It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

The Sphinx could be 2.5 Million years old based on the age of the Sahara

page: 2
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2010 @ 12:17 PM
link   
Why are we assuming there is water erosion, I have seen loads of discovery and they have always talked about sand erosion from the harsh sandstorms of the desert but I have never heard of this water erosion. Getting sandblasted might take longer than water, but thet didn't have acid rain that long ago either.

GummB




posted on Sep, 29 2010 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by GummB
 


I think we're coming to realize, what they 'talk' about is diametrically different than what's actual. Now whether they report things incorrectly on purpose or ignorance, we have to take 'history' with a grain of salt because many things that are stated are just not true. They have a tendency to replace their ignorance with arrogance (or, we're being duped on purpose).

I believe the Giza area is eons old. As I feel Stonehenge is too!



posted on Sep, 29 2010 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by GummB
 


You might want to check out some serious research at on Creighton's forum here on ATS, the information that Discovery or the History Channel provides many times is bias.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

You may also want to check out Robert Bauval work on the Sphinx and his book The Orion Mystery


www.robertbauval.co.uk...



posted on Sep, 29 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Makes sense, people don't build things in arid deserts, they build things close to where they can live. No way that area was desert when those things were built.



posted on Sep, 29 2010 @ 09:13 PM
link   
reply to post by leira7
 



Who is to say that the builders of The Sphinx were human? After all, they did make that monument in their image, and then man felt the need to carve a disproportionate head atop it. I'm going to bet that The Felinean Race came to earth a very long time ago, and one of their monuments just so happened to be in Egypt.

If you think about it, cat symbolism is everywhere, all over the world, even places where there aren't cats, they still worship the cats, why???


You understand cats don't have opposable thumbs, right? How exactly were they 'spose to hold a chisel?


I'll say this much about your theory, it's no worse than the tripe shoveled by Sitchin! (actually I like it better...)



posted on Oct, 3 2010 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by sheepslayer247
 


the 'mythical' deluge would be associated with the massive upheavals caused by the end of the last ice age. this would be about 11,000 years ago, roughly.

no reason the sphinx couldn't be that old. would fit with many ideas from the likes of Ignatious Donnelly and (ahem) Graham Hancock...



posted on Oct, 3 2010 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Heres my 2 cents.....so....... Analyze the anatomy and compare it to the other sphinx in Kemet and you will find that something is a little different. The body of the great Sphinx is abnormal compared to the others. Other sources are adamant about the sphinx being a dog. and we all know whats up with Sirius. Please check that out.. Many people dislike Hancock, but he brought valuable facts to the table. According to Hancock and many other researchers the Sphinx may have something to do with Leo, but on the other hand it may not....It may be older....I have done quite a bit of research on this subject and in my humble opinion I believe it is the body of a dog and the face of a Kush.ite/Kemetyu (Egyptian) Woman. I also wanted to add its not sand that caused the erosion, if it was the face would show some of the same characteristics as the lower body. At one point in time, the face was the only part of the Sphinx visible.
--The builders of the sphinx, pyramids and all of the other Megaliths were built by man...It took me about 15 years of research to figure it out and it does not involve some thousands of slaves, a ramp, nor any other dumb westernized theory.....and it probably took about a year at the most. And their purpose is or WAS planetary not regional....I will leave it at that

On another note, I really hate Dr. Zawi Hawass. He is so lame and he discredits anyone who believes the Sphinx has water erosion, when the its apparent the contrary is present...and he has "Dominion" over all of these sites.^sigh^



posted on Oct, 3 2010 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by AKINOFTHEFIRSSTARS
 




So 2.5 million blocks were placed in 1 year and Hawass is an idiot?! 7000 blocks a day? 300 blocks an hour? 5 blocks every single minute?! That is 24 hours a day 7 days a week for 52 weeks right?

I agree they may have been built by man but in 1 year? Elaborate please.....



posted on Oct, 3 2010 @ 08:14 PM
link   
reply to post by wellsybelieves
 


Yes sir and.....Yes sir. I believe the technique they used will be overlooked for the next couple of hundred of years or they will not be revealed. I won't say too much because.....well I don't want to be the one to light the fuse. I believe it is a combination of two very-very sophisticated sciences that we are NOT employing within any civilizations present today. In my humble opinion I don't think one rope was used. I apologize if that doesn't do it for you, I cannot go into detail. I am more than happy to try to discuss it more if you have any questions. You may be able to pry it out of me with the right questions.
Hawass is an idiot because is very close minded. He refuses to acknowledge certain facts that the original Egyptians knew and are still alive in oral traditions. Hawass isn't even a true native Egyptian by definition. He is just a descendant of "the raiders" that currently occupy the land.

Just wanted to add+ Robert Bauval is a genius and his work are amazing....Black Genesis is great and informative about the contributions of early West African customs contributing to the foundation of Egypt.


edit on 3-10-2010 by AKINOFTHEFIRSSTARS because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2010 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien
reply to post by GummB
 


I think we're coming to realize, what they 'talk' about is diametrically different than what's actual. Now whether they report things incorrectly on purpose or ignorance, we have to take 'history' with a grain of salt because many things that are stated are just not true. They have a tendency to replace their ignorance with arrogance (or, we're being duped on purpose).

I believe the Giza area is eons old. As I feel Stonehenge is too!


We don't just make stuff up we have sources and archaeological evidence on ancient Egypt which backs up widely held beliefs much better than "we don't know this or that so lets just make up the most ridiculous explanation possible". Of course we have to fill in some gaps but there are also a lot of things we know for fact as well as a lot of things that we can make a damn good guess at. I won't go into all the intricacies of analysing sources or the complexities of scientific dating but trust me there is a method.

Granted there is plenty we don't know about Ancient Egypt and other civs but to completely disregard what we do know is nonsensicle.

Sorry if I came across a confrontational it wasn't my intent I just get slightly annoyed when people accuse historians and archaeologists of "reporting things incorrectly on purpose or through ignorance" when there are lots of highly intelligent, hard working and honest people out there coming up with theories and backing them up with evidence to further our understand of the past.



posted on Oct, 25 2019 @ 05:25 PM
link   
After searching Mars and noticing how the rocks are eroding it would be my bet that the Sphinx is much older then they say that's not water erosion that's wind erosion we see .



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join