Originally posted by Byrd
Originally posted by FlyInTheOintment
reply to post by Byrd
Khufu wasn't responsible for the design/ construction of the Great Pyramid. He didn't attribute the pyramid to himself; he himself referred to it as
the 'house of Isis' -
Got a reference for that? All my references say its name is Khufu's Ahket, which roughly translates to "horizon"
Yes, will add it into this post later.
FLY - there's a hieroglyph on the inventory stele suggesting that the pyramids were already standing when he came into power.
BYRD - The Inventory Stele was created some 1200 years after his death.
Will look into that - I'm not an expert so may be getting my dates mixed up. However, one thing I have gathered from general observations is that
disciplinary paradigms are built upon a supporting 'timeline of best fit' (I mentioned the preferred uncivilised-civilised gradient in my previous
post). Archaeological/ anthropological finds are then slotted into an appropriate place on the timeline, depending on how that piece of evidence can
be used to support the paradigm. What I'm saying is that some artifacts (which cannot always be precisely dated) can be fudged in order to make the
accepted timeline seem more 'solid'.
FLY - Considering the technical perfection of the Great Pyramid, it is ridiculous that Khufu gets merely a passing mention in the actual
BYRD - A lot of this has to do with the culture. Temples were repurposed by their successors (the son would take the favorite temple that his
dad or granddad made and recave things with his own name (see the "helicopter hieroglyphs" which were actually ol' Ramses plastering over and
recarving his dad's monuments.)) But the Egyptians didn't see it as a huge technical perfection and certainly the other pyramids were equal to it.
It certainly was an exceptional piece of engineering perfection, and don't try to deny it. Many features remain 'perfect' even by today's standards.
In addition, I like the way you tried a 'debunk two for the price of one' in that section for your reply. A couple of examples re: technical
precision of the engineering at Giza follow:
- Deviation of 1/50th inch along the whole masonry part of the descending passage. (150 feet)
(a fiftieth part of an inch is about twice the width of a 'full stop' in size 10 font - NB - narrower than two 'full stops' side by side in size 10
font .. )
- Joints of 1/50th inch between all six sides of the polished white casing stones (up to 15 tons each, fitted together with cement to make the
- Features of trepanned (hollowed-out) granite artifacts (discovered by Petrie, further examined by Chris Dunn) suggested sonic engineering techniques
To clarify, I don't expect to 'win' this discussion Byrd, but I do want to make damn sure that people who look in as outsiders don't simply take the
'party line' and believe everything they're told about the pyramids by the 'experts'.
BYRD - You are probably thinking of these [Pyramids] as isolated structures.
No, I'm thinking of them as the original model predating the pharaonic dynasties, constructed by the 'gods' (Nefilim/ Watchers/ AN.UNNA etc) and used
as a power generation/ communications/ tracking/ radar beacon/ atmospheric manipulation device of some sort.. which the Pharaohs tried to emulate with
varying degrees of success. (and by 'success' I mean in terms of actually building a pyramid that stands up without falling in on itself, or without
crappy mud bricks painted white to resemble the polished limestone of the Great Pyramid)
BYRD - The "friends of Khufu" inscription is genuine,
No, it isn't. Sitchin firmly kicked that one into touch thirty years ago. If they were his friends, they wouldn't have gotten his name wrong. Or
committed blasphemy above his 'tomb', perhaps inviting the wrath of Ra down upon their dead King/ friend? Unless they were drunk too, like the others
BYRD - and they've found similar inscriptions in the other pyramids ("drunkards of Menukare" is one)
Yes - it's strange how that cartouche has been attributed to semi-literate, work-gang drunkards instead of fraudsters unfamiliar with writing
For the second pyramid (Khafre's), and quoting Petrie - 'The only monumental evidences are the pieces of a bowl and a mace head with his name
found in the temple (east) of this pyramid'
BYRD - Uhm... work on the pyramids and surrounding area didn't quit with Petrie. Other things have been found since then.
Yes, you see that's what I meant when I said that some of the layout of the site you chose to link to was unusual. The point you have just 'debunked'
came directly, unabridged, from the site you linked. Not my words or beliefs necessarily.
FLY - Funny how the naming of Menkaura as builder of the third pyramid seems to have been based on exactly the same 'evidence' as that which
led to the Great Pyramid being attributed to Khufu; however, for some reason the attribution of the Great Pyramid is left unexplained in the above
BYRD - Again, your sources quote material from the early 1900's. Work didn't stop there once Petrie died.
Again, I was referring to your source, not mine. The words 'above text' was in reference to the external content I'd quoted from your linked site.
The basic point I was making was that the Egyptologists are using poor 'evidence' to define the ownership of a pyramid complex. The 'evidence' would
not normally be considered acceptable as a definitive proof in the context of the argument (who built the pyramids).
Herodotus' word for it, and a forged cartouche - these are the key items of evidence linking Khufu to the Great Pyramid, and Menkaure to 'his'
pyramid. Your source claimed those as evidence of ownership in each case respectively. The second sentence was referring to a quirk of the website's
presentation of the details.
FLY - An assessment of the evidence by dispassionate, non-stakeholders shows clearly the truth of the matter.
BYRD - Have the stakeholders been keeping up with the digs and the finds in the workers' graveyards and the new tomb of father and son found in
the area (we discussed this recently) and so on? There has been so much done and found there in the past 40 years -- were your sources aware of all
the work and all the ostrika and other material that's been found?
The stakeholders are the mainstream Egyptologists under the cudgel of Hawass and his minions. Therefore I guess they've been keeping up with
developments. Hawass has had that place locked down tight for over a decade - deception becomes more complex and easier to manifest after a century
of practice, with the right level of control over the target area.
NB - pottery fragments don't count as a form of evidence for anything other than association.
It understandably took the Egyptologists some time to build a suitable defence against the onslaught from Sitchin and his contemporaries in the
seventies/eighties. Disinfo was spawned and became prevalent in the late eighties - into the nineties it just got worse. The torch was entrusted to
PR guy Hawass for the final leg of the show-run (to deflect the world's attention from the reality of our origins). He has the world all but convinced
that Giza is no longer a mystery to be in awe of; strangely, this seems counter-productive to his role, and to the Egyptian tourist industry in
general - but there we go.
Our text books require a massive overhaul of false paradigms concerning ancient cultures the world over - a fresh and honest approach to understanding
our origins is well overdue; however, corruption and vested interests will probably ensure that the truth won't ever come out 'officially', unless as
part of a psy-op.
Over a hundred and fifty years after Vyse committed fraud, the Pyramid Paradigm is built - and it will be defended until the death. I don't buy the
'party line', which is all about proving the superiority of modern man in comparison to his ancestors - nothing to see here, move right along...
One final note on the way in which the experts can pick and choose which bits of the evidence they want to fit onto their framework. The Manethos'
King's lists. The mainstream uses Menes as a start-point for Egyptian history in 3100BC, but ignores the tens of thousands of years described by
Manetho as the 'rule of the gods' beforehand. Picking and choosing.
The 'gods' were responsible for the Great Pyramid, but the PTB have carefully constructed an academic paradigm and a media/ social environment that
does not allow for that reality to become evident to most of the world's populace. The attacks on Sitchin by the academic community; the general
ridicule faced by people who seek to discover the truth - de facto evidence that the establishment becomes very uncomfortable when there is talk of
'the rule of gods on earth' at the dawn of civilisation.
edit on 23-12-2010 by FlyInTheOintment because: (no reason given)