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). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Go to: Forum HomeBoardNew Topic

Pages: 12345...LastNext
Current Page: 1 of 10
Results 1 - 30 of 273
Today
thinkitover
Warwick Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "I've already answered that for you and everyone > Warwick, and you're asking the same question > again. Folk above are still asking the same > question because you keep forgetting the answer > that even the AEs say: recreating what they know, > believe and observe into a construction in order
Forum: Mysteries
Today
thinkitover
Manu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And so here is my dilemma. If another alternative > history researcher wants me to accept that the > primary principle was to enshrine the FSC with > 411, in which case the diagonal is an incidental > occurrence, then how do I adjudicate? What is the > next higher level of proof we need to falsify one
Forum: Mysteries
Today
thinkitover
Manu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > as its reciprocal α−1 is currently > known to be 137.035999084... > > You can find the FSC's numerical integer portion > 137, among a few places, in the base length of > Khafre's Pyramid, as many of you likely > know and this has already been published by some > authors. 137 x 3 x 4 and 137 x
Forum: Mysteries
Today
thinkitover
DUNE Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > thinkitover Wrote: > > > > > The edge length of G3... > > > > sqrt (((height 216)^2) + (half base 172.9249818 > x > > sqrt 2 = 244.5528545)^2)) = 326.2853026 = > > 2.719044188 x 120 = 2.720174976 to .999584235) > > Not sure i understand your use of the word &q
Forum: Mysteries
Today
thinkitover
DUNE Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Ok, i think because i have used slightly different > slope angles that has set my upper base higher up > than one using those published angles, now don't > forget they are estimations , so i think one can > go either way by a small amount on all their > measurements due to the structures condition, so
Forum: Mysteries
Today
thinkitover
Manu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > QuoteThey thus far seem to have been stewarding > a number of units as far as I can tell, quite > possibly because of both sentimentality or > tradition, and because of the mathematical > properties of the units themselves. That is the > thing about some of the most ideal unit values is > that they
Forum: Mysteries
Today
thinkitover
Thanos5150 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Instead of being so unbearably condescending > about > > it, > > Not condescending in the least. Dennis actually > does consider it a possibility time travelers from > the future built the pyramids and gave him this > knowledge. Why do you think that belongs in a discussion a
Forum: Mysteries
Today
thinkitover
drew Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Q2: I've explained that in other topics about the > ratio of measure of 10deg existing between the > axes of upper and middle chambers, and the horizon > to align pyramid to cosmos and to Earth being the > top of the 20th course and Earth's equator. This > level is the base of the valley between the mou
Forum: Mysteries
Yesterday
thinkitover
Manu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > thinkitover Wrote: > I'd rather > > hear him out... These are not the sort of > things > > that should be decided in a day, and probably > not > > a month. Most importantly, what if DUNE > happened > > to be right? > > > I gave his theory just about the most thoro
Forum: Mysteries
Yesterday
thinkitover
DUNE Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thinkitover wrote > > "Why don't you guys just cut to the chase > and give DUNE a good spanking because his upper > baseline on the Bent is 2 and a half feet short of > consensus data? > > Hi Think, could you elaborate on the above and put > me right . You have 402.68 on the upper
Forum: Mysteries
Yesterday
thinkitover
Sirfiroth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hey Robert, > > Perhaps you can find some evidence in the Ancient > Egyptian Archives where the Ancient Egyptians > designed anything with measurements other than > cubits, palms and digits. Hey, Jacob Thank God Zahi found the receipts for the laborers in the "Ancient Egyptian Archive
Forum: Mysteries
Yesterday
thinkitover
cloister Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > "In my opinion, some of the most important > things > > I've ever written on the subject of metrology > have > > to be that > > > > 365 / 30 = 1.216666666 > > 365 / 31 = 1.177419355 > > 365 / 354 = 2.062146903 / 2 > > 365 / 225 = 1.622222222 = 1.21666
Forum: Mysteries
Yesterday
thinkitover
Manu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > QuoteThey thought in lots of units, obviously, > and for no better reason than mathematics > apparently. > The > > > If you can prove this statement with a better > theory than Dune's, I will be all ear. Apparently this is a new development then since I have been going on about that very sub
Forum: Mysteries
Yesterday
thinkitover
Thanos5150 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The AE foot, the djeser, was 11.81", and yet > instead of using this, if one must use feet, you > all use the modern 12" foot. Now I understand why > you think the pyramid builders were time travelers > who gave only you this special knowledge. Hi, Thanos Please don't make me lose my c
Forum: Mysteries
Yesterday
thinkitover
Manu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jim, don't take it from me, take it from the > Egyptians themselves. They did not think in feet. They thought in lots of units, obviously, and for no better reason than mathematics apparently. Why else would someone work with that many units in the first place? Most if not all of us metrologists are good enough t
Forum: Mysteries
Yesterday
thinkitover
Hi, cloister cloister Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It is commonplace. You can make any structure fit > any criteria you like, eventually! This is the part I would like to have proven to me. So far this seems to be a widespread notion that people can "torture" "all sorts of things" out of a given dataset, but what is the basis
Forum: Mysteries
2 days ago
thinkitover
cloister Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > That's a very good description of confirmation > bias. > > You may be right about all sorts of things here, > but as long as you won't even test your theories > on a neutral control you have no actual proof that > you are doing anything other than fooling > yourself. If I were fooling
Forum: Mysteries
2 days ago
thinkitover
Manu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > However, don't get me wrong: With every multiplier > I introduce, the chance I am right goes down. In > your model those are the factors 875, 50, and > 4200. You did not justify their use. You > implicitly justify their use by the outcome they > produce, the Moon. Hi, Manu I was afraid DUNE was go
Forum: Mysteries
2 days ago
thinkitover
cloister Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I suspect you are finding just what you are > looking for, and you will probably find much the > same wherever you look if you look hard enough. > Without applying the same criteria to other > unrelated structures how can you know whether your > maths is peculiar to ancient structures? Hi, cloist
Forum: Mysteries
2 days ago
thinkitover
Manu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi, Manu Many thanks for the diagrams. I hope I understand your concerns correctly. You seem to have highlighted the 188.6 m figure on M&R's diagram here. I'm not sure what to say about that except that this seems to be at odds with both Petrie and Dorner, even while I went back and checked Romer again and fou
Forum: Mysteries
2 days ago
thinkitover
cloister Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The biggest problem with the encoded information > theory is that you have to know all the answers in > order to find any evidence of them, so it's all a > bit pointless. As far as finding these things in > ancient structures goes, have you tried applying > the same effort into finding them in more
Forum: Mysteries
3 days ago
thinkitover
DUNE Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi Think, > > Yea Legons method of labelling the slope angles > got me well confused , but im easily confused . I'm writing the book on easily confused. It's called Easily Confused so I don't get confused as to what it's about > Anyway , another confusing aspect for me at least > is Petries Mean v
Forum: Mysteries
3 days ago
thinkitover
Manu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If you prefer to dismiss Stadelmann's observations > corroborating Maragioglio and Rinaldi's contention > of a pyramid extension and a three-phase > construction, you should still explain them within > your own, one-design model. > > Stadelmann examined the two corridor systems and > found fiss
Forum: Mysteries
3 days ago
thinkitover
Another excellent guide. Many thanks for taking a look at this neglected pyramid. Cheers!
Forum: Mysteries
3 days ago
thinkitover
Warwick Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > BUT if what you see is what they wanted you to > see. > > Why did they want us to see it? > > What benefit did they gain from it? > > To what end? > > Maybe here we can find a common language Hi, Warwick Very good questions. Why indeed would somebody incorporate all sort
Forum: Mysteries
4 days ago
thinkitover
DUNE Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi thinkitover > > Got my slope angles mixed up . > > Removed diagram , > > Back to the drawing board Hi, DUNE I was about to tell you that it looks like Legon who got the slope angles wrong - or has them very confusingly labelled? Petrie, in A Season in Egypt pg 30 goes on to give
Forum: Mysteries
4 days ago
thinkitover
DUNE Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Here's my analysis of the Bent pyramid, and a > possible design connection to The Great Pyramid . > > Hi, DUNE That's interesting. I didn't even spot the 311.04. Very nice. I wonder how long that was going to take me on my own. Not sure where the 268.88888888 comes from though. Looks more like the di
Forum: Mysteries
4 days ago
thinkitover
DUNE Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Like John Legon, i favour Dorner's findings for > the base of the Bent pyramid . > > From John Legons site > > > > > > > > So here's why i feel 362 cubits fits , > > If we take the cubit as 20.62" x 362 / Pi exact > = 2376.00" or 198 ft >
Forum: Mysteries
6 days ago
thinkitover
DUNE Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi Jim, > > Test it i did, and it seems we are quite a way > apart, not sure where your getting your > measurements from, my center to center is some > 6740.7 ft , if i use your 3960 Royal Cubit ratio > my cubit comes to 20.4264" . > > Now i think im going to stick with my 6740.7 ft
Forum: Mysteries
6 days ago
thinkitover
Warwick Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ".about,nearly,about,about. " > > was an Observation, a critique. Really? "Gastropods from Sirius" somehow doesn't quite seem like an appropriate "critique" to the subject material. Was it supposed to be a scientific one? > To my thinking "about,nearly,about and about
Forum: Mysteries
Pages: 12345...LastNext
Current Page: 1 of 10