Mayan 2012 Date Corroborated by Ancient Egyptians

hey scott, excuse for the stupid question, but have you posted this before?

I have seen the images in your link before, but there was text with the photos that explained what we are seeing. I have seen just about every single image somewhere else.

Care to link the original document? Please.

reply to post by jtma508

---

Hi JTMA,



SC: Interestingly the first date given in the presentation - 9,700 BCE - is very close to the date Plato offers for the sinking of mythical Atlantis.

Clearly though - as science is now confirming - major global events of a cataclysmic nature were happening around the Earth at this time (end of Ice Age, disappearance of megafauna & megaflaura species etc).

Interesting that this 9,700 BCE date should be highlighted along with the 2,012 CE date.

Regards,

Scott Creighton

[edit on 8/10/2009 by Scott Creighton]

Well, I dont agree with all of your statements, due to the fact you forget to take all pyramids in your explanation.

But I really like this! Very nice!

reply to post by Le Colonel

---

Hello Le Colonel,

You ask if I have posted this idea eslewhere. The idea originated here:

www.grahamhancock.com...

Regards,

Scott Creighton

So, basically we are looking at another disaster coming?

reply to post by Lunica

---

Hello Lunica,



SC: There is much more to my work than what has been shown in the presentation within the OP of this thread. Here's a couple of other presentation that demonstrate how ALL the structures at Giza are connected to Orion's Belt.

The Giza-Orion Blueprint

The Precession of The Queens

Kind regards,


Scott Creighton

reply to post by lardo5150

---

Hello Lardo,



SC: I've no idea. I am merely presenting here what I can reasonably and factually demonstrate. If there is anything more significant to these particular dates, is not something I particularly wish to speculate upon.

In short - make of this what you will.

Best regards,

Scott Creighton

Okay - I posed a small challenge earlier in this thread. So far JTMA is the closest to the date I have but no one is yet within 100 years of my date.

100 Kudos points are still up for grabs. Get those rulers out!!

Cheers,

Scott Creighton

Howdy Scott



Hans: So does your circle-didn't you earlier use the circle as an indicator of time-are you now saying there are two such indicators?



Hans: Considering the pyramids were built in a general line that is not surprizing




Hans: Not necessarily, its just a line connecting parts of three structures that are roughly in line-you could do the same with the two groups of satellite pyramids. What value does Lehner place on his line? Why does the Lehner line touch a different queen's pyramid that the one your circle is based on?



Hans: er no they connect with different satellite pyramids and the Lehner line doesn’t connect with your circle. Shouldn't they be related?




Hans: Yet they don’t intersect??

3. I stand corrected



Hans: Really I’ve always seen a date of 25,771 for the precession – or does it change over time, if so how could a value have been placed on it? Odd that a ‘time line’ would be created to mark an imprecise time.

Hans: 5. Why is the date 3114 BC not involved? That would be a key date if your idea is correct. As would be the start and stop of the Mayan cycle before it.



Hans: Wouldn’t this violate your other theory that in a dream Imhotep was given the plan for the Giza plateau? If the Sphinx was built thousands of years earlier how would they have known the plateau would be laided out ‘as you believe’ by the Egyptians in the correct order?

So to read this ‘timeline’ an observer must be able to view the plateau from an aerial view, physically or on a map. They must somehow pick two obscure satellite pyramids and draw a line between them and then, for apparently no particularly reason create lines to go to certain points along said line – from a point, the dream stelae that was built long after the Sphinx....Considering you can draw lots of lines all over the plateau how would they find this particular line? – and how does this work with your earlier theory of the time being indicated by the circle?




Hans: Not really if it were natural it would be lined up directly with the invisible line. If I was making a time line I’d use a physical structure not an invisible line that depends on two of the smallest structures on the Plateau surviving. With a marker that is off the center line.





Hans: Since a cubit can be almost anything that is why I asked for meters, so what in meters is the length of Lehners line (does it have a precise start and stop point) and your circle?




Hans: A quote from your Gravity cubit “By simply adding the height and width of the Great Pyramid together we find the value of 14,839 inches. This is an interesting figure in its own right simply by virtue of the fact that it demonstrates the key values of 148 and 39!”

Sorry Scott all that is an amazing using of numerology.

Final comment how would an unknowing observer figure this all out? I figure that was the point right?

So what happens in 2012 that the guys-who-aren't-Atlanteans wanted us to know?


[edit on 8/10/09 by Hanslune]

reply to post by Hanslune

---

Hello Hans,

Thank you for your questions.




SC: The circle is STILL being used as an indicator of (precession) time but obviously in a different manner to that which I presented before. This method makes use of the ‘Lehner Line’ which I had not done before which is clearly an obvious and intentional ‘feature’ of the Giza structures. The ‘Lehner Line’ has a function which I had not previously appreciated.



SC: Ten points (see image below) along a 45* line I think demonstrates clear intention.





SC: See diagram above. It’s much more than three structures. As stated – there is clear intention here.



SC: The ‘Lehner Line’ connects structures along a 45* diagonal. The circle circumscribes the entire Giza pyramid field so that ALL Gizamids are precisely within the circle. Were the designers to have inscribed the circle to Queens pyramid G3a of the ‘Lehner Line’ then the circle would be smaller and it would not precisely circumscribe all the Gizamids. Neither would the Sphinx end up precisely on a smaller circle as it does with the circle that precisely encompasses the three most outer points of the Giza pyramid field. In addition, a smaller circle would not present the precessional value of 155520 (inches) in its circumference.

It is also important to remember a circle can be found that will connect any three non-linear points – not so with FOUR points i.e. the three most outer corners of the Giza pyramid field and the Sphinx. That these FOUR ‘significant points’ can be linked by a circle again demonstrates intent on the part of the Designer.



SC: The satellite pyramids are symbolic of Orion’s Belt at their 2 culminations. On this premise, the ‘Lehner Line’ DOES indeed connect the same two ‘stars’ (satellite pyramids). Rotated 90* to the eastern horizon.





SC: Yes, the rate of precession does change over time – it speeds up and slows down, speeds up and slows down. So the rate of precession as it is at present will calculate a total Great Year of around 25,771 years but the rate of precession in the past was slower so the average Great Year will be more than 25,771 years.



SC: From a ‘codex’ of some description, perhaps a granite model of the entire site (including the Sphinx which may have been constructed by the Designers of the ‘codex’). Remember, the Inventory Stellae tells us that Khufu built a structure at Giza “to the length of the Sphinx” i.e. the Sphinx was extant before Khufu began building at Giza. Intriguingly, the Great Pyramid is 3.14 (Pi) times the length of the Sphinx.



SC: My guess is there existed a ‘codex’ of some kind – perhaps a granite model of what we see at Giza today.



SC: They simply scaled up a model plan of some kind. This is easily done with a grid.



SC: Do not confuse what the Builders were doing with what the Designers intended. These are two different things. The Designers had a perfectly good reason for doing what they did. The Builders merely scaled-up the Design. If the Sphinx was already on-site this would have provided the perfect start (orientation) point for implementing the rest of the codex.



SC: This is true but it is likely that the ‘Dream Stellae’ was a replacement to a damaged original, much older Stellae and embellished by Thutmosis IV.



SC: It seems to me that whoever made this design knew what they were doing. It’s not so certain that the AE of the 4th Dynasty remembered this. More likely that the AE of the 4th Dynasty implemented this plan as they viewed it as sacred, as uniting Upper (Stellar) Egypt with Lower (terrestrial) Egypt. A sacred sky-ground unification. The deeper knowledge/information placed in the 'codex' may have been lost/forgotten by the 4th Dynasty AEs.

SC: There are only 2 points on the circle BEYOND the timeline - points 1 & 4. The Sphinx is the most natural and obvious 'calibration point' - the 'point of origin'.



SC: I understand what you are saying here. However, the ‘Lehner Line’ is very obvious as the diagram above shows. But what I see is a very clever and economic use of the structures that would be necessary for us to identify Orion’s Belt and its 2 culminations. It may actually even be the case that the ‘Lehner Line’ is inscribed on the ground at Giza (see below):





Now it could very well be that the line (trench) in the images above was dug for the purposes of laying cables for the former Light & Sound Show. This does not, however, preclude the possibility that a line (trench) already existed that was conveniently utilised for the S&L cables.

Continued....

reply to post by Hanslune

---

Continued from previous....



SC: The cubit length used is 20.618 inches. As stated though, I haven’t measured the length of the ‘Lehner Line’. I shall see if there’s a reference anywhere as I am very interested to know this myself.



SC: I suggest reading the entire article rather than selecting a somewhat “quirky” fact.



SC: Well, if this WAS the intention then it HAS been figured out – right?



SC: I have no idea. Perhaps this: The Great Pyramid and the Pole Shift

Regards,

Scott Creighton

Hi Scott

I'm going to switch to essay with points instead of question to question response as it was getting too long.

Some points

If I understand your idea you are taking the Lehner line- which isn't a straight line but runs up and down the topography of the plateau. You have assigned two circa dates to each end and suggest that with this you can arrive at picking up the Mayan date of 2012?

1. As noted the line is a fictional one, nor does it incorporate all the main features of the plateau
2. The sighting station, the dream stelae, cannot actually see the line. If is located down slope from the 'line' and well enclosed by the forward paws of the Sphinx and the walls of the enclosure.
3. Your dates are circa's at best but somehow they can be refined down to produce a single year? How is that done?
4. The sighting station cannot see the line (I'd suggest you use the central pyramid - from the top of it you can shoot your black lines out-but how anyone would get there is beyond me)
5. In this idea the end of a Mayan cycle is important but the start of the same cycle is not? Why? Also why aren't the earlier cycles also noted?
6. Continuing on the comment above where is 3114? The Maya thought their world had re-started then - yet we know they were wrong, why would the 2012 date be significant then?
7. The Mayan calendar evolved over time- how did the guys-who-were-not-atlanteans know it would produce that date?
8. How does Imhoteps dream morph into a granite model?
9. Just what where the guys-who-weren't-Atlanteans thinking, LOL
10. The gravity thing is just pure numerology-may I suggest you do a separate thread on that amusing thing.
11. How does this tie in with your earlier circular indicator of time?

So an imaginary uneven line that runs up and down the terrain that cannot be seen by your 'sighting station' is a source of profound knowledge??

[edit on 10/10/09 by Hanslune]

reply to post by Scott Creighton

---

Thought I had seen this before, I followed your posts on this topic at Grahams site. Thanks for all your work Scott.

Hi Scott Creighton,

I am fascinated by the Mayan Calender ever since I found out the accuracy and age of their mathematics.

I have a questions though and it seems that everyone is convinced the end of the Mayan Calender is 21st December 2012.

But Dr Johan Calleman has calculated that actually end date is the 28th October 2011.

Please can you comment on this please as it has been of much confusion to me recently. Either Dr Calleman is wrong or everyone believe in 2012 is wrong.

Regards,
E.T

Carl Johan Calleman's website

Mayan end date

Risks of 2012

reply to post by Hanslune

---

Hello Hans,



SC: The ‘Lehner Line’ is a straight (theoretical) line since – as I’m sure you know – any two points form a straight line. What we see at Giza is that there are a number of 'strategic' points in structures - 10 in all - aligned along the ‘Lehner Line’. This theoretical line is clearly implied by the position of these various structures.



SC: The ‘Lehner Line’ connects the two groups of so-called Queens Pyramids that are symbolic of the 2 culminations of the Belt Stars. This forms a theoretical precessional axis with a start point at one end of the axis and an end point at the opposite end. This is analogous to a theoretical timeline running east-west with sunrise depicted at one end and sunset depicted at the opposite end. If we know our latitude and date, we can determine the duration between the 2 points, the duration of the ‘solar timeline’.



SC: The line is a THEORECTICAL line – theoretical is quite different from fictional. A circle will always have a diameter but a line actually showing the circle’s diameter might not always be present even though the circle's diameter clearly exists.



SC; The ‘sighting station’ does not necessarily have to ‘see the line’. The builders are using a plan, a model of some kind and scaling up this model on the plateau using a simple grid system or center line system in the very same way it has been proposed that the Nazca lines may have been created. See here: Creating The Nazca Lines. As long as the builders can see and measure the model they can easily scale this up on the ground at Giza using a grid or centre line method.



SC: By getting the largest print of the Giza Plateau Mapping Project hi-res map of Giza that I could. The bigger the drawing, the more accurate the date. Yes, I could have said c.2,000 CE but the figure I got was most definitely nearer to 2,012 CE so I thought that was interesting in that it corresponds with the end date of the Mayan Fifth Sun. Why should I not offer my more precise date?



SC: By scaling-up a plan using a technique not dissimilar to that proposed for the creation of the Nazca lines. With such a technique you do not require ‘line of sight’ across the entire plateau.



SC: I have no idea why. I am merely presenting the dates that the intersection lines across the timeline (Lehner Line) offer us. As for earlier cycles – we have the cycle; that’s all we need to know. Some time after min culmination (sunset) of the belt stars a significant event may occur. Something similar may also occur some time before maximum culmination (sunrise).



SC: As stated above – I can only demonstrate the 2 dates at the intersections of the timeline. C.9,700BCE and c.2,012 CE. We know that c.9,700 BCE major global changes were taking place on the Earth. It is curious that this time should be picked out and then another date some 11,700 years later (that so happens to concord with the Mayan end of the 5th Sun) should also be pinpointed. I can’t comment on a date that does not seem to be identified using this technique.



SC: Not quite sure what you are asking here. What is of more interest (and of some apprehension) to me is that we know with some degree of certainty that major Earth changes took place circa the first date in the timeline (c.9,700BCE) and that this date is in some way connected with the second date (c.2,012CE) in the timeline. Why are these two dates identified? Is there perhaps some common factor between them? Well, if there is, then I think the 2,012 date in the timeline should perhaps give us some pause for thought considering what we DO know about the other c.9,700 BCE date.



SC: Don’t you mean Thutmosis’ dream? And shouldn’t you be asking how does the granite model morph into Thutmosis’ dream? The AEs were rather good at embellishment.


SC: Irrelevant.



SC: Numerology based in science and perhaps also supported by some tantalizing AE glyphs. There is already a thread in my ATS Forum discussing The Gravity Cubit.



SC: The circle is still key to the scheme. But now the ‘Lehner Line’ which previously served only as the axis of the precessional culminations has a more important role. Giza is a precessional clock – the evidence I have uncovered absolutely convinces me of this. I may not yet have worked out precisely how the various components of the precessional clock were intended to come together in order to present its information, but I don’t think I am too far off the mark either. Progress isn’t made without making some mistakes.



SC: A clearly implied theoretical line that does not require line of sight for its creation could indeed present us with two significant moments in the precessional cycle of the Earth. I do not myself consider that of itself to be profound knowledge – I would much prefer to understand why these dates are perhaps being indicated to us.

Regards,

Scott Creighton

[edit on 10/10/2009 by Scott Creighton]

reply to post by eclectic.thoughts

---

Hello Electic,

Alas Mayan cosmology is not my field. I'm sure there are a few knowledgable ATS members better qualified to answer your question.

Good luck.

Scott Creighton

Thanks so much for the little lesson - it was VERY helpful. Since I pretty much failed at math in school, I wondered why this looked too easy? LOL

I don't have a ruler handy at the moment - but the answer has to be close to 7000 BCE?

Another question (after reading through your page on GH's site) - If the two shafts differ by 6.5* - how were these changes built into the pyramids? Did the shift happen during construction, after construction - or perhaps predicted before construction? What is your theory on that?

(and so I don't have to go back and read more - are these shafts in all 3 pyramids or just the big one?)

Edit: To change answer several times!

[edit on 10-10-2009 by Julie Washington]

I asked the Lumerians not Lemurians ascended beings from Earth, that I channel

with what happened to the Mayan civilization to make it disappear. You

really do not want to know the answer but the answer they gave me was

they were eaten by the underworld beings that were responsible for their

sacrifices. Many call these underworld beings the reptilian race.


When I was given the answer to the question on how the Mayans

disappeared off the face of this Earth I was stunned. ^Y^

reply to post by Julie Washington

---

Hi Julie,



SC: In my opinion any (theoretical) shift would have occurred before the Great Pyramid was constructed. I say this because it seems the Designers of the Great Pyramid actually used the shift of 6.5* (via the two sets of shafts) to design the Great Pyramid. You can see this here.


As you can see in the presentation above, the slope and height of the Great Pyramid is determined by the angles of the 2 sets of shafts so this implies the shift occurred before the GP was built. As for predictability of such axial shifts, this theory of Regular Pole Shifts by Robertino Solarion claims that regular (and predictable) shifts of the Earth's polar axis can and does occur.

Hope this helps answer some of your questions.

Best wishes,

Scott Creighton

[edit on 10/10/2009 by Scott Creighton]

Thanks Scott, I'll read through those links.

How did I did on my answer?