A clash of high-production and low-production values typical of Q-Anon youtube presentations. This time we have the Atlantis truthers.
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
Byrd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kanga Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> > As far as I am concerned Petrie's measurements of
> > the elevations (done in inches) still stand. All
> > that is left is to convert the values to cubits
> > and palms.
>
> Except... you can'
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
We've been over this before. Petrie is correct on the numbering of the courses. The list of elevations and thickness for each course is listed at Birdsall's site.
Gantenbrink is wrong on the numbering of the courses. His model implies that both courses exit at the top of course 104, elevation 154c above the base. That is wrong, disproven by Petrie's diagrams. However, Gantenbri
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
robin cook Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There should be no need to mount an expedition.
> Petrie surveyed Giza and published his results,
> which have been accepted by the Egyptological
> community. Gantenbrink said that he made his own
> survey of the pyramid which placed his shaft exit
> points at a higher level, but as far as I know
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
robin cook Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Meanwhile, returning to real Egyptology, has
> anyone come across any information that would help
> to resolve the Petrie/Gantenbribrink controversy?
Are you referring to the alleged discrepancy over the exit levels of the KC shafts?
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
The way von Daniken writes, not being able to hold onto a single thought, but often going off on a tangent, seems to indicate that he has attention deficit disorder.
by
Kanga
-
Paper Lens
Robins and Shute, "The Rhind Mathematical Papyrus," say (p. 11) it was written during the reign of King Auserre (Apophis) around the middle of the 16th century BCE, which is basically what you have said, but Robins and Shute go on to say that the papyrus is a copy from the time of King Amenemhet III, in the second half of the 19th century BCE, so basically between 1800 and 1850 BCE, alm
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
engbren Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This claim is important because, the Karnak water
> clock is dated to the 14th Century BCE making it
> contemporary with the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus.
This date is 500 years out. The RMP dates from the time of Amenemhet III, who reigned in the 19th century BCE.
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
engbren Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I received some feedback from a highly respected
> academic that they felt my paper had several
> problems, including:
> 1. The core idea itself is very old and harks back
> to the ideas of Taylor and Piazzi Smyth;
> 2. The numbers as presented were very much skewed
> in favour of the design mode
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
You have to realize that the KCN shaft is not one single slope. It is a 7:11 slope at the bottom end and a 14:23 slope at the top end. Gantenbrink's KCN exit point of 154c elevation was gained by projecting the 7:11 slope to the theoretical point on the surface. The 154c exit elevation is theoretical only. Where the problem lies is taking Gantenbrink's value of 154c as the actual level
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
In his book Mysteries and Discoveries of Archaeoastronomy: From Giza to Easter Island (2007), Prof. Giulio Magli made the observation that, if the King's Chamber were on the central axis, like the Queen's Chamber, and if the KC shafts were to exit at the same level, as the QC shafts seemingly do, then they would have the same slope; but they do not. There must be a reason for the offse
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
Chris Tedder Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi Kanga,
>
> You wrote: I still maintain that it was I who
> first suggested that KCS pointed at Al Nilam”
>
> Over the years, I’ve posted on the HoM that the
> top opening of the south shaft in the sarcophagus
> chamber was facing an area of the sky where
> Alnilam, the centre s
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
keeperzz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi Hermione,
>
> Thanks for the link.
>
> I have two questions to all on the following
> drawing:
>
>
>
> 1) Was there any reason the architect chose the
> 7:11 grid, or was this choice arbitrary?
> If the choice is reasonable, can we determine the cause?
The primar
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
Hermione Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Interestingly both shafts exit at the same
> level
> > if the casing isn't there.
> > If you believe Sakovich, then this would imply
> the
> > air shafts were used before
> > the casing was installed.
>
> A point that came up not so long ago -
>
> Acco
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
aarvai Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here is a nice explanation for the shafts:
>
>
Sakovich (or is it Sakovitch? - the journal spells it both ways) repeats Gantenbrink's false assertion that the upper shafts exit at the same level, 154 cubits above the base (top of course 104).
If you look at Petrie's diagrams, you will see that
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
I've just been to Gantenbrink's site (cheops.org) and all the data on the shafts is gone. That's a worry.
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
OK, I'll start.
The first thing you need to know about the air shafts is that they are not air shafts. If there were a need to ventilate the chambers, the shafts would run horizontally to the surface of the pyramid. A horizontal design would make them so much easier to construct. Instead, the architect has gone out of his way to make it hard for the masons to construct these shafts.
Ot
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
Great research, and greatly appreciated.
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
Not that I accept Creighton's explanation, he has nevertheless misquoted Trimble. He has also erroneously stated that the Orion's Belt orientation of KCS was her idea. It was not. It was Badawy's. Trimble only made the astronomical calculations at Badawy's request.
I still maintain that it was I who first suggested that KCS pointed at Al Nilam.
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
I have a lot to say about this topic. However, I think you should start a new thread on it. Leave this thread to Martin's discussion of Creighton.
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
I also notice he's started a thread on the work of Trimble and Badawy regarding the KCS shaft, only he's left out Badawy, attributing Badawy's insight to Trimble. He's also got the alignment of the shafts wrong. Trimble only referred to Orion's belt generally, but Creighton says Trimble makes the KCS shaft point at Al Nilam. I don't recall her saying any such thing.
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
> ... 111.5 by 48.5 palms
> which equals 15.92857 cubits by 6.92857 cubits
You don't need to be so exact or you'll miss the obvious.
This is meant to be 16 cubits by 7 cubits.
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
Hermione Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There’s no end to conspiracy theories about who built the pyramids.
> Frequently they involve ancient aliens, lizard people, the Freemasons,
> or an advanced civilization that used forgotten technology. Scientists
> have tried and failed to combat these baseless ideas. But there is
> another misconcepti
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
Mark Heaton Wrote:
> The original height of Khafre's pyramid (274 cubits)
> appeared to be higher than Khufu's Pyramid by about
> 4 cubits if the base was 10 cubits higher than Khufu's
> base because Khufu's pyramid was 280 cubits:
I don't think this is correct. From memory, Khafre's platform is 19 to 20 cubits higher than Khufu's platfo
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
"This area is fenced in by a zigzag wall, with only one access point leading to internal corridors and residential areas. The single entrance makes us think it was some sort of security, with the ability to control entry and exit to enclosed areas."
The zigzag nature of the wall is in imitation of the Step Pyramid's enclosure wall, but with the square niches replaced by curvy ni
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
As the narrator says, the ancients' ability to move these megalithic stones is "mind bogging."
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
Haydn Butler notes that the length of 27 cubits is the same as that of Khufu's Subterranean Chamber, thus probably copied from that. He also notes that the floor of Khafre's burial chamber is 6 cubits below the platform, meaning that it is 6 + 274 = 280 cubits below the apex, the same as Khufu's pyramid's height.
by
Kanga
-
Ancient Egypt
These figures are from authors I read over a decade ago, but unfortunately I do not have the exact references to hand. I think the height of the steps was recorded by Lauer. Haydn Butler also pointed out that the height of 114 cubits was half the 228c E-W base length, i.e., in the 1:2 ratio.
by
Kanga
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
The heights of the steps are not the same. The bottom three are 20 cubits each. The top three are 19, 18 and 17 respectively. This makes a total height of 114 cubits.
by
Kanga
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology