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.

 

Undeniable Proof of Intelligent Design.

page: 21
23
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


I see that you're still igoring the fact that the earth is ovular and not a perfect sphere. And for that matter,is the moon even a perfect sphere? And have you prove that this perfect ratio deal happens more than 0.02% of their total cyclical relationship? Again, optimal conditions that are complete under the control of whatever cosmic influences happen to affected celestal bodies on a regular basis - none of them intelligent so far as we are able to concretely determine.

You have a very loose, very weak case here. You're taking an awful lot of water on board, and your only hope is that w begin to ask less questions and make more assumptions. Sorry, we're not going to do that. That's not how we got all of our amazing magical electronic toys. That's not how we've managed to photograph atoms and chemical interactions. That's not how we invented medicine and defense systems.

So don't expect us to do it now. You want us to believe you? Then convince us. Show us that we would be blind idiots to ignore your evidence. And stop trying to convince us that we don't need evidence to believe your preposterous theories. We're giving you every chance here, and you're wasting every chance trying to build a case that you don't need a case while throwing pictures around with sparing explanations of how they're connectd to anything. You want us to focus so closely that we forget about how much sense the big picutre doesn't make. It's not working. Try a new strategy or you're dead in the water.

End of story.




posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


Lol If he posts that same picture again I will scream



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


Do you think that the speed of light encoded into the degrees north latitude of the grand gallery of the great pyramid was a mere coincidence?


Pretty much so. Since the Egyptians didn't have a numbering system like ours. They didn't use zero, for example. And their fractional calculations were based on units (1/2, 1/8, etc.). Try converting that decimal fraction to a unitary fraction.

Did the Egyptians use the modern meter? No, they used the cubit (about half a meter). What's the speed of light in cubits per second?

Not sure you can really determine the location of the Grand Gallery to that precision with Google Earth though.




and what does any of this have to do with the moon and it's relationship to the earth, and the sun?
Good question.

Well, before assuming, let's investigate it more fully..shall we?

I'm glad this guy documented the contents of the video that's no longer there.

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder

I saw this documentary posted on another thread and decided to document some of the mathematical 'coincidences' that are contained in the geometry of the Great Pyramid. I ended up writing for over an hour and it took up a bit of my time creating and editing some of these pictures so I decided to post this thread.

NAM, aside: Behold, the meter!


The picture you see above shows some simple dimensions of the Great Pyramid (most drawings aren't to scale). Think of this as a side on view of the Great Pyramid. The 440 (width) and 280 (height) are measured in 'cubits'. As you will see, this design has many interesting mathematical features. So what is this cubit I speak of?


The cubit is a traditional unit of length, based on the length of the forearm. Cubits of various lengths were employed in many parts of the world in Antiquity, in the Middle Ages and into Early Modern Times.

The Egyptian hieroglyph for the cubit shows the symbol of a forearm. The Egyptian cubit was subdivided into 7 palms of 4 digits each; surviving cubit rods are between 52.3 and 52.9 cm in length.[1]

Cubit - Wikipedia


The cubit is the unit of length that was used to build the Great Pyramid of Giza. It seems to have some amazing properties. For instance. If you draw a circle with a diameter of 1 meter, one sixth of the circumference will be equal to 1 cubit. Keep in mind that we weren't using the meter as a unit of measurement until some time after 1789.



So what exactly is a meter/metre?


The metre (meter in the US), symbol m, is the base unit of length in the International System of Units (SI). Originally intended to be one ten-millionth of the distance from the Earth's equator to the North Pole (at sea level), its definition has been periodically refined to reflect growing knowledge of metrology. Since 1983, it is defined as the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum in 1⁄299,792,458 of a second.[1]

Metre - Wikipedia


Upon further inspection mathematicians found that the Great Pyramid of Giza has Pi built into the geometry. If you take the perimeter of the base and divide it by the height multiplied by 2 you'll get Pi (1760/560 = 3.14). The Great Pyramid is a 'square circle' as they say. This is another highly debated subject. Many people refuse to believe the Egyptians had knowledge of Pi or encoded it into their buildings. So what exactly is Pi?


π (sometimes written pi) is a mathematical constant that is the ratio of any circle's circumference to its diameter. π is approximately equal to 3.14. Many formulae in mathematics, science, and engineering involve π, which makes it one of the most important mathematical constants.[1] For instance, the area of a circle is equal to π times the square of the radius of the circle.

π is an irrational number, which means that its value cannot be expressed exactly as a fraction having integers in both the numerator and denominator (unlike 22/7). Consequently, its decimal representation never ends and never repeats. π is also a transcendental number, which implies, among other things, that no finite sequence of algebraic operations on integers (powers, roots, sums, etc.) can render its value; proving this fact was a significant mathematical achievement of the 19th century.

Pi - Wikipedia


Further more, the Great Pyramid has another very important number hidden within its geometry. If you take the surface area of the four top sides and divide it by the surface of the base, you'll get the 'golden number', also called the 'golden ratio'. In mathematics I think this number is called 'Phi' (identified with the φ symbol). So just what is this golden number?


In mathematics and the arts, two quantities are in the golden ratio if the ratio of the sum of the quantities to the larger quantity is equal to the ratio of the larger quantity to the smaller one. The golden ratio is an irrational mathematical constant, approximately 1.61803398874989.[1] Other names frequently used for the golden ratio are the golden section (Latin: sectio aurea) and golden mean.[2][3][4]

Golden Ratio


Now that we have all the ingredients that we need to connect this all together, prepare to have your mind blown. If you take Pi and subtract Phi squared you'll get one cubit (Pi - Phi^2 = cubit).



Maybe you think it couldn't get any crazier than that? Well you're wrong. Think of the next picture as a top down view (birds eye view) of the pyramid, which is drawn in black lines. If you draw two circles, one inside the square and one outside the square as shown below, and you subtract the inner circumference from the outer circumference, the answer is equal to nothing else but... the speed of light.



Coincidence?

Remember this?



If I'm not mistaken, and I need to further verify this, but apparently the sum of the area of the outer circle and square combined = 440,000 cubits.. another "coincidence" I guess..

Continuing to investigate - stay tuned, for those with an open mind not unwilling to consider all possibilities..

Best regards,

NAM

P.S. We can, all of us, learn something new, and I'm learning new things too, and, at least to me anyway, I find it utterly fascinating even to the nth degree.


edit on 5-6-2013 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 01:02 PM
link   
Why is it the threads trying to validate nonsense get the most activity? And the threads that are truly thought-provoking threads get almost nothing? Let's see NAM solve that puzzle.
edit on 5-6-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
Why is it the threads trying to validate nonsense get the most activity? And the threads that are truly thought-provoking threads get almost nothing? Let's see NAM solve that puzzle.
edit on 5-6-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

Nice try.

Hey AI if you don't have anything of value to add to the discussion, than some sort of ad hominem, why post?



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 01:33 PM
link   

"There is a principal which serves as a bar against all information and proof against all arguments, and one that cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance. That principal is called - contempt, prior to investigation."

~ Herbert Spencer, Scientist



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


For instance. If you draw a circle with a diameter of 1 meter, one sixth of the circumference will be equal to 1 cubit.
If you draw a circle with a diameter of 1 meter you get a circumference of pi. One sixth of pi is 0.5236. So yes, within the variance in the length of a cubit (about a quarter inch)
But what is the significance of one sixth of pi? Wouldn't 1/5 (five fingers) been a little more interesting?
 



If you take the perimeter of the base and divide it by the height multiplied by 2 you'll get Pi (1760/560 = 3.14).
That's nice and convoluted. Do you know how the Egyptians made the measurements for the pyramid? They used a wheel. What happens if you use a wheel to make measurements? You find multiples of pi. Surprise.

 


The Great Pyramid is a 'square circle' as they say.
Huh? How so?
 


If I'm not mistaken, and I need to further verify this, but apparently the sum of the area of the outer circle and square combined = 440,000 cubits.. another "coincidence" I guess..
The math is pretty simple. And no. It doesn't. The radius of the circle is 279.84 cubits. The square has a side of 440 cubits. Can you do the rest yourself? But is there something significant about 440,000?


But to clarify all this. Are you saying that God built the Great Pyramid?

edit on 6/5/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage


If I'm not mistaken, and I need to further verify this, but apparently the sum of the area of the outer circle and square combined = 440,000 cubits.. another "coincidence" I guess..
The math is pretty simple. And no. It doesn't. The radius of the circle is 279.84 cubits. The square has a side of 440 cubits. Can you do the rest yourself? But is there something significant about 440,000?

But to clarify all this. Are you saying that God built the Great Pyramid?


edit on 6/5/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

I got 439494.736 cubits, with a slight "bulge" and it's not inconceivable that the final value would be precisely 440,000, which would be precisely 1000 times greater than the width of the pyramid at 440 cubits, and where the height of the pyramid X 1000 X 1000 X 1000 or X 1 billion = the distance to the sun.

No I'm not saying God built the pyramid, but that the Egyptians embedded into the pyramid the design parameters of the earth-moon-sun configuration and relationship, which it's beginning to appear isn't "random" or some sort of "chance" or fluke "coincidence" by any means, measure or stretch of the imagination in light of the data.

There are a number of other integers in regards to the moon-earth-sun relationship which reveals or gives evidence for, ID (intelligent design), but like I said I'm still looking into it.

I was also refuting your rebuttal about the meter ie: that the Egyptians were not aware of it or that it had no correlation with the cubit, which was false.


edit on 5-6-2013 by NewAgeMan because: edit



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


with a slight "bulge" and it's not inconceivable that the final value would be precisely 440,000
But it's a circle. Circles don't bulge. Neither do squares.


1 billion = the distance to the sun.
One billion what?The average distance to the sun is about 93 million miles, not one billion. Not close. BTW, 93 million miles is about 286,173,269,598 cubits.



I was also refuting your rebuttal about the meter ie: that the Egyptians were not aware of it or that it had no correlation with the cubit, which was false.
The Egyptians were not aware of what?
What has a correlation to a cubit?

edit on 6/5/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 

Bump post - because we must also consider the effect (life as we know it) from initial causes within the context or framework of these design parameters. It's elementary Dear Watson..



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


with a slight "bulge" and it's not inconceivable that the final value would be precisely 440,000
But it's a circle. Circles don't bulge. But remember, it's the inner circle that's supposed to represent Earth anyway.


1 billion = the distance to the sun.
The average distance to the sun is about 93 million miles, not one billion. Not close. BTW, 93 million miles is about 286,173,269,598 cubits.



I was also refuting your rebuttal about the meter ie: that the Egyptians were not aware of it or that it had no correlation with the cubit, which was false.
The Egyptians were not aware of what?
What has a correlation to a cubit?

edit on 6/5/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

1) Ah yes, your right about the bulge not being the outer circle, but when i did the math for the sum of the two areas it came up just a hair short of 440,000.

2) I said height of the pyramid X 1 billion = distance to the center of the sun.

3) The meter. Earlier you said that there was no correlation between their measuring system and the modern one, and that therefore the encoded reference to the speed of light in meters/second must have been a pure coincidence. You also said earlier that the latitudinal degree for the center of the Grand Gallery cannot be determined with precision, but the result is replicable on Google Earth.




posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


I said height of the pyramid X 1 billion = distance to the center of the sun.
No. Height of the Pyramid 280 cubits. Distance to the center of the Sun 287,503,092,165 cubits. More than 7 billion off.
 


The meter. Earlier you said that there was no correlation between their measuring system and the modern one, and that therefore the encoded reference to the speed of light in meters/second must have been a pure coincidence.
That's right. There is no correlation.
 


but the result is replicable on Google Earth.

And Google Earth does not provide that sort of precision. It goes to 6 decimal points (the speed of light claim is 7 decimal points). That represents a distance of 5 inches. Google Earth does not provide that kind of accuracy.

The accuracy tests show that the Helmert transformation used by the program is on average 1.3m horizontally from the position in the imagery. The true published values of the passive stations were even further from the imagery. This is an error of position in the Google Earth imagery. The accuracy of the aerial imagery depends on how well-aligned it is to the coordinate system used by Google’s model of the Earth. The alignment accuracy depends upon how much time and effort has gone into georeferencing the vertical photographs, and the preparation of the digital mosaics. The Helmert transformation was found to be 2.1m from the published values. The use of OSTN02 would eliminate this error, however, it can be seen that this will not help the KML align with the imagery.
google-earth-plotter.googlecode.com...

Google Earth does not position it's imagery accurately. Add to this the fact that it depends on the coordinate system used to specify a location and you really don't have anything particularly interesting. Unless you think the Egyptians also knew the spheroid that Google Earth was going to use. The Earth is not round so there are different models in use.

I know...close is good enough.
edit on 6/5/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

Height of the Pyramid once rose to 146.64 m (when built)

www.earthmatrix.com...

hypertextbook.com...

minimal distance between the Sun and the Earth is equal to approx. 147 million kilometers.

not so far off after all..

Re: Google Earth - fine, the number could be a pure coincidence.., but not the means by which the speed of light (in meters/sec) may be calculated from the base of the pyramid (see post above).

They were well aware of the meter, for which there is a most definite correlation to the cubit. (see post above, again).


edit on 5-6-2013 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 05:14 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


How does that supports the theory of intelligent design?



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


not so far off after all..
That would depend on how judiciously you round the numbers. And which one you want to select. Didn't you say "the center of the Sun". I guess a moving target makes it easier, huh?

Perihelion: 147,098,290 km. That's 147,098,290,000 meters. That's a difference of 458 million meters from that billion times the height of the pyramid. That's a lot of meters. Greater than the distance to the Moon.

But why use perihelion? Why not use aphelion or the average distance? Or better yet, to really show a connection, the semi-major axis. Those don't work so well, do they? That's called cherry picking. If it fits (sort of), use it. If it doesn't ignore it. That's not how it works.

 



They were well aware of the meter, for which there is a most definite correlation to the cubit.
I saw the post. There is no connection with the meter. Ill ask you again, what is the significance of 1/6 of something?

Do you know how the length of a meter was originally established?

Do you understand the the cubit was based on the length of a body part?


edit on 6/5/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 




How does that supports the theory of intelligent design?

I think it's because...um...well...you know. It's really weird so it must be evidence of...something.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Either God or




or coincidence...which one of the three is the more likely?

Personally I have enjoyed the thread and learnt from it but sorry OP nice try but you failed with the undeniable proof, you just have faith thats all.
edit on 5-6-2013 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

Looking into it and the relationship between the different measuring systems of old and present, it's very very interesting.

www.cosmic-mindreach.com...

Of particular interest is one referred to as the Megalithic Yard.

What does this have to do with the moon, earth and sun you ask, again?

Hang in there and try to be open.


edit on 5-6-2013 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by Phage
 


Re: Google Earth - fine, the number could be a pure coincidence.., but not the means by which the speed of light (in meters/sec) may be calculated from the base of the pyramid (see post above).


I get a difference of 375.9858 cubits. Please explain how that is forced to be equal to the speed of light.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


Looking into it and the relationship between the different measuring systems of old and present, it's very very interesting.
Which one says the cubit has any relationship to the meter?

The "megalithic yard" (which is not a meter) does not stand up to close examination. There was no consistent measurement applied to monolithic structures in Britain.

edit on 6/5/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
23
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join