posted on Nov, 29 2008 @ 09:55 AM
reply to post by zacherystaylor
My sincere apologies - I totally overlooked your thread here. Great link there btw - an interesting assortment to go through. It'll take me a
ZT: Scott I have taken a quick look at your strings here and on Hancocks board. I'm having a har time figuring out what your theories are. I
tried to access your website and couldn't possibly due to outdated computer on my part.
SC: My website is still under construction at the moment. All of my ideas can be download via links in various board threads here at ATS or from
I don't have any ONE theory, per se. The work I have done over the last few years has been largely in support of Bauval's original OCT. The new
findings I have made with the Gizamids corroborates Bauval's hypothesis to the point now where it becomes somewhat churlish to argue against the
Giza/Orion correlation. Although complimentary in a number of ways, my work differs from Bauval's in many respects. A small example is that Bauval
only ever proposed that the Gizamids indicate the past date of 10,500BCE when the Gizamids were at their minimum culmination as indicated by the
so-called Queens' Pyramids of Menkaure. I have shown that the so-called Queens' Pyramids of Khufu demonstrate the belt stars when at their maximum
culmination c.2,500CE (i.e. 500 years from now). Bauval only ever showed the three stars aligning with the three main pyramids (i.e. the
of those pyramids).
My own work demonstrates how the actual base dimensions of the 3 main Gizamids were in fact derived from the Orion Belt asterism and also show how
this "Orion Blueprint" places the 2 sets of Queens Pyramids. My work also shows why the Pharaoh Khafre (G2) has no Queens' Pyramids when he in
fact had more Queens than Khufu and Menkaure together - so why no Queens Pyramids for his wives? Simple - the so-called Queens' Pyramids are
precessional markers indicating the maximum and minimum culminations of the Belt stars. There's no need to indicate any intermediate point thus the
reason there are no so-called Queens' Pyramids at Khafre's pyramid.
Of course this raises the obvious question: how is it possible that the ancient designers of Giza were able to calculate and project the orientation
of the Belt Stars over 13,000 years (to 2,500CE) and place them accordingly? We can only make such calculations using sophisticated star-mapping
software on our computers. So - how on Earth did the ancients do it?
I am arguing that what we are witnessing is 'lost knowledge' from a lost chapter in the development of human civilisation. We either have to accept
that the Ancient Egyptians were a lot smarter than conventional wisdom presently understands and attribute this ability to them - or we have to
attribute it to some other - as yet - unknown external influence.
ZT: Is there someplace I could read your basics arguments. I get the feeling I must have missed the beginning.
SC: It's all here in my Forum on ATS.