> In saying that they might not have correctly understood what
> they were intending, all we have to do is look at what has
> survived down to us, and there can be no better reference than
> the pyramids themselves.
> You made a mention of Imhotep in another topic, and considering
> he was the architect of Djoser's pyramids, how can it be that
> Khufu's pyramid was so much more? And yet by all accounts,
> that was the pinnacle of achievement for inclusions in
> pyramids. Sure, masonry might have been a little better in
> later pyramids, but that is not to say that we are certain
> about Khufu being the pyramid's builder...only that he is
> identified as the one who left his mark upon it.
> So many examples exist where particular rulers destroyed
> references to older rulers, and not limited to defacing texts
> carved onto buildings and tombs. To erase history and claim
> something as one's own is easy enough, but to have a structure
> that stands out as being quite unique when compared to other
> similar structures can only make one wonder where something
> should appear historically instead of where it is claimed to
> appear. Khufu's and Khafre's pyramids are quite unusual, but
> because Menkaure's pyramid is also upon the Giza Plateau can
> only make us wonder whether the three were actually built in
> the same time period, or if some other time period offers up a
> better explanation for when pyramids were actually built, and
> when they were copied. The feature above the entrance to
> Khufu's Pyramid possibly identifies that another time period is
> responsible for the Giza pyramids, and all because of the two
> mounds AND the pyramid within that feature. While some
> speculate that the three pyramids mimic the belt stars of
> Orion, the entrance-feature gives a glimpse that some other
> identity is being expressed, and I think it alludes more to two
> primary sources of existence that enable an offspring to come
> into existence.
> Djoser had four pyramids built, as we are lead to believe, and
> yet each one of them was different to the other. If Imhotep
> truly was the architect of all of them, then what was he trying
> to do? Advance the style of the mastaba? Perfect a form? Mimic
> something that already existed?
> In my own study of the Great Pyramid, I found the size of it to
> align to a flattened plan of the cosmos, with the floor of the
> Queen Chamber referencing Sirius in its lowest position
> according to Earth's Axial Precession, and the half height of
> the pyramid referencing Sirius at its highest position, the two
> moments some 12,500 years apart, being 11,875BCE and 627CE. How
> would the AEs have known this, let alone incorporate it into
> the architecture of the pyramid?
> As much as I can determine, no other pyramids exhibit this.
I don't know. There are so few facts available all anyone can do is try to connect the dots and everyone is connecting them differently. There's a lot of reason to believe many of the various theories are at least in part correct and some could be correct in their entirety.
I still think the best course is to get more data; more dots. Nailing down some of these points should be relatively easy if science is used. Surely, better sampling could help establish ages better. I'd wager that if microscopic forensics were performed viable samples of organic material would even be found for good carbon dating.
Some of the most obvious concepts like ancient interest and deep knowledge of astronomy seems to be invisible to orthodoxy.