The Great Sphinx is more than 12,000 years old.

just out of pure quriosity does anyone know in what age this 800.000 years ago would represent it self in old hindu timeline

Hindu time

Our current date

Currently, 50 years of Brahma have elapsed and we are in the first Day of the 51st year. This Brahma's day, Kalpa, is named as ShvetaVaraha Kalpa. Within this Day, six Manvantaras have already elapsed and we are in the seventh Manhavatara, named as - Vaivasvatha Manvantara. Within the Vaivasvatha Manavantara, 27 Mahayugas (4 Yugas together is a Mahayuga), and the Krita, Treta and Dwapara Yugas of the 28th Mahayuga have elapsed. We are in the Kaliyuga of the 28th Mahayuga. This Kaliyuga began in the year 3102 BC in the proleptic Julian Calendar. Since 50 years of Brahma have already elapsed, we are in the second Parardha, also called as Dvithiya Parardha.

there is usualy some story or concept behind all the time periods , so just out of quriosoty wonder what time they spoke of then.


edit ,

after a quick read it could have been built in the early years of dvapara yuga or later years of treta yuga

the later years of treta yuga spoke of some sort of golden age "ramas kingdom or Rama-rajya

and on dvapara yuga wiki had this quote that should make the "6k earth" people happy *joke joke* ,

The living and moral standard of the people overall in the Dvapara Yuga drops immensely from the Treta Yuga. The average life expectancy of humans begins to fall to only 1,000 years in this era because of neglect of the Varnashram, Vedas and Yagyas.

dvapara ended February 17, 3102 BC/BCE and had its start some 864,000 years earlier

one should probobly read the whole stories to get context out of it ,

hope i didnt derail to much






[edit on 17-10-2009 by zerbot565]

reply to post by RiotComing


good find thouse papers

Assuming the Sphinx really is 12,500 years old, I still don't see why it couldn't be Egyptian. Why couldn't the Egyptian people have done it during a previous golden age, then perhaps had a dark age, then what we commonly see as the beginning of Egyptian civilization? I'd take that over aliens any day.

I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that archaeologists may have misjudged the dates of the Sphinx (or other monuments). It's hard to gauge such things. If you take the Sphinx and try to fit it into what is already known about Egypt, it cannot be more than about 4,500 to 5,000 years old. But if you were to take Egyptian civilization, and try to make it fit with the Sphinx, you get the possibility that the Egyptians (or a group of people who later became the Egyptians) carved the monument many thousands of years earlier than that.

This idea of an older time for human civilization fits in with some studies of India and (I think) the Indus Valley civilizations of India, where there is some evidence that those civilizations may have existed over 10,000 years ago, too.

Originally posted by chiron613
Assuming the Sphinx really is 12,500 years old, I still don't see why it couldn't be Egyptian. Why couldn't the Egyptian people have done it during a previous golden age, then perhaps had a dark age, then what we commonly see as the beginning of Egyptian civilization? I'd take that over aliens any day.

Just curious, but why?

I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that archaeologists may have misjudged the dates of the Sphinx (or other monuments).

Woah woah woah now! Archaeologists have to go on evidence. We may have theories, but unless we can back them up they don't go into print.

We have lots of theories.

reply to post by chiron613


but if natural erosion shows us that the buildings are 800k old and civilization only began to show up 10k+ years ago ,

a few question arises and that is what happened between that 800k and 10k and where is the rest of these monuments , are these the only thing/s left of some civilization pre "modern man" or are there more ?

reply to post by zerbot565

Thank you. I think they are very interesting too.

I have been following this thread on and off. In the meanwhile we have contradicting theories about the age of the Sphinx that differ more than 785,000 years.

I think it's hard to pinpoint the true age and it will probably remain a mystery of who built it for what purpose. It is pretty obvious that it is more than simple decoration of the area.

Some members posted that it is a lion and it may have been built in the age of lion. However, I came across an interesting article by Robert Temple who actually suggests that the Sphinx has the body of a dog because it is straight without a rising chest which would be characteristic for a lion. Further, he theorizes that it is the image of Anubis, the guard of the sacred acropolis.

Regarding the age: the Sphinx sits in a pit and not as someone would expect for such a monument to be elevated. Temple believes that the Sphinx was intended to sit in a moat surrounded by water, hence all the flowing water erosion patterns which differ from rain water erosion. So, the question is when was the last time this area has been covered by water?

Another member posted an article about similar findings and evidence that the Sphinx is actually closer to 800,000 years old.

I don't have the answer to it but something doesn't sound right about such an ancient age. My personal unprofessional opinion would be around 35,000 years old.

reply to post by Historical-Mozart


GREAT THREAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! have to lookk n 2 it asap... thank you for the research and links... very intresting.....

reply to post by thomas_


did you read my first post in this thread?

the word "sphinx" comes from the word "sphingo", which means "to join"...

the Sphinx is a representation of the zodiac's Leo and Virgo, which is where they join together to form the beginning and end of the astrological cycle.

the Sphinx was built to symbolize what was said in my earlier post in this thread:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 17-10-2009 by adrenochrome]

reply to post by Tayesin


you're VERY close with that explanation there!

i wish the truth and purpose of the Sphinx would get out there, because there's way too much speculation and misinformation about it...

[edit on 17-10-2009 by adrenochrome]

reply to post by RiotComing


Thanks for the link!

I'm totally buying that. But the implications are too huge to even be considered by "archeologists" and the so called (or self entitled) scholars.

This would be enough to throw all of the theories about human evolution on a trash bin and prove a whole lot of scientists wrong by a margin that is far from acceptable.

Unless of course what we see today practically as chimpanzees that learned how to make fire were in fact engineering masters using wood and rock tools.

reply to post by adrenochrome


Hi andrenochrome,

I must have overlooked your post, sorry. But it makes sense. All I know is that it was clearly modified from a previous version due to the proportions. Be it a Woman's head or a Lion's head it wasn't a pharaoh's head me thinks

Originally posted by thomas_
reply to post by RiotComing

 

Thanks for the link!

I'm totally buying that. But the implications are too huge to even be considered by "archeologists" and the so called (or self entitled) scholars.

Hey hey hey! Easy on the archaeologists! As I said before they can only publish what can be verified.

I just read the .pdf file and loved it. I am an archaeologist and majored in geology in undergrad. I love reading papers like this. I've read good arguments on both sides, and I lean in favor of over 10K years myself. However, you can only print what you can prove, so I doubt you will find very many archaeologists that will put their name in print with a date unless it's gone through a few academic caucuses.

And that is only natural as this is their "bread and butter". If you are wrong, no big deal. If they are wrong they might not get hired.

This would be enough to throw all of the theories about human evolution on a trash bin

.

How so? The standard notion is the earth is 4.5 billion years old. It wouldn't necessarily throw evolution in the trash bin. They've found axes that were 900K years old and peer reviewed it, so this isn't that much more of a leap.

and prove a whole lot of scientists wrong by a margin that is far from acceptable.

Not all scientists mind being proven wrong. I love open-ended mysteries, and I do not mind if someone is able to show me something new. Now, I might have a different view on this if I were near the end of my career, and having to compete with young whipper snappers...

Unless of course what we see today practically as chimpanzees that learned how to make fire were in fact engineering masters using wood and rock tools.

Don't forget gorillas that learn sign language, paint on canvas, and have kittens for pets...

I hope someone reads this


okay, so what if the sphinx was carved 12,000 years ago? all that mean is that man was sculpting and shaping things back then. I can accept that. No one BUILT the sphinx though. aliens didnt come down and lay a huge unshaped rock in the desert. They carved and shaped it. I can believe that. I'm sure humans did that 40,000 years ago. Its still not proof of anything beyond ancient peoples working with stone.

remeber the Sphinx wasnt built like the pyramids. it was carved out of existing stone. gid this is why I hate ATS sometimes

Originally posted by Totalstranger
I hope someone reads this


okay, so what if the sphinx was carved 12,000 years ago? all that mean is that man was sculpting and shaping things back then. I can accept that. No one BUILT the sphinx though. aliens didnt come down and lay a huge unshaped rock in the desert. They carved and shaped it. I can believe that. I'm sure humans did that 40,000 years ago. Its still not proof of anything beyond ancient peoples working with stone.

remeber the Sphinx wasnt built like the pyramids. it was carved out of existing stone. gid this is why I hate ATS sometimes

So what? Are you serious?

12.000 years would already have lots of implications in a whole bunch of stuff regarding ancient Egypt, 40.000 would have even more. But 800.000 would basically require a complete history re-write regarding Egypt, ancient civilizations and human evolution.

Carved, so what?

It's there, it's old, it's not a natural formation and it is most likely way older than the date current archeologist say it is.

The difference between being carved or built it's the least of the issues here. And I bet that most in here when said "built" were referring to the fact that someone went there and transformed a simple stone in one of -- if not -- the biggest mystery of all times.

intresting .. I was watching a documentry on either the Science or History Channel and they were talking about acient civilizations and how they came to be and if they were in fact influeanced by an alein culture..

I remember the lady archeologist with no less that 3 PhDs behind her name say something very astounding.. this is NOT a direct quote ..

"if we take a look at the way how acient civilizations were created, you can retrace they origins from different locations from other lands and see how the people started tradeing with each other & buiilding on a gradual basis and finally came to being ..

I thought that was deeply intresting~! I've always woundered about how in the scripture they actually made a wooden staff turn into a snake. That is true alchemy or some mojo magic !!!

I've also heard some astounding mathmatical statisics on the building of the pyramids would have to be older than describe because the sheer number of ppl it would take to build a structure that size would be more than what the scripture posts there was. It was something like 1 million people laying 1 brink every sec to have it built in the 'normal' stated time in records today. WAY more people than what is suppose to have been.

My question has always been..."Where did the children of Isreal leave off at ..begining, middle or near the end?"

So who actually built the pyramids since pharoh was wiped out along with his armry??

Originally posted by A Fortiori

Originally posted by thomas_
reply to post by RiotComing

 

Hey hey hey! Easy on the archaeologists! As I said before they can only publish what can be verified.

Sorry, I might gone a bit over the top. But I wasn't referring to all, but just some archeologists, mostly the ones that love to perpetuate something just so they get prove wrong.

But like you aside from being only allowed to publish just verifiable facts, they also have the option to publish nothing

How so? The standard notion is the earth is 4.5 billion years old. It wouldn't necessarily throw evolution in the trash bin. They've found axes that were 900K years old and peer reviewed it, so this isn't that much more of a leap.

Not evolution as whole, just human evolution. I really can't see homo heidelbergensis carving stuff like that using tools made of stone and wood with such level of detail and finishing.

If you get a 800k years old skull and compare it to the face of the sphinx you may see that they are not very similar in terms of proportions and stuff.

Anyway... once I see a "man-made" 800k years old structure that is similar to the Sphinx in terms of work, tools required, level of detail, engineering, etc, I'll accept that a major re-write wouldn't be required case that theory was found to be true.

Don't forget gorillas that learn sign language, paint on canvas, and have kittens for pets...

Hahaha! True, true!

But from that to creating a gigantic structure witch is the combination of a human face with the body of a lion there is a huge gap I guess.

Originally posted by thomas_
reply to post by RiotComing

 

Thanks for the link!

I'm totally buying that. But the implications are too huge to even be considered by "archaeologists" and the so called (or self entitled) scholars.

This would be enough to throw all of the theories about human evolution on a trash bin and prove a whole lot of scientists wrong by a margin that is far from acceptable.

Unless of course what we see today practically as chimpanzees that learned how to make fire were in fact engineering masters using wood and rock tools.

Don't worry the theories on human evolution are fine the sphinx cannot be 12000 years old for one reason every one seems to ignore.If it was that old it would have eroded to the point we wouldn't even knew it existed.

And another problem with this whole theory is people believe it doesn't rain in Egypt it does also theres Nile floods as well used to happen every year until the dam was built.So we ruled out weathering as an indication of the age.

A close geological study of the sphinx and the nearby temples has revealed that the large blocks which were used to build the Valley Temple of Khefren's complex were most likely quarried from the layers that run through the upper part of the Sphinx's body.

The core blocks that were used to build the Sphinx Temple temple, on the other hand, came from just below the chest height of the Sphinx's body.

This means that the Sphinx was sculpted at almost the same time as when the Valley Temple and temple in front of the Sphinx were built. As the Valley Temple was built as part of Khefren's Pyramid Complex, it thus stands that the Sphinx was sculpted out of the rock during Khefren's reign as well.

I think archaeologist have proved the age and theres little doubt.However i do believe there is something buried under the sphinx or dare i say someone.

Originally posted by dragonridr
... the sphinx cannot be 12000 years old for one reason every one seems to ignore.If it was that old it would have eroded to the point we wouldn't even knew it existed.

And another problem with this whole theory is people believe it doesn't rain in Egypt it does also theres Nile floods as well used to happen every year until the dam was built.So we ruled out weathering as an indication of the age.

We cannot say that as fact. Unless we have records of rainfall for the past 10,000 years or so, which we don't, so that line of reasoning doesn't work.

Originally posted by dragonridr
A close geological study of the sphinx and the nearby temples has revealed that the large blocks which were used to build the Valley Temple of Khefren's complex were most likely quarried from the layers that run through the upper part of the Sphinx's body.

The core blocks that were used to build the Sphinx Temple temple, on the other hand, came from just below the chest height of the Sphinx's body.

"most likely" is not the same as "definitely were". There is still much room for doubt, in which case we cannot make claim. And, the layers running through the area will be found at many places besides the Pit where this Sphinx resides.

Also, the blocks dug out from the pit may well have been used elsewhere for all we know and then re-used in those temple complexes.

Originally posted by dragonridr
This means that the Sphinx was sculpted at almost the same time as when the Valley Temple and temple in front of the Sphinx were built. As the Valley Temple was built as part of Khefren's Pyramid Complex, it thus stands that the Sphinx was sculpted out of the rock during Khefren's reign as well.

We have no proof of Khefren having built the Pyramid complex. He may well have restored the Sphinx and placed a slab stating his name on it between the paws, but this does not prove he built it or the pyramids. Since we cannot even decide for sure how the pyramids were built, anything we say about them is still only pure assumption.

reply to post by Tayesin


The core blocks definitely were from the lower portion of the Sphinx the upper blocks may be from another location as well as there is some degree of difficulty since the upper blocks are a softer limestone and erosion makes there identification more difficult. Bottom line we know they temple used blocks quarried from the Sphinx enclosure.

When Khafre’s architects built the Sphinx and the Sphinx Temple, they removed the northern Valley Temple enclosure wall leaving a portion of it in place, incorporating that leftover part into the new Sphinx Temple southern wall.

So we can say:

The Valley Temple enclosure wall respects the Valley Temple casing stones.
The Valley Temple therefore predates its now-missing northern enclosure wall.
Part of the Valley Temple enclosure wall was later incorporated into the Sphinx Temple southern wall.
The Sphinx Temple was therefore built later than the Valley Temple.
This becomes even more important when you look at clear evidence indicating that the stones for the Sphinx Temple came from the lowest layers of the Sphinx quarry. We can sequence three of Khafre’s monuments in the following way:

The Sphinx is carved from the same quarry as the core blocks in the two lower Khafre temples.
The Sphinx Temple was built using blocks from the Member II layer of the Sphinx quarry.
The core blocks of the Sphinx Temple are matched geologically and archaeologically to the lower layers of Member II of the Sphinx quarry, indicating that the Sphinx lower body and Sphinx Temple were part of the same quarry-construction sequence.This is called archaeological sequencing if your curious.

Egypt's a Hobie of mine been there 4 times all ready and planing another trip soon oh and heres something most people don't know. There is a hole in the top of the head, now filled in, that once provided support for additional head decoration.