Hi all ...

From an earlier post:

Quote


I have been following Clive's work for a few years now off and on. I have never gone into it in depth however. In fact he even invited me to perhaps collaborate on a book with him but the scheduled meeting never happenned. As I have said in many of my posts he has forgotten more than most of us will ever learn about Giza and in my opinion has the correct answers. It is so in depth it would take almost a lifetime to follow all the paths that he has opened up. My work was always gearing toward melding with his but from a purely geometrically "god"-designed fabric of space using a Phi like template. Remember the saying .... As Above .... So below. I have always taken that to mean one of two things. The first is that Giza is what is above EXACTLY and secondly that the heavens themselves follow an ordered geometrical precission of unbelieveably simple ratios.

In my opinion at Giza we have the union of both of these theories.

I am about to start a thread where I will begin to show Clive's theories and expand on them where I can.

I thought I knew Giza ... I was so mistaken !!!!!

I thought I had exhausted the geometrical possiblilites ... I must have been drunk for I have slowly discovered through Jim Allison's and Clive Ross' work that the iceberg goes under the water.

Best
Don Barone

Firstly I will explain what has happenned .. yet again. My mind was quite simply put, a puddle of mush. I could see nothing, think of nothing, had no new ideas and was for all intents and purposes to various discussion groups, in a vegetative state.

And then ... C. Wayne Taylor posted that he thought he had cracked the code at Giza and after giving him profuse congraulations someone or something once again lit the pilot light within me and here we go again. Hang on for it is usually a whirlwind of a ride.

I honestly don't know where to begin as it encompasses so much but I think this is a good one. Actually I am going to post all four images I have already posted over at Graham's to get this thread up to speed.

This first one is a simple additon of two numbers but what they reveal could be Earth changing ... I am shocked about how little response some of these have gotten --- compared to the hype of a very weak OCT theory. Anyway no stone throwing now Don and now for something completely new ... I think.

Diagram one ... a simple additon a + b = WOW !!!

Orbital time of one Earth rotation is 365.24

Orbital time of Mars rotation in Earth days is 686.98

Total of these two = 1052.22

and now for something completely different.

Again please be aware this is Clive Ross' work.



and this from Wayne Taylor who by the way was THE ONLY ONE who would commit to an answer on the widths. Maybe they knew I was going to bop them with more numerology

Re: Height and widths of Pyramids at Giza
Posted by: C Wayne Taylor (IP Logged)
Date: May 23, 2008 11:52AM


G1
Cole's average base = 230.364m
in/m = 39.370079
Cole's average base = 9069.439in

G2
Petrie's average base = 8474.875in

G3
Petrie's average base = 4153.633in

The distance in cubits depends on what cubit value you use.
If G1 = 440, then cubit = 20.612
Then, G2 = 411.155
And, G3 = 201.512

If cubit = 20.632,
then G1 = 439.581
And G2 = 410.764
And G3 = 201.320

Which values you use depends on your starting assumptions and analytic methods.

So were we to use 20.618033988 (20 + Phi) we would get:

G1 = 9069.439in / 20.618033988 = 439.8788

G2 = 8474.875in / 20.618033988 = 411.0419

G3 = 4153.633in / 20.618033988 = 201.4560
-------------------------------------------------------------

Total = ...................... = 1052.38

Close to within .16 of a cubit or 3 inches over the width of the three pyramids so that is about an inch per pyramid but since there are two sides we are out about a half an inch each side. Accurate enough for me.

Another thing that is almost impossible is getting the other side to commit to a side length so finally I have come up with what I consider are correct ... for now

G1 = 439.88 cubits

G2 = 411.04 cubits

G3 = 201.46 cubits (subject to possible revision

Now if we use 411.04 as the side length for G2 we get this astounding correlation:



Pretty neat eh .. ?

Anyway moving on. This image below does not agree with what Clive found as we are for the moment using different east-west measurements but I hope to tie them in soon. Anyway I kind of enjoyed this one as well.



And to close this evening's post I will leave you with one of mine which I found last year but for some reason did not see the amazing correlation in what I had found. I mentioned it on my diagram but it did not sink in how marvelloussly delicious it was.

I am not sure if this shows they had a sense of humour or not ...



Anyway that is it for now but rest assured the next post will blow you way as I still can't believe what I discovered by playing around with Clive's numbers and diagrams.

Stay tooned !

Don Barone


"There is nothing as impenetrable as a closed mind"
and ..." if everything is a coincidence what is the point of studying or measuring or analyzing anything ?" db



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 06/25/2008 11:11AM by Ahatmose.