Author of the Month :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
Join us at this forum every month for a discussion with famous popular authors from around the world. 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Hello Scott,

When someone comes up with a theory he should ask himself how probable it is. For example you refer to the 26.5 degree angle which shows up especially in the slope of the passages. How probable is it that it depicts a pole shift? What if a simpler explanation can be found? For example a right triangle with right sided of a 1 : 2 ratio leads to an angle of 26.57 degrees. Then we come to the so-called 6 degree angle. You show a sphinx divergence which I don’t understand. The sphinx stands due east not rotated direction wise by 6 degrees. Then we have the direction of the sphinx in regards to the apex of the Khafre pyramid. Once again it is around 8 degrees South of East, not 6 degrees. We then move on to the air shafts. The South KC shaft is “raised” by 5.392 degrees in relation to the QC shafts. This is not 6 degrees. The North KC shaft is “lowered” by 6.524 degrees which is closer to 7 degrees. Once again, what are the chances that this depicts a pole shift of some sort? Why not look into the simpler explanation of it encoding a different coordinate – place on the globe – in Greece. This way the Southern shafts always depict the slope of the Sun and the Northern shafts depict the pole star of a certain epoch. Besides the position of this coordinate is encompassed in the slope of the Khufu Pyramid through it’s complementary angle at the apex. This apex angle corresponds to the geocentric latitude of the city in Hellas that aligns with the mountains that were the inspiration for the Giza mapping. The niche angle you propose I believe is not of great importance. Besides, what would make more sense is to try figuring out the angle to the top of the North-South walls. This does not come out to 6 degrees. The last proposition is the 2 chamber to apex angle. In a book you co-authored with Gary Osborne one reads the correlation between the chamber to apex angle with the inclination of the Moon. What happened to this idea? Have you now rejected it in favor of the pole shift idea? To me it seems a lot more plausible. I just want to note that the inclination of the Moon is 5.145° to the ecliptic, and it’s axial tilt is 6.687° to the orbital plane.

Best Regards
Spiros

EIMI H ZΩH = IHΣOYΣ

[the-phaistos-disk.webnode.com]

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 400 Scott Creighton 14-Jul-21 13:42
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 99 michael seabrook 14-Jul-21 20:43
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 88 Scott Creighton 15-Jul-21 16:34
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 91 michael seabrook 15-Jul-21 21:56
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 97 cjcalleman 15-Jul-21 18:48
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 99 Scott Creighton 16-Jul-21 08:51
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 96 Martin Stower 16-Jul-21 09:37
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 108 cjcalleman 16-Jul-21 17:55
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 105 Martin Stower 23-Jul-21 23:23
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 118 mhgaffney 15-Jul-21 23:08
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 95 Scott Creighton 16-Jul-21 08:40
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 92 drew 16-Jul-21 03:59
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 84 Spiros 16-Jul-21 15:25
Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2) and a Palm Leaf 92 Reagent 18-Jul-21 00:35
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2) and a Palm Leaf 85 Merrell 18-Jul-21 09:31
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2) and a Palm Leaf 100 Reagent 18-Jul-21 20:30


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.