Pyramids: through the eyes of the builders.

[cladking]

The title really needs no punctuation. It is a pun on countless levels and the colon exists partly to represent a set of eyes and primarily as a tribute to Samuel Mercer whose intellectual honesty in translating the PT made it possible to crack it using a computer. Mercer splashed punctuation everywhere.

 

How the great pyramids came to be spills out of the "only" written source that exists from ancient Egypt; the Pyramid Texts. But it is also evidenced throughout the physical record. The ancients didn't really communicate in puns but it looks like it to us because of the nature of their language. It looks like puns because their language was a natural language like computer code that was based on the logic of the various aspects of nature they studied. Each of these aspects of nature were called something we mistranslate as "god" and they were each heavily anthropomorphized. The gods were created in man's image. But man was an animal; a part of nature himself so when an animal better represented a trait then that aspect of nature (god) was depicted with the animal part that best represented the concept.

 

The language arose naturally and was probably just an enhancement of whatever animal language proto-humans spoke before the mutation of the speech centers which allowed for complicated language. But how the language came to be isn't at issue here, only how the language expressed meaning and the proof of this which is the pyramid. The question really boils down to were our ancestors superstitious bumpkins who dragged tombs up ramps or were they sophisticated scientists made powerful by their ability to think in a language that was a reflection of nature itself. I believe the answer will someday be seen as obvious and that even a casual observation of the evidence will show they were the latter.

 

A logical place to start might be what is the nature of the pyramid;

 

1416b. N. truly ascends to heaven, permanent like the earth.

 

The meaning of this does not become clear until each referent is solved by context. "N" is the dead king and he ascends to heaven as the pyramid. The Pyramid Texts consistently say the pyramid is not a tomb and this meaning can be extraxcted in many instances. In no instance at all does it say the pyramid is a tomb. We must assume that the pyramid is not a tomb and that it represents (is) the dead king.

 

So how does the king ascend as the pyramid;

 

1405a. To say: The earth is high under the sky by (means of) thine arms, Tefnut.

 

Again each term must be solved by context. Each time a term is used it gains definitional and connotative properties. Indeed, a word is these properties because some will use worrds incorrectly to mean something else. But in every case in the PT "tefnut" is the "physical phenomenon of downward" they used this term as a synonym for what we call "weight". Word usage was based on whether the concept under consideration was being viewed scientifically or colloquially. "Tefnut" is the scientific term and "earth" is a colloquial term. The scientific term for earth was "Geb" (physical phenomenon of the earth). Here it's not the planet being lifted but rather constituent parts of it. Gods can act at a distance only through their arms so this states that earth is being piled up by means of weight. This is consistent throughout the PT and all the little literature that survives. Osiris (physical phenomenon of water under pressure and its discharge) is even said to tow the earth by means of Ma'at (the physical phenomenon of balance).

 

In modern terms what they said and said consistently is that the pyramid was built by using counterweights full of water. They said that the gods built the great pyramids and men merely helped. Men made the counterweights and maintained them but it was gods who did the heavy lifting.

 

1101a. Further, to say: Men and gods, your arms under me,

1101b. while you raise me and lift me up to heaven,

 

They said this consistently and coherently. They never contradicted such statements. The pyramids were built by pulling stones up in an ascender one step at a time using counterweights full of water (Seker was the phenomenon of ballast). This is exactly what every single piece of physical evidence points to. Ramps have been debunked based on evidence.

 

The meaning of the PT probably isn't as important as the implications. It answers how and why the pyramids were built but, more importantly, it answers why and how human history before 2000 BC was lost. Language changed because it became overly difficult to express meaning in a natural language. The invention of writing was the final starw for the ancient language since it allowed one teacher to instruct many students and human knowledge exploded over the next 1200 years. It simply became too difficult to say what you wanted to say. Everyone used this language and many people simply weren't up toi the task. Improper phraseolgy resulted in an uitterance being mere gobblety gook. One wrong word would make your statement something akin to word soup.

 

So a new language was invented and confusion has reigned since for the main part. Of course modern language has undergone 4000 years of tweaking and word invention to reduce the confusion but it is hardly solved.

 

It is observation (heka; magic) which enables men and gods to act. It was the Eye of Horus through which Atum created the power (Sekhmet) to lift stones. It was men's ability to observe which led to being able to use nature itself to do the lion's share of the work. People have simply got to get the idea that the ancioents thought like us but were none too bright out of their heads. It's not true in any sense. They shared our values (even invented them) but they did not think like we do. They were scientists and had no religion at all. They did not believe in "magic". Each person had to understand science to even speak and one could get ahead by invention and discovery.

 

 

 

 

 

[cladking]

There is carbonated water today under the Giza Plateau. In ancient times it was apparently so heavily carbonated that it sprayed out of the ground like seltzer. This is described over and over in the PT but the powers that be won't even test this water. There are caves all over the plateau and the powers that be denied their very existence until they were led into one by the hand in 2010. The ancient name of the plateau translates as "Mouth of Caves". Caves figure prominently in the PT but especially in the Coffin Texts.

 

The PT paints a picture of stones being pulled up the side of the pyramid in steps. The last science that was done at Giza was more than 25 years ago and confirmed that the pyramid is composed of five steps wirth each 81' 3" as the PT says;

 

http://hdbui.blogspot.com/

 

You can see the picture at the top of this page. The author misinterprets it as ramps but if you measure these lines you can see they are parallel to the base so it's impossible for them to represent ramps. It's virtually impossible to build a cladded pyramid like G1 that is stepped with ramps. Ramps are debunked anyway because the evidence points elsewhere. The builders oversaw metal shops, canals, boats and the weighing of material. There are simply no titles whatsaoever consistent with ramps. The builders village is a tiny fraction of the size that it would need to be to build with ramps.

 

There is obvious water handling devices and operation all over the great pyramid building sites that Egyptologists seem unable to even admit. They concoct 92 word sentences to not say water was channeled from a water catchment device that surrounded each pyramid to the cliff face where there is a 300' counterweight run. Ancient source say stones "flew" to the pyramid 300" at a time.

 

I can only scratch the surface with all the evidence in a single post. But, I believe, the more important point is that all this is mentioned in the Pyramid Texts in a different sort of language than we use today. The builders describe how to use this water and how to continue its flow. They do so in a simple to understand language that's like computer code and expresses meaning through description(though it sorely needs retranslation). They said the pyramids were not tombs and were built by the "gods" and this is stated not by superstitious bumpkins as we percieve them but as highly sophisticated scientists who used a natural and primitive language which was the metaphysics of their science.

 

If anyone is interested I've got a great deal more evidence and I'd be happy to cite sources and defend any statement.

 

They could not have used ramps. The concept is simply absurd. The actual method is easily falsifiable through a little simple testing.

 

They said a lot of other things that are probably true and far more startling than using nature to lift stones. People are in for a rude awakening.

[cladking]

Pictures maybe then;

 

 

 

This is a picture of the boat they used to lift the stones but is an artist's rendition. The oryx at the head symbolizes their ability to work with a minimum of water. The bullrepresents the strenght. The stone speaks for itself and is "horus" who sits atop it.

 

 

Here you can see the water catchment device that surrounds G2. These catchments sat under the pyramids so had to have been built first. They were necessary to catch water. Incredibly this specific "integral apron" is even mentioned in the PT!!!

 

 

Here you can see the vertical lines on the pyramids stright up their sides which resulted from the finishing operations. All stones throughout the projecrt moved straight up the side. It's impossible ramps could have left such evidence.

 

 

 

Here you can see the traces of the route stones took much better. Counterweights moved down and stones moved up. Be sure to look at the top picture here which essentially proves ramps can not have been used.

 

http://hdbui.blogspot.com/

 

 

Here's a ben ben stone growing on a primeval mound right this moment. Robert Temple says the water is percolating up from deep underground in the Sphinx Temple leaving this behind.

 

 

The simple fact is the evidence is virtually conclusive but the tests aren't being done to prove it. Indeed, the last real science done at Giza was 25 years ago when it was shown stones were pulled up one step at a time. This evidence is consistent with the fact that the ancients had difficulty making ropes in excesss of 100'. The evidence is all consistent. The lack of depth of this evidence is reflective of the fact so little is known and that the powers that be are unwilling to do basic science (like infrared imaging) which would show how these were really built.

Edited September 15, 2013 by cladking

[Sayonara]

Quick query, because I think I possibly misunderstand you.

 

In your first post you talk about the language appearing naturally as "an enhancement of whatever animal language proto-humans spoke".

 

Is it an assumption of this thread that the Egyptian culture developed in isolation from other cultures, from their ascension from animal status to the beginning of their written history? Or that they are the common root of modern languages? I get the impression from your posts that there is an unspoken supposition at work: that modern languages and civilisation exclusively have their roots in Egyptian culture. This is not the case.

 

 

I'm also curious to know what your understanding of "computer code" is. I suspect from the context that you don't quite appreciate its lack of redundancy, the structure and context division, or the inherent fact of function by intention. Yet you're suggesting that an early language, which anthropomorphised natural phenomena, was similar. They could hardly be more opposed. The only similarity I can see is that some computer languages abstract concepts into functional classes, which could be said to be similar to the use of metaphor in human language. But the design intent and reliability outcome are so different as to make the link tenuous and superficial.

 

So yeah... curious to know what computer code you refer to and why (there are many languages, organised in a loose hierarchy, so it's not a good term to bandy about without being specific).

[Strange]

 

Samuel Mercer whose intellectual honesty in translating the PT made it possible to crack it using a computer.

What is "it" that has been cracked using a computer? And by whom?

 

(Again, you might want to read a book on clear communication. An introductory college text on essay writing would probably be a useful start. Pronouns with no antecedents tend to be pretty much meaningless. Maybe English is not your native language, in which case you may need to take a bit more care, or get someone else to help you.)

 

 

The ancients didn't really communicate in puns but it looks like it to us because of the nature of their language.

In what way do you think the language looks like puns? I am not an expert on the Egyptian language, but is appears be a typical Afroasiatic language.

 

 

It looks like puns because their language was a natural language like computer code that was based on the logic of the various aspects of nature they studied.

This is very confusing. It sounds as if you are saying that "computer code" is a natural language. But even so, Egyptian is a typical Afroasiatic language which, therefore, bears no relation to any computer code that I am aware of. What computer code are you talking about.

 

 

The language arose naturally and was probably just an enhancement of whatever animal language proto-humans spoke before the mutation of the speech centers which allowed for complicated language.

Although little is known of the origins of human language it is likely to have been something like 100,000 years before the Egyptian language. Egyptian and hundreds, maybe thousands, of other languages would have developed over the intervening period and spread across the whole world. Why do you think there is something special about Egyptian?

 

 

But in every case in the PT "tefnut" is the "physical phenomenon of downward" they used this term as a synonym for what we call "weight".

So your entire "theory" is based on making up arbitrary new meanings for words which already have well attested meanings.

 

 

The pyramids were built by pulling stones up in an ascender one step at a time using counterweights full of water (Seker was the phenomenon of ballast). This is exactly what every single piece of physical evidence points to.

Citation needed: what physical evidence are you referring to?

 

 

Ramps have been debunked based on evidence.

Citation needed: what evidence are you referring to?

[Endy0816]

There's actually good evidence they used an internal ramp instead. Basically avoiding the issues associated with a long external ramp.

 

Backed up by an actual density study and the partially unsealed "notch".

 

 

 

[cladking]

 

 

 

There's actually good evidence they used an internal ramp instead. Basically avoiding the issues associated with a long external ramp.

 

Backed up by an actual density study and the partially unsealed "notch".

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks for the picture. I might have to quote you extensively on this. Dr Bui is a brilliant man but he is obviously misinterpreting this picture. I can put a grid on it that shows the five steps but can not obtain his permission so anyone who cares how the pyramids were built will simply need to create his on five step grid. This grid clearly shows the impossibility that these represent any sort of ramp at all. It is simply impossible that a line parallel to the base shows a ramp. This scan shows a five step pyramiud and it shows how the great pyramids were actually built; the stones were pulled up one step at a time. If you think about it ramps would be the most highly inefficient means due to the effort to build ramps, the incredible effort of dragging stones on them, and the need to remove them after the work. However a team of men on the top could pull stones up easily. Ramps are debunked and we know stones "mustta been" pulled up a step at a time. Logic, common sense, the physical evidence and the Pyramid Texts are all in agreement.

 

People don't realize just how shallow the argument for ramps actually is. It consists of "there was no other means to lifft stones for such primitive and superstitious people.". This concept has fallen flat. There were countless easier ways for them to build and the other means are actually evidenced.

 

I like the internal ramp theory quite a lot. More genius has gone into this than ANY Egyptological theory of pyramid building in history (which starts in 2000 BC). Unfortunately the theory is incorrect in main part. If they ever allowed its inventor to do the basic science to falsify his theory we would have the answer to how irt was built regardless of what that answer is. This is simple 1970's technology and Egyptology has stood in the way of it being done. While Egyptologists drill holes in G1 looking for treasure this testing is inexpensive, unobtrusive, necessary, and wholly nondestructive.

 

They are scared to death of what the testing will find. It will overturn all their assumptions so they won't do it and won't even let anyone else.

 

These are the facts and they can't be changed by dodging them.

[cladking]

What is "it" that has been cracked using a computer? And by whom?

 

 

Modern communication is extremely poor. Language is still nearly as useful as ever for thought, but communication is divided and confused. There is no alternative to saying the same thing over and over for me to be understood. I do use some strange terminolgy but it's an an attempt to be understood correctly and to otherwise be not understood at all. My typing skills are horrendous and I drop words and sentence fragments in trying to correct text sometimes.

 

This is the root of the problem that people can't see this. They have so many basic beliefs that are contradicted by the concept that ancient people were scientific rather than superstitious that they simply miss the points. Modern people have a lot of preconceptions that seem to invalidate the idea that the ancient language was meant literally. But it's not the idea that is wrong it is the myriad preconceptions. In a sense the most absurd preconception is that Egyptology is a science but this is not fair to those in the field who have done so much work and expended so much effort to make it possible to solve this. We have the belief that humans are intelligent but this is not well supported by evidence. We have the belief that we can communicate clearly but this is obviously untrue. We have the belief that everything is known by someone and all we need to do is seek out the person who knows. This is absurd as seen by the ability to obtain opposing expert witnesses on anything from the simplest science to the most complex. We have the believe that invention springs from trial and error rather than through observation and this belief goes 100 times over if we're speaking of ancient people and a million times over if we're speaking of beavers. We believe ancient people were highly superstitious because this is what we've been told and we need to have some understanding of why they were so perfectly primitive. It's seems the simplest explanation for why people would be willing to live without modern conveniences, machines, and infrastructure.

 

It is all of these beliefs that have to laid bare for people to even consider the facts and the science related to reverse engineering of the great pyramids.

 

The toughest thing for people to accept is that there is a single coherent meaning that is expressed in the only ancient writing that exists; the Pyramid Texts. Anyone who reads it sees gobblety gook and the translators who put it into every modern language sees gobblety gook. They see words that must change meaning because they see no consistent meaning. They see it in terms of the religion that existed centuries later that arose from the great grand children of the pyramid builders. In actuality the words express meaning differently than the way we express meaning. They were misinterpreted by the children of the pyramid builders much the same as we misinterpret them. The change in language was as invisible 4000 years ago as it is now.

 

It appears as though all humans spoke the same language. No doubt there would be numerous dialects and differences could be significant but vocabulary was very limited and grammar always the same. This language was simply the natural human language which might be akin to other animal languages. Computer code is "natural" to computers. It was designed that way. It works.

 

Modern human language is different. Words gain their definitions from context. Meaning is often unclear yet it's not noticed by the listener who fills in the meaning as he understands it.

 

This is why the PT sounds like nonsense. Of course there are also translation problems and numerous unknown words. Some of these words have been "solved" by Egyptologists by using concepts from later times further muddying the waters. They never understood the meaning and every translator has stated that the meaning is unclear and they can only circumscribe the meaning. In actuality it appears to be written in language that is not readily translated because it is more complex than simple translation can be accomplished into modern fragmented language.

 

This is as clearly as I can say it but I'm sure there will need to be many more attempts before these concepts are understood. I'll add some examples to this post as I have time and address your other concerns later. What you need to get here is that I've been able to solve how the great pyramidswere built largely through reverse engineering them but also through understanding the actual intended meaning of the builders themselves. This meaning appears to be clear but isn't understood by Egyptologists who all speak modern language.

 

...Mebbe if there were some computer programmers among them...

Here's one of my favorite examples because it is absolutely absurd as understood in modern language;

 

Utterance 538.

1302a. To say: Back, thou lowing ox.

1302b. Thy head is in the hand of Horus; thy tail is in the hand of Isis;

1302c. the fingers of Atum are at thy horns.

 

These should be called "rituals" rather than utterances. Egyptology misunderstands the Pyramid Texts to be spells, incantation, and religious nonsense. They start out "to say" because these rituals were read aloud to the crowds at the many ascension ceremonies of the dead king (N) not because they are incantations that must be spoken aloud. This particular ritual certainly seems to be written by stinky footed bumpkins. There seems to be an implication that three of their most powerful gods are required to overpower an ox.

 

This is entirely wrong and when each of these terms is solved by context you'll find it actually paints a very clear picture of loading the device that lifted stones up the nearly sheer side (72 degrees) of the stepped pyramid. I know a lot about this device because of this utterance and many others. All the terms were solved by context and this context tells a different tale than inept gods threatening small cattle.

 

The "ox" is actually the "bull of heaven" which was the entire device that lifted the stone. It was the "boats of balance" and described as the boats tied together and operated by the "Overseer of the Boat of Neit" and the "ferryman" who filled the counterweight (boat). Meaning was expressed in context and the head of the bull of heaven is defined as the context. The scientific term was "dndr-boat" but this term isn't applicable here because it's not the subject. The "ox" is the actual sled on which they put the stones and/ or the remains of the king to be lifted up the pyramid. It was shaped simiolarly to the head of an ox;

 

 

Atum was the first god who separated the earth from the sky through definition when he sprayed water high in the air. All gods manipulated things through their fingers and Atum moved this sled through the horns at the back. These horns were simply the attachnments for the ropes from the counterweight on the other side of the pyramid.

 

Horus the Younger was the stone that came from the quarries in the Land of Rainbows where the great pyramids were built. Horus the Elder was the falcon god of the Land of Rainbows. Horus the younger "had no feet and he had no arms" but he sat on his hands (the ability to manipulate the ox through his weight). Isis is the goddess of the counterweight and mother of horus the younger whom she lifted from the nearby quarry. This is all stated directly in the PT and it's stated consistently, repeatedl, and coherently.

 

The ferryman filling the counterweight and a device called the "Min" determined the height of the sled (ox head) as it was being filled. Several stones went into each load and they were all loaded from the same platform on the east side of the pyramid. The ferryman added water to raise the ox and the min was a large "boat" submerged in the water that pushed up on the sled. Each time a stone was loaded the sled (ascender) would sink lower and someone would sometimes recite the ritual above. The ox would make a "lowing sound" as the heavy wooden timbers moved against the "ladder of heaven" upon which it ascended.

 

This language is extremely expressive but if you don't understand it then it's just gobblety gook and you'll get strange ideas about the people and their beliefs. It's not extremely difficult to understand but the powers that be buried their heads in the sand on this issue four years ago and show no sign of coming up for air.

 

It's not so friustrating becuase any number of simple tests can prove I'm right or they're wrong. It's frustrating because there are tests that can answer the questiuons no matter what the reality is. They won't do them because they are afraid of the results. Instead they commission one study after another to prove with math that it's possible to have used ramps. ...Even though ramps have been debunked for two years now.

[phantom]

Horus the Younger was the stone that came from the quarries in the Land of Rainbows where the great pyramids were built. Horus the Elder was the falcon god of the Land of Rainbows. Horus the younger "had no feet and he had no arms" but he sat on his hands (the ability to manipulate the ox through his weight). Isis is the goddess of the counterweight and mother of horus the younger whom she lifted from the nearby quarry. This is all stated directly in the PT and it's stated consistently, repeatedl, and coherently.

 

The ferryman filling the counterweight and a device called the "Min" determined the height of

A good place to start is by defining what is exactly meant by the Land of Rainbows. I suspect it may be somewhere over the rainbow.

[cladking]

A good place to start is by defining what is exactly meant by the Land of Rainbows. I suspect it may be somewhere over the rainbow.

 

It probably had many names but the one used predominantly in the PT is "Land of Horus". The newer translation of the word for "rainbows" is "sky arcs" but Mercer used "bows". This was the land of "the horizon" which was the true horizon from which the sunset and sunrise could be seen. Down in the valley these events were obscured by the valley walls.

 

The "land of rainbows" was a triangular area from the Fayuum Depression to Giza. It was about 25 miles on its long axis and less than 10 on the side at the Fayuum. It is the land "under magic" (observation) where all of the great pyramids were built. It is the area where water sprayed from the ground like seltzer water. The PT is exquisite in its detail and refers to the "effervescent water like wine that tosses violently at Giza beginning in the summer each year". The ancients named the years after the (calculated) amount of water that filled the 37 acre Saqqara enclosure during the season. This measurement can be used to provide an estimate of the amount of stone lifting done each year.

 

Yes, this evidence is open to interpretation but what's not really open to interpretation is some the physical evidence which all agrees with it.

Scientific definition;

 

1455a. for N. is a star, the light-scatterer of the sky.

 

Poetic;

 

1078c. the steps of Nun are open,

1078d. the steps of light are revealed

1078e. by that one who endures always.

 

Everyday usage;

 

1680b. the apertures of the (heavenly) windows are open for thee;

1680c. broad are thy steps of light;

 

"Poetic" may be something of a misnomer since these lines are used to establish the who, when, what, and why of the subject for the specific ritual. They didn't really write anything we'd recognize as poetry probably in the PT except to the significant degree everything they ever said was a sort of poetry. Their words always rhymed with nature.

The concept of rainbows have been vital to my ability to decipher the meaning of the PT and to even follow some of the concept across the change in the language circa 2000 BC. There are many more usages of this concept in the PT and in history.

 

A rainbow is Atum's adornment;

 

1587a. To say: Greetings to thee, Atum.

1587b. Greetings to thee, Khepri, who created himself.

1587c. Thou art high, in this thy name of "Ḳȝ."

1587d. Thou comest into being, in thy name of "Khepri."

1588a. Greetings to thee, eye of Horus, which he adorned with his two hands completely.

 

Atum is the spraying water from the ben ben on the primeval mound. Khepri is the "natural phenomenon of the same sun each day" which shines down on Atum creating rainbows;

 

It's so ironic that another name for the primeval mound in later Egyptian language was "sandbank of horrible face bringing water".

[cladking]

Quick query, because I think I possibly misunderstand you.

 

In your first post you talk about the language appearing naturally as "an enhancement of whatever animal language proto-humans spoke".

 

Is it an assumption of this thread that the Egyptian culture developed in isolation from other cultures, from their ascension from animal status to the beginning of their written history? Or that they are the common root of modern languages? I get the impression from your posts that there is an unspoken supposition at work: that modern languages and civilisation exclusively have their roots in Egyptian culture. This is not the case.

 

 

I'm also curious to know what your understanding of "computer code" is. I suspect from the context that you don't quite appreciate its lack of redundancy, the structure and context division, or the inherent fact of function by intention. Yet you're suggesting that an early language, which anthropomorphised natural phenomena, was similar. They could hardly be more opposed. The only similarity I can see is that some computer languages abstract concepts into functional classes, which could be said to be similar to the use of metaphor in human language. But the design intent and reliability outcome are so different as to make the link tenuous and superficial.

 

So yeah... curious to know what computer code you refer to and why (there are many languages, organised in a loose hierarchy, so it's not a good term to bandy about without being specific).

 

I apologize for losing track of this post.

 

 

 

 

 

I believe the Egyptian civilization borrowed heavily from earlier civilization, most of which were African. Like all peoples they also imported ideas from trading partners and others they encountered. Egypt then became much of the basis of the Greek civilization but, again, each civilization has built on what came before. The Greeks gave little credit to earlier peoples. I believe that civilization really started as soon as complicated language arose around 40 to 50 thousand years ago because it was the language that encoded al the science that was required for progress. Some of this is talked about here;

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/78437-ancient-beliefs-and-evolution/

 

There are an infinite number of ways to say something in modern language. There are strict limitations on how something is worded in computer code or in the ancient language. There are a few other similarities as well.

 

I haven't done computer code since the days of fortran and wasn't especially good at it. I'm a little more familiar with hardware but equally out of date. Directions for computers and electronics are often written in an indecipherable language that looks like computer code translated into English. This is similar to how the Pyramid Texts read. I believe almost all computer languages are strictly brutal when it comes to logic. Almost any logic error in almost any computer program will cause it to fail. GIGO. The ancient language is the same way; it is dependent on understanding the entire sentence and each sentence can sometimes hinge on other sentences. Any error of "logic"; any choice of the wrong word will cause the entire sentence to be meaningless. It's possible for a progran to have a function despite an error and it's possible to express some meaning in the ancient language with an error but usually neither have any meaning at all with even the smallest error.

[phantom]

"The "land of rainbows" was a triangular area from the Fayuum Depression to Giza.

I disagree with you.

 

Its a place where there isnt any trouble.

Its far far away.

 

Behind the moon.

Beyond the rain.

 

Somewhere over the rainbow

Skies are blue

And the dreams that you dare to dream really do come true

 

There is no place as the Land of Rainbows in this physical universe which is why people have always had trouble finding an actual location. It simply doesnt exist or at least not in this universe.

 

What the ancient Egyptians and other cultures, were describing are visual hallucinations ranging from simple migraine auras to more complex seizures and some deep NDE experiences while awake. These experiences are described with a lot of creative graphics and in later times, even more creative symbols and writing.

 

I think you have your apples and bananas mixed up in the sense that you assume that every inscription, symbol, and hieroglyphic has some physical counterpart. Some may have and others may not.

 

It is possible that water has sprung up in the desert as a result of an artesian spring, geyser, or flooding, and it is also possible that it was a mirage, or a mirage coupled with a hallucination. It is also possible that the water they speak of means the Water of Life.

The terms need to be understood within the context they were written.

 

I also disagree with your interpretation of the ox.

 

What you havent shown is an adequate explanation of how or why the builders chose this particular design and what it represents.

 

Someday I'll wish upon a star. . .

[cladking]

 

What the ancient Egyptians and other cultures, were describing are visual hallucinations ranging from simple migraine auras to more complex seizures and some deep NDE experiences while awake. These experiences are described with a lot of creative graphics and in later times, even more creative symbols and writing.

 

 

 

Egyptologists believe in stinky footed bumpkins as evidenced by a translation that suggests even their gods aren't smart enough to not walk through corpse drippings.

 

722c. Thy foot shall not pass over, thy step shall not stride through,

722d. thou shalt not tread upon the (corpse)-secretion of Osiris.

723a. Thou shalt tiptoe heaven like Śȝḥ (the toe-star); thy soul shall be pointed like Sothis (the pointed-star).

 

Indeed, the author sems to be suggesting that walking gods should squish their toes in the corpse drippings. Most people who study ancient times though other than Egyptologists seem to subscribe to the sun addled bumpkin theory. These people simply spent so much time out in the desert that they saw people turning into pillars of salt and falling towers causing changes in the language. There are newer theories that suggests the ancients were stoned and there are known to be hemp ropes dating back many centuries as well as magic mushrooms and toads with questionable taste. Many people see trial and error. All you'd need is 4.2 X 10 ^ 807,000 th monkeys and typewriters to get War and Peace so how many bumpkins does it take to build a pyramid?

 

These are probably impossibilities. But none of these ideas are addressing the evidence. Why does the literal meaning of the PT actually explain the physical evidence???! Why did the builders consistently say one thing and we believe another?

 

It is possible that water has sprung up in the desert as a result of an artesian spring, geyser, or flooding,...

 

 

This is exactly what the builders described; CO2 geysers. This is what the ancient historians recorded. This was the "secretion" that came from Osiris that required people to tiptoe or die.

 

2110b. ’Iḫ.t-wt.t, thou art not enveloped by the earth.

2110c. Thy fame is by day; thy fear is by night, as a god, lord of f ear.

2110d. Thou commandest the gods like the mighty one, chief of the mighty.

2111. [O] Osiris, the overflow comes, the inundation hastens, Geb groans.

 

"I’ḫ.t-wt.t," is "risings begetter" that caused cake and bread to rise. It caused foam to rise on beer. It is defined in numerous contexts as CO2. It caused the overflow of water from Osiris. No other concept fits in every place they used the term "’Iḫ.t-wt.t," therefore it meant CO2. This was the scientific term and colloquially it was Osiris' sweat or efflux (corpse secretion).

 

All adaptive behavior of groups is based on logic and observation. It is probably impossible to build a civilization through superstition and hallucination will not aid in any way.

 

The "theory" that they mustta used ramps is debunked. It is wholly disproved. It is apparent they pulled the stones up one step at a time and this is consistent with what the builders actually said. If as you yourself say, they actually had geysers then this would be conclusive proof of my theory and virtual proof they meant what they said. All the physical evidence is in agreement. In twenty years the concept of ramps will be quaint. People will wonder what we were thinking but we're what thinking is that we are the pinnacle of creation and the ancients were bumpkins who just didn't know better.

 

 

Citation needed: what physical evidence are you referring to?

 

 

Again, all the physical evidence is either neutral to how they were built, denies ramps were used, supports that they used counterweights, or both denies ramps and supports counterweights. Essentially the argument for ramps is that the people were too primitive to invent any other means. All the evidence cited for ramps is assumptive and/ or anachronistic.

 

There are two apparent arguments for ramps but they disintegrate on closer inspection. One is that there is fill on the cliff face on the NW corner of G1. This is the site of a counterweight that ran down the cliff face and pulled stones up an inclined plane from the quarry. The fillwas needed to resghape the cliff face for counterweight operation. The nature of the fill is largely debris like broken pottery. The other argument is the oft repeated story that the main quarry east of G2 was filled with "ramping material" but no analysis of this material is known. There were temporary structures of various sorts used as infrastructure at Giza. Most of these were made of tura limestone and cannibalized to build the cladding on the pyramid but some were made of material like tafla and stone chips such as the 80' loading platform on the south side of G2.

 

All the evidence says they used counterweights. Much of this evidence is actually fairly good quality. There's an excellent sampling of builders' jobs that reflect using water and not one single job consistent with ramps. It is apparent that few men were employed at this task and there is extensive evidence for water all over the plateau. It's what the builders said.

[cladking]

The pyramids were stained red below double the height of zero kebehwet (twice the height of a step)(162' 6"). The heiroglyph for "pyramid" has the same region colored red. The angle of the pyramid is 52 degrees or the color red on the secondary rainbow and the arris angle up the corners is 42 degrees or the color red on the primary rainbow. The former is not coincidence because there was siderite in the water but the latter are probably coincidences. It would be nice if we studied these to find out.

 

 

There is no place as the Land of Rainbows in this physical universe which is why people have always had trouble finding an actual location. It simply doesnt exist or at least not in this universe.

 

 

Just to be clear on this point I should point out that NO egyptologist believes the ancients were talking about rainbows. When Mercer used "bow" he believed is was referring to one of the "enemies" of Egypt, and, I believe, when Allen uses the term "sky arc" it is as a theoretical place between earth and heaven. I'm not certain he's ever defined his understanding of the term but keep in mind that Egyptologists believe there was no concrete meaning to the ancient words. They write whole books describing how a simple concept like the eye of horus (the opening for water) changes meaning with each usage in the PT.

 

They also don't believe in CO2 or the hydraulic cycle known as "nehebkau" (Nḥb-kȝ.w);

 

1140c. (he is dried) by the wind of the great Isis, together with (which) the great Isis dried (him) like Horus.

...

1146a. N. is the pouring down of rain; he came forth as the coming into being of water;

1146b. for he is the Nḥb-kȝ.w-serpent with the many coils;

 

There very much is a land of rainbows still lying under the desert sand. The water failed in 2600 BC and then the language changed in 2000 BC so it was forgotten. But in every important way it is still there and still critical to the species.

[phantom]

Just to be clear on this point I should point out that NO egyptologist believes the ancients were talking about rainbows. When Mercer used "bow" he believed is was referring to one of the "enemies" of Egypt, and, I believe, when Allen uses the term "sky arc" it is as a theoretical place between earth and heaven. I'm not certain he's ever defined his understanding of the term but keep in mind that Egyptologists believe there was no concrete meaning to the ancient words. They write whole books describing how a simple concept like the eye of horus (the opening for water) changes meaning with each usage in the PT.

I am not an Egyptologist and Im not talking about rainbows either. Im merely making a connection between the descriptions in the literature and migraine auras which can have the appearances of a rainbow or a rainbow of colors. I suggest you look up images of migraine aura. Various visual phenomena can be easily induced and was not out of reach of ancient Egyptian technology.

 

Again, the word water needs to be understood within the context in which it is written. There are many things called water. Substances melt because of an ancient concept called the element of water. If I put a piece of sulfur in a crucible and heat it, it will melt. Why? Because of ancient concepts, it contains water. Everything melts because it contains the element of water.

 

There is also water of the Nile, sea water, well water, rain water, water of mirages, water from the Eye of Horus, and maybe some others. The tear of the Eye of Horus may be connected to the rainbow. If it is, then this is why it would be called water because it could induce a migraine aura with a rainbow of colors. Rainbows are caused by water.

 

So what does the pyramid represent? I suspect this is how to square a circle.

Edited September 19, 2013 by phantom

[cladking]

It's funny that in this modern world we can't seem to agree on a single thing. There are hundreds of time zones throughourt the world which shows we can't even agree it's the same time everywhere. Nobody knows what day midnight falls on because it is undefined in such terms but everyone thinks he knows. We can't agree on word usage, pronunciation, best authors, or war and peace. Once in a while scientists might agree on something but there are just as many priests to disagree.

 

But there's one thing that almost every modern person will agree with; our ancestors were ignorant and superstitious. There are countless ways we believe and say this and new ones are dreamed up every day. Of course the new superstition is to never insult any group even if they've all been dead for tens of thousands of years so when we say they were superstitious we usually append "not that there's anything wrong with that", or that they were brilliant and sophisticated despite being ignorant and superstitious.

 

The bottom line remains exactly the same; they could not have done what they did with ignorance and superstition. These traits lead to regression and death, not to building and improvement. It is most highly improbable they passed down science, engineering, and paleontology through oral tradition and preserved only their superstitions and religions in writing. If this were so then where is all the ancient sacred writing? why wasn't it preserved? Why do no books survive? It doesn't matter if these words are understood or not. It doesn't matter if they are believed or not. What matters is how did the builders of the great pyramids see their own work. The answer is that there are clues throughout their entire culture as gleaned from their tombs. The answer is that the Pyramid Texts that was inscribed in stone is simple ritual written by highly scientific people whose science was observation and logic and its metaphysics was language. This is why it looks like religion and magic to us and it's why we don't understand either the ancient religion nor the ancient magic.

 

Does it really make any sense at all that we could have a thick book on the ascension of the king and not understand the simplest terms in the book ansd have no clue at all about their beliefs, their magic sceptres, the icons, or anything? Does it really make any sense that all the writing from the era is gobblety gook and lists? Does it really make any sense that they left nothing related to their knowledge? What is wrong with this picture?

Again, the word water needs to be understood within the context in which it is written. There are many things called water. Substances melt because of an ancient concept called the element of water. If I put a piece of sulfur in a crucible and heat it, it will melt. Why? Because of ancient concepts, it contains water. Everything melts because it contains the element of water.

There is also water of the Nile, sea water, well water, rain water, water of mirages, water from the Eye of Horus, and maybe some others. The tear of the Eye of Horus may be connected to the rainbow. If it is, then this is why it would be called water because it could induce a migraine aura with a rainbow of colors. Rainbows are caused by water.

So what does the pyramid represent? I suspect this is how to square a circle.

 

I believe you might make a pretty good Egyptologist. You've figured out something that took me 6 years to deduce; the ancient elements. Egyptologists don't know about these elements because they believe all the writing is religion and incantation. They believe that Re' was just the sun "god" and had limited manifestation. I can't speak extensively on this subject because there are few clues in the rituals which we call the Pyramid Texts about their "chemistry" as it applies to the elements. They speak of compounds much more often than the rules for understanding the elements. However, it appears that water was not itself an element per se, or if it was, it was always represented by the moon. It's a tough call and not one I understand yet.

 

Egyptologists do not even recognize that the eye of horus is connected to water!!! They believe that word changes meaning by context and over time. Yet none of these meanings is clear.

 

Even if you were right (it's quite possible) that some uses of the word "water" in the PT do not apply to H2O the fact remains that the important ones are extremely well defined and do neceesarily apply to H2O. There is only a single liquid that can form a pillar on the horizon and off gas CO2 . They called it "water like wine", "cool effervescent water that came to the uplands", and various other things that simply have only one real world referent. They either had geysers and a funny way of saying it or a shared hallucination that persisted for centuries and resulted in all their books being destroyed by later generations.

[CharonY]

 

 

It's funny that in this modern world we can't seem to agree on a single thing. There are hundreds of time zones throughourt the world which shows we can't even agree it's the

 

You... do not know the practical reason of time zones (which, ironically is based on an agreement of sorts, not disagreement)...? And hundreds of them? Seriously?

[phantom]

Egyptologists don't know about these elements because they believe all the writing is religion and incantation. They believe that Re' was just the sun "god" and had limited manifestation. I can't speak extensively on this subject because there are few clues in the rituals which we call the Pyramid Texts about their "chemistry" as it applies to the elements. They speak of compounds much more often than the rules for understanding the elements. However, it appears that water was not itself an element per se, or if it was, it was always represented by the moon. It's a tough call and not one I understand yet.

 

Egyptologists do not even recognize that the eye of horus is connected to water!!! They believe that word changes meaning by context and over time. Yet none of these meanings is clear.

The problem is that science and religion are woven into each other. Physical cause and effects have some sort of religious explanation along with cultural bias. The Greeks may have come up with the concept of elements either from the Egyptians or they learned the secret from the Egyptians and developed the concept on their own. There does seem to be some communication across the borders in their trade routes and this could have been the founding of the Ancient Order of Masons. Similar concepts can be found in Israel although expressed differently. Here we have the symbolic expression for water as an inverted equilateral triangle with the apex pointing down, probably because rain falls down. And the symbol for fire, a normal equilateral triangle with the apex pointing up, because flames go up. If you superimpose the symbol for water on top of the symbol for fire, what do you get?

 

The term water has to be understood within the context in which it was written. From the above fire water it cant be determined if the element of water was contained within the substance or if the fire was the cause of the water. If the symbol for water in the PT is the moon this would point to a form of spiritual water which is not to be confused with the symbol water ripple which would indicate sea water, pond water, etc.

 

The spiritual water is an entopic phenomenon and can be associated with palinopsia. I think it is possible that different countries and cultures didnt want to be under Egyptian rule or anybody elses, so they developed their own explanations to establish their independence but the underlying cause and effect appears to be the same. The Dome of the Rock has the same meaning as the pyramids of Egypt.

 

The sun god Re is not only the god of the physical world but that of the underworld. Putting the underworld on the side for now, Eye of Horus is the same as the Eye of Re/Ra. From which the spiritual water flows which is represented by the tear.

 

A lot of written information may have been lost in the destruction of the library of Alexandria or looted in various invasions. It does seem that the basics were passed along in oral tradition. We find similar concepts in the Emerald Tablet.

 

The father of it is the sun, the mother the moon. The wind bore it in the womb. Its nurse is the earth, the mother of all perfection.

[cladking]

The sun god Re is not only the god of the physical world but that of the underworld. Putting the underworld on the side for now, Eye of Horus is the same as the Eye of Re/Ra. From which the spiritual water flows which is represented by the tear.

 

A lot of written information may have been lost in the destruction of the library of Alexandria or looted in various invasions. It does seem that the basics were passed along in oral tradition. We find similar concepts in the Emerald Tablet.

 

The father of it is the sun, the mother the moon. The wind bore it in the womb. Its nurse is the earth, the mother of all perfection.

You're either sandbagging a lot or you have a natural talent for this. You've got the thread ends and they just need to be tied together like fire and water making stars. ...Like Re' and the moon makes bubbles.

 

Before I get back to all the new stuff in the thread let me just address these.

 

Re' is not a god of the underworld. This is a confusion of the ancient language. There is no religion, there is no magic,and there is no underworld. It is Re' which adorns the ben ben with a rainbow. The ben ben is the life's work (ka) of Atum who is the natural phenomenon of the geyser. This word for "geyser" in it's scientific form was the "D3.t" which is misinterpreted as the "duat" in modern times. When Atum stood on the Giza Plateau as the "D3.t" he was not only the ben ben on the primeval mound but also the column of water offgassing CO2 and the water which built the ka of the king (tthe pyramid) as well as the Marsh of Offerings where the water collected (as the wdn.t-offerings). Meaning was expressed differently in Egyptian and they had a different "mode of consciousness". This is part of what is hiding the obvious meaning.

 

The specific lines misinterpreted as saying that Re' is a god of the underworld are all through the PT. Essentially Re' is simply connected with everything that takes place outdoors during the day.

 

372c. he makes, the ka of N. clean in the lake of the Dȝ.t.

372d. He rubs down the flesh of the ka of N. and his own

372e. with that which is near Rē‘ in the horizon, that which he (Rē‘) took,

 

The geyser was composed of several "natural phenomena" but when the CO2 level dropped below a critical point all that was left were dead "gods" and Nun (natural phenomenon of water of the abysss) under the ground. The term D3.t morphed into a new concept that meant dead gods under the ground after the water dried up, the language changed, and religion was invented to try to preserve the ancient knowledge. This new concept is the "duat". It is a modern word for a symbolic place.

 

NONE of the definitions assigned by Egyptology apply to the language in which the PT was written. Sure, many of the verbs and like are highly similar in meaning but the words are used differently to express meaning. It is similar to computer code. Essentially in order to understand the ancient language you need to go through the PT line by line and word by word determining what words have to mean for the statements to be logical and express coherent meaning. The way Egyptologists do it simply doesn't work. In 150 years they've made no sense of it at all. There are 27 different sceptres and they don't know the origin or meaning of a single one of them but using the technique of solving for referents has yielded definitions for 15 of these so far. It has also solved the origin of several of the icons such as the symbol for "life" (the ankh) is the geyser. Water in the sunny desert is life. The PT seen in this light is answering such basic questions as how and why the pyramids were built but all Egyptology has is the assumptions that changeless bumpkins dragged tombs up ramps. These assumptions have no evidence in support. Our ancestors simply changed after they built the pyramids one step at a time and we are the bumpkins.

 

The Caliphate Al Mamuum was likely the first modern person in the Great Pyramid in the 13th century AD. He foreced an "entry" below the main entrance on the north side. There is a significant probability that the upper reaches were accessible by means of the grotto and so-called escape tunnel but he made the hole to remove something rather than to get in. I mention this because the lid of the so-called sarcophagus is missing and the Emerald Tablets are traced to the Caliphate. The lid would not fit out without the new "entrance" even if the descending corridor was open which it likely was not.

 

I do have a lot of doubt that the Caliphate had any means to translate any text that might have been on the lid. But we don't know what else was in the so-called king's chamber so there might have been an older translation of the lid into Syriac or some other ancient language. It appears he spoke a few languages. Whatever the case the Emerald Tablets of Hermes appear to be a fairly faithful translation of an ancient text written in the ancient language. They describe how to build using a geyser!! Indeed a corrolary of Newton's third law of motion is #8 on the tablets;

 

8) With great capacity it ascends from earth to heaven. Again it descends to earth, and takes back the power of the above and the below

The water ascends to heven and its energy is used in a counterweight to lift an equal quantity of stone. It's interesting Newton himself studied the pyramid looking for help with his law of gravitation. There's a curious inscription near the main entrance which might state this mathematically. Newton's translation of #8 is less good;

 

8) It ascends from ye earth to ye heaven again it desends to ye earth and receives ye force of things superior inferior

Remarkably a couple even mention the rainbow!!!

 

8) It ascends from the earth to the heavens (and orders the lights above), then descends again to the earth; and in it is the power of the highest and the lowest.

It orders the lights above!!!!!!

 

Once you see it it all becomes rather cut and dried. It's not really so outlandish once you remember that things change and the evidence is all there. I still find I have a few superstitions left. Just recently I realized that I see the universe very mechanistically which is most probably in error especially in light of the newest science. The Egyptians saw the universe as a massive dance and until you can see this you can't understand several lines in the PT.

 

It will be tempting to belittle the ancient science when we finally start trying to reinvent it but, I suspect, it holds some knowledge we've yet to discover and it will hold some important keys to the future. It will apply much more closely to humans than modern science. Of course, I've been wrong before.

 

http://www.the-book-of-thoth.com/content-157.html

Edited September 20, 2013 by cladking

[phantom]

The Caliphate Al Mamuum was likely the first modern person in the Great Pyramid in the 13th century AD. He foreced an "entry" below the main entrance on the north side. There is a significant probability that the upper reaches were accessible by means of the grotto and so-called escape tunnel but he made the hole to remove something rather than to get in. I mention this because the lid of the so-called sarcophagus is missing and the Emerald Tablets are traced to the Caliphate. The lid would not fit out without the new "entrance" even if the descending corridor was open which it likely was not.

 

I do have a lot of doubt that the Caliphate had any means to translate any text that might have been on the lid. But we don't know what else was in the so-called king's chamber so there might have been an older translation of the lid into Syriac or some other ancient language. It appears he spoke a few languages. Whatever the case the Emerald Tablets of Hermes appear to be a fairly faithful translation of an ancient text written in the ancient language.

Im not sure which pyramid you are referring to as the Kings Chamber is in the Great Pyramid and according to what I have read, this would be the Eastern pyramid (Smyth, 1880). According to The Egyptian History Treating of the Pyramids, Written Originally in the Arabic Tongue by Murtardi the son of Gaphiphus, translated 1672:

 

The Gate of the Eastern Pyramid was on the South-side a hundred Cubits distant from the midst of the Western wall on the Western side. They measur d also from the Western wall, that is, from the midst of it a hundred Cubits, and they diggd until they got down to the door of the vaulted Casemate, through which they entered into it.

It is possible this is misinformation to discourage further investigation or there is another entrance on the Southside.

 

 

The ankh presents the water of Life (the tear of the Eye of Horus), and the Emerald Tablet was written by Hermes, the messenger of the gods and he was Greek not Egyptian. The Emerald Tablet appears to have been written at a later date but it does look like it traveled around the world.

[cladking]

The ankh presents the water of Life (the tear of the Eye of Horus), ...

 

Yes, and no. The water came out of the eye of horus because the eye of horus was any opening through which the geyser flowed. The ankh is a representation of the geyser and the eye is only a small part of it.

and the Emerald Tablet was written by Hermes,...

 

 

No! Hermes was a god and there's no proof any religious based god ever existed much less that one wrote books. This isn't to deny the possibility of (G)od(s), merely to state none are factual in the sense we think of and no evidence exists of writing other than One using a finger to enscribe the ten commandments (weakly evidence). Hermes was born in a cave (like atum) and the name means column (like atum was a column of water).

 

...the messenger of the gods and he was Greek not Egyptian. The Emerald Tablet appears to have been written at a later date but it does look like it traveled around the world.

 

Yes. The Emerald Tablets appear to be written in our modern confused language but they appear to be a direct and good translation of something from the ancient language. As such the tablets describe building using water from a geyser. Go back and read it. It is higfhly improbable that the translator of this work understood its meaning which is why we don't understand its meaning. You can't easily translate between computer code and any modern language. Any attempt will result in flow charts and logic charts and be mostly incomprehensible to most people.

 

This is why we don't understand any of the ancient writing that exists; it is not and can not be properly translated. A far better job can be done when the meaning is known.

 

Im not sure which pyramid you are referring to as the Kings Chamber is in the Great Pyramid and according to what I have read, this would be the Eastern pyramid (Smyth, 1880). According to The Egyptian History Treating of the Pyramids, Written Originally in the Arabic Tongue by Murtardi the son of Gaphiphus, translated 1672:

 

 

It is possible this is misinformation to discourage further investigation or there is another entrance on the Southside.

 

 

There is most probably no entrance on the south side. I'm not sure what the confusion is here but will try to research this when I have the time. It might be the source of Vyse's conviction that there was a southern entrance which led him to dynamite (probably nitroglycerin actually) a massive hole on the south side.

 

There is one entrance implied in the PT that isn't known on the north side but there are only two known known entrances both on the north side and one being made by the Caliphate. There were also two tiny air shaft entrances that lead out and two others similar during construction that only reached the flat top. I believe there are poorly sealed canals leading nearly to the outside in several locations at 80 feet and 160 feet.

 

The spiritual water is an entopic phenomenon and can be associated with palinopsia. I think it is possible that different countries and cultures didnt want to be under Egyptian rule or anybody elses, so they developed their own explanations to establish their independence but the underlying cause and effect appears to be the same. The Dome of the Rock has the same meaning as the pyramids of Egypt.

 

Again, I don't believe any evidence exists that the ancient Egyptians thought this way. We have interpreted the PT in terms of the religions that didn't even exist when the PT was written. This is not legitimate research. More importantly though it has yielded no knowledge of the ancient beliefs and failed to make any predictions. It is quite apparently in error. All we have from two centuries of study of the pre-2000 BC Egyptians is endless mysteries and inconsistencies in the paradigm.

 

Perhaps your words apply to later eras but they would have no meaning to earlier people.

 

You... do not know the practical reason of time zones (which, ironically is based on an agreement of sorts, not disagreement)...? And hundreds of them? Seriously?

 

There are so many logical inconsistencies with time keeping I hardly know where to start.

 

 

 

 

Of course there are only "hundreds" of time zones when viewed from a maritime perspective. Most countries have strict rules about time keeping in port and these can vary over short distances. There are areas that use daylight savings and some that don't. These can be mixed. The time zones are not all linear based on longitude. Perhaps, one of the weirdest phenomena associated with out definitions is the international date-line which causes one to gain or lose a day when crossing. No provision exists for adjusting this for rapid movement such as a high spewed conveyance or a person circling one of the poles (earth's axis).

 

I really don't see any practical advantage to using our definitions. It seems somewhat akin to trying to define the earth as flat and making the math work out. A place can be on either side of a time zone so you don't know sunset or sunrise by knowing the time there. If we all used the same time then there would be less confusion and "local" time would come to mean its offset from greenwich time. If you're -6.5 hours then you'd know sunset and sunrise. Life revolves around the sun rather than local time which varies the sunset many hours over the course of the year. Of course there would still be latitude differences but these are estimatable.

 

We would still need to define midnight as part of the day; either 0:00 or 24:00.

 

It's remarkable that time definitions are as good as they are but then there's still the problem with the various calenders in use as well.

 

I believe if we went to standard time there would be a lot less confusion all around. Perhaps people would pay more attention to accuracy as well. As is, it can be extremely difficult to determine the exact time anything happens and this especially applies when the event is half a world away.

 

I'm not sure I see any benefit to current definitions other than to keep the terms AM and PM. These terms have little meaning when we change the clocks twice a year. I think most people would be more likely to know when noon and midnight actually occur on standards time.

[cladking]

 

1416b. N. truly ascends to heaven, permanent like the earth.

 

1405a. To say: The earth is high under the sky by (means of) thine arms, Tefnut.

 

1101a. Further, to say: Men and gods, your arms under me,

1101b. while you raise me and lift me up to heaven,

 

There's really quite a few statements about the pyramids and their nature as made by the actual builders. Egyptological assumptions are everywhere contradicted by these statements.

 

1249c. To say four times: N. mounts to heaven;

 

1559c. that N. may rest in heaven, as a mountain, as a support.

 

Just as the column of water known as "Atum" defined the sky and the earth through eruption the dead king as the pyramid supports the sky.

 

1296a. (And) men will construct with their arms a stairway to thy throne.

 

990b. The earth shall rise under the feet of N.;

 

Over and over the Pyramid Texts say that the pyramid is not a tomb and that it was built in "battlements" or as steps to heaven yet Egyptology persists in believing the builders were so primitive they could only have used ramps. The only evidence that can remotely apply to the builders is in the PT yet it isn't believed because it doesn't fit the assumptions. The physical evidence doesn't fit the assumptions either but rather than do the testing or performing the science they ignore any idea that doesn't fit their beliefs.

 

Egyptology has more in common with a religion than a science as it applies to the great pyramids. It is based on four false assumptions which they refuse to try to falsify or investigate. I believe this is extremely important but the status quo is immovable. Egyptology is blocking science at Giza. They won't do it themselves nor let anyone else. They are destroying the artefacts and the cultural heritage while a little bit of non-destructive testing would positively answer the questions of how they were built and who built them. Each year they bury more evidence in concrete and tourist centers and drill more holes looking for loot they are sure is hidden away. Meanwhile the important discoveries lie inches away or in plain sight undisturbed. The paradigm has failed for 150 years but it is still sacrosanct.

1834a. The earth [produces] N.; he shall be chief of the gods who are in heaven,

[cladking]

So what does the pyramid represent? I suspect this is how to square a circle.

 

I try to as great a degree as possible to stick to the actual facts and the direct implications of these facts. Any discussion of why these were built starts getting away from facts and toward speculation. This was the only site of fresh clean water near the population centers. Indeed, the population centers may have been produced by the water sources. Memphis (Saqara) was the capital back in the great pyramid building age and is the site of the first great pyramid. The PT suggests that there were many uses for the water from the site but lists only laundries, growing herbs, and building the pyramid. The first parts of construction was always a glass smooth and perfectly flat water collection device and a canal (causeway) down to the low lands (probably flooded at high nile). This water was likely used for all sorts of food processing and beer making in the so-called valley temple.

 

The problem is that people aren't looking at this through the eyes of the builders. Most people see it through the kaliedascope called "egyptology". They imagine that the ancients were so primitive and superstitious that they could only build it through dragging stones up ramps. Nevermind that ramps are debunked. Nevermind that the word "ramp" isn't even attested until more than a century after the pyramids were built. They imagine that the effort required would only be expended if they were superstitious and believed the dead king could only ascend to heaven if they endangered their lives and threw away much of the prodiuctive capacity of a nation. Today we waste on such a massive scale so imagining the ancients wasting so much is easy.

 

This is all wrong. There was little work building these beyond the quarrying. The pyramid built itself just as the primeval mound did. There would have been numerous observations that could be made only with a tall structure. Many of these would involve barometric pressure which would be useful in the determination of the atmosphere thickness and size of the earth. They would have felt their ears pop going up and sought explanations.

 

It's also a virtual certainty that these things were used as clocks and even calenders. The ancients were keen observers and skilled at math which allowed them to invent time measurement by stellar observation. Not only is G1 oriented perfectly north and south but it has inleaning sides which causes the shadow of the setting sun to flash on the equinoxes. The shadows of the SE corners line up on the winter solstice. They no doubt had various gnomens (obelisks) spread around to tell the time of day and time of year. This is mentioned indirectly in the PT and the CT but both instances are somewhat fragmentary so I can't be absolutely certain of the meaning.

 

1679a. -------------------------------------

1679b. ---------------- he rests alive in the West (or, he is satisfied in living in the West),

1679c. among the Followers of Rē‘, who make the way of twilight mount up.

 

This is exactly the way they would describe the shadows lining up if they were speaking of this.

 

These structures and the engineering required to build them are simply wondrous but to dismiss them as the products of barefoot bumpkins does them and us a tremendous dissservice. We deserve answers to basic questions.

 

 

The builders stated in almost no uncertain terms that these structures were the steps by which the king ascended to heaven. They said that the king became the pyramid after he ascended. They said the king's mummy was burned on the incompleted pyramid and ascended as the smoke. The king was responsible for everything in life and in death he became all those things from justice (ma'at), to the pyramid (instrument of ascension), to the means by which he ascended (Seker, Atum, Osiris).

 

Egyptologists find it very easy to sit in comfortable chairs and condemn ignorant savages to a lifetime of building ramps and dragging stones up them. This belief colors out perception so we don't see the facts like the gravimetric scan or lack of any evidence for ramps. We imagine that it must have been easy to drag about stones since that's how they mustta done it. In the real world, building the pyramids was "easy" but it was easy only because they did not use ramps.

 

There's probably more math "encoded" in the pyramid. I personally haven't really looked for it because the easiest thing to solve is how it was built and Egyptology won't even seek to falsify ANY theory on this subject. Once some real data starts flowing in it should be fairly easy for people to make the other connections.