Are the Khufu pyramid reliving chamber inscriptions FAKE ?

[Trev12]

The only reason Egyptologists think Khufo/Cheops built the great
pyramid is that inscriptions bearing his name were found in the
reliving chambers by Howard Vyse.

I always thought they were as Sitchin had told the story
about the great grandson of a man who worked with Howard
Vyse claimed he had letters proving it was fake.

I have seen it for myself and it looks very amateurish in red paint

I heard Robert Temple on Red Ice radio last week who thinks they
are fake

However someone on another website claimed that Graham Hancock
used to think they were fake and now doesn't? He now thinks the
great pyramid was built by Khufu. Anyone else confirm this?

[nippur10]

The inscriptions in the relief chambers are fakes. Here's why: 1. There is only one name of the pharoah in the relief chamber; the pharoah always had his or her 5 names present, whenever written. 2. The pharoah's name would never be hidden as it is in the relief chamber. 3. The writing style is of a much later period ( even the Egyptologists know this). 4. There is a mis-spelling: as it is written is the chamber, it is translated not Khufu but as Rhufu. I can assure you that no scribe would make that mistake (again, the Egyptologists know this). So what to make of this? Wrong time, wrong place!

[Gemini]

I have not heard Graham changing his mind. His work is based on ancient unidentified advanced civilizations with technology.

[Inquiring Mind]

I'm convinced the sig is a fake.

[Nikola]

In his special reissued edition of "Fingerprints of the Gods" G.Hancock indeed abandons his initial statement about Sitchin been right. But i don't know why and what made him turn away.

[Trev12]

In his special reissued edition of "Fingerprints of the Gods" G.Hancock indeed abandons his initial statement about Sitchin been right. But i don't know why and what made him turn away.

Strane . For me they are obviouslt fake. All you need to do is look
at all other Egyptian writings - they are beautiful and precise.
This is one its like someone spray painted it on

[Hearte]

Either the Egyptians disassembled the Great Pyramid, painted some hieroglyphs, and then reassembled the pyramid, or they are not fake:

A Position Statement From Graham Hancock On The Antiquity And Meaning Of The Giza Monuments
22 July 1998
I am the author of "Fingerprints of the Gods" and the co-author (with Robert Bauval) of "Keeper of Genesis" (entitled "The Message of the Sphinx" in the United States).


Re the 'quarry mark' hieroglyphs in the relieving chambers above the King's Chamber in the Great Pyramid, I have rightly been taken to task for uncritically supporting Zecharia Sitchin's forgery theory. I reported this theory in Fingerprints (published 1995) and in Keeper/Message (published 1996).
As an author and researcher I hope that my work will always be 'in progress' and never finished or set in stone. When I come across new evidence that casts doubt on theories that I previously endorsed I am ready to change my views and admit to past mistakes.
As John West kindly reported in his open letter to Stower I have changed my views on the validity of the forgery theory. The relieving chambers are strictly off limits to the public and are extremely difficult to gain access to. I had been unable to obtain permission to visit them prior to the publication of Keeper/Message in 1996. However, in December 1997, Dr Zahi Hawass allowed me to spend an entire day exploring these chambers. There were no restrictions on where I looked and I had ample time to examine the hieroglyphs closely, under powerful lights. 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.

http://www.grahamhancock.com/features/trenches-p4.htm

You guys are so desperate to believe that you've let yourself fall 13 years behind current research - even FRINGE research, for God's sake.

Snap out of it. There's no evidence for ancient astronauts, and no need to call on them to explain anything we've found so far.

Hearte

[truthseeker]

Either the Egyptians disassembled the Great Pyramid, painted some hieroglyphs, and then reassembled the pyramid, or they are not fake:

A Position Statement From Graham Hancock On The Antiquity And Meaning Of The Giza Monuments
22 July 1998
I am the author of "Fingerprints of the Gods" and the co-author (with Robert Bauval) of "Keeper of Genesis" (entitled "The Message of the Sphinx" in the United States).


Re the 'quarry mark' hieroglyphs in the relieving chambers above the King's Chamber in the Great Pyramid, I have rightly been taken to task for uncritically supporting Zecharia Sitchin's forgery theory. I reported this theory in Fingerprints (published 1995) and in Keeper/Message (published 1996).
As an author and researcher I hope that my work will always be 'in progress' and never finished or set in stone. When I come across new evidence that casts doubt on theories that I previously endorsed I am ready to change my views and admit to past mistakes.
As John West kindly reported in his open letter to Stower I have changed my views on the validity of the forgery theory. The relieving chambers are strictly off limits to the public and are extremely difficult to gain access to. I had been unable to obtain permission to visit them prior to the publication of Keeper/Message in 1996. However, in December 1997, Dr Zahi Hawass allowed me to spend an entire day exploring these chambers. There were no restrictions on where I looked and I had ample time to examine the hieroglyphs closely, under powerful lights. 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.

http://www.grahamhancock.com/features/trenches-p4.htm

You guys are so desperate to believe that you've let yourself fall 13 years behind current research - even FRINGE research, for God's sake.

Snap out of it. There's no evidence for ancient astronauts, and no need to call on them to explain anything we've found so far.

Hearte

I take it that is your "expert" opinion on the matter?


To apply a 1 paragraph retraction about 1 specific "mistake" to the entire Ancient Astronaut Theory, which may or may not be related to said "mistake" is not only VERY unscientific of you, but also short sighted. Not to mention, a sure-fire way to end debate, and there is ALLOT of room for debate regardless of which opinion you happen to hold as the most plausible.



truthseeker

[Gemini]

Snap out of it. There's no evidence for ancient astronauts, and no need to call on them to explain anything we've found so far. Hearte

Are you a supporter of the ancient advanced civilizations with technology theory?

[Hearte]

Snap out of it. There's no evidence for ancient astronauts, and no need to call on them to explain anything we've found so far. Hearte

Are you a supporter of the ancient advanced civilizations with technology theory?

I'll support any theory that has any decent evidence behind it.

So, no.

Hearte

[Moon]

The graffiti might be real, but that does not mean it happened the same time the pyramids were built. Most of the pharaohs would of tried to claim the Great Pyramid as their own.

[Gemini]

Snap out of it. There's no evidence for ancient astronauts, and no need to call on them to explain anything we've found so far. Hearte

Are you a supporter of the ancient advanced civilizations with technology theory?

I'll support any theory that has any decent evidence behind it.

So, no.

Hearte

Before I respond to the above:

What is your view regarding the Nikola Tesla free wireless energy towers?

Is your opposition to Intervention Theory and Advanced Ancient Civilizations with Technology Theory based on mainstream science or religious reasons or just that there is no evidence in your view?

What is your view on the Native North Americans? Did some of the Native Tribes have writing and how did they arrive in North America?

By the way, welcome to the forum. Why don't you introduce yourself in the 'Introduce Yourself' section.

[Jeff Sheets]

Snap out of it. There's no evidence for ancient astronauts, and no need to call on them to explain anything we've found so far. Hearte

Are you a supporter of the ancient advanced civilizations with technology theory?

I'll support any theory that has any decent evidence behind it.

So, no.

Hearte

Hearte, So I take it that you don't "get" the AAT. No problem. I don't mind any alternate view, just don't condescend and generalize. It gets old. Your previous posts have been borderline and baiting.
Admin warning one...

Sorry to interrupt your thread Trev12.

-Jeff

[truthseeker]

I'll support any theory that has any decent evidence behind it.

So, no.

Hearte

So, what in your opinion would constitute "decent evidence"?



Answer me with honesty and i'll do my honest best to supply you with some "decent evidence".


truthseeker

[Hearte]

Snap out of it. There's no evidence for ancient astronauts, and no need to call on them to explain anything we've found so far. Hearte

Are you a supporter of the ancient advanced civilizations with technology theory?

I'll support any theory that has any decent evidence behind it.

So, no.

Hearte

Before I respond to the above:

What is your view regarding the Nikola Tesla free wireless energy towers?

There's no such thing as "free energy" and Tesla's method didn't involve energy being free.

Energy has to be generated somehow, after all.

That being said, there's no question that energy can be broadcast through the air, rather than through wires.

Is your opposition to Intervention Theory and Advanced Ancient Civilizations with Technology Theory based on mainstream science or religious reasons or just that there is no evidence in your view?

It's based on the fact that every single piece of "evidence" I've ever read about or examined turned out to either be misrepresented, fraudulent, or more easily explained without resorting to alien intervention. Occam's razor. I suppose that is a "mainstream science" idea, isn't it?

[What is your view on the Native North Americans? Did some of the Native Tribes have writing and how did they arrive in North America?

Several Tribes had writing while others did not. My personal opinion of how people got to the new world involves the usual land bridge, plus sea routes following the coastline.

It's possible that the predecessors of the Polynesians arrived in the New World via direct ocean routes, but there's no evidence of this. Of course, they might have all died off.

By the way, welcome to the forum. Why don't you introduce yourself in the 'Introduce Yourself' section.

Fear. I know you folks won't like me. Especially Giorgio.

Harte

I'll support any theory that has any decent evidence behind it.

So, no.

Hearte

So, what in your opinion would constitute "decent evidence"?

Evidence that requires the postulation of something extraordinary such as alien interference or greatly advanced, yet undiscovered, ancient civilizations.
Note the use of the word "requires."

Answer me with honesty and i'll do my honest best to supply you with some "decent evidence".

That would be great.

Hearte

The graffiti might be real, but that does not mean it happened the same time the pyramids were built. Most of the pharaohs would of tried to claim the Great Pyramid as their own.

You should go to the link I provided (Graham Hancock's website) to see why there can be no question that the grafitti was written on the stones at the time the pyramid was being constructed.

Hearte

[Ace Rimmer]

Just a reminder on forum rules..Double Posting

Ok carry on, sorry for the Public Service Announcement.

[Moon]

Hearte, I just finished reading Robert Temple's book "Egyptian Dawn". In it, he and Professor Ioannis Liritzis use a new dating method that dates the pyramids a few hundred years before Khufu and also has a chapter on the graffiti.

While I wasn't a big fan of the book, it does have some good information in it. (My problems with the book dealt with the narrative, not the information in it.)

[angeloneastralseed]

How does this forum attract people who don't and won't be open minded to the AAT? Are 'they' just looking to stir things up, hooked on debates? I don't believe in evolution, you don't see me joining a forum of people who do. I was enjoying this thread until someone had to voice an opinion and not back it up with their own evidence.



Trev, I would like to know if they are fakes too, do you have anything besides what you heard on them being fakes?

[Gemini]

Hearte,

Tesla: I stated 'free' because Tesla wanted the energy to be free for the public. Of course, there are construction, maintenance and other costs involved and everyone would need to pay for that part, but a meter couldn't be attached to it to charge customers for the usage, so the project was discontinued.

You stated above "without resorting to alien intervention".

I'm not resorting to alien intervention as the only possibility. There is evidence of technology being used at the ancient sites.

Regarding the migration: According to the Ojibwa tribe, they state that they crossed the Atlantic in turtle boats.

[Hearte]

Hearte,

Tesla: I stated 'free' because Tesla wanted the energy to be free for the public. Of course, there are construction, maintenance and other costs involved and everyone would need to pay for that part, but a meter couldn't be attached to it to charge customers for the usage, so the project was discontinued.

You stated above "without resorting to alien intervention".

I'm not resorting to alien intervention as the only possibility. There is evidence of technology being used at the ancient sites.

Didn't mean to imply you were. You may have notice the warning about double posting? I posted one reply to each of three others, but they were combined into one by the Mod.

Regarding the migration: According to the Ojibwa tribe, they state that they crossed the Atlantic in turtle boats.

I'd be interested in a link to this. I've always been interested in Amerind mythology.

How does this forum attract people who don't and won't be open minded to the AAT? Are 'they' just looking to stir things up, hooked on debates? I don't believe in evolution, you don't see me joining a forum of people who do. I was enjoying this thread until someone had to voice an opinion and not back it up with their own evidence.

Can you please indicate where I voiced an opinion without backing it up?

Have you not noticed that the entire thread, other than my one post you refer to, is nothing but opinion, without a single bit of evidence provided to back these opinions up? I didn't notice you complaining about that.

I stated that even Graham Hancock has learned that the grafitti in the Great Pyramid had to have been painted on before they pyramid was constructed. The grafitti is in Egyptian Hieroglyphics, hence, the Egyptians wrote it. I linked (and quoted) from Hancock's website so that you could read it yourself and somehow this morphs into an "opinion" with no evidence to back it up? Hancock provides the evidence here, although, if you want, you can find plenty more about this grafitti. That is, provided you're not afraid to let go of your erroneous ideas once you discover the facts of the matter.

Lastly, discussion requires two viewpoints. Without that, you may as well just put two bobblehead dolls together and let them nod vigorously at each other all day.

Hearte

[Ace Rimmer]

How does this forum attract people who don't and won't be open minded to the AAT? Are 'they' just looking to stir things up, hooked on debates? I don't believe in evolution, you don't see me joining a forum of people who do. I was enjoying this thread until someone had to voice an opinion and not back it up with their own evidence.



Trev, I would like to know if they are fakes too, do you have anything besides what you heard on them being fakes?

The majority of us are here because of this..what it says at the top of every forum page.

Discuss controversial and provocative topics with fellow Legendary Times Magazine readers and like-minded truth-seekers! Have fun, and please always be courteous to each other. Crack the Code!

And the main theme is we believe in some sort of Alien Intervention in our past, we don't all believe the same thing however.

This is not Above Top Secret, we are not here to de-bunk everything little thing somebody believes. And we are not bobble head dolls either.

But I do agree with Angel. I wouldn't go join a Ford Truck forum and then spend all of my time telling all the guys how wrong they are to drive Ford trucks, when clearly GMCs are the only truck to own.

[Hearte]

But I do agree with Angel. I wouldn't go join a Ford Truck forum and then spend all of my time telling all the guys how wrong they are to drive Ford trucks, when clearly GMCs are the only truck to own.

Do you assert that everything, then, is an opinion?

The hieroglyphs in the GP extend fairly deep into small spaces between very large stones in the relieving chamber. Deep enough where no one could have painted them on after the stones were placed. IOW, the glyphs were on the stones before the stones were placed.
This makes sense, since many of them are actually quarry marks.

That's a fact, not an opinion.

Whether GMCs are better than Fords might be arguable, but in the end, that's really just an opinion.

Now, it would seem to me that if people are truly interested in fringe ideas about the ancient past, then those same people should be interested in the facts that are actually known about the ancient past. That way, perhaps they could fit their fringe theories into the available facts.

Apparently, some people here would choose to remain ignorant of the actual truths that we do know about the past. Why this should be, I have no idea.

Hearte

[Ace Rimmer]

Sorry we got off topic here folks, I am partly to blame. I slapped myself.

Meanwhile back to the great pyramid.

[angeloneastralseed]

Since I haven't studied the great pyramid much, all I have to offer are things I find interesting on it. There is a lot of information to sift through, and I plan on doing that.

I found this article quite interesting, it doesn't seem to claim a 'who dunnit'. However, it's interesting.

http://www.europa.com/~edge/giza.html

Here is another one, I like how this article goes into a little more depth of the pyramid and the bible.

http://www.bible-history.com/resource/ff_giza.htm

[Serene]

This is whom Giorgio created this board for:

Welcome to the Legendary Times Magazine / A.A.S. R.A. Forum! Discuss controversial and provocative topics with fellow Legendary Times Magazine readers and like-minded truth-seekers! Have fun, and please always be courteous to each other. Crack the Code!

This is why I am on this board.

There are hundreds of other forums out there for skeptics and debunkers and open minded folks like myself to discuss, but I choose not to. I chose THIS BOARD and it is NOT one of them.

Discuss controversial and provocative topics with fellow Legendary Times Magazine readers and like-minded truth-seekers.

You guys are so desperate to believe that you've let yourself fall 13 years behind current research - even FRINGE research, for God's sake.
Snap out of it. There's no evidence for ancient astronauts, and no need to call on them to explain anything we've found so far.

So I wonder why are YOU here on this board, Harte?

[Ace Rimmer]

I apologize to everybody for dropping the ball up there.

Now, it would seem to me that if people are truly interested in fringe ideas about the ancient past, then those same people should be interested in the facts that are actually known about the ancient past. That way, perhaps they could fit their fringe theories into the available facts.

Apparently, some people here would choose to remain ignorant of the actual truths that we do know about the past. Why this should be, I have no idea.

I'll take the fringe comment as a compliment, but the ignorant crack was uncalled for, what part of "be courteous to each other" are you having a problem understanding.

[Hearte]

This is whom Giorgio created this board for:

Discuss controversial and provocative topics with fellow Legendary Times Magazine readers and like-minded truth-seekers.
What is a discussion? Is it a bunch of people just agreeing with each other?

What is controversial? When everyone agrees on the explanation for a thing?

So I wonder why are YOU here on this board, Harte?

Sorry if I ruined the ET and/or ancient civilization hypothesis for pyramid construction for you. Apparently, you would rather not have been made aware of the facts of the situation.

Does this board have an "ignore" function? If so, I suggest you put me on ignore, because there's probably a whole lot of other factual information I'm aware of that you'd rather not know. I might accidentally let some knowledge slip into a post right in front of you.

Hearte

Combined a double post. Please read the rules.

http://www.legendarytimes.com/forum/vie ... php?t=1861

I apologize to everybody for dropping the ball up there.

Now, it would seem to me that if people are truly interested in fringe ideas about the ancient past, then those same people should be interested in the facts that are actually known about the ancient past. That way, perhaps they could fit their fringe theories into the available facts.

Apparently, some people here would choose to remain ignorant of the actual truths that we do know about the past. Why this should be, I have no idea.

I'll take the fringe comment as a compliment, but the ignorant crack was uncalled for, what part of "be courteous to each other" are you having a problem understanding.

Didn't realize that "fringe" might be taken as an insult.

Ignorant is not an insult. For example, I was ignorant of the existence of this board until a couple days ago.

Choosing to remain ignorant is a bad thing. That bad thing was displayed right here in this thread. I merely pointed that fact out.

To rephrase:
"Some people here would choose to remain uninformed of the actual truths that we do know about the past."

Better? Says the same thing, doesn't it?

Hearte

[Ace Rimmer]

Sure that sounds much better.
I left a link for you again, please follow the forum rules in regards to double posting. This is the second time in this thread I have had to enlighten you. You are double posting like you are uninformed and as you just pointed out, that is a bad thing.

[Moon]

Hearte, for someone who like to use facts, you seemed to ignore my response about Robert Temple's book with the new dating methods. This is a fact and not an opinion as it is a new scientific method for dating when the structures were put up.

As for the opinions expressed here, they are just that: ideas and questions of what is believed by mainstream to be absolute truths.

Also, not everyone here is stating the pyramids and monuments were built by aliens or even alien technology. That is a dangerous assumption to make on all members.

I am one to believe the ancients had contact with extraterrestrials. The fun part is looking for the proof of this, and I will admit no hard proof exists. But the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming about it.

Also, I have read from authors like Christopher Dunn, who is an engineer and knows his stuff. He has applied his knowledge on how some of these structures were made and it is all quite interesting.

It is interesting you also embrace something Graham Hancock is stating about the hieroglyphs on the Great Pyramid, as you would be the first one to knock this man (you have been merciless toward him in another forum).

I am glad you are taking a more civil tone here and want the mainstream viewpoint on this forum.

Just remember though, if we want the mainstream viewpoint we would go to those sites too.

Lloyd

[Serene]

Sorry if I ruined the ET and/or ancient civilization hypothesis for pyramid construction for you. Apparently, you would rather not have been made aware of the facts of the situation.
Hearte

Re vera, cara mia, mea nil refert.

[Pons Asinorum]

"Re vera, cara mia, mea nil refert. "

I do.

--

So I wonder why are YOU here on this board, Harte?

Sorry if I ruined the ET and/or ancient civilization hypothesis for pyramid construction for you. Apparently, you would rather not have been made aware of the facts of the situation.

There was a failure to answer Serene's question, followed by two presumptions of fact not in evidence regarding Serene's beliefs and preferences.

On this site, please refrain from making personal judgments about fellow members you do not know and are not qualified to make. If you do not wish to answer a question, then explicitly make that known as a matter of common courtesy, or ignore the request if so inclined.

If you wish to discuss this matter further, please feel free to PM me or any other moderator.

-Pons Asinorum

--

What is a discussion?

Here are a couple authoritative definitions:

noun

1. Consideration of a subject by a group; an earnest conversation.

2. A formal discourse on a topic; an exposition.

Is it a bunch of people just agreeing with each other?

The premise of this question is logically flawed because it exclusively implies only a debate is possible and ignores other characteristics which define a discussion.

What is controversial? When everyone agrees on the explanation for a thing?

No. From the context of the statement "Discuss controversial and provocative topics with fellow Legendary Times Magazine readers and like-minded truth-seekers!", the term "controversial" is referring to those ideas and concepts that are mostly polemical to popular mainstream belief-systems.



Those answers are my opinions and are offered in the hope that upon consideration, they might assist you in some small measure.

--

Trev12, my apologies for interrupting this thread.

[Hearte]

Hearte, for someone who like to use facts, you seemed to ignore my response about Robert Temple's book with the new dating methods. This is a fact and not an opinion as it is a new scientific method for dating when the structures were put up.

Sorry, maxmercury. I haven't read Temples new book. Could you post about his method, or link me (and other interested parties) to information about it, maybe a synopsis?

Colin Reader has proposed a possible earlier date for the Sphinx. Like what you say, it's a few hundered years difference.

There's no question that Egyptology could have the precise dates of the Old Kingdom wrong. The only hard dates they have are based on C14, which often yeilds a fairly broad range of possible dates. Well within a few hundred years anyway, if you go that far back.

Though Temple inverted the photo of Orion in order to get it to "align" with the configuration of the three main Giza pyramids, I've read his explanation of that and I would view his opinion on this matter fairly. Not so much with many other alternative authors, as I've found glaring misrepresentations in the works of many such authors.

As for the opinions expressed here, they are just that: ideas and questions of what is believed by mainstream to be absolute truths.

Not a problem. I was accused, however, of staing my opinion without providing any evidence for it (I had actually, as you know, provided some.) Why then is it okay for everyone to state opinions, except for me?

Also, not everyone here is stating the pyramids and monuments were built by aliens or even alien technology. That is a dangerous assumption to make on all members.

I don't believe I did this. I was responding to a particular poster who, I believe, was upset to have learned about the argument involving the grafitti in the relieving chambers in the Great Pyramid.

I am one to believe the ancients had contact with extraterrestrials. The fun part is looking for the proof of this, and I will admit no hard proof exists. But the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming about it.

You are welcome to your opinion. I don't share the opinion that the evidence is overwhelming, although I used to. I do, however, agree that it is fun.

Also, I have read from authors like Christopher Dunn, who is an engineer and knows his stuff. He has applied his knowledge on how some of these structures were made and it is all quite interesting.

I've read some of his work as well. Some of it is quite interesting. Some of it, such as microwave generation through "Earth movements," is quite outlandish. I myself was a mechanical engineer for thirty years before I took up teaching.

It is interesting you also embrace something Graham Hancock is stating about the hieroglyphs on the Great Pyramid, as you would be the first one to knock this man (you have been merciless toward him in another forum).

I have indeed. I feel differently toward him now that I've learned that he actually did retract some of his claims in the intro to a newer edition of Fingerprints of the Gods, a fact which I learned right here at this board.

Of course, I knew he'd posted his retraction on his site (the one I quoted) years ago.

My use of Hancock as a reference here involved that retraction. I felt that many on this board might be more likely to delve into the facts of situations like that one if such information came from an author such as Hancock, rather than, say, Zahi Hawass (whom Hancock states is the person that actually showed this to him.)

I am glad you are taking a more civil tone here and want the mainstream viewpoint on this forum.

Just remember though, if we want the mainstream viewpoint we would go to those sites too.

I shall endeavor to endure! LOL

The "mainstream view" is something that has to be considered, in my opinion. If it is not considered, or not even looked at, arguments for extraordinary things such as ancient advanced civilizations and ancient alien contacts really end up having no weight at all.

After all, any theory must fit into the known, factual data. If such data is never considered, never even known about, then theories and opinions about these things have no foundation in reality. Wouldn't you agree?

Hearte

[Gemini]

Sorry Trev12, I got off topic.

[Hearte]

Maxmercury,

When I posted the following:

Though Temple inverted the photo of Orion in order to get it to "align" with the configuration of the three main Giza pyramids, I've read his explanation of that and I would view his opinion on this matter fairly. Not so much with many other alternative authors, as I've found glaring misrepresentations in the works of many such authors.

I was thinking of Robert Bauval, not Robert Temple.

Sorry, but I wouldn't trust anything Temple says, after his travesty of a book regarding the Dogon. I have found that particular book ("The Sirius Mystery") to have been based primarily on Temple's misrepresentation of the Dogon (through the mistakes made by Marcel Griaule) and his decision to basically ignore the implications of later investigations into the matter.

Hearte

[Bob137]

Is the heiroglyphs of Khufu fake? Duh! I would bet my booty, that if Khufu was going to have his name engraved anywhere, it would have been on the front door, or just inside the hall if he built it! Cat's don't fly, and bears poop in the woods, but Khufu wouldn't have his name just carved in some chamber up inside the pyramid and no place else if he built it. His ego was way to big for that! Check out all heiroglyphs on him, and you will see just that! So to say because the inscriptions were carved deep, and couldn't have been done by someone else with the right tools and an agenda, at a later date, is not very scientific! I'll bet if I had the right tools, and I was allowed in side anywhere in that Pyramid or any other, I could do the same thing, and then you could say that I built the pyramid in 2011, because my name is carved in the stone, so deep in the grooves, that I must have been the one to build it, cause it doesn't matter if their is any evidence to the contrary, because my name is there!
I own it, it's mine, so give it back, or I'm gonna tell!

<------------------------------------Edit: Posts combined to comply with the "no double posting rule" -Pons ------------------------------------>

Hearte, from you post, you seem to be scientifically minded, and yet some of the logic you use is from many mainstream ideaogies, that do not evaluate all the evidence to come to a logical conclusion! Especially being of an engineering background, one would have to speculate, and investigate themselves the megalithic sites, the machining that had to be done to do these operations, especially with all the evidence of machine work on them, that either there was a highly advanced civilization upon this earth in the ancient past, and or either Extraterrestrials built or assisted in these endeavors. To say their is not evidence to the contrary, is being close minded to the actual facts right here on the earth! whether some people have made mistakes or misspoken on some of the information, does not refute the facts that are plain for even a child to see and understand! I have studied out of place and ancient artifacts, and megaliths for over 35 years, and not one actual authentic open minded scientific study has proved other t han what I have concluded, let alone numerous others throughout the world. Just because mainstream doesn't like it, doesn't make it so!
Advanced CNC machining processes cannot be accomplished with simple copper tools!

Another post combined, no editing or altering of content-mm

Sorry about double posting, my mind ain't as good as it used to be, but no excuse. I will just have to do better next time. Thanks for reminding me!