L Cooper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It seems to me that you are saying
> that this underlying rationale was to pass along
> some sort of message to a far in the future
> generation that would alert us to how clever they
> were and how sophisticated their knowledge had
> become.
>
> This strikes me as, well, out of character and
> unlikely.

Lee, you are implying that your belief is these structures being built for the AE's time of present...no more...no less.

That's not true...you build monuments for at least two reasons: for those of the present to realize your status and for those of the future not to forget it.
How far in the future did they assume their knowledge would remain locked/concealed within the Giza site...who knows, but 4,500 years? Wow...!!!

The openness of the Internet over the past ten years has helped reveal evidence that indicates more is involved within the Giza design than the old well-established concept/teachings of the "built for kings only" theory. It’s been a long battle, but the changing of the tide is evident.

Now that the pi function is a well-illustrated and established fact at the Giza site, the remaining issue of greatest concern is my belief that the AE understood true planet motion.
The problem when attempting to prove this fact is my audience; they are not verse in astronomy. How is it possible to relay information if the recipients do not understand your language? Their answer is...how could the AE know these measures when we don’t?
Ridiculous as it may appear, the critics do not accept the simple fact that these people of past lived by and worshiped the heavens, whereas we only care about tomorrows weather. Of course the AE knew...!!!

Now that you have visited my web site...you have read the data; it’s well presented and factual. But...you are following the footsteps of others.
You now fully understand the planetary ratios and numbers but there is no admittance from you that the AE could have understood. Yet, at the same moment you present the following:

> The purpose was not to speak out across the ages
> to some unknown future intelligencia, but to
> provide an immediate benefit to themselves and
> their progeny. It is this kind of overall purpose
> of design that I find lacking in the site plan
> theories I have seen.

First and foremost:
You opened with an “assumed factual” statement that you cannot prove.
Second:
You have the audacity to proclaim the lack of evidence at the Giza site to support what your statement professes to be true !

> I, myself, have no answers in this regard.

I realize that.

> My only sense is that they may well be
> part of an as yet unidentified unifying scheme. I
> would expect this greater scheme to be based on a
> diagrammatic geometry approach that in some way
> involved the two modalities (ie, area and
> circumference) of squaring the circle.

You see Lee..!
My web site is not about basic geometry involving circles and squares. You don't build massive monuments to display basics. If that were true then the mathematical engineering required to construct was superior to the knowledge diplayed...pointless !

> I said above, many of the correlations you point out appear
> credible, I say this because this seems to have been the central basis
> behind the design of pyramid interiors, and I should expect they
> would have wanted to extend this basis outward in some fashion.

I will repeat what I tell everybody on this site:
If you do not understand the outside of the Giza pyramids then you will “never” understand the insides.

Do me a favor...return to the site and read the other topics listed. Read until you fully understand, then get back to me.
Any questions...you know how to contact me.

Best.
Clive