Support NeoGAF

[Orbis Tabula]

I don't think I understand exactly what is being claimed here. If you took any random handful of buildings in the world, I'm sure you could find some stars that sorta kinda look like they're oriented the same way. Especially when you're only talking about three points.

 

[ZOONAMI]

Yeah the sphinx being 10000+ years old is complete horseshit too. It's widely accepted to be in the 2500 BC range.

 

[Toxi]

that calculation was done for around 2550BC.

for 10500 BC, it matches. so it correlates. not just the for the pyramids, but others as well.
that is why i'm asking the question.

See, the problem here is that you're taking "the arrangement of those three pyramids kinda resembles the supposed arrangement of the stars of Orion's belt seen from that location in 10500 BC" to mean "the pyramids were planned in 10500 BC".

I'm the same height as Jimmy Carter. Does that mean I'm Jimmy Carter's long-lost twin brother? Because that's the sort of logical leap you're making.

 

[Orthogonal]

It's complete horseshit.

Even if the three largest Pyramids of Giza actually had the same arrangement as the stars of Orion's Belt at the times and location of their construction (they don't), it's pure coincidence. The concept of Orion as a constellation was not invented yet and had no meaning to the people of the time and place. Not to mention it's just looking at the three largest pyramids and ignoring the others at the same site.

The three largest pyramids of Giza have as much to do with Orion's belt as they do with the Three Stooges.

And no, they're not fucking 12,000 years old.


This is a myth.

I agree, Orion theory is pure speculation, but rain erosion on the Sphinx is not, see what I posted above. It is not heresy or crackpot theory.

 

[karasu]

Neither has 99% of the world's population. Unless you've never seen aerial photos of the famous Giza strip I'm not sure how you can be so obtuse here.

Not sure how he can be so obtuse? Most people don't pay great attention to the stars. It's not unusual to be incapable of recognizing a constellation. Jesus.

 

[Blargonaut]

The pyramids are the remains of the dice the gods rolled to determine our perception of the ultracosmos. That's why only Orion's belt is visible to us.

You think they're tombs? Nope. Cradles of the mind.

Mo'ai? They were supposed to be us, Man. Now they're just pieces. Life's nothing but a board game to the stars.

 

[Hoho for breakfast]

I don't know OP but if you're interested in that you'd possibly be interested in things such as the Antikythera Mechanism or Gobekli Tepe. Check them out if you haven't.

As for the pyramids they're at least very precise when it comes to the alignment to the cardinal North/South direction. I think the great pyramid is aligned to within 1/20th of one degree of true north. That may be wrong I just remember something like that. That in itself is quite an accomplishment.

 

[Toxi]

I agree, Orion theory is pure speculation, but rain erosion on the Sphinx is not, see what I posted above. It is not heresy or crackpot theory.

It's a crackpot theory that the Sphinx is that old because there is no associated archaeological context at Giza.

Let's say early neolithic societies built the Sphinx before 7,000 BCE. Where is the rest of their shit? If you have the means and manpower to make an edifice like the sphinx, you have the means and manpower to do a lot more. So why isn't there other limestone work in the area comparable to the Sphinx that can be dated to more than 7,000 BCE? Or in other parts of Egypt? Why does all the stuff in the area date to later than that?

Gobekli Tepe, despite how ridiculously awesome it is, has context. There are tools at the site, there is progression of architecture.

Yes, the archaeological record won't preserve everything... But people leave shit around. And it takes a lot of people to move and carve that big ass chunk of limestone. So where is their shit? The reason the water erosion hypothesis is not accepted is because it's more parsimonious to think of other explanations for the erosion than to assume the Sphinx was some one-of-a-kind freak anomaly constructed by people who made nothing else like it.

 

[LookAtMeGo]

It's a crackpot theory that the Sphinx is that old because there is no associated archaeological context at Giza.

Let's say early neolithic societies built the Sphinx before 7,000 BCE. Where is the rest of their shit?

1000's of years of Egypt happened bruh.

I dont think its that old. But I do think the theory that it is older than the current consensus holds weight.

Like the begining of the early dynastic period around 3100BC. Maybe a bit earlier.

 

[sphagnum]

If you want an ancient structure that's actually 10,000 years old, just read up on Gobekli Tepe.

 

[Toxi]

The sphynx also lines up with Leo at the same time the pyramids line up with Orions belt. Coincidence? I think not.

The constellations Leo and Orion were not even conceptualized at that time, so yeah, it's a coincidence.

Constellations are random assortments of prominent stars assigned identities based on the shapes some people made out.

The idea that a person would look at this

and always see a lion is absurd.

1000's of years of Egypt happened bruh.

I dont think its that old. But I do think the theory that it is older than the current consensus holds weight.

Like the begining of the early dynastic period around 3100BC. Maybe a bit earlier.

That's completely acceptable.

The problem is with dating it to early Neolithic times.

 

[LookAtMeGo]

The constellations Leo and Orion were not even conceptualized at that time, so yeah, it's a coincidence.

Constellations are random assortments of prominent stars assigned identities based on their shapes.

The idea that a person would look at this

and always see a lion is absurd.

I was kinda kidding around with that comment. I dont believe that the sphynx is from 10000BC. But I do support the theory that it was originally a lion. The fact that it did face Leo back then is actually a coincidence IMO.

 

[Toxi]

I was kinda kidding around with that comment. I dont believe that the sphynx is from 10000BC. But I do support the theory that it was originally a lion. The fact that it did face Leo back then is actually a coincidence IMO.

Oh, sorry for jumping down your throat about that. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[amar212]

Some people will never accept they will never go Flawless nor visit Mercury.

Osiris is life.

 

[Hermii]

Except they don't correlate, beyond there being three of them. The pyramids are upside down compared to the Orion stars and they're off by well over 10 degrees compared to the stars' alignment with one another at the time.

If they are meant to correlate, the civilization that managed to align 60 ton blocks to an error margin of inches somehow managed to miss the mark by many meters when it came to where to put the fucking buildings.

The civilization that elected Obama managed to elect Trump.

 

[Lonely1]

Even if they did, is akin to the Nasca lines. Ancient people were as inteligent as we are now and were capable of impressive feats.

 

[danowat]

It's impressive enough that they managed to build them AT ALL, let alone if they managed to line them up with stars!

I went there about 10 years ago, and we had a private guide and I spent quite a bit of time talking to him about them, he was saying that even Egyptoligists can't rule out that extraterrestrial beings didn't help them.

 

[Screaming Meat]

The pyramids are the remains of the dice the gods rolled to determine our perception of the ultracosmos. That's why only Orion's belt is visible to us.

You think they're tombs? Nope. Cradles of the mind.

Mo'ai? They were supposed to be us, Man. Now they're just pieces. Life's nothing but a board game to the stars.

Guys, I found Grant Morrison's account.

It's impressive enough that they managed to build them AT ALL, let alone if they managed to line them up with stars!

I went there about 10 years ago, and we had a private guide and I spent quite a bit of time talking to him about them, he was saying that even Egyptoligists can't rule out that extraterrestrial beings didn't help them.

"Please tip generously."

 

[Preezy]

Everyone knows about the theory of the Pyramids of Giza aligning with the Orion's belt constellation. So researching little bit on this, the original statistics were refused by some scientist because it didn't align exactly with the belt. However, they calculated the alignment for 2550BC when they originally theorized that's about when the Pyramids were built. New calculations indicate that the alignment to the Orion's belt is precise in 10500BC, indicating that the Pyramids are much older. I just want to know if this is true and accepted?

 

[Shiggy]

Fact or fiction?

 

[danowat]

"Please tip generously."

Baksheesh bakseesh

 

[Polk]

I went there about 10 years ago, and we had a private guide and I spent quite a bit of time talking to him about them, he was saying that even Egyptoligists can't rule out that extraterrestrial beings didn't help them.

So you are telling me they cannot prove negative? What a shocker.

 

[Septimus Prime]

Fact or fiction?

No respect for anyone. Not even the dead... Egyptian Pharaohs.

 

[Greddleok]

Everyone knows this obscure assertion based on nothing. However if this, but that and maybe this, it could be true!

 

[StayDead]

The constellations Leo and Orion were not even conceptualized at that time, so yeah, it's a coincidence.

Constellations are random assortments of prominent stars assigned identities based on the shapes some people made out.

The idea that a person would look at this

and always see a lion is absurd.

That's completely acceptable.

The problem is with dating it to early Neolithic times.

The interesting thing is though, what if evidence of the orions belt being conceptualised was stored in the Library of Alexandria and was lost in the fire? Would there be any other legitimate way of knowing that humans didn't have that knowledge back then?

I don't think the pyramids are that old, but it is an interesting theory.

 

[Dragon Puncher]

Somewhere along this train of thought there was a giant leap taken to prove a point by making up an entire different theory.

LOL, exactly. When you're using one unfounded theory to support another unfounded theory, you done fucked up.

 

[JJDubz]

Would the world worship me if I copied down the angles between stars in Orion's belt to build three sheds in my backyard?

 

[FunkyDealer]

What if, they couldn't get the relation of these incredible, massive and ancient structures exactly right?

The egyptians were human after all, so I wouldn't put it past them to think "that'll do".

 

[Alter_Fridge]

Would the world worship me if I copied down the angles between stars in Orion's belt to build three sheds in my backyard?

Sure, anyone can become a YouTube sensation these days

 

[HoodWinked]

always reminds me of this when pyramids are brought up

 

[Blackthorn]

No one gave a shit about Orion's Belt before Men in Black and the Egyptians didn't even have Fresh Prince of Bel Air yet.

 

[[Fugo]]

the pyramids being built in ~2500BC and the stars alignement being from ~10500BC could be easily explained if the pyramids were built over pre-existing stuff that was passed down as sacred place.

 

[HellofaMouse]

Heres a theory, there was already some ancient monuments where the pyramids were built from 10500 bc, and egyptians just replaced them at 2500 bc.

Edit: 4mins too late

 

[Maledict]

Right. So there are untraceable giant monuments that were built by Neolithic people that lasted for several thousands of years longer than all of recorded history?

That isn't making it easier to understand. You're adding impossibilities into an already crazy and easily evidenceably wrong theory. The belt is upside down! It's wrong from the start!

 

[Theonik]

The constellations Leo and Orion were not even conceptualized at that time, so yeah, it's a coincidence.

Constellations are random assortments of prominent stars assigned identities based on the shapes some people made out.

The names vary by culture. But the same constellations tend to exist in every culture and we have records of this being the case dating thousands of years.

It's just a useful way of identifying groups of prominent stars in the sky which was very important in ancient times.

 

[HellofaMouse]

Right. So there are untraceable giant monuments that were built by Neolithic people that lasted for several thousands of years longer than all of recorded history?

That isn't making it easier to understand. You're adding impossibilities into an already crazy and easily evidenceably wrong theory. The belt is upside down! It's wrong from the start!

If it was sacred people would maintain them

 

[Blargonaut]

The constellations Leo and Orion were not even conceptualized at that time, so yeah, it's a coincidence.

Constellations are random assortments of prominent stars assigned identities based on the shapes some people made out.

The idea that a person would look at this

and always see a lion is absurd.

.

 

[Maledict]

If it was sacred people would maintain them

That's... not how this works. At all.

Seriously, do you understand how long 7500 years *is*?

 

[Wvrs]

Archaeological evidence proves pretty well that human civilisation only started ~8,000 BCE at earliest, in the Fertile Crescent (the levant). Early society would have been very basic, it took generations to develop even rudimentary agricultural techniques. Highly unlikely that the pyramids would have been constructed before then, human population was small, scattered; even if the Egyptians did have high society, they wouldn't have found the slaves needed to construct them.

 

[Theonik]

even if the Egyptians did have high society, they wouldn't have found the slaves needed to construct them.

The pyramids were not constructed by slaves. We have evidence that indicates they were compensated workers/farmers.

E: Also re: Human civilisation, our understanding of early human civilisation especially ones that lack written records is extremely limited. Earliest structures discovered in Stonehenge date back to ~8000 BCE there has been other relatively recent discoveries that would also lay credence to the idea of earlier civilisations.

 

[plufim]

How could the pyramids line up with anything when the planet spins?

 

[JonnyDBrit]

The interesting thing is though, what if evidence of the orions belt being conceptualised was stored in the Library of Alexandria and was lost in the fire? Would there be any other legitimate way of knowing that humans didn't have that knowledge back then?

I don't think the pyramids are that old, but it is an interesting theory.

Worth stressing that the Library of Alexandria isn't that old. It was founded in the 3rd century BC (under the reign of Ptolmey Soter I, though when within his reign isn't so clear), so to be a bit cliché, it was about as close to us as it was to the Pyramids of Giza. Most of its contents would likely have been closer to the time, or otherwise then contemporary recordings of ancient folklore; so even if there was documentation of the origins of Leo and Orion's Belt - concepts established for hundreds, if not thousands of years by the time of the library, much younger than the Pyramids - they wouldn't necessarily have actually dated them unless there was a specific reference to an Egyptian monarch.

One shouldn't especially rely on the notion of 'Well, the might have been evidence, but it was destroyed', unless you have further evidence that such ever existed but cannot be found now.

The pyramids were not constructed by slaves. We have evidence that indicates they were compensated workers/farmers.

Pays to be a bit careful with that sort of statement. Both because the Pyramids (unless strictly referring to those at Giza) were built by differing kingdoms across a long span of time, but also because the nature of slavery in this regard wouldn't necessarily have aligned with a modern perspective either. You could be in forced labour while still receiving a form of compensation, rather than say, a specific 'slave population' as we would imagine, and was imagined by the likes of Herodotus.

Edit: Also because people keep missing it, the supposed 'alignment' in this case is in terms of the relative positions and sizes of the Pyramids. Ie, they're supposedly set up in terms of location to look like how Orion's belt does.

 

[teruterubozu]

Are we in the 90s again?

 

[jakonovski]

I miss the X-Files.

 

[Machina]

Just because the Pyramids sit in a row of three, doesn't mean they were intended to line up with Orion's Belt. Maybe the Egyptians were just smart enough to understand the idea of symmetry?

 

[StreetDisciple]

Everyone knows about the theory of the Pyramids of Giza aligning with the Orion's belt constellation. So researching little bit on this, the original statistics were refused by some scientist because it didn't align exactly with the belt. However, they calculated the alignment for 2550BC when they originally theorized that's about when the Pyramids were built. New calculations indicate that the alignment to the Orion's belt is precise in 10500BC, indicating that the Pyramids are much older. I just want to know if this is true and accepted?

I believe it. I also believe they weren't built by man.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

they aligned the pyramids to the position of orion's belt at the time of the aliens' arrival.

they also left behind the screenplay for men in black.

Those fucking aliens... ruining our society, one shitty movie at a time.

 

[Theonik]

Are we in the 90s again?

I wish.

Pays to be a bit careful with that sort of statement. Both because the Pyramids (unless strictly referring to those at Giza) were built by differing kingdoms across a long span of time, but also because the nature of slavery in this regard wouldn't necessarily have aligned with a modern perspective either. You could be in forced labour while still receiving a form of compensation, rather than say, a specific 'slave population' as we would imagine, and was imagined by the likes of Herodotus.

Naturally, but when you are looking at Egyptian kingdoms, the Pharaoh's power was supreme, in ways that even say Medievil monarchs were not. Ancient Egyptian kingdoms were command economies in the first place so peasants probably didn't have much choice than to work on the pyramids when the Nile was flooded if they wanted to eat.

 

[gdt]

This thread is driving me nuts.

 

[JonnyDBrit]

I wish.


Naturally, but when you are looking at Egyptian kingdoms, the Pharaoh's power was supreme, in ways that even say Medievil monarchs were not. Ancient Egyptian kingdoms were command economies in the first place so peasants probably didn't have much choice than to work on the pyramids when the Nile was flooded if they wanted to eat.

Also a major factor. Really it's just the broad nature of the statement, especially given how Egypt today can be a bit quick to try and use such to scrub over the less savoury aspects of their ancient past.

Still damned impressive stuff either way, if quite excessive for their intended purpose.