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.

 

Men Who Vandalized Great Pyramid To Prove 'Theory' Face Charges

page: 5
73
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 03:56 PM
link   


Wasn't there a television show similar/relating to this years ago? sending a robot up a shaft to a dead end, blocked by what looked like a stone door with a copper handle?
reply to post by all2human
 


Indeed there was....Rudolph Gattenbrink was the man's name if memory serves. I seem to remember them coming across a "rod" or "stick of some kind in the shaft....here it is...was made of cedar...they suspect it was part of a measuring rod.....seems it was found in 1872 along with 2 other artifacts.

www.touregypt.net...

So I was wondering....why hasn't the cedar rod been carbon dated. I believe that they think that it has been there since the pyramids construction...that would answer the question of the pyramids age....no?

from the article linked...




The fragment of measuring rod is currently reported as missing

Read more: www.touregypt.net...


My how very convenient. Yet you can see the other two artifacts at the British museum....funny those weren't lost.





posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Amagnon
The postulate of the Annunaki origin of the pyramids, is that they were built by the Annunaki - not by humans.

Neither the Sumerians nor the Akkadians make this claim about the Anunna or Anunnaki. Nor is there any such ancient Egyptian belief.


Amagnon Humans had limited knowledge - as it was given to them by the Annunaki.

Neither the Sumerians nor the Akkadians claim that the Anunna or Anunnaki gave them any knowledge either, and this subgroup of minor gods belong solely to that culture.

In fact, the original claimant is Sitchin. It is his idea and his only. He fabricated it from thin air to fascinate the ignorant (as most people are concerning ancient Mesopotamia) and in order to maintain the astonishment of the chronically astonished - his customers.

The only belief in Egypt throughout it's known history is that Khufu built the Great Pyramid. They even named it after him.

People at ATS are always saying they would prefer to believe the stories of the locals over the findings of archaeologists. These stories usually involve giants building megalithic structures (South America) or megaliths that were made to "walk" (Easter Island.) Obviously, these posters prefer to believe these tales because they are more sparkly than the truth.

But in this case, what happened? Why aren't these posters chiming in to defend the stories told by the locals concerning the GP? I'll tell you why - they are hypocrites.

Harte



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 01:30 AM
link   
The claim the Vyse cartouche is a fake, a deliberate act of forgery, comes from Sitchin. Turns out Sitchin did a little forgery himself in making his claim.

While there was some debate about the script used in the workmen graffiti by scholars of Vyse's day, that matter had been settled, as explained by Harte earlier (It was acknowledged that the heiratic script had indeed existed in the time of Khufu).

But here is the forgery, the outright fraud, perpetrated by Sitchin - it comes in two parts:

1. The claim the cartouche "misspells" Khufu, using a solar disc (circle with dot) instead of a sieve (circle with 3 lines inset). He backs up this claim with a hand-drawn illustration.

However, photographs of the cartouche published show the correct hieroglyphics, using "sieve" (for "kh") and not a "solar disc" (for "Ra"). Sitchin fabricated this claim. He ignored photographs clearly showing the cartouche was spelled correctly, instead relying, as he claims, on Vyse's own hand-drawn illustration in his notes. However, this illustration (which Sitchin does not depict in his book) is "too indistinct", so Sitchin hand drew an enlargement himself, which he does publish in his book, conveniently omitting the three lines of the sieve glyph, giving it the appearance of the Ra glyph. Subsequent photocopies of Vyse report show that the cartouche, as copied down by Vyse, used the correct seive glyph.

Both Perring and Vyse made illustrations of the chambers and hieroglyphics:
Perring
Vyse

Photograph of the cartouche in the upper chamber (rotated 90 degrees), clearly showing a correct "sieve" glyph (note, the edge of the cartouche disappears into the floor of the chamber):
Khufu cartouche

So what does Stichin choose to depict in his book, Stairway to Heaven, chapter "Forging the Pharaoh's Name?" His OWN hand-drawn enlargement, making the radical change in the cartouche!

In Stairway to Heaven Sitchin dedicates a whole chapter to his claim of Vyse's forgery. In that chapter, he did not produce one photograph of the maligned cartouche on the wall of the relieving chamber. He based his claim on that pitiful hand-drawn illustration from Vyse's notes. However, in 1996 he did publish a photograph of A cartouche painted on a wall for a German version of his book - and the photograph was a fraud, it did not come from the upper relieving chamber, and Sitchin could not give any details on who took it or where it came from. This photograph did not match anything seen in the pyramid.

The faked name: This page goes over in detail this act of fraud by Sitchin. The author is German, so the English is a little off, but still very clear and concise. Highly recommend everyone read it.


2. The "Walter Allen" claim, which Slayer posted on page 2. This is another claim by Sitchin and one of his readers, who, as Sitchin states in "The Wars of Gods and Men," came forward after reading his book "Stairway to Heaven" with "corroborating evidence." This one gets even stranger. It was admitted by this Allen (who has never talked to anyone, only Sitchin), he claimed to be a great-grandson of a stone mason working for Vyse (one Humphries Brewer). He claimed he had documented family notes from his great grandfather about his complicity in forging the cartouche. However, he also later admitted his family notes were not written by Brewer, but by his father - in 1954, based only on his memories of a conversation between his mother and another person. When Sitchin was asked to display the papers, he couldn't. Allen couldn't find them. They vanished. When others asked to meet Allen, they couldn't. All intercourse with Allen had to go through Sitchin. Then Allen up and disappeared. No one has seen or heard from him since.

That page of "family notes" Sitchin published, the photograph of which Slayer posted on page 2 of this thread - that was taken by Sitchin. No one else but Sitchin has ever seen them.

A detailed look into the Allen letter is given here:

"Revelation of the Pyramids": Sitchin, or not Sitchin ?


Too many other claims used by Sitchin have been proven false. Sitchin claimed Vyse had been marking the relieving chambers with red paint with the names of important colleagues, dedicating to them their discovery (Davison, Wellington, Nelson, etc.) This implies Vyse had at hand the red paint to commit his fraud. Yet, the names were not painted in red, but black paint.


Some other points of contention:

Sitchin makes the claim that Vyse was pressured to commit the fraud because "money was running out, and it would restore the confidence of his patron." Yet Vyse funded his expedition himself - he had no patrons. In fact, after leaving Egypt he continued to fund the expedition of his associate Perring. So neither money nor patronage was an issue for Vyse. Why would Sitchin make this claim? Sitchin knew that to allege a criminal act, you have to establish motivation, hence the claim Vyse was pressured by lack of funds and threatened loss of patronage, unless he produced a real score.

Read "Revelation of the Pyramids": Sitchin, or not Sitchin ?, and you'll realize what an errant fraud Zecharia Sitchin was. He was a bullsheet artist plain and simple. The damage Sitchin causes is the influence over Fantasists, who will be convinced the the Great Pyramid is the product of Aliens or Atlanteans or some far-gone globe-spanning civilization, and will set out themselves to "prove" it, with some asinine act of vandalism.

Conveniently left out of this discussion is the very workmen graffiti itself. It wraps around blocks and disappears beneath the blocks of the floor. In both upper chambers, Khufu's cartouches vanish into the floor. That suggests, obviously, the graffiti was in place before setting them into place.

Pics of the graffiti running behind floor or walls:
Ceiling and wall of the left hand side of Campbell's Chamber
Khufu cartouche



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 03:46 AM
link   

Grimpachi
Honestly I don't have any sympathy for those guys. The next time some legitimate archeologists want to examine the pyramids I imagine it will be that much more difficult to do so because of their actions.


The only examination allowed is that which shows the official story to be true, so what's the point?

These guys did no harm, they did not "vandalize" the pyramid, and the results already came back showing the paint to be less than 200years old!! So their suspicions were proven correct!



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 06:01 AM
link   

8675309jenny

Grimpachi
Honestly I don't have any sympathy for those guys. The next time some legitimate archeologists want to examine the pyramids I imagine it will be that much more difficult to do so because of their actions.


The only examination allowed is that which shows the official story to be true, so what's the point?

These guys did no harm, they did not "vandalize" the pyramid, and the results already came back showing the paint to be less than 200years old!! So their suspicions were proven correct!

The "samples" were never tested, so you are propagating misinformation with your post.

Harte



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 06:43 AM
link   
Why is it that some of the dumbest things i read on ATS usually comes from the so called "experts"?



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Rosinitiate
 

Perhaps you should examine exactly what you think "dumb" means, and why.

Harte



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Nice thread.

Using Sitchin's theory of everything, is a fraud of everything.




Sitchin's ideas have been rejected by scientists and academics, who dismiss his work as pseudoscience and pseudohistory.



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


I equate stories like this to the Vatican in quite a few respects. Does the Vatican really want to dig deep towards the validity of the claims and stories made within the bible, artifacts, etc.? Of course not, because if an independent investigation ever took place disproving any of the claims they've made since early days of the religion, it could hurt the cash cow they currently have, while also crushing the spirits of hundreds of millions (if not more) of its followers. Now I believe the same could be said about the Egyptian Govt. and why they are so closed off to uncovering the truth to all the mysteries we see around The Great Pyramid and all the other historical sites there, because if the findings show something different then what's been historically accepted there could be an effect from it, monetarily speaking...

S&F for you Slayer... not that you need it anyways

edit on 23-2-2014 by jhn7537 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by jhn7537
 



Now I believe the same could be said about the Egyptian Govt. and why they are so closed off to uncovering the truth to all the mysteries we see around The Great Pyramid and all the other historical sites there, because if the findings show something different then what's been historically accepted there could be an effect from it, monetarily speaking...


So you are suggesting that uncovering the "truth" about the Great Pyramid, being connected to Atlantis, Aliens, or some other ancient civilization would hurt them financially?

"Well, honey I really wanted to see the Great Pyramid on our vacation, but now they admit is was built by Atlantis, I don't know, let's go see the big ball of string in Poughkeepsie instead..."

Is that how you see it? That if it ever got out the Pyramids were built by Atlantis (or aliens) that it would hurt tourism? Such a connection to aliens or Atlantis would make Giza 1000X more valuable than it already is.

Fact is, Egypt has never stopped "Atlantis researchers" from having access to archeological sites. Mark Lehner himself was an Atlantis researcher with the Edgar Cayce foundation. Robert Schoch (ancient Sphinx proponent) has had no restriction on access to sites. Graham Hancock has never been blocked from the GP, he's even seen the cartouche in question in person, and even agrees it is from the 4th dynasty.

I love how deluded some in this thread remain, that instead of viewing the cold hard facts surrounding the pyramids, they prefer their own imagined scenarios.



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


I think it could help or hurt them, if the findings show Atlantis, then great, if it shows something less than what was once historically accepted it would be bad... I think Egypt just wants to maintain.



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by jhn7537
 


That doesn't make sense. If the Great Pyramid was "proven" to be 10,000 years old, how does that diminish it in any way? How would uncovering some far older civilization in Egypt, capable of building the pyramids in the stone age, hurt the Egyptian Antiquities department?



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Harte

8675309jenny

Grimpachi
Honestly I don't have any sympathy for those guys. The next time some legitimate archeologists want to examine the pyramids I imagine it will be that much more difficult to do so because of their actions.


The only examination allowed is that which shows the official story to be true, so what's the point?

These guys did no harm, they did not "vandalize" the pyramid, and the results already came back showing the paint to be less than 200years old!! So their suspicions were proven correct!

The "samples" were never tested, so you are propagating misinformation with your post.

Harte


The last article on ATS about this said the samples had been tested and revealed the paint to be mere centuries old.

The tests were done in either Austria or University of Dresden if I recall correctly.



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by 8675309jenny
 


Not true. The claim is false. I hope you aren't referencing the 2005 film "The Cheops Lie", by Stefan Erdmann - one of the German perpetrators in defacing the cartouche...?

 


Another thing to consider, and not mentioned in thread regarding Vyse and his alleged forgery, is that there are 5 relieving chambers, all contain graffiti linking to Khufu;

NOVA - Who Built the Pyramids? (PBS.org)

“First of all, they say that only the second room is inscribed. It’s not true—all the five relieving chambers are inscribed.” - Dr. Hawass.

Graham Hancock, a fringe writer with his own theories on aliens and ancient civilizations;

“There were no restrictions on where I looked and I had ample time to examine the hieroglyphs closely, under powerful lights. Cracks in some of the joints reveal hieroglyphs set far back into the masonry. No 'forger' could possibly have reached in there after the blocks had been set in place - blocks, I should add, that weigh tens of tons each and that are immovably interlinked with one another. The only reasonable conclusion is the one which orthodox Egyptologists have already long held - namely that the hieroglyphs are genuine Old Kingdom graffiti and that they were daubed on the blocks before construction began.”

Note where he says, "Cracks in some of the joints reveal hieroglyphs set far back into the masonry." He could see the inscriptions, written on the faces of the blocks running behind the floor blocks, where it would be impossible for anyone to reach to write them. Except of course, before they were set in place.

In addition, 11 of the inscription vanish behind the floor blocks.
edit on 23-2-2014 by Blackmarketeer because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2014 @ 12:28 PM
link   

havok
The problem is, how else would the testing take place?

Egypt, and it's hidden hierarchy of rulers who don't want the history being researched, has put this on itself. If the proper precautions were taken place and the correct procedures were followed then why hasn't this been tested already? Is there something to hide? Does Egypt know something the world shouldn't know?

I support their cause and they did what they had to do. They didn't "vandalize" the pyramids in any sense, or literally. They took a scrape sample and I'm sure a small one at that. To say they "vandalized" the pyramid is akin to the people who actually robbed the sites or those who literally painted the walls with "ancient" paint signifying someone else's name under whom the pyramid wasn't even built just to pass on a lie written down in a book.


oh wait....that is what happened before this and is what these guys tried to prove.





I'm sorry, but the idea that someone is hiding history from you is just ridiculous. There is nothing to gain from doing so. These guys were misguided vandals who make themselves and many others look like idiots.



posted on Feb, 24 2014 @ 12:31 PM
link   

jhn7537
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


I think it could help or hurt them, if the findings show Atlantis, then great, if it shows something less than what was once historically accepted it would be bad... I think Egypt just wants to maintain.


Oh. My. God. Atlantis?! Really?! HOW IN THE WORLD are you ever going to attribute the building of the pyramids to a civilization that the man who first mentioned it said plainly DID NOT EVEN EXIST?! SMH...



posted on Feb, 24 2014 @ 09:08 PM
link   
Yet another nail in the coffin (sarcophagus?) of Sitchin's claim of Vyse the forger is the epigraphy of the script in question. These two links (here and here) go over it in some detail, but the gist is this:

The script of the inscriptions was unknown in Vyse's day (1830's). It was a linear or "hieratic" script, thought to have been used much later in Egyptian history (hieroglyphics had only been deciphered in 1822) . So when Vyse announced his discovery and presented his detailed sketches, it caused some controversy - which Sitchin capitalized on in his books.

But since Vyse's time, archeologists and Egyptologists have learned a great deal more about Hieratic script, and that it was in use as long as hieroglyphics. It is now known that these inscriptions were a true script from that era (in fact could be found as far back as the late prehistoric period).

It would have been impossible for Vyse to fake an unknown script.

Sitchin conveniently ignored more than 150 years of research to convince his readers the controversy about the scripts was still valid.


Now, where did all the diehard "Vyse is a forger" fans go...?



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Blackmarketeer
In Stairway to Heaven Sitchin dedicates a whole chapter to his claim of Vyse's forgery. In that chapter, he did not produce one photograph of the maligned cartouche on the wall of the relieving chamber. He based his claim on that pitiful hand-drawn illustration from Vyse's notes. However, in 1996 he did publish a photograph of A cartouche painted on a wall for a German version of his book - and the photograph was a fraud, it did not come from the upper relieving chamber, and Sitchin could not give any details on who took it or where it came from. This photograph did not match anything seen in the pyramid.


Which book exactly did this appear in?

A photograph of the Khufu cartouche appears in Sitchin’s Journeys to the Mythical Past (Figure 39, p. 66)—without any sign of awareness from Sitchin that this is the very cartouche of which he repeats his hand-drawn fakery (same book, p. 6).

As usual in Sitchin’s books, the photograph is unattributed.

M.
edit on 1-3-2014 by mstower because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Blackmarketeer
The script of the inscriptions was unknown in Vyse's day (1830's). It was a linear or "hieratic" script, thought to have been used much later in Egyptian history (hieroglyphics had only been deciphered in 1822) . So when Vyse announced his discovery and presented his detailed sketches, it caused some controversy - which Sitchin capitalized on in his books.


It’s not even true that there was any such controversy. Sitchin concocts the controversy through a textbook exercise in selective quotation.

M.



posted on Mar, 2 2014 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Here is a video Bauval posted on his Facebook earlier. Yes his page is back open! No idea why it was closed for those few days but it's back and he is back posting on this topic.

Here is a video interview with him. I have not listened to it yet. It is over an hour long but if anyone wants to hear about this from Bauval himself then here you go.




Here is another video with Bauval and Dominique Gorlitz who I also have on my FB, discussing this subject. This was posted on Dominique's FB page on the 22nd. I have not listened to it since I just came across it. I don't have the time i use to but I will try to listen to these at some point over the next few days.


edit on 3/2/2014 by mblahnikluver because: add second video

Ok I see I posted the second video already. Oh well. lol
edit on 3/2/2014 by mblahnikluver because: (no reason given)



***For those arguing they didn't have permission or a permit, yes they did. Go to about 10:30 mins into the first video and Bauval shows the permit these two had to enter the pyramid.
edit on 3/2/2014 by mblahnikluver because: add last part about permit.



new topics

top topics



 
73
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join