> Hi Thanos
> There is so much that can be said about your OP but......
> PLEASE ALLOW ME TO... perhaps?...RELIEVE SOME OF YOUR AND
> lOVERITAS (AND ORIGYPTIAN)
> AND OTHERS FRUSTRATION BY ASKING ALL INTERESTED TO READ THE
> MUCH EARLIER 2013 THREAD
> WHICH YOU KINDLY LINK!
> It is well worth reading it ALL first.
That is a great thread. Much credit to Loveritas. I think I linked it in the OP.
> I do not understand why you say "then by extension this must
> also include the stepped platform base of G2"
> Do you mean to say the size and style of the blocks are
> similar? I think not, because you state earlier that you think
> it was left as a remnant of levelling the site? The opposite
> corner apparently was needed to be raised.
I'm saying the base of G2 is basically a "leftover" from carving down the G2 enclosure. The corner in particular is not actually blocks, but shaved down rock.
You can see when its starts trailing away on both sides to other other corners you can see individual blocks appearing.
Part of this leveling would have included the area that the mortuary temple sits on which I make the case must be as old as the Sphinx and its temples, ergo so must the base of G2. I hope that makes sense.
> I think you (Thanos) and Lover, and T'Bird, in particular in
> the other thread quoted make extremely valid cases for a very
Credit to them both.
> The pyramids themselves with perhaps the exception of G1? show
> they likely were originally a smaller
> construction and much later development followed in stages.
I think its possible G1 as well. I post to MJT about it in this thread but the hillock core of G1 which includes the Grotto and part of the shafts as MJT points out may predate the pyramids could not have been just left that way. It must have been shaved down to to accommodate the blocks so if this is the case who is to say it was not an already existing structure shaped into a stepped platform like G2.
> At this stage all I can offer is anything to do with Old
> Kingdom Egyptians read eg 3rd and 4th Dynasty
> (that is if even the names we associate with that period eg
> Khufu were even accurately dated which I think is debateable)
> were renovators, inheritors, and had nothing to do with
> building any of it!
This seems likely to me as well.
> The case in point is something you have disguised in this
> thread (perhaps to check who is reading and following?)
> is the ridiculous conundrum re G3 Temple.
> Those granite renovations, followed by mud brick renovations,
> on what Graham Hancock notes in Fingerprints
> of the Gods.... was an already eroded structure!
Indeed. Many people think the pyramids predate the 4D but why? IMO the temples are exhibit A that at least they do which stands to reason more than likely the core structures of the pyramids as well.
> So yes I agree contemporary with likely the Sphinx and the so
> called "temples"
> > "His [Reisner] excavation reveals granite blocks which have
> > been contoured to fit around an already existing, badly
> > limestone wall."
> AND NO ABSOLUTELY NOT ... NO WAY!...did they or would anyone
> ... cut the granite to match the limestone backing!!!
> Either the limestone was cut (most likely) .... or it was
> limestone concrete/mortar ;-)
Either which way the granite could have only been placed later.
> Thanos, I have read a lot of what you (and Lover) have posted
> here over the years.
> Critically and as objectively as I can.
> You have convinced me of the absolute Mesopotamian influence at
> some stage in Egypt
> but I am far too dumb and lacking knowledge/research to
> declare whether that came
> before or after the Great Pyramids.. the ones with corbelled
> vaults... were built.
Mesopotamian influence is part and parcel of the formation of the Dynastic state. Pyramid building requires vast networks of labor, industry, administration, commerce, agriculture, et al. From before 4,000BC there is nothing and no one capable of doing this work. The Sphinx and associated temples are not the same level of infrastructure as would be required and could have easily been accomplished by an infinitely smaller group washed away by the activity of later pyramid building. Just look at Malta (for more reasons than one). Pyramid building on the other hand could only have been accomplished during a time of sufficient population/civilization which is only found after 4,000BC, namely the Dynastic Era.
> However the technology in evidence indicates to me, done to
> death re stonework etc
> indicates the builders were nothing like the "Antiquarians "
> describe in culture and likely
> are pre catastrophe or catastrophe survivors likely near end
> of last ice age.
Obviously this is what some believe. I do not agree, but I am a-ok to be wrong but I see nothing to contradict this as of now. Personally, I date this catastrophe(s), what is spoke of in the common origin flood myths of the world to 6,000BC. If this idea interest anyone it can be found here about 1/4 the way day (huge post):
> I hope that kicks off some discussion of your most deserving
> thread and post.
> I might have more to say but there is a heck of a lot to think
> through first.
Mull it over. Chew on it. I look forward to your comments. I have to commend you on your open mind and effort you put research into these things on your own as time allows before just barfing up rhetoric to fit pre-ordained beliefs. It is refreshing and I respect your opinions, so I'm glad you have come out from the shadows.
> Sorry about the quarry stuff, I'll read your info, thanks!
> However I found that interesting too
No worries and nothing to apologize for.