posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 08:24 AM
reply to post by smartie
I had a quick look at the article you linked to. It is so riddled with errors that it beggers belief. It refers to the Cygnus Theory as being
developed by 'Collin Andrews'. Actually, it was Andrew Collins. And, contrary to what the article states in the opening paragraphs, Egyptologists DO
NOT accept the Orion Correlation (or any correlation for that matter). One or two renowned Egyptologists have considered it worthy of further
examination but, in the main, it has been rejected by mainstream Egyptology.
I have discussed the Cygnus Theory in the past with Andrew Collins. It is simply wrong. Its Geo-Stellar Fingerprint simply fails on every level to
match the Gizamids whereas the GSF of Orion's Belt matches the Gizamids almost perfectly as you can see here:
The Giza-Orion Blueprint
Furthermore - and I demonstrated this to Andrew Collins - his Cygnus theory cannot account for the two sets of so-called Queens' Pyramids at Giza
whereas these are easily realised as the two culminations (max and min) of the Orion Belt stars. You can see this
The evidence points, unequivocally to the Orion Belt stars ergo Andrew Collins' Cygnus theory is erroneous. Andrew is, of course, entitled to his
opinion. The evidence, however, does not permit me to share it.
edit on 21/12/2011 by Scott Creighton because: Fix Typo.