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.
www.cnn.com...
Rediscovered walls protected Sphinx from winds, sandBy the CNN Wire StaffNovember 4, 2010 6:21 a.m. EDT
The Sphinx depicts the pharaoh as a human-headed lion, wearing the headdress of the pharaohs.STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Walls are found along two more sides of the Sphinx
They were used to protect the giant carving from the wind
The Sphinx is near the Khafre pyramid
(CNN) -- Protection from the Sahara's howling dust storms may have helped the Sphinx maintain its steady gaze over the millennia.
Newly discovered walls on the Giza plateau were part of an enclosure to protect the Sphinx from wind-borne sand, Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities says.
Originally posted by TheDolphinSings
There is no doubt that the Sphinx is a thousand times older than anyone would have you believe.
Key Terms to Understand The Mystery:
The Number 72 • Cymatics & the Underground Tunnels beneath the Sphinx • The Masonic Obsession with rebuilding the Temple • Cats, most highly developed Carnivore on Earth • Sound & Acoustic Levitation • Russian Studies Showing Dolphins were Humans Taken to the Sea • Kundalini Rising • Graham Hancock & Our Atlantean Ancestors • Solfaggio Frequencies & The Schumann Resonance • Mohammed & His Love of Cats • Water has the ability to Remember • Earth Orbit 360 days to 365 • 12,000 years ago, the Great Deluge, Enoch • Tuatha de Danann & the Tribe of Dan • Au Baum • The Earth As The Great Ark • Babylon = Bangkok 13 44 N • Symbol of Infinity
Originally posted by Fryaga
reply to post by Havick007
I still say it's probably one of the most terrifyingly old objects on the planet - I wish we had more facts to base an age on it, it has always given me the impression that if there was ever a doorway into knowing our true past, it is the gatekeeper.
Unless something more insane pops up once the icecaps melt, in which case...game on.
Originally posted by Fryaga
Nice thread.
Makes me wonder though, if there is merit to this link to Aker, is/was there a second Sphinx at some point and time?
Um I did investigate thank you..Do you not know how much there is to read out there about Egypt? I do have a life and other responsibilities. Well since you seem to know why why dont you tell me instead of insult me. Not everyone is going to know the exact same thing. It's best to help others and not be rude...and yes I took your statement as rude.
Originally posted by Harte
Originally posted by mblahnikluver
Ever since I did a paper on the Sphinx 8 years ago in school (college) I have come to believe it is older than what they say it is and that it had the face of a lion first. It always bugged me how out of proportion the Sphinx is.
Well, it must not have bugged you too much. If it had, you would have investigated. And if you'd investigated, you'd know that there are at least two perfectly reasonable explanations for the disproportionality you noted.
Originally posted by mblahnikluver
Um I did investigate thank you.
Originally posted by Harte
Originally posted by mblahnikluver
Ever since I did a paper on the Sphinx 8 years ago in school (college) I have come to believe it is older than what they say it is and that it had the face of a lion first. It always bugged me how out of proportion the Sphinx is.
Well, it must not have bugged you too much. If it had, you would have investigated. And if you'd investigated, you'd know that there are at least two perfectly reasonable explanations for the disproportionality you noted.
Originally posted by mblahnikluver
Well since you seem to know why why dont you tell me instead of insult me. Not everyone is going to know the exact same thing.
Originally posted by mblahnikluver
It's best to help others and not be rude..
Originally posted by mblahnikluver
.and yes I took your statement as rude.
Originally posted by Havick007
reply to post by Harte
How can you can any of my sources or links fringe websites? Please explain your reasoning behind this? Also i never put forward my theory as fact, only a theory with facts that support it and yes also other theories as well. but hardly fringe.
Yes you disagree and that is fine but dont put forward your theories or more correctly the theories and work of others and say i am completely wrong. That is what you are doing, looking back, that is what you always do to peoples threads.
Originally posted by RisingPhoenix33
I heard the Records of Atlantis are or were kept in the right paw of the Sphinx. I have no idea if this is still the case. I'm pretty confident at one time they were kept there. When the Library of Alexandria was destroyed, I'm not sure if they were moved there or were kept there originally.
Byrd: ...The Sphinx was built around 2500 BC...
Harte: The other theory is that a larger head couldn't be supported by the layer of stone making up the neck. See, limestone varies greatly layer from layer.
Originally posted by Scott Creighton
SC; By qualifying your statement with the word "around" I presume you are giving an error margin of +/- 100 years?
This dating of the Sphinx is nothing more than conventional OPINION - it is NOT proven fact.
There are modern badge-carrying geologists who have dated the erosion on the body of the Sphinx (and its enclosure) to anything between 7,000 BCE and 800,000 BCE.
And then there are those pesky texts that tell us Khufu knew the Sphinx.
SC; By qualifying your statement with the word "around" I presume you are giving an error margin of +/- 100 years?
Byrd: Well, yes. It's much better than saying "June 1st, 2433 BC." You'd have to have a dedication stela to prove that.
SC: This dating of the Sphinx is nothing more than conventional OPINION - it is NOT proven fact.
Byrd: Actually, it's theory which is more than opinion.
Teapot: Is it your work?
there is aparently acording to this vid there diging just of the foot of the sphinx ?
Originally posted by Havick007
reply to post by Fryaga
I still think there may be someting benath Sphonx and as soon as they find something that can be carbonn dated that would provide proof, if we were ever told about it...
Originally posted by Scott Creighton
reply to post by Harte
Harte: The other theory is that a larger head couldn't be supported by the layer of stone making up the neck. See, limestone varies greatly layer from layer.
SC: Your argument makes no sense. The same layers that support the current head would have been the same - though likely much wider - layers that may once have supported a much larger head,
Reforming a larger head of say a lion into something else - say a Pharaoh - will require removing material not just from the head but also from the neck.
Regards,
Scott Creighton