Are the Khufu pyramid reliving chamber inscriptions FAKE ?

[Hearte]

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!

Khufu's name appears in the context of the name of one of the work gangs. The name? "Friends of Khufu," if I remember correctly.

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!

It is very apparent that you haven't even tried to find out what is known about the hieroglyphs in the Great Pyramid. They are painted on with red ocher, not carved.

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'll take that bet, since the painted-on "grafitti" can be seen extending deep into cracks between the stones in that chamber. Cracks only an inch or two wide. Extending several feet into these recesses.

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!

It is plain to see for any child that hasn't even made the least effort to learn a single thing about that upon which they decide to pontificate, that's for sure.

On the other hand, my 12 year old (a child) can tell anyone that wants to know exactly why it is absolutely certain that the Great Pyramid was constructed no earlier than the reign of Khufu.

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!

As I pointed out above, perhaps you should "study" a little more.

Lastly, it is very difficult for me to understand exactly why you would think the grafitti in the G.P. was carved, given the prodigious amount of research you claim to have conducted on the subject. Not to mention the fact that I quoted Graham Hancock right here in this very thread (indeed, on this page of this very thread - scroll up) telling anyone that can read pretty much exactly what I'm telling you in this post.

Hearte

[nippur10]

Does anyone have any information on the chemical composition of the paint used by Col. Visse when he wrote the inscriptions? If it is different from the paint formulas used during the fourth dynasty, case closed.

[Bob137]

That is pretty good Hearte, even though you are very wrong. I have studied the information, and I concluded what I stated, without a doubt! On the other hand, I do not just take certain so called experts word for it. I actually check others expert opinion on it also. So I could be open minded enough to get to whether the accepted "theory" is just that, a theory, or actual fact, which it is not fact! You have the right to believe what yu wish, and I will not try to convince you otherwise. I myself will keep digging, to see if I am right, or wrong on this subject. It remains to be seen, so far what I have found though, is that I am right, but we shall see!

[Hearte]

That is pretty good Hearte, even though you are very wrong. I have studied the information, and I concluded what I stated, without a doubt! On the other hand, I do not just take certain so called experts word for it. I actually check others expert opinion on it also. So I could be open minded enough to get to whether the accepted "theory" is just that, a theory, or actual fact, which it is not fact! You have the right to believe what yu wish, and I will not try to convince you otherwise. I myself will keep digging, to see if I am right, or wrong on this subject. It remains to be seen, so far what I have found though, is that I am right, but we shall see!

I think the following speaks for itself. But first, here's a pic of a page from Vyse's journal. It's the page that the following quote is referring to:

According to Sitchin, Vyse believed that "Khufu" was written with a solar disc. And because of that the faker had written it this way into the chamber. But Vyses Journal tells another story:

On May 27th 1837 we find the first entry dealing with the Khufu-cartouche. In the following days Vyse begins with an analysis. And if one is able to read his hand writing he finds out fascinating things. Yes, Vyse was no expert on hieroglyphics. And yes, Vyse had the fatal book "Material Hieroglyphica" with him. And because he HAD the book with him he expected a solar disc as the first sign. And he was wondering, why this sign was NOT a solar disc. He couldn't get a sense out of the "Kh", therefore he philosophises on this page of his journal about the possibility to write a "Re" with lines in it instead of a dot.

He even copied the faulty picture from Wilkinson to this page of his notes, it's on the upper left - the hollow solar disc is clearly visible. On the right side he notes, that this disc can also be written with a dot in the middle (the small circle on top) and that he had expected one of these two writings - and notes, that he instead got a circle with three lines. This is clearly an aberration from Wilkinson, a famous hieroglyphic expert. So Vyse did not copy something from a book to the walls - he found something that completely contradicted a table of a famous academic book.

Source: http://doernenburg.alien.de/alternativ/pyramide/pyr05_e.php

Here's a pic of Khufu's painted on name in one of the relieving chambers in the Great Pyramid. It's the pic on the right. Inset in the center bottom of the pic is a closeup of the disk glyph (the glyph seen at the far right in the cartouch) that Vyse saw but didn't understand because at that time, that particular name for Khufu was not known:


Note the disconcerting absence of any carving evident in the photo.

Dude, you could have found this out in less than a minute. What happened during all those years of study? My guess - you should have put the bong down and gone to class. The voice of experience here! LOL

I suggest you read the material at the link I provided above. It gives a clear and easily understood explanation of the "graffiti" in the relieving chambers of the GP, and exposes Sitchin's butt (and kicks it as well) for what he is - a person out to mislead others for monetary gain.

Does anyone have any information on the chemical composition of the paint used by Col. Visse when he wrote the inscriptions? If it is different from the paint formulas used during the fourth dynasty, case closed.

The paint is the same type of paint found in pyramids and mastabas all over Egypt. The "grafitti" is quarry marks and names of work gangs. Similar quarry marks - painted with the same paint - has, as I have said, been found in virtually every pyramid and/or mastaba where they've looked for it.

It's a red iron oxide paint. Called red ochre. The same red stuff Neandertals painted their dead with.

I'd like to read your theory explaining how Vyse wrote Khufu's name in a form that wasn't even known during Vyse's life.
This site: http://doernenburg.alien.de/alternativ/pyramide/pyr05_e.php shows that Vyse couldn't have known that name for Khufu, the one found in the relieving chamber.

Also, as I said earlier, what's your answer to Graham Hancock bearing witness to the fact that the "grafitti" extends deep back between stones in that chamber, which proves the Egyptian hieroglyphic written language was painted on the stones before they were assembled into the pyramid?

Hearte

[Bob137]

Here is a different information in regards to the forgery:

http://www.rickrichards.com/egypt/Egypt6.htm

Notice the sun symbol is different, look closely!

[Hearte]

Here is a different information in regards to the forgery:

http://www.rickrichards.com/egypt/Egypt6.htm

Notice the sun symbol is different, look closely!

Bob,

I provided you with a copy of the pertinant page in Vyse's journal - the page your reference mentions.

Do you not see the disk with three slashes that Vyse drew in his journal?

Do you simply refuse to believe that this name for Khufu wasn't even known in Vyse's time, a fact that Vyse frets over right there on that very same page of his journal?

If you go to the link I gave, you'll find a link to a much larger pic of this journal page. if you try, you can even make out what Vyse scribbled to himself about this.

The Khufu name with the seive mark - with the three slashes inside the circle - was completely unknown to mankind when Vyse entered that chamber. It was later found in other writings in Egypt that, in Vyses time, were undiscovered.

You should give this up. After all, the painted hieroglyphs extend into areas that no forger could possibly reach - still visible deep inside spaces between stones.

It wouldn't matter if Vyse made everything he said up - it still won't account for the paintings on completely unreachable parts of multi-ton stones.

Unless, that is, you wish to assert that the Egyptians disassembled an already-existing Great Pyramid, painted words on some of the stones, then re-assembled it.

Hearte

[Bob137]

Hearte, I read it before, and I read it again, but I have also read many others refutting what yours say! Here's another.
At the time Col. Howard-Vyse began his quest to find chambers above the King’s Chamber, his digging concession from the Egyptian authorities, as well as his financial support, were both running out. It was necessary for him to make a major discovery as soon as possible in order to continue his work. He was hoping that the area above Davison’s Chamber (the first air space chamber, discovered by Nathaniel Davison in 1765) would contain a large, hidden room or vault, and was severely disappointed when instead he brought to light only another air space chamber, which was far from the "dramatic discovery" he needed.

Only two months before, his rival, the Italian explorer Captain Caviglia, had stirred archaeological circles with his find of quarry inscriptions in some of the tombs around the Great Pyramid. These quarry inscriptions took the form of hieroglyphs daubed on the building blocks with a red paint, and had been used by the builders of the Old Kingdom as directions for where the blocks were to be placed. A number of modern researchers now suspect that, in the battle for archaeological oneupman-ship, Col. Howard-Vyse sought to overshadow Caviglia, and gain renewed support for his own projects, with a similar but more spectacular "discovery," by imitating these quarry inscriptions inside the Great Pyramid itself. Forging such inscriptions would have been fairly easy, since the Arabs still use similar red ochre paint, called moghrah, that is indistinguishable from that of the ancients.

The question has never been answered, why do inscriptions appear only in the air space chambers that Col. Howard- Vyse opened, but none were found in Davison’s Chamber, with which the Colonel had nothing to do, discovered earlier, in 1765?

Serious problems also arise when we examine the nature of the inscriptions themselves. Samuel Birch, a hieroglyph expert of the British Museum, was among the first to analyze the air chamber paintings, and noted a number of peculiarities among them which remain unresolved to this day. These "peculiarities" represent serious mistakes on the part of the forger. Birch noted, for example, that many of the daubings were not hieroglyphic but hieratic. Now hieratic was a form of written shorthand first developed during the Middle Kingdom, or at least a thousand years after the Fourth Dynasty. In one location, directly after a royal cartouche, the title is given, "Mighty in Upper and Lower Egypt," in a form that made its first appearance during the Saitic period of the 6th century B.C., a full 2,000 years after Khufu’s reign.

In another place, the hieroglyph symbol for "good, gracious" was used as the number "18," a usage found nowhere else in the entire body of Egyptian literature. In fact, Birch and later Egyptologists such as Carl Richard Lepsius and Sir Flinders Petrie were disturbed at the number of exceptions of usage in the air space chamber, inscriptions found by Col. Howard-Vyse that have absolutely no parallel throughout 4,000 years of hieroglyphic writing.

In perhaps the most blatant example of forgery, in Col. Howard-Vyse’s chambers one finds great confusion concerning the appearance of the name Khufu. At the time these chambers were being opened, the Pharaoh’s cartouche had not yet been fully revealed from other excavations, and there were several possibilities to choose from. As a result, a number of crude hybrid forms appear throughout the air chambers, such as "Khnem-Khuf," "Souphis," "Saufou," etc. The problem with the first example, "Khnem-Khuf," is that we know today that it signifies "brother of Khufu" and refers to Khafre, Khufu’s eventual successor. For years, this appearance of a second king’s name has not been explained, and as Gaston Maspero observed in The Dawn of Civilization: "The existence of the two cartouches of Khufu and Khnem-Khufu on the same monument has caused much embarrassment to Egyptologists."

Adding to this further is the fact that, where the right hieroglyph name for Khufu does appear, it is spelled wrong. The hieroglyph sources available to Col. Howard-Vyse in 1837, Sir John Gardner Wilkinson’s Material Hieroglyphia, and Leon de Laborde’s Voyage de l’Arabee Petree, incorrectly depicted the first symbol of Khufu’s name as an open circle with a dot in the middle—the sign of Ra, the sun god—instead of a solid disk, which is the phonetic sound kh. Col. Howard-Vyse made the fatal error of copying this mistake in the uppermost of the air space chambers, so that, when strictly translated, the name given is Raufu, and not Khufu. Again, nowhere else in all of Egyptian literature, except in the air space chamber inscriptions, is this aberrant spelling for Khufu found.

This last mistake is the final blow showing that Col. Howard-Vyse and not the original builders of the Great Pyramid was the true source who caused the red-painted markings to be inscribed. And with that the proof that the Great Pyramid was built by Pharaoh Khufu in the Fourth Dynasty also vanishes.

Actually, we have the testament of Pharaoh Khufu himself that he only did repair work on the Great Pyramid. The Inventory Stele, found in 1857 by Auguste Mariette just to the east of the Pyramid, dates to about 1500 B.C., but according to Maspero and other experts, shows evidence of having been copied from a far older stele contemporaneous with the Fourth Dynasty. In the Stele, Khufu himself tells of his discoveries made while clearing away the sands from the Pyramid and Sphinx. He dedicated the account to Isis, who he called the "Mistress of the Western Mountain," "Mistress of the Pyramid," and identified the Pyramid itself as the "House of Isis."

The Stele describes how Pharaoh Khufu, "gave to her (Isis) an offering anew, and he built again (to restore, renovate, reconstruct) her temple of stone." From there, the Pharaoh inspected the Sphinx, according to the text, and related the story of how in his time both the monument and a nearby sycamore tree had been struck by lightning. The bolt had knocked off part of the headdress of the Sphinx, which Khufu carefully restored. Egyptologist Selim Hassan, who dug out the Sphinx from the surrounding sands in the 1930's, observed there is indeed evidence that portions of the Sphinx were damaged by lightning, and the mark of ancient repairs is very apparent. Also, he noted, sycamore trees once grew to the south of the monument, which had been dated to a great age.

The Stele then ends with the story of how Khufu built small pyramids for himself and his daughters, wife and family, next to the Great Pyramid. Today, the ruins of three small pyramids are indeed situated on the east side of the monument. Archaeologists have found independent evidence that the southernmost of the three small pyramids flanking the Great Pyramid was in fact dedicated to Henutsen, a wife of Khufu. Everything in the inscription thus matches the known facts. If these facts can be believed as true, then the additional information that Khufu was only a restorer of the Great Pyramid and not its builder, must also be treated as historically true.

Read more: What are the ancient buildings Khufu, Khafra and Mankauru collectively known as? | Answerbag http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/653484#ixzz1DZOKr1Us

Combined a double post.
Here's more info on pyramid building:
Some ancient Egyptian artifacts made with very hard stone, like diorite and quartzite, defy reproduction when modern steel hand tools are used. Nonetheless, many thousands of such artifacts were fashioned during the Late Stone Age. Many people are surprised to learn that the Egyptians built the most admired and mysterious monuments of all time—Egypt’s Great Pyramids—when tools were at the Late Stone Age level. At that time, the strongest metal available was copper, a relatively soft metal. The hardest limestone blocks in the pyramid complexes (consisting of pyramids, temples and other sacred architecture) are too hard and intricately fit to have been cut on such a massive scale with copper tools, or with these instruments along with abrasive sand. Indeed, assuming the Great Pyramid was completed or nearly completed during the 24-year reign of Pharaoh Khufu, as Egyptologists assert, its scale is too large for the myriad of form-fitted pyramid blocks and the overall near-perfect giant pyramid shape to have been cut with these primitive stone-cutting devices. Experts estimate that the Great Pyramid contains over two million block
Since the Egyptians of the time pyramid were building utilizing simple copper tools, (per current Egyptology), and since copper tools cannot cut granite, which is throughout the pyramid, then it is logical, and comes to reason, that it was not built during that time period, there is no other conclusion that can be made scientifically! That is fact, and cannot be refutted, with a cartouche, or any other evidence to the contrary, unless Egyptologists, and archeologists want to change their story, to meet the facts!

[Hearte]

Hearte, I read it before, and I read it again, but I have also read many others refutting what yours say! Here's another.

Adding to this further is the fact that, where the right hieroglyph name for Khufu does appear, it is spelled wrong. The hieroglyph sources available to Col. Howard-Vyse in 1837, Sir John Gardner Wilkinson’s Material Hieroglyphia, and Leon de Laborde’s Voyage de l’Arabee Petree, incorrectly depicted the first symbol of Khufu’s name as an open circle with a dot in the middle—the sign of Ra, the sun god—instead of a solid disk, which is the phonetic sound kh. Col. Howard-Vyse made the fatal error of copying this mistake in the uppermost of the air space chambers, so that, when strictly translated, the name given is Raufu, and not Khufu. Again, nowhere else in all of Egyptian literature, except in the air space chamber inscriptions, is this aberrant spelling for Khufu found.

The bolded part above is simply not the case, as you would already know had you bothered to even glance at the photo I posted for you, Bob:


The sieve glyph is there for all to see, on the right side of the cartouche.

Obviously, your source is talking out of his butt.

Or, does that look like a disk with a dot in the middle to you?

Look, you can believe what you want about Vyse. But, unless you are willing to believe he is ElasticMan, you can't pin the glyphs between the stones on him.

DaVinci could have painted the Last Supper on the walls of the relieving chamber and it still wouldn't do a thing to explain how heiroglyphic writing was made to appear three and four feet deep into crevices between rocks, crevices that are only an inch or two wide.

Again, you can stipulate that the Early Egyptians came across the Great Pyramid already standing there, took the top half of the pyramid apart, painted these glyphs on, then reassembled the structure.

Or, you can believe the Egyptians built the thing in the first place.

Vyse or no Vyse. Whether you want to see the truth with your own eyes in that cartouche, or whether you want to pretend you don't see it. There is no other explantation other than the two I just stated for how the glyphs got between the stones, a discovery that was made a hundred years after Vyse was in his grave.

Hearte

[Bob137]

Read my prior post with the additional part I just moved so as not to double or triple post!

[Vance]

How could they see writing that is 3-4 feet deep inbetween stone that only has a crack an inch wide? I may have missed that; there's alot of writing in this thread though.

Just wondering. Pls don't shank me.

[Hearte]

How could they see writing that is 3-4 feet deep inbetween stone that only has a crack an inch wide? I may have missed that; there's alot of writing in this thread though.

Just wondering. Pls don't shank me.

The writing extends that far back. It doesn't start that far back.

You can see it in some places with a flashlight, which wasn't even invented when Vyse blew open the chamber (with dynamite.)

I should again remind everyone that Zahi Hawass took Graham Hancock into that chamber so he could have a look. Hancock has a board on the internet similar to this one. Ask him about it yourself. I mean, I provided the quote from him. If you doubt Hancock, then call him on it.

Hearte

[Bob137]

I should again remind you, of my earlier post in regards to Granite precision and that the pyramid was not built during that time period, otherwise the archeologists, and Egyptologists are all wrong on the tools they had to build it!

[Moon]

While Graham Hancock's book "Fingerprints of the Gods" is widely read by this group, Mr Hancock is far from perfect in his ideas.

For instance, Mr Hancock states that he believes Continental Drift happened quite quickly causing the great deluge 13,000 years ago. I think that idea is out there and would call him on it (plate tectonics rules that out).

What I am saying is Mr Hancock is far from perfect either. He could of made a mistake now stating the graffiti was written while the Pyramid was being built.

This link is a video from Christopher Dunn, who is an experienced engineer and has studied the pyramids:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 1474744663

The above video does show there is more than one opinion out there.

[Hearte]

While Graham Hancock's book "Fingerprints of the Gods" is widely read by this group, Mr Hancock is far from perfect in his ideas.

I agree 100% on that. In fact, he is certainly wrong in approximately 100% of what he implies in his books.

However, I cited Hancock in anticipation of this forum's dismissal of all things mainstream. If you want, I can quote 15 or 20 Egyptologists on this same subject (painted-on glyphs between the stones in the relieving chamber.)

Of course, there would be no use in doing so,. If Ancient Alien fanatics refuse to believe what their fellow believer Graham Hancock saw with his own eyes, and his admission that Egyptology is correct on this issue, then what's the point of quoting Lehner or Hawass?

There are a multitude of opinions out there, of course. However, the only things that actually matter are the facts. I've given one here. Dance around it all you want, it won't change the fact.

Hearte

[upperworld]

If Ancient Alien fanatics refuse to believe what their fellow believer Graham Hancock saw with his own eyes, and his admission that Egyptology is correct on this issue, then what's the point of quoting Lehner or Hawass?

If you have thoroughly read other threads on this forum Hearte you would be well aware the general opinion of Hawass is that he is a scoundrel, and that's putting it nicely. He suppresses the research of those that are looking for anything outside the bounds of what he has deemed the true Egyptian history, and controls what information is released to the public. Mark Lehner has the pedigree of a credible archaeologist but he has worked closely with Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities (see Hawass), most likely to gain permits and access, but therefore he must be forced to tow the company line so to speak in regards to his idealogoy or else his research would be shut down. Sure you can poke holes in any of the AAT based egyptologists but the mainstream ones show cracks in their credibility as well.

For the record, Graham Hancock isn't your typical AAT theorist either. He, specifically over the last couple years, has distanced himself from the notion of extraterrestrial involvement and has focused simply on the premise of alternative history.

Hearte, i appreciate your devils advocate rebuttals here i really do, so let me ask you do you believe the pyramids were tombs for the pharoahs and were built by egyptian "gangs" with rollers and pulleys? Because that is precisely what the egyptologists you are referring to believe and i find it hard to completely dismiss alternative points of view when theirs just don't seem to add up to the evidence at hand.

See link:

http://www.drhawass.com/blog/new-tombs-pyramid-builders-found

[Hearte]

If Ancient Alien fanatics refuse to believe what their fellow believer Graham Hancock saw with his own eyes, and his admission that Egyptology is correct on this issue, then what's the point of quoting Lehner or Hawass?

If you have thoroughly read other threads on this forum Hearte you would be well aware the general opinion of Hawass is that he is a scoundrel, and that's putting it nicely. He suppresses the research of those that are looking for anything outside the bounds of what he has deemed the true Egyptian history, and controls what information is released to the public. Mark Lehner has the pedigree of a credible archaeologist but he has worked closely with Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities (see Hawass), most likely to gain permits and access, but therefore he must be forced to tow the company line so to speak in regards to his idealogoy or else his research would be shut down.

Thus my quoting of Hancock, who has seen the paint with his own eyes.

Sure you can poke holes in any of the AAT based egyptologists but the mainstream ones show cracks in their credibility as well.

I haven't seen anyone here point out any such cracks in mainstream theories.

Mainstream theories are fact-based. No scientist will aver that such theories are absolutely correct. On the other hand, if a theory here at this board is contradicted by known facts - such as paint between those cracks or the use of a name for Khufu that was unknown in Vyse's time, then the theory cannot stand.

Hearte, i appreciate your devils advocate rebuttals here i really do, so let me ask you do you believe the pyramids were tombs for the pharoahs and were built by egyptian "gangs" with rollers and pulleys?

Yes. As far as I've been able to tell, and I've been looking into since around 1980, there is no reason at all to believe anything else.
Obviously, if new facts arise, such a position is subject to modification. This is true for me as well as for Mainstream Egyptology. The modifications and even complete turnarounds in theory that Egyptology has shown over the last century or so is witness to the fact that science changes with new data.

Without facts, all is speculation. The idea that the pyramids predate the Egyptians is not speculation, it is simply impossible given known facts and therefore just wrong.

Because that is precisely what the egyptologists you are referring to believe and i find it hard to completely dismiss alternative points of view when theirs just don't seem to add up to the evidence at hand.

I can see that you have this difficulty. This is, however, your personal problem, and you shouldn't expect others to solve your problems for you.

Hearte

[upperworld]

I haven't seen anyone here point out any such cracks in mainstream theories.

Mainstream theories:

Pyramids were tombs, that's why we haven't found any mummies right? Cenotaphs? Possibly, but literal tombs...doubtful.

The Giza complex was built with ramps and pulleys by gangs of egyptian workers. Sure this is speculaiton on my end but tell me how 2.3 million 50 ton blocks (the heaviest at least) were quarried and transported from Aswan (500 miles away) then placed perfectly into slots 400 feet high with man power and ramps. Hard to figure.

[Gemini]

I haven't seen anyone here point out any such cracks in mainstream theories.

Mainstream theories suggest that there was no technology used in the ancient past and that the ancient people used simple tools to build monumental structures.

There are other existing threads to discuss evidence of technology being used so we don't get off topic on this thread.

Edit:

Hearte, I got your private message, here's a thread that had discussion of technology being used.

http://www.legendarytimes.com/forum/vie ... php?t=1909

[Moon]

Here is an interview of Robert Temple on the dating methods he used for his book "Egyptian Dawn":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyloQjX-3eU

[3d monkey]

Re vera, cara mia, mea nil refert.

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

I do.

"The Board has two official languages, English and Bad English. Deal with it. Posts written in any other language than English will be deleted immediately."

no favouritism here and any implication of such is NOT welcome!

I enjoy adding things together. While I can...

[Hearte]

I haven't seen anyone here point out any such cracks in mainstream theories.

Mainstream theories:

Pyramids were tombs, that's why we haven't found any mummies right? Cenotaphs? Possibly, but literal tombs...doubtful.[/quopte]
And the funerary temples associated with every pyramid are for...?

The Giza complex was built with ramps and pulleys by gangs of egyptian workers. Sure this is speculaiton on my end but tell me how 2.3 million 50 ton blocks (the heaviest at least) were quarried and transported from Aswan (500 miles away) then placed perfectly into slots 400 feet high with man power and ramps. Hard to figure.

Very hard to figure, especially when you don't have the facts.

Most of the stone in the Giza pyramids (about 95%) is limestone quarried right there at Giza, some of it right in front of the pyramids.

The red granite, used in some places inside the pyramids for decoration and for strength, came from Aswan by barge.

The Egyptians, as far as we know, didn't have pulleys. They certainly didn't have compound pulleys.

Hearte

[Bob137]

Ask any Architect, engineer, or building contractor, and they will all state that you cannot build a pyramid with all that, and that precise that way! The Egyptians did not build it without some other way. Either they had assistance, or they had technology not found, or someone else built it with technology! Not one person has been able to even build one the same on a 1/10th scale, not one the way the mainstream says it was built, with what the Egyptians of those time periods had to work with, and many have tried to no avail!

[Ace Rimmer]

Ask any Architect, engineer, or building contractor, and they will all state that you cannot build a pyramid with all that, and that precise that way! The Egyptians did not build it without some other way. Either they had assistance, or they had technology not found, or someone else built it with technology! Not one person has been able to even build one the same on a 1/10th scale, not one the way the mainstream says it was built, with what the Egyptians of those time periods had to work with, and many have tried to no avail!

I am reading Christopher Dunn's latest book right now, Lost Technologies of Ancient Egypt: Advanced Engineering in the Temples of the Pharaohs, it is just astounding.

A unique study of the engineering and tools used to create Egyptian monuments

• Presents a stone-by-stone analysis of key Egyptian monuments, including the statues of Ramses II and the tunnels of the Serapeum

• Reveals that highly refined tools and mega-machines were used in ancient Egypt

From the pyramids in the north to the temples in the south, ancient artisans left their marks all over Egypt, unique marks that reveal craftsmanship we would be hard pressed to duplicate today. Drawing together the results of more than 30 years of research and nine field study journeys to Egypt, Christopher Dunn presents a stunning stone-by-stone analysis of key Egyptian monuments, including the statue of Ramses II at Luxor and the fallen crowns that lay at its feet. His modern-day engineering expertise provides a unique view into the sophisticated technology used to create these famous monuments in prehistoric times.

Using modern digital photography, computer-aided design software, and metrology instruments, Dunn exposes the extreme precision of these monuments and the type of advanced manufacturing expertise necessary to produce them. His computer analysis of the statues of Ramses II reveals that the left and right sides of the faces are precise mirror images of each other, and his examination of the mysterious underground tunnels of the Serapeum illuminates the finest examples of precision engineering on the planet. Providing never-before-seen evidence in the form of more than 280 photographs, Dunn’s research shows that while absent from the archaeological record, highly refined tools, techniques, and even mega-machines must have been used in ancient Egypt.

[Bob137]

Metaluna, you are so cute, when you spout truths like this! Just makes me all warm and fuzzy inside!

[Hearte]

Ask any Architect, engineer, or building contractor, and they will all state that you cannot build a pyramid with all that, and that precise that way!

Ahem.

Bob, I am an engineer.

That's how it was built. Your fallacious logic (argument from incredulity) is not an argument at all.

Hearte

[Bob137]

Excuse me, I should have said a construction Engineer! Anyway, all the ones I have talked with for over the last 25 years, have stated so!

[Hearte]

Excuse me, I should have said a construction Engineer! Anyway, all the ones I have talked with for over the last 25 years, have stated so!

I'm calling bullsheet on that.

Daniel, Mann, Johnson and Mendenhall (DMJM), a prestigious Civil Engineering firm, would disagree. They are construction engineers responsible for some of the most ambitious projects in the world.

Read what they have to say on the matter:
http://www.ekt.bme.hu/CM-BSC-MSC/ProgramManagementBC.pdf

Harte

[Bob137]

HUh! I have tried over and over to get to that database, but it just will not load?

[Hearte]

HUh! I have tried over and over to get to that database, but it just will not load?

It's not a database, it's a report that first appeared in "Civil Engineering" magazine.

It's in .PDF format. You got Adobe?

Hearte

EDIT:
Man, I'm having a hard time too!

I tried right-clicking and then clicked on "save as" and saved it to my desktop. It came right through and I've got it in front of me now.

Try that.

Is there some place on this forum I can upload it instead of just linking to it?

H.

[Pons Asinorum]

Is there some place on this forum I can upload it instead of just linking to it?

There is a new upload feature, but it does not take pdf.

I also had trouble getting the pdf to work (on-line or off-line) but did manage to open text as a cached html file. It does lose some of the formatting, but the general project outline is there and the math is basic and clear:

http://74.6.117.48/search/srpcache?ei=U ... MTHJH4mg--

Also, Bob this is the same firm I cited when you and I had the same argument. Also cited were other scientists who used small scale modeling techniques to examine the different aspects of the Pyramid construction:

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=395

Since then, even more architects have come forward with evidence on how the Pyramid was constructed solely and wholly via anthropological causes at that time with existing technology. Not saying it was done this way, but that it was possible and today, is becoming increasingly likely.

Just some more 2 cents

[Bob137]

These specualtions, and asssumptions are from that site, you posted! Nothing in regards to how the granite was cut either! That information does not prove anything other than a speculative process, that could be possible, but is not a "this is exactly how the great pyramid was built, just a possibility"!
We know that sloping ramps were constructed for other pyramids; thus we speculated that after the site was leveled.
We also surmised that in the center of the area encompassed by the base of the pyramid a rock outcropping remained to some unknown height and area.
For example, a single ramp to the top of the pyramid would have extended for more than half a mile and would have involved more construction than the pyramid itself. Likewise, ramps to each face were found to be unnecessary.
A single large ramp to level 50 of the pyramid would have been of reasonable height and volume; it would have permitted two-thirds of the blocks to be put in place.
The team suggested that an internal "staircase" was created and that levers were used to place the capstone and the last remaining blocks.
We assumed a large number of workmen could be recruited on a seasonal basis to assist in transporting the blocks up the ramps to the working area.
No records have been found that relate to the design of the Great Pyramid. However, drawings have been discovered for tombs constructed during later dynasties.
We speculate that the pyramid site was surveyed and then excavated to bedrock.
Once bedrock was exposed the site was leveled. This was most likely done by the use of a square level—a right angle with a cross piece resembling the letter A with a plumb bob that hung from the apex and registered against the cross piece.
Based on a survey reported in the literature, the base is square and is oriented to the four points of the compass to standards that would be challenging to a builder today.
We assumed the use of rollers but not wheels or pulleys.
For example, our stonecutting estimate of two man-days per block is based on our judgment.
Thus the total labor costs for construction of the pyramid were approximately 111 million jugs of beer and 126 million loaves of bread over the 10-year span of the project. (They drank this much, they were to drunk to be precise to build the pyramids)!
The pyramid stands today as awesome testimony to the skill and sheer determination of the ancient race that built it.We must also stand in awe of their program management techniques, as it is equally certain that they had highly developed administrative and planning skills. The complexity and logistical requirements of this project are simply extraordinary.

[Gemini]

Well, since technology was presented in this thread...

Here's episode two from Carmen Boulter's, 'The Pyramid Code' series - 'High Level Technology'. They present their view on the purpose of the Great Pyramid.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/215033/the-py ... technology

[Pons Asinorum]

These specualtions, and asssumptions are from that site, you posted! Nothing in regards to how the granite was cut either!

False; of the links and subsequent citations listed, the evidence was empirical: for granite, a copper blade cut a 3 cm deep by 95 cm long cut per 7.5 mm of copper blade per 14 hrs --> 3 X 95 cm granite / 7.5 mm copper / 14 hrs = 28.5 k mm^2 / 7.5 mm Cu per 14 hr = (3,800 mm of granite/ Cu saw) per 14 hr.

Perhaps you missed the relevant paragraph:

In 1999, D.A. Stocks tested the efficacy of copper saws and drills on the granite in the Aswan quarries 500 miles up the Nile. The copper saw in his test was 1.8 meters long, 15 centimeters in depth, and 6 millimeters thick. Stocks experimented with both wet and dry sand and smooth and notched saws. In one test, workmen cut a slot 3 centimeters deep and 95 centimeters long in14 hours. It was slow work, but the ancient Egyptians had plenty of time and manpower. In the same experiment, the copper saw blade was ground down 7.5 millimeters. Overall, dry sand with a smooth blade worked best.

Regarding the cached article that you highlighted, there were some speculations as you stated, but the date of the cached article was 1996. That is why I said:

"Since then, even more architects have come forward with evidence on how the Pyramid was constructed solely and wholly via anthropological causes at that time with existing technology."

Remember, this was an engineering firm saying how they would construct it today with similar tools and manpower. It was not an archeological institution. Most of the highlighted speculation was centered on the structure of a possible internal ramp as the best possiblity for construction within the technical limits and manpower requirements established. That was in 1996.

Today, the internal ramp is no longer speculation. Evidence of such a structure was discovered just like Craig B. Smith (engineer and not archeologist) theorized --he may have been correct, just from an engineering POV and without knowing about the evidence for an internal ramp(!).

Far from being just another theory, the internal ramp has considerable evidence behind it. A team headed by Jean-Pierre Houdin and Rainer Stadlemann, former director of the German Archaeological Institute in Cairo and one of the greatest authorities on pyramids, has submitted an application to survey the Great Pyramid in a nondestructive way to see if the theory can be confirmed. They are hopeful that the Supreme Council of Antiquities will grant permission for a survey. (Several methods could be used, including powerful microgravimetry, high-resolution infrared photography, or even sonar.)

All of the current theories -- a long, straight ramp, a ramp that corkscrewed around the outside of the pyramid, or cranelike shadoufs (used in Egypt until recently for irrigating fields) -- have serious flaws... architect Jean-Pierre Houdin and I presented a radical new theory: that blocks of stone were raised to the very top of the pyramid on an internal ramp.

We gave what we felt was strong evidence for the theory, which explains a French team's microgravemetric survey in the 1980s that recorded variations in the density of the pyramid... an image from the survey may show a ramp still open inside the pyramid, running parallel to the outer face of the structure and turning 90 degrees at the corners, corkscrewing up to the top.

I am limited to two url's, so feel free to google the quotes. The information is easy to find.

Here is a video that sets the stage with some background information (and some other stuff too):
http://khufu.3ds.com/company/passion-fo ... hufu/home/

Here is a 1980's microgravity survey that was imaged in 2009(?) by Dassault Systemes:

[Gemini]

In the wireless energy machine hypothesis, the internal 'ramp' could be a 'Tesla coil' funneling wireless energy up to the capstone. It would be interesting knowing what type of stone was used in the 'ramp'.

[AncientSoldier]

nevermind Hearte he is still asleep. although i would like to know what do you beleive in. if you believe in anything at all? or is your skull hollow? one thing to keep in mind that if the A.A.T is true you think the governments are going to allow everyone to know the truth about this? think about it, who controls the world? Government and there all about money and control. if we discover the truth there will be a rebellion. we will all know for sure that our governments have been lying to us since day one.