New data on Alignment of the Great Pyramids

Much has been written about the alignment of the Pyramids.

Close examination of the Orion's belt theory for alignment actually falls short if you look closely you can see it is actually quite a ways off.

Try it for yourself! It is quite easy to find an overhead photo of the pyramids and also a photo of Orion's belt.

Lay one on top of the other in your favorite photo program and you will see, that no matter which way you stretch or turn it, it will never fit nicely, there will always be a big error on one point.

A much bigger error than the precision we have come to expect from the ancients who built the pyramids.





However....the following photos display a much higher precision as to alignment as we can clearly see.

I would say this would appear to be a much more productive path to explore.








Photos from -

www.andrewcollins.com...

a reply to: A51Watcher

I'm going to have to read that link. There seems to be a lot of really interesting information there. Thanks for posting, if I am interpreting what you have presented here correctly it is rather compelling.

They were building upwards toward the sky anyway so they would emulate the sky by what they saw. No revelation, just common sense.
What is amazing is what humans can do when they believe they are serving a god ruler that lives among them.

interesting....

I have a hard time wrapping my head around what is basically just an enormous art exhibit. Coming from a time when practicality seemed to be more prevalent.

a reply to: TinfoilTP

Yeah I certainly can't vouch for any of the theories put forth on Andrew Collins website, I have not had time to research all he has to say.

You could be right, and maybe he is.

But as I said those photos indicate they are a much more productive path to explore, their alignment being so much more precise.

My primary point being that the commonly held view that the Pyramids were built to emulate the constellation of Orion appears to be incorrect, and, that we also have a much better candidate.

originally posted by: wtbengineer
a reply to: A51Watcher

I'm going to have to read that link. There seems to be a lot of really interesting information there. Thanks for posting, if I am interpreting what you have presented here correctly it is rather compelling.

Sure wtb, glad you found it of interest.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
interesting....

I have a hard time wrapping my head around what is basically just an enormous art exhibit. Coming from a time when practicality seemed to be more prevalent.

I know right?

Seems more research is in order.

Could the reason for a misalignment be from the stars moving their relative position over thousands of years, or how ever old the pyramids are?

a reply to: A51Watcher

Really cool.

Wouldn't that alignment with the stars make them harder to be accurate?

Seems to me it would, rather than just having a floor plan.

a reply to: A51Watcher

I read someone here mention that the egyptians were kind of free spirited, and tended towards rampant spirituality and artistic endeavors. Which you can see in the way they employed art, i suppose.

It could be that the pyramids were used to derive power (religious power) over a people. I agree...more research is in order. And likely always will be. I do appreciate that the key to this lies in the Egyptians Mysteries. Given the nature of the culture, that would be plausible,

Im interested in Byrd's take on this.

originally posted by: kwakakev
Could the reason for a misalignment be from the stars moving their relative position over thousands of years, or how ever old the pyramids are?

Well if we didn't have a better candidate, I might think so.

But since we do, are we to consider it a stroke of luck?

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
a reply to: A51Watcher

Really cool.

Wouldn't that alignment with the stars make them harder to be accurate?

Seems to me it would, rather than just having a floor plan.

Well yes maybe but the ancients didn't seem to have a problem with accuracy, no matter the challenge.

In fact they seemed to revel in it, to display their prowess.

originally posted by: kwakakev
Could the reason for a misalignment be from the stars moving their relative position over thousands of years, or how ever old the pyramids are?

That was my question in a nutshell being the procession of the stars causing the alignment error.
So the question is when was that alignment projected to be in error,present day or when the Pyramids were built.

I saw a documentary years ago where the procession of Orions belt was wound back around 12 000 years ago and it matched perfectly which was actually to prove the Pyramids were a lot older than believed and the technology of the Pyramids were a reverse evolution meaning the younger the Pyramid the worse built,it may have been Andrew Collins himself that was trying to prove this or maybe Graham Hancock, i can't remember to be honest as it was shown around 1998.

a reply to: southbeach
Precession (I think that's what you mean) does not change the location of the stars in the sky. It changes the time of year at which they appear.

For example. Right now the constellation Pisces rises just before the Sun, the Sun is "in" Pisces. On April 28 in the year 12016, the Sun will be "in" Sagittarius. But the relative positions of the stars will be the same. The constellations will look the same, for the most part. So, unless you sort of arbitrarily decide what time of year (and time of day for that matter) was being represented, precession is not much use in "astroarcheology."

While it is true that stars do, very slowly shift their positions in the sky because they are actually moving through the Galaxy (as are we), it has nothing to do with precession and the changes for most are very slight over very long time spans.

a reply to: Phage

The constellations will look the same, for the most part.

Man, I hope so. If they change Cthulhu might come and devour us all.

a reply to: Phage

Well said.

a reply to: Phage

Fair enough i take your point and thanks for the correction but you understand what i was trying to say that the stars move position over time.

a reply to: southbeach

Fair enough i take your point and thanks for the correction but you understand what i was trying to say that the stars move position over time.

I wasn't sure, when you threw "procession" into it. But the relative motions of the stars is not great enough for anyone to say that any ancient construction which "matched" them then, does not now.

As far as Orion's belt goes, they have not changed. They all have essentially the same relative motion (the astronomical term is proper motion). While it is feasible that the layout of the pyramids may represent the stars of Orion's belt, there is no way to use that to date the pyramids.

Collins linked page has been up for years and is a short version of some of what he laid out in his ten year old book "The Cygnus Mystery."
Takes some nerve to call this "new data."

Please note what is happening with this:

1) we assume an alignment with the stars for no reason,
2) we go about looking for stars for the three main pyramids at Giza to align with.

An exercise in self-deception, helped along by someone trying to sell a fringe book.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte
Collins linked page has been up for years and is a short version of some of what he laid out in his ten year old book "The Cygnus Mystery."
Takes some nerve to call this "new data."

Judging by the responses posted here, this is indeed new data to most ATS members.

Which is what I presumed it would be since I found no reference to these pictures anywhere on ATS.

Takes more than nerve to be such a nit picker.