Re: Technically possible...

Home

Discussion Forums

Papers

Authors

Web Links

May 18, 2024, 6:53 am UTC

In: The Hall of Maat > Ancient History - Ancient History and Archaeology > Topic

Goto: Forum List • Create A New Profile • Log In

Ancient History • Ancient Egypt • Laboratory • Humanities • Apocalypse • Paper Lens • Coffee Shop
Exhibitions, Conferences, Lectures, Journals • Alternative Geometry and Numerology

Stephen Tonkin

September 30, 2001 11:30PM

<HTML>Anthony <sakovich@msn.com> writes:
[...]
>On what do you base your contention that the three pyramids HAD to be
>aligned to ANYTHING?

If you read what I actually wrote, you will find that I have not
contended that they had to be aligned on anything. (And if you believe
otherwise, please cite.) What you will find is that all I have contended
that, had the AEs wished to align the SE corners better than they
are aligned, they had the technical and technological ability to do so.

One thing that seems to be missing from the objections to my contention
is an understanding of just how easy it is to get good alignments over
long distances. And that, in conditions of good lighting and contrast,
the resolution of the human eye is approximately 1 arcminute. If I could
demonstrate to you the existence of more precise intentional alignments of greater distance over hillier terrain approximately contemporaneous with the building of the pyramids, would you be happier?

Your misunderstanding of my position suggests that I've not put my case
very well; let me try again:

* The SE corners of the pyramids are not perfectly aligned.
* The builders had the technological and technical ability to achieve a
significantly better alignment than that which exists.
* Therefore, the fact that they are not better aligned suggests that
the builders were not concerned with getting any intended alignment perfect, if indeed they were aiming at anything other than an
aesthetically pleasing arrangement that permitted clear and unobstructed
'views' to the N and S of each of the pyramids.

My objections to the 'perfect 45 deg alignment' assertion is therefore
not a million cubits away from my objections to the OCT assertions.

In another message you wrote:
>Triangulating over undulating land is very much another.

I must have missed the post where someone suggested that they
triangulated the positions – can you please point me to it. (Or is it a generally accepted understanding that the AE surveyors used triangulation?)</HTML>

Reply Quote

Subject	Author	Posted
For Duncan RE Coincidence	sandy	September 29, 2001 06:21PM
Re: Sorry	sandy	September 29, 2001 06:41PM
Re: Sorry	Anthony	September 30, 2001 05:51AM
Re: Sorry	Stephen Tonkin	September 30, 2001 07:30AM
Re: Sorry	Anthony	September 30, 2001 07:50AM
Re: Sorry	Stephen Tonkin	September 30, 2001 11:05AM
Re: Sorry	sandy	September 30, 2001 08:19AM
Re: Sorry	Stephen Tonkin	September 30, 2001 11:07AM
Technically possible...	Anthony	September 30, 2001 05:12PM
Re: Technically possible...	Greg Reeder	September 30, 2001 06:00PM
Yep.... see this	Katherine Reece	September 30, 2001 07:55PM
Re: Technically possible...	Brad	September 30, 2001 09:11PM
Re: Technically possible...	Stephen Tonkin	September 30, 2001 11:30PM
Two answers....	Anthony	October 01, 2001 04:25PM
Long accurate alignments and TRASH	Stephen Tonkin	October 02, 2001 05:10AM
TRASH is RIGHT!	Anthony	October 02, 2001 10:32AM
Re: TRASH is trash!	Stephen Tonkin	October 02, 2001 06:59PM
Re: TRASH is trash!	Anthony	October 03, 2001 07:07AM
Re: TRASH is trash!	Stephen Tonkin	October 03, 2001 11:20AM
Re: Sorry	John	September 30, 2001 06:12AM
Re: Sorry	Anthony	September 30, 2001 06:45AM
A Hint	ISHMAEL	September 30, 2001 01:26PM
Re: A Hint	John	September 30, 2001 02:00PM
No, he won't elaborate...	Anthony	September 30, 2001 05:16PM
Re: No, he won't elaborate...	Anonymous User	October 01, 2001 04:19AM
Re: No, he won't elaborate...	ISHMAEL	October 01, 2001 06:57AM
Statistical Analysis and probability	Claire	October 01, 2001 07:20AM
Re: Statistical Analysis and probability	ISHMAEL	October 01, 2001 09:10AM
Re: No, he won't elaborate...	Anonymous User	October 01, 2001 07:22AM
Re: No, he won't elaborate...	ISHMAEL	October 01, 2001 09:21AM
Re: No, he won't elaborate...	Anonymous User	October 01, 2001 09:40AM
Re: No, he won't elaborate...	ISHMAEL	October 01, 2001 10:24AM
Rotating the Axis	Anthony	October 01, 2001 10:26AM
Re: Rotating the Axis	Anonymous User	October 01, 2001 11:50AM
Call me stupid...	Anthony	October 01, 2001 12:47PM
Re: Call me stupid...	Claire	October 01, 2001 01:16PM
Re: Call me stupid...	ISHMAEL	October 01, 2001 01:49PM
Re: Call me stupid...	Anonymous User	October 01, 2001 03:55PM
Re: Call me stupid...	ISHMAEL	October 02, 2001 09:10AM
Re: Call me stupid...	Anonymous User	October 02, 2001 10:29AM
Re: Call me stupid...	ISHMAEL	October 02, 2001 12:56PM
ISHMAEL!!!!!!	Anthony	October 02, 2001 01:45PM
Re: ISHMAEL!!!!!!	ISHMAEL	October 02, 2001 02:19PM
Re: ISHMAEL!!!!!!	Anthony	October 02, 2001 02:21PM
Re: Call me stupid...	Anonymous User	October 02, 2001 01:54PM
Re: Call me stupid...	ISHMAEL	October 02, 2001 02:28PM
Re: Call me stupid...	Anonymous User	October 03, 2001 08:29AM
Re: Call me stupid...	Stephen Tonkin	October 03, 2001 11:06AM
Re: Call me stupid...	ISHMAEL	October 03, 2001 11:12AM
Re: Call me stupid...	Claire	October 02, 2001 03:27PM
Re: Call me stupid...	Anonymous User	October 03, 2001 08:18AM
Don't Call the AE's Stupid :-)	ISHMAEL	October 03, 2001 11:17AM
Re: Call me stupid...	Anthony	October 01, 2001 01:51PM
Re: Call me stupid...	Claire	October 01, 2001 01:59PM
Call you Smart!	Anthony	October 01, 2001 02:15PM
Anthony	Claire	October 01, 2001 02:19PM
Re: Anthony	Anthony	October 01, 2001 02:25PM
Re: Anthony	Claire	October 01, 2001 02:27PM
Re: Call me stupid...	Anonymous User	October 01, 2001 03:42PM
Yo, Duncan!	Anthony	October 02, 2001 01:50PM
Re: Yo, Duncan!	Anonymous User	October 02, 2001 02:28PM
East is east and West is west.	ISHMAEL	October 02, 2001 02:45PM
Guys...	Anthony	October 02, 2001 03:19PM
Re: Guys...	Anonymous User	October 02, 2001 03:34PM
Okay...Uh....no.	Anthony	October 02, 2001 04:55PM
Re: Okay...Uh....no.	Anonymous User	October 03, 2001 08:49AM
Re: Rotating the Axis	ISHMAEL	October 01, 2001 01:30PM
Re: Rotating the Axis	Anonymous User	October 01, 2001 04:10PM
Re: Rotating the Axis	Stephen Tonkin	October 02, 2001 01:51AM
Re: Rotating the Axis	Claire	October 02, 2001 05:03AM
Re: Rotating the Axis	Stephen Tonkin	October 02, 2001 06:08AM
Re: Rotating the Axis	Anonymous User	October 02, 2001 06:19AM
Re: Rotating the Axis	Stephen Tonkin	October 02, 2001 09:14AM
Re: Rotating the Axis	Anonymous User	October 02, 2001 03:03PM
Re: Rotating the Axis	Dave Moore	October 05, 2001 03:17AM
Re: Rotating the Axis	Stephen Tonkin	October 05, 2001 05:50AM
Re: Rotating the Axis	Dave Moore	October 05, 2001 09:08AM
Re: Rotating the Axis	Stephen Tonkin	October 05, 2001 11:39AM
Re: Rotating the Axis	ISHMAEL	October 02, 2001 09:14AM
Re: Rotating the Axis	sandy	October 02, 2001 09:51AM
Re: Rotating the Axis	ISHMAEL	October 02, 2001 01:05PM
Re: No, he won't elaborate...	Stephen Tonkin	October 01, 2001 01:40PM
Re: No, he won't elaborate...	ISHMAEL	October 01, 2001 01:50PM
Re: No, he won't elaborate...	ISHMAEL	October 01, 2001 10:08AM
Re: No, he won't elaborate...	Anonymous User	October 01, 2001 11:21AM
Re: No, he won't elaborate...	Stephen Tonkin	October 01, 2001 01:42PM
Re: Sorry	John	September 30, 2001 06:57AM
Re: Sorry	Anthony	September 30, 2001 07:52AM
Re: Sorry	Katherine Reece	September 30, 2001 08:12AM
Re: For Duncan RE Coincidence	Anonymous User	October 01, 2001 04:44AM
Re: For Duncan RE Coincidence	Stephen Tonkin	October 01, 2001 05:20AM
Re: For Duncan RE Coincidence	Anonymous User	October 01, 2001 07:08AM
Re: For Duncan RE Coincidence	Stephen Tonkin	October 01, 2001 01:47PM
Re: For Duncan RE Coincidence	sandy	October 01, 2001 05:25AM
Re: For Duncan RE Coincidence	ISHMAEL	October 01, 2001 07:05AM

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login