Fraud in the Great Pyramid - The Final Proof

Amazing research. It was basically a gold rush, and that's all it was. Lying, cheating and stealing wouldn't have been unheard of during these times of discovery.
I find it sad that they had to lie though. Ancient Egypt is a fascinating subject to research, but you do have to take a lot of what you find with a pinch of salt.

This would be easier than simple to prove or disprove.

I honestly feel Khufu refurbished the exterior of the Great pyramid, Kafre refurbished the second one and re carved the head of the sphinx too, to what we see remaining presently.

20 years to build the Great Pyramid? Not likely in my book and that time frame was sourced back to the Greeks who came around about 2100 to 2200 years after the fact. 20 years to refurbish the exterior with new or polishing up the old casing stones is more believable.

a reply to: Scott Creighton

Excellent presentation! It is a shame that there are forgeries and deceit in history. It is good though that there are people who discover and reveal these lies.

It is really great to see the amount of people lately that are questioning the officially presented history and are now starting to think for themselves.

I wonder how long mainstream historians will be able to keep their deceit going?

originally posted by: SLAYER69

...

20 years to build the Great Pyramid? Not likely in my book and that time frame was sourced back to the Greeks who came around about 2100 to 2200 years after the fact. 20 years to refurbish the exterior with new or polishing up the old casing stones is more believable.

Mark Lehner suggests that it might have taken 20,000-30,000 men twenty years. The AE were very organised, and had systems of corvée labour, supervised by administrators. In the Old Kingdom, labour was organised into work crews known as phyles (Roth, A.M., Work Force, Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 2001/2005).

(There are more sources on AE available here).

a reply to: Scott Creighton

You truly are a legend in your own time 👑

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Harte
a reply to: Hanslune
All you really need to do is read the free kindle preview on Amazon to see exactly how vacuous Creighton's "argument" is.

Harte

Well of course!

www.amazon.co.uk...

Yeah, 2 minutes or less per block makes a lot more sense.

originally posted by: Hooke

originally posted by: SLAYER69

...

20 years to build the Great Pyramid? Not likely in my book and that time frame was sourced back to the Greeks who came around about 2100 to 2200 years after the fact. 20 years to refurbish the exterior with new or polishing up the old casing stones is more believable.

Mark Lehner suggests that it might have taken 20,000-30,000 men twenty years. The AE were very organised, and had systems of corvée labour, supervised by administrators. In the Old Kingdom, labour was organised into work crews known as phyles (Roth, A.M., Work Force, Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 2001/2005).

(There are more sources on AE available here).

And they never once had an instance of delays due to weather, or a shortage of supplies... or shortage of labor due to sickness, war, famine, drought... Damn those AEs were PERFECT.

originally posted by: 3n19m470

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Harte
a reply to: Hanslune
All you really need to do is read the free kindle preview on Amazon to see exactly how vacuous Creighton's "argument" is.

Harte

Well of course!

www.amazon.co.uk...

Yeah, 2 minutes or less per block makes a lot more sense.

If you accept the 2,300,000 number of course - have you ever researched who made that number up?

Why do you believe it?

A far better number estimate if between 500-900,000. The guy who came up with 2.3 wasn't aware of the hill incorporated into the structure.

originally posted by: 3n19m470
a reply to: Hanslune

harassing people

What??? This man sounds dangerous... why isnt he in jail? I guess harassment doesnt carry a long sentence so he got out already...?

Thanks for warning me that he is a criminal. I was gonna buy copies of his books, donate to his research, spread the word about his work... but thank you for warning me that he is someone I would really rather not be involved with. I'll make sure and warn the others, giving you full credit of course. 👍

You just have to agree with him and you'll be just fine. His harassment was directed at those who corrected him. You know threatening sue people who told him he was lying about stuff - things like that.

originally posted by: 3n19m470

originally posted by: Hooke

originally posted by: SLAYER69

...

20 years to build the Great Pyramid? Not likely in my book and that time frame was sourced back to the Greeks who came around about 2100 to 2200 years after the fact. 20 years to refurbish the exterior with new or polishing up the old casing stones is more believable.

Mark Lehner suggests that it might have taken 20,000-30,000 men twenty years. The AE were very organised, and had systems of corvée labour, supervised by administrators. In the Old Kingdom, labour was organised into work crews known as phyles (Roth, A.M., Work Force, Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 2001/2005).

(There are more sources on AE available here).

And they never once had an instance of delays due to weather, or a shortage of supplies... or shortage of labor due to sickness, war, famine, drought... Damn those AEs were PERFECT.

They were pretty effective indeed - perhaps you can tell us your idea of how long it took them?

originally posted by: ClovenSky
It is really great to see the amount of people lately that are questioning the officially presented history and are now starting to think for themselves.

I wonder how long mainstream historians will be able to keep their deceit going?

Pretty much as they have. The problem with the fringe is that the only thing they agree on is that the orthodoxy is wrong while heteroloxy cannot agree on an alternative theory to offer up.

By the way who in country writes the official history? Now that use to be the case in Communist countries but most of those are gone.

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: 3n19m470

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Harte
a reply to: Hanslune
All you really need to do is read the free kindle preview on Amazon to see exactly how vacuous Creighton's "argument" is.

Harte

Well of course!

www.amazon.co.uk...

Yeah, 2 minutes or less per block makes a lot more sense.

If you accept the 2,300,000 number of course - have you ever researched who made that number up?

Why do you believe it?

A far better number estimate if between 500-900,000. The guy who came up with 2.3 wasn't aware of the hill incorporated into the structure.

Nor was it known that the building is full of voids between the walls.
The number comes from pretending that the GP is a solid pyramid construction containing blocks similar to what we see on it's exterior all the way though the building.

In other words, a solid pile of similarly-sized blocks, which is certainly not anything like reality.

Harte

the alleged number of 2,3 mio blocks is made up..only the fringe keeps lying .

one can clearly see the irregular inner filer structure, not only on the gunpowdered hole on the south side but also inside.

originally posted by: anti72
the alleged number of 2,3 mio blocks is made up..only the fringe keeps lying .

one can clearly see the irregular inner filer structure, not only on the gunpowdered hole on the south side but also inside.

Yep that big number makes it seem especially 'mysterious'. I apologize I forgot to put in the link from where one of those newer numbers comes from. I believe my colleague and opium eater Harte has also seen a few.

illuminate10.tripod.com...

Is the above correct? I have no idea math and I aren't presently on speaking terms.