Date: January 11, 2017 12:21AM
Steve Clayton Wrote:
> Hi Phil,
> An after thought... If all the Causeway's turn
> out to be 4.6-ish, wouldn't that lend credence to
> an earlier build time?
>There are 2 matters regarding the causeways that I've not seen mentioned.
>In 2014 it was announced that the causeway of G1 had been found in a village 33' below someone's house. G1's causeway is abruptly cut off at the cliff but it was estimated to be approx. 825m long continuing to the NE. Also, in 1990 Hawass announced the finding >of G1's valley temple below a village.
>This would upset your 4.6 degrees.
Egyptologists believe the causeways were covered, like a tube of sorts. I don't know why they think so, but IF that's true it would make operation of a funicular difficult, if not impossible.
>In 2014 it was announced that the causeway of G1 had been found in a village 33' below someone's house.
Yes, I have provided prof that I was able to predict that event, using the 4.6 angle. Would you like to see it again? If the Nile began changing coarse, and pulled away from the Giza shoreline, they would need to build a structure, so they could continue reaching the Causeway. That find, may or may not be part of the original causeway. It is indisputably in line.
>G1's causeway is abruptly cut off at the cliff but it was estimated to be approx. 825m long continuing to the NE.
We produced a drawing, and plotted an 825m arc. I will look for it... The only evidence, I am aware of, is that they found remains of a basalt floor and not a causeway leading to it, and/or from it. They simply "assumed" the causeway "must of" ran over to their find. If you can show otherwise, please post it.
One way to help disprove Funiculars, would be to do a dig in line with Khafrey's causeway. In this survey, they show a hump in the lay of the land.
They would need to dig down to bedrock, and see where they hit it. It still remains that the ropes could handle such a bend, as they would lay in the causeways slip channel. Currently, the height of the Funicular/barge is 6.37' tall when on the Causeway. They may have chosen to cover the causeway, as the sun would cause water to evaporate at a higher rate. The 4.6-ish angle, came about by many measurement. It certainly wasn't 8.5 degrees as Houdin stated, unless it did in fact have an upward bend.
>Also, in 1990 Hawass announced the finding of G1's valley temple below a village.
I believe, that would be this basalt floor. As no Temple has ever been found...they drew the above conclusion. If that was some other building, then the Temple may still be buried, and/or washed away by a flood. As you have pointed out, there is an abrupt break, where the Nile once likely was. None of this upsets our 4.6-ish calculation. You would need to apply it to numerous Pyramids, as I did, and you would (may) conclude it is real. Start at Abydos and work your way forward. There are some Pyramids that seem to lack a causeway, though that may be explained, that they have not been uncovered. Even at the bent pyramid, they found a large canal. Why is that? It would appear they needed a large amount of water. I could be guilty of reading into my analysis, what I wanted to see.
Researches are guilty of this all the time. It's part of human nature, though I am aware of it, and try and avoid it.
Below are some interesting picture from my Imgur account. You may find some of them interesting. I was looking for that 825m arc Dune and I created. It will be difficult to find, though I know it is back in the past posts.