Re-Dating the Sphinx of Egypt

[Immortal4life]

Re-Dating the Sphinx of Egypt

 

In the 1990s a large body of evidence, including the evidence of water erosion, determined the Sphinx of Egypt to have been built in 10,500 BC as opposed to the previously held 2,500 BC date for it's construction. According to Geology only rain water, and nothing else, can cause the deep, smooth, grooved channels, or the so called vertical fissures which are basically small waterfalls, that are found on the Sphinx. It couldn't have rained on the Sphinx enough to cause the rain weathering it has on it, unless it was built closer to 12,000 years ago when the Giza plateau was not a dry desert like it is now, but when it was greener and wetter. Thus, the old 2,500 BC dating of the Sphinx can be ruled out.

 

This discovery was covered by the Emmy award winning documentary "The Mystery of the Sphinx", which was watched by over 30 million people when it first aired on television on NBC

 

The data is very straightforward, but generally geologists never had bothered to study the Sphinx much. In 1990 a team led by Dr. Robert Schoch of Boston University analyzed the Sphinx and the findings were clear, the Sphinx bears rain weathering. This means it was built long before 2,500 BC, likely before the end of the last ice age.

 

Dr. Schoch's findings were presented at the annual meeting of the Geological Congress of America in 1990, where his findings were thought to be very interesting and over 280 geologists personally offered to help in any further study on the Sphinx. 1,400 geologists agreed the data was correct and the Sphinx must be thousands of years older than archaeologists had thought.

 

From there it became huge news and appeared in headlines in newspapers around the world. It became a hugely contested issue. A major debate was scheduled to take place under the direction of the AAAS which is the publisher of the scientific journal Science, one of the most prestigous in the world. Zahi Hawass the Director of Antiquities of Egypt, and Mark Lehner the world's foremost expert on the Sphinx attended to argue against the Geological data and to represent for archaeology. In the end the rain erosion findings could not be disproven as it is a simple fact. Archaeologists cannot accept the implications of the data, but they have to accept the Sphinx bears rain erosion.

 

Geology beats Archaeology here as the harder science.

 

Introduction with Charleton Heston-

 

Here is the complete Emmy award winning documentary "The Mystery of the Sphinx", which was watched by 10s of millions of people when it first aired on television-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQ-xh3kedW4

 

Video on an Archaeology cover-up-

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5644481843574621580#

 

Redating the sphinx, published in the World History Bulletin, Vol. 11, No. 1 (Spring-Summer 1994), pp. 1-4. -

Redating the Sphinx

A research team has discovered physical evidence that the Great Sphinx of Giza, Egypt, may date from 5000 and 7000 BCE and possibly earlier. In response, archaeologists have thrown mud at geologists, historians have been caught in the middle, and the Sphinx, having revealed one secret, challenges us to unravel even greater ones.

 

I noticed this site because of the first part, talking about the Re-dating of the Sphinx, but there's a lot of other suff on there too it looks like

Famous Conspiracy Theories

The American Association for the Advancement of Science scheduled a session to debate the issue at its annual general meeting in Chicago on 7th February 1992. Lehner attended along with geologist K. Lal Gauri of the University of Louisville, who had also studied the Sphinx for many years. West also attended and presented his arguments. (17)

 

Once again, the water erosion findings were endorsed even though Egyptologists themselves could not bring themselves to accept the implications of this endorsement.

 

The AAAS meeting broke up in words that, according to the New York Times "skated on the icy edge of scientific politeness."

 

A writer for the AAAS magazine Science wrote that Schoch "hadn't convinced many archaeologists or geologists" of his findings. In fact, Schoch had received offers of support from geologists after the October and February meetings. Even some archaeologists accepted his geological findings without conceding the conclusion to which they pointed"

 

The vertical fissures can be seen clearly

 

Another interesting observation. The Body is a perfectly proportioned body of a lion, and the head is a perfectly proportioned head of a black African Human. However, they don't match at all, the head is way too small for the body-

 

More resources-

Circular Times Alternative Magazine

Magical Egypt Tours & Symbolist Egyptian Research with John Anthony West

http://atlantisrisingmagazine.com/2009/07/01/12000-years-old/

Edited August 14, 2011 by Immortal4life

[Aetherous]

There's a theory that the Sphinx was originally a statue of Anubis...

 

[Marblehead]

I had a date with her once but she was a no-show. Oh well.

[Immortal4life]

Another theory is that it was a Lion.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1092827/The-Great-Sphinx-Giza-reborn-lion-desert.html

http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf109/sf109p12.htm

 

The Lion makes a lot of sense, because in the year 10,500 BC, the Sphinx directly faces it's counterpart in the sky, the constellation of Leo-

Edited August 14, 2011 by Immortal4life

[Immortal4life]

More information here, that some Archaeologists rufuse to accept though they can not refute it or explain it-

http://www.perceptions.couk.com/sphy.html

[Harmonious Emptiness]

There's also the theory that the nose and lips were defaced by Napoleon, maybe angered over impending defeat in Haiti, to cover up her African features.

[Immortal4life]

Yes, even though the Sphinx's head has likely been modified and changed at a date much later than when the body was originally carved, Forensic expert Frank Domingo proved that the face is not Khefren or even Egyptian, but black African.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Yes, even though the Sphinx's head has likely been modified and changed at a date much later than when the body was originally carved, Forensic expert Frank Domingo proved that the face is not Khefren or even Egyptian, but black African.

 

Yeah, I can't remember where to find it but there is a quote from an anthropologist in the 1700's who say's something like "what would happen if only everyone knew that the people from the Cradle of Civilization were of the same race as those we hold in bondage" when talking about the sphinx. Maybe this is why freemasons have been part of the conspiracy against blacks in USA. Maybe they're afraid they themselves are somehow racially inferior and so they have to keep the black man down? I don't know, but I'm white and find this simple fact to have HUGE potential ramifications.

Edited August 16, 2011 by Harmonious Emptiness

[Aetherous]

Maybe this is why freemasons have been part of the conspiracy against blacks in USA.

 

Huh? There have been many black freemasons. How were they part of the conspiracy against blacks?

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Huh? There have been many black freemasons. How were they part of the conspiracy against blacks?

 

basically being the backbone of a network between judges, law enforcement, and politics.

[orb]

There's a theory that the Sphinx was originally a statue of Anubis...

 

 

 

There's also the theory that it was designed from the beginning with a flaw because that's the only way to show the key to it's message.

Just imagine had it been a statue of a lion or some mythical creature it would have been treated as a simple art piece.

However if there's the feeling that it caries a message then it will be studied in depth in the attempt to understand it. And the old civilizations were counting on it.

 

Over time cultures and languages change and the orginial meaning of the symbols is always getting lost.

Even people that can speak an old language, because of their different mind set - most of the time they don't understand and misinterpret the old message.

So many of these ancient monuments were created to transcend this unfortunate process.

These are not simple art pieces - these are very well designed sources of ancient wisdom that we are unable to comprehend yet.

[strawdog65]

Very cool topic!

 

The Great pyramid complex at Giza and the Sphinx

were, I believe, both pre-existing when Egyptians

claimed them as their own.

 

If you look closely at he structure and time line of ancient Egyptian

culture and development, on thing that stands out is the strange way in

which they are a culture that had it's greatest accomplishments at the

very beginning of their culture. There is no progression to greater things.

there is a marked decline in what they were able to accomplish as the

culture moved forward in time.

 

It's almost as if they had no actual knowledge of both the pyramids or

the sphinx, and were merely the next culture to come on the scene and

claim these things as their own.

[Immortal4life]

There's also the theory that it was designed from the beginning with a flaw because that's the only way to show the key to it's message.

Just imagine had it been a statue of a lion or some mythical creature it would have been treated as a simple art piece.

However if there's the feeling that it caries a message then it will be studied in depth in the attempt to understand it. And the old civilizations were counting on it.

 

Over time cultures and languages change and the orginial meaning of the symbols is always getting lost.

Even people that can speak an old language, because of their different mind set - most of the time they don't understand and misinterpret the old message.

So many of these ancient monuments were created to transcend this unfortunate process.

These are not simple art pieces - these are very well designed sources of ancient wisdom that we are unable to comprehend yet.

 

This is very true.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

There's also the theory that it was designed from the beginning with a flaw because that's the only way to show the key to it's message.

Just imagine had it been a statue of a lion or some mythical creature it would have been treated as a simple art piece.

However if there's the feeling that it caries a message then it will be studied in depth in the attempt to understand it. And the old civilizations were counting on it.

 

Over time cultures and languages change and the orginial meaning of the symbols is always getting lost.

Even people that can speak an old language, because of their different mind set - most of the time they don't understand and misinterpret the old message.

So many of these ancient monuments were created to transcend this unfortunate process.

These are not simple art pieces - these are very well designed sources of ancient wisdom that we are unable to comprehend yet.

 

I'm not too sold on this theory. Looking at all the other Egyptian art, they were so specific and detailed that we still have no idea how they did some of it given the materials they were carving. I don't think the Japanese pottery rule really applies...

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Very cool topic!

 

The Great pyramid complex at Giza and the Sphinx

were, I believe, both pre-existing when Egyptians

claimed them as their own.

 

If you look closely at he structure and time line of ancient Egyptian

culture and development, on thing that stands out is the strange way in

which they are a culture that had it's greatest accomplishments at the

very beginning of their culture. There is no progression to greater things.

there is a marked decline in what they were able to accomplish as the

culture moved forward in time.

 

It's almost as if they had no actual knowledge of both the pyramids or

the sphinx, and were merely the next culture to come on the scene and

claim these things as their own.

 

From around 3000BC to around 1600BC there was rulership by the original culture. Then it started to go back and forth quite a bit. So, as you said, the rest were "merely the next culture to come on the scene and claim these things as their own."

[Apech]

Definitely true that the Old Kingdom surpassed the Middle and New Kingdoms in many ways including the 'purity' of its religion. As with a lot of churches in Europe I think the Egyptians were using sacred sites which were already ancient to them. The sphinx being one of them. Not sure about the Great Pyramid though as there are reasons to think it was built in the Old Kingdom itself ... but its possible that they just 'enhanced' something pre-existing.

[orb]

I'm not too sold on this theory. Looking at all the other Egyptian art, they were so specific and detailed that we still have no idea how they did some of it given the materials they were carving. I don't think the Japanese pottery rule really applies...

 

Well it's just a theory like all of them.

 

But it states clearly that most of the art is not designed like that - but only a few. Supposedly the builders of the Sphinx carried a very useful type of knowledge that was important to be transmitted to humanity but it was hard because of the lack of consistency in people's mentality. Most of the art just happened by imitation and misinterpretation without any esoteric background.

 

Just like let's say a lot of paintings of tibetan religion. There are many westerners that reproduce those painting and they do even a better job then the tibetans themselves but they rarely can grasp the true meaning of them.

 

But what about the Japanese pottery that you mentioned. Did they do that as well ?

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Well it's just a theory like all of them.

 

But what about the Japanese pottery that you mentioned. Did they do that as well ?

 

The theory with Napoleon was based on the writing of an anthropologist before Napoleon got to Egypt who commented about "to think that the race of Cradle of Civilization is the very same as those we hold in bondage.." So it seems the face was more obvious before Napoleon got there.

 

Also Napoleon wanted to maintain the slave trade and fought very hard to keep it in Haiti where he was defeated, Haiti winning their independence upon their victory. So it stands to reason that Napoleon, having no respect for anything by that time, would stoop so low (pun intended) as to try and destroy evidence that would undermine the justification of his future unpaid-labour force.

 

Not to say that your theory was without basis, but that's that's the basis of accusing Napoleon for the crime.

 

 

There is a practice in some Japanese pottery to make an intentional error so that everything is not too perfect and sterile. The same is reflected in Zen tea huts, and goes back to Shintoism's appreciation of nature's ability to reflect the spiritual, though most attribute it to "Zen naturalness" which is fair in it's own right, even though the concept existed before.

[orb]

The theory with Napoleon was based on the writing of an anthropologist before Napoleon got to Egypt who commented about "to think that the race of Cradle of Civilization is the very same as those we hold in bondage.." So it seems the face was more obvious before Napoleon got there.

 

Also Napoleon wanted to maintain the slave trade and fought very hard to keep it in Haiti where he was defeated, Haiti winning their independence upon their victory. So it stands to reason that Napoleon, having no respect for anything by that time, would stoop so low (pun intended) as to try and destroy evidence that would undermine the justification of his future unpaid-labour force.

 

 

 

Oh, I wasn't refering to the fact that the face has been damaged. I was refering to the error in proportions. The head's size just doesn't fit the rest of the body. It's too small. The theory that I am talking about is much older then Napoleon's days. Basically it's referring to one of the laws by which everything was created on this planet and that is the law of proportions.

 

It has been reflected in other structures as well. Like some temples that have a cupola for instance. All of the temples around it would have a cupola that is rested on 4 poles let's say. But this specific one is intentionally built on 3 poles so that it would attract peoples attention.

 

Of course not everyone would understand that concept, but somebody involved in construction of temples would notice it. Then they would question it: Why the hell there are only 3 poles in this one when every normal cupola has 4 poles, this just doesn't feel right. Hmm lemme look into this?. And that's just step nr1. From there you go to the next clue etc....

 

All this would determine you to think in a certain way until you get the message - This method would save the author hundreds of pages of theories that can would be lost in translation anyway or sumtimes can't even be put in words....

[Jetsun]

Oh, I wasn't refering to the fact that the face has been damaged. I was refering to the error in proportions. The head's size just doesn't fit the rest of the body. It's too small. The theory that I am talking about is much older then Napoleon's days. Basically it's referring to one of the laws by which everything was created on this planet and that is the law of proportions.

 

It has been reflected in other structures as well. Like some temples that have a cupola for instance. All of the temples around it would have a cupola that is rested on 4 poles let's say. But this specific one is intentionally built on 3 poles so that it would attract peoples attention.

 

Of course not everyone would understand that concept, but somebody involved in construction of temples would notice it. Then they would question it: Why the hell there are only 3 poles in this one when every normal cupola has 4 poles, this just doesn't feel right. Hmm lemme look into this?. And that's just step nr1. From there you go to the next clue etc....

 

All this would determine you to think in a certain way until you get the message - This method would save the author hundreds of pages of theories that can would be lost in translation anyway or sumtimes can't even be put in words....

 

That is what Gurdjieff called "objective art", at one point men of knowledge realised that all wisdom gets corrupted and lost through time so they tried to find a way to transmit knowledge through the generations for genuine seekers to find without it being contaminated by mass ignorance, so they built works of art using precise measurements and mathematical proportions but then would on purpose create an error or an inexactitude at a precise point. The general masses of the future population would view the error as a mistake or laziness of the craftsman but the seeker would recognise that is unlikely, so the mistake is there to be pondered and the task is to discover it's secret and esoteric meaning. The Sphynx is objective art as well as many of the European gothic Cathedrals like Chartres in France.

[Immortal4life]

[Machin Shin]

The theory with Napoleon was based on the writing of an anthropologist before Napoleon got to Egypt who commented about "to think that the race of Cradle of Civilization is the very same as those we hold in bondage.." So it seems the face was more obvious before Napoleon got there.

 

Also Napoleon wanted to maintain the slave trade and fought very hard to keep it in Haiti where he was defeated, Haiti winning their independence upon their victory. So it stands to reason that Napoleon, having no respect for anything by that time, would stoop so low (pun intended) as to try and destroy evidence that would undermine the justification of his future unpaid-labour force.

 

I've heard it said that the Pyramids were white before the French conquest of Egypt. The marble that covered the structures was removed by the soldiers and hauled to Europe for private use.

 

The fall of Napoleon caused the Rothschild fortune to become a reality.

[Immortal4life]

I've heard it said that the Pyramids were white before the French conquest of Egypt. The marble that covered the structures was removed by the soldiers and hauled to Europe for private use.

 

The fall of Napoleon caused the Rothschild fortune to become a reality.

 

That wouldn't surprise me at all.

 

Although, they claim the white covering was just gradually removed by thieves over the millenia.

[Kronos]

the face looked once like this:

 

It looked like a swiss cow. That's because the Swiss people invented the pyramides and stonehenge ;-)

[Immortal4life]

another page on this topic-

http://www.timstouse.com/EarthHistory/Egypt/sphinx.htm