientist, but when it does it comes back to the "posture" thing. Sometimes the very same theories that they discredit re-surface as being truth. It's a forever changing scenario where no one knows anything for sure.

Hans: Yet it is natural despite the repeated attempts of Cayce followers to make people believe it is artificial. The evidence speaks louder than their claims.

I'll look into that.

Hans: his theory has overwhelming evidence to support it, and no falsification of the theory has been shown. No other theory has any standing at this time against it.

"No other theory has any standing at this time against it"

That's exactly my problem with it. Someone should because there are a whole bunch of stuff that simply don't make much sense.

Hans: Not really sure what your point is here – if you mean multiple hominids?

Sure. If according to Darwin evolution is happening at all times why just a single specie of monkeys turned into humans?

Why not other species?

And it's a pretty basic and honest one.

Hans: Unknown, but evolutionary pressure allowed humans to gain an upright posture and then gain greater intelligence which in turn made them more survivable – are ability to make tools gave us an edge in beating animals for resources.

This "evolutionary pressure" would impact other species no?

I think so, since once one specie changes it's alimentary habits the whole food chain according to Darwin would have to adapt "evolute" to meet the new patterns. This automagically would yield smarter animals, something that doesn't seem to have happened since we don't see cows with special abilities.

Hans: So what prevents you from asking? I think what you mean is that you ask and you get answers you don’t like?

Nothing, that's why I question these things. What I meant is that science sometimes cease to question certain things that were not fully answered in the first place, and that I don't like.

reply posted on 18-1-2009 @ 09:44 PM by thomas_

Hans: Yes we have gone off topic. For causing this you must tell Harte that you believe in Atlantis and ask him to prove you wrong. That should be punishment enough

Hahahaha!

Ok, I'll do.

My sincere apologies to Alienstar for going to far off-topic.

reply posted on 19-1-2009 @ 12:08 AM by Hanslune

reply to post by thomas_

No to worry Alienstar has left the building, around August it would appear but for a better place I'm sure.

reply posted on 19-1-2009 @ 04:43 AM by thomas_

Hey Hans,

Since his out I will dare to go off-topic just once more

Just did a quick research on Bimini and I'm still not convinced by the so called "facts" or "evidences" presented by the archeologists that it's a natural formation.

Maybe I want to see a road there I don't know, but since some archeologists still insist that Yonaguni is also a natural formation I think I'll stay with my point of view that they are all man made.

Maybe Churchward work isn't that off after all.

reply posted on 19-1-2009 @ 12:39 PM by Hanslune

Originally posted by thomas_
Hey Hans,

Since his out I will dare to go off-topic just once more

Just did a quick research on Bimini and I'm still not convinced by the so called "facts" or "evidences" presented by the archeologists that it's a natural formation.

Maybe I want to see a road there I don't know, but since some archeologists still insist that Yonaguni is also a natural formation I think I'll stay with my point of view that they are all man made.

Maybe Churchward work isn't that off after all.

Hans: Don't look at the archaeologists for info on Yonaguni, look at the geologists, its more there area. The archaeology on the island has shown small hunter-gather groups.

Bimini, no collabrative evidence. If the geologist were wrong and the fringe right there should be abundance signs of construction and habitation - there is none. Example the waste around the pyramids in Giza was old kingdom, tons of it. Not a single scrap at Bimini. Human's by their nature tend to leaves signs - now there are signs on Bimini of human presence - all much later Arawak and other NA moving into the area around 4-6 K years ago (going from memory here)

[edit on 19/1/09 by Hanslune]

reply posted on 19-1-2009 @ 01:07 PM by xoxo stacie

Check this
What does the sphinx actually stand for/mean?
Next why would the hall be in a place they had not originally settled?
Third why is that ONE temple far away from the sphinx prohibited and under guard 24/7?
Now you are getting closer. The hall "may" have been at the sphinx at one time. But it WAS moved by the Egyptians long ago.The temple that is closed talked about it among other things in the glyphs, my grandpa had papers on it.
Hawass is a jackbutt who has spent his carrer making sure no one finds out the truth about the people who came there and why they where forced to do so.

reply posted on 19-1-2009 @ 03:03 PM by Hanslune

reply to post by xoxo stacie

Howdy XS

Third why is that ONE temple far away from the sphinx prohibited and under guard 24/7?

All the site are under guard 24/7 now days and some or parts of many of the sites on Giza are closed. Can you name the temple/site you are referring too?

Hawass is an egocentric dude but he has done a lot to improve conditions in Egyptian archaeology. Most of the complaints about him come from believers who have been told to hate Hawass by fringe writers, almost always without real reason. Most believers have no idea what he does but they are subservient and obdient to the will of those fringe writers.

Remember if you cannot find evidence to support your alternative beliefs in things Egyptian - blame Hawass! LOL

reply posted on 23-3-2009 @ 02:32 PM by Mindspin77

The new issue of Atlantis Rising reports that Zahi hawass has agreed to have a test hole drilled into the suspected chamber to quell the appetities of those who want resolution to this mystery. If its true its about time. The evidence and anecdotal arguments at least give weight to doing something. If its just collapsed bedrock then ok, otherwise, Egypt and the world will have something to surely talk about.

Anyone hear of this news?

reply posted on 24-3-2009 @ 07:17 AM by Harte

Originally posted by thomas_
For instance how do you explain the Phoenician inscriptions found in the Gávea Stone in Rio de Janeiro?

Phoenicians lived around 1500-300 B.C. while that country was only discovered by outsiders according to history in 1500 A.C.

On this stone, the supposedly "Phoenician" scribes that carved the letters refer to themselves as "Phoenician."
The problem is, the Phoenicians never, ever referred to themselves by this name, anywhere else in their history.

The thing is a fake.

Originally posted by thomas_Why we can clearly see drawings about mens from space and flying soccers in ancient temples and science simply chooses to neglect or simply ignore their existence. Granting them the status of fantasy.

No, what I see is a poster that hasn't, or won't, take the time to look into the ridiculously easily disproven claims upon which he has constructed a faulty and fantastical view of how science actually works.

Originally posted by thomas_
Scientists for instance say that the Bimini road is a natural formation. I really don't know but I never saw anything done (created) by nature which is both symmetrically aligned with repeated shapes with the exact same dimensions spread in that way.

You simply haven't looked, than. You can find pics of natural formations you claim you've never seen (and apparently cannot conceive of) in many posts over the years right here at ATS.

For example, take a look at the Giant's Causeway in Ireland.

Harte

reply posted on 17-6-2009 @ 09:14 AM by reugen

Originally posted by Harte
The page I linked explains quite clearly that Gatenbrink has certainly not been "kicked out."

He lost his affiliation with the German Institute in Egypt. It was they that had the permit, not Gatenbrink.

No individual can legally be granted a permit to conduct archaeology anywhere in Egypt. Only Institutions and accredited Archaeological groups. Hawass does not write the laws governing activity in Egypt.

And the second exploration of the 8 by 8 inch "doors" was not framed as if it were the first. If you look, you'll also find a Nat. Geographic article on it and you will find that a Japanese firm was involved.

Hawass "stole" nothing. This fact was established only a few weeks ago in another thread right here. The thread about Hawass and "unkept promises" I believe.

Harte

To me it seems that a lot of research is suddenly cut short and then there is nothing, its just stops without any further explanation given. So what did the Japanese firm find then? The radar survey showing tunnels below the Sphinx and the second pyramid, anything? Tomb of Osiris, Hall of Records?

About Gatenbrink, Hawass could easily make it so that German Institute would lose its concession if Gatenbrink wasnt exclucded from further research. Its called politics.

Edit:
A recent interview with Robert Bauval. theories about the Sphinx, Orion and more.

YouTube Link

His further research showed that shafts inside the Great Pyramid's chambers were pointed at stars in Orion, coinciding with where they would have been in the sky around 10,500 BC,

´

In the age of Leo, the sphinx was once a much larger monument, of a lion ?

Common interpretation: ca. 10,500 BC to 8000 BC.
Sacred Sites' interpretation: ca. 10,970 BC to 8810 BC.
The major event at this time was an ancient global warming to such a massive extent that it led to the deglaciation of what now constitutes much of the modern inhabitable world.