Forbidden Egyptology

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Along with these cogwheels from the museum in cairo.

A picture is worth a thousand words.

Great thread Sky and I agree with you on a multitude of things.

But this picture baffled me.

Why is it the Ancient Egyptians had cogs but no wheel? Surely they learned to make wheel, then place it on an axle and THEN develop the more complex cog?
This intrigues me.
Are these definitely, 100%, pukka, genuinely, swear on your mam's life, if you're lying then you're a big fairy - Ancient Egyptian? and if so can I have details and sites etc of the photographs?
What are they made of out of curiosity?

reply to post by itchy_tartan_blanket


An acquaintance that had been to the egyptian museum in cairo made pictures of them. I have no idea what they are, what they are made of. But they´re fascinating.

I guess you´d have to visit the museum yourself to find out more. (But often even they dont know what things are)



[edit on 26-4-2008 by Skyfloating]

When you visit the egyptian museum in cairo, one thing you´ll notice is that they have all this clutter and stuff lying around...undated, un-examined, un-labelled. In their backrooms and storage-spaces they have even more stuff that they cannot allocate to any dynastic period. So what do they do with the stuff? It just lies around without anybody knowing what it is.

From jbmitch:

You also refuse to recognise the work of other "fringe" Egyptologist because to dont accept them as scholars

"Fringe" Egyptologist is an oxymoron if ever I heard one. What fringe researcher is an actual accredited Egyptologist?

From PhotonEffect:

We take a piece of evidence and postulate a theory based on that evidence because the mainstream can't otherwise explain it; or their explanations aren't satisfactory enough, as it's typically just speculation guised (and presented) as fact which usually seems based on circumstantial evidence.

You and a few others do. Skyfloating has a different method. Present something as fact and then complain, change the subject, etcetera when its shown to be in error.

From Skyfloating:

I assume that your basic beef with this is that there are people "looking" that are not educated and approved-by-university to do so.

No, see the following.

Yes, you´re right: There are many hard-working and honest archaeologists out there and our wild musings tend to lessen the value of that work. In this sense, all the posts I made that refer to the mainstream as "stupid", "unable", "part of an evil cover-up" are the wrong approach (including the pictures recently posted). Us "fringers" need to learn to focus soley on presenting alternative ideas and pieces of evidence, without putting down and slandering the work of the experts.

That is, in my opinion, the whole problem. You come off as COMPLETELY DISMISSIVE of everything known by the mainstream. You call what you do, "thinking outside the box". What you are actually doing though is throwing "the box" away in favor of one you've created that is more palatable.

So, on my part, there is a basic understanding that what mainstream archaeology and history does is of great value.

Really, you seem to dismiss it all out of hand.

And if you admit it, some of the posts here (such as those made by photon effect), have inspired you to take a deeper look at the subject, have they not?

I don't have to agree with someones opinion in order to respect them for it. BTW, PhotonEffect is among the few who will be first to say, "this is my opinion" or "this is what I believe". You should take lessons.

From gwhint:

You can see the changes as well as the flaws in the pre-periods from the first step pyramid using hand carried rocks to the final Giza efforts, so there's nothing there, but real blood sweat and tears for the builders. They loved their Pharoahs and sacrificed their lives to honoring their rulers, because to get to heaven they had to worship the pharoahs- this was the only path for the commoner.

Just an average man using his own eyes and he's intelligent enough to see the natural progression of construction techniques. Could it be you can't see the forest for the trees?

As to why I believe the Ancient Egyptians were responsible for the Giza Plateau.

1. Because they said they built it.

2. Because they told the Greeks they built it.

3. Because, even with the problems with C14 dating, there is nothing to indicate that anyone else built it.

4. Because the pyramid city, complete with skeletons exhibiting extensive skeletal damage from severe labor, dates to the appropriate time.

5. Because remains of the ramps used to move the blocks have been found from that period.

6. From the fringes very own Robert Schoch:

For one thing, this particular cartouche is turned up on end, and I would soon see in the other chambers that many of the red-painted inscriptions are completely up side down. What is going on here? Well, no one was meant to view these inscriptions once the pyramid was completed and access to these chambers cut off. Vyse had suggested they were nothing but “quarry marks” put on the blocks by the gangs that cut, hauled, and positioned the stone. But was Howard Vyse being totally honest? Had maybe his workmen who blasted and chiseled their way into these chambers in fact drawn these crude “Egyptian” inscriptions on the blocks themselves? Were these just fakes? Studying them closely, however, they looked authentically ancient to me. For one thing, this particular cartouche is turned up on end, and I would soon see in the other chambers that many of the red-painted inscriptions are completely up side down. What is going on here? Well, no one was meant to view these inscriptions once the pyramid was completed and access to these chambers cut off. Vyse had suggested they were nothing but “quarry marks” put on the blocks by the gangs that cut, hauled, and positioned the stone. But was Howard Vyse being totally honest? Had maybe his workmen who blasted and chiseled their way into these chambers in fact drawn ea these crude “Egyptian” inscriptions on the blocks themselves? Were these just fakes? Studying them closely, however, they looked authentically ancient to me. I could see later mineral crystals precipitated over them, a process that takes centuries or millennia, and the inscriptions continue under the overlying blocks.

And from your very own Graham Hancock:

"Cracks in some of the joints reveal hieroglyphs set far back into the masonry. No 'forger' could possibly have reached in there after the blocks had been set in place - blocks, I should add, that weigh tens of tons each and that are immovably interlinked with one another. The only reasonable conclusion is the one which orthodox Egyptologists have already long held - namely that the hieroglyphs are genuine Old Kingdom graffiti and that they were daubed on the blocks before construction began."

From Hancock in '98:

"For the record I believe that Khufu did build the Great Pyramid - or anyway most of it (perhaps the subterranean chamber and some other rock-hewn parts of the structure may be earlier)."

cormac

reply to post by cormac mac airt


yes, yes. We understand. Now to shift from antagonizing to sharing:

Now: What are some true unsolved mysteries of ancient egypt you are aware of?

An interesting old ATS-Thread I found with the new search function:


Nabta Playa - What secret does it hold?

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by cormac mac airt

 

yes, yes. We understand. Now to shift from antagonizing to sharing:

Now: What are some true unsolved mysteries of ancient egypt you are aware of?

I see so its antagonizing when someone presents facts you can't answer and sharing when they don't

what a wonderful methodology you appear to have

Personally, I'd be interested in what more we may find out about these alleged pre-dynastic kings of Upper and Lower Egypt.

Scorpion I....................Ska
Falcon..........................H`yw
Lion.............................Tyu
Double Falcon...............Tsh
Horus Iry-Hor................Nhb
Horus Ka.......................Wadjha
Scorpion II....................Mch

Also, what other kings do we not now know about.

Also of interest would be what other cities we would find older than Abydos and how much further back we will be able to trace them. Where are they in relation to the Nile?


cormac

reply to post by legionromanes


Disproving me is fine, providing a better mystery is even better though. I have yet to see an AE mystery or unanswered question provided by cormac.

If you guys are going to critisize something then at least show something that is a real mystery.

Otherwise Im going to think you are not really interested in the unresolved.

Originally posted by cormac mac airt
Also of interest would be what other cities we would find older than Abydos and how much further back we will be able to trace them. Where are they in relation to the Nile?

How far back do you think it goes? And do you happen to know where one might look for older cities?

Oh and by the way...


one source of allegations concerning the ancient artifacts found by the cairo subway authorities apparently comes from the french engineer and egyptologist Jean Kerisel who supported the cairo subway authority in building its system. The claim is said to be made in the book of his, but I could not verify this as I dont have the book. So if anybody who has the book could verify or debunk this, that would be nice. Jean Kerisel died in 2005.

There is as yet, in my opinion, no reason to believe that it goes back any further than the end of the last Ice Age. Between the climate, disease and the megafauna we had our hands full just trying to survive.

Considering that Ancient Egypt was much wetter than today, the best place for evidence for settlements and such would probably be in the western oasis'. I believe much more effort should be extended there.

See, even I have questions.

cormac

reply to post by Skyfloating


Something else I believe to be important is to what degree is something considered ancient. In a thread, like this, which tends to assert "ancient" as pre-2600 BC something only as old as the Roman Empire is rather pointless.

cormac

Originally posted by cormac mac airt

See, even I have questions.

At last.

The western desert of Egypt can be daunting, because it is so vast and barren, stretching over 3 million square kilometers. It begins on the banks of the Nile river and occupies two thirds of Egypt, all the way to Libya, and from the Sudan to the Mediterranean Sea.

3 million square kilometres leaves a lot to discover. No question that there are yet things covered by sand to be discovered.

Originally posted by cormac mac airt

Something else I believe to be important is to what degree is something considered ancient. In a thread, like this, which tends to assert "ancient" as pre-2600 BC something only as old as the Roman Empire is rather pointless.

Yes, on ATS it seems to refer to everything pre-civilization with the implication of...well you know what.

I think the offical definition of ancient reaches to the year 900 or something?

Originally posted by Skyfloating

I think the offical definition of ancient reaches to the year 900 or something?

I thought it was anything pre rome (400bce)

Using the ATS search function I was surprised not to find any mention of far-out-fringe-researcher stephen mehler, who says "I dont study egyptology, I study Khemitology".

So, for completeness sake here is some stuff by Mehler:

The Search for Kinnaman`s entrance

Khemit and the Myth of Altantis

Stephen Mehler


Welcome to the Search-Engine of ATS Stephen Mehler!





[edit on 27-4-2008 by Skyfloating]

reply to post by Skyfloating


that was an interesting read, and as you noted ,,it didnt much "air" time.
Yet another megalithic site out of date with the little know inhabitants of that time frame. That seemly knew the heavens before "glass" lenses and telescopes were around,,,

reply to post by itchy_tartan_blanket


Hehe, at first glance the stamps on the cogs look a lot like the MicroSoft product code stamp on my PC !
There appears to be wear on certain areas of the cogs teeth as if the rotation to that spot on the cog was a repeated measurement and was required to hold for some time under pressure weight or a counter spring(like a locking cog). As the center of the cog is a square it would seem to be a cranking cog,, As if so many turns would bring a lenght of rope to a certain point and then hold it there until released.

reply to post by gwhint


I'm not arguing that the Pharohic line didnt exist or built edifaces to mimic the G.P. I'm arguing that the G.P is unique and its geometry has not been duplicated by anyone to date (to my knowledge). No one in Egypt at the time of Khufu would argue with Khufu if he claims he build it,, and he had scribes record it as such. If you want to believe that slaves dragged stones across the desert and drug them up sand ramps and placed them is such a way that they wouldnt collaspe under the weight , its is your right and I respect that ,,please respect my right to question this explanation and I dont stand alone, its my perogative to express my doubt ,,,(concerning the GP) surely the was forced labor to attempt copies all of which were unsucessful.

My other point is that facts are speculations that have been accepted by more than a few in one circle of believers. The history of science is replete with errant "facts" as researchers push back the heavy curtain of main stream academia to enlighten those who would turn away from a flat earth theory or that the earth is not the middle of our solar system often at the cost of their very lives. Fornunately we have the inter-net and and a more permissive society that is open to disscussion and it is allowed to challenge dogma.. And thanx to ATS and its moderators we are allowed to express our "speculations" and discuss their merits without incriminations.
Counter points are the essence of a viable discussion, respect of others rights to express their thoughts is the essence of freedom to adventure and go where no one has gone before.