Pyramid warning?

Originally posted by Essan
Correct. Compared to other cultures at the time the Egyptians were indeed advanced in mathematics, engineering and astronomy

Actually, it was the Sumerians and Babylonians... until the Greeks came along.

And the most knowledgeable Egyptian mathematicians, engineers and astronomers undoubtably knew a lot more tha 99% of people in our civilisation.

(evil grin) Are we taking bets? (waves the Rhind papyrus)

...but, I do agree with the rest of your comments. 50 years ago, most 14 year olds had no idea how to do anything with a computer (you had to have lots of vacuum tubes and flip zillions of switches...) Today, even six year olds can operate them.

reply to post by Mozzy

this thread was actually reposted again and i can't blame the OP because you're a total azz.

People talking about me again, nothing wrong with being a total azz .

I am enjoying this thread, a lot of links, and so much information, I can only let the evidence talk to me really, but I do love some of the theories that come forward.

Does anyone else believe that Hawass is hiding anything? I can understand his clampdown on digs without the proper authorisation, which these days is really hard to get I understand? and I also understand his wishes to have the Pharaohs put back as close to if not in their original burial places.

If he is hiding information or discoveries, why ? also are others hiding the same information? be it because of age, building methods, or even hidden chambers or tombs, or could it be just to save face.

I do believe whole heartedly, that the Sphinx has many secrets to reveal though.

azz

[edit on 4/3/2009 by azzllin]

reply to post by Byrd


the solar boat doesn't have a name on it.

herodotus also talked about cyclops and griffons and million men persian armies.

the wikilinks are much more impartial than you and harte will ever be.

the remains in the queens pyramids are good and very telling. but they don't know who's remains they are.

so what's the point of all those links byrd? you're not trying to give us an impression are you? now why would you do a thing like that...

reply to post by foremanator


Great info when you put it with other little tidbits and you have a grand picture coming forth.

If you look at this picture...




img7.imageshack.us...
It links with this discussion.... www.abovetopsecret.com...
and it gets into a sort of challenge but you will see that PI does come into play quite alot in the pyramids.

There is a lot more than meets the all seeing eye.

Rgds


[edit on 5-3-2009 by AllTiedTogether]

[edit on 5-3-2009 by AllTiedTogether]

Originally posted by foremanator
You need to read the material regarding the Pyramids. I am not trying to be condescending.

I read the material you provided to me. It's completely bogus, except for the reasonable measurements of the dimensions of the Great Pyramid.

I'll wager that I have read far more real "pyramid materials" than you. This is probably because I waste little time on mysticism and other unfounded claims.

BTW, everything you think might be true, but the problem is there is simply not a single piece of evidence for it.

Originally posted by foremanator
The location of the Pyramids gives evidence that the builder knew the exact dimensions of the earth...

Absolutely not so.

Originally posted by foremanator
This is thousands of years before we were hanging people for claiming the earth was round.

The idea that "everybody thought the world was flat" is a complete and utter fallacy. It was started by Washington Irving, in fact.

Originally posted by foremanatorYou need to let that sink in for a bit, you need to consider the implications of this.

You need to do some actual research yourself. Your link states that the Egyptians called them "pyramids" because they were solar observatories. ("Pyro" meaning fire and "mid" meaning center so he gathers it to mean "fire in the middle.")
Actually, the word "pyramid" is thought to derive from a sort of Greek pastry or cake, called "pyramis" IIRC, which was cone shaped.

IOW, the word "pyramid" is not even Egyptian. Ten seconds of research could tell you this simple fact. Note I said 'fact."

Sorry, but I won't let these sorts of claims remain unchallenged. It's why I'm here. Forgive my terseness if you will. It's not your fault you've been misled. Well, not entirely anyway.

Yours,

Harte

[edit on 3/5/2009 by Harte]

reply to post by Harte


Originally posted by foremanator
The location of the Pyramids gives evidence that the builder knew the exact dimensions of the earth...

Absolutely not so.

Nobody alive today knows for certain how the pyramid was erected, how long it took to build, or how its near perfect alignments were achieved. It is aligned with the earth's four cardinal points, and at the exact center of the geometrical quadrant formed by the Nile Delta. It is located at the exact center of the earth's land surface. The geographical center of the whole land mass including the Americas, and Antarctica.

www.vinesbranch.com...

[edit on 5-3-2009 by foremanator]

reply to post by Harte


"The idea that "everybody thought the world was flat" is a complete and utter fallacy. It was started by Washington Irving, in fact."
This one I will give to you.
Doing some reading it seems you are correct.

reply to post by Harte


"You need to do some actual research yourself. Your link states that the Egyptians called them "pyramids" because they were solar observatories. ("Pyro" meaning fire and "mid" meaning center so he gathers it to mean "fire in the middle.")
Actually, the word "pyramid" is thought to derive from a sort of Greek pastry or cake, called "pyramis" IIRC, which was cone shaped."

Just because I provide a link to some information, does not mean that I agree with everything the writer has to say.
I would say the Author is speculating, like we all do.
I think he is entitled to his opinion doesn't mean I agree with all he has to say.
I wont even ridicule him for expressing his beliefs.

reply to post by Harte


"Sorry, but I won't let these sorts of claims remain unchallenged. It's why I'm here. Forgive my terseness if you will. It's not your fault you've been misled. Well, not entirely anyway."

Not at all
I respect your opinion, you are well informed and you bring up some good points.
Its just I find the "brainier" people are, the less tact they posses.
I am more interested in valid information than being misled.
In saying that however. I do still believe that there is a phenomenal amount of sience engineering and mathematics involved in the pyramids.

I believe that a society develops all of these attributes in parallel with their development.
I think it speaks volumes that this amount of complex knowledge in engineering mathematics and astronomy, existed so long ago.

In my humble opinion I feel we do not have a good grasp on our own history.

At the time of the ancient Egyptians humanity was supposed to know nothing about the true size and shape of the Earth. Is it therefore coincidence that there is a relationship - in a scale of 1:43,200 - that exists between the dimensions of the Great Pyramid and the Earth?

If you take the Pyramid's original height and multiply it by 43,200 you get a stunningly accurate estimate of the polar radius of the Earth.

Pyramid's Height (481.3949 ft) x 43,200 = 3938.685 miles

Which is an underestimate of only about 11 miles, as worked out by our best modern methods.

Furthermore, if you take the Pyramid's perimeter and multiply it by 43,200 you get a very close estimate of the equatorial circumference of the Earth.

Pyramid's Perimeter (3023.16 ft) x 43,200 = 24,734.94 miles

Which is an underestimate of about 170 miles; an error of just three quarters of a percent.

www.geocities.com...

The Spynx (about half a mile away from the pyramids) points due east and in the pre-dawn of 10,500 BC it would have pointed directly at its celestial counterpart - the constellation of Leo.

Therefore, at the moment of sunrise on the vernal equinox in 10,500 BC there would be a conjunction involving the three Pyramids and the Orion's Belt and a conjunction involving the Sphynx and the constellation of Leo. This conjunction marks the beginning of the 'Age of Leo' and the beginning of the upwards precessional cycle of Orion's Belt.
Can all this be accidental?

It seems unlikely that such engineering and astronomical precision can be purely coincidental. Either the Pharaohs had much more knowledge than we even thought remotely possible or, perhaps, a civilisation more ancient than the Egyptians (circa 10,500 BC, maybe?) once existed and was endowed with great knowledge.

Either way, it seems that the epoch of 10,500 BC is being commemorated by the Pyramids and the Sphynx for some reason.

www.geocities.com...

reply to post by foremanator

Well there's plenty of... numbers... on that site, but I only got as far as one of the first paragraphs:

"Pi is not supposed to have been known until the Greeks discovered it in the 3rd century BC, yet the pyramids were built as long ago as 2,500 BC at least."

I was left absolutely flabbergasted with the nothingness of that sentence.

[edit on 5-3-2009 by merka]

Originally posted by foremanator

Nobody alive today knows for certain how the pyramid was erected, how long it took to build, or how its near perfect alignments were achieved. It is aligned with the earth's four cardinal points, and at the exact center of the geometrical quadrant formed by the Nile Delta. It is located at the exact center of the earth's land surface. The geographical center of the whole land mass including the Americas, and Antarctica.

www.vinesbranch.com...

The bolded portion is simply a lie. This is why I reccomended you do your own research. I'd not visit the linked sit again, were I you.

Originally posted by foremanator
"The idea that "everybody thought the world was flat" is a complete and utter fallacy. It was started by Washington Irving, in fact."
This one I will give to you.
Doing some reading it seems you are correct.

Thank you. Funny how an erroneous idea can take hold, isn't it?
Like the G.P. being at the "exact center of the Earth's land surface."

Originally posted by foremanator
Just because I provide a link to some information, does not mean that I agree with everything the writer has to say.

Point taken, and glad to hear it. Don't forget, it was you that admonished us to "read the materials" you provided, though.

Originally posted by foremanatorI would say the Author is speculating, like we all do.
I think he is entitled to his opinion doesn't mean I agree with all he has to say.
I wont even ridicule him for expressing his beliefs.

That author is not simply expressing his beliefs. He is pretending to have discovered something that nobody else knew, and using pseudoscience to do it.

If he'd simply said "let's speculate" this or that, I'd have no problem with it.

Originally posted by foremanator
I respect your opinion, you are well informed and you bring up some good points.
Its just I find the "brainier" people are, the less tact they posses.
I am more interested in valid information than being misled.

Thankls, and I agree. Being misled is the reason I'm here. I was misled by VonDaniken. Eventually I educated myself enough on the subject to realize I'd been lied to and ripped off. Just trying to save others the trouble of the same sort of thing.

I believe if you use the search function, you might find out why I'm so cantankerous. I've only stated the same facts about the pyramid (and other things) at least twenty times here at ATS, and many others have given up and left the site because of theitr frustration over the same thing. Most of them repeated facts over and over proabably 50 times longer than I have.
You last two posts, by the way, were also filled with misleading mischaracterizations (nicer way to put it.)

Don't go to Geocities to find out about Egypt. You're wasting your and my time and everyone elses'. There's plenty of good archaeology sites out there to find what you want.


Harte

Originally posted by merka
reply to post by foremanator

 

Well there's plenty of... numbers... on that site, but I only got as far as one of the first paragraphs:

"Pi is not supposed to have been known until the Greeks discovered it in the 3rd century BC, yet the pyramids were built as long ago as 2,500 BC at least."

I was left absolutely flabbergasted with the nothingness of that sentence.

[edit on 5-3-2009 by merka]

Well at least it matches your point.
You don't think there is any relevance in the builders advanced understanding of math?

[edit on 5-3-2009 by foremanator]

i wonder what the 43,200 refers to? you'd need some kinda of link to make it stick. the fact that it's a whole number is pretty good too. all in all i'd say it leans towards proving that the pyramids do in fact refer to the proportions of the globe.

but really maybe it was just luck as well. if i measuerd my laptop i'd eventually find a multiple that came very close to a measurement of the earth. and if miles didn't work maybe meters would.

Originally posted by foremanator
The Spynx (about half a mile away from the pyramids) points due east and in the pre-dawn of 10,500 BC it would have pointed directly at its celestial counterpart - the constellation of Leo.

Except for two points: The constellation of Leo was defined by the Ancient Greeks. Nobody had a "Leo" before then. The Egyptians (see the astronomical ceiling drawing here: www.planetarios.com... ) apparently identified what we call "Scorpio" as a recumbant lion. A part of Leo was part of a constellation named Horus.

Secondly, the shapes of the constellations were a bit different back then, and the tilt of the Earth made for a different "north star." Leo might not have been a rising constellation back then (haven't checked astronomical software.)

Originally posted by merka
reply to post by foremanator

 

Well there's plenty of... numbers... on that site, but I only got as far as one of the first paragraphs:

"Pi is not supposed to have been known until the Greeks discovered it in the 3rd century BC, yet the pyramids were built as long ago as 2,500 BC at least."

I was left absolutely flabbergasted with the nothingness of that sentence.

[edit on 5-3-2009 by merka]

Not only that, it's incorrect. The ancient world was aware of "pi" as 22/7 and it shows up in the Rhind Mathematical papyrus. They had a way of doing brute force calculations with that. The Sumerians also used it:
en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by Mozzy
reply to post by Byrd

 

the solar boat doesn't have a name on it.

I see you're correct. I had one source that said it did, but others say that it's only the name of his son, Djedefre, and that appears on the walls around the boat. It was identified as Khufu's because of his son's cartouches and the fact that it was buried underneath the pavement of the pyramid.

herodotus also talked about cyclops and griffons and million men persian armies.

Yes, he was repeating what he was told... and we all know this. But what it established was that in his time, the pyramid was associated with Khufu, and later digs found some material associated with that name there. There is also the (occasionally controversial) workers' quarry markings on the stones inside the pyramid.

And the pyramid is called "Khufu's Ahket."

so what's the point of all those links byrd? you're not trying to give us an impression are you? now why would you do a thing like that...

You said that nothing was known about Khufu and there wasn't anything to link him with the site. I simply gave some links that supported my disagreement with that statement.

reply to post by Harte

Harte: The Egyptians had two measures, hands (or fingers) and cubits….

SC: The AE had a number of intermediary measures from their base unit of digits and palms, to wit:

4 digits equaled a palm, 5 digits a hand.

12 digits, or three palms, equaled a small span.

14 digits, or one-half a cubit, equaled a large span.

16 digits, or 4 palms, made 1 t'ser.

24 digits, or 6 palms, were a small cubit.

28 digits made a Royal Cubit.

Harte: A cubit to them equaled 28 hands.

SC: A Royal Cubit equaled 28 digits (not hands or palms as you stated. The palm and hand were different sizes, 4 and 5 digits respectively). The Standard or Small Cubit equaled 24 digits..

This is why it is my contention that the AE base unit the ‘digit’ is based upon the phalanges of a pair of human hands of which there are 28 giving the Royal Cubit and excluding thumbs there are 24 giving the Standard Cubit.

Scott Creighton



[edit on 7/3/2009 by Scott Creighton]

reply to post by azzllin

Azzlin: Does anyone else believe that Hawass is hiding anything?

SC: Perhaps............

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Regards,

Scott Creighton