The Ancients Series | Part IV: Egyptians

page: 2
39
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 07:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Dagar
 



Maybe you should take your blinkers off ... it might help you open your mind a bit.


Man, that hurts. FYI I'm profoundly blind and have worn dark glasses since childhood. Have a heart, eh?




posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by Dagar
 



Maybe you should take your blinkers off ... it might help you open your mind a bit.


Man, that hurts. FYI I'm profoundly blind and have worn dark glasses since childhood. Have a heart, eh?



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by serbsta
Hawass made, what is to me at least, a revelation, where he states:

"I still believe that the burial chamber of Khufu is still hidden inside the pyramid. That we are going to go, through, the first door and the second door to find out what is the mystery behind them."

In other words, he still doesn't know if this is the burial place of Khufu, i.e. he is still questioning whether the Great Pyramid is a tomb at all.

This is baffling.

After all, orthodox Egyptology states that the Pyramids of Giza are "tombs and tombs only", with the King's chamber being called the "King's" chamber for a reason

No this is brilliant! One of those hidden in plain sight profound realizations, even the experts do not know if the pyramids were ever used as a tomb and they are obviously lying when they say otherwise. Great point.


I must say, Wow...this Egyptian historical time line is far more radical than I had imagined. One might think this to be dangerous but never-the-less I see some curious numbers:

13,000 and 26,000 years represent precession of the equinoxes which is a large measurement of time and one which has been assumed the ancients were not aware of, assumed erroneously in my opinion.

"10,900 BC" is a time when there was a great global catastrophe as per evidence found all over the world.

In North America was the "Clovis Event" or evidence that has been found in the "Black Matt" layer.
The "Carolina Bays" and the disappearance or extinction of animal species; Camels, Giant Sloths and Mammoths- and entire civilizations (Clovis Indians) on the North American continent coincide with this date.
The "Younger Dryas Event" along with the sudden freezing of Siberia killing everything there also is found to have been around 10,900 BC.

The amount of information about the event that occurred at that time is overwhelming, this event deserves a thread all its own. I didn't want to dump a bunch of links here pertaining to this event, simply do a search for those words in quotations. The amount of material found is crazy.

I find the overview schematics of many Egyptian temples to be oddly constructed in such a way that suggests some intended physical function. Furthering the mystery is the fact that some of these temples are filled with water.
Could this be evidence of a connection between form and function with a liquid medium (water)? I have read of theories about an ancient pump but I am thinking way beyond something as simple as just moving water.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 05:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Devino

No this is brilliant! One of those hidden in plain sight profound realizations, even the experts do not know if the pyramids were ever used as a tomb and they are obviously lying when they say otherwise. Great point.



Great, someone found it as baffling as I did. Ok, let's just assume the sarcophagus was never intended for a tomb, what is it there for? I'm sure you're aware of the question that Julie W. posed in the King's Chamber thread in regards to the plausible chance that the stone coffer could in fact be covering an entrace (exit?). That in itself is an 'in plan sight profound realization' as you called it above, don't you think?



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 09:34 AM
link   
Man, I have eagerly been awaiting this installment of your series.

This is my favorite of all - as I said in another post, recently, I think the Gizamids are the cornerstone (pun intended) for every other theory out there.

Well done, serbsta. (S&F)



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by serbsta
Great, someone found it as baffling as I did. Ok, let's just assume the sarcophagus was never intended for a tomb,

The burden of proof is for those who suggest that the pyramid chambers were ever tombs and that this stone tub was ever intended as a sarcophagus. As far as I can tell there is no reliable evidence that proves this even in the least so the assumption would be in the suggestion that these were ever tombs in the first place. All that we need to do is look at the evidence for what it is without the corruption of any 'a priori' like the pyramids were tombs for the Pharaohs.

So the question remains, What were these stone tubs made for?
One guess, that I disagree with, is that they were to house a mummy. No mummy was ever found and the basis for this assumption relies on a basic similar shape this tub has to other sarcophagi. Personally I think we need more proof than this.

Another theory is that this tub has something to do with a Hermetic initiation which the total understanding of this right of passage or ritual seems to be far beyond our imagination. I think that evidence for this purpose can be found in the myths, culture and writings from this and other civilizations.

Similarities to this "Hermetic Initiation", for the most part, can be found in the cultures from civilizations around the world. I believe that this has a direct correlation to a unity in myth, this can even be found today in the Christian religion. The very understanding of Hermetics, "to preserve", and Gnosis, "knowledge", leads my imagination towards the idea that this is a device intended to "Preserve Knowledge" somehow.

The question about a passageway under the tub can be answered if there is any record that the tub has ever been moved. I had originally assumed it had been moved after reading about the removal of other tubs from other pyramids.

After looking at the image from one of your posts in another thread I now have new questions.

Has this tub ever been moved?
Is it hiding a passageway? 'as Julie Washington asked'.
Or is this tub made from the same rock as the floor (all one piece)?



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 02:03 PM
link   
The Sahara, the west, was not a desert until around 5,000-6,000 years ago.

Before then, it was a lush green paradise with a network of rivers and mega-lakes that comprised the largest reserve of fresh water on the planet.

It transformed into a dead dry wasteland within a century or two when the Earth's axis shifted.

Thousands of people were forced east in search of water in the Nile valley and formed what became Egypt.

This is all backed up by the latest research.


[edit on 11-1-2010 by Deny Arrogance]

[edit on 11-1-2010 by Deny Arrogance]



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Devino

Has this tub ever been moved?
Is it hiding a passageway? 'as Julie Washington asked'.
Or is this tub made from the same rock as the floor (all one piece)?


I've heard nothing of it ever being moved.

To me, it looks as if they are two separate pieces of rock and that the coffer was put in place on top of the rock. The coffer and floor stones don't even look the same, in terms of color and texture. Further, there is a clear 'division line', which I'm not sure what its made of, but it clearly separates the coffer from the floor.

What do you think?



posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by serbsta
 

It wasn't until after reading of the question regarding a possibly shaft under the tub that I began to think that it's possible it has never been moved. From your image the tub 'looks' as though it is made of the same rose granite that the chamber walls are made of and I thought the floor looks different because of lighting. After doing a search for other images, specific information on the tubs is scarce, I began to see a difference between the tub and floor. It was when I realized that I didn't know either way that those other questions popped up.

Quote from another thread.

Originally posted by Scott Creighton
It seems also that Petrie found the sarcophagus propped up in one corner by a small stone - possibly from an earlier explorer checking underneath for a hidden entrance.

This is enough for me to no longer believe that there is a hidden passageway under the granite tub, I think I have read similar information about this some time ago.

I'm not eager for someone to find any secret chambers inside the pyramids in the hopes of possibly finding Khufu's remains. There is no evidence that the pyramid was constructed for the purpose of a tomb so hoping to find a burial chamber is wishful thinking and absent of any facts (this is science with blinders on). Personally I am more interested in finding an intended purpose for these monuments and for this reason I believe Scott Creighton is going in the correct direction. Although I don't share his enthusiasm for a possible location of a buried box I believe he is light-years ahead in his thinking than current Egyptologists.


Originally posted by Scott Creighton
Knowledge is infinitely more precious than all the gold in the world.

This is very true and I believe knowledge yet to be discovered is still hidden within these monuments. Herodotus is called "the father of history" for his work in recording many different things like precession of the equinoxes. He was not the discoverer of this motion but rather learned of it from Egyptian Shaman, amongst other things. Never-the-less he is credited in discovering this slow movement of the Earth, 1 degree of movement takes almost 72 years.

There are a host of other knowledge contained within that almost goes unnoticed like the measurement of the lengths of Earth's year (Earth has more than one measurable length to a year), The circumference of Earth's equator, the length of a degree, sextesimal derivatives of a circle (360*) and time (60sec 60min 12hrs and 12mo). This and much more knowledge is taken for granted as if we always knew this stuff or maybe Herodotus discover it but the fact is that this is ancient knowledge, origin unknown. This knowledge is priceless for navel navigation and astronomy I assure you, literally more valuable than all the gold in the world.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 07:49 AM
link   
Serbsa, you've done it again! S&F for you.

I've been looking forward to the continuation of The Ancients series and thoroughly enjoy reading your threads.

To Devino, it is interesting that you should call the Coffer a "tub", as one theory exists that it was in fact quite the opposite of a sarcophagus, it was a birthing pool, using the natural vibrations created by the pyramidal shape to create a kind of natural harmony for which (I presume) high ranking children to be born.

Personally, I do not follow this theory and do tend to go for the "Ancient advanced civilisation" theory. I am currently reading Dead Men's Secrets by Jonathan Gray, who is a serious proponent of this theory. Although I do not fully agree with everything he proposes in this book, due to the fact that I have not been able to confirm some of his supposed "facts" through extensive research, it is still a very interesting read for anyone interested in the origin of civilisation and the ancients.

Thanks for all the effort Serbsta



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Devino, there might be an explanation for the "peculiar" scales used in time measurement and angle measurement. They most certainly derived from ancient Babylon, the Babylonians used the hexagesimal system (base 60 numeral system, we use base 10 numeral system). that can give the "60 seconds per minute, 60 minutes per hour" pattern in time measurement and also in angle measurement (of course the terms for each scale differ for angles). I am not sure about definite dates, from what I found in Wikipedia (I had to start somewhere) this system dates back to around 1900 BC (recorded on tablet), perhaps it was in use in earlier times.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Devino
 


I totally agree with you, also with the OP of the forum. He put out some things that can't be answered. One is the Scrolls being history but the other writings being myth because of the age. Also the description of the stone of Osiris compared to the complex in front of it. The stones where of a different style and cut and tooling, and extremely large (I'll come back to this one later). And then there was the pyramids themselves, where supposedly these god kings and/or narcississtic rulers where so determined to build this big structure that they decided to make a bare (who cares about the treasure, that can always be removed by looters) room and burial sercophagus without anything showing his divine presence in the pyramid/temple (but yet everything else that was carved and built had writings and designs inside and outside aplenty. And then the rule of when a egyptian king sees something he likes or wants he makes it his.

It's really simple what has been done by the ancient egyptians, and that is they found relics from an ancient past which where so old and awe aspiring (The pyramids at least had polished stone on the outside, you could see it from 20 miles away at least) that they where initially afraid of being around them. Then over the years and/or decades they "mission creeped" there curiosity testing to see if anything would come out and nothing did or nobody attacked and then the king and kings slowly started to claim pieces of this ancient world for themselves. Look at the sphynx, many claim (including me) that the face had a feline or animal look to it. And one of the kings decided to carve it down to look like him (face is out of proportion to the rest of the head). Now lets imagine 26 to 34 thousand years before the 5 to 6 thousand years of Western thinking of Egyptian history. Then sometime around 10,000 years or 13,000 years ago, the Great Flood happened or some form of Cataclysm that every culture around the world experience in their flood creation myths. So you have that time of 10,000 to 13,000 years and then add the start of Egyptian culture or kings back 4500 BC, you got at minimum 17,500 years BC. Then if you add the 2,000 years AD you have close to 19,500 years of time after the said cataclysm till today.

Thats alot of time alot of time for stories to be forgotten and rulers/big men/religious zealots to change history to their liking. Just as many of you might not know that the flood myth with the ark and such that we get from the bible is actually a Babylonian myth which in turn they got from the Sumerians which was at least 1,700 years BC which was a myth to them back then. The same reason they can't accept the longer timeline is the same reason there isn't any mention of this link of the bible flood myth being taken from older civilizations. It's because if they accept this, then they would also have to accept other writings that are found all over the place and have to dig deeper. And it would through their timeline out to a distant time that goes against religion, scholars, and Egyptologists.

I wanted to get back to the stone work because this is important. These massive plain cut stones that fit perfectly at Osiris aren't the only ones. Take a look at Puma Punku and Baalbek. Somehow they moved around these massive blocks and the conspiracy said it was done by rope leverage and stone cutting tools. But yet they didn't do this style for the later periods in Egypt. Puma Punku is more of an oddity because it was built on a shrub plain at high altitude that trees don't grow and the stone was cute from Diarite (hardest stone next to diamond) and all the stones show tooling. It shouldn't be existing in the first place, but it does and the MS scientists says that the indians around that time 1300 BC (this was made up by the two scientists that dated the area because that was the time said indians where in that place (who by the way didn't have writing)) built it but many have the time of that place being over 10,000 years older.

Then Baalbek has Massive stones (one being over 1,000 tons) cut and many placed on whats left of a platform. The Romans came to the area and built a temple on the stones but the Romans didn't build the ancient rock cuttings. It's as if the whole planet heaved and the remains of this ancient civilizations went with it. Then the survivors came out and had to build if they can some form of civilization. It's as if there was a golden age, then a dark age from the cataclysm and now a civilization that built itself up from what little it knew or thought it knew of the past. Our scholars are not wanting to go back and dig up "ancient history", because they are afraid of what they may find.

Also as a side note, the reason that we may be seeing bits and pieces of this massive deluvian world is because mose of it may be at the bottom of the ocean. Remeber the Ice Age lowered the worlds seas and oceans by 120 meters, and as everyone knows many large and prosperous cities are close to bodies of water including rivers. And once the flood came back in it flooded everything and the rivers back flowed and swallowed cities on the edge of the rivers etc. etc.. Then hundreds and really thousands of years of sediment and coral could have covered enough of the cities to not be seen again and the pieces that missed out where higher up and succumbed to drastic chances in the weather and climate (places like egypt instead of being savannah becoming desert etc.).



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by hoghead cheese
 
Hello
I'm a nice guy and hesitate to point out any faults in your post. It's well-written and clearly took a long time to write. The ideas are interesting. I've read similar in many books and websites. Your sig site had the tri-lobed dish IIRC? I read the site's description a couple of years ago. Off memory, it was attributed to a Prince so and so?

Writing a point for point rebuttal isn't gonna happen right now, but is certainly possible. Let's go for just one...




It's really simple what has been done by the ancient egyptians, and that is they found relics from an ancient past which where so old and awe aspiring (The pyramids at least had polished stone on the outside, you could see it from 20 miles away at least) that they where initially afraid of being around them. Then over the years and/or decades they "mission creeped" there curiosity testing to see if anything would come out and nothing did or nobody attacked and then the king and kings slowly started to claim pieces of this ancient world for themselves.


Wrong. What you have there is a rhetorical flight of imagination. It reads like you've got some youtube footage from the actual time...and you haven't. You picture a dumb tribe of cowardly cavemen sniffing in fear around these strange monuments.

In fact, the Egyptian civilisation's development is rather well documented by archaeology, contemporary records, graves, grave goods, pyramid texts, mtDNA etc. The architecture from mastaba to pyramid is clear. Records from neighboring cultures record trade and conflict with the AE too. Dental analysis provides evidence of diet. That evidence is then supported by grain, animal/fish bones and the analysis of stomach contents of exhumed remains. Artwork reflects that diet. Stela record the number of livestock owned by priests, overseers, pharoahs etc. Tablets show receipts for trade.

All the above can be checked for accuracy. Each point can then be cross-checked and referenced to other sources.



posted on Feb, 5 2010 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Very interesting thread.

You know, Im only really starting to study Egypt in depth recently, though Ive done a lot on and off you know?

Personally I believe the attribution of the Sphinx and the pyramids to the Egyptians is wrong, I have not been compelled by the evidence as of yet.

Anyways the Kings Chamber is a real Mystery, along with the Osirian, hmm, isint the Kings Chamber the exact dimensions ascribed to the ark of the covenant?

And, keeping in mind the attributes ascribed to the ark, doesint pyramid mean "fire in the middle"?

So many mysteries, very intriguing stuff!!!



posted on Feb, 5 2010 @ 02:48 PM
link   


Wrong. What you have there is a rhetorical flight of imagination. It reads like you've got some youtube footage from the actual time...and you haven't. You picture a dumb tribe of cowardly cavemen sniffing in fear around these strange monuments. In fact, the Egyptian civilisation's development is rather well documented by archaeology, contemporary records, graves, grave goods, pyramid texts, mtDNA etc. The architecture from mastaba to pyramid is clear. Records from neighboring cultures record trade and conflict with the AE too. Dental analysis provides evidence of diet. That evidence is then supported by grain, animal/fish bones and the analysis of stomach contents of exhumed remains. Artwork reflects that diet. Stela record the number of livestock owned by priests, overseers, pharoahs etc. Tablets show receipts for trade. All the above can be checked for accuracy. Each point can then be cross-checked and referenced to other sources.


As much as I agree with you generally here, flights of fantasy have been bandies around in eqaul amounts by modern Egyptology, as for archeology supporting the Egytptian timeline, where does the evidence of the Shpinx's seeming 10,000 years old(at least) antiquity in regards to John Anthony West, L.Shwaller and Rob Schoch's research fit into that?



posted on Feb, 5 2010 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Outlawstar
 



As much as I agree with you generally here, flights of fantasy have been bandies around in eqaul amounts by modern Egyptology, as for archeology supporting the Egytptian timeline, where does the evidence of the Shpinx's seeming 10,000 years old(at least) antiquity in regards to John Anthony West, L.Shwaller and Rob Schoch's research fit into that?


Robert Schoch doesn't claim the Sphinx to be that old. IIRC he changed his mind and suggested a period of 7000 to 5000 years ago. The Sphinx is carved and built from several layers of limestone bedrock. Each layer erodes at different rates...one being softer than the other. It's been subject to eolian processes. Ice crystals form, expand, melt, dissolve and resolve again under the extremes of temperature. This process erodes the limestone as it contracts and expands. The Sphinx has been buried and revealed by sands for centuries. All of which erodes the layers at different rates.

Robert Schoch doesn't support weird ideas about the Sphinx or the pyramids of Giza. He's a professional academic and replies to email if it interests him. I had reason to contact him a couple of years ago and found him to be a decent guy...informative and informal



posted on Feb, 5 2010 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by Outlawstar
 



As much as I agree with you generally here, flights of fantasy have been bandies around in eqaul amounts by modern Egyptology, as for archeology supporting the Egytptian timeline, where does the evidence of the Shpinx's seeming 10,000 years old(at least) antiquity in regards to John Anthony West, L.Shwaller and Rob Schoch's research fit into that?


Robert Schoch doesn't claim the Sphinx to be that old. IIRC he changed his mind and suggested a period of 7000 to 5000 years ago. The Sphinx is carved and built from several layers of limestone bedrock. Each layer erodes at different rates...one being softer than the other. It's been subject to eolian processes. Ice crystals form, expand, melt, dissolve and resolve again under the extremes of temperature. This process erodes the limestone as it contracts and expands. The Sphinx has been buried and revealed by sands for centuries. All of which erodes the layers at different rates.

Robert Schoch doesn't support weird ideas about the Sphinx or the pyramids of Giza. He's a professional academic and replies to email if it interests him. I had reason to contact him a couple of years ago and found him to be a decent guy...informative and informal




I didint say he claimed anything^__^

Anyways an equally logical and for more probable explanation is indeed rain erosion.



posted on Feb, 5 2010 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Outlawstar
 



Anyways an equally logical and for more probable explanation is indeed rain erosion.


Equally, probable and logical are misrepresented in that sentence



posted on Feb, 5 2010 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by Outlawstar
 



Anyways an equally logical and for more probable explanation is indeed rain erosion.


Equally, probable and logical are misrepresented in that sentence




Oh now thats just plain cheeky

Seriously though, Im genuinely interested, why not rain erosion? Where is the proof the Egyptians even built the Sphinx, and for the love of God dont site old Hawass favourite stela.

Where are the depictions of its construction, the description of the methods used?



posted on Feb, 5 2010 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Outlawstar

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by Outlawstar
 



Anyways an equally logical and for more probable explanation is indeed rain erosion.


Equally, probable and logical are misrepresented in that sentence




Oh now thats just plain cheeky

Seriously though, Im genuinely interested, why not rain erosion? Where is the proof the Egyptians even built the Sphinx, and for the love of God dont site old Hawass favourite stela.

Where are the depictions of its construction, the description of the methods used?


I agree with you, where are the drawings and such that depict the building of the pyramid. They where drawing everything else in detail but wanted to leave out the most massive and longest constuction projects of the empire and leave everything BLANK on the inside of this "tomb". And if you can imagine what this thing looked like up close let alone 20 or 30 miles away with the casing stones and such literally glowing when the sun hit them, the pharoh would have been breaking his neck to make sure it is written all over the place that HE and not no other had this accomplishment built and made (heck they even don't have the sphinx construction written down anywhere). As I have said on other posts in regard to this and this particular post. They came across this area thousands of years ago (probably seeing the glow of the casing stones on the pyramids) and where in awe. The lived around the ruins but didn't enter them or touch them because they feared them. After a couple of decades or maybe someone or group got enough nerve to look around they felt secure that it wasn't "dangerous". So they took little liberties with the ancient structure taking stones and/or building around them and over them (and even trying to figure out left over equipment that may have been around there at that ancient site). They didn't know what they had and possibly never did find out (I hate it that the Alexandria library was destroyed, that must have had writtings about that area).

It's two choices, they either built them (which I say they didn't) or they didn't buildn't build them. Make two columns and go through the pros and cons of each, you may find out that information showing (which is alot) that they didn't build the pyramids.





new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join