Alciabides: ...We flatter ourselves that they are a "message" to us, or a designed or implied mechanism that speaks to the technology or science of our age, simply waiting all these eons for people like us who are smart enough to interpret them...
SC: The three Great Pyramids correlate reasonably well with the arrangement of the Orion Belt stars. However, as I think you pointed out in an earlier post, Andrew Collins has proposed the 3 wing stars of the Cygnus constellationas offering a 'better fit'. This is complete nonsense and a red herring to boot! The fact is - and I have said this to you before - you can pick three stars of your choice and
create an exact match[/i] with the Orion Belts stars. I do not for a moment dispute that this is possible. So how do we know it is the Orion Belt stars? What mechanism could be deployed to tell us this unequivocally? The answer is simple and is present at Giza. The relative placement of the 2 sets of so-called Queens pyramids demonstrates to us how the 3 large pyramids (i.e. Orion's Belt) move over a half-precessional cycle (13,000 yrs), and then back again like a pendulum swing. The concavities of Khufu and Menkaure tell us - to the minute! - the start of this precessional swing. The 'First Time', if you like. And, of course, there is no need for mid-swing markers (i.e. 'Queens' of Khafre) hence there are none.
Now, I may not have the - to use your word - 'message' correct, but I am absolutely convinced that I am along the right lines in interpreting the design of these structures.
What is your explanation for the lack of Queens of Khafre? What is your explanation for the concavities of Khufu and Menkaure? What is your explanation for the missing concavities of Khafre? Are you really convinced that the so-called 'Queens' pyramids were originally intended as such?
Regards,
Scott Creighton