Ancient Reality

[MNoBody]

I've read several such articles.

I believe there was some such geopolymer knowledge and application but I doubt it was widespread. I believe there is a natural travertine deposited in place that is sometimes mistaken for cement.

The geopolymer theories have been dealt a series of significant blows over the last ten years. I don't dismiss them but it appears improbable that any great pyramid consists chiefly of such a material.

There are going to be a lot more data points if Egyptology ever starts studying the pyramids or allowing scientists to do so.

possibly, finding another method does not mean it was employed universally for everything, however many things seem to be cast with precision not possible by carving, Egypt has literal tons of excellent examples, some have crumbled and reveal the basework of blocks with obvious cast oozings internal....some people have been doing a decent job of compiling these anomalies and there are more than one would think
many artifacts in the americas also show the same features, as do the ruins in Petra and pretty much every megalithic site globally.... I think multiple techniques were used, and these varied over time and locale so it makes it difficult to conduct accurate forensics later

 

[ChristineM]

If I am correct language is the programming for the brain. Ancient Language HAD NO ABSTRACTIONS.

Language, oh right, so we are not talking of humanity who do and have possessed abstract thought. But of words about abstract thought. Cool. The Chinese language has no past tense but Chinese people are easily able to talk about past events.

No it doesn't. Reverse engineering a crime requires no abstraction.

Try it someday

The pyramid pales in comparison to everything that goes with this. We will need ancient science to survive this century and it's still there complete under the NE corner of G1.

Nobel prize stuff.. publish and be damned.. what do you have to loose except your reputation?

 

[cladking]

possibly, finding another method does not mean it was employed universally for everything, however many things seem to be cast with precision not possible by carving, Egypt has literal tons of excellent examples, some have crumbled and reveal the basework of blocks with obvious cast oozings internal....some people have been doing a decent job of compiling these anomalies and there are more than one would think
many artifacts in the americas also show the same features, as do the ruins in Petra and pretty much every megalithic site globally.... I think multiple techniques were used, and these varied over time and locale so it makes it difficult to conduct accurate forensics later

I really don't doubt that some things were cast and the evidence varies by location. There are efficiencies gained by casting especially as it involves lifting.

I just don't believe the case for the core stones and backing stones of G1 is very good. There are apparently some poured or cast stones in and around the pyramids but the bulk of the pyramid itself appears to me to be stones exactly as they were removed from the nearby quarries and then shaped and inverted. My opinion on this is not really well-informed but I have read a few articles related to them as well as read the opinion of various experts including geopolymer proponents. The argument that G1 itself is cast does not seem very strong to me. This is mostly outside my knowledge base and I don't dismiss the argument. I believe my theory could still stand if it is concrete but its basis would be weakened.

I have not studied all these sites but have a passing knowledge of all the Egyptian great pyramids. I too, have puzzled over the bosses and apparently cast stones at various S American sites but have few opinions on them. There is a weir and storage tanks on top of the Acapana Pyramid but I've not seen good photos of these. My wheelhouse is reverse engineering and the discovery of premises. This puts a great deal of everything outside my apprehension. I have no relevant expertise and my experience is mostly in systems and material handling with a smattering of computer programming. But then, figuring out what my co-workers were saying was virtually a full time job in itself.

 

[MNoBody]

being involved with stone as a craft put it into a whole different light for me, practical as i was looking for ways to improve my techniques and learn new methods, and oddly the older the method in some cases, the better it works.....but diamonds are a cutters best friend...
have to get my portable slab cutter set up this summer [if the impending dystopic future is suspended] as I have literally tons of stone to chop...

 

[cladking]

Language, oh right, so we are not talking of humanity who do and have possessed abstract thought.

You just averred your conclusion while ignoring all the evidence. You need to explain how a language without words of abstraction can reflect abstract thought. You need to show it's even possible to communicate abstractions without words for "belief", "thought", taxonomies, and reductionism. I simply maintain it's an impossibility and Egyptologists are wrong.

You need REAL evidence that any animal can understand ANY ABSTRACTION AT ALL rather than just the belief of researchers. Of course this puts you in a catch-22 but this gets right back to what I'm telling you; that we can't even define "consciousness" so we can study it. There are no viable hypotheses to cover most of what my theory says is obviously true. We think in language. But ancient people had no word for "think". They lacked almost all of our words. They had a few verbs, some of what we call "adverbs", and 15,000 nouns. WE CAN'T POSSIBLY COMMUNICATE WITH SUCH A LANGUAGE! So how in the hell did they? The answer is simple; the formatting of Ancient Language was entirely different.

You can skip over these facts but it changes nothing.

Try it someday

I am Homo Omnisciencis. I have a broccas area that grew so I could learn modern language. I can't turn off my humanity or will myself to think differently. I can't suddenly become a "Homo Sapien" because they are extinct and the die is cast. I suffer dunning kruger just like everyone else in the world. Egyptologists are wrong and they suffer dunning kruger. I aver I am right and I suffer dunning kruger. The only real difference is they can't imagine being wrong about anything and I know they are wrong about everything. It is your job to show I'm wrong. It is your job to use evidence and logic to undermine any part of my theory. Meanwhile you're just lobbing softballs at me.

You're making the assumption that everyone who doesn't agree with you assumed the conclusion. My assumption is that everyone makes sense in terms of their premises and assumed the conclusion.

Is this not clear?

Nobel prize stuff.. publish and be damned.. what do you have to loose except your reputation?

Did I mention that Egyptologists refuse to release data even to Peers?

What you don't seem to understand is that I dispute NO SCIENCE AT ALL. Real science is based on experiment and is often expressed as "theory". But "theory" is more than mere experiment it is also extrapolation and interpolation. It is a (mostly) logical extension of experimental results. People BELIEVE that Egyptology is based on science and that all "science" is based on metaphysics. They BELIEVE metaphysics is set in stone so theory can never deviate from reality and that experiment is necessarily interpreted correctly. None of this is the nature of reality. We've tied up metaphysics with abstraction to such a degree that even the meaning of the word is different for each individual. We've divorced the axioms and definitions of science from experiment and we've substituted observation for theory in many many cases. Science is a train wreck but most of the carnage and equipment damage is in soft sciences like Egyptology. It is no longer a "science" at all. They will no longer even publish data until it agrees with what they believe. It has no more relationship to science than an apple orchard has with sodium tripolyphosphate mining in China. They're both related to the American diet but there the similarities end.

So where do you propose I publish? Just like chaos theory has no place in scientific journals a new perspective of science gleaned from the solution of how the pyramids were buiult has no place anywhere. People don't like my theory and those with dunning kruger who like it least are scientists or call themselves "scientists".

 

[ChristineM]

You just averred your conclusion while ignoring all the evidence. You need to explain show a language without words of abstraction can reflect abstract thought. You need to show it's even possible to communicate abstractions without words for "belief", "thought", taxonomies, and reductionism. I simply maintain it's an impossibility and Egyptologists are wrong.

You need REAL evidence that any animal can understand ANY ABSTRACTION AT ALL rather than just the belief of researchers. Of course this puts you in a catch-22 but this gets right back to what I'm telling you; that we can't even define "consciousness" so we can study it. There are no viable hypotheses to cover most of what my theory says is obviously true. We think in language. But ancient people had no word for "think". They lacked almost all of our words. They had a few verbs, some of what we call "adverbs", and 15,000 nouns. WE CAN'T POSSIBLY COMMUNICATE WITH SUCH A LANGUAGE! So how in the hell did they? The answer is simple; the formatting of Ancient Language was entirely different.

You can skip over these facts but it changes nothing.



I am Homo Omnisciencis. I have a broccas area that grew so I could learn modern language. I can't turn off my humanity or will myself to think differently. I can't suddenly become a "Homo Sapien" because they are extinct and the die is cast. I suffer dunning kruger just like everyone else in the world. Egyptologists are wrong and they suffer dunning kruger. I aver I am right and I suffer dunning kruger. The only real difference is they can't imagine being wrong about anything and I know they are wrong about everything. It is your job to show I'm wrong. It is your job to use evidence and logic to undermine any part of my theory. Meanwhile you're just lobbing softballs at me.

You're making the assumption that everyone who doesn't agree with you assumed the conclusion. My assumption is that everyone makes sense in terms of their premises and assumed the conclusion.

Is this not clear?



Did I mention that Egyptologists refuse to release data even to Peers?

What you don't seem to understand is that I dispute NO SCIENCE AT ALL. Real science is based on experiment and is often expressed as "theory". But "theory" is more than mere experiment it is also extrapolation and interpolation. It is a (mostly) logical extension of experimental results. People BELIEVE that Egyptology is based on science and that all "science" is based on metaphysics. They BELIEVE metaphysics is set in stone so theory can never deviate from reality and that experiment is necessarily interpreted correctly. None of this is the nature of reality. We've tied up metaphysics with abstraction to such a degree that even the meaning of the word is different for each individual. We've divorced the axioms and definitions of science from experiment and we've substituted observation for theory in many many cases. Science is a train wreck but most of the carnage and equipment damage is in soft sciences like Egyptology. It is no longer a "science" at all. They will no longer even publish data until it agrees with what they believe. It has no more relationship to science than an apple orchard has with sodium tripolyphosphate mining in China. They're both related to the American diet but there the similarities end.

So where do you propose I publish? Just like chaos theory has no place in scientific journals a new perspective of science gleaned from the solution of how the pyramids were buiult has no place anywhere. People don't like my theory and those with dunning kruger who like it least are scientists or call themselves "scientists".

You have provided no evidenced

I have previously shown that cro magnon were capable of abstract thought. A long time before ancient egypt

Here are some 20 to 25000 year old abstract paintings

 

[Agnostisch]

I've finally figured out what everyone has been missing in these words for 150 years;

The Pyramid Texts Index

Incredibly no one noticed there are no abstractions!!! Imagine writing that has no words for "belief", "thought", taxonomies, or reductionism AND NO ONE NOTICED!!! This is just staggering that no one noticed because these words account for most words of every modern language. Almost all their words were nouns and people never noticed.

OBVIOUSLY their language didn't work like ours and they couldn't have thought like us.

Yet, Egyptologists are still whistling past the graveyard of their failed theories and beliefs.

They still refuse to do testing,

As an Egyptian Man , I can tell you a great secret that you do not know about the pyramids, who wanted immortality in the world and wanted never to die, he should use the technology found in the pyramids. When we come to the true mystery of these pyramids, we can bring life back to the dead person with ease.
The pyramids are the factories of eternity.

 

[MNoBody]

As an Egyptian Man , I can tell you a great secret that you do not know about the pyramids, who wanted immortality in the world and wanted never to die, he should use the technology found in the pyramids. When we come to the true mystery of these pyramids, we can bring life back to the dead person with ease.
The pyramids are the factories of eternity.

Hi Agnostisch, nice to meet you.
i came across this fellow this winter when I was researching kemetic cosmology and i was wondering if you are familiar with him.....he seems very astute and rational and I find his material quite intriguing and compelling and he lives there as well [in Egypt]
[am looking forward to getting some $$ so I can buy his book]
Ashraf Ezzat

 

[gnostic]

Did I mention that Egyptologists refuse to release data even to Peers?

That’s because there are no peer review for Egyptology.

Egyptology is multiple-discipline study of ancient Egypt, which include philology, literature, history, anthropology, archaeology, Egyptian religion/theology and myth, Egyptian arts, architecture, and whatever other stuffs that are missing in the list above.

Egyptology isn’t just one area of study, and some of them, like literature, philology/translations, history, theology (religion and myths), arts, have nothing to do with science whatsoever. Therefore, you wouldn’t bring up Egyptology before Peer Review, because Egyptology isn’t science.

And since Egyptology involved a wide area of so many different skills, not every Egyptologists would have have the same skills or would have the same “levels” of skills.

Some may specialized in just philology so they may spend a large part of their career translating hieroglyphs or hieratic, never spending times out in the fields. And translations are dependent on translators’ abilities to interpret what they are seeing, so there may be disagreement among translators on what the words or sentence mean.

Others may tend to focus on religion aspect of Egyptology.

And other Egyptologists would want to only study Egyptian architecture, that may not have skills to translate hieroglyphs.

And Egyptologists who focused on arts, probably wouldn’t know anything about the engineering aspect of pyramid building.

And some Egyptologists would focus on certain periods, like Predynastic period, Old Kingdom, Middle Kingdom, New Kingdom, Late Period, Ptolemaic Egypt, etc.

In any case, there are too many different skills in Egyptology, and clearly some of them have absolutely nothing to do with science, so it would be pretty much be pointless to bring before Peer Review.

 

[Agnostisch]

Hi Agnostisch, nice to meet you.
i came across this fellow this winter when I was researching kemetic cosmology and i was wondering if you are familiar with him.....he seems very astute and rational and I find his material quite intriguing and compelling and he lives there as well [in Egypt]
[am looking forward to getting some $$ so I can buy his book]
Ashraf Ezzat

Welcome.
Yes, I have read the book of the researcher Ashraf Ezzat before, and I have a copy of the book pdf.
I can give you the copy for free if you want, but I don't know what the forum rules are here, is it allowed to share links or files or what?

 

[MNoBody]

Welcome.
Yes, I have read the book of the researcher Ashraf Ezzat before, and I have a copy of the book pdf.
I can give you the copy for free if you want, but I don't know what the forum rules are here, is it allowed to share links or files or what?

not sure about that being a recent arrival here myself
what was your overall impression of the book?
just in general?
i would like to buy a copy to support him since writing books of that nature usually isn't a lucrative career choice, but $$is a scarce commodity right now....
I have only also just learned there is a private chat room function in the forum somewhere, so perhaps there is a place to put portions of works that aren't in the public domain yet and won't get the site into issues......

 

[Agnostisch]

not sure about that being a recent arrival here myself
what was your overall impression of the book?
just in general?
i would like to buy a copy to support him since writing books of that nature usually isn't a lucrative career choice, but $$is a scarce commodity right now....
I have only also just learned there is a private chat room function in the forum somewhere, so perhaps there is a place to put portions of works that aren't in the public domain yet and won't get the site into issues......

Ok as you like.
I don't think I like the book. The writer is determined to disprove the Torah and is determined that the Jews have no right in the land of Palestine or to say the land of the Canaanites, so there are a lot of fallacies in which the writer fell, but that does not prevent him from having an independent point of view.
The author has a religious background and his main reference is the Book of Quran, so he is not neutral in his vision of the heritage of religions that preceded the Islamic religion.

 

[cladking]

As an Egyptian Man , I can tell you a great secret that you do not know about the pyramids, who wanted immortality in the world and wanted never to die, he should use the technology found in the pyramids. When we come to the true mystery of these pyramids, we can bring life back to the dead person with ease.
The pyramids are the factories of eternity.

There is, I believe a great deal more truth here than most imagine.

However the only way they could bring someone back to life was to build them a new body as they did the king.

"Greetings to thee, O Khnum, who was made harmless though he built N."

By remembering the dead king he lived forever and this is exactly what they said was the function of the pyramid. They said the pyramid made him live by day and at night when the pyramid couldn't be seen he was remembered by a star designated for exactly this purpose. Their entire history was written in the stars. Not their future, just the history.

 

[cladking]

You have provided no evidenced

I have previously shown that cro magnon were capable of abstract thought. A long time before ancient egypt

Here are some 20 to 25000 year old abstract paintings

View attachment 38953

Now you're playing word games. "Abstract art" is just a word and this painting was made in the 20th century.

There is NOTHING abstract about putting your hand on the wall and blowing paint at it.

 

[cladking]

You have provided no evidenced

How about the fact that there are no words for "belief" or "thought" in the Pyramid Texts or anywhere else in Ancient Language? That there ARE NO abstractions is the king of all evidence.

It's funny how when Egyptology completely blunders in doing any kind of science people rally round and say that they are "linguists", and when I point out that they never noticed that the language was different then they are scientists.

They dropped the ball in 1882 and now they are afraid of the game. They are afraid of the pyramid, the culture, and doing any kind of systematic application of modern science.

 

[ChristineM]

Now you're playing word games. "Abstract art" is just a word and this painting was made in the 20th century.

There is NOTHING abstract about putting your hand on the wall and blowing paint at it.

No i am not, to produce abstract art one must be able to think in the abstract. It doesn't not matter if there is or isn't a word for abstract in the language, the human brain has been capable if abstract thought.

All those paintings are over 20,000 years old and can be viewed in cro magnon caves within 50km of Les Eyzies-de-Tayac-Sireuil in the Dordogne, France?

Your personal opinion of what constitutes abstract art is not relevant

 

[ChristineM]

How about the fact that there are no words for "belief" or "thought" in the Pyramid Texts or anywhere else in Ancient Language? That there ARE NO abstractions is the king of all evidence.

It's funny how when Egyptology completely blunders in doing any kind of science people rally round and say that they are "linguists", and when I point out that they never noticed that the language was different then they are scientists.

They dropped the ball in 1882 and now they are afraid of the game. They are afraid of the pyramid, the culture, and doing any kind of systematic application of modern science.

Words are not required as shown in my previous post

So report it

Your opinion again

 

[Agnostisch]

There is, I believe a great deal more truth here than most imagine.

However the only way they could bring someone back to life was to build them a new body as they did the king.

"Greetings to thee, O Khnum, who was made harmless though he built N."

By remembering the dead king he lived forever and this is exactly what they said was the function of the pyramid. They said the pyramid made him live by day and at night when the pyramid couldn't be seen he was remembered by a star designated for exactly this purpose. Their entire history was written in the stars. Not their future, just the history.

The purpose of the inscriptions and writings was to help the deceased pharaoh to return to life after his death again, and since this work was contrary to nature and the laws of life, magic had to be relied upon to complete it. The process of re-living was therefore a magical process with certain ceremonies and rituals, the most important of which was the pouring of the holy magic liquid into the crucified body as a result of death to restore vitality to it, and this ceremony is carried out with the chanting of the chanters and this holy liquid is called osiris liquid i.e. Nile water and by the ancient Egyptians think life returns to the deceased body.
Some liken this process and its consequences to the baptism of Christians representing birth. In drinking his drink, which does not despair until he becomes a soul, this passage reminds us of what is said in the New Testament about the bread of life and living water, but the difference between them is that the bread and water that the New Testament means are symbolic bread and water to which it is intended to describe what values life.

 

[cladking]

That’s because there are no peer review for Egyptology.

This is really very simple and you playing word games about what the word "peer" means changes nothing. The FACT is the leaders in Egyptology have stated they will not release data that doesn't agree with their own BELIEFS and have never released the results of century old technology even to OTHER EGYPTOLOGISTS.

You can play with the meanings of any word in any sentence but your games have no EFFECT ON THE MEANING. Most people can make a very good deconstruction of my original statement with or without your obfuscation.

Egyptology is multiple-discipline study of ancient Egypt, which include philology, literature, history, anthropology, archaeology, Egyptian religion/theology and myth, Egyptian arts, architecture, and whatever other stuffs that are missing in the list above.

Yes!!!

And they are doing ALL OF THIS very very poorly.

In their defense though they have created a really interesting "religion" out of this air and the beliefs that stinky footed changeless bumpkins dragged tombs up ramps. Of course there was no religion of any sort and they lacked the word "believe" but it's one crazy religion they created. It took a lot of work to turn the Pyramid Texts into something it was not. So how did they never notice there was no word for "belief" and the language breaks linguistic laws?????? This is not merely evidence they suffer dunning kruger in the worst sort of way but almost proof. How did they never notice that there were so few words?

And since Egyptology involved a wide area of so many different skills, not every Egyptologists would have have the same skills or would have the same “levels” of skills.

Here, I think you'd be surprised. There is a tremendous similarity between ALL Egyptologists. Of course, universities have different programs and standards and individuals have different strengths and weaknesses but ALL Egyptologists believe the pyramids were tombs. All Egyptologists believe the builders were very highly superstitious. ALL Egyptologists believe the ancient were wholly ignorant of modern science and lacked modern technology. ALL Egyptologists believe the pyramid builders were just like the authors of the book of the dead who were just like ALL Egyptologists.

While ALL Egyptologists are different they are also cookie-cutter replicants of each other. ALL Egyptologists believe that a very primitive and highly savage means of building pyramids was used and it doesn't matter what specific ignorant means was used and besides it "mustta been ramps". They are wrong And I've already not only proved it by showing stones were pulled straight up the sides but I debunked ramps for good measure.

ALL Egyptologists are wrong. Sure there are individuals who focus in areas where they are far less wrong but they are still fundamentally wrong since they believe that the earlier Egyptians were superstitious. The ancestors of the authors of the book of the dead were not superstitious. WE ARE SUPERSTITIOUS and some of us don't even know it because they believe in science and they believe their own belief are sacrosanct. We believe in belief and ancient people didn't even have the words for it.

 

[MNoBody]

Ok as you like.
I don't think I like the book. The writer is determined to disprove the Torah and is determined that the Jews have no right in the land of Palestine or to say the land of the Canaanites, so there are a lot of fallacies in which the writer fell, but that does not prevent him from having an independent point of view.
The author has a religious background and his main reference is the Book of Quran, so he is not neutral in his vision of the heritage of religions that preceded the Islamic religion.

well, that is pretty much standard when studying religions or ancient topics, since by now they have been through many hands, and there are many biases, however i do not discriminate based on labels..... and am interested in seeing all sides of the story.

given the consistent mishandling of antiquities and history by the so called 'experts' in the field and the pejorative light it is always cast in, I by nature do not rely on what they say out front, but rather through the sides, and carry a big bucket of salt [so to speak]
it is like a legal case, all sides have to be heard, and of course there will be emotions involved as these things touch things that are close to home and heart and can incite passion and more...
but from what i read through on his site, it seemed that there would be new evidence presented
and as i have only read the quran somewhat about 30 yrs ago, new insights from this cultural perspective are useful.
the Yemen connections to this are interesting as it lines up with what i learned from another fellow who had come from there and knew much about the traditions and such