Ancient and ArchaeologyÌý permalink
Shaft in Queens chamber
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Ìý
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Sunday, 5th October 2008
I was just wondering if anybody remembers or has seen the T.V. program on the shaft in the Queens
chamber of Kufu's pyramid? I remember someone
sending a small robot up the shaft in
the wall of the chamber. And upon reaching the end of the long shaft there was a door. On this door there were two pieces of metal attached to it. A small piece of metal had fallen off the piece on the left. it lay on the floor of the shaft directly under where it had broken off of.
Does anyone remember that??
Now my second question, a number of years later
I believe it was a group of Germans that had built a second robot, one with a drill mounted on the front for the purpose of drill through the door in the shaft to see what was on the other side of the door. When the robot reached the door
I noticed that the small piece of metal lying on the floor of the shaft was missing.
I'm wondering if I'm the only one who notice that. I wrote a letter to the director of antiquties but never received a reply.
I know without a shadow of a doubt that Dr Hawass
is holding from the rest of the world what he found behind that door. -
Message 2
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Saturday, 11th October 2008
Dr Hawass! What a persona! But then he has the right to hold it away from others if he judges so. So many others have held away much more important findings anyway!
-
Message 3
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Sunday, 12th October 2008
Thanks for you'r interest, Dr. Hawass is holding back a lot more from the world than just that.
Have you ever heard of Edger Cayse? Americas sleeping prophet??? Hawss is also holding back what he decovered under the right paw of the Sphinx. -
Message 4
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Monday, 13th October 2008
If that's the same Edgar Cayce who believed that pre-dynastic Egypt was established by refugees from Atlantis I think I can sympathize with Dr Hawass's reluctance.
TP -
Message 5
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Monday, 13th October 2008
Cayce "dreamed" he saw a big chamber under the sphinx's right foot which housed all the lost records showing that refugees from Atlantis built all the stuff around Giza 7,000 years before the earliest Egyptian dynasty. A few years ago some Japanese surveyors detected what might be a void in the general area (limestone tends to do that) which might be all of 21 inches across. This has excited the Cayceans mightily.
It has also excited Dr Hawass who for years has been fighting a losing battle against incompetent and half-baked conservation attempts on the sphinx which have accelerated rather than inhibited its erosion. The latest I heard was that effluent from the sewage system supporting a quarter of a million inhabitants of the nearby town has now begun to infiltrate the water table which lies perilously close to the monument and which is using these same voids to undermine portions of it. The last thing the poor guy needs right now is a load of new-age Atlanteans descending on the site with shovels, drills and vacant heads. -
Message 6
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Tuesday, 14th October 2008
Open your mind my friend, don't believe everything your teachers taught you in school.
And don't believe everything Dr. Hawass says about the history of Kemit. -
Message 7
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Tuesday, 14th October 2008
I can sympathize with Dr. Hawass concerning the advance of civilization around the pyramids, but you my friend are another example of someone who believes everything that is written about ancient Egypt. Open your mind, there is much more to history than is written in books.
-
Message 8
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Tuesday, 14th October 2008
What you say about books is so right, my friend.
There is so much more to stupidity than has been written in them about the subject too. -
Message 9
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Tuesday, 14th October 2008
Hi proudleatherneck,
Keep open minds by all means; but not so open that our brains fall out.
TP -
Message 10
Posted by jinks-cider-stash (U7847019) on Wednesday, 15th October 2008
proudleatherneck, are you King Atur-tii in disguise? If not, you two should hook up. Seriously, you'd have a great time.
-
Message 11
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Saturday, 18th October 2008
You my friend are another great example of someone who believes everything they were taught in school. God forbid you should think for yourself. Jesus said "There are more things in Heaven and Earth than you can dream of in dreams." By the way, I bet you believe everything that written in the Bible too.
-
Message 12
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Saturday, 18th October 2008
Hello Twin Probe. Have you seen the TV shows I've mentioned? They were both on several years ago. If you did, What did YOU think happened to that small piece of broken metal that was lying on the floor in the first show but showed up missing in the second?? Dr Hawass HAS to have been behind the disappearance of it.
-
Message 13
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Sunday, 19th October 2008
Dr Hawass HAS to have been behind the disappearance of it.Ìý
How would it be significant if Hawass were responsible for removing a small piece of broken metal? -
Message 14
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Sunday, 19th October 2008
Hi proudleatherneck,
No, I'm afraid that I didn't see the television programmes that you mentioned. I would like to support Hieru's question; now might be an appropriate time to explain explicitly what you believe.
I'd be interested in a discussion on the subject of ancient Egypt but I had better say at once that if the word 'Atlantis' is mentioned I'll find it hard to believe I am in the presence of a serious historian.
TP -
Message 15
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Sunday, 19th October 2008
but I had better say at once that if the word 'Atlantis' is mentioned I'll find it hard to believe I am in the presence of a serious historian.Ìý
Unless of course you are discussing the cultural influence of Egypt on Plato's fable. -
Message 16
Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Sunday, 19th October 2008
somehow I doubt that Plato will come into the arguments however
-
Message 17
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Sunday, 19th October 2008
Hello again Twin Probe:
What I believe? First, I don't believe the history I was taught in school. When you see knowledgeable people on TV explaining that the Sphinx is older than most historians believe because of the rocks around it were rounded by water thousand's of years before so called "historians" claim is WAS built. And these same "historians" claim the pyramids were built by hauling ten ton boulders up ramps made of sand
without the use of wheels. Stop and think, I don't care how smart the Egyptians were in the fourth dynasty I don't believe they built the pyramids. These structure's were built by intelligent beings LONG before the fourth dynasty.
And the proof of who and when I believe was in that chamber behind the small door in the Queens chamber. And I believe Dr Hawass knows "WHO,WHEN and HOW." And He's keeping the truth under wraps. -
Message 18
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Sunday, 19th October 2008
The fool!
And why is he doing that, then? After all, the release of this "proof" would make him the most significant historian in history. So what's shutting him up? -
Message 19
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Sunday, 19th October 2008
Hi proudleatherneck,
A wise man once said "half of what we think we know is quite untrue; the problem is that we don't know which half".
I'm sure many things I was taught at school were honest mistakes, but plenty were well founded and still considered correct today. The only way in which we can attempt to distinguish between the two possibilities is to constantly re-examine the evidence ourselves.
There is a theory that the body of the Great Sphinx was eroded by rainfall. The theory continues to claim that no significant rainfall has occurred in the area for 8,000 years and thus the date of the Sphinx must be 6,000 BC. This is an interesting theory, but several authorities say that the erosion pattern is capable of being produced by wind erosion. The real problem with the old Sphinx theory is the lack of other evidence of a pre-dynastic civilisation producing monumental constructions.
A great many monuments, from Stonehenge to Zimbabwe have been attributed to 'alien cultures' because imperialist scholars could not believe indigenous peoples capable of design and construction. Most of us believe that the ancient Egyptians had a most advanced culture and could, and indeed did, construct the pyramids.
TP -
Message 20
Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Monday, 20th October 2008
And these same "historians" claim the pyramids were built by hauling ten ton boulders up ramps made of sand
Ìý
Actually, most often this is explained as a "best guess" as we do not have any surviving details covering the exact nature of construction. We can and have made educated guess' based on the known level of technological advances at the time however.
When you see knowledgeable people on TV explaining that the Sphinx is older than most historians believe because of the rocks around it were rounded by water thousand's of years before so called "historians" claim is WAS built.
Ìý
I've also seen experts on TV explain it as sand erosion which on the limestone blocks of the Sphinx can act in the same way as water. So which experts are correct?
These structure's were built by intelligent beings LONG before the fourth dynasty
Ìý
And your proof for this is what exactly? A book by Graham Hancock by any chance??
And as for
I believe Dr Hawass knows "WHO,WHEN and HOW." And He's keeping the truth under wraps.
Ìý
What would he profit from in this? Such a discovery would make him one of the most famous men in the world. People still today speak of and know about Howard Carter and all he discovered was the tomb of a very insignificant Pharoh. IF you are to be believed this secret is many mnay times more significant and yet he's twiddling his thumbs. Why? -
Message 21
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Monday, 20th October 2008
I've had some interesting rebuttals to my original
letter on the shaft in the Queens chamber. And all the arguments I've received about historians being correct and the damage to the Sphinx not being done by water but wind and sand and the fact that any new discovery made in the great pyramid would put Dr. Hawass on the "MAP" so to speak. And if that is so, Why has he kept his mouth shut, why has he not shouted to the world of what else he has found in the chamber behind the shaft? Doesn't that sound some kind of alarm??? Exactly what did he find there. And, oh yes, he found something. There is no doubt in my mind and there should be no doubt IN ANYBODIES mind as to what he found. Why do I say that??
That my friend brings me back to my original question. WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT SMALL PIECE OF METAL THAT MYSTERIOUSLY VANASHED FROM THE SHAFT IN THE QUEENS CHAMBER????? -
Message 22
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Monday, 20th October 2008
Hello again TP
You mention the fact that there is no evidence of a "Pre-dynastic civilization" building any structures. And then I remember that I've seen on TV and I've read that the pyramids at Giza are aligned exactly to the three stars in the belt of "Orion" as the stars were aligned several thousand years before the fourth dynasty. And that they were built with two big pyramid and one small pyramid. Just like the stars in the belt. One small and two bright stars. Coincidence ? I doubt it. Why would some civilization come down to this small planet to build these structures? Maybe the answer was in the chamber behind the small door in the shaft of the queens chamber. -
Message 23
Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Monday, 20th October 2008
So I guess your last post answers the Hancock question then
-
Message 24
Posted by cloudyj (U1773646) on Monday, 20th October 2008
I've read that the pyramids at Giza are aligned exactly to the three stars in the belt of "Orion" as the stars were aligned several thousand years before the fourth dynasty.Ìý
That's true, but it's also true that they represented the same alignment in the fourth dynasty and still do so today. Why? Because the only points of alignment are three points in Orion and the Milky way. These haven't changed in human history.
Incidentally, Hancocok has a similar theory about Ankor Wat based on an alignment of a dozen of so temples selected from the several hundred available. If that's proof I reckon I can prove that London was built ten thousand years ago too.
What happened to the bit of metal? It was probably cleared out of the way by the Germans prior to sending their little robot up the shaft. It'll be sitting in a cardboard box in a museum basement waiting for someone to get funding to look at it. -
Message 25
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Monday, 20th October 2008
Hi proudleatherneck,
I have no problem with archaeological monuments being aligned on the position of the sun, moon and stars. The theory is unprovable but seems quite credible for, to give two examples, Stonehenge and Maes Howe, Orkney.
The problem with the Orion's Belt alignment theory of pyramid placement is that its authors (Bauval, Gilbert, Hancock) believe that the alignment is so accurate that it can be used to date the construction to 8000 BC. When the Ö÷²¥´óÐã examined this theory in a documentary in 1999 they had no problem coming up with astronomers who claimed that the alignment of the pyramids did not, in fact, agree with this date.
Who is right? Well, I am no astrophysicist but the simplest view would seem to be that in constructing the pyramids and representing Orion's Belt on the ground (if that is indeed what they did) the builders couldn't get the positions exactly right. Does this matter? No indeed, construction of the pyramids was still a tremendous technical achievement.
Were there civilizations about in 8000 BC? Perhaps: Neolithic Jericho is about that age and Catalhoyuk in Turkey has been dated at 7000 BC. These are impressive mud-brick constructions. But the theory of an advanced technological civilization at that time (let us not say Atlantis) that passed its knowledge to Egypt or Cambodia or wherever seems to be implausible and unnecessary. The actual achievements of the ancient world seem quite impressive enough to be going on with. Sorry if you find this disappointing but that's the problem with reality, it may not match up to the the romance of speculation.
TP -
Message 26
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Monday, 20th October 2008
Hello cloudyj: The alignment of the stars in the belt of Orion and the milky way has changed, ever so slightly. After all the galaxy is moving through space. And over a period of 5000 to 8000 years there will be a slight change. Now, as for that piece of metal. As to your theory, JUST HOW did the Germans clear it out of the way?? I can assure you the Germans didn't move it. There is no way it could have been done, except from the other side of that small door. No my friend, Dr Hawass moved it. And he's holding back a lot of history from the rest of the world. Why? I can't even begin to imagine. Can You???
-
Message 27
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Monday, 20th October 2008
Hello Nordmann, Yes, that is my question. Just why is he hiding what he found from the rest of the world. But I guess it will be a long time before anyone finds out.
-
Message 28
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Monday, 20th October 2008
How would it be significant?? Well that would mean he's holding out a lot of history from the rest of the world. And it would mean he found his way into the chamber behind the small door in the shaft before the Germans sent their robot up the shaft to drill a hole IN the door to see what was behind it. And Dr. Hawass was sitting there watching them progress up the shaft knowing he'd already been there. JUST WHAT IS HE HIDING?
I'm sure its something significant. -
Message 29
Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Monday, 20th October 2008
TP,
excellent post. But do you get the impression that Proud isn't exactly listening (or reading for that matter?)
As another aside, if Egypt did indeed build Orion on earth how do you account for the other star positions (not the belt) those pyramids are not complete (ie: there are more stars in Orion than there are corresponding pyramids in Egypt) Those few pyramids that are put forward are of different qualities, all of them sub-par for the Giza complex. How do you account for the other pyramids at Giza (for there are more than 3) and the attending funeral complexes. If a super civilisation built this you would expect to find a complete set with all built to the same standards. We don't.. How do you propose that Hawass removed this metal that you are faintly obsessed with? How did he get the teams into the pyramid with the attendant equipment to remove it. Again what goal would he have (you still haven't really answered that one) How did he do it infront of all the worlds Egyptologists, tourists and the modern plethora of camera equipment?
You don't seem to be very good at answering anything or even putting forward more than wild but vauge global conspiracy theories so far -
Message 30
Posted by cloudyj (U1773646) on Tuesday, 21st October 2008
The alignment of the stars in the belt of Orion and the milky way has changed, ever so slightly. After all the galaxy is moving through space. And over a period of 5000 to 8000 years there will be a slight changeÌý
But that change is so minute that in terms of being viewed from earth it's effectvely nothing.
Did they align the pyramids to mirror Orion? It's entirely plausible, we know Orion had religious significance for the Egyptians. There are monuments which could represent the other stars, but once again you're selecting four from dozens of possible monuments. Having said that, the topography of the Giza plateau lends itself to an arrangement similar to that built.
No my friend, Dr Hawass moved it. And he's holding back a lot of history from the rest of the world. Why? I can't even begin to imagine. Can You???Ìý
Have you any proof of that? How did he move it if the Germans couldn't? What history is he holding back? -
Message 31
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Tuesday, 21st October 2008
Hello Richie, as far as my obsession is concerned, I never claimed to be an expert on anything. My obsession is with the 18th dynasty not the fourth.
I just happen to see both shows on TV and noticed that the small piece of metal was missing in the second TV program. As far as Dr. Hawass is concerned, I understand he has crews of workmen crawling all throughout the pyramid. It is even closed to tourists at certain times during the year. How could he remove that piece of metal?
Think my friend, its obvious he found away into the chamber behind that door. THAT is the ONLY way he could have removed it from the shaft. That shaft is over 200 feet long. As far as What goal he has, I don't know, but he found a way into that chamber, that I'm sure of. And what ever he found there is obviously big enough and important enough for him to keep his mouth shut and continue on as if nothing happened. -
Message 32
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Tuesday, 21st October 2008
Hello Richie, I responded to your last e-mail about an hour and a half ago. But it doesn't seem to have gone through. So here goes again.
As far as my "obsession" is concerned, Don't you think its kind of strange that this small insignificant piece of metal, maybe an inch long,
vanished from a shaft that is over 200 feet long?
Its not as if Dr. Hawass reached his hand up the shaft and removed it. The only way to reach that piece of metal is from THE OTHER SIDE OF THE DOOR.
I don't understand how you and TP can't see that.
And if that's how it happened, then Dr. Hawass DID INDEED get into the area behind the small door. And if he did------WHY DID HE LET THE GERMANS PROCEED WITH THEIR ROBOT. And let them drill a small hole in that door to see what was behind it, knowing, since he had already removed everything, that the German robot would see nothing but an empty space. And as far as "my not being very good at answering anything," as you have stated, I'm not trying to answer anything, I'm posing questions that everyone of you seems to be shrugging off as "Conspiracy Theories."
When as far as I see it, the only conspiracy is the one Dr. Hawass is envolved in. -
Message 33
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Wednesday, 22nd October 2008
Hi proudleatherneck,
We're not trying to be difficult but firstly we have not seen the two TV presentations that you originally mentioned. Can you give us any help on identifying them? Do you have them recorded or are you depending on your own memory for the events portrayed?
Secondly you seem more positive than it is possible to be on the evidence you have provided. You say that 'without a shadow of a doubt' that Dr Hawass is holding from the world what was behind the door. Also you say that 'the proof of who built the pyramids is behind the door in the small chamber'. If the the piece of metal is indeed missing might one of the documentary teams have removed it 'off camera' for example?
Thirdly you haven't really been explicit about the type of evidence that you think might be missing. Your introduction of Edgar Cayse and the Orion theory into this discussion is very worrying to conventional historians of the ancient world. When do you yourself think that the pyramids were constructed? If you subscribe to the 8000 BC theory are you saying that the 'missing piece of metal' dates from 8000 BC as well, in other words millennia before the conventional starting date of the Middle East Bronze Age?
Finally you must be aware that you have not posted a topic on this board before, at least not under your present name. In a sense then you don't yet have 'provenance' as a poster. If you could provide us with some more background with your knowledge of, and beliefs about, the ancient world it would help us place your views in context.
I hope that you don't feel I am being unreasonable.
TP -
Message 34
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Wednesday, 22nd October 2008
proudleatherneck,
I can't help but wonder if you are getting the footage of the north and south shafts confused.
In the north shaft there are two rods left behind by previous attempts to explore the shaft. If you had seen footage of this shaft and were next shown footage of the south shaft, you might be left wondering why the previously seen rods were missing.
I also agree with TwinProbe, in that it is more likely that any artifacts were removed off-camera by the robot. It is certainly more plausible than Dr. Hawass finding an unknown alternative route to a hidden chamber that supposedly lies at the end of the shaft.
WHY DID HE LET THE GERMANS PROCEED WITH THEIR ROBOT. And let them drill a small hole in that door to see what was behind it, knowing, since he had already removed everything, that the German robot would see nothing but an empty space.Ìý
You do realise that the chamber you are talking about is very small (not much larger than 10cm x 10cm x 10cm)? -
Message 35
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Wednesday, 22nd October 2008
Dr Hawass obviously has access to an ancient Atlantean shrinking device (which he has obviously found under the Sphinx in the Atlantean Hall of Records - the one that no one is to know about either).
In fact I am sure he has such a device. I have seen him on my TV several times. It's only got a 22" screen but he never had to bend down even the once. -
Message 36
Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Wednesday, 22nd October 2008
Hi Proudleatherneck,
When you were noticing the lack of metal in the slabs were you actually looking at the correct slabs? As there are plugs in the shafts that contain no metal.
he has crews of workmen crawling all throughout the pyramid
Ìý
They would have to be rather small. The shafts are very small under a foor in diameter if memory serves.
The shaft may well be 200ft long but it has no terminus.
And what ever he found there is obviously big enough and important enough for him to keep his mouth shut and continue on as if nothing happened
Ìý
But not too big otherwise it wouldn't fit in the shaft. And it is still pure supposition on your behalf with no evidence submitted other than that you find Hawass shifty. -
Message 37
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Wednesday, 22nd October 2008
Hieru: OK, let me try to explain just what I saw on the two TV broadcasts. The first one was approx. 1992. Now because the shaft in the so called Kings chamber leads to the outside of the pyramid. And if I remember correctly, you can see the constellation of Orion, which I believe the ancient Egyptians called Osiris. And in the Queens chamber, nothing could be seen looking up the shaft. So, someone built a small robot with treads like a tank. There was a camera on the front of it. It was placed in the shaft and crawled more than 200 feet before reaching a small door. Now to make a long story short, there were two pieces of metal attached to the door.
and a small piece maybe an inch long, on the floor of the shaft that the narrator of the program brought to everyones attention. Also at the bottom right of this door there was a small opening as if the door was chipped. This first robot zoomed in on this space and it was obvious to all watching that there was a space beyond the door. This robot was not equipped to pickup anything. approx. 5 yrs later a German team built a robot that had a long drill in the front for the express purpose of drilling a hole in the door to see what was beyond it. Upon reaching the door the first thing I noticed was the small piece of metal on the shaft in the first show was not there now. If anyone wanted to remove it, the only was is from the other side of the door. More than this I can not add. I started writting on this site just to see if anyone else noticed the missing piece. -
Message 38
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Wednesday, 22nd October 2008
TP my friend, if I may call you friend. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe most contributing to this cite are English. I am an American from New Jersey. Since the 1970s I've been studying ancient Egypt. I took a course in a local collage on the subject. My specialty is the 18th dynasty.
I have a small library on Egypt. My fascination with the subject surprises even me.
As to your question on my "evidence," it would be only speculation on my part. How could I possibly know what was behind that door. And as far as conventional historians of the ancient world is concerned. What makes you so sure there isn't
more to history than is written in books?? These people read what is written and to them its the "Gospel." I hate to bring this into the discussion, but I believe this world has been and is still being visited by civilizations from other worlds. To think we are alone in the universe is absurd. And to removing the piece of metal off camera, again the shaft is over 200ft long. Now as to who built the great pyramid? I can't even begin to guess. Let me ask YOU a question. If you built the a structure as large as the great pyramid, wouldn't you want the world to know and plaster your name all over it?
Correct me if I'm wrong again, but I believe there was no writting at all in the great pyramid.
And, NO, I don't think your being unreasonable -
Message 39
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Wednesday, 22nd October 2008
Nordmann your comments don't even rate a response.
-
Message 40
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Wednesday, 22nd October 2008
proudleatherneck,
If anyone wanted to remove it, the only was is from the other side of the door.Ìý
But that isn't the ONLY possibility. As has already been suggested, a robot could have been sent back up the shaft in order to retrieve the metal - presumably a broken-off portion of one of the copper handles found in the end stone at the top of the south shaft. -
Message 41
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Wednesday, 22nd October 2008
Hi proudleatherneck,
Call me friend by all means.
Strictly speaking most contributors to this board are British rather than English, that is we have regular posters from Ireland, Scotland and Wales in addition to England. We also have a few regular contributors from (among others) the USA, Greece, Norway, and Belgium. There are few topics that can't raise an expert audience.
I'm not totally surprised that you feel this world is being visited by alien civilizations, but do try to remember that this type of belief is far commoner in the USA than in Europe. I understand about that about 50% of Americans actually believe in alien abductions, but few British people do. I agree that it seems improbable that in the Universe we are the only intelligent beings, but thus far I'm really not convinced we have any compelling evidence of visits here by other intelligent creatures. However you will certainly find a few other posters who agree with you; some time ago we had a contributor who considered that advances in electrical engineering followed alien contact. I can't agree with this myself.
I entirely concur, as I have already stated in this thread, with your view that not everything we are taught is true; but the problem is that much of it is actually correct. Only constant re-evaluation of the evidence will enable us to determine which is which.
I'm impressed by your interest in the 18th dynasty but I think there is something to be said for developing a broader interest in history and contributing to other topics. Recently we have had postings from USA contributors who only wish to discuss the oil under Stonehenge or Dragon's Teeth found in Utah. 'One hit wonders' often provoke a rather sceptical response here, especially if the opinions expressed are rather 'independent' thoughts.
You may now feel that this topic has progressed about as far as possible until we can all see the TV evidence. But there are plenty of other interesting areas to discuss.
Best wishes,
TP -
Message 42
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Wednesday, 22nd October 2008
Hieru: What you said is a distinct possibility. The robot would have to have been altered. If this did happen Why would Dr. Hawass not mention it in the second film as the German robot was going up the shaft. He would know that a question would arise as to what happened to it. But thats pure speculation on my part, but a good point.
-
Message 43
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Wednesday, 22nd October 2008
Could you be mistaken perchance ???????????????
I have seen the footage in question (I watch Discovery and National Geographic too) and cannot alas see a piece of loose metal unaccountable for in the second syndicated programme (most likely because the narrator explains that the shaft has been examined by no less than three different archaeological survey teams in the interim).
Have you contacted the teams involved? Or are you just interested in seizing on misunderstandings of your own contrivance in order to generate "controversy"?
Good to hear you acknowledge your American roots. I'd never have guessed it. But you'll be pleased to hear that Egyptian archaeological heritage is in safe hands - at least so far they've kept the nutters at bay. And the TV company-financed pseudo archaeologists, for the most part.
I still think you should invest in a smaller TV, like I have. You won't be so fooled by wild TV commentator talk of "shafts" and "chambers" at least. -
Message 44
Posted by cloudyj (U1773646) on Thursday, 23rd October 2008
He would know that a question would arise as to what happened to it. Ìý
Which does beg the question: If he knew the disappearance would give rise to questions, why did he move it? Your theory is that he has another route into the chamber, so why do anything to anything in the shaft? -
Message 45
Posted by jinks-cider-stash (U7847019) on Thursday, 23rd October 2008
TP - The article you were referring too
It all gets a bit silly towards the end but there is a good quote from stanilic "we need aliens now just as much as in earlier times we needed `God'".
proudleatherneck - You would probably be interested in some of Dr Urparz's theories. I think he has a website that can be found it you Google him. Also the poster King Atur-tii, who I thought you originally were, again has a strong interest in the mysteries of ancient Egypt. -
Message 46
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Thursday, 23rd October 2008
Hi jinks-cider-stash,
Many thanks; that's the one. Since I am not very computer literate may I ask how you did that?
TP -
Message 47
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Thursday, 23rd October 2008
Nordmann, I'm not quite sure if you have the right program in mind. The first robot showed the small piece lying on the floor of the shaft. IN the SECOND program IT was missing. It was not there. So you wouldn't have seen it would you??
There have only been two robots sent up the shaft. I'm don't think Dr. Hawass would have sent a robot up the shaft just to clean the floor and nothing else. The German robot was the second robot. I'm glad you think Egyptian archaeological heritage is safe. You just continue to live in your "safe world where everything that is written is the Gospel and where everyone connected with archeology is honest and there are no controversies. -
Message 48
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Thursday, 23rd October 2008
TP, you are right, I believe this subject has progressed as far as it can go until and if we ever find out what was behind this door. One more thing I'd like to mention that I hesitated to mention before. When the German robot drilled the small hole in the door, and the space beyond was eliminated, I saw on the floor on both sides of the space, wheel marks that went from where the camera was to the door on the other side. I don't believe the Egyptians had wheels at that time, am I right??
-
Message 49
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Saturday, 25th October 2008
If anyone is interested, below is a Link detailing proposed future surveys by the team who built the Upuaut robot that explored the south shaft in the Queen's chamber:
On the "The Future" page you will find an interesting proposal that shows how it might be possible to determine if there is a chamber behind the rough-hewn stone at the end of the southern shaft.
I had hoped that the site would feature some high resolution images from the shaft, but I was sadly disappointed.
For the more exotically inclined, here is an interesting article which theorises that the Great Pyramid is a device for manufacturing Hydrogen:
Whilst I am highly sceptical of the theory, some of the images and illustrations are extremely useful.
The above page features an image of the rough-hewn stone at the top of the South shaft. Whilst I can't see the "wheel" marks described by proudleatherneck, there is a single groove on the right-hand side of the shaft. -
Message 50
Posted by proudleatherneck (U13503297) on Saturday, 25th October 2008
Hieru, I stand corrected, The photo on the gizapower.com cite is the same photo I saw back in 99. there is a groove and my memory thought it was a wheel mark. Any idea what the groove is for?? The photo of the door is a little fuzzy, but there is a piece missing off metal piece on the left.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Ìýto take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Ö÷²¥´óÐã iD
Ö÷²¥´óÐã navigation
Ö÷²¥´óÐã links
Ö÷²¥´óÐã © 2014 The Ö÷²¥´óÐã is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.