Egyptian Glyphs in Australia???

War Arrow · Post by **War Arrow** » Mon Aug 18, 2008 5:52 am

Minimalist wrote: If the hieroglyphs are real and date from the Old Kingdom, someone has a big problem to explain away.

I'm still betting on hoax, though.

Me too, though that's probably no great surprise.

For you folks who tend to think there's something in diffusionism, I ask this without any wish to denigrate whatever ideas you may hold dear, but does this example not, in some ways, seem a little too good to be true - as in a little too clearly spelled out?

Ishtar · Post by **Ishtar** » Mon Aug 18, 2008 6:02 am

Yep!

I'm still wondering how they got blown off course and whether it was after their being blown off course and ending up in the Grand Canyon .. or before!

kbs2244 · Post by **kbs2244** » Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:10 am

Based on the translation, I agree that they didn’t plan on being there.
But based on the location, it doesn’t seem they were trying very hard to get home which is far to the west.
Maybe the leader taking advantage of an accidental landing on an unknown shore and continuing on in exploration mode?
The problem with the hoax idea is that a hoax has to have a reason.
Fame, money, something.
These have been known about for over 100 years and no one has come forward to be on center stage regarding them.
If anything they were kept semi secrete.

kbs2244 · Post by **kbs2244** » Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:17 am

Ah yes.
The “Forbidden Zones” of the Grand Canyon.
What a dream subject.
If I was younger and stronger, (and dumber) I would be para sailing into those spots.
Aren’t they supposed to be on Ley Lines?

But there are well documented Egyptian style rock art in the Arkansas River valley.
Through Oklahoma, Kansas and on into Colorado.

War Arrow · Post by **War Arrow** » Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:02 pm

kbs2244 wrote:Based on the translation, I agree that they didn’t plan on being there.
But based on the location, it doesn’t seem they were trying very hard to get home which is far to the west.
Maybe the leader taking advantage of an accidental landing on an unknown shore and continuing on in exploration mode?
The problem with the hoax idea is that a hoax has to have a reason.
Fame, money, something.
These have been known about for over 100 years and no one has come forward to be on center stage regarding them.
If anything they were kept semi secrete.

Possibly some good points here, though I disagree that a hoax needs a reason, or at least a reason beyond sheer naked fun. Maybe (if this is a hoax) the perpetrators are sitting out there reading this thread shaking with laughter (I'm suggesting this as a point rather than a description of what I suspect is actually happening). Then again, you might yourself argue - surely there's a bit too much effort gone into this for a 'just for kicks' hoax, and - who knows - maybe that's a good point too.

I still reckon the motive behind this is identical to that of Baby Sue in my favourite Baby Sue cartoon strip:

What are you doing, Baby Sue?
I'm sitting on the sidewalk yelling at cars.
Why on Earth are you doing that?
For fun, man... pure fuckin' fun.
Well, that doesn't sound like much fun to me!
Ha! You don't KNOW how to have FUN!!!

kbs2244 · Post by **kbs2244** » Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:43 pm

Not just the effort W A
But the time frame
These were known about 100 years ago.
Who ever carved them is well over 100 years old (if not 1000's) by now.
And they are not laughing any more.

Pippin · Post by **Pippin** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 12:19 am

HI

If noone recorded them 100 years ago, then i might not be the same markings as the one found. Someone might have seen some strange markings a hundred years ago. Then later (maybee the dog guy) have made new hiroglyphs to spark interests in the local area.

Kim

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 8:27 am

The thing that intrigues me is the apparent "Djedefre" reference. He was not widely known 100 years ago.

Rokcet Scientist · Post by **Rokcet Scientist** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 11:40 am

Minimalist wrote:why assume that once they made landfall that they didn't keep sailing around?

If blown off-course "keeping sailing around" would have been the logical thing to do in search of a route back home. And in the absence of maps and navigational tools that could very well have led them just about anywhere. Including Sydney...

But for now my vote goes to 'hoax' too.

kbs2244 · Post by **kbs2244** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 1:34 pm

I know nothing of the local weather conditions.
(What I am saying in based on the wind patterns as shown on my high school level Globe.)
Sydney seems to be a great harbor with no way to get to it.
The winds of the east Australia coast seem to be very variable.
If he wanted to “just keep going” it may have been “into the wind.”

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 9:17 am

In fact, as long as we're speculating, there is no reason to discount the possibility that seafarers heard tales of a large island to the south. India was not un-populated at the time and there always seems to have been sea-based trade in the Indian Ocean. We know that Old Kingdom Egypt had contacts with Afghanistan because of the lapis lazuli found in the tombs. How much more of a stretch is it to assume contact with southern India?

kbs2244 · Post by **kbs2244** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 5:03 pm

Not just southern India but up the east coast to the Ganges civilization and then down the east coast of the Bay of Bengal.
We know there were sites on both sides of the Indo-China peninsula.
It is a good guess they were doing a short cut from Malaysia to Sri Lanka.
To get to the Mekong you had to go through the Straits of Malacca.
That means coasting Indonesia.
You would never be out of sight of land.
And you can almost see across the Sea of Timor.
For sure it is less than a day’s sail from the island of Timor to the north coast of Australia.
I cannot believe Australia was not known. Just ignored since there wasn’t much of any reason to go there.
Even the globe conquering British just considered it a place to dump criminals.

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 5:28 pm

That means coasting Indonesia.

Yep. While the Polynesians apparently made a few successful open ocean crossings...we may never know what their average success rate was but some of them made it...coasting is much more reasonable for sea travel. Put into shore at night. Have a refuge in case of a storm. Be able to re-provision when necessary.

Makes sense and all it would take is one literate Egyptian to carve the hieroglyphs.

Rokcet Scientist · Post by **Rokcet Scientist** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 5:51 am

kbs2244 wrote:For sure it is less than a day’s sail from the island of Timor to the north coast of Australia.

With sea levels being what they were back then it probably wasn't more than a couple hours sailing from the island of Timor to the north coast of Australia!

Nigel Di Salvia · Post by **Nigel Di Salvia** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 4:24 am

One of the carvings is of a bell. Bells, from what I can gather, are not among any Egyptian hieroglyphs found to date. It seems that over the years extra carvings have been added to the site. In the 1980’s an old Yugoslavian man was caught by a local NPWS officer adding to the existing “hieroglyphs.”

Some of the figures are even backwards.

Leaning towards hoax.