Ancient Pyramids and other structures, astronomical alignment & similarity.

Cuddles said:
Actually, I don't think they do. The usual practice is simply to make sure you draw enough connections between places that it's almost impossible not to find a pattern somewhere, and then act all surprised that you found a pattern. Of course, in some cases, like this one, the pattern isn't actually a pattern at all, but just something that looks vaguely like it should be*.
Click to expand...


Yes, I should probably have expressed that idea better.

I didn't do my quickie job that way partly because there aren't enough places in Australia to make complex patterns, and partly mainly because I'm lazy.

I imagine it's a fairly simple thing to do on a European or North American map.


Cuddles said:
It's very similar to the technique used by alt med. Look at enough variables in enough different ways and you're bound to find a positive correlation between your product and something somewhere. Whether this is due to dishonesty or merely incompetence will vary from case to case, but I think very few people are so dishonest that they'll actually start out with the pattern and then try to fit things to it.
Click to expand...


Maybe this is where my cynicism lets me down, because I thought I was pretending to do exactly what the pattern-finding bleevers do - start with a pattern. I might have been a bit harsh.

In any case, I understand the idea of meta-analysing and data-mining (I do it all the time in the Forum, but only for demonstration purposes). I think that's why I was confident that if I just drew a random arrow, there'd be places I could spin into 'anomolies' at all the corners, without even fudging the names or locations. The 'descriptions' are all bollocks, of course.


Cuddles said:
*Actually, this brings up an interesting and, amazingly enough, relevant point. The technique of drawing a picture that almost looks like there might be a pattern and claiming that you've found a pattern is extremely similar to what KotA is doing with his "similar" pyramids. If you look at the actual details, they're not similar at all, but if you just look at the general impression, they're all vaguely the same shape and size and therefore look quite similar. The jump to assuming that there must be some connection between them is exactly the same jump made by Tom Brooks in concluding that some wonky, different sized triangles that don't quite make any kind of pattern must be connected.
Click to expand...


I think anyone who looks at all of the Egyptian Pyramids (there's about 100 of them) from the oldest to the newest can see for themselves how the final geometry was arrived at. It's just logical, science-based engineering, and the failures tell as much about the development as the monuments which remain.

It therefore seems reasonable that anywhere on Earth pyramids are built, they're eventually going to conform to best practice, or they aren't going to go he distance for us to be talking about them. They is rubble.
 
Last edited:
Akhenaten said:
Okay, how to I solve this dilemma?

These are both very nice things to say, but they seem mutually exclusive.

I can see that some kind of duality is going to be needed, or maybe even a trinity. This monotheism is harder than it looks.


ETA:


[qimg]http://www.yvonneclaireadams.com/HostedStuff/AvatarsGeneral/CoreaNeto4.gif[/qimg]​


:)
Click to expand...
Simple. All you have to do is to recognize the multiplicity within the unit and the unit created by multiplicity.

I take from it you consider my avvie is a bit outdated... LOL! Thanks.
 
Akhenaten said:
Maybe this is where my cynicism lets me down, because I thought I was pretending to do exactly what the pattern-finding bleevers do - start with a pattern. I might have been a bit harsh.

In any case, I understand the idea of meta-analysing and data-mining (I do it all the time in the Forum, but only for demonstration purposes). I think that's why I was confident that if I just drew a random arrow, there'd be places I could spin into 'anomolies' at all the corners, without even fudging the names or locations. The 'descriptions' are all bollocks, of course.
Click to expand...


Go look up one of Jiri's threads to see a classic example of what Cuddles is talking about.
 
King of the Americas said:
Aheem...

"How old is the Sphinx?"
Click to expand...

Orthodoxy says 2500bce
Pseudo historians say 10,500bce

there is only credible evidence to support the first of those two dates, the latter is actually based on Platos dating for Atlantis, reiterated by Madame Blavatsky (on information gained from some ascended masters which she channelled) and then popularised by Edgar Cayce (while he was asleep) before finally made famous by Bauval and Hancock (who both got pseudo history books out)

which of those do you "believe"
:p
 
Last edited:
Marduk said:
Orthodoxy says 2500bce
Pseudo historians say 10,500bce

there is only credible evidence to support the first of those two dates, the latter is actually based on Platos dating for Atlantis, reiterated by Madame Blavatsky (on information gained from some ascended masters which she channelled) and then popularised by Edgar Cayce (while he was asleep) before finally made famous by Bauval and Hancock (who both got pseudo history books out)

which of those do you "believe"
:p
Click to expand...

Belief doesn't matter here. What 'evidence' is there to be had to date this monument, besides the written/mythological.

Let's examine the weathering patterns.

What does those tell us?

ETA:

Mimicking astronomical alignments from previous or surrounding structures is a poor dating tool. But I am not anywhere near the study of the area that Lehner or Hawass are. Those guys have the GREATEST job ever.

I grew up with this kid who showed up in the 5th grade, who was born and raise in Cairo. He claimed to have used the pyramids like his personal playground. He and his brother climbed the Great Pyramid twice. He could answer almost none of my probative questions, and was much more focused on the sizes the the stones used, at which levels. His memories where all 'up close and personal', rather than the 'overview' and layout questions I was hoping to have answered. The Sphinx and the Pyramids weren't connected in his mind.
 
Last edited:
Could be. They had to train all the ancient alien blimp pilots somewhere.
 
And sorry Pharaoh, but those wigs, make-up and the obelisks...

Totally gay. Lots of gay rodeos in ancient Egypt.

Its not theory, mind you, its a revelation I got from the channeled spirit of an alien who lived in Atlantis.

No prejudices, tho...
 
Perhaps not blimps, so much.

I have a friend in another thread, and he has a startling theory.


Nationalcosmopolitan said:
Dear Akhenaten!

Thank you very much for your interesting questions and for your supporting the idea of Flying 3D form David Star Temple.
If it is interesting to you to make animation of New Saturday Temple floating low over New York, Jerusalem, Moscow, London, Paris please do it!

The draft sizes of the Temple have to be not less than the draft sizes of SECOND TEMPLE and not larger than the sizes of the Temple Mount.

May be some of this slides will help you.

1263384659-clip-22kb.jpg
1263385104-clip-22kb.jpg
1263385325-clip-40kb.jpg
]
1263385823-clip-23kb.jpg
1263386064-clip-24kb.jpg
1263385563-clip-27kb.jpg
Click to expand...
 
Akhenaten said:
I wonder if Pyramids are, in fact, ancient blimp hangars.
Click to expand...

They are called mooring towers not hangars. [/Nitpic]

But you do have an excellent point, as we all know ancient alien blimps were much larger than they are today and needed weighty mooring towers.

BTW: I thought the Sphinx rock was much older than 10000 years. ;)
 
Correa Neto said:
And sorry Pharaoh, but those wigs, make-up and the obelisks...

Totally gay. Lots of gay rodeos in ancient Egypt.

Its not theory, mind you, its a revelation I got from the channeled spirit of an alien who lived in Atlantis.

No prejudices, tho...
Click to expand...


Toke said:
They are called mooring towers not hangars. [/Nitpic]

But you do have an excellent point, as we all know ancient alien blimps were much larger than they are today and needed weighty mooring towers.

BTW: I thought the Sphinx rock was much older than 10000 years. ;)
Click to expand...


I think you two are getting confused with Byzantium.


HagiaBlimpia.jpg

The Hagia Blimpia​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom