>>9946524

(Please read from the start)

“Critique

Arguments made by Hancock, Bauval, Anthony West and others concerning the significance of the proposed correlations have been described as a form of pseudoarchaeology.

Among these are critiques from two astronomers, Ed Krupp of Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles and Tony Fairall of the University of Cape Town, South Africa. Using planetarium equipment, Krupp and Fairall independently investigated the angle between the alignment of Orion's Belt and north during the era cited by Hancock, Bauval, et al. (which differs from the angle seen today or in the third millennium BC, because of the precession of the equinoxes). They found that the angle was somewhat different from the "perfect match" thought to exist by Bauval and Hancock in the Orion correlation theory. They estimate 47–50 degrees per the planetarium measurements, compared to the 38-degree angle formed by the pyramids.

Krupp pointed out that the slightly bent line formed by the three pyramids was deviated towards the north, whereas the slight "kink" in the line of Orion's Belt was deformed to the south, and to match them up one or the other of them had to be turned upside-down. Indeed, this is what was done in the original book by Bauval and Gilbert (The Orion Mystery), which compares images of the pyramids and Orion without revealing that the pyramids’ map had been inverted. Krupp and Fairall find other problems with their arguments, including noting that if the Sphinx is meant to represent the constellation of Leo, then it should be on the opposite side of the Nile (the "Milky Way") from the pyramids ("Orion"), that the vernal equinox c. 10,500 BC was in Virgo and not Leo, and that in any case the constellations of the Zodiac originate from Mesopotamia and were completely unknown in Egypt until the much later Graeco-Roman era. Ed Krupp repeated this "upside down" statement in the BBC documentary Atlantis Reborn (1999).

Bauval stated that some astronomers including Archie Roy of the University of Glasgow have rejected Krupp's argument. Krupp presented a counterpoint to the objections, that Bauval statement has been made by the late Dr. Roy, who was a Professor Emeritus of Astronomy at Glasgow University (including the accusation that Bauval and Gilbert deliberately inverted the pyramid map).

In a ruling by the Broadcasting Standards Commission (UK), the committee ruled in favour of Robert Bauval that Krupp's statement that maps were placed upside down was "unfairly" presented in the BBC documentary Atlantis Reborn, without including Bauval's filmed response.[1] Bauval and Hancock's filmed responses to Krupp's statements were included in the modified version of the documentary Atlantis Reborn Again shown on 14 December 2000.”

>> The same tricks from the same group of hacks.

“Leo and the Sphinx

The Great Sphinx is a colossal statue with the face of a man and the body of a lion. Carved out of the surrounding limestone bedrock, it is 57 metres (187 ft) long, 6 metres (20 ft) wide, and has a height of 20 metres (66 ft), making it the largest single-stone statue in the world. The Great Sphinx is one of the world's largest and oldest statues, yet basic facts about it such as the real-life model for the face, when and why it was built, and by whom, are debated. These questions have collectively earned the title "Riddle of the Sphinx", a nod to its Greek namesake.”

• Page 185 –

>>9958382

(Please read from the start)

“The Great Sphinx is commonly accepted by Egyptologists to represent the likeness of King Khafra (also known by the Hellenised version of his name, Chephren)[16] who is often credited as the builder as well. This would place the time of construction somewhere between 2520 BC and 2494 BC. Because the limited evidence giving provenance to Khafra is ambiguous, the idea of who built the Sphinx, and when, continues to be the subject of debate. An argument put forward by Bauval and Hancock to support the Orion Correlation Theory is that the construction of the Great Sphinx was begun in 10,500 BC; that the Sphinx's lion-shape is a definitive reference to the constellation of Leo; and that the layout and orientation of the Sphinx, the Giza pyramid complex and the Nile River are an accurate reflection or "map" of the constellations of Leo, Orion (specifically, Orion's Belt) and the Milky Way, respectively.”

>> I agree with the first and second = Orion belt and constellation of Leo, but I’m not so sure about the Nile being the Milky Way because the river was different, along with the landscape and the flora.

“A date of 10,500 BC is chosen because they maintain this is the only time in the precession of the equinoxes when the astrological age was Leo and when that constellation rose directly east of the Sphinx at the vernal equinox. They also suggest that in this epoch the angles between the three stars of Orion's Belt and the horizon were an "exact match" to the angles between the three main Giza pyramids. These propositions and other theories are used to support the overall belief in an advanced and ancient, but now vanished, global progenitor civilization.”

>> There is a possibility this date given, might not be the ONLY time the Leo constellation was directly East of the Sphinx at the vernal equinox. The thing is, we have no idea how LONG this ancient civilization lasted in existence: was it just a few hundred years, thousands, ten of thousands or was it in the hundreds of thousands?

“The theory that the Sphinx is actually far older has received some support from geologists. Robert M. Schoch has argued that the effects of water erosion on the Sphinx and its surrounding enclosure mean that parts of the monument must originally have been carved at the latest between 7000–5000 BC.[18] Colin Reader has suggested a date only several hundred years prior to the commonly accepted date for construction. These views have been almost universally rejected by mainstream Egyptologists who, together with a number of geologists including James Harrell, Lal Gauri, John J. Sinai, and Jayanta K. Bandyopadhyay,[19][20] stand by the conventional dating for the monument. Their analyses attribute the apparently accelerated wear on the Sphinx variously to modern industrial pollution, qualitative differences between the layers of limestone in the monument itself, scouring by wind-borne sand, or temperature changes causing the stone to crack.

>> I personally think we can put a date on the Sphinx and the pyramids behind it when we found out about this ancient civilization and how long it existed on earth before it was wiped out by a cataclysm. Until, then, we will be chasing our own tails trying to figure this one out.

Don’t let the Main Stream History convince you the Giza pyramids do not match the Orion constellation….because they do…..it can be seen with your naked eyes, if you bother to look.

• Page 186 –

>>9958477

(Please read from the start)

But that is not all there is about the Giza Pyramids: They found fossils there too.

https://curiosmos.com/fossil-discovery-suggests-the-pyramids-and-sphinx-were-submerged-under-water/

“However, El Morsi explained that the creature was cemented, or petrified, in relatively recent time. The researcher indicated that the creature was found placed gravitationally on the floor, and in almost perfect condition, located within the intertidal range of the lagoon.

“We can clearly see the pristine condition and the details of the perforations of the exoskeleton, this means that the sea creature must have been petrified in recent times.” El Morsi explained.

The researcher notes that in addition, the flooding of the plateau was quite significant, peaking up to seventy-five meters above current sea levels.

This produced a coastline which most likely spanned up to the Khafre enclosure near the Great Sphinx and Menkare’s temple.

But the evidence is there, argues El Morsi. We only have to look at the monuments and surrounding blocks which show clear erosion marks produced by tidal waves, suggesting that an intertidal zone of about two meters existed in the past.

The Sphinx, as well as the Great Pyramid of Giza, also show evidence of a major flood. According to El Morsi, the first 20 levels of the Great Pyramid of Giza bear evidence of erosion caused by deep water saturation.”

Let me add: https://www.gigalresearch.com/uk/Menkara-petrified-shallow-marine-creature.php

This article is a MUST read, incredibly good photos as well.

Anons, in this second link I just put right now, they also mention the erosion on the Temple Complex. HERE, I have a problem in putting one piece of the puzzle in its place = which structures of the complex were built later on, during the dynastic times? It’s one of the issues where I’ve been stuck for quite some time now. See, we have clear evidence that the pyramids and the Sphinx already existed when a BIG Flood occurred. We also have solid evidence that during dynastic time construction then restoration occurred on the Giza site by many Pharaohs. So, when did that occur and what was added to the pre-existing structures? I’ve suspected the Temples being added later on but it seems I was wrong according to this article. If not the Temple then what was built there, added? What were the stones transported during Khufu’s time, used for? Did they rebuild a demolished section? This is why I had suspected the Temples, at least parts of them, being from dynastic time, at first. Should I start suspecting then the smaller pyramids known as the pyramids of the queens to have been built during the dynastic time? I’ve been unable so far to put the pieces of this section together.

• Page 187 –

>>9954389

What you said makes perfect sense. You are totally right. But I also know the army has better resolution pictures, that’s why I said those words even though I knew I won’t get to see any of them.

The newest frontier for archaeology is currently underwater archaeology… and we’re barely starting there. I also know, in the near future, once Space Force gets into action, Space Archaeology will be a new frontier for us. It’s just a matter of time.