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.

 

The secrets hidden in the pyramids. A real eye opener!

page: 16
200
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 05:49 PM
link   
very interesting topic. can't wait to watch the videos when i have time




posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by tigereye
 


And what you just said?

It's hero worship.


If you want to do that, be my guess. There are more interesting things than the pyramids. And it doesn't take years to figure them out. I've gotten a pretty clear view of the ancient world from just 3 or so years of collecting a couple of pieces of data. And I'm just over half your age.

That's the problem of your own kind. You hop on the train just because it isn't mainstream, therefore being no different than mainstream.

Incapacity to understand that which everyone else gets doesn't make you special, and ability to goggle up insane theory doesn't make your eyes opened, it can also mean you're even more closed than the ones you ridicule.

You focus on stocks of rock, ignoring true mysteries like the ruins in South America, or the early reports of stone ruins in North America. You question proven fact and waste your life questioning it when your life could have been used asking real question on real mysteries, like why Gobekli Tepe seems to show myths that we would all know from Sunday school, only 6000 years before they supposedly happened.


Oh and it is my theory. Because I agree with his theory. A theory is claimed by its supporters. Just as you did not make up any theory, just read and get on the bandwagon.

Go ahead if you want to waste a life on questioning reality while ignoring true mysteries. But I do pity the fool who does.
edit on 17-2-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-2-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 09:04 PM
link   
The secrets hidden in the pyramids.

The seek writs hidden in the pyramids....

Rad is an abbreviation, which means radius. Definition of RAD

Definition of RAD
2 radius
www.merriam-webster.com...


Egypt, I'm Earth's Rad(ius)

And, yes, Egypt's great pyramids do tell us the Earth's radius...


The Great Pyramid is one of the most comprehensively surveyed buildings in the World. Scientists over the centuries have taken thousands of measurements in their quest to find out more about its mysteries.
Among those intrigued by the incredible accuracy of the Pyramid's construction was the great scientist and mathematician Sir Isaac Newton. Attemping to formulate his famous law of gravity, Newton needed to know the diameter of the Earth. However, in the 1600's no measurement was accurate enough, especially since Newton theorized that the Earth's spin would cause an equatorial bulge. Having heard legends claiming that knowledge of the Earth, the past, and the future were contained in the Pyramid, Newton set out to investigate.

After studying the detailed measurements made by the investigators before him, Newton recognized that many key measurements would be in round numbers if the standard unit of measure was just 0.001 (1/1,000) inch larger than the British inch-which just happens to be the Sacred Jewish Inch. (The Sacred Jewish Inch, 1/25 of a cubit, equals 1.00106 British inches.) This discovery allowed the secrets of the Pyramid to be unlocked and revealed unmistakable and mathematical relationships. For instance:

We know from geometry that there is a universal relationship between the diameter of a circle and its circumference. Consider this: The height of the Pyramid's apex is 5,812.98 inches, and each side is 9,131 inches from corner to corner (in a straight line). If the circumference of the Pyramid is divided by twice its height (the diameter of a circle is twice the radius), the result is 3.14159, which just happens to be pi. Incredibly, this calculation is accurate to six digits. So the Pyramid is a square circle, and thus pi was designed into it 4,600 years ago. Pi is demonstrated many times throughout the Pyramid.

www.europa.com...



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by onewithall
 
A close friend had a spontaneous experience through automatic writing one night while he was writing on his computer. The entity from the other side explained all about pyramids, Egyptians, crop circles, the Mayans, and many more related subjects. Click on: messages2012.blogspot.com - it's free and astoundingly informative and interesting.
s



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pigraphia

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by Barcs
I don't understand why people are saying that the mystery is solved. They suspect a ramp might have been used to help construction, nothing has been proven about the age. Even if they did prove the ramp, it still doesn't prove that they didn't need advanced tools, or indicate a date of construction.

No advanced tools are needed to cut and shape limestone or granite. Since that is a fact, why do you need "proof" of it?
Also, remains of ramps have been found at quite a few pyramids in Egypt, including the Great Pyramid. That means it falls on you to explain how it is that there's a ramp there but the ramp wasn't used to construct the thing.
And they certainly have proven how old the GP is through two different rounds of radiocarbon dating, not to mention the quarry marks, hieroglyphic grafitti and whatnot found inside chambers in the GP that had been sealed off by megaliths since the construction date.
The fact that you (apparently) don't know of these things doesn't invalidate them, you know.
Harte


They aren't arguing the fact that the stones can be cut with primitive tools, they are arguing the speed at which the pyramids were raised.
Which if you say it was done in 20 years which most of the articles I've read put it at under 50 years to build you have to wonder how they did it so fast.

As for "radiocarbon dating" can't use that on granite, granite isn't and wasn't alive.
Sure they used various radiometric dating methods, but if you're gonna counter someones point don't just grab the first thing your mind can come up with actually put the proper facts.
Otherwise it discredits your entire post as anecdotal.


Sorry about this, don't mean to point at someone with his foot in his mouth, but:

1984
Project members collect samples

In 1984 we conducted radiocarbon dating on material from Egyptian Old Kingdom monuments (financed by friends and supporters of the Edgar Cayce Foundation). We then compared our results with the mid-point dates of the kings to whom the monuments belonged (Cambridge Ancient History, 3rd ed.).

The average radiocarbon dates were 374 years earlier than expected.

In spite of this discrepancy, the radiocarbon dates confirmed that the Great Pyramid belonged to the historical era studied by Egyptologists.

1994-1995

In 1994-1995 the David H. Koch Foundation supported us for another round of radiocarbon dating.

We broadened our sampling to include material from:
The 1st Dynasty tombs at Saqqara (2920-2770 BC).
The Djoser pyramid (2630-2611 BC).
The Giza Pyramids (2551-2472BC).
A selection of 5th Dynasty pyramids (2465-2323 BC).
A selection of 6th Dynasty pyramids (2323-2150 BC).
A selection of Middle Kingdom pyramids (2040-1640 BC).

We also took samples from our Giza Plateau Mapping Project Lost City excavations (4th Dynasty), where we discovered two largely intact bakeries in 1991. Ancient baking left deposits of ash and charcoal, which are very useful for dating.

The 1995 set of radiocarbon dates tended to be 100 to 200 years older than the Cambridge Ancient History dates, which was about 200 years younger than our 1984 dates.

More HERE

Organic material exists within the mortar between the stones (and dumped in huge piles between the walls.) This material is mainly charcoal - limestone has to be burned to make the lime with which the Egyptians made mortar.

There. Is that okay by you?

Now I get to quote myself, one of my favorite activities:


The fact that you (apparently) don't know of these things doesn't invalidate them, you know.


Harte



posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


There isn't mortar used in the pyramids, they are fit together without mortar.
So yes it's possible to date things around the pyramids, but all that tells you is stuff around the pyramids was x years old.
My point still stands the actual stones could not be carbon dated.
Even if you choose other radiometric dating it will only tell you the age of the stone not when it was cut and shaped.

Yes it's possible to date items around the pyramids, and items build with mortar, but that is only the things around them.
It doesn't have actual bearing on the pyramid itself.
All those dates prove is at some point in time something was built with mortar, it doesn't say if the pyramid was already there, or would be built after the mortar constructed items.

You're grasping at straws to prove your point.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 12:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pigraphia
reply to post by Harte
 


There isn't mortar used in the pyramids, they are fit together without mortar.

I would have thought that you would be somewhat coy about exposing your ignorance after the last fiasco of a post you put up.

Apparently I was wrong.

Not only are all the pyramids made using mortar, the mortar is literally slathered on in inches-deep layers between many visible stones.

It's at least a half inch wide between some of the stones lining some rooms in the interior.

It's plainly visible in any number of photos from Guiza.

In spaces between stone courses - where we can see today because they were blown open with black powder in the 1800's - we can see piles of waste mortar that are many feet thick in some spots.

Got Google Images? Then educate yourself.

Two examples:






If you can't see the mortar in these two pics, then you're wearing your blinders wrong.

Regarding the large piles of waste mortar:


Behind the backing stones, the core stones are actually even more irregular. We know this because, in the 1830s, Howard Vyse blasted a hole in the center of the south side of Khufu's's Pyramid while looking for another entrance. This wound in the pyramid can still be seen today, and in it, we can see how the builders dumped great globs of mortar and stone rubble in wide spaces between the stones.

Source: www.touregypt.net...
Pics of these piles of mortar are out there too. You just have to look and you will find them.


Originally posted by Pigraphia
My point still stands the actual stones could not be carbon dated.

You are absolutely correct about this. However, nobody has claimed that such a thing could be done.

Harte
edit on 2/19/2012 by Harte because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 12:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Pigraphia
 


I heard there was a deep layer of insect shells put in an area above the King's chamber that was inaccessible before they dynamited into it. I wonder if this insect material was kept because they could date that couldn't they? I think these insect shells were put there for a scientific reason as well (electrical insulation because of the chitin)... and they were in an area where insects were highly unlikely to get to on their own.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by 8311-XHT
 


If the shells were kept and they contain carbon than yeah they can be dated.
All it would say though is when the shells were placed there.

It would be nice to know why a whole bunch of shells were put there for sure.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 01:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harte
You are absolutely correct about this. However, nobody has claimed that such a thing could be done.


Originally posted by Harte
And they certainly have proven how old the GP is through two different rounds of radiocarbon dating, not to mention the quarry marks, hieroglyphic grafitti and whatnot found inside chambers in the GP that had been sealed off by megaliths since the construction date.


At the very least you were not specific as to what was carbon dated, since you weren't specific I inferred you were talking about the stones.

Again to the dating, any material dated is only adjacent to the monuments and doesn't actually directly date them.

As for the mortar, I'll get back to you on that I need to do some digging and have an online test due in 42ish min.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 01:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pigraphia

Originally posted by Harte
You are absolutely correct about this. However, nobody has claimed that such a thing could be done.


Originally posted by Harte
And they certainly have proven how old the GP is through two different rounds of radiocarbon dating, not to mention the quarry marks, hieroglyphic grafitti and whatnot found inside chambers in the GP that had been sealed off by megaliths since the construction date.


At the very least you were not specific as to what was carbon dated, since you weren't specific I inferred you were talking about the stones.

Again to the dating, any material dated is only adjacent to the monuments and doesn't actually directly date them.

As for the mortar, I'll get back to you on that I need to do some digging and have an online test due in 42ish min.


Good luck with your test.

No need to get back to me on this. The existence of the mortar is an easily verified fact, so I will assume you'll do so.

Sorry if my first post on the matter wasn't clear. It's just that I'm astounded that someone doesn't already know this.

You gotta understand - I've been posting here for a pretty good while. Long enough to have repeated established facts (with links) about the pyramids and a great many other so-called "mysterious" things out of the past many times over.

After a couple of years of that, one reaches a point where it's just not worth going into details - most posters here won't read or believe what I show them, anyway. Plus, most people find education a painful experience and shun it when they can.


Harte



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


Lousy 97.9% I wanted a 100%.

I'm very surprised to find so many examples of mortar in articles from PBS through discovers.
All the videos on the History channel alwasye said the stones were cut so precise that no mortar was used in their construction.
The videos go onto say the outer surface had mortar to make it smooth and refined, I had just alwayse taken that to mean for the internal construction to not have mortar and the outer construction to be aesthetics...



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 02:05 AM
link   
i love the ego of modern man who thinks science is all perfect when in fact it is ever changing
we need to realize we as puny mind ego driven beings know nothing all facts are educated guesses at best and downright fallacious at worst
we need to forget what we know than just maybe we will discover what has been forgotten or hidden
the forces of nature are more powerful than the forces of man and there is more than meets the eye in the scheme of the physical world
the profound discoveries coming to light in this time are going to rewrite the fact of our existence and soon i hope
every day something extinct or impossible is being found in the world we need to pay attention to the many changes in or small part of this existence and realize we are but bacteria in the scheme of universal existence
he who knows it all knows nothing and he who knows nothing will learn more than expected



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


How do you know that the sampled mortar wasn't used for repairs? Certainly the pyramids have been repaired over the years. I can't honestly say that indicates a definite date of construction or the absence of advanced tools necessary to lay 1 block every 5 minutes.
edit on 19-2-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by unknown32
 


amazing and very intriguing so the pyramids hold secrets yet they are hidden oh the irony of the
creation ha ha very well visioned and constructed



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheHunterOfSouls
reply to post by unknown32
 


amazing and very intriguing so the pyramids hold secrets yet they are hidden oh the irony of the
creation ha ha very well visioned and constructed


The secrets were only hidden by our own ignorance... it's like if you took an iPad to some villagers who have no idea what it is and one day they figured out how to turn it on and then years later they figured out how to kind of use it.. and then even later they figured out how to recharge it and understand kind of how it works. We are just reaching that point now with the pyramid machine. Though the government and secret societies have probably known for a long time.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   
These videos are very interesting! Had some "new light" shown on the subject of what the pyramids were used for! Makes perfect sense to me! Thanks for sharing!



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by tigereye
 


And what you just said?

It's hero worship.


If you want to do that, be my guess. There are more interesting things than the pyramids. And it doesn't take years to figure them out. I've gotten a pretty clear view of the ancient world from just 3 or so years of collecting a couple of pieces of data. And I'm just over half your age.

That's the problem of your own kind. You hop on the train just because it isn't mainstream, therefore being no different than mainstream.

Incapacity to understand that which everyone else gets doesn't make you special, and ability to goggle up insane theory doesn't make your eyes opened, it can also mean you're even more closed than the ones you ridicule.

You focus on stocks of rock, ignoring true mysteries like the ruins in South America, or the early reports of stone ruins in North America. You question proven fact and waste your life questioning it when your life could have been used asking real question on real mysteries, like why Gobekli Tepe seems to show myths that we would all know from Sunday school, only 6000 years before they supposedly happened.


Oh and it is my theory. Because I agree with his theory. A theory is claimed by its supporters. Just as you did not make up any theory, just read and get on the bandwagon.

Go ahead if you want to waste a life on questioning reality while ignoring true mysteries. But I do pity the fool who does.
edit on 17-2-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-2-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



Let me teach you something that is very unselfish of me, stop with the negative frequency, please. I can't make it out, one ear out the other. You are one of few reasons I dislike putting my views out there. You have stumbled over your own posts due to the obvious theories you keep proposing are facts. As far as "everyone else" understanding, obviously there are numberous people that don't. So yet another false statement, maybe some understand. Not "everyone else".



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pigraphia
reply to post by Harte
 


Lousy 97.9% I wanted a 100%.

I'm very surprised to find so many examples of mortar in articles from PBS through discovers.
All the videos on the History channel alwasye said the stones were cut so precise that no mortar was used in their construction.
The videos go onto say the outer surface had mortar to make it smooth and refined, I had just alwayse taken that to mean for the internal construction to not have mortar and the outer construction to be aesthetics...

Sort of tells you something about the veracity of History Channel "documentaries," doesn't it?

More like crockumentaries.


Originally posted by Barcs
reply to post by Harte
 


How do you know that the sampled mortar wasn't used for repairs? Certainly the pyramids have been repaired over the years. I can't honestly say that indicates a definite date of construction or the absence of advanced tools necessary to lay 1 block every 5 minutes.


Tell you what, Barcs. I teach for a living and I'm not getting paid. If you don't believe me, look into it for yourself. that's how I learned about it.

FYI, there exists no consensus on the number of stones in the GP, and in fact it makes very little sense to even talk about it as if it were gemane to anything at all.

See, the core stones of the Great Pyramid are basically thrown together in a hodgepodge fashion and appear to mainly be uncut. Sizes vary for these normally unseen stones from football-sized up to around dining room table sized.

The estimates you've read about assume all stones are sized at about the average of the sizes we see on the exterior today (those stones were originally covered as well, by very fine white limestone from Tura - you can still see some of these on Khafre's pyramid next door.)

The calculated estimate you're using - 2-1/2 million stones, IIRC - makes that assumption and goes from there based entirely on the formula for the volume of a square pyramid (four equal sides.)

That's already bogus on it's face because we know there is a small hill inside there that the Great Pyramid was constructed around and on top of.

Between the hill, the huge variety in sizes observed in the inner core (where the structure has been blown open in the past with black powder,) and the large voids between the exterior and inner core that have been filled with sand, rubble and extra mortar (again, we can see this where it was blown open,) it makes very little sense to claim anything at all about how many stones per hour or whatnot had to have been laid in the pyramid.

Your "one stone every five minutes" is therefore a meaningless claim.

Harte



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


How can you possibly make this claim when so little of the pyramid has been explored? It took them decades to get the nerve just to explore the vent in the Queens chamber..

Also.. the stability and the precision of the over all structure certainly doesn't support your claim of a loose structure. If it had any amount of voids filled in with loose or ill fitting material the whole structure should have settled dramatically by now. It would be a mess. The reality is completely contrary.



new topics

top topics



 
200
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join