Zero Point: Volumes I, II & III- Ancient Civilizations Redux

reply to post by mcx1942


Yeah. Unfortunately our civilized world views questions as challenging authority.

Originally posted by mcx1942


Prove it. Let us see sources to everything you say is wrong. Real sources, not HoM or Geocities. Real University sites. State what is incorrect, what time it is said in the video then give a legitimate source to disprove it. Please.

As I mentioned before HoM's papers are legitimate as they are based on books written by 'authorities', the films you are placing up are not.

Okay I'll do one, Giza pyramids, dated by two courses of C-14,


The two radiocarbon studies

Also by association with hieroglyphs, inscriptions, stylistic comparison, etc

I have never said these theories or your theories are correct. I have called them what they are.Theories. You are the one that states your theories are correct, even though they have as much proof as the theories I have presented.

Theories are theories some have much better evidence to support them, ie example there is a theory that the earth goes around the sun - well evidenced, there is another theory that the sun goes around the earth, some circumstantial evidence but a vast host of evidence against it, so two theories but only one is deemed 'proven' - well until contradictory evidence/observation is received

Show me where I am attempting to influence people. It must be the way I clearly state these are all theories multiple times. In this thread and in my Stone Vase thread you so love to bash. It must be the way I simply just present information without saying 'this is the truth' and using the carefully chosen word 'theories'. For you are clearly trying to influence people by saying they are wrong and your way is right. I never once say the ideas I presented are the absolute truths. You do.

No its because you show only one side, the side you support and ignore all contrary evidence. In the three videos above is the 'other side' shown?

Again, absolutely hilarious! Your on a 'fringe' site complaining about people posting 'fringe' topics. All the while arguing your absolute truths with other 'fringe' sites. Show me actual university links and not another wiki style site. Show me a picture of you in Egypt circa 3,000 BC. Whats that? No? Instead you will argue theories with other theories. Just because history is claimed to be accurate by scholars does not make it so. Has every piece of recorded history been documented in a fair and non biased way? I do not even need to answer that.

No historian claims history is accurate they know it is at best an outline. Of course this is fringe site, and no I don't complain about them posting fringe information what I complain about is posting incorrect information not supported by evidence

For someone that likes to puff his chest out, your pretty poor at it. Show me where I have stated I 'believe stuff' like you so intellectually put it. I consistently state that everything I have posted are theories. I am fascinated with these theories and I feel they have weight behind them.

As noted above in a discussion you show only one side of a story and resist other evidence that is contrary to it.

For whatever reason you have decided to become my first ATS stalker. Congrats! I even went out of my way to extend an olive branch to you after I got angry from you bashing posters on my Stone Vases thread. Lesson learned.

No I respond to all threads which are of interest to me. I'm not attacking you I'm discussing your evidence - or lack of it

I don't mind that you have your opinions and your sources. What I do mind is how you go about making yourself heard. You do not need to belittle people, it is just plain silly. People will hold your opinions in higher regard if presented in a better fashion. Simple as that.

Belittle you? Of course not, Oh you mean I disagree with you and put up evidence against what you post? Yes, and I will continue to do so - as that is the purpose of this site

Originally posted by Druscilla
reply to post by mcx1942

 

Unfortunately, most people are fine with being told how to think.

All the while I attended various institutions during University, I was never ever, not once told HOW to think.
If anything, I was always encouraged to think different, to attack old problems in new ways, to seek out and find new answers, to topple the established paradigm.

Science is all about crash-testing itself over and over and over. Science invites something that can knock the legs out from under any established paradigm because by doing so, so many unanswered questions might then have answers.

I find your statement about the university education system promoting free independent thinking a fallacy according to my own personal experience. While they may have given those verbal cues.....and made you think that............everything they taught you, how they taught you and the materials they taught you with, were to keep you very much inside the paradigm of their linear mandate for what society is instructed to produce.

Even Einstein knew this and was instructed to not share some of his discoveries that would bring into question that established order. None of it is designed for truth. It is designed for the truth that they have created inside the world that they you have come to accept as normal. There is very little that is normal or true about it. They tell us what their version of truth is and the system forces us to live inside that box. That is the world and society we live in.

I went to university for 5 years, college twice for a total of 3 years.........................I did everything to break free from the restricted learning structure in the educational system. In my view what I saw and experienced was anything but free and those who truly challenged that were punished or treated punitively. It is designed to produce a controlled population meant to fit into a controlled system within an enslaved paradigm that has kept the truth from us for the most part. Every part of society ties into this.

Perhaps you were fortunate enough to have experienced something different.

reply to post by Egyptia


I indeed experienced and observed something far different than you describe.
Granted, I may have been encouraged and treated a little differently in my freshman year of undergrad in starting University full time at the age of 16; scheduling 16 hours of courses and labs.
Even if such may have been the case, which I never felt was, that doesn't account for the other 11 years across other campuses, other schools, all the time receiving encouragement, praise and support, while also observing similar treatment toward others.

No doubt, there are certainly different standards, expectations and cultures indigenous where it comes to the differences between State funded, and Private funded schools, as well as between the larger schools with active student bodies in the thousands compared to schools where selection for seats rates in the hundreds.

Just like dining out for the evening, there are indeed value-meal quality higher educations, just as there are those that will rack up $100k + in student loans.
Attitude and doing one's research in seeking out and finding the right fit in an institution, including going so far as to visit campuses to reverse interview faculty; ala you are hiring them to do a job, as well as interviewing current students and Alumni, even auditing classes, are important steps toward getting the most for your educational $, as well as the time you'll be investing toward whatever goals you have.

There's a personality fit to be found at every campus as well. You're looking at a long term relationship with a set of buildings, the other students, and the staff. Long term relationships typically get to be successful long term relationships due to compatibility, as well as sacrifice, compromise, communication, and mutual understanding.

You've my sympathies for your perception of a negative experience, but, as said, I've experienced and observed differently; prospering and enjoying a positive experience the whole course through.

I never said it was easy. Nothing worth having should ever be expected to be cheap or easy.

reply to post by mcx1942


just watched the first one, and although I had heard or seen most of the info presented, there were a few things new to me, and its great that someone took the time to gather and connect these topics.
Thanks for the thread, will watch the other ones tomorrow

reply to post by athousandlives


Indeed, my pleasure.

Yeah the first video does have a lot I have seen already as well. It really is just to get us in the right frame of mind to watch the other two videos. The other two videos are a bit more of a mental challenge. At least for me since my advanced math skills are, to put it delicately 'lacking' lol. Hope you enjoy them.

reply to post by Hanslune


As far as hieroglyphs inside the Giza Pyramids to 'identify' them with a date/style, I thought there weren't any? The 'Khufu' inscription not withstanding, as it's debatable who/when it was put there.

I know that in 2011 there were hieroglyphs found in one of the shafts, but I haven't seen anywhere that they've been translated or credited to any specific dynasty.

Aside from guesswork or assumptions, I still have an open-mind when it comes to who/when/why the Pyramids were built. Modern Egyptology doesn't provide me with enough concrete evidence to make a decision.

In fact, up until the past few years, Pharaoh Hatshepsut was thought to have been murdered/removed by Thutmosis III... and then they found a mummy that may have been her, and what..? Oh, some sort of dental infection that at the time would have been deadly seem to have been the cause of her demise.

Every so often we're getting great new finds that rewrite what we THINK we know, so.. to say without a doubt 'The Pyramids were built by the Fourth Dynasty' is a bit of a stretch. I personally do not find enough proof to support it.

Oh, and as we all know.. C-14 is only fairly reliable. Not that its a make or break scenario, but I don't put all my eggs in one basket, if ya know what i mean!

Cheers!

Originally posted by Fimbulvetr
reply to post by Hanslune

 

As far as hieroglyphs inside the Giza Pyramids to 'identify' them with a date/style, I thought there weren't any? The 'Khufu' inscription not withstanding, as it's debatable who/when it was put there.

Howdy Fimbulvetr

Use the scrollen feature to go thru all the images of the inscriptions in the relieving chambers

Here is a link to all inscriptions found, it uses the Greek name of Cheops for Khufu

Another list of inscriptions found at Giza - In English

Goyon's marks these were found separately

I know that in 2011 there were hieroglyphs found in one of the shafts, but I haven't seen anywhere that they've been translated or credited to any specific dynasty.

No those have not been associated with any other dynasty, except perhaps the one that built it

Aside from guesswork or assumptions, I still have an open-mind when it comes to who/when/why the Pyramids were built. Modern Egyptology doesn't provide me with enough concrete evidence to make a decision.

Oh and what evidence have they provided you?

Every so often we're getting great new finds that rewrite what we THINK we know, so.. to say without a doubt 'The Pyramids were built by the Fourth Dynasty' is a bit of a stretch. I personally do not find enough proof to support it.

Not at all if you look at the evidence

Oh, and as we all know.. C-14 is only fairly reliable. Not that its a make or break scenario, but I don't put all my eggs in one basket, if ya know what i mean!

It gets more reliable as you do more and can arrive at an average. The averages support the construction of pyramids and a number of other monuments in the time from previously assigned to them

Given that there is no definitive answer to HOW the pyramids were built, let alone dating them based on what MAY be contemporary finds.. I still hold to the 'Hm, I just don't know!' mentality with regards to the Giza Plateau. Too often in Ancient Egypt, older constructions were taken over by new Pharaohs simply by stamping their own cartouche on it to legitimize their own reign.

As far as the hieroglyphs inside the Great Pyramid, as I said before, they're all up in the air, including the relieving chamber inscriptions. COULD be a forgery, could not be. Until conclusive evidence shows one way or another, I won't rule out that we could possibly be WAY off in our dating of construction/ownership of the megalithic site.

When you look at ALL of the drawings of ALL the cartouches in ALL of the relieving chambers, you can easily see a pattern of discrepancies. If nothing else, the simple fact that the photographed cartouche (Fig.4) does not match Vyse's account of the SAME cartouche he found in May 1837 raises a RED FLAG all by itself!

I suspect SOMEONE at some point in time FORGED the cartouche of Khufu in Campbell's Chamber, as well as the cartouches discovered in Lady Arbuthnot's Chamber.

And for the other side of the argument:

However, to give Col. Vyse the benefit of some doubt, according to his drawings, some inscriptions in Lady Arbuthnot's Chamber (North Side) and in Campbell's Chamber (North Side) appear to be partially hidden behind blocks of granite. If there is NO space between the blocks of granite and the wall, AND it can be proven that these inscriptions continue behind the blocks, then THOSE inscriptions must have been made during the building of the Great Pyramid, and therefore, they must be authentic.

www.rickrichards.com...

All theoretical, but all very interesting.

Cheers!

Originally posted by Fimbulvetr
Given that there is no definitive answer to HOW the pyramids were built, let alone dating them based on what MAY be contemporary finds.. I still hold to the 'Hm, I just don't know!' mentality with regards to the Giza Plateau. Too often in Ancient Egypt, older constructions were taken over by new Pharaohs simply by stamping their own cartouche on it to legitimize their own reign.

A few did that and it shows in the archaeological record

As far as the hieroglyphs inside the Great Pyramid, as I said before, they're all up in the air, including the relieving chamber inscriptions. COULD be a forgery, could not be. Until conclusive evidence shows one way or another, I won't rule out that we could possibly be WAY off in our dating of construction/ownership of the megalithic site.

Not even remotely possible that they are 'forgeries", the 'evidence' for the 'forgeries' is made up and oddly the titles for the same gangs was later found in the pyramid village many decades after the relieving chamber finds

Remember Sitchin made up the charge of forgery when he needed the pyramids to be waymarkers for alien space ships

One of the interesting aspects of fringe mythology is that when a factual find is made that contradicts or prevents a fringe idea from being believed an execuse is made up and for some odd reason it is then believed that this somehow negates the original evidence....Let me give an example

I presume you are an American male - and that we have evidence for such

Now as a fringe believer I don't like - so I make up the following story

No he's a female Lebanese shoe maker from Tyre..

Now is your identity as an American male conpromised? No not at all but in fringe land it now is, completely....lol

Hans, get PC please. I'm Phoenician. Ugh, Lebanese is so passe.. =)

But I really enjoy going back 'n forth with you on the various threads.

My main bone of contention with re-writing in AE would be Thutmosis III and Ramesses II, both of whom absorbed large amounts of monuments into 'their' collective, to establish either for themselves or their progeny, legitimacy that they felt would have be denied them. I don't know. I just don't know!!!!!!!!

P.S. If I could put a big S&F on your forehead I would!

Originally posted by Hanslune
the films you are placing up are not.

You obviously did not even bother to actually see what information these three videos are trying to propose.

If you could take some time and stop being pompous and actually watch the videos, they really have nothing to do with your 'take' on ancient cultures.

It has to do with possible energy sources.

But for what ever reason you just decide to be close minded and start arguments that have nothing to do with the actual theme of the videos or the thread.

At this point, I am not surprised.

Again, just watch the videos before you start bashing people. Then maybe you can take your negativity elsewhere.

Originally posted by mcx1942

I clearly state I watch a minute and half and found 7 errors - I also asked you to summarize the contents. Since they couldn't even get the basic right I see no reason to suffer thru further mistakes. So I bashed the films

I don't have time to watch hours and hours of fringe speculation, so you're now saying its all about 'energy'? Great no archaeology and I can skip them....if you like I can link you to 4 1/2 hours of real archaeology

Originally posted by Hanslune
As I mentioned before HoM's papers are legitimate as they are based on books written by 'authorities'

This is such a thin argument.

By this logic, people can say Ancient Aliens is correct because they display their information with insights from Phd holders, astrophysicists, ect. As well as the good old 'fringe' side.

Just because one site that is actually a forum has information provided by 'authorities' does not make it the absolute truth.

Originally posted by Hanslune

I clearly state I watch a minute and half and found 7 errors - I also asked you to summarize the contents. Since they couldn't even get the basic right I see no reason to suffer thru further mistakes. So I bashed the films.

Exemplary ignorance sir.

Originally posted by mcx1942

Originally posted by Hanslune
As I mentioned before HoM's papers are legitimate as they are based on books written by 'authorities'

This is such a thin argument.

Nope a full bodied argument you just don't like it because the information there disagrees with you

By this logic, people can say Ancient Aliens is correct because they display their information with insights from Phd holders, astrophysicists, ect. As well as the good old 'fringe' side.

They don't usually cite actual research which has been peer reviewed an published

Just because one site that is actually a forum has information provided by 'authorities' does not make it the absolute truth.

Again you use a strawman argument - and it fails - again, lol

Originally posted by mcx1942

Exemplary ignorance sir.

Yes you should stop doing that, it detracts from your OP

Can you refute my observation about the string of errors in the first minute and a half? If they get that much wrong so fast why go thru 4 1/2 hours of it?

lol

reply to post by Hanslune


I do not need to refute it.

You are the one that states they are wrong.

I simply asked you to list what is incorrect, what time it is said in the video and give sources other then HoM or Geocities to prove you are correct.

Simple as that.

All you gave in a response is two radiocarbon studies. That does not prove the list of facts you say are incorrect.

Originally posted by Fimbulvetr
Given that there is no definitive answer to HOW the pyramids were built, let alone dating them based on what MAY be contemporary finds.. I still hold to the 'Hm, I just don't know!' mentality with regards to the Giza Plateau. Too often in Ancient Egypt, older constructions were taken over by new Pharaohs simply by stamping their own cartouche on it to legitimize their own reign.

As far as the hieroglyphs inside the Great Pyramid, as I said before, they're all up in the air, including the relieving chamber inscriptions. COULD be a forgery, could not be. Until conclusive evidence shows one way or another, I won't rule out that we could possibly be WAY off in our dating of construction/ownership of the megalithic site.

When you look at ALL of the drawings of ALL the cartouches in ALL of the relieving chambers, you can easily see a pattern of discrepancies. If nothing else, the simple fact that the photographed cartouche (Fig.4) does not match Vyse's account of the SAME cartouche he found in May 1837 raises a RED FLAG all by itself!

I suspect SOMEONE at some point in time FORGED the cartouche of Khufu in Campbell's Chamber, as well as the cartouches discovered in Lady Arbuthnot's Chamber.

All theoretical, but all very interesting.

Cheers!

All completely explained right here, with a link to a pic of that particular page of Vyse's actual journal.

Greater detail here.

The moral of the story is don't believe Rick Richards.

Harte

Originally posted by mcx1942
reply to post by Hanslune

 

I do not need to refute it.

Then it stands

You are the one that states they are wrong.

You are the one stating they are correct

I simply asked you to list what is incorrect, what time it is said in the video and give sources other then HoM or Geocities to prove you are correct.

Done, list to the first minute and a half those claims are made or if you like 00:01 to 01:30

I reject again your poisoning of the well, see below

All you gave in a response is two radiocarbon studies. That does not prove the list of facts you say are incorrect.

All? That all your going to get because you are doing as I suspected you'd do, blatant denial of all evidence.

Now explain why that evidence doesn't meet your standard? lol