Support NeoGAF

[Tk0n]

always reminds me of this when pyramids are brought up

i bet, if you go back far enough in time, you find a correlation between the orion belt and the 3 stars in this picture.

could mean this picture is 1 million years old.

 

[Graphics Horse]

The pattern being mirrored (not much of a pattern, tbh) doesn't sway me one way or another, If it's wrong way round from an aerial view, it still works from the perspective of the earth instead.

 

[[Fugo]]

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?

nobody talked about GIANT monuments being there before the pyramids. Could have been several through the ages, starting from monolithic stones to statues to whatever till the pyramids were built. The spots were sacred, not what was there by itself.
I'm not saying this IS the explanation, but it isn't beyond the possibilities

 

[Maledict]

nobody talked about GIANT monuments being there before the pyramids. Could have been several through the ages, starting from monolithic stones to statues to whatever till the pyramids were built. The spots were sacred, not what was there by itself.
I'm not saying this IS the explanation, but it isn't beyond the possibilities

I go back to my point - I don't think you fully comprehend the length of time you are talking about here. It's twice as long as recorded history. It would require insanely precise, static worship of sites to have gone on longer than anything else in human history.

And why? To align up with three random stars that have literally nothing to do with each other? People do understand that constellations are not actually linked in space? That one of the stars on Orion's Belt is twice as far from the sun as the other two? That in fact the three stars from Orion's Belt are 387, 1200 and 2000 light years away respectively and are *completely* unrelated from each other? That constellations only have relevance when your stood on earth, and that no alien species is ever going to use them to co-ordinate anything because they don't actually exist other than a visual effect when seen from here?

 

[JonnyDBrit]

nobody talked about GIANT monuments being there before the pyramids. Could have been several through the ages, starting from monolithic stones to statues to whatever till the pyramids were built. The spots were sacred, not what was there by itself.
I'm not saying this IS the explanation, but it isn't beyond the possibilities

But that argument only makes sense and is necessary if the proposed timescale is already accepted as true, which is only because of the supposed alignment with the stars of orion's belt, which is only observed as from the pyramids that stand there today. The moment you stop assuming the pyramids are related to Orion's belt, or that such implies them as over ten thousand years old, it falls apart. It's an embellishment without cause.

 

[HStallion]

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.

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

I'm sorry but this is such a horse shit stance. People really like undercutting the feats of our ancestors with that ancient aliens bull shit and that's what it is, bull fucking shit. Its like people think everyone was a caveman till 500 years ago or something.

 

[Bumhead]

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.

They say similar things about Chichen Itza. We were told a theory that the huge deep pool of water just near to the Pyramids themselves was the crash site.

All part of the fun on the tours, I guess.

EDIT: This;

 

[hirokazu]

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?

Lining things up with the stars isn’t a scientifically valid method of dating the age of things, LOL.

 

[StreetDisciple]

I'm sorry but this is such a horse shit stance. People really like undercutting the feats of our ancestors with that ancient aliens bull shit and that's what it is, bull fucking shit. Its like people think everyone was a caveman till 500 years ago or something.

So lets recreate it today using the tools available at the time. Every stone is cut different, up to 15 ton stones. They say when it was first built you couldn't scale it because it was perfectly flat on all sides. You couldn't put a razor in between one of the stones. All built with laser precision. It didn't look like a pile of rubble as it does today. Its explainable in the bible and or the book of Enoch if you care to read. To me its better than any BS theory scientist or Geologist have put forward.

 

[ConfusingJazz]

So lets recreate it today using the tools available at the time. Every stone is cut different, up to 15 ton stones. They say when it was first built you couldn't scale it because it was perfectly flat on all sides. You couldn't put a razor in between one of the stones. All built with laser precision. It didn't look like a pile of rubble as it does today. Its explainable in the bible and or the book of Enoch if you care to read. To me its better than any BS theory scientist or Geologist have put forward.

A) They had been doing this a while, the Pyramids of Giza aren't the first nor the last pyramids, just the most impressive collection. When I went, I really liked the earlier Red Pyramid, myself.

B) Why does the earlier Bent Pyramid exist? The Bent Pyramid is basically ancient Egyptian architects scaling up previous pyramids to the giant one and realizing it doesn't work.

C) They smell like urine. Did these ancient aliens build these impressive structures and forget ventilation? One of the most enduring memories I have of the structures besides the usual "These are magnificent" stuff was "This is cramped, it smells like urine, and I can see a combination KFC/Pizza Hut across the street."

 

[HStallion]

So lets recreate it today using the tools available at the time. Every stone is cut different, up to 15 ton stones. They say when it was first built you couldn't scale it because it was perfectly flat on all sides. You couldn't put a razor in between one of the stones. All built with laser precision. It didn't look like a pile of rubble as it does today. Its explainable in the bible and or the book of Enoch if you care to read. To me its better than any BS theory scientist or Geologist have put forward.

So because it was built so well it has to be aliens? Well now I'm convinced!

 

[OrionX]

It's all true.

 

[shockthrill]

this is somewhat related

but some guy try to tell me that Ancient Egypt had an understanding of General Relativity before Einstein? this was a while back, maybe 2 years ago, but it always stayed in my mind

is this possible?

 

[willy_2]

So lets recreate it today using the tools available at the time. Every stone is cut different, up to 15 ton stones. They say when it was first built you couldn't scale it because it was perfectly flat on all sides. You couldn't put a razor in between one of the stones. All built with laser precision. It didn't look like a pile of rubble as it does today. Its explainable in the bible and or the book of Enoch if you care to read. To me its better than any BS theory scientist or Geologist have put forward.

how does the book of enoch support your claims?

 

[Vastag]

.

 

[StreetDisciple]

So because it was built so well it has to be aliens? Well now I'm convinced!

U keep mentioning aliens...never came from my mouth.

 

[Simon Belmont]

this is somewhat related

but some guy try to tell me that Ancient Egypt had an understanding of General Relativity before Einstein? this was a while back, maybe 2 years ago, but it always stayed in my mind

is this possible?

Lol, no.

 

[HStallion]

U keep mentioning aliens...never came from my mouth.

That's what I was referring to originally as you said they weren't built by men. What else would you be talking about? Lizard people?

 

[Samurai G0SU]

i want a stone hedge thread now.

 

[ClosingADoor]

So lets recreate it today using the tools available at the time. Every stone is cut different, up to 15 ton stones. They say when it was first built you couldn't scale it because it was perfectly flat on all sides. You couldn't put a razor in between one of the stones. All built with laser precision. It didn't look like a pile of rubble as it does today. Its explainable in the bible and or the book of Enoch if you care to read. To me its better than any BS theory scientist or Geologist have put forward.

So what where the other 100+ Pyramids for? Practice run for the aliens? And after these were built, they just liked it enough that they put a few more in random places?

 

[shockthrill]

Lol, no.

How advanced was Egyptian mathematics compared to say Greece or Babylon?

 

[Earthbound64]

this is somewhat related

but some guy try to tell me

"some guy try to tell me"?

Yeah, it's related in that it's nonsense.

i want a stone hedge thread now.

"stone hedge"?
I'd like to see Homer disappear back into one of those.

 

[Simon Belmont]

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.

The Library of Alexandria was destroyed WELL into the "colour" era of History in 30BC. Records abound from that era, and the Romans would have incorporated the constellations into their pantheon like they did everything else.

How advanced was Egyptian mathematics compared to say Greece or Babylon?

Relativity is not a math problem. You would need to be able to measure the speed of light and notice it doesn't change to even start deducing the nature of relativity. There's simply no way.

Not to mention that the most famous part of the theory - e=mc*2 is about the amount of mass energy adds to an atom. Seems a little unlikely.

Egypt was also heavily Hellenized, so about on par with Greece math wise

 

[shockthrill]

on topic


the alien theory is bullcrap and often has racist connotations

a theory created by Zacharia Sitchin, a white russian author, and propogated by white europeans because they couldn't believe that a civilization of People of Color created such wonders like the pyramids, so it must be aliens

that's how I always saw it

 

[guggnichso]

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.

No. It doesn’t.

 

[Apath]

Why so much animosity? Is it that big of a deal if the Egyptians placed the pyramids to match a constellation?

 

[Earthbound64]

Is it that big of a deal if the Egyptians placed the pyramids to match a constellation?

No.
But, they didn't.

 

[shockthrill]

what is the consensus among mathematicians

does it match the constellation perfectly?

 

[Earthbound64]

what is the consensus among mathematicians

does it match the constellation perfectly?

As someone with a Mathematics degree, I feel I can speak for all Mathematicians when I say:
No

(Especially considering the use of the word "perfectly.")

 

[shockthrill]

As someone with a Mathematics degree, I feel I can speak for all Mathematicians when I say:
No

what are the measurements, is it like a few inches off?

 

[Apath]

No.
But, they didn't.

Okay. To be clear, I have never heard of this "theory" until this thread, and am still clueless as to why this would matter. Even if they lined up perfectly in 10500BC, that is a much larger leap in logic than simply going off carbon dating.

I really feel like I am missing something here. Especially the part where people are talking about aliens.

 

[Maledict]

Again, just to point out the constellation does not exist. It is a completely artifical visual effect that occurs only on earth. The three stars in Orion's Belt are literally thousands of light years apart.

Even if Aliens *did* build the pyramids (they didn't!) they aren't going to be pointing to a constellation because the constellation doesn't exist! Those stars are further apart from each other than they are earth and are totally unconnected.

 

[Simon Belmont]

what are the measurements, is it like a few inches off?

Off by 10 degrees according to the first page.

Okay. To be clear, I have never heard of this "theory" until this thread, and am still clueless as to why this would matter. Even if they lined up perfectly in 10500BC, that is a much larger leap in logic than simply going off carbon dating.

I really feel like I am missing something here. Especially the part where people are talking about aliens.

These types of theories are used pretty much exclusively to promote ancient aliens hypotheses

 

[shockthrill]

this whole thing is ridiculous

we already have proof aliens exist

 

[Earthbound64]

what are the measurements, is it like a few inches off?

Considering your previous use of the word "perfectly," it is essentially impossible to answer this question.
Consider re-wording your question.

Okay. To be clear, I have never heard of this "theory" until this thread, and am still clueless as to why this would matter. Even if they lined up perfectly in 10500BC, that is a much larger leap in logic than simply going off carbon dating.

I really feel like I am missing something here. Especially the part where people are talking about aliens.

Beats me.
Conspiracy theorists and all that most likely.

 

[L Thammy]

What if the pyramids already existed when the aliens got here?

 

[Earthbound64]

Again, just to point out the constellation does not exist. It is a completely artifical visual effect that occurs only on earth. The three stars in Orion's Belt are literally thousands of light years apart.

Even if Aliens *did* build the pyramids (they didn't!) they aren't going to be pointing to a constellation because the constellation doesn't exist! Those stars are further apart from each other than they are earth and are totally unconnected.

Indeed.
I still have no clue whatsoever why people take "constellations" seriously.

And that includes scientists too, naming stars by "which constellation they're in" and such.
It doesn't make a bit of sense.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Everyone knows about the theory of the Pyramids of Giza aligning with the Orion's belt constellation.

Everyone?

[CITATION NEEDED]

 

[Earthbound64]

Everyone?

[CITATION NEEDED]

Yeah, I brought that up at the beginning of the thread.
It went about as well as one might imagine in a thread opening with that kind of "premise."

 

[Simon Belmont]

Indeed.
I still have no clue whatsoever why people take "constellations" seriously.

And that includes scientists too, naming stars by "which constellation they're in" and such.
It doesn't make a bit of sense.

Naming by constellation is just convention at this point, and getting rare. Most stars just get a serial number unless they're super notable.

 

[Wray]

No Geologist disputes that the erosion is caused by water. They have not proven Dr Schoch wrong in his assessment, but only put forth different theories for the cause of the water erosion than from rainfall. One is from Nile Flooding at certain periods which can cause significant erosion in short time periods. The problem with this theory is that flooding will preferentially erode the base of walls and cause an under-cut erosion at the base. Neither the Sphinx or the quarry walls have any base erosion so flooding is unlikely. The other theory is erosion from a process called Haloclasty, a process where water/moisture (partiularly salt water) soaks into stone and crystalizes and then heat expansion causes rock to flake off. The problem with this theory is that no where else on the Giza platuea shows any sign of this type of erosion and it can't explain why the Sphinx and its quarry would be preferentially eroded over everything else.

Rainfall is the only theory that can adequately explain the evidence and is the only physical evidence to date the Sphinx and would push back its creation to at least 7000 BC if not thousands of years earlier. Eqyptologists date the Sphinx exclusively based on interpretation of Eqyptian writings, and a close examination of the writings connecting the Sphinx to early dynastic Egypt is circumstantial at best. When it comes down to it, the only meaningful retort archeologists have for the rainfall hypothesis is that there was no evidence of Human activity capable of monolithic and precision Stone carving 8,000-12,000 years ago which proponents of a much older Sphinx didn't have an answer too....

That was, until only a few years later when archeologists discovered Gobekli Tepe and completely overturned everything we thought we knew about the rise of ancient civilization and pushed back the first known civilization to 9000 BC. There is now indisputable proof that hunter gatherer's were much more sophisticated than originally thought and capable of monolithic and advanced stone carving capabilities. This doesn't directly prove the Sphinx was carved back then, but it does prove humans had the capability to do it much earlier than Archeologists thought.

The fact that stones from the quarry are used in a Khafra temple proves nothing. Recycling stones from one structure to another was a very common practice.

I think civilization is far older than we think. People forget that the further back you go, it gets exponentially harder to find ruins.

A city built 10k years ago would be practically gone. There would be nothing left from erosion and overgrowth. A city in the Sahara would be underneath so much sand and desert after 10k years that'd it be virtually impossible to find.

 

[L Thammy]

Orion's belt is important because it holds Orion's pants up, preventing us from seeing Orion's Dong.

 

[Simon Belmont]

I think civilization is far older than we think

Just out of curiosity, is there a specific line of evidence that leads you to that conclusion?

 

[shockthrill]

oh god just had a thought that Assassins Creed Origins will probably run with this theory and tie it in with the First Civilization shenanigans

 

[HStallion]

I think civilization is far older than we think. People forget that the further back you go, it gets exponentially harder to find ruins.

A city built 10k years ago would be practically gone. There would be nothing left from erosion and overgrowth. A city in the Sahara would be underneath so much sand and desert after 10k years that'd it be virtually impossible to find.

I don't think the belief is the Egyptians were the start of civilization. They were just one of the most well known earlier civilizations. There are other large ancient cities including one that was almost entirely underground that was discovered recently in Turkey they call Derinkuyu. It went nearly 6 stories under the Earth and could have held up to 20,000 people. Our ancestors might have not had our level of technology but they were just as creative and driven as we are today.

Edit: Apparently this one isn't as old as originally thought but still. Its thought to be about 3500 years old, not 5000 but still. There are many ancient civilizations that created incredibly structures and feats of engineering.

 

[LookAtMeGo]

Just out of curiosity, is there a specific line of evidence that leads you to that conclusion?

Well to be fair, and I know some people hate it being brought up but Gobekli Tepe kinda pushed our Idea of more advanced civilization back by a few thousand years. Mesopotamia was always the craddle of civilization but its not so much anymore. So we kinda already know that civilization goes back more than we thought not that long ago. There have been findings pretty recently that have challenged our current understanding of the age of homo sapiens. Its not exactly lunacy to believe that there might be more out there we just have not discovered yet that could change our understanding of the timeline of civilization.

 

[StreetDisciple]

That's what I was referring to originally as you said they weren't built by men. What else would you be talking about? Lizard people?

Dude u are a natural comedian...i never quoted u so what are u talking about. I was responding to the OP.

I already gave my opinion on the explanation. Your explanation is "ancestors" are smarter and more capable than us today. Which ancestors are we talking about? And what tools did they have to cut single 15 ton stones of granite and limestone with laser precision, move them hundreds of miles away from quarry and place them perfectly in Pyramids and or stand them erect in monuments?

 

[Mahonay]

Sure, and Stargate is based on true historical events.

 

[shockthrill]

Dude u are a natural comedian...i never quoted u so what are u talking about. I was responding to the OP.

I already gave my opinion on the explanation. Your explanation is "ancestors" are smarter and more capable than us today. Which ancestors are we talking about? And what tools did they have to cut single 15k stones of granite and limestone with laser precision, move them hundreds of miles away from quarry and place them perfectly in Pyramids and or stand them erect in monuments?

there's this belief that the Ancients know more than modern scientists believed by some people

Which is why I brought up the guy saying he believed the Egyptians knew about General Relativity before Einstein

it's one of the weirdest beliefs I have heard

 

[willy_2]

I think civilization is far older than we think. People forget that the further back you go, it gets exponentially harder to find ruins.

A city built 10k years ago would be practically gone. There would be nothing left from erosion and overgrowth. A city in the Sahara would be underneath so much sand and desert after 10k years that'd it be virtually impossible to find.

it's unlikely there's anything much older than gobekli tepe, which is already near the limit of what would've been possible at that time given the world population and level of technological sophistication at that time. the agricultural revolution, along with animal husbandry probably did more to stimulate human development than anything else in history.