reply posted on 28-8-2004 @ 08:19 PM by LadyV
How Old are the Pyramids?
The controversy raised by John Anthony West and Robert Schoch concerning the true age of the Great Sphinx is now beginning to overcast the other
famous monuments which share space on the Giza plateau—namely, the three pyramids that were supposedly built by Pharaohs Khufu, Khafre and Menkhare in
the Fourth Dynasty. Were these Pyramids constructed only 4,300 years ago, or—like the Sphinx—is there evidence they could be far older, dating instead
to perhaps 12,000 years ago?
Let’s begin first with looking at the age of the Great Pyramid. The conservative historians’ entire case for dating the Great Pyramid to the Fourth
Dynasty rests upon two major pieces of evidence. The first is the story of Herodotus, who in 443 B.C. visited Egypt and recounted how Pharaoh Cheops
(the Greek name for Khufu) built the Great Pyramid during his reign with 100,000 men in 20 years. However, we now know this story is highly
questionable. Even his contemporaries called Herodotus the "Father of Lies." Not only do the construction estimates he gave not work, but Herodotus,
as an Initiate in the Egyptian Mystery Schools, was sworn to secrecy regarding the true nature of the Pyramid, and he more than likely copied a
fictitious tale about the monument that was then in circulation among the common masses. The Greek historian’s account stands in sharp contrast to
most other Egyptian, Hebrew, Greek, Roman, Hermetic, Coptic and medieval Arabic scholarly sources which agree that the Great Pyramid was not
constructed during the time frame of Pharaoh Khufu or Dynastic Egypt, but was the product of the "Age of the Gods" thousands of years earlier.
The second piece of evidence is the existence of painted hieroglyphic inscriptions found in the air space chambers above the King’s Chamber, which
include the name of Pharaoh Khufu. They were supposedly discovered by Col. Richard Howard-Vyse in 1837, when he forced his way up to these chambers
using gunpowder. But there are certain facts showing these inscriptions were in actuality forgeries.
Actually, we have the testament of Pharaoh Khufu himself that he only did repair work on the Great Pyramid. The Inventory Stele, found in 1857
by Auguste Mariette just to the east of the Pyramid, dates to about 1500 B.C., but according to Maspero and other experts, shows evidence of having
been copied from a far older stele contemporaneous with the Fourth Dynasty. In the Stele, Khufu himself tells of his discoveries made while clearing
away the sands from the Pyramid and Sphinx. He dedicated the account to Isis, who he called the "Mistress of the Western Mountain," "Mistress of
the Pyramid," and identified the Pyramid itself as the "House of Isis."
The Stele describes how Pharaoh Khufu, "gave to her (Isis) an offering anew, and he built again (to restore, renovate, reconstruct) her temple of
stone." From there, the Pharaoh inspected the Sphinx, according to the text, and related the story of how in his time both the monument and a nearby
sycamore tree had been struck by lightning. The bolt had knocked off part of the headdress of the Sphinx, which Khufu carefully restored. Egyptologist
Selim Hassan, who dug out the Sphinx from the surrounding sands in the 1930's, observed there is indeed evidence that portions of the Sphinx were
damaged by lightning, and the mark of ancient repairs is very apparent. Also, he noted, sycamore trees once grew to the south of the monument, which
had been dated to a great age.
The Stele then ends with the story of how Khufu built small pyramids for himself and his daughters, wife and family, next to the Great Pyramid. Today,
the ruins of three small pyramids are indeed situated on the east side of the monument. Archaeologists have found independent evidence that the
southernmost of the three small pyramids flanking the Great Pyramid was in fact dedicated to Henutsen, a wife of Khufu. Everything in the inscription
thus matches the known facts. If these facts can be believed as true, then the additional information that Khufu was only a restorer of the Great
Pyramid and not its builder, must also be treated as historically true.
ANCIENT LEGENDS AND MODERN RESEARCH CONFIRM EACH OTHER
When we look at mythic history for the story of the origins of the Great Pyramid, we discover that the monument was not attributed to any Pharaoh, but
was the product of the genius and higher learning of the Gods of Old. Time and time again, from the Roman Marcellinus to the Coptic Al Masudi and the
Arab Ibn Abd Alhokim, the recounters of the ancient legends tell how the Pyramid was built to preserve the knowledge of a magnificent civilization
from destruction by a Flood, and that it was this Flood which brought the Age of the Gods to its tragic end. The various Chronologies of Legendary
Rulers place a minimum date for the Age of the Gods as circa 10,000 B.C. This is the time frame Plato, in his Timaeus and Critias, ascribed the
destruction of Atlantis. And it is also this date, as can be proven in modern scientific studies, which was highlighted by major climatic, geologic
and geomagnetic disturbances, accompanied by massive paleo-biological extinctions in the planet, marking the division point between the Ice Age and
the Present Era.
In Egypt, geologists examining the fossil record have found that the combined effect of melting glaciers in the Mountains of the Moon, plus a sharp
rise in precipitation levels in Central Africa, caused the Nile river circa 10,000 B.C. to swell in size a thousandfold, eroding away cliff walls
miles from its present banks, and washing out its entire valley throughout the length of Egypt. At the same time, as the Mediterranean Sea began to
fill and rise due to higher ocean levels from melting northern glaciers, its waters for a brief period also flooded the lower Nile valley.
These, geologists are certain, are the last major flood events in Egypt’s fossil history, before the sea retreated and the Nile settled down to
today’s relatively peaceful, winding flow. Yet, knowing this, geologists are hard pressed to explain why there existed a fourteen-foot layer of silt
sediment around the base of the Pyramid, a layer which also contained many seashells, and the fossil of a sea cow, all of which were dated by
radiocarbon methods to 11,600 B.P. (Before Present) plus or minus 300 years.
Legends and records likewise speak of the fact that, before the Arabs removed the Pyramid’s outer casing stones, one could see water marks on the
stones halfway up the Pyramid’s height, in about the 240-foot level, which would be 400 feet above the present Nile level. The medieval Arab historian
Al Biruni, writing in his treatise The Chronology of Ancient Nations, noted: "The Persians and the great mass of Magians relate that the inhabitants
of the west, when they were warned by their sages, constructed buildings of the King and the Giza Pyramids. The traces of the water of the Deluge and
the effects of the waves are still visible on these pyramids halfway up, above which the water did not rise." Add to this the observation made when
the Pyramid was first opened, that incrustations of salt an inch thick were found inside. Most of this salt is natural exudation from the chambered
rock wall, but chemical analysis also shows some of the salt has a mineral content consistent with salt from the sea. Thus, during the prehistoric
Flood, when waters surrounded the Great Pyramid, the known and unknown entrances leaked, allowing seawater into the interior, which later evaporated
and left the salts behind. The locations where the salts are found are consistent with the monument having been submerged half-way up its height.
If the floodings of 10,000 B.C. were the last major catastrophic water events in Egypt, and the Pyramid exhibits signs of having been subjected to
them, it means the Pyramid must date from a period before the flooding occurred.
Though most Egyptologists today have yet to accept such a necessary "radical" revision of their dating of the Pyramid, there have been other
discoveries that have forced them to at least realize that their preconceived theories of any early Dynastic age for the structure is no longer
tenable.
In 1983 and 1984, prehistorian Robert J. Wenke from the University of Washington, and president of the American Research Center in Egypt, was given
permission to collect mortar samples from various ancient construction sites, including the Great Pyramid and the Sphinx Temple. The mortar contained
particles of charcoal, insect matter, pollen, and other organic materials which could be subjected for carbon-14 dating analysis. Using two different
radiocarbon dating laboratories—the Institute for the Study of Man at Southern Methodist University, and the Institute of Medium Energy Physics in
Zurich—the samples revealed a number of curiosities. For the Great Pyramid samples, the tests performed at the two labs initially gave very different
clusterings of dates, off by several thousands of years. When certain "adjustments" in the data were applied, the resulting time frame narrowed to
3100 B.C. to 2850 B.C.—which is still 400 years earlier than when most Egyptologists believe the Great Pyramid was built. Even more anomalous, the
dates obtained from mortar used near the top of the Pyramid were a thousand years older than those obtained from mortar nearer the Pyramid base. The
researchers, if they were to fully believe these findings, would have to propose that the Pyramid had somehow been built from the top down.
What makes the datings further unacceptable is that all of them were taken from areas of previously exposed surfaces. We know from such sources as the
Inventory Stele that the Giza monuments were time and time again subjected to many reconstructions and repair work, inside and out. Therefore the
radiocarbon dates can only give us clues as to when the time frame was for the repair work, not the actual construction of the Great Pyramid. If the
dates are to be believed at all, they at least tell us that reconstruction work was done on the monument in a time period long before the "accepted"
building was done, which means the Pyramid itself must be from an even earlier period, farther distant in the past.
[edit on 8/30/2004 by LadyV]
. Sorry but I don’t understand. I personally have said nothing in a mind that was
not open. I was stating before that I like how you think (the thing about your English was sarcastic). I don’t remember killing a good topic but this
topic does seem to be exhausted from the above 10 pages. We have pretty much covered everything that we know. If you have something else to add than
please feel free to add it as I don’t think we know what else to say. It seems like this topic is going into the records. 
