Forbidden Egyptology

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


But doesn't this go against how accurate the c14 is supposed to be? I went and read a little about it and there are as many people out there that say it doesn't work as well as main stream science claims. Now I understand it is the web and there is as much bad info as good...so I take it all with a grain of salt

I also understand the arrogance of man and the horrors that have been commited because some has thought that they were above others...This leads me to this question...How many times in history have we (and I mean mankind here) developed a theory/opinion though it wasn't correct and ran with it anyway? If we are going to be wrong we will all be wrong kind of thing? It is the old we have picked a course and we will stay on this course attitude. Like when a auto manufacturer knowingly sends out a defective car and will address any issues if they are reported. I know I dont make a lot of sense but I have a lot of questions that I just need to sit down and write out properly and organize the ask but there were a couple that I had to throw out to begin to see the forest..so to speak

I am trying to wrap my mind around all of the info I have read here and what doesnt make any sense to me is that the people that say that the Egyptians did all of this on their own and had no help...but there is a total lack of documentation for the pyramids(I know both sides of this have been discussed and I can see both sides of the coin here...I;m just trying to get somewhere with it) but take a adamant stance that they did the building themselves.

Now, we also have documentation saying that there were Gods and that the Gods were involved in their lives....enough to write about it and record it for generations...I know you could argue finding the bible or something like that in the future...but for every bible you found I would bet that you could find something that would say different...How much (if any) information has been found in egypt that says that the gods were not real? I understand that they were supposed to be part of a religion but what if they weren't...Without definitive proof you cannot confirm or deny that these "Gods" were real. Real humans w/ extraordinary knowledge?

Now, I went and looked up the elongated skulls and there were places on the web that were both pro and con. Some place stated that if the skulls were a result of binding that the volume doesnt change just the shape...but the volume of these skulls are obviously larger....Now could you take a small piece of the material from the skull and have dna tests done on them to see if in fact that they were human? If so why hasn't anyone done this...what would they be afraid of finding out? That it was indeed a human but just deformed?

I dont know enough about the subject and could really piss off the people here with a million questions that probally get asked a lot. I am just asking ?'s that I have trying to clarify some things....Right now it is all muddy...but MY personal belief is that the puramids are much older than believed...why would that be so hard for people to accept? If the egyptians could build such marvels w/o anydocumentation saying so then why could'nt people much older do the same? I read things all of the time that say we are not any smarter than people back then...so why?

sorry for the way this is put together

Originally posted by kaferwerks
reply to post by TheWalkingFox

 

But doesn't this go against how accurate the c14 is supposed to be? I went and read a little about it and there are as many people out there that say it doesn't work as well as main stream science claims. Now I understand it is the web and there is as much bad info as good...so I take it all with a grain of salt

Carbon-14 dating is only usable on organic materials, and is only good for objects less than 10,000 years or so of age. The objects in question were tested with uranium-thorium dating, fission track dating, tephra hydration dating and the studying of mineral weathering. None of which are foolproof, since you're basically measuring external effects on hte object, rather than the object itself as with C14.

The Pyramids, as Harte has pointed out, were dated with C14. The mortar contains such things as straw, river silt, animal hair, manure, sawdust, basically anything to thicken it up. It can thus be subject to C-14, which is pretty reliable.

I also understand the arrogance of man and the horrors that have been commited because some has thought that they were above others...This leads me to this question...How many times in history have we (and I mean mankind here) developed a theory/opinion though it wasn't correct and ran with it anyway? If we are going to be wrong we will all be wrong kind of thing? It is the old we have picked a course and we will stay on this course attitude. Like when a auto manufacturer knowingly sends out a defective car and will address any issues if they are reported. I know I dont make a lot of sense but I have a lot of questions that I just need to sit down and write out properly and organize the ask but there were a couple that I had to throw out to begin to see the forest..so to speak

Oh, it's happened plenty. Piltdown Man for example - a hoax that anthropologists refused to let go of because of the pride from the "earliest hominid fossil" being found in England... 'Course it was through plain ol' mainstream science and scientific method that the hoax was exposed, torn down, and its staunch advocates laughed at soundly. Of course, Piltdown Man was a pretty crude hoax and there was no access to the dating and investigative techniques we use now.

I am trying to wrap my mind around all of the info I have read here and what doesnt make any sense to me is that the people that say that the Egyptians did all of this on their own and had no help...but there is a total lack of documentation for the pyramids(I know both sides of this have been discussed and I can see both sides of the coin here...I;m just trying to get somewhere with it) but take a adamant stance that they did the building themselves.

Lack of documentation is not proof that someone other than the Egyptians built these. As I mentioned, it's been a VERY long time between then and now, and most of the blueprints and such would have been on portable, fragile materials. Harte has pointed out that there are writings and carvings on the blocks themselves to reflect the organization of the labor force that built them - in Egyptian hieroglyphs.

Now, we also have documentation saying that there were Gods and that the Gods were involved in their lives....enough to write about it and record it for generations...I know you could argue finding the bible or something like that in the future...but for every bible you found I would bet that you could find something that would say different...How much (if any) information has been found in egypt that says that the gods were not real? I understand that they were supposed to be part of a religion but what if they weren't...Without definitive proof you cannot confirm or deny that these "Gods" were real. Real humans w/ extraordinary knowledge?

Well, the Egyptian gods didn't really bother with humans much, not in the way that the Greek or Hebraic gods did. It was all pretty much internal affairs, the Egyptian's way of explaining worldly phenomina.

Now, I went and looked up the elongated skulls and there were places on the web that were both pro and con. Some place stated that if the skulls were a result of binding that the volume doesnt change just the shape...but the volume of these skulls are obviously larger....Now could you take a small piece of the material from the skull and have dna tests done on them to see if in fact that they were human? If so why hasn't anyone done this...what would they be afraid of finding out? That it was indeed a human but just deformed?

It's internal volume that's the concern. Not ecternal. I haven't seen any cross-sections of these skulls, but I'd bet those that exceed "human" dimensions, still maintain the same cranium volume, but have a thickened skull.

I dont know enough about the subject and could really piss off the people here with a million questions that probally get asked a lot. I am just asking ?'s that I have trying to clarify some things....Right now it is all muddy...but MY personal belief is that the puramids are much older than believed...why would that be so hard for people to accept? If the egyptians could build such marvels w/o anydocumentation saying so then why could'nt people much older do the same? I read things all of the time that say we are not any smarter than people back then...so why?

sorry for the way this is put together

Well, we know the Egyptians existed. There's nothing supporting the idea of an earlier people building the pyramids - not even the pyramids themselves back the idea up.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


thanks for answering...some of my questions w/o beating me up

I am still reading and learning...I have found a LOT of looney theories out there. I can see where some could be believeable but others I find a little hard to swallow...but hey I am just a guy just poking around and askin questions.

Big what if REALLY BIG But what if the people that built it were like the Navajo indians and didnt have a written language?

reply to post by kaferwerks


Then the Egyptian writing and carving would be pretty puzzling

Even without a written language, people leave marks and symbols to signify "I was here" or whatever.

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by kaferwerks

 

Then the Egyptian writing and carving would be pretty puzzling

Even without a written language, people leave marks and symbols to signify "I was here" or whatever.

And nothing says 'I was here' quite like a huge pyramid shaped lump of stones

Sorry, couldn't resist it

Since there was no response to this on page 4, I will do a re-post here:


"Lets not provide fodder for the UFO-Crowd"

Turkish-German author Erdogan Ercivan, who has published more than five books on alternative egyptology (much of it a rehash of Hancock-Bauval-West) has told the following story in one of his books. Since its not available in English nor found on google, I will talk about it right here.

In 1997 he received an invitation to an international convention of meteorologists because the organizer (F. Huber) was a fan of his book "The Stargates of the Pyramids" (not available in English). The organizers of the convention wished to invite several experts from the field of egyptology to hold talks and speeches for the elect crowd. The convention took place from the 4th to the 7th of September in the "German Museum" in Munich, Germany and Ercivan was honoured to mingle among dozens of mainstream egyptologists without them knowing they have an "alternative egyptologist" in their midsts. Ercivan relates several interesting speeches and discussions having taken place...and also the "UFO / Ancient Astronaut crowd" being made fun of. The following statement reportedly made by Marvin A. Powell, Assyriologist of the Northern Illinois University is most surprising though (rough translation): "Of the 500 000 cuneiform tablets, only 20% are published. Another 80% are translated, but we havent published them yet. They contain a lot of information on Astronomy, foreign planetary systems, visitors from the stars, and data on the origins of mankind. By publishing them we would only provide fodder for the Daniken-crowd" (audience laughs). (Note: Daniken of ancient-astronaut fame).

Ercivan is telling/publishing this story since years and the the Assyriologist has apparently not presssed charges for libel (probably considering the many witnesses present).



[edit on 16-2-2008 by Skyfloating]

Along with these cogwheels from the museum in cairo.





A picture is worth a thousand words.

According to ancient lore, the Gods had left before the deluge and taken all of their technology and flying craft with them. This is the reason flying craft are sometimes depicted in odd ways.

Hermes flying chariot:




But fact is: They were depicted, they were talked about, they were admired.

Mainstream science and schooling have lied to us


A beautiful example of how mainstream "science" that always cries for "evidence" lies to us on a consistent basis was brought home to me by the following post ATS-member "Illusionsaregrander" made in another thread. In school I was taught that everyone pre-middle ages thought that the earth was flat. I´ll copy/paste the post here:

According to Wikipedia it is at 33b in an annotated version, I checked and indeed it is:

"As for the figure, the demiurge created the world in the geometric form of a globe. Indeed, the round figure is the most perfect one, because it comprehends or averages all the other figures and it is the most omnimorphic of all figures: "he [the demiurge] considered that the like is infinitely fairer than the unlike" (33b)."


I could not find an annotated version online so I have located the passage and reproduced it for you here. My copy of the Timaeus reads;

33b: "And he gave the world the figure which was suitable and also natural. Now to the animal which was to comprehend all animals, that figure would be suitable which comprehends within itself all other figures. Wherefore he made the world in the form of a globe, round as from a lathe, having its extremes in every direction equidistant from the center, the most perfect and most like itself of all figures, for he considered that the like is infinitely fairer than the unlike."

This is only one example of Plato and the ancient Greeks speaking of the world as a "sphere" or "globe." Contrary to popular conception, the ancients were well aware of the fact that the Earth was round, it wasnt until the Christian church gained power that this bit of information was "lost" or suppressed.

reply to post by Skyfloating

By publishing them we would only provide fodder for the Daniken-crowd" (audience laughs). (Note: Daniken of ancient-astronaut fame).

Now that's funny. Some people understand jokes. Obviously Ercivan doesn't.

reply to post by nablator


I dont know if being lied to and ridiculed is that funny.

reply to post by Skyfloating


And a picture without context is worth less than a single letter. How about you post some full pages sourcing these objects, instead of just uploading pictures and telling us what they are? For all I know, that picture is nothing more than proof of Egyptian ninja.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


For those really interested in something other than debunking, the ATS archives as well as the internet, offer plenty of material. Those truly interested in the uncovering of it all will find.

Instead of trying to debunk every single proposal made, what about actually contributing some of your own research?

The Poster "Harte" for example actually managed to uncover the contact information of the person mentioned in the opening post. He fullfilled the minimum required to find out anything: Go look for yourself.

[edit on 16-2-2008 by Skyfloating]

reply to post by Skyfloating


"Mainstream science and schooling have lied to us"

That's ridiculous! We haven't been to the same school.
Ancient Greece was much more advanced than medieval Europe. The Greek astronomer, Eratosthenes of Cyrene (c276 - 195 BC), was able to deduce the Earth's radius.

reply to post by nablator


We must have been to different schools, because most people I talk to actually believe that it was believed that the earth was flat!

reply to post by Skyfloating


Wait wait. You make a claim, and then tell me to go look it up when I have a question about it? I'm not sure you know how this works. The burden of proof is on you. If you are certain that what you claim is true, then you should be happy to provide links and documentation backing up your assertions, right? Why the hell should I do your research for you?

You didn't even provide enough information for me to look anything up with, even!

[edit on 16-2-2008 by TheWalkingFox]

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by Skyfloating

 

Wait wait. You make a claim, and then tell me to go look it up when I have a question about it? I'm not sure you know how this works. The burden of proof is on you. If you are certain that what you claim is true, then you should be happy to provide links and documentation backing up your assertions, right? Why the hell should I do your research for you?

And why should I do the research for YOU?

I wasnt making any claims on this page. I was presenting data.

[edit on 16-2-2008 by Skyfloating]

Suppose you type into google "hermes chariot". What do you find? Most probably that picture.

In this sense no claim is made and no "burden of proof" lies on me. I am simply showing pictures widely known and available in the field.

A note to skeptics/debunkers:

If any of you seriously wish to debate the case against alternative egyptology, feel free to join me for an ATS-Challenge-Match in the ATS-Debate Forum under the scrutiny of judges that will not tolerate broad generalizations and detractions.

The cogwheel picture is awesome. I would love to see an explanation (other than a japanese shuriken).

OTOH Hermes is not an Egyption god, there is no cover-up about his chariot and is therefore off-topic. Sorry to point this to a moderator.