Mysteries :
The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board).
Origyptian wrote:
> Jon Ellison wrote:
>
> > Please provide images of confirmed AE heiroglyphs/quarry marks
> > that can only have been painted during the building of the
> > pyramid.
> >
>
> I never said the pyramids were not built by Egyptians.
> I have no idea where he got that from.
> I only said the evidence points to a time earlier than the
> dynastics.
I stand corrected.
My understanding now is that Origyptian is claiming or hypothesising (I am not sure which) that the Dynastic Egyptians could not have built the Great Pyramid of Giza because they did not have the means to do so, but it could have been designed and built by pre-Dynastic Egyptians who did have the means to do so.
This, to me, means that Origyptian holds that the hieroglyphs in the Great Pyramid’s Chambers of Construction/Relieving Chambers (that I pointed to as evidence that the GP is Dynastic Egyptian) are not Dynastic Egyptian but possibly are pre-Dynastic Egyptian.
In a nutshell, and as I now understand it, Origyptian is claiming or hypothesising (again, I am not sure which) that the Great Pyramid of Giza might have been/could have been/was (take your pick) built by Egyptians pre c. 3,000 B. C.
I wonder, somewhat fancifully; were the pre-Dynastic Egyptians who could, allegedly, have designed and built the Great Pyramid of Giza different to the Dynastic Egyptians who could not, allegedly, have designed and built the Great Pyramid of Giza?
If memory serves, Origyptian has suggested/implied/hypothesised (take your pick) in the past that the Lost Ancient Civilisation could have been/might have been/was (take your pick) ‘peopled’ by non-Humans.
This conjures up in my mind a situation in which we have pre-dynastic Egyptians being Extra-terrestrials and Dynastic Egyptians being Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and both being seen simply as Egyptians, i.e. one and the same.
> Regarding the language, who knows where the dynastics got their
> hieroglyphics.
[snip]
I know very little about hieroglyphics and their history, consequently I cannot comment on the remainder of Origyptian’s post.
No, let me rephrase that: I know absolutely nothing about hieroglyphics and their history, consequently I cannot comment on the remainder of Origyptian’s post.
MJT
Post Edited (16-Jun-15 11:52)
> Jon Ellison wrote:
>
> > Please provide images of confirmed AE heiroglyphs/quarry marks
> > that can only have been painted during the building of the
> > pyramid.
> >
>
> I never said the pyramids were not built by Egyptians.
> I have no idea where he got that from.
> I only said the evidence points to a time earlier than the
> dynastics.
I stand corrected.
My understanding now is that Origyptian is claiming or hypothesising (I am not sure which) that the Dynastic Egyptians could not have built the Great Pyramid of Giza because they did not have the means to do so, but it could have been designed and built by pre-Dynastic Egyptians who did have the means to do so.
This, to me, means that Origyptian holds that the hieroglyphs in the Great Pyramid’s Chambers of Construction/Relieving Chambers (that I pointed to as evidence that the GP is Dynastic Egyptian) are not Dynastic Egyptian but possibly are pre-Dynastic Egyptian.
In a nutshell, and as I now understand it, Origyptian is claiming or hypothesising (again, I am not sure which) that the Great Pyramid of Giza might have been/could have been/was (take your pick) built by Egyptians pre c. 3,000 B. C.
I wonder, somewhat fancifully; were the pre-Dynastic Egyptians who could, allegedly, have designed and built the Great Pyramid of Giza different to the Dynastic Egyptians who could not, allegedly, have designed and built the Great Pyramid of Giza?
If memory serves, Origyptian has suggested/implied/hypothesised (take your pick) in the past that the Lost Ancient Civilisation could have been/might have been/was (take your pick) ‘peopled’ by non-Humans.
This conjures up in my mind a situation in which we have pre-dynastic Egyptians being Extra-terrestrials and Dynastic Egyptians being Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and both being seen simply as Egyptians, i.e. one and the same.
> Regarding the language, who knows where the dynastics got their
> hieroglyphics.
[snip]
I know very little about hieroglyphics and their history, consequently I cannot comment on the remainder of Origyptian’s post.
No, let me rephrase that: I know absolutely nothing about hieroglyphics and their history, consequently I cannot comment on the remainder of Origyptian’s post.
MJT
Post Edited (16-Jun-15 11:52)
So many questions.
So few answers - and not one of them mine.
So few answers - and not one of them mine.
Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed.