Author of the Month :
The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
SC: Well, if your are saying Orion's Belt stars were used (are you?) and each star centre simply plotted on the plateau with a base randonly determined around each centre then how do you explain that the base proportion of each pyramid can be derived from the Belt stars? I can't imagine that the step-by-step process of the GSF could or would be carried out on an area the size of the plateau, do you?
SC: I can't explain how the AEs did it but I can certainly suggest how it might have been done. You start by finding true north/south and this can be done in a number of ways e.g. using two pillars to mark the rising and setting point of a star and bisecting the arc will give you true north/south. to a high degree of accuracy. The problem with that method is that you require a perfectly even horizon for your rising and setting points which may not always be possible. To overcome that problem you could use something like this where it doesn't really matter if the horizon is even since you are tracking the arc of the star itself across the sky and bi-secting its arc. Just a couple of means to achieve high alignment accuracy off the top of my head.
But I do think you are neglecting somewhat the geometric relationships that exist between the structures as I have described and the fact that the Orion GSF can replicate these relationships to a high degree of accuracy (including some peculiarities such as the Lehner-Gdeke line, the G3 slight rectangle) what we find on the ground at Giza.
Regards,
SC
Join us at this forum every month for a discussion with famous popular authors from around the world.
Quote
MJ: I earlier wrote to Gary, '...it occurs to me that a scaled plan of the layout of the Giza pyramids could have been created without recourse to the geometry and arithmetic (i.e. the ‘Orion Geostellar Fingerprint’) that Scott and you claim the Giza pyramids’ builders used.
All it needed was a good eye, a clear night sky, and an ability to draw a fair copy of a simple natural pattern made up of three dots/stars.'
Do you disagree with this, and if so, why?
SC: Well, if your are saying Orion's Belt stars were used (are you?) and each star centre simply plotted on the plateau with a base randonly determined around each centre then how do you explain that the base proportion of each pyramid can be derived from the Belt stars? I can't imagine that the step-by-step process of the GSF could or would be carried out on an area the size of the plateau, do you?
Quote
MJ: Regarding your comment, 'A simple grid is all it needs', can you explain how the base of the Great Pyramid was laid out on the Plateau with such a high degree of accuracy.
SC: I can't explain how the AEs did it but I can certainly suggest how it might have been done. You start by finding true north/south and this can be done in a number of ways e.g. using two pillars to mark the rising and setting point of a star and bisecting the arc will give you true north/south. to a high degree of accuracy. The problem with that method is that you require a perfectly even horizon for your rising and setting points which may not always be possible. To overcome that problem you could use something like this where it doesn't really matter if the horizon is even since you are tracking the arc of the star itself across the sky and bi-secting its arc. Just a couple of means to achieve high alignment accuracy off the top of my head.
But I do think you are neglecting somewhat the geometric relationships that exist between the structures as I have described and the fact that the Orion GSF can replicate these relationships to a high degree of accuracy (including some peculiarities such as the Lehner-Gdeke line, the G3 slight rectangle) what we find on the ground at Giza.
Regards,
SC
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.