Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

The Old World is a reference to those parts of Earth known to Europeans before the voyages of Christopher Columbus; it includes Europe, Asia and Africa.

Moderators: Minimalist, MichelleH

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Diviacus » Wed Feb 14, 2018 10:49 pm

@circumspice
To come back to your initial post about the papyrii discovered at Wadi Al Jarf in 2013, a book has been published in 2017 by Pierre Tallet... but it's in French.
However, there is an abstract in English (pp 149-161). hereafter the cover and the first pages of the abstract.
https://screenshot.net/fr/d3lzdco
https://screenshot.net/fr/dkn3di6
Diviacus
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 4:21 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby circumspice » Thu Feb 15, 2018 12:14 am

Diviacus wrote:@circumspice
To come back to your initial post about the papyrii discovered at Wadi Al Jarf in 2013, a book has been published in 2017 by Pierre Tallet... but it's in French.
However, there is an abstract in English (pp 149-161). hereafter the cover and the first pages of the abstract.
https://screenshot.net/fr/d3lzdco
https://screenshot.net/fr/dkn3di6


@Diviacus: Thanks! :D
"Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer, and, without sneering, teach the rest to sneer." ~ Alexander Pope
User avatar
circumspice
 
Posts: 769
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:10 pm

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Skiessa » Thu Feb 15, 2018 12:27 am

Diviacus wrote:
Skiessa wrote:it's horrible argumentation tactics to mention a book and tell the opponent to go to read the book, instead of just quoting the book in the argument.

I have mentioned two books. I did not only read these biooks. I studied them, as I have been for three years now working on the time the ancient people spent when constructing their buidings (and I will work at least three more years on this subject). As I said, there are 550 pages in these two books. I will not summarised them as there are too many different subjects. If you don't want to look for the evidences (as they are written in these books), I will not spend time for you. I don't care if you don't want to spend some time reading them (and other books).


that's absolute rubbish - meanwhile the whole theories may very well take 550 pages to cover, the main arguments can be summarized in shorter arguments, especially if you have actually studied the books. that's nothing more than a christian claiming that you cannot argue my belief on the creation story because you haven't read the bible. question the general relativity and you will indeed receive tons of book names but the arguments in the books will be presented to you in shorter term. and it's easy, because they exist and they are strong. your evasive rhetorics make the books only sound that they don't provide any good theory all - you just want to protect the mainstream archaeology by making me look bad and smoking me out of the discussion. the burden of proof lies on you - if you refuse to summarize the arguments, then the default is that the arguments are too bad or don't exist.
Skiessa
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:22 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Skiessa » Thu Feb 15, 2018 12:44 am

circumspice wrote:
Skiessa wrote:Lol, still somehow the only evidence so far that i've got for the construction of the pyramids has been that i don't have the evidence that it didn't happen. I'm looking for the evidence - I just don't consider dogmas as one.


@Skiessa: Similarly, one cannot prove a negative. Your whole contention is that the native ancient Egyptians could not have built any of the stone monuments. You offer no proof whatsoever for your belief.
You simply state that it couldn't be done in ancient times & it can't be done in modern times. You also state that any evidence of contemporary attribution is either forged by 'mainstream archaeology' or perhaps is the ancient Egyptians 'trolling' archaeologists in the distant future. Your whole argument rests upon your demand that it all be proven to your satisfaction, not with you offering even some small shred of evidence that it couldn't be done... So what does that make you? The entire tone of your contribution to this 'discussion' is argumentative & also racist.
You have not contributed anything substantive to the 'discussion'.


"Similarly, one cannot prove a negative" doesn't this speak for me? i cannot prove that something didn't happen - I can only argue that it looks impossible.

In a scientific world nothing should be taken for granted - nothing is taken as a default without the evidence - the first burden of proof lies on the archaeology, and only then it's our burden to prove them wrong. If the MA cannot carry their burden of proof, then there is no argument to argue against - no default to prove wrong. the archaeology holds no privilege on making defaults without definitive evidence.

"also racist" yes indeed, people of color couldn't build the pyramids with copper tools, that was my point whole time. thank you for finally understanding what i was saying :----D
Skiessa
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:22 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Diviacus » Thu Feb 15, 2018 1:47 am

Skiessa wrote:that's absolute rubbish - meanwhile the whole theories may very well take 550 pages to cover, the main arguments can be summarized in shorter arguments, especially if you have actually studied the books. that's nothing more than a christian claiming that you cannot argue my belief on the creation story because you haven't read the bible. question the general relativity and you will indeed receive tons of book names but the arguments in the books will be presented to you in shorter term. and it's easy, because they exist and they are strong. your evasive rhetorics make the books only sound that they don't provide any good theory all - you just want to protect the mainstream archaeology by making me look bad and smoking me out of the discussion. the burden of proof lies on you - if you refuse to summarize the arguments, then the default is that the arguments are too bad or don't exist.
As I said, there are two many subjects. So let's take one, which is the initial subject of this thread. The papyrii already deciphered clearly say that Mener was responsible of the transport by boat of the stones from Tourah to Kephru pyramid. Do you have any reaction?
Diviacus
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 4:21 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Tiompan » Thu Feb 15, 2018 2:55 am

[quote="Skiessa"
yes indeed, people of color couldn't build the pyramids with copper tools, that was my point whole time. [/quote]

Why didn't you say that to begin with ? Instead of multiple posts highlighting your confusion and misunderstandings about RC dating , the rate of axial precession , "magic " number 72 , accurate cardinal alignment achieved with simple tech (although the deviation from cardinality was based on the amount of care taken , as evidenced by later more inaccurate alignments ) etc.

Why couldn't people of colour build the pyramids ? Copper tools almost certainly were used , but not exclusively .Why limit the choice of tools to just copper ?
Last edited by Tiompan on Thu Feb 15, 2018 11:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
Tiompan
 
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Simon21 » Thu Feb 15, 2018 4:19 am

Diviacus wrote:
Skiessa wrote:it's horrible argumentation tactics to mention a book and tell the opponent to go to read the book, instead of just quoting the book in the argument.

I have mentioned two books. I did not only read these biooks. I studied them, as I have been for three years now working on the time the ancient people spent when constructing their buidings (and I will work at least three more years on this subject). As I said, there are 550 pages in these two books. I will not summarised them as there are too many different subjects. If you don't want to look for the evidences (as they are written in these books), I will not spend time for you. I don't care if you don't want to spend some time reading them (and other books).


Certainly an interesting subject. It is always interesting to reflect that many signature buildings would have been partially built for long periods of time and we tend to concentrate (for obvious reasons) as if they had always been finished.
Simon21
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2014 4:40 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Tiompan » Thu Feb 15, 2018 5:34 am

The history of the site is often ignored .
Stonehenge is a good example , like many stone circles or Bronze Age monuments , there was often activity at the site prior to the erection of
the megalithic components and it was the the earlier activity that can explain the choice of the siting of the more obvious features .
Tiompan
 
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby circumspice » Thu Feb 15, 2018 6:38 am

Skiessa wrote:
circumspice wrote:
Skiessa wrote:Lol, still somehow the only evidence so far that i've got for the construction of the pyramids has been that i don't have the evidence that it didn't happen. I'm looking for the evidence - I just don't consider dogmas as one.


@Skiessa: Similarly, one cannot prove a negative. Your whole contention is that the native ancient Egyptians could not have built any of the stone monuments. You offer no proof whatsoever for your belief.
You simply state that it couldn't be done in ancient times & it can't be done in modern times. You also state that any evidence of contemporary attribution is either forged by 'mainstream archaeology' or perhaps is the ancient Egyptians 'trolling' archaeologists in the distant future. Your whole argument rests upon your demand that it all be proven to your satisfaction, not with you offering even some small shred of evidence that it couldn't be done... So what does that make you? The entire tone of your contribution to this 'discussion' is argumentative & also racist.
You have not contributed anything substantive to the 'discussion'.


"Similarly, one cannot prove a negative" doesn't this speak for me? i cannot prove that something didn't happen - I can only argue that it looks impossible.

In a scientific world nothing should be taken for granted - nothing is taken as a default without the evidence - the first burden of proof lies on the archaeology, and only then it's our burden to prove them wrong. If the MA cannot carry their burden of proof, then there is no argument to argue against - no default to prove wrong. the archaeology holds no privilege on making defaults without definitive evidence.

"also racist" yes indeed, people of color couldn't build the pyramids with copper tools, that was my point whole time. thank you for finally understanding what i was saying :----D


We pretty much understood you from the very beginning. It's just hard to accept that someone with even the minimal education in these days & times could possibly equate skin color with the ability or inability to build enormous stone monuments. You still haven't given any valid reason why the native ancient Egyptians couldn't build such monuments. You merely say that they can't do it. You show no evidence whatsoever, you keep repeating that they can't & challenge us to prove that they can. The members of this board attempted to answer your 'questions' by posting links & suggesting relevant reading materials to you. You rejected everything that was offered to you out of hand. You aren't seeking answers, you're seeking to impose your dogma on us.
"Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer, and, without sneering, teach the rest to sneer." ~ Alexander Pope
User avatar
circumspice
 
Posts: 769
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:10 pm

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Skiessa » Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:49 am

Diviacus wrote:
Skiessa wrote:that's absolute rubbish - meanwhile the whole theories may very well take 550 pages to cover, the main arguments can be summarized in shorter arguments, especially if you have actually studied the books. that's nothing more than a christian claiming that you cannot argue my belief on the creation story because you haven't read the bible. question the general relativity and you will indeed receive tons of book names but the arguments in the books will be presented to you in shorter term. and it's easy, because they exist and they are strong. your evasive rhetorics make the books only sound that they don't provide any good theory all - you just want to protect the mainstream archaeology by making me look bad and smoking me out of the discussion. the burden of proof lies on you - if you refuse to summarize the arguments, then the default is that the arguments are too bad or don't exist.
As I said, there are two many subjects. So let's take one, which is the initial subject of this thread. The papyrii already deciphered clearly say that Mener was responsible of the transport by boat of the stones from Tourah to Kephru pyramid. Do you have any reaction?


even some part of the hypothesis for building such amazing monument would do for the start. i'm sure that if you really have studied the book like you said you can easily summarize some of the argument if you want. there is a whole world to discover under this question which so far haven't been answered by the mainstream archaeology - a whole world which basically is the pyramid itself. so if any arguments for it exist, it should be a honor to propose them.

my initial post on this topic was about the papyri that should prove that the egyptians did build the great pyramid. basically my thoughts about it are, that if we consider the pharaohs to be egomaniacs to the extent that they would build such pyramid just to immortalize themselves on this earth, then why wouldn't we believe them to be egomaniacs enough to lie such buildings to be the work of their demi-god hands? in the other hand this very short piece of papyri verifies the whole consensus of the modern egyptology without giving us a single detail of how the construction actually was made - to me it looks as if the Hawass hitsquad fabricated this papyri just to put an end to the growing disbelief caused by folks like Hancock and West.

if the archaeologists from 20,000 years from now would find my personally written note which claims that i built the falcon heavy with my screwdriver and hammer, should they believe me?
Skiessa
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:22 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Skiessa » Thu Feb 15, 2018 11:04 am

We pretty much understood you from the very beginning. It's just hard to accept that someone with even the minimal education in these days & times could possibly equate skin color with the ability or inability to build enormous stone monuments. You still haven't given any valid reason why the native ancient Egyptians couldn't build such monuments. You merely say that they can't do it. You show no evidence whatsoever, you keep repeating that they can't & challenge us to prove that they can. The members of this board attempted to answer your 'questions' by posting links & suggesting relevant reading materials to you. You rejected everything that was offered to you out of hand. You aren't seeking answers, you're seeking to impose your dogma on us.[/quote]

i wouldn't be arguing here if the pyramids would have been built in england by the white man. because white skin has this unique ability of accomplishing impossible things where the other skin colors don't. have you ever read mein kampf? wake up now Neo. i thought that my sarcasm was little bit more obvious to you. or am i missing yours now?

but seriously, the mainstream view still lacks the arguments of it's own - it's not my burden to provide factual evidence that something which has never been proven to happen didn't happen. let's make this straight: i don't have the evidence that someone other than the egyptians built the pyramids, but neither does the mainstream view have the evidence that they did. the mainstream archaeology itself has provided us tons of information which underlines the incomprehensibility of the great pyramid even by modern standards; it has put its own presumptions under question which it cannot answer. this is my argument: that the mainstream view of the pyramids should no longer be the default because of the information that the mainstream has provided us. at this point we have no other civilization either who we know to be able to build the pyramids, but it doesn't make it logical to pick the only bad option available. i argue that the best we can do is to admit that we don't know who built the pyramids or how.
Skiessa
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:22 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Tiompan » Thu Feb 15, 2018 11:18 am

[quote="Skiessa" the best we can do is to admit that we don't know who built the pyramids or how.[/quote]

We ? .It might help if you got some of what you thought were facts sorted out before "we" even start a discussion .
Tiompan
 
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby circumspice » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:28 am

Occam's Razor states: "other things being equal, simpler explanations are generally better than more complex ones"...

Facts:

1. The Great Pyramids of Giza are located in Egypt.

2. The ancient Egyptian civilization has had a broken history of hegemony that spans approximately 3000 years, with 3 intermediate periods of foreign rule. Pharoanic Egypt ceased to exist with the inception of the Greco-Roman Era. Yet the ancient Egyptians continued living the same lifestyle unchanged, following the rhythms of the seasons & the annual inundations of the Nile River. Essentially an unbroken record of occupation by the same people in the same area for 3 millennia. The language remained the same. They kept records in that language.

3. Pyramid building began with the step pyramid of Djoser, in the 3rd Dynasty, approximately one century before Sneferu's 3 pyramids in the 4th Dynasty. There is an obvious building trend that starts & stops before culminating in the construction of the pyramids on the Giza Plateau. The development of the pyramid is plain to see if you look at them in the chronological order of their construction. The pyramids did not spring into being instantaneously, perfect & pristine. There was a progression, with plenty of errors & mishaps involving their construction.

4. Ignoring all the external inscriptions, which make claims as to who built each pyramid, there are inscriptions & graffiti that were never meant to be seen which make the same claims... The inscriptions & graffiti were made by quarry workers, masons, work crews, etc. These inscriptions were effectively hidden as work on the pyramids progressed. And those inscriptions were in the same language as the native people of ancient Egypt.


So... Please explain why they didn't build all the stone edifices that you claim that they couldn't build.
"Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer, and, without sneering, teach the rest to sneer." ~ Alexander Pope
User avatar
circumspice
 
Posts: 769
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:10 pm

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Skiessa » Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:08 am

circumspice wrote:Occam's Razor states: "other things being equal, simpler explanations are generally better than more complex ones"...

Facts:

1. The Great Pyramids of Giza are located in Egypt.

2. The ancient Egyptian civilization has had a broken history of hegemony that spans approximately 3000 years, with 3 intermediate periods of foreign rule. Pharoanic Egypt ceased to exist with the inception of the Greco-Roman Era. Yet the ancient Egyptians continued living the same lifestyle unchanged, following the rhythms of the seasons & the annual inundations of the Nile River. Essentially an unbroken record of occupation by the same people in the same area for 3 millennia. The language remained the same. They kept records in that language.

3. Pyramid building began with the step pyramid of Djoser, in the 3rd Dynasty, approximately one century before Sneferu's 3 pyramids in the 4th Dynasty. There is an obvious building trend that starts & stops before culminating in the construction of the pyramids on the Giza Plateau. The development of the pyramid is plain to see if you look at them in the chronological order of their construction. The pyramids did not spring into being instantaneously, perfect & pristine. There was a progression, with plenty of errors & mishaps involving their construction.

4. Ignoring all the external inscriptions, which make claims as to who built each pyramid, there are inscriptions & graffiti that were never meant to be seen which make the same claims... The inscriptions & graffiti were made by quarry workers, masons, work crews, etc. These inscriptions were effectively hidden as work on the pyramids progressed. And those inscriptions were in the same language as the native people of ancient Egypt.


So... Please explain why they didn't build all the stone edifices that you claim that they couldn't build.


first and foremost, occam's razor isn't a scientific method, and definitely does not apply on human activity. the claim that the mainstream view would be the most simple explanation in general is arbitrary anyways, since it ignores every single pyramid fact except the one that the egyptians were the earliest known civilization on the giza plateau.

as mentioned earlier, the pyramids that are known to be egyptian origin are mudcakes compared to khufu & khafre pyramids. it's like assuming that the falcon heavy must be ancient chinese construct since the ancient china also had rockets on their arsenal.

and the last: there is only one known graffiti in the great pyramid, a puny cartouche of khufu basically hidden from the sight of anyone visiting the pyramid interiors, and as far as i know, the khafre pyramid has none, and neither does the sphinx. anyone could have painted the cartouche at any time, and there is absolutely no reason to assume that such off-handed tag would be the builder's signature, especially if the pyramid would have been built to immortalize a god-like ego. build the greatest monument ever existed to immortalize your almighty, but somehow forget to claim the monument to be yours.

instead of ignoring everything i say, try answering to my replies since they are my part of this argument. it's frustrating to discuss with someone who doesn't appear to even have read what you've said before already coming with new comment.
Skiessa
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:22 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby circumspice » Tue Feb 20, 2018 12:49 pm

Thought provoking blog post concerning the status/usage of all ancient Egyptian pyramids. This post does not address the issues involving the building of said pyramids. Hopefully you'll find the author's down to earth & matter of fact approach to the subject refreshing & informative. He is not a professional archaeologist or Egyptologist, he's a well educated volunteer docent at the Oriental Institute & the Field Museum in Chicago.

Enjoy.

https://ancientneareast.org/2012/02/10/ ... d-as-tomb/
"Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer, and, without sneering, teach the rest to sneer." ~ Alexander Pope
User avatar
circumspice
 
Posts: 769
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:10 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Old World

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron