Archaeologica.org

Cool.

I recall all that pyramidology stuff but that goes back to the 70's. It is a far cry from claiming that the pyramid "shape" preserves meat and noting that the pyramid has a specific math value.

But Zahi Hawass and his crew always manage to mix in the outlandish claims when dismissing the more sober scientific observations. They do that for a reason.

My razors are sharp enough thanks , I was just curious to see if the math had any basis in fact

Minimalist wrote:Cool.

I recall all that pyramidology stuff but that goes back to the 70's. It is a far cry from claiming that the pyramid "shape" preserves meat and noting that the pyramid has a specific math value.

But Zahi Hawass and his crew always manage to mix in the outlandish claims when dismissing the more sober scientific observations. They do that for a reason.

Zahi Hawass is a great arcaheologist and passionate about preserving Egypts heritage, but he is also a cultural promoter IMHO. He does a great job of bringing an interest in the past and the work of archaeologists into the mainstream. Thus the mention of the spectacular along with the sober and scientific.

Tech wrote:My razors are sharp enough thanks , I was just curious to see if the math had any basis in fact

To my knowledge, most or all of the cosmic math is bogus, but I need to find my source to back that up, so don't take my word on it for now at least. There is something to the layout representing astronomical observation IMHO, but that's easily accounted for and isn't mystical in nature.

I liked the pyramid theories as well, but if I'm going to disagree with posters like Archaeologist on discussion boards like this, and ask him to examine his beliefs in the light of evidence, then I have to be willing to do the same with my pet ideas. I'd love it if there really was an Atlantis, but there just isn't any evidence, so in fairness, I have to put that on the mythology pile along with the rest of the unsubstantiated stories. If evidence comes up I'll be glad to pull them off the discard pile and have another look. That's the great thing about science - it re-examines itself for error. Dogma doesn't.

Jim

jim wrote:

That's the great thing about science - it re-examines itself for error. Dogma doesn't.

Right on, Jim.

Hey oldarchystudent and Tech,

Check-out article #2 at www.IceAgeCivilizations.com, it answers your questions regarding the length of the Egyptian royal cubit, and thereby, the dimensions of the Great Pyramid, so I look forward to your comments.

Genesis Veracity wrote:Hey oldarchystudent and Tech,

Check-out article #2 at www.IceAgeCivilizations.com, it answers your questions regarding the length of the Egyptian royal cubit, and thereby, the dimensions of the Great Pyramid, so I look forward to your comments.

I'm having trouble loading that link. Do you have another?

EDIT - never mind - it was the comma at the end of the link that messed me up. Reading.....

OK - right off the top he's talking about Atlantis. Credibility gone right there.

Oh how wrong you are about Atlantis, archy, Plato was talking about 9,000 lunar cycles before Solon's time, when the Ionians were vying with the people of Atlantis (Atlantes, Atlan, Aztlan, Attalan, Avalon, Atlantida, Atland) for dominance in the Mediterranean from circa 2000 B.C. to circa 1500 B.C.

Hey archy, do you really think that the Athenian kings Erecthonius, Cecrops, and Erecthius, mentioned in Plato's account, lived at around 9600 B.C., pleeeeeeeeease.

Plato used a story to illustrate a political allegory. The story goes on to tell how the brave and pure Athenians defeated the morally corrupt Atlanteans. Problem is Athens didn't exist in the timeframe given for Atlantis.

Stan, do you want to know how the ancients determined the length for the Egyptian royal cubit? See article #2 at www.IceAgeCivilizations.com.

That is the standard which you were seeking several posts back, so there's your standard, do you see any flaw in the analysis?

No Greek city-states existed at 9,600 B.C., the first were of the "Mycenaeans" circa 2000 B.C., and of course, Athens is just across the way from Mycenae, with ruins from the same period, and Plato knew the names of the kings from circa 1500 B.C., Erecthius, Cecrops, and Erecthonius, and he mentions triremes, and huge port facilities, and bronze weapons, so 9,600 is out of the picture.

Plato also wrote that much of Greece went under when Atlantis went under, and there are submerged megaliths off Greece, as there are off Spain and Morocco, to prove it, so I'm afraid you're punching at the wind on this one.

Plato was a pholosopher, not a historian. His dialogues of Timeaus and Criteas (sp?) are the only place you find any mention of Atlantis. They are allegories intended to teach a political idea to his students. That's all. Any reference to areas of Greece being destroyed is a reference to Thera.

Sorry archy, Critias talked about vast tracts of Greek land which succumbed to the sea, when it was wetter, with much more lush vegetation, and many more springs (Ice Age), so your Thera dealy is absurd, though Thera did go off as the sea level rose a few hundred feet circa 1500 B.C., when Atlantis, and the many other now-submerged ruins in the Med, off India, off Japan, and many other places, went under.

And what about the other ancient people groups who called Atlantis: Atland, Atlan, Aztlan, Attalan, Avalon, and Atlantida?

Hey archy, do you see any flaw in the analysis in article #2?