<HTML>I have been following the OCT debate occasionally, in my view it has become depressingly repetitive. There is no new imput, there is just the same old arguments and objections. So I'm going to try and inject some new imput into this debate.
Robert
You formulated the Orion correlation theory based on the position of the 3 largest structures at Giza, does that not tell you something? Does it not tell you that all of the Giza necropolis is important to this theory and debate, not just the 3 pyramids, the sphinx, and the so called star shafts in the GP.
Yes I say so called star shafts, because it is only an assumption that they are star shafts. Only two of those shafts exit the pyramid, the other two do not. There is no real data about the termination of the queens chamber shafts, do they just stop, or do they change direction? If there is a further change in direction, then that would certainly blow away the star shaft alingment part of the OCT.
These 4 shafts are tiny, yet they seem to play a significant part in your theory.
Going back to the queens chamber shafts, even though they do not exit the pyramid, you have aligned them with certain stars. Why have you placed such significance in two tiny shafts with no measurable exit point?
Why did you not give any significance to the largest chamber in the GP(Grand gallery)? Like the queens chamber shafts, it does not exit the pyramid, but it does have a measurable inclination, and it does point south. Or for that matter, the passageway leading to the queen chamber, again no southern exit point If you projected those passageways through the pyramid, could you also have aligned them with stars?
That is why I think there is no substance in the star shaft alignment part of your theory, you are basing it on two measurable exit points, and two assumed exit points. Are these shafts so important to the overall theory? The impression I get is, these shafts are a stumbling block. People are using the direction of those shafts(north, south, up thataway, down thataway) to trash the theory, and thrash you round the head with it.
If the 3 main pyramids are a ground based representation of the belt stars in Orion. Then what other significant(external) ground based structural, or angular representations can be found at Giza? Are there any more pointers, to anything?
What about the causeways, they are far larger than any of the shafts in the GP chambers. There is one to each pyramid, and each one has a significant angle. Menkaure's causeway runs almost due east, or is it west. To remove any confusion from the minds of the reader, I am going to refer to east as over thataway, and west as back thataway. Menkaure's causeway might run almost back thataway, but no matter which direction you look it would point to the rising or setting sun at some point. This causeway is a good starting point, it gives us an east west direction, a base line.
The next causeway is Khafre's, it runs southeast, or over/back thataway ish.
I have no precise data on the exact angle of this causeway, every reference I have seen gives a slightly different angle(talk about confusion). One of the significant aspects of this causeway is, it points south of east by x number of degrees, minutes. I believe this angle needs to be accurately determined as part of the Giza plan.
Khufu's causeway runs north of east by x number of degrees, minutes, it also changes direction by x number of degrees, minutes. So you have two angles incorporated into that causeway, is there any significance in this change in direction. Some will argue that it is a result of topography, and nothing more. I have measured the angle of this causeway, through its change in direction, and that angle is to within a few arc minutes of the angle measured through the northwest corners of the 3 pyramids. Yes John, I'm being honest here. I can not pin down the precise angle of that causeway, due to the variations in angular data. All of the measurements I have taken with the data I have, give a result of less than one degree. Some of the results are within arc seconds of the angle through the northwest corners of the pyramids. Exact survey measurements would have to be taken to get a precise fix on the angle. So is there any ground based significance in two angles that could be, or are almost exactly the same?
Measuring the angle of Khafre's causeway, and the primary angle of Khufu's causeway, with the data I have. When the two angles are added together give results of less than one degree of latitude from Giza. One result gave a figure of 29.98. If you convert this to degres minutes, it gives you 29° 58' 48". That would place it right in the heart of the Giza complex, other results equate to half a degree or less from giza. Accurate survey measurements would have to be taken, in order to determin if there is any exact relationship in the angles of these causeways, to the angles through the northwest corners of the pyramids, and the latitude coordinates of Giza.
I believe there is a lot more to the OCT giza complex layout, than meets the eye. But as I said earlier, I do not believe that pyramid shafts play a really significant role in all of this. I do believe that major external structures are of more importance in the overall layout.</HTML>
