It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Egyptologist, the Sphinx and the cover-up

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Feb, 20 2010 @ 05:27 AM
reply to post by AeJor_Mn

No doubt that if you look at the dream stele of Thutmosis IV you'll notice that the two Sphinxes are sitting on top of a Temple. This would also explain the large amount of water being pumped out by Zawi Hawass underneath.

The two sphinxes could represent Upper and Lower Egypt...he unified them. They are sitting on shrines, not temples and this is clearly shown by the figure on the right. The Sphinx sits on limestone bedrock. It's carved from the same bedrock and consists of 3 layers.

There are cavities beneath the Sphinx and IIRC four behind the head. The cavities were discovered by gravimetric analysis (I think) and the best of which were subsequently bored into to see if there was anything interesting. There wasn't. Cavities are a common property of limestone bedrock.

The tunnels were investigated by Hawass and Petrie (long ago) and found empty. They were bricked up. The images of the tunnels show they go under the Sphinx for some few feet and end. A popular theory is that they dug by optimistic treasure hunters and looters.

The water is being pumped out at lots of locations of the Giza's below the water table and the water is causing premature damage. It's rather a big problem.

posted on Feb, 20 2010 @ 05:52 AM

Originally posted by downunderET

No, there's nothing wrong with research. Except Hawass has been, lets say a little backward in admitting that the Egyptians didn't build the pyramids. From an engineering point of view it has been established that we couldn't build the pyramids even today.

But the main fact remains, who built them and more importantly WHY. I believe Hancock and Bouval are on the right track.

There is a message in the pyramids, all's we have to do is figure it out.

Now, anybody want to take a guess WHY they were built?

The Egyptians DID build the pyramids and nobody has any evidence that they didn't. There are over a 100 pyramids too...not just at Giza.

'From an engineering point of view' means many things. Cutting, moving, lifting, labour resources etc etc. Did they need machinery? We built this without hi-technology too...

St Peter's Basilica (completed 1626)

Also, do these images show anything that would be beyond the capabilities of modern builders?

I'm illustrating the points to highlight the lack of evidence some people use when they make their claims. I used to swallow all these ideas and remember what it's like. The authors make bold claims and they make sense because we're our listening instead of thinking about them. Does this make sense?

'Who built them?' Egyptians. They've left their bones and buildings across Egypt. Writings, objects and even the neighbours have written about them too....they fought them.

'Why did the Egyptians build them?' The best evidence is they are built as tombs....certainly monuments to the Pharaoh that commissioned them. That evidence is pretty expansive.

You asked 'why' twice.

[edit on 20-2-2010 by Kandinsky]

new topics
<< 1   >>

log in