It seems that a number of posters in this thread consider the Giza-Orion concordance as either pareidolia or that such a correlation could be made
with three other stars forming the same pattern. I have to disagree with both of these suggestions - but not without good reason.
Certainly the human mind has a great capacity for seeing patterns in things, for bringing order out of chaos. How many of us have seen faces in clouds
or in rock formations etc? But the Giza-Orion concordance is not simply about matching a pattern of three stars in the sky with the layout of three
pyramids on the ground. The concordance goes much, much deeper than that so much so, in fact, that we are left in no doubt that the Giza Pyramids were
indeed matched by the ancient builders with Orion's Belt. There is simply no doubt in my mind about this.
So, what is it that makes me so convinced? A number of things.
First of all there is the fact that using the Orion Belt stars, we can, in a simple and systematic fashion, replicate the base dimensions of the three
main Giza pyramids to a very high degree of accuracy. You can observe how this is achieved
. Now, the chances of this correlation between the Belt Stars and the base
dimensions of the three main Gizamids occurring is something in the order of 280 TRILLION to 1 against. And yet, even in the face of such immense and
truly staggering odds, there it is at Giza. Try using any other configuration of stars other than Orion's Belt and they will produce three entirely
different relative bases. Even the slightest difference in the star pattern can create huge differences in the three bases produced. (See Cygnus v
Orion comparison below). This tells us, beyond reasonable doubt, that the Giza pyramids were the result of deliberate, preconceived site planning. A
grand, preconceived, unified site plan.
But why am I convinced it is Orion and not, for example, the wings of the Cygnus constellation which author, Andrew Collins, presents as a better
centre-to-centre correlation? Or some other triad of stars?
Simple. At Giza we have two other clues that tell us, unequivocally, that it can be no constellation other than Orion's Belt. These clues are
presented to us in the two sets of three smaller satellite pyramids at Giza. One set of three stands to the east side of Khufu's pyramid (G1) whilst
the second set of three small satellite pyramids stands to the south of Menkaure's pyramid (G3). Now, the truly remarkable and quite unique feature of
these two sets of three small pyramids is that they actually present what is known as the 'precessional culminations' of the Orion Belt stars at
rising (ca. 2,500 CE) and setting (ca. 10,500 BCE). You can observe this here
. The point to
understand here about the precessional culminations is that there are simply NO OTHER triad of stars in the night sky that can replicate this other
dimension of the Giza pyramids. ONLY Orion's Belt works. This is independent corroboration of the underlying influence of Orion's Belt in the design
and layout of the Giza site.
Some others in this thread have asked about the purpose of it all. It does serve a very important function, imo. The inclusion of the Belt Stars into
the grand plan was, imo, to present a celestial clock marking specific dates both past and future. You can read more on this
BTW, for anyone interested in seeing the Geo-Stellar Fingerprint of Orion and Cygnus side-by-side to see how they compare, have a look
. (Powerpoint Show).
Hope at least some of you may find the above of some interest.
edit on 18/1/2013 by Scott Creighton because: (no reason given)