Secret Door in Great Sphinx leading to the Hall of Records (Cover up!)

a reply to: peacefulpete

In an old thread about this - link

Harte

originally posted by: Harte
a reply to: peacefulpete

In an old thread about this - link

Harte

Thanks but isn't this linking to a pretty small, fringe idea? You just posted to one particular post, which is only talking about one guy, who decided the monoliths were from the Romans.

And the whole tone of the post, is that it's a new, fringe idea.

Isn't this a fair assessment of your linked post, at a glance?

originally posted by: peacefulpete

originally posted by: Harte
a reply to: peacefulpete

In an old thread about this - link

Harte

Thanks but isn't this linking to a pretty small, fringe idea? You just posted to one particular post, which is only talking about one guy, who decided the monoliths were from the Romans.

And the whole tone of the post, is that it's a new, fringe idea.

Isn't this a fair assessment of your linked post, at a glance?

I don't know I haven't read that thread in years. But there's plenty of info there - and links - and the email reply of one of the Archaeological team that worked on the DAI report Hanslune previously mentioned.

Harte

a reply to: Hanslune

The usual response to this is for the fringe to claim 'yes the later pyramids were tombs' but the Giza ones

Can you present any evidence to support your opinion. Can you explain why the the three pyramids of Osiris never contained any bodies. Nor did they like contemporary pyramids contain any hieroglyphs.

Further of fundamental importance can you explain why these three pyramids where not architecturally designed to house tombs underground and it is a known fact that all Pharaohs are buried underground.

Can you provide me with the evidence that allows you to date the the pyramid of Osiris.

Happy days

a reply to: peacefulpete

Harte I don’t think you showed me exactly why of anything. You just said you don’t believe any of the notions of sacred geometry or hidden numbers in the pyramids.

You cannot debate with someone who cannot see opposing sides of a view. You can bring a horse to water but you cannot make it drink.

a reply to: Harte

You have stated more than once in this thread that all stonework done in the past can be repeated today.
I am now going to demonstrate you are so wrong and debunk you.

Show me a granite lathe that can do this ancient artifact.

a reply to: peacefulpete

These are not fringe ideas. This is our history and it is being kept hidden from us. Once upon a time acnient peeps all around the world decided to build massive pyramids and monoliths out of huge stone. Some of which weighing thousands of tonnes. The aligned these structures to very specific alignments. They then all just stopped.

it is evident there are links in culture. Thank you for your replies in this thread.

a reply to: Harte

No stone was ever lifted in antiquity that can't be easily lifted using modern equipment - mobile cranes. I suggest you look at the capacities of modern cranes.

Take a hike! When was the last time you saw a lorry moving down the road carrying an object this size. Funny have a look at that image below. Can you see any roads going to this block. How did they move it without a road.

a reply to: Harte

No sacred geomerty. I can give you three different ways of calucalting the speed of light from the pyramid of Osiris. Can you do that and can you demostrate to me that you that is not coindence. If not you really should not pass comment.

Can you explain to me the importance of the 144,000 which in encoded within the pryamid and its significance. Can you explain to the importance of this number in the bible or to the mayans. Why do the same numbers keep repeating themselves.

Can you explain to me the significance of the big year to the Egyptians and the sothic cycle. If your so sure of yourself I will put a separate two part thread up on this and your welcome to come and do your heart stuff

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Harte

No stone was ever lifted in antiquity that can't be easily lifted using modern equipment - mobile cranes. I suggest you look at the capacities of modern cranes.

Take a hike! When was the last time you saw a lorry moving down the road carrying an object this size.

Take a reading lesson. Or show me people lifting stones with lorries.

originally posted by: purplemerFunny have a look at that image below. Can you see any roads going to this block. How did they move it without a road.

Does a road lift something?
You can go ahead and create the argument you want to have, as you are now doing. Just don't expect much response, since no one here is saying what you claim. In fact, nothing anyone has said has anything at all to do with carrying stones at all, much less by truck.

Harte

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Harte

No sacred geomerty. I can give you three different ways of calucalting the speed of light from the pyramid of Osiris. Can you do that and can you demostrate to me that you that is not coindence. If not you really should not pass comment.

Where in Sacred Geometry does one find information about the speed of light?
And there IS no "pyramid of Osiris."
And why would I want to demonstrate to you your own hypothesis - that it's not a coincidence?

originally posted by: purplemerCan you explain to me the importance of the 144,000 which in encoded within the pryamid and its significance. Can you explain to the importance of this number in the bible or to the mayans. Why do the same numbers keep repeating themselves.

I can explain it to you with perfect clarity, but you won't accept it so why bother?
I'll do it anyway: there is no significance to the 144 number you believe is "encoded" into the Great Pyramid. 144 is merely a number. One greater than 143, and one less that 145, and has no significance other than that in the real world, other than when counting by 12, which is the number of months.

originally posted by: purplemerCan you explain to me the significance of the big year to the Egyptians and the sothic cycle. If your so sure of yourself I will put a separate two part thread up on this and your welcome to come and do your heart stuff.

The Sothic Cycle was unknown to Ancient Egypt, and has significance only to modern Egyptologists.

originally posted by: purplemerYou said before that you like geometry. I will put a thread up that will blow you away. You will love it. It will be the best thread ever!

Keep using the noggin. I hope you enjoyed the fill.

I am quite skeptical that I will ever see any Geometry from you. You can't even phrase your own argument correctly..

Harte

Not having access to the truth and knowledge of the world in which we live, especially in this day and age.. is very sad and depressing.

originally posted by: peacefulpete
a reply to: Hanslune

It's a lame denial of knowledge that I don't believe the hieroglyphics have ever been translated (beyond those on the Rosetta Stone)? Why?

You are denying a body of knowledge you don't know.

The onus of proof is on the assertion that we DO understand them. I acknowledged the Rosetta Stone, which is the most tangible true translations... but beyond that, it all seems like guesswork. It's just guessing what weird drawings mean lol.

Already done no one but you is responsible to understand the material. You can reject it if you want and that sir is YOUR problem.

In 2007, Susan Wise Bauer claimed in her book Earliest Accounts to the Fall of Rome, that the theory that the Great Pyramid was the geographical center of Earth would only hold true if a Mercator projection is used as the map for Earth, which was "unlikely to have been a common practice of the ancient Egyptians".


So it does work out as center... on a Mercator projection map, right?

It would seem but that isn't the center of the land mass on earth - Mercator distorts it greatly and was probably the map a 19th century fellow made the claim from....

Obviously by flying around in spaceships and scanning the Earth with unimaginable advanced technology, of course. lol

Yep and this from people who didn't understand germ theory, suffered from dental decay, parasites and died of TB and other common diseases....there science was a tad off eh?

originally posted by: peacefulpete

Dude the Romans were only building on top of monoliths that were already there...

Do you really believe the Romans were moving the largest cut stones on Earth? They're my own ancestors and I don't believe it.

Yes there were bronze age building there earlier (which were not monolithic) that is what the DAI proved. NO I don't believe they were moving the largest cut stones on earth. The Egyptians did that. They did however move some smaller ones around 800 tons the trilithons similar to work done elsewhere. The really big ones were never cut away from the earth, never finished.

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Hanslune


Can you present any evidence to support your opinion. Can you explain why the the three pyramids of Osiris never contained any bodies. Nor did they like contemporary pyramids contain any hieroglyphs.

Further of fundamental importance can you explain why these three pyramids where not architecturally designed to house tombs underground and it is a known fact that all Pharaohs are buried underground.

Can you provide me with the evidence that allows you to date the the pyramid of Osiris.

Happy days

Contemporary? The first one with writing inside of them besides Graffiti was a 150 years later - good old Unas. They were looted in antiquity - of 300 pharaohs only one was not looted.

All three pyramids had underground burial but one the GP had two others in a higher position and those seemed to have been finished to a greater degree than the one underground.

RC-14 dates from the two large studies

journals.uair.arizona.edu...

Can you provide your evidence they were called the pyramids of Osiris?

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: peacefulpete

Dude the Romans were only building on top of monoliths that were already there...

Do you really believe the Romans were moving the largest cut stones on Earth? They're my own ancestors and I don't believe it.

Yes there were bronze age building there earlier (which were not monolithic) that is what the DAI proved. NO I don't believe they were moving the largest cut stones on earth. The Egyptians did that. They did however move some smaller ones around 800 tons the trilithons similar to work done elsewhere. The really big ones were never cut away from the earth, never finished.

There is a smaller T-shaped foundation within the Roman one that was never completed. Rather than remove it, the Romans engulfed it. But that foundation was Herodian.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: peacefulpete

Dude the Romans were only building on top of monoliths that were already there...

Do you really believe the Romans were moving the largest cut stones on Earth? They're my own ancestors and I don't believe it.

Yes there were bronze age building there earlier (which were not monolithic) that is what the DAI proved. NO I don't believe they were moving the largest cut stones on earth. The Egyptians did that. They did however move some smaller ones around 800 tons the trilithons similar to work done elsewhere. The really big ones were never cut away from the earth, never finished.

There is a smaller T-shaped foundation within the Roman one that was never completed. Rather than remove it, the Romans engulfed it. But that foundation was Herodian.

Harte

Yeah I remember that from the DAI report trying to find the graphic for that.

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: peacefulpete

These are not fringe ideas. This is our history and it is being kept hidden from us. Once upon a time acnient peeps all around the world decided to build massive pyramids and monoliths out of huge stone. Some of which weighing thousands of tonnes. The aligned these structures to very specific alignments. They then all just stopped.

it is evident there are links in culture. Thank you for your replies in this thread.

Extrtemely fringy unfortunately or if you wish alternative. Oh so whose hiding all this history from you?

Now lets get our facts straight one - exactly one statue weigh 1,000 tons everything else was less than that and very few very heavy stones were moved because it was really hard to do.

No they kept building but they found easier ways to build stuff - the amount of material in the Roman roads drafts the work on the great pyramid.

Once upon a time it was easier to cut a few large stones and move them but later they found it easier to cut and move smaller stones as technology improved.

Can you design a structure on earth that aligns to nothing? Given the sky above has thousands of moving dots you can line it up with something at some time. However they did line stuff up especially to sunset and sunrise on key days important to farmers.

originally posted by: peacefulpete
a reply to: Harte

3. Are there are any records of Romans actually dragging around these monoliths? They were known for a lot of things but I've never heard them dragging stones the size of modern day buildings lol.

Okay the 3 large stones they moved aren't the size of modern day buildings - remember there are the stones they moved and then there are the much larger stones in the quarry WHICH WERE NOT MOVED. You seem to be confusing the two different kinds of stones.

Yeah the Romans lifted Egyptian obelisks and took them to Rome and raised them up.

There are eight ancient Egyptian and five ancient Roman obelisks in Rome.

en.wikipedia.org...

The heaviest of these was 455 tons about 60% of the larger stones moved at Baalbek

Let me add a bit of information. A new piece for dating the Giza pyramids was discovered only a few years ago

Merers papyrus: en.wikipedia.org...

The diary of Merer (Papyrus Jarf A and B) are logbooks written over 4,500 years ago that record the daily activities of stone transportation from the Turah limestone quarry to and from Giza during the 4th Dynasty.

www.roger-pearse.com...