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
Hi Andy,

Thanks for asking about this. The earlier threads begun in these AoM discussions are mostly on the themes that Scott concentrated on in his contributions to the book, so naturally - and not without feeling as if I appear to be slacking on the responses and leaving all the work to Scott, (who by the way, has done a marvelous job in replying and responding to the questions) - I decided it was best to allow Scott to answer most of the posts on those particular threads that deal with his side of things, as he has done most of the research in those areas and understands it all "back to front" - or rather "Kruppside down" so to speak.
He has also created some really excellent Flash and PowerPoint presentations to explain the more complex issues of his work.
Scott mostly concentrated on the Giza Monuments and I concentrated mostly on the Great Pyramid - although our insights also crossed over into each of these two areas of research and there is much that Scott had already done as regards the subject of the chamber shafts in the GP.
Because his and my work connected on so many levels, and we found that a deeper meaning could be derived both from what appears to have been encoded within the angle geometry of the Great Pyramid, as well as what appears to have been encoded within the layout of the Giza monuments as a whole, we decided to work together which finally resulted in the new book.

So onto your question, and thanks for purchasing the book.
You write:

" . . . are you able to expand on what we know about this angle?"

The answer is really quite simple and logical really, and I'd like to go into this in some depth if I may - but you will find this explanation also given for the first time in the first chapter of 'The Giza Prophecy'.

The doctrine espoused by the Church was the ‘Concentric’ or Geocentric view offered by Claudius Ptolemy (100–165? AD) that all heavenly bodies – including the Sun – revolved around the earth.
The earth was the centre of all creation; each body was fixed upon a series of rotating celestial spheres, and according to God’s plan, the earth was perfectly stable, did not rotate and was therefore ‘upright’ and in every way we would use the term.

Being burdened with this sort of blind ignorance we can see why people also continued to believe the earth was flat – and this hundreds of years after the ancients, especially the hierophants and priests of the scientifically more advanced cultures of Chaldea, ancient Egypt and India, had perceived it all correctly the first time.

Sources:

Quote:

“Where did the Greek philosophers get such ideas? Probably from the scientifically more-advanced cultures of Chaldea and Egypt”.

Arktos: Polar Myth in Science, Symbolism and Nazi Survival by Joscelyn Godwin. (New Leaf Distribution Company; New edition, Dec 1996). Originally published in 1993. p. 182.


Quote:

“A great number of those wonderful Greek scientists, who gave forth such mighty discoveries from Alexandria thus appear to have been merely offering as their own work that of the Egyptian, Chaldean and Hindoo masters, who had preceded them, a proceeding which none will recognize as having been either good, square or true on their parts”.

Ancient Freemasonry: An Introduction to Masonic Archeology, Frank C. Higgins. (First published 1919). p. 381.


As we can see, there’s no doubt whatsoever, that part of the answer as regards these encoded references to the earth’s obliquity angle and mostly between the 15th and 18th centuries, is associated with the staunch celestial beliefs that were promulgated by the Church and which were later reinforced and with such ferocity in the face of the emerging alternative views that began with the Reformation in the 1500s, and the re-discovery of ancient Greek manuscripts which had been preserved and brought over from the East.
For example, a Greek philosopher of the Pythagorean school, Philolaus (c. 480–385 BCE), described an astronomical system in which the celestial bodies all revolved about a central fire. Then there’s the Greek philosopher and astronomer Heraclides Ponticus (387–312 BCE), who proposed that the Earth rotated on its axis.
And finally, we have the Greek astronomer and mathematician Aristarchus of Samos (310 – ca. 230 BC), who presented the first known heliocentric model of the solar system; his hypothesis was that the fixed stars and the sun remained motionless, that the earth revolves about the sun in the circumference of a circle, and that the earth rotates about its axis every 24 hours.
Also we should not be naive in thinking that the ancients didn’t know the earth was tilted at around 23 degrees. Long before the Greeks, the earliest astronomers had managed to calculate the tilt of the earth by measuring the shadows cast by a simple stick, or indeed obelisks and pillars, as was used originally by the ancient Egyptians to determine these facts about the earth – information and knowledge that was also jealously guarded by many of these ‘astronomer priests’ and hierophants.
Not only was the earth’s obliquity calculated through using this technique, of which more will be said later, but also the whole circumference of the earth could be calculated as the Greek astronomer and mathematician Eratosthenes had discovered.

Anyway, these and the new scientific discoveries that were being made with the arrival of the Greek manuscripts, all led to the Renaissance, and it was during this time that the persecutions made by the Church were in full swing to stamp out the “heretical beliefs” that threatened its authority.
However, in the wake of these persecutions, some were bold enough to publish knowledge of the tilted earth and as early as the late 17th century. For example, the English poet, John Milton gave vague reference to the tilt (obliquity) of the celestial polar axis in his famous work, Paradise Lost, written sixty five years after Bruno was executed – as did Thomas Burnet in his Telluris Theoria Sacra, (The Sacred Theory of the Earth) – written in 1681.
And we can see how the ideas of Aristarchus were taken up again some 1800 years later: first by Copernicus, whose book De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres) was completed in 1543 and just before he died, and developed further by Johannes Kepler and Isaac Newton, when these persecutions by the Church began to wane.

So then, in a nutshell, what we see with these encoded 23.5-degree angle references, which I have found in numerous sources over the years, is perhaps a glimpse into the minds of those who defied the wrong and staunchly-defended views of the Church, and who were active as part of a secret ‘covert resistance’ against the Church, by also ‘encoding’ the tilt angle of the earth in many different sources, thereby bringing to light the true condition of the earth and its place in the universe for those who had the eyes to see it and all in accord with the knowledge and wisdom of the ancients.

These are logical observations and interesting connections, but my research is still ongoing because there may be more to this belief in an ‘upright earth’ than we realise.
What comes to mind when viewing the many sources in which this angle is evident, is that these angle references reveal the truly heretical truth that God’s plan is not perfect; that the tilt of the earth which was seen as unnatural also indicates that the fate of the earth is uncertain and that its tilted condition may be the result of a global cataclysm in the past.
This of course means that rather than the earth being a superlative example of God’s creation in which ‘certainty’ and ‘order’ reign and are maintained throughout the universe, that on the contrary, this imperfect image of a ‘skewed’ earth in orbit around the Sun reveals our planet has an inferior position in the universe and in God’s plan; that it is also vulnerable to ‘uncertainty’ and ‘chaos’ and is therefore prey to the random wanderings of smaller celestial bodies and any series or periodic cycles involving natural cataclysms that may befall it.

For example, in the mural 'Tallinn’s Dance of Death', we can gather that the ‘Man of the Church’ standing upright is under a delusion, because the earth is not perfect – hence the dead who are shown dancing around him with their limbs of at the angle of the earth’s obliquity, indicating that the angle of 23° or 23.5° is associated with negativity, destruction and death. There’s no denying that even today the number ‘23’ has some occult significance. In any case, one would be forgiven for suggesting that perhaps some past catastrophic event had caused the tilt in the first place.



But what makes this particular theory convincing, is that these angle references and what they appear to be conveying, is in stark contrast to the views of the Church which were being enforced at the time when many of these angles were also being added into paintings on certain religious themes; and it is this that reveals both the motive and the reason why these references were subtly added and secretly encoded.
Ironically, we find these codes in paintings that had even been commissioned by elite members of the Catholic Church – many of them unaware that they had been patron to ‘heretic initiates’. No doubt many of these initiates had infiltrated the Vatican and were behind a good number of these commissions, benefactions and investments in art, sculpture and architecture.
Whatever the reason, it appears that the encoding of these specific angles associated with the earth’s geophysics has largely been a tradition with artists and for hundreds of years, because I have found that even today there are artists who appear to be encoding the same angle(s) in their works even though the Church and the Inquisition are no longer active. One can only conclude from the sheer volume of the references we find to this angle, that the people behind them – artists especially – belonged to a secret fraternity spanning many generations.
If having been passed down by tradition, it’s likely that these angles were used by artists who were initiated into the meaning behind them. The initiate artists who encoded these angles in their paintings, sketches, woodcuts and other works of art are numerous, and they include Raphael, Da Vinci, Poussin, Tenniers, Heironymous Bosch and also Albrecht Dürer – and really the list goes on and right up to the present day.
But it’s also fair to say – and because of the sheer volume of paintings I have found with references to the earth’s obliquity angle of 23.5° – that many artists may have just been following tradition, not really knowing the real meaning as to why they should paint swords, spears, trees, staffs, limbs, bones and other linear objects at this same angle.

Apologies for rambling on, but I thought it would best to cover this in some detail to show that this explantion as provided by Scott as we worked on the book cannot really be argued. Again, thanks for bringing this up. I was going to begin a thread on this myself, but your post made an excellent introduction to this particular theme - one of many in the book.

Best wishes,
Gary



Post Edited (05-Feb-12 16:56)

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
23.5 Degrees 513 Andy McCallum 05-Feb-12 12:12
Re: 23.5 Degrees 240 Gary Osborn 05-Feb-12 13:40
Re: 23.5 Degrees 215 Andy McCallum 06-Feb-12 20:03
Re: 23.5 Degrees 226 Gary Osborn 07-Feb-12 00:07
Geophysical/Geodetic information encoded in the GP 283 Gary Osborn 08-Feb-12 03:12
Re: The Moon and the Butler did it in the Library 179 Thunderbird 08-Feb-12 04:19
Re: The Moon and the Butler did it in the Library 164 Gary Osborn 08-Feb-12 14:00
Re: Geophysical/Geodetic information encoded in the GP 216 Gary Osborn 09-Feb-12 19:51
Re: Geophysical/Geodetic information encoded in the GP 239 Gary Osborn 09-Feb-12 19:52
Mod Note > Duplicate post 220 lukehancock 10-Feb-12 11:25
Re: Mod Note > Duplicate post 183 Gary Osborn 10-Feb-12 12:37
Scott's Al Nitak Alignment - Qs? 177 Misterx 15-Feb-12 12:06
Re: Scott's Al Nitak Alignment - Qs? 176 Scott Creighton 16-Feb-12 15:13
Re: Scott's Al Nitak Alignment - Qs? 160 Misterx 17-Feb-12 05:42
Re: Scott's Al Nitak Alignment - Qs? 150 Scott Creighton 17-Feb-12 16:14
23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 187 Misterx 15-Feb-12 10:41
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 251 Gary Osborn 15-Feb-12 20:07
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 166 Gary Osborn 15-Feb-12 20:49
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 173 Gary Osborn 15-Feb-12 20:52
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 214 Ahatmose 15-Feb-12 21:00
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 180 Gary Osborn 15-Feb-12 21:26
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 167 Gary Osborn 15-Feb-12 21:18
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 208 Gary Osborn 16-Feb-12 14:00
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 164 Ahatmose 16-Feb-12 14:31
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 166 Gary Osborn 16-Feb-12 20:59
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 295 MJT 24-Feb-12 17:37
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 134 Ahatmose 24-Feb-12 17:42
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 173 Gary Osborn 24-Feb-12 18:10
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 158 MJT 24-Feb-12 22:42
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 255 Gary Osborn 24-Feb-12 22:54
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 222 Ahatmose 24-Feb-12 22:56
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 201 Gary Osborn 24-Feb-12 23:23
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 231 MJT 26-Feb-12 00:46
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 177 Gary Osborn 26-Feb-12 02:02
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 161 MJT 26-Feb-12 12:17
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 184 Gary Osborn 26-Feb-12 13:50
Re: 23.5 Degrees to nowhere 233 MJT 26-Feb-12 22:27
Re: 23.5 Degrees to nowhere 156 Gary Osborn 27-Feb-12 00:58
Re: 23.5 Degrees to nowhere 290 MJT 27-Feb-12 01:51
Re: 23.5 Degrees to nowhere 179 Ahatmose 27-Feb-12 02:32
Re: 23.5 Degrees to nowhere 171 Gary Osborn 27-Feb-12 02:39
Re: 23.5 Degrees to nowhere 327 Gary Osborn 01-Apr-13 13:28
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 163 Gary Osborn 24-Feb-12 18:00
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 193 Gary Osborn 24-Feb-12 18:25
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 143 Ahatmose 24-Feb-12 20:48
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 174 Gary Osborn 24-Feb-12 21:49
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 229 Misterx 17-Feb-12 06:08
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 217 Gary Osborn 18-Feb-12 16:54
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 210 Misterx 20-Feb-12 05:01
Re: 23.5 Degrees - Pyramid of Cestius 187 Gary Osborn 20-Feb-12 23:18
Re: 23.5 Degrees 194 Nick L 24-Feb-12 21:56
Re: 23.5 Degrees 379 Gary Osborn 09-Feb-12 21:44
Re: 23.5 Degrees 145 Ahatmose 10-Feb-12 15:12
Re: 23.5 Degrees 210 Scott Creighton 10-Feb-12 15:35
Re: 23.5 Degrees 152 Ahatmose 10-Feb-12 16:22
Re: 23.5 Degrees 162 Gary Osborn 10-Feb-12 16:22
Re: 23.5 Degrees 156 Ahatmose 10-Feb-12 16:29
Re: 23.5 Degrees 225 Gary Osborn 10-Feb-12 16:38
Re: Disturbances in the very fabric of The Solar System 149 Thunderbird 10-Feb-12 18:24
Re: Disturbances in the very fabric of The Solar System 190 Ahatmose 10-Feb-12 18:31
Re: 23.5 Degrees 229 Gary Osborn 10-Feb-12 17:44
Always new surprises ! 23.5 Degrees revisited in light of solar system studies 179 Ahatmose 16-Feb-12 16:09
Angle to subterranean chamber? 206 Misterx 18-Feb-12 07:39
Re: Angle to subterranean chamber? 155 Gary Osborn 18-Feb-12 13:33
Re: Angle to subterranean chamber? 178 Misterx 18-Feb-12 14:03
Re: Angle to subterranean chamber? 245 Gary Osborn 18-Feb-12 14:41
Re: Angle to subterranean chamber? 180 Misterx 19-Feb-12 09:52
Re: Angle to subterranean chamber? 164 Gary Osborn 23-Feb-12 16:48
Beyond spooky .... the largest of the 23.5 degree angles 252 Ahatmose 23-Feb-12 21:17
Re: Beyond spooky .... the largest of the 23.5 degree angles 149 Ahatmose 23-Feb-12 22:53
Re: Beyond spooky .... the largest of the 23.5 degree angles 155 Ahatmose 24-Feb-12 01:37
Re: Beyond spooky .... the largest of the 23.5 degree angles 173 Gary Osborn 24-Feb-12 12:09
Re: Beyond spooky .... the largest of the 23.5 degree angles 153 Ahatmose 24-Feb-12 13:39
Re: Beyond spooky .... the largest of the 23.5 degree angles 213 Gary Osborn 24-Feb-12 16:30
Re: Beyond spooky .... the largest of the 23.5 degree angles 145 Ahatmose 24-Feb-12 16:41
Re: Beyond spooky .... the largest of the 23.5 degree angles 144 Ahatmose 24-Feb-12 16:27
Re: 23.5/22.5 Degrees 178 MJT 27-Feb-12 10:54
Re: 23.5/22.5 Degrees 208 Ahatmose 27-Feb-12 13:32
Re: 23.5/22.5 Degrees 253 MJT 27-Feb-12 15:53
Re: 23.5/22.5 Degrees 325 Gary Osborn 27-Feb-12 19:35
Re: 23.5/22.5 Degrees 179 MJT 27-Feb-12 20:29
Re: 23.5/22.5 Degrees 237 Gary Osborn 27-Feb-12 21:34
Re: 23.5/22.5 Degrees 185 MJT 27-Feb-12 22:23
Re: 23.5/22.5 Degrees 221 Gary Osborn 28-Feb-12 01:59
Re: 23.5/22.5 Degrees 137 MJT 28-Feb-12 11:43
Re: 23.5/22.5 Degrees 159 Scott Creighton 28-Feb-12 13:19
Re: 23.5/22.5 Degrees 202 MJT 28-Feb-12 21:54
Re: 23.5/22.5 Degrees 184 Scott Creighton 28-Feb-12 22:57
Re: 23.5 Degrees 163 Spiros 28-Feb-12 19:14
Re: 23.5 Degrees 183 Spiros 28-Feb-12 19:42


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.