Sphinx Rain Marks From 12,000 Years Ago?

The Sphinx is a never-ending topic, but I don't think the forum has really focused on whether it's really showing rain-marks or not.

If so, then it would apparently mark the torrential rains of 12,000 years ago. The end of the last Ice Age, was the cause of the torrential rains (all the excess water from the melted Ice Age).

If all that is true, then it would definitively mark the Sphinx as AT LEAST 12,000 years old. It would be the best proof of ancient advanced civilization.

It also correlates with ideas of ancient nuclear war (described in the Vedas / ancient Indian texts), with the general idea of nuclear war causing sudden climate disruption, such as the sudden warm end of the Ice Age.





At any rate, it's never looked obvious to my eyes, whether or not there is rain-damage. And I'd imagine that sand-storms could PROBABLY create a similar erosion effect as water erosion... I'd expect.




Does anyone have a definitive answer, if the Sphinx is really even showing water-marks, or not?

The walls around it, have a weird clumpy look, like it was old mud, maybe? Or heat melted rocks lol.

How can anyone decide if the statue really has water damage, compared to wind & sand erosion? And what's up with those goopy looking walls, around it?





Also: Here's a cool thread that proposes the Sphinx was a giant water fountain statue:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

But still, the heart of the issue is: Can we decide for sure that is really water evidence, on the Sphinx, in the first place?

a reply to: JamesChessman

Its very likely there was some kind of cataclysm before in the lands of Egypt near Cairo.

originally posted by: vNex92
a reply to: JamesChessman

Its very likely there was some kind of cataclysm before in the lands of Egypt near Cairo.

I agree, I know I've seen photos of exploded pyramids and statues from ancient Egypt. As if hit with that ancient cataclysmic war, described in the Vedas / Indian texts.

That war could have been the trigger of the warm rains, and excess water of the Ice Age melting suddenly.

So the Sphinx can be a time-marker of that event... if the stature really does have water marks... which is not obvious to my eyes, either way.

Wiki page of the general Sphinx - water erosion theory

The Sphinx water erosion hypothesis is a fringe claim, contending that the Great Sphinx of Giza and its enclosing walls eroded primarily due to ancient floods or rainfalls, attributing their creation to Plato's lost civilization of Atlantis over 11,500 years ago.

a reply to: JamesChessman

Something also came to Ancient Egypt, that is a certain.

So the Sphinx can be a time-marker of that event... if the stature really does have water marks... which is not obvious to my eyes, either way.

I do believe around Sphinx there were more structure, road system. Unfortunately those structures were likely destroyed in the cataclysm event.

This is the problem with archaeology in general. The expectation is that you are to take them as experts in mechanical engineering, civil engineering, structural engineering, hydrology, etc., etc. when they really just have a liberal arts degree.

That said, there are some very capable ones who have done the work to become knowledgeable in these areas (not to mention there are engineers who shouldn't be engineers.). It is just that the starting point is off, and the ego-driven part of that field often clouds objectivity and the ability to ask for expert help.

In this particular case, I have seen some evidence that could be water, but I wouldn't make any conclusion without being there and seeing the whole situation. Flowing sand and flowing water can be very similar mechanisms, but there would be a few things that could help differentiate with close examination.

a reply to: JamesChessman

How can anyone decide if the statue really has water damage, compared to wind & sand erosion? And what's up with those goopy looking walls, around it?

Because it leaves different patterns of erosion, falling water would leave vertical lines and have a smoothing effect, where as wind would erode more horizontally or randomly depending on airflow. Go look at waterfall for an example.

The Geologist who says there are signs of water erosion on the outer walls of the enclosure, does explain his reasoning in a vid I’ve seen. I’m not aware of it being proved or refuted. You’ll need better pictures showing more of a close up than the one in your OP to be able to see.

a reply to: JamesChessman

Yes, the video in 19Bones79 thread here: ATS Thread talks about the erosion and how you can tell it's from water.

a reply to: JamesChessman

Another video that deepens the mystery..

The last time heavy rain fell in the region, capable of causing erosion to soft limestone, was ...... last year

www.africanews.com...


Just because average annual rainfall is much less now than during the AHP doesn't mean heavy rainstorms do not occur. Whatever someone who doesn't know much may tell you on youtube.

a reply to: JamesChessman
The Sphinx was supposedly built facing the constellation of Leo, when it was the main constellation in the sky due to the precession of the equinox.

This is just more Graham Hancock nonsense. He's like the Stephen Greer of archeology in my opinion.

originally posted by: darkwingduck
a reply to: JamesChessman
The Sphinx was supposedly built facing the constellation of Leo, when it was the main constellation in the sky due to the precession of the equinox.

... or might have been, if the AE:

a) had actually had a constellation identified as Leo; and

b) had actually identified the phenomenon of precession (generally accepted as not recognised until the time of Hipparchus [2nd cent. BC]).

a reply to: JamesChessman

I've believed for many years that the Sphinx was built/carved in the age of Leo.

It's pretty obvious when you think about it...

originally posted by: darkwingduck
a reply to: JamesChessman
The Sphinx was supposedly built facing the constellation of Leo, when it was the main constellation in the sky due to the precession of the equinox.

Meh.

That's just some nonsense to hide the real age of the Sphinx.

a reply to: JamesChessman

Rain erosion would be from it being inside at some point if not originally in a very lush atmosphere much like the rain forest of Brazil or Amazon.

It is far older than people realize.

Potentially has a secret chamber inside the head with a staircase leading down inside its neck to the body. Inside is a huge room/labyrinth that has a tunnel to one of the other pyramids and inside this space is the hidden history of the pre flood civilizations along with all the hidden technology that people have stumbled upon over the years like Telsa etc.

That's all I know about this thing through years of listening lol

There is some really cool videos on the web you can find that dive deep into all this

Part of me understands why they keep certain areas of certain things off limits to tourists and people in general but I’m much on the side of exploration and knowledge attainment. The fact there are spots that are not speculation but KNOWN to exist and are being gatekept really bothers me. How can we even begin to get an accurate scope of history when large parts of it are kept hidden.

It depends who you ask and what you believe. The most telling thing for me are the proportions - they’re all wrong. My opinion is that this is a far older structure which once had the head of a lion. Only far later was the head carved into the likeness of a pharaoh. Thus creating a head too small for the body. The Egyptian’s were generally good with proportions. Mind you it’s fairly likely the pyramids are older too, but the Sphinx, for me at least, is significantly older than mainstream archeology believes.

originally posted by: MykeNukem
a reply to: JamesChessman

Yes, the video in 19Bones79 thread here: ATS Thread talks about the erosion and how you can tell it's from water.

Thanks, I'll have to look at the thread more, but it starts with the video about tunnels inside the Sphinx and ground, which is awesome, but I guess I'll have to read through the thread... because at a glance, I didn't even see the parts about water, yet.

ALSO I was playing with the colors of the Sphinx, do you guys know it has EYELASHES?

And she's wearing a dark outline of mascara make-up, around her eyes, too.

I made some color edits but really you can see the mascara and eyelashes if you just look closely. Upload isn't working for my color edits and I think I gotta take a break because that's really annoying. I just put time into color edits and can't upload it to the conversation, oh well.

Anyway, once you see the thick make-up and giant eyelashes, she sure looks like a woman.

Same pic, and it's NOT color edited, because my edits won't upload:

If it was underwater or undermud the line would have probably eroded by now. I hear it's packed with seashells - that's a hint.

I figure it would be more exciting to examine what's INSIDE the Sphinx, far BELOW it and why the lid/entrance on top of its head that we see in pre-1940s photos, has disappeared.