The mysteries of the Great Pyramid, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 10 times

reply posted on 25-5-2009 @ 05:27 AM by Invisible Drone

reply to post by mblahnikluver

Agreed. Hawass is the worst thing to happen to archaeology since Heinrich Schliemann. He showboats and takes credit himself for the hard work (mentally and physically) of others.

Apparently the underground chamber that rests beneath the Sphinx was excavated and all signs pointed to it being the "Tomb of Osiris". He's a good frontman for those with an agenda to obscure the truth that belongs to all of us and not just the Egyptian government.

reply posted on 25-5-2009 @ 05:36 AM by Kandinsky

reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic

That's an original thought I haven't heard before. Nice one

The Egyptians were capable of excess and elaboration (the Great Pyramid is a fairly arrogant size:@@

, but they did everything for a reason. In the intervening thousands of years we have a disconnect regarding the intentions for the shafts. Lots of ideas and lots of questions...

The water idea is unlikely due to the limited capacities of an 8"X8" channel combined with the problems of getting the water to the great height where the openings are located. Furthermore, the blocks aren't mortared and sealed. Any water poured down the shaft would see gravity pulling it through the gaps and cracks.

reply posted on 25-5-2009 @ 05:49 AM by Neo Christian Mystic

And I want to rehash an earlier post of mine that got little attention, which I honestly believe is a Hebrew referance to the Great Pyramid, and it's from a book called "the Revelation of Moses".

Most of the book goes on about the life of Adam and Eve, and when Adam dies, God burries him under a cernatin "three edged seal", so is should not be opened during "the six days" until the day of ressurection when "his rib returns to him". And like King David reveals for us in the Psalms of the Bible, one day for God is 1000 years for a man. And the Hebrew calendar counting years since the birth of Adam soon tipples 6000 years, 1000 years for each day God created, six days, an on the seventh he rested, the Sabbath, the prophecy of the Peace Millennium after which God returns from his resting place.

Anyway, under the same three cornered seal we should find two men, one young and one old, and one old woman. The old woman is Eve who died last of the three, the young man is Abel, whom Cain killed, and finally the old man would be Adam whom God created some 5770 years ago according to the Hebrew calendar. It is my sincere belief that God created the Great Pyramid. And I strongly believe they aren't as empty as they seem, and that there are rich tombs hidden inside containing the bodies of the Eden people. The building is just too damn perfect to have been constructed by humans IMO.

reply posted on 25-5-2009 @ 10:29 AM by Scott Creighton

reply to post by Kandinsky

Hello Kandinsky,

Kandinsky: Bauval and Hancock's 'Orion Theory' is unsupported by the Giza Plateau's position,

SC: I cannot agree with your statement. New evidence has come to light since Bauval/Hancock wrote their books that clearly demonstrate that the BELT STARS of the Orion constellation (or whatever it was called in ancient times) did indeed form the underlying design imperative for both the layout of the main Gizamids, the so-called 'Queens Pyramids' and ALSO determined the very (base) dimensions of the main Gizamids. The proof is incontrovertible:

The Giza-Orion Geo-Stellar Fingerprint'

www.scottcreighton.co.uk...

The Precession of the Queens

www.scottcreighton.co.uk...

Regards,

Scott Creighton

[edit on 25/5/2009 by Scott Creighton]

reply posted on 25-5-2009 @ 03:39 PM by Neo Christian Mystic

One is certain, Orion or Sahu, was important to the ancient Egyptians, in that the constellation represented the soul or Ka (double) of Asar (Osiris), brother-husband of Isis, mother of Hor (Horus). It was the first the Egyptian Creator God Huhu created; his first breath produced Sahu or Orion and the last he created was Asar, son of Ra (ra in Hebrew means evil, in ancient Egypt it meant sun), or Osiris. In the Hebrew Kabbalah Kesil (Orion) represents Archangel Gabriel, the Mighty Messenger of God, with his strengthy belt of Ufaz gold around his waist, his unbreakable Chain of Incorruptibles in his left hand and the Book of Life in the other... Every now and then his face shines like the Sun...

[edit on 25/5/2009 by Neo Christian Mystic]

reply posted on 25-5-2009 @ 05:32 PM by Outlawstar

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
And I want to rehash an earlier post of mine that got little attention, which I honestly believe is a Hebrew referance to the Great Pyramid, and it's from a book called "the Revelation of Moses".

Most of the book goes on about the life of Adam and Eve, and when Adam dies, God burries him under a cernatin "three edged seal", so is should not be opened during "the six days" until the day of ressurection when "his rib returns to him". And like King David reveals for us in the Psalms of the Bible, one day for God is 1000 years for a man. And the Hebrew calendar counting years since the birth of Adam soon tipples 6000 years, 1000 years for each day God created, six days, an on the seventh he rested, the Sabbath, the prophecy of the Peace Millennium after which God returns from his resting place.

Anyway, under the same three cornered seal we should find two men, one young and one old, and one old woman. The old woman is Eve who died last of the three, the young man is Abel, whom Cain killed, and finally the old man would be Adam whom God created some 5770 years ago according to the Hebrew calendar. It is my sincere belief that God created the Great Pyramid. And I strongly believe they aren't as empty as they seem, and that there are rich tombs hidden inside containing the bodies of the Eden people. The building is just too damn perfect to have been constructed by humans IMO.

I strongly disagree, come on, "built by God", Im assuming your reffering to the Biblical God, the murderer, promoter of war, rape and incest.........I sincerely doubt it, whatever this "God" was, I wnt nothing to do with him/it.......

Its much more likely they were built by a race long forgotten in our modern memories, a race of supreme knowledge, I really cant come to ANY other conclusion based on my research into the topic......so much evidence, NONE for "God" having had a hand in it

reply posted on 25-5-2009 @ 07:24 PM by Neo Christian Mystic

Originally posted by Outlawstar
I strongly disagree, come on, "built by God", Im assuming your reffering to the Biblical God, the murderer, promoter of war, rape and incest.........I sincerely doubt it, whatever this "God" was, I wnt nothing to do with him/it.......,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Faith can move and build mountains. If the Pyramid contains the tomb of Adam it was built before the Great Flood. Adam was 930 years when he died, and the flood came about half a milennium later, something which can explain why the Great Pyramid was once covered in a water proof coating of white marble. These stones were later taken from the pyramid to build temples and other buildings. 144,000 blocks of white marble, sealed together in the joints to infact making the whole construction water proof.

- Murder: When did ever God kill anyone? And is it really that bad to kill someone when you have promised and is capable of and comitted to bring every person from Adam forward back to life?
- War: The wars of the Torah were already started, God just pierced through the enemies of his chosen nation's defences with his tactics, skill and power.
- Rape: Can't remember ever reading about God ever ordering rape.
- Incest: In the Law of Moses he strongly prohibits sexual relations between closely related people. But the Egyptian pantheon on the other side, is full of incestous relationships, and the pharaos and noblety in ancient Egypt followed their example, even into the Ptolemaic era.

Its much more likely they were built by a race long forgotten in our modern memories, a race of supreme knowledge

The story goes that God and his people came from the stars and Created our civilisation some 6000 years ago. Some of them mixed with the humans, but since we are not of the same race as the "sons of God" or the Anunaki, the "Travellers from the Stars", resulting in offspring showing extreme growth, gigantism and deformities called the Nephilim. They also mixed different species of animals making new species perhaps using advanced technology depicted and referanced to in ancient Vedic, Egyptian and Sumerian art and literature.

reply posted on 25-5-2009 @ 09:03 PM by Byrd

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
One is certain, Orion or Sahu, was important to the ancient Egyptians, in that the constellation represented the soul or Ka (double) of Asar (Osiris), brother-husband of Isis, mother of Hor (Horus). It was the first the Egyptian Creator God Huhu created; his first breath produced Sahu or Orion and the last he created was Asar, son of Ra

Uh, you might want to go reread the web page.
www.touregypt.net...

Hu was created last, Sahu was not as important as Sirius (not part of Orion) and Ra created Hu; not the other way around.

(ra in Hebrew means evil, in ancient Egypt it meant sun), or Osiris.]\

It's "rah" in Hebrew. Re in Egyptian, and Osiris is not the same as Re and was not the last created.

Haven't studied the Kabbalah, but have studied Egypt. Your source here was tweaking stuff to make it fit the idea they had -- I think you should mark it as "not terribly accurate" in your catalogs. There are better sites.

reply posted on 25-5-2009 @ 09:41 PM by Neo Christian Mystic

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
One is certain, Orion or Sahu, was important to the ancient Egyptians, in that the constellation represented the soul or Ka (double) of Asar (Osiris), brother-husband of Isis, mother of Hor (Horus). It was the first the Egyptian Creator God Huhu created; his first breath produced Sahu or Orion and the last he created was Asar, son of Ra

Uh, you might want to go reread the web page.
www.touregypt.net...

Hu was created last, Sahu was not as important as Sirius (not part of Orion) and Ra created Hu; not the other way around.

Not according to my learning, other than that Huhu like Ra concider themself self created, outside time-space, and not the product of sexual relations in a linear time-space. I have learned that Huhu was the oldest of the Egyptian gods who created Heaven, Nut, then the Earth, Geb. From their union came the Air Shu, and Water, Tefnut, and then all the other Egyptian gods came forth with Ra, the Sun, becoming the most prominent and worshipped. Can't give much sources for my story, other than that it parallells the Biblical account. Sa his female counterpart corresponds to the Sophia of the Gnostic Christians of the first and second century. Searching for these things on the net will only confuse you for every page tells a different story.

(ra in Hebrew means evil, in ancient Egypt it meant sun), or Osiris.]\

It's "rah" in Hebrew. Re in Egyptian, and Osiris is not the same as Re and was not the last created.

Haven't studied the Kabbalah, but have studied Egypt. Your source here was tweaking stuff to make it fit the idea they had -- I think you should mark it as "not terribly accurate" in your catalogs. There are better sites.

Rah or Ra, it sounds exactly the same. You can split the Egyptology community in two and one half says Ra, the other Re, but Ra is correct since it also occurs in oposite, Ar, meaning the same thing in Egyptian, Sun or Ra, we would have to rewrite a great deal of names and retransliterate qite a bunch of words had Re won concensus before Ra. Anyway, it is like discussing the pope's beard. And I didn't say Asar is the same as Ra, did I? Reat the sentance without the parentesis:

Asar, son of Ra [strikeout](ra in Hebrew means evil, in ancient Egypt it meant sun)[/strikeout], or Osiris.

Asar is Osiris, Ra is Asar/Osiris' father.

[edit on 25/5/2009 by Neo Christian Mystic]

reply posted on 26-5-2009 @ 01:44 AM by merka

Rah or Ra, it sounds exactly the same.

In English yes... But ancient Egyptians didnt talk English (AFAIK). One of the key flaws with comparing names (such as names similar to Atlantis, seen this ALOT) is that people take no regard to how you actually say the word, they just look at the English translation and interpretation.

That said, I dont know if Rah and Ra sounds exactly the same in ancient Egyptian myself.

reply posted on 26-5-2009 @ 06:05 AM by Outlawstar

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic

Originally posted by Outlawstar
I strongly disagree, come on, "built by God", Im assuming your reffering to the Biblical God, the murderer, promoter of war, rape and incest.........I sincerely doubt it, whatever this "God" was, I wnt nothing to do with him/it.......,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Faith can move and build mountains. If the Pyramid contains the tomb of Adam it was built before the Great Flood. Adam was 930 years when he died, and the flood came about half a milennium later, something which can explain why the Great Pyramid was once covered in a water proof coating of white marble. These stones were later taken from the pyramid to build temples and other buildings. 144,000 blocks of white marble, sealed together in the joints to infact making the whole construction water proof.

- Murder: When did ever God kill anyone? And is it really that bad to kill someone when you have promised and is capable of and comitted to bring every person from Adam forward back to life?
- War: The wars of the Torah were already started, God just pierced through the enemies of his chosen nation's defences with his tactics, skill and power.
- Rape: Can't remember ever reading about God ever ordering rape.
- Incest: In the Law of Moses he strongly prohibits sexual relations between closely related people. But the Egyptian pantheon on the other side, is full of incestous relationships, and the pharaos and noblety in ancient Egypt followed their example, even into the Ptolemaic era.

Its much more likely they were built by a race long forgotten in our modern memories, a race of supreme knowledge

The story goes that God and his people came from the stars and Created our civilisation some 6000 years ago. Some of them mixed with the humans, but since we are not of the same race as the "sons of God" or the Anunaki, the "Travellers from the Stars", resulting in offspring showing extreme growth, gigantism and deformities called the Nephilim. They also mixed different species of animals making new species perhaps using advanced technology depicted and referanced to in ancient Vedic, Egyptian and Sumerian art and literature.

Youll note I never said "God" did all of these things, I said he promoted ALL of them, yes ALL.
Though he did, and even if he didint, the promotion is enough, would you let George Bush off the hook because he only told people what to do, who to kill, but didint actually do it himself.
And like I said I dont want ANYTHING to do with a being of such malign.

There were certainly civilisations long before 6000 years ago, your interpretation comes from stories that are perversed in so many ways, and ancient beyond the date of the Bible.

[edit on 26-5-2009 by Outlawstar]

reply posted on 26-5-2009 @ 07:13 AM by Kandinsky

reply to post by Scott Creighton

The proof is incontrovertible

Those are fairly strong words and yet I'm still not convinced. The Orion-Giza theory hasn't developed from it's earlier incarnation other than to attach to itself numerous diagrams. Given the unanswered questions about said earlier incarnation, it becomes less interesting to follow. Naturally, it all hinges on 'advanced/lost civilizations' and that too is a McGuffin, a strawman to hang one's ideological hat upon.

I'm minded of a dog that chases its own tail. The observers know it is just a tail and the dog can't catch it. So why does the dog carry on? Why doesn't it understand this? It's simple...it's too busy chasing his own tail to notice

reply posted on 26-5-2009 @ 07:17 AM by Outlawstar

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by Scott Creighton

The proof is incontrovertible

Those are fairly strong words and yet I'm still not convinced. The Orion-Giza theory hasn't developed from it's earlier incarnation other than to attach to itself numerous diagrams. Given the unanswered questions about said earlier incarnation, it becomes less interesting to follow. Naturally, it all hinges on 'advanced/lost civilizations' and that too is a McGuffin, a strawman to hang one's ideological hat upon.

I'm minded of a dog that chases its own tail. The observers know it is just a tail and the dog can't catch it. So why does the dog carry on? Why doesn't it understand this? It's simple...it's too busy chasing his own tail to notice

There is evidence in abundance of a lost civilisation.......so much evidence, it really is just a logic train, nothing "out there" about it.

reply posted on 26-5-2009 @ 07:53 AM by Kandinsky

reply to post by Outlawstar

Lost cultures? almost certainly.
Lost civilizations? Unlikely.
Lost advanced civilizations with technology matching or surpassing our own? Nah...

reply posted on 26-5-2009 @ 08:14 AM by Neo Christian Mystic

Originally posted by Outlawstar
Youll note I never said "God" did all of these things, I said he promoted ALL of them, yes ALL.

A prophecy isn't promotion. When God says about the future that Israel shall kill women and children, it is not an order, it's a statement and a prophecy. Blaming God for what he foretold is like blaming Greenpeace for extinct species or Amnesty for torture. The prophetic side of God is maybe his strongest and recognisable feature. However, God is reknown for his wartime endeavours. The birth of a nation is normally a very violent thing. And religion is normally a key factor and often used as a motivator for soldiers and civilians alike. However I never liked jealousy, and God seems very jealous. Only evil comes out of jealousy. But I guess one would need it if you're God. I'll say like AC/DC: it's a long way to the top, if you wanna rock'n'roll.

reply posted on 26-5-2009 @ 08:56 AM by Scott Creighton

reply to post by Kandinsky

Hello Kandinsky,

Thank you for your reply.

SC: The proof [of an Orion Belt influence at Giza] is incontrovertible

Kandinsky: Those are fairly strong words and yet I'm still not convinced.

SC: Strong words as a result of strong evidence. This new evidence presented here might not convince you but it certainly does convince many others.

Kandinsky: The Orion-Giza theory hasn't developed from it's earlier incarnation other than to attach to itself numerous diagrams. Given the unanswered questions about said earlier incarnation, it becomes less interesting to follow.

SC: All of which rather neatly sidesteps actually dealing properly with the NEW evidence here which demonstrates - beyond reasonable doubt - an Orion's Belt influence at Giza both in the layout of the structures but - more crucially - in the actual base dimensions of the Gizamids. This new evidence also demonstrates how the so-called Queens are postioned and aligned to mimic the precessional min and max culminations of those very same stars and thereby, rather neatly, explaining the complete absence of such 'Queens'" structures at Khafre's tomb - a pharaoh who had more Queens than the other two Giza Kings combined. It shows how Menakure is aligned at 212* azimuth with its stellar counterpart - the Belt star, Mintaka - at 212* azimuth c.10,500BCE. Of course, this is all just nothing more than simple coincidence to you, isn't it? Surely you cannot really believe that? Surely you have a better rebuttal than simply saying you're "still not convinced"? It seems to me you do not actually want to be convinced. But that, of course, is entirely your choice.

There comes a time, Kandinsky, when coincidence must give way to conformity. Witrh this new evidence of an Orion influence at Giza we have more than surpassed that point.

Kandinsky: Naturally, it all hinges on 'advanced/lost civilizations' and that too is a McGuffin, a strawman to hang one's ideological hat upon.

SC: I don't understand your point here? Why is it not possible for the AE to have conceived of this? Why are you suggesting 'advanced/lost civilisations'? Are you seriously suggesting the AE could not have set out a straight line, create an angle of 45* or 90* or that they had no interest in the stars of the heavens? I think everything we know of the AE civilisation tells us quite emphatically that such a capability was well within the means of the AE - no lost civilisations required, thank you.

Kandinsky: I'm minded of a dog that chases its own tail. The observers know it is just a tail and the dog can't catch it. So why does the dog carry on? Why doesn't i understand this? It's simple...it's too busy chasing his own tail to notice

SC: This is actually a meaningless analogy but one that, neverthless, can cut both ways. Mainstream Egyptology is too busy chasing its own tail to have noticed that there is a much bigger picture going on at Giza - a narrative that has totally escaped them. Perhaps if they stopped chasing for a few moments, took said tail from their line of sight and seriously examined the evidence I have presented here (and evidence others have presented elsewhere) then they might perhaps begin to see the bigger picture themselves. And do not misunderstand what is being said here. No one is saying the Egyptologists are wrong in what they tell us about the AE civilisation. What most serious alternative writers/researchers are suggesting is that there exists a narrative that has been completely overlooked by mainstream Egyptology. It is a narrative that is inextricably linked to the AEs sense of their place in the cosmos and their reverance to that cosmos.

Regards,

Scott Creighton

reply posted on 26-5-2009 @ 09:44 AM by Neo Christian Mystic

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic

...
The water idea is unlikely due to the limited capacities of an 8"X8" channel combined with the problems of getting the water to the great height where the openings are located. Furthermore, the blocks aren't mortared and sealed. Any water poured down the shaft would see gravity pulling it through the gaps and cracks.

Firstly, the channels are only about 5.5 in. high, but the channels could still very well support workers inside with running water, the limited dimentions of the channels actually limit the amount of water running to a stream instead of a river or a flood

. A series of Archimedes screws could easily support more than enough water to sustain a contineous stream of flowing water, and a slight breeze of fresh air inside. The excess water would then be guided downwards through the gallery and out, and would work as a sewage system and where there is running water there is movement in the air. The same system was probably used in the hanging gardens of Babylon. And my guess is that the builders used elephants and lever- and A-beam lifts and other primitive, but effective lifting and positioning tools. Utilising suspension- and levering technology to the full, and you can push, lift or position hundreds of tons with your finger.

reply posted on 26-5-2009 @ 10:10 AM by Neo Christian Mystic

Hey, I just got a crazy idea when thinking about the"Dixon Relics", and one relic in particular -- the granite ball. What if they rolled the gigantic limestone blocks on a bed of these much harder granite balls, it would ease friction to a minimum, and be much easier to pull. Like I said, it's a crazy idea, but what if?

reply posted on 27-5-2009 @ 05:43 AM by Outlawstar

Originally posted by Scott Creighton
reply to post by Kandinsky

Hello Kandinsky,

Thank you for your reply.

SC: The proof [of an Orion Belt influence at Giza] is incontrovertible

Kandinsky: Those are fairly strong words and yet I'm still not convinced.

SC: Strong words as a result of strong evidence. This new evidence presented here might not convince you but it certainly does convince many others.

Kandinsky: The Orion-Giza theory hasn't developed from it's earlier incarnation other than to attach to itself numerous diagrams. Given the unanswered questions about said earlier incarnation, it becomes less interesting to follow.

SC: All of which rather neatly sidesteps actually dealing properly with the NEW evidence here which demonstrates - beyond reasonable doubt - an Orion's Belt influence at Giza both in the layout of the structures but - more crucially - in the actual base dimensions of the Gizamids. This new evidence also demonstrates how the so-called Queens are postioned and aligned to mimic the precessional min and max culminations of those very same stars and thereby, rather neatly, explaining the complete absence of such 'Queens'" structures at Khafre's tomb - a pharaoh who had more Queens than the other two Giza Kings combined. It shows how Menakure is aligned at 212* azimuth with its stellar counterpart - the Belt star, Mintaka - at 212* azimuth c.10,500BCE. Of course, this is all just nothing more than simple coincidence to you, isn't it? Surely you cannot really believe that? Surely you have a better rebuttal than simply saying you're "still not convinced"? It seems to me you do not actually want to be convinced. But that, of course, is entirely your choice.

There comes a time, Kandinsky, when coincidence must give way to conformity. Witrh this new evidence of an Orion influence at Giza we have more than surpassed that point.

Kandinsky: Naturally, it all hinges on 'advanced/lost civilizations' and that too is a McGuffin, a strawman to hang one's ideological hat upon.

SC: I don't understand your point here? Why is it not possible for the AE to have conceived of this? Why are you suggesting 'advanced/lost civilisations'? Are you seriously suggesting the AE could not have set out a straight line, create an angle of 45* or 90* or that they had no interest in the stars of the heavens? I think everything we know of the AE civilisation tells us quite emphatically that such a capability was well within the means of the AE - no lost civilisations required, thank you.

Kandinsky: I'm minded of a dog that chases its own tail. The observers know it is just a tail and the dog can't catch it. So why does the dog carry on? Why doesn't i understand this? It's simple...it's too busy chasing his own tail to notice

SC: This is actually a meaningless analogy but one that, neverthless, can cut both ways. Mainstream Egyptology is too busy chasing its own tail to have noticed that there is a much bigger picture going on at Giza - a narrative that has totally escaped them. Perhaps if they stopped chasing for a few moments, took said tail from their line of sight and seriously examined the evidence I have presented here (and evidence others have presented elsewhere) then they might perhaps begin to see the bigger picture themselves. And do not misunderstand what is being said here. No one is saying the Egyptologists are wrong in what they tell us about the AE civilisation. What most serious alternative writers/researchers are suggesting is that there exists a narrative that has been completely overlooked by mainstream Egyptology. It is a narrative that is inextricably linked to the AEs sense of their place in the cosmos and their reverance to that cosmos.

Regards,

Scott Creighton

All excellent points Scott and I agree for the most part...........except I genuinely dont believe that the Egyptians built the pyramids, it is a feat that was WAY out of even their league.

reply posted on 27-5-2009 @ 06:51 AM by Scott Creighton

reply to post by Outlawstar

Hello Outlawstar,

Many thanks for your comments. You write:

Outlawstar: All excellent points Scott and I agree for the most part...........except I genuinely dont believe that the Egyptians built the pyramids, it is a feat that was WAY out of even their league.

SC: It remains my view that the C14 dates offered for the pyramids (at Giza), although not in perfect harmony with the King Lists, is in the ball-park for a 4th Dynasty construction. The Sphinx, however, is an entirely different issue and there seems to be a growing consensus that this structure predated the Gizamids. By how much remains uncertain.

Regards,

Scott Creighton

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 >> ^^TOP^^