Giza and the Flood

Like most people I am fascinated by the Giza pyramids and the Sphinx. One of the more interesting theories that I have come across over the years is the idea that the erosion on the Sphinz is the result of water not wind/sand.

I find it very interesting that when experts are just shown pictures of the rocks they agree that the images are classic water erosion patterns. However when it is revealed that the rocks are actually stones in the Sphinx everyone changes thier tune (and usually the interview is over). Add to this the work by Graham Hancock and many others who put forward the idea that the Pyramids possiblly line up with the stars in Orion's Belt circa 11 500 BC ish and more questions arise.

Whether any of this has merit is up to each person's own views.

If however they are right, then the Pyramids would have been around at the time of the Flood. This makes me wonder about the photos of the plateau...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/642914c02138.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/931aa4541a8b.jpg[/atsimg]

We are told that the Pyramids were once sheathed in marble or polished limestone, that this stone was later removed by people to be used in construction elsewhere. Plausible for sure, but what if it was actually washed away by tides caused by the Flood in 8-10 000 BC? The two pictures I have embedded show the remains of the cap on the Great Pyramid and the total absence of a sheath on all other, shorter, pyramids on the plateau.

Just a thought for discussion.

reply to post by [davinci]


I believe it aligned in 10 500 BC actually, not 11 500. What about the other monuments that line up with constellations around that time? Do they show signs of erosion too?