Zahi Hawass Storms out of Debate with Graham Hancock

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

I am of the mind that the structure, was originally for contacting the "Gods" whoever they were. When you look at human history, its only in the last hundred years, of thinking scientifically, that is logically with reason and no mumbo jumbo , the rate of knowledge has been mind boggling. Its a lifetime, nothing compared to the time that humans have been on this planet. If you ask what caused this, its got to come down to a particular societal model that favours this expansion of knowledge. Who is to say this hasn't happened once before to a society properly structured? One country, Britain had the set up to industrially advance, the rest were left clutching at its skirts . By the time of the great exhibition it was fifty years ahead of the rest of the world.

To say this hasn't happened before is delusional . It might not have happened in the same way, but the probability seems high. All it takes is one deluded idiot that prefers a hot bath, and the Library at Alexandria is lost. It could easily happen again, once the world is a monoculture like its becoming today, and something goes wrong its all over.

We are essentially Apes, that's not putting down Apes because its been shown that they can construct sentences and communicate the same as Dolphins. A hundred thousand years ago we still had hair all over us. Something big happened.

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

I am of the mind that the structure, was originally for contacting the "Gods" whoever they were. When you look at human history, its only in the last hundred years, of thinking scientifically, that is logically with reason and no mumbo jumbo , the rate of knowledge has been mind boggling. Its a lifetime, nothing compared to the time that humans have been on this planet. If you ask what caused this, its got to come down to a particular societal model that favours this expansion of knowledge. Who is to say this hasn't happened once before to a society properly structured? One country, Britain had the set up to industrially advance, the rest were left clutching at its skirts . By the time of the great exhibition it was fifty years ahead of the rest of the world.

To say this hasn't happened before is delusional . It might not have happened in the same way, but the probability seems high. All it takes is one deluded idiot that prefers a hot bath, and the Library at Alexandria is lost. It could easily happen again, once the world is a monoculture like its becoming today, and something goes wrong its all over.

We are essentially Apes, that's not putting down Apes because its been shown that they can construct sentences and communicate the same as Dolphins. A hundred thousand years ago we still had hair all over us. Something big happened.

I believe in science we call it evolution. It's when a species adapts to its surroundings through a process called natural selection and genetic mutations. If we went into an ice age for example all those hairy guys you see on the beach with back hair will be the new human race lol.

a reply to: engineercutout

Criticisms The claims made by Hancock, Bauval, and others (such as Adrian Gilbert and Anthony West) concerning the significance of these proposed correlations have been examined by several scientists, who have published detailed criticism and rebuttal of these ideas. Among these critiques are several from two astronomers, Ed Krupp of Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles and Anthony Fairall, astronomy professor at the University of Cape Town, South Africa. Using planetarium equipment, Krupp and Fairall independently investigated the angle between the alignment of Orion's Belt and north during the era cited by Hancock, Bauval, et al. (which differs from the angle seen today or in the 3rd millennium BC, because of the precession of the equinoxes), and found that the angle was somewhat different from the "perfect match" claimed by Bauval and Hancock in the Orion Constellation Theory—47–50 degrees per the planetarium measurements, compared to the 38-degree angle formed by the pyramids.[9] Krupp also pointed out that the slightly-bent line formed by the three pyramids was deviated towards the north, whereas the slight "kink" in the line of Orion's Belt was deformed to the south, and to match them up one or the other of them had to be turned upside-down.[10] Indeed, this is what was done in the original book by Bauval and Gilbert (The Orion Mystery), which compared images of the pyramids and Orion without revealing that the pyramids’ map had been inverted.[11] Krupp and Fairall find other problems with the claims, including noting that if the Sphinx is meant to represent the constellation of Leo, then it should be on the opposite side of the Nile (the "Milky Way") from the pyramids ("Orion"),[9][10] that the vernal equinox c. 10,500 BC was in Virgo and not Leo,[9] and that in any case the constellations of the Zodiac originate from Mesopotamia and were completely unknown in Egypt until the much later Graeco-Roman era.[11] Ed Krupp repeated this "upside down" claim in the BBC documentary Atlantis Reborn (1999).

source Do i have to think for you too, or can you do that on your own, since it looks like blindly believeing is more your thing? Want me to wrap it in some brainwashing like Icke and Bauval do, "to go", so to speak?
You're one of many many victims of a real disinformation campaign conspiracy. If i were you i'd sue them.

a reply to: Peeple

Yeah they went to an online astronomy program and said see it matches. What an observatory can do is recreate the sky as they would have seen it. And when they did well doesn't match another theory down the tubes as they say. But it's ok hell continue to write books saying It does and people will buy it.

swear o should write a book about egypt have a degree in physics I'm sure I could use the alignment of the pyramids ro show they understood E=mc just takes playing with equations.

a reply to: dragonridr

Chris White invested a lot of work to take a closer look at the ancien aliens history channel scheme:

Also i'd like to point out Hancock was speaking at the '99 scientology conference and who exactly would benefit the most from all the lost and lonely, believing in ancient aliens? Where has Däniken etc. all the money from, for their "research"?
Which country has become prominent to promote ancient aliens and pushing other countries to accept scientology as religion? See why i call it a big conspiracy? It's about nothing less than brainwashing the masses to make way for nothing less than a scientology world of slaves. (Disclaimer: no i can't prove that claim. Yet. I am working on it.)

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: engineercutout

Criticisms The claims made by Hancock, Bauval, and others (such as Adrian Gilbert and Anthony West) concerning the significance of these proposed correlations have been examined by several scientists, who have published detailed criticism and rebuttal of these ideas. Among these critiques are several from two astronomers, Ed Krupp of Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles and Anthony Fairall, astronomy professor at the University of Cape Town, South Africa. Using planetarium equipment, Krupp and Fairall independently investigated the angle between the alignment of Orion's Belt and north during the era cited by Hancock, Bauval, et al. (which differs from the angle seen today or in the 3rd millennium BC, because of the precession of the equinoxes), and found that the angle was somewhat different from the "perfect match" claimed by Bauval and Hancock in the Orion Constellation Theory—47–50 degrees per the planetarium measurements, compared to the 38-degree angle formed by the pyramids.[9] Krupp also pointed out that the slightly-bent line formed by the three pyramids was deviated towards the north, whereas the slight "kink" in the line of Orion's Belt was deformed to the south, and to match them up one or the other of them had to be turned upside-down.[10] Indeed, this is what was done in the original book by Bauval and Gilbert (The Orion Mystery), which compared images of the pyramids and Orion without revealing that the pyramids’ map had been inverted.[11] Krupp and Fairall find other problems with the claims, including noting that if the Sphinx is meant to represent the constellation of Leo, then it should be on the opposite side of the Nile (the "Milky Way") from the pyramids ("Orion"),[9][10] that the vernal equinox c. 10,500 BC was in Virgo and not Leo,[9] and that in any case the constellations of the Zodiac originate from Mesopotamia and were completely unknown in Egypt until the much later Graeco-Roman era.[11] Ed Krupp repeated this "upside down" claim in the BBC documentary Atlantis Reborn (1999).

source Do i have to think for you too, or can you do that on your own, since it looks like blindly believeing is more your thing? Want me to wrap it in some brainwashing like Icke and Bauval do, "to go", so to speak?
You're one of many many victims of a real disinformation campaign conspiracy. If i were you i'd sue them.

Hello Peeple,

I discussed the Giza-Orion cardinality issue with Dr Krupp a few years ago and effectively debunked his objections. Dr Krupp was using modern cosmographic conventions and projecting this onto an ancient culture that viewed the heavens very differently. You can read it here: Dr Ed Krupp Debunked.

Regards,

SC

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Peeple

I'm sure I could use the alignment of the pyramids ro show they understood E=mc just takes playing with equations.

I'm all ears

originally posted by: Scott Creighton

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: engineercutout

Criticisms The claims made by Hancock, Bauval, and others (such as Adrian Gilbert and Anthony West) concerning the significance of these proposed correlations have been examined by several scientists, who have published detailed criticism and rebuttal of these ideas. Among these critiques are several from two astronomers, Ed Krupp of Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles and Anthony Fairall, astronomy professor at the University of Cape Town, South Africa. Using planetarium equipment, Krupp and Fairall independently investigated the angle between the alignment of Orion's Belt and north during the era cited by Hancock, Bauval, et al. (which differs from the angle seen today or in the 3rd millennium BC, because of the precession of the equinoxes), and found that the angle was somewhat different from the "perfect match" claimed by Bauval and Hancock in the Orion Constellation Theory—47–50 degrees per the planetarium measurements, compared to the 38-degree angle formed by the pyramids.[9] Krupp also pointed out that the slightly-bent line formed by the three pyramids was deviated towards the north, whereas the slight "kink" in the line of Orion's Belt was deformed to the south, and to match them up one or the other of them had to be turned upside-down.[10] Indeed, this is what was done in the original book by Bauval and Gilbert (The Orion Mystery), which compared images of the pyramids and Orion without revealing that the pyramids’ map had been inverted.[11] Krupp and Fairall find other problems with the claims, including noting that if the Sphinx is meant to represent the constellation of Leo, then it should be on the opposite side of the Nile (the "Milky Way") from the pyramids ("Orion"),[9][10] that the vernal equinox c. 10,500 BC was in Virgo and not Leo,[9] and that in any case the constellations of the Zodiac originate from Mesopotamia and were completely unknown in Egypt until the much later Graeco-Roman era.[11] Ed Krupp repeated this "upside down" claim in the BBC documentary Atlantis Reborn (1999).

source Do i have to think for you too, or can you do that on your own, since it looks like blindly believeing is more your thing? Want me to wrap it in some brainwashing like Icke and Bauval do, "to go", so to speak?
You're one of many many victims of a real disinformation campaign conspiracy. If i were you i'd sue them.

Hello Peeple,

I discussed the Giza-Orion cardinality issue with Dr Krupp a few years ago and effectively debunked his objections. Dr Krupp was using modern cosmographic conventions and projecting this onto an ancient culture that viewed the heavens very differently. You can read it here: Dr Ed Krupp Debunked.

Regards,

SC

So let me get this straight your solution to the fact that they wouldn't match the sky that the egyptians saw is to remove the earth from the equation?? If they were trying to represent the heavens it would be as they saw it. They wouldnt project the image to 3d remove the earth and reorient the heavens, I don't mind people making money off an idea but if you have to alter reality to do it well your idea is probably wrong.

And even if you move it to 3D you still wont get a match the angles are wrong. But you know if i were to believe they were trying to leave a message like the date of construction.Why wouldn't they just carve it in stone? They could have easily just carved a stella with an accurate representation of the sky. Heck we sent voyager out with a star map giving our location included instructions on how to play the record that any advanced race can figure out. If you want to leave a message to the future its easy so why would they be so cryptic? Id be much more likely to believe they were giving a warning of a future date say 3000 yrs from now, Than at least it could be a pre apocalyptic warning or something.However do to the time and effort i understand why you feel like you do and i promise ill leave you alone.

a reply to: Scott Creighton

Really, this

that viewed the heavens very differently

is true when it suits your needs, but the fact that the zodiac and therefore Leo only came in use in Roman times doesn't matter at all?
And maybe you could give us a different source for a honoured state university astronomer "being debunked", other than you supporting your buddy on his homepage?
There should be something in the T&C to forbid that. How is it when i open now a page writing about how all pyramids were covered in pink plush and present it as a source, will it help me to sell a few more books too, or what's happening here?

a reply to: dragonridr

Hello Dragonridr,

The points you raise have either been answered elsewhere in my ATS Forum or on other Boards. I have no intention in this thread of going through all of this again. The thread here has been derailed enough.

Regards,

SC

I do not understand why its so difficult for society to accept that an advanced race was present at some point in our recent past. Take Dwarka, India. The 12,000 Year Old City of Lord Krishna was found off the coast of India "accidentally". IF 12,000 years ago society was advanced enough to create / sustain a city, trade, and have the ability to build and house its residence. Why is it so difficult to imagine that anywhere else? The amount of proof is overwhelming. Just as quickly a race can come to power, it can also disappear.

> Take The Younger Dryas impact hypothesis :

The general hypothesis states that about 12,900 BP calibrated (10,900 14C uncalibrated) years ago, air burst(s) or impact(s) from a near-Earth object(s) set areas of the North American continent on fire, disrupted climate and caused the extinction of most of the megafauna in North America and the demise of the North American Clovis culture after the last glacial period.[4] The Younger Dryas ice age lasted for about 1,200 years before the climate warmed again. This swarm is hypothesized to have exploded above or possibly on the Laurentide Ice Sheet in the region of the Great Lakes. Though no major impact crater has been identified, the proponents suggest that it would be physically possible for such an air burst to have been similar to but orders of magnitude larger than the Tunguska event of 1908.[5][6] The hypothesis proposed that animal and human life in North America not directly killed by the blast or the resulting wildfires would have suffered due to the disrupted ecologic relationships affecting the continent.

Impact crater floor of Lake Ontario

If a single air-burst with the magnitude of the Tunguska event could wipe out an entire continent. It would seem much less of an event could wipe out a smaller settlement or region.

* To maintain on topic, Hawass is old school, arrogant, and stubborn. Hes too far invested into his own spiral of assumed fact to back out now. It would fracture the foundation of everything hes done. Don't expect him to change.

a reply to: Peeple

Hello Peeple,

P: is true when it suits your needs, but the fact that the zodiac and therefore Leo only came in use in Roman times doesn't matter at all?

SC: Sorry--I have no idea what you are talking about here or indeed why your are asking me this? Perhaps you are confusing my theories with those of Bauval? There is much in Bauval's theory I consider plain wrong, including the Sphinx/Leo correlation.

But anyway--I digress. The thread has been derailed enough.

Regards,

SC

a reply to: Scott Creighton

Yeah well i tried to talk to you about your theory and got ignored in the propper thread and deleted in this one.
Maybe that's why Hawass is reacting so annoyed? your people are using unfair methods.
The whole point is, there is definetly something more to our history than what we found out so far, but with people like Sitchin, Bauval Hancock and you, we won't get closer but further from the truth. Science doesn't work like this, you know? One tries to establish and prove a fact and not expect everybody to turn their brains off in order to believe some wild claims the ones making them can't prove, or fit in a plausible time frame.
And with all best regards to you, what else should we discuss here if not the difference in opinion that led to Hawass storming out? Too critical? Oh yes Scott Creighton, how can i dare to not share your opinion on history, how dare i to think for myself and provide not only established facts, but also show the holes in your friends theory. Bad Hawass, bad mainstream science, bad free thinkers. All bad, right? And i am sooo happy you don't understand what i am trying to say, because it proves my point: You and you buddies get paid to disinform on purpose. Your behaviour is by the training book of your organisation.
"Entangled: Eater of souls" and now please tell me why the # anybody should buy this obvious scientology crap you guys are promoting?
I love Hawass, he's a very good guard of his ancestors legacy, and i am really feeling sorry for the man, having to endure people like this slimy Hancock (who got critisised for not being able to prove any of his thoughts), questioning his professionell integrity and paranoid disappointet sci-fi fans following the pied piper.
Too off-topic,to answer? Has to get deleted again? Too rude? Oh no, wait i know:

SC: i really don't know what you are asking me.

Just a fair word of warning: You and your buddies will get what you deserve. You probably can't tell a lie from a fact anymore already and i see a not-so-bright future of delusion for you.
Now i'll leave you with your zombie flock to bash on reality, how it fails to live up to your phantasy.

a reply to: Peeple

Sorry if I'm getting off topic here, Scott.

Is this the best debunkage you have for Hancock, Peeps? A Wikipedia entry, and a THREE HOUR documentary debunking Ancient Aliens, of which I assure you I shall watch every minute with breathless anticipation

Surely there is more damning evidence than this to be found...

a reply to: engineercutout

Oh look the one uncapable of thinking shows up... I leave you two then to your pseude-mysterious realms. good night and tell each other nice stories, but watch out your friends, friends soul eaters may be after you. Keep believeing them. Good boy.
(Usually if someone shows you a link with the name of the author, his papers title and other real scientist to back his critiscism one would want to belive the adressed person would be capable to figure the rest out for him-/herself. I see your brain hasn't taken that hurdle yet.)
@ATS in general:
And why the # is this dudes comment not off topic, but when i point out relevant information it gets deleted? Do we have a double standard?

originally posted by: Scott Creighton
a reply to: dragonridr

Hello Dragonridr,

The points you raise have either been answered elsewhere in my ATS Forum or on other Boards. I have no intention in this thread of going through all of this again. The thread here has been derailed enough.

Regards,

SC

Than why did you bring it up in the first place? You claimed the issue was debunked and indeed there isnt a problem with alignment. There most definitely is you cant force a theory to be right. If a theory doesnt fit the facts time for a new theory. As far as Hawass well the man spent his entire life trying to uncover the history of his people. As such hes arrogant and overall a pain. He doesnt like when people mess with what he sees as the legacy of the Egyptian people. I dont blame his to much people identify themselves with their history. For him this was his passion and he wants people to take it as seriously as he does.

When i visited Egypt i got to meet him and ill tell you hes not a nice person never was. But he doesnt have to be but after our meeting even i thought he probably wasnt the right person for the job. But then i realized i was wrong hes stubborn attitude and demeanor was perfect for the job. Realize the west came into Egypt transported off his country's history taking statues and even obelisks to far off lands. Egyptian dead were being sold by the pound. They were used to start fires there was even talk of using them to make paper out of the linens. Mummies were ground up for powder for various reasons by apothecaries since the 1600's.So they needed someone to be hard and protect egypt so in the long run he was perfect for the job. Good evidence for that now that hes no longer in charge well their antiquities are being robbed again.

Hawass has been Eygpts Iron fist protecting its history for years. Imagine now that all you've striven to uphold and protect is now open to attack.

He's like a father protecting his kid.

Hes suffering from impotence, frustration.

Maybe the bacteria from all those tombs has rotted his brain over time.

Eygpt has nothing to offer the world but its history and línen shirts, if it looses its history, bad it would be.

a reply to: Peeple

Look, I might have done so snidely, but I was actually serious when I asked you if you had links to other information refuting Hancock's arguments. There's really no need to continue to resort to name calling. Besides, calling me a tool and telling me that I can't think for myself really isn't going to convince me of anything except that you can be a real jerk sometimes. I am open to new information, and/or being wrong, if that is the case. I'm not scared!!!(gulp) Feel free to PM me if they won't let you post it in this thread...