cladking

"We are an expression of whatever beliefs we choose to accept. " I mean it quite literally. Life is consciousness and consciousness has the exact same logic that underlies reality that we perceive as the "laws of nature". In part consciousness is pattern recognition and in humans this manifests as explanations of our perceptions based on beliefs and models. These models often derive from paradigms which are, in effect, more beliefs; beliefs about the proper interpretation of experiment. Each human chooses what to believe and this begins with trying to imitate and please our caregivers/ parents. As we learn we each choose what beliefs to incorporate. We are each a construct of what we choose to believe. Obviously nothing is static and these beliefs evolve over a lifetime and the change will ideally be driven by logic as we perceive it and the logic of reality as expressed by experiment. At every point of our lives our actions and perceptions are driven by our beliefs. Typically our beliefs are reinforced by our perceptions and by the outcomes of actions driven by those same perceptions. There is no breaking out of this pattern but by recognizing it we can influence it.

We are an expression of whatever beliefs we choose to accept.

We must use science to untangle the illogic of language. Experiment provides glimpses of reality which we extrapolate. When we remember we also interpolate these glimpses. Logic is logic and science is science and they are both a part of reality.

It appears the precision involved with the ancient vases has been confirmed; They have good provenance. Petrie himself said stones were fitted on the pyramid with "optical precision". The evidence of our own eyes says our interpretations of the ancient societies and what they left is all wrong.

Here I am referring to the horizontal section from the queens chamber to the chevrons above the entrance of the great Pyramid. I believe this entire length has sand in the walls in some places with most of it near the exterior. Today they've announced I was right all along that there is at least a 30' section of passage that was previously unknown through here. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-36351-0 There's also a picture taken from a boroscope inserted at the chevrons;

This was quick. there's already n update.

What's missing is that words like "think", "believe", "ramp", and all abstractions didn't even exist in Ancient Language. They had a mere handful of words and they were almost all nouns. The language breaks Zipf's Law because they not only didn't think like Egyptologists they didn't think at all just like "all" non-human species. I didn't say this simply because I thought that saying they didn't think like Egyptologists would suffice and it is not my intent to take this thread off topic. We can't imagine a metaphysical, digital, and representative language used by people who each thought exactly alike and didn't even experience "thought" at all. And since we can't my showing it it can and does exist will probably do very little good. I believe I answered your question very comprehensively in the last post but have elaborated only little here because I'd like to keep this as clos4e as I can to pictures and things that can be seen. There are a virtually infinite number of tests that this can and has already appeared. Hence the thread. "Funiculars" make numerous specific predictions beyond what has already been delineated. For example if chemical testing were done there would likely be several places that it is seen. Protected areas on the north side should have copper hydroxide deposits cause by the chemical interaction of copper sulfate, sodium decahydrate, sodium chloride, and calcium carbonate as described in ancient literature. There is probably still significant CO2 dissolved in the water at the bottom of the Osiris Shaft. There are numerous other ways this can show up. Ultraviolet imaging will probably show returns under the chevrons on the north side. The infrared imaging already showed most of the results I predicted but more extensive study will show many more. Microscopic stratigraphy done inside the great pyramids will show none were used as a tombs and other data will appear. There has already been vaterite found in the walls of the horizontal passage but i can't show a picture if this!!! There will be sand all through the walls here and it is the cause of many of the high density regions. All the testing needs to be done. And then all the anomalies will need follow up. Most of the work needed is the technical stuff that has never been done but there is also more mundane things like excavating the cave at the "Tomb of the Birds", and eventually clearing out the massive fissure just to the north of G1 in which Vyse failed to get all the way. There are barometric readings that need to be undertaken in the great pyramids and especially the Bent Pyramid. By this means the cause of anomalous air movements can be discovered. I have little doubt we'd quickly find caves open to the atmosphere under them. Many of these tests would probably provide new pictures for this thread.

Principally we are missing the simple fact that ancient Egyptians didn't think anything at all like Egyptologists. Egyptologists insist on parsing what they believe are incantations in order to understand them. The reality is there are no incantations and they only seem to be because Egyptologists can't understand the writing that can not be parsed because it is like bird's song, computer code, or a mathematical equation. The meaning disappears when it is parsed in any way at all. Because they wholly misapprehend the people they misapprehend the artefacts and everything else about the culture and the physical evidence. Because the tests have never been done we are missing the reality of how pyramids were built. Were the truth known that it was built with linear funiculars it would be be far easier to see this in the ruins and in the cultural context which said "Osiris tows the earth by means of balance and that it is "downward" that provides the motive force to build". They virtually used these exact words but it is invisible to anyone who believes ancient people couldn't even manipulate a wheel and appealed to many gods in every sentence. You can't parse any sentence correctly if you don't know the referents and this goes many times over for Ancient Language which was literal and could not be parsed. It meant only exactly what it said but Egyptologists assumed from the very beginning that it was incantation.

Then you have the results of testing that I've stated categorically has never been done!!! I didn't say that Egyptology is a 'conspiracy", I said they have never done great amounts of testing from chemical to microscopic and they've done no systematic testing except for stratigraphic work since the t9ime of Petrie 125 years ago. There is probably no conspiracy, and I certainly don't believe one exists, there is merely the professional belief that the answers are already known so testing is superfluous. Before the infrared testing showed that there are all sorts of structures inside G1 the Egyptological position said that the pyramid is too homogenous to show any kind of detail.

Thank you. I should have thought of this. I'm not sure these capabilities would be transferrable to building vases however. I do not believe it was done this way. The evidence of your own eyes suggests it was built in five steps and stones were relayed one step at a time up the 72 degree step sides. Obviously one can argue the definition of "ramp" to include the 72 degree sides but the bottom line is that there was no team of stone draggers pulling them up and no teams of "ramp builders" as defined by modern beliefs. While I've delineated and pictured a great deal of evidence to show this is how it was built in this thread there is still a great deal more evidence which simply can't be pictured. Most of the necessary evidence exists in ruins but not all of it can be pictured. There is also a great deal of cultural context that supports this hypothesis including statements by the builders which state how it was built. I believe, because there is evidence, that almost no stone movement was made through muscles. They used motive forces most of which were falling counterweights full of water. I believe, again based on evidence much of which can be pictured, that the builders were a force of nature and masters of one moving piece machines. I've never really cared much for this hypothesis for numerous reasons. initially because it would be almost impossible to clad the structures and it should leave evidence in the stone work. But it also flies in the face of the simple fact that the pyramid was stepped. The wooden cradles would make the stones more easily moved on level ground but uphill would be little easier and downhill a nightmare. They are generally much too flimsy for most stones. Just as a 6' tall grasshopper couldn't even stand up there is a fundamental difference between a 50' pyramid ands a 500' pyramid. It's not only the amount of stone and the work to lift it because more work has to be concentrated in a smaller area. As ramps get longer there is not enough room to support the number of men who must work on them. I believe these questions will never be answered without the use of modern science. I believe they aren't using modern science because they believe the builders could have used nothing but ramps. "Beliefs" very much are the issue when it comes to the great pyramids and the application of science. The perfection. Nobody has come close to duplicating even the easiest of the vases. The evidence is the utter lack of evidence and published reports. It's almost impossible to do anything on the Giza Plateau because it will not be allowed. If you are willing to pay for it yourself AND entice a museum to return artefacts they might let you in but there's a five year wait. All technology that has been applied to the pyramid has been thrown at it to see hat sticks but very little has been done. This is why you can't find any data about the pyramid or any of the artefacts. When anomalies are found they are ignored. Caves "known" to not exist are simply locked up when their existence is proven. But far worse is that there is no clearing house to record the many changes and extensive damage that is still occurring. It is almost impossible to differentiate the original from modern changes. Holes that are likely infrastructural are often filled with concrete for to accommodate tourists. Holes are drilled everywhere in the search for gold and booty. Science applied systematically would measure everything and then it would investigate every anomaly. None of this has been done since Petrie left over a century ago. There would be stratigraphic microscopy and many other such results. When infrared photography which has been commercially available for more than a century was finally applied the results were so stunning they not only refused to allow publication but never followed up on the dramatic anomalies. Allowing an isolated test from time to time does not constitute "study", I believe. "Study" by definition must mean the usage of all applicable resources. It must mean all science and all human knowledge coming to bear. In reality not even the knowledge of a single individual has been brought to bear. I've long said an engineering intern could solve how the pyramids were built on his summer vacation. Egyptologists are linguists.

This should help;

There are tens of thousands (if not more) of "Egyptian" earthenware, stone, and ceramic vases. Egyptology has great expertise in most of this material. But just as we fail to distinguish between the great pyramids which are huge and older and the tiny pyramids which are all in ruins there has been no differentiation between the older perfectly made vases and the later ones. I believe most if not all of these were found in a single spot dating back before the end of the great pyramid building age. I simply don't know how many were found and how many were mostly intact. The initial report said a "cache". I know of no reason to believe that other vases and art objects share such characteristics. There are certainly more of these older artefacts that defy ready explanations as to their manufacture or use but none are known to have been made to such exacting standards. As I've said many times, all the artefacts from the great pyramid building age should be subjected to systematic scientific testing. Only this one, to date, have been. Nothing has been scientifically examined systematically since Petrie at the end of the 19th century. We have far more knowledge and instrumentation than we did a century and a quarter ago. We have far more means to seek anomalies and so we can then study them to learn about the great pyramid builders and their lives. We can't see through the pyramids or see the characteristics of vases with our naked eyes. We must use science and it is not being done! The "Evidence of Your Own Eyes" does not extend into the ultraviolet or the specific gravity of ancient artefacts. We must use instrumentation and knowledge to peer into the unknown and unseeable.

https://www.cnn.com/2015/11/10/africa/egypt-giza-pyramids-thermal-anomalies/index.html The tests were so surprising to Egyptologists even though I had predicted them exactly that the initial reaction was to publish them and ask all Egyptologists for hypotheses regarding the causation. Of course it quickly became more widely known that I had predicted them and there were no further stories released to the press. There were several leaks as they tried to communicate outside the press which were sufficient to show my theory was probably accurate. There were other goings on reported by visitors to he site including evidence that endoscopes were used and scientists were trying to devise a means to access this area. It was all rather comedic. But the scientists didn't stop in 2015 and continued to gather more evidence that almost certainly corresponds to my theories and predictions but this is not certain since Zahi Hawass has refused to allow publication of more data even to Egyptologist for fear it might "confuse" people!!! There are continuing leaks and they still conform to my predictions. They went looking for gold and spiral ramps and found neither and the failure to publish proves they found no ramps. I'm sure no one knows how they were made. But accessing these might be extremely difficult. IMS there are fewer than 100 of them and there are UN laws now that essentially put the onus of proof on the owner rather than the countries of origin. In other words if you own an ancient artefact you almost need to show a 4000 year trail of receipts to prove legal ownership. Many items now are traded outside the eyes of the press, the foreign governments, and their agents. There is a continual flow of objects out of the US especially from private collections. Museums are usually supportive of both the Egyptian government and Egyptology. I agree that it shouldn't be overly difficult to get at least a few vases and other objects to check but Egyptology still controls the sites in Egypt and simply refuse the systematic application of modern science to any of them. It's not so much "they" as it is Dr Zahi Hawass who still calls all the shots. No doubt he gets support from others, some of whom could be named. He seems to believe he is the final authority and nobody has contradicted him. Egyptology is highly insular.

I've been campaigning for many years to get these vases tested right along with the great pyramids but it has always fallen on deaf ears. When some tests in 2015 showed exactly what i predicted they refused to release the results with the explanation that they didn't want to confuse the public. Where I predicted it they lacked even hypotheses or speculation as to its cause. This time an object was found outside their control and it is not explicable in terms of modern beliefs about stone pounders and brutish force. Read the comments!

It is clearly seen in this picture of the top of the Great Pyramid that stones came up the bottom of the photo and were then spread from right to left starting on the far side. This is consistent with the usage of linear funiculars to lift the stones.

Did you not see the chart showing the same symbols being used all over the world or the one showing Ancient Language breaks Zipf's Law. One of the reasons it breaks Zipf's Law is that there are very very very few words that were used. Most of the words were nouns and none of the words are necessarily abstraction. Indeed, there were also no words for "thought" or "belief" as well as no taxonomies!! Many languages are traced back to a single one called "Proto-Indo European" and I believe they all split even earlier than this and this is invisible because none of these languages were actually recorded and survived other than Sumerian and Egyptian. I believe the fact that all languages obey Zipf's Law and the Pyramid Texts do not is highly significant. It implies a different formatting or usage or a different way to think. I believe it is all of these. I really intend this thread to be "the evidence of your own eyes" so intend to try to avoid this specific subject to the degree possible.

As I said I discount the report in its entirety. It is merely interesting that no part of such a detailed account contradicts any of my hypotheses at all. I find it humorous because I discount it. There are some strange things implied by my hypotheses but those not in agreement with known science AND with ancient science I dismiss in their entirety.

This whole thing has been happening in very slow motion for many years now. A doctor and polymath as well as an expert on ancient Egypt and hieroglyphs has given me permission to reproduce his work undertaken because of my contention that Ancient Language does not obey Zipf's Law which holds all writing displays word incidence that lays out on a logarithmic scale. I knew it didn't obey the law because of its appearance so never counted words. By; Manu Seyfzadeh As you can see it's almost exactly as I had predicted; two well defined intersecting lines instead of a sweeping curve as all modern languages exist; Also I have contended since 2006 that the Egyptians could use linear funiculars without having the wheel which had existed for ten centuries when great pyramids began. I have contended they could have simply used a log or roller confined to a trough. Now that are teams working on this; https://egyptianpulley.com/the-egyptian-pulley They've actually demonstrated the ability to lift heavy weights up steep inclines. Again, it is quite apparent they had actual pullies but these experiments prove they were not necessary. As an aside since this thread is at the top anyway, there is a humorous little tidbit from the CIA where a mystic was interviewed and repeatedly said that there was water spraying up. Even though the mystic actually mapped some aspects of my hypotheses and this is CIA I still tend to discount it in its entirety. https://archive.org/details/CIA-RDP96-00789R001601170001-5/page/n4/mode/1up?view=theater I also find it absolutely fascinating that he described people with attributes of animals since the usage of metaphysical language forces an entirely different mode of thought that is just like animals. This fits with my contention that homo sapiens are extinct and we are homo omnisciencis.

I'm in general agreement but would say it differently. Life is consciousness and the first demand of consciousness is survival and the second reproduction. Second is to have fun to both feed your soul but also to maintain your desire to survive. Third, and most importantly, is to try to leave the world a better place than you found it. In every way you want to leave it better. Fourth, fight death with every living breath. You can age gracefully as you seek the fountain of youth. If you find it just hope you're still young enough to enjoy it.

Mebbe never been. My theory is the aliens have a machine that can extract intelligence from the human species and will leave when they suck up the last little bit. We have lost sight of our humanity. We have lost sight of why science works and what it is for. We no longer hold leaders responsible. "Science" is often not pursued for its own sake but rather for monetary purposes. Aliens might be our only hope.

The meaning of life? That's the easy one. Mebbe Mother Nature just got tired of watching boulders turn into sand while an entire species could have come and gone so She invented consciousness. 😎

You certainly need to know how a computer works to improve on it. Like all life all science is individual. Individuals invent hypothesis and experiment and interpret results. Individuals build models and then science changes one funeral at a time. https://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Pajares/Kuhn.html Without understanding consciousness the mechanisms of this interpretation are unknown. The effects of interpretations on humans and other science are unknown. Only individuals are conscious.

They did it the same way animals do it; without beliefs, thought, or abstractions. It is modern human consciousness that is different. Ancient humans "thought" just like other species and part of this mode of consciousness is to not experience 'thought" at all. It is apparently our beliefs that give rise to "thought" which is a comparison of sensory input to our models and beliefs. Without beliefs animals experience reality directly but can perceive only what they understand. I couldn't disagree more. There is no reason given time that even an animal brain couldn't be modeled with transistors. Of course such miniaturization may well be very far in the future. But even before that I believe that actual machine intelligence can be created. Whether or not it is conscious is a different question. I seriously doubt that language can create awareness or intelligence. No. You're oversimplifying. You assume they are symbols but I believe they are representations of human knowledge. This suggests either language spread from a point and was universal or that the nature of human consciousness was such everyone ended up at the same conclusions or it was both. Since there is no known contact between humans tens of thousands of years ago it implies some kind of shared consciousness or shared language or both. The odds against the same symbols evolving on each continent are too high to even bother to estimate. History is history and the fact is there are incredibly few words expressed in ancient writing, virtually no historical accounts, no abstractions, no words for belief or thought, no taxonomies, breaks Zipf's Law, and none of it makes sense after translation. This refers to the oldest language(s) does not apply to newer writings. There is a very strong implication that the authors could not possibly think like we do. There is an implication that consciousness itself must be different. Rather than saying he acted after he thought about it they said he acted the second moment after perception!!!! This says almost categorically that they could not think like we do.

The language wasn't "limited" the vocabulary was. There were only some few hundred words and several thousand nouns but with these words they could talk about anything they knew. Just like computer language employs only eight words and operates everything they could live their lives with very few words each with a single meaning. No. People who spoke this language were conscious but simply didn't experience thought. They knew they were alive and individual but their brains operated like other life forms. They were "human" only because they possesses complex language which allows the generational passing down of knowledge and in many ways defines what it means to be human. Language, modern language, programs the brain and allows us to experience thought. Ancient Language was the natural programming for the brain but did have shortcomings like the lack of taxonomies, abstractions, and symbolism which made inductive reasoning impossible. At this time. I'm not ruling out the God, magic, or the ability to create machine consciousness. I'm merely saying that at this time to our knowledge all life is conscious and consciousness, no matter how it is experienced by the individual, is life. It isn't only words about "thought" that don't exist in Ancient Language but all words related to "believe" and all abstractions. There is no inductive reasoning and their words show they reasoned from the specific to the general. It was apparently a totally different way to experience consciousness. There are the same "symbols" written in caves all over the world. Obviously these must be somehow innate to man. I believe that they are the product of deductive reasoning, they are what early man learned based on his consciousness. They are the natural product of a natural language as experienced by people all over the planet.

I believe all these questions and their answers are highly relevant but I might be the only one. I'll have to be extremely circumspect. Only those answers directly related to consciousness will be provided. "Arose" is not a biological term here. The parent language that was natural lent only its highly limited vocabulary to modern language that gives rise to our consciousness and experience of thought. In essence modern languages are a pidgin form of natural human language which is now nearly totally lost. Consciousness is life and all life is conscious. Language in other species arise from the way the brain is organized or wired. This wiring forms in utero and follows logical rules and a mathematical unfolding. For practical purposes in all other species language and consciousness are two sides of the same coin. Each species has a unique set of knowledge and this knowledge is based on what is needed to survive and procreate. Their worlds are perceived only in terms of this knowledge while ours are perceived in terms of what we have been taught. No. Words in other languages represent something and each word has a fixed meaning. The direction of a bee's waggle dance can not be interpreted or parsed because it represents the direction of food. Each bee must take the exact same meaning so abstractions and symbolism do not exist. Ancient people apparently described a different way to "think" where words like "think" simply did not even exist. It is an abstraction and there's no evidence any animal understands abstraction. But to deny them consciousness is obviously wrong. We don't relate to animals (communicate) because we can't think like they do. The formatting of the languages is different and "thought" as we experience it is an artifact of language. Perhaps if you're interested I can start another thread for the evidence of this.