cladking

Somewhere along the line people came to believe the conjectures of archaeologists. Probably this was caused by the fact that everyone calls themselves a "scientist" and we all know that experiment can't be done in the historical contexts. Since experiment isn't possible then some won't even do simple testing. You might be surprised to learn that the concept ramps must have been used to build the Great Pyramid has been disproven and simpler more efficient means are in evidence. Indeed, the use of ramps at all for building great pyramids has been debunked. It appears they used water filled counterweights and funiculars on the causeways instead. There is extensive physical evidence and, I believe, there is extensive cultural and historical evidence to support it. So far in 150 years Egyptology has failed to identify any of the symbols of the ancient Egyptians from the simplest to the most complex. Almost no writing of any sort exists and they don't understand it. They have been scrambling for a couple years since ramps were debunked to try to reestablish the concept but so far the efforts are amusing at best. One of the ancient concepts was the ben ben stone which sat on the primeval mound. Despite the fact that not only the chemical composition of this can easily be deduced but I can point them to one that exists now. It exists and is growing in the Sphinx Temple below the Great Pyramid today; It's a little hard to see if you don't know what it is because that's the nature of the perspective imparted by language. http://www.egyptiandawn.info/chapter7.html

My favorite book other than the "Handbook of Chemistry and Physics" is "The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Science" EA Burtt 1923. There's a very old book and its metaphysics I've read countless times. Newton's work on physics and the pyramid have always interested me as well. I've always had a dictionary (usually Webster's New Collegiate 1973 or '81) because you don't necessarily know what the other guy's talking about. Now days I'll fall back on wiki when surfing. The 1920's produced some great scientific work and hypotheses especially in physics. Burtt's work deserves more attention than it gets. I consider it virtually comprehensive.

I guess I've had a date with this place for half a century when I built my first computer out of tinkertoys. I was close to computers my whole life and even studied programming back in the '60's. Now I'm nearly computer illiterate because they are so remarkably non-intuitive and I become more literal every passing year. I'm a natural born (and raised) scientist and studied a little physics in school but am largely a self taught generalist with my primary interest in metaphysical foundations. I used to be pretty good with equations and estimations but now use modeling to approximate realities. I'm mostly verbal and intuitive now days. I'm on a quixotic quest to prove the obvious and have been failing broadly and utterly. It started six years ago when I deduced the stones of the Great Pyramid had been raised with counterweights that had been filled with water that appeared through a natural process at altitude and I set out to prove this wrong. It can't be proven wrong because it's most likely true and I've gained some small expertise on the Egypt that actually existed at the time this was built. This isn't a very difficult task since virtually nothing is really known and mostof what passes as fact is nothing more than assumption and interpretation. Most of it is actually material from hundreds of years later projected back to the era of pyramid building. I've attacked this problem from virtually every single angle but can't find a purchase for a prise. There are so few facts that they are all dismissed because they fit my theory perfectly and don't fit conventional understanding. What brings me here is that the pyramid builders themselves left a significant corpus of material related to the great pyramids. This corpus (the Pyramid Texts) is wholly misunderstood by scholars because they have translated it as though it's written in the same type of gobblety gook spoken by modern man. The languages of the earth were actually confused around 2000 BC based on the meaning of the PT and other sources. Only two such languages survive from before this period because they weren't understood later. Sumerian survived and the PT survived because it was inscribed in stone under collapsed pyramids. This is what specifically brings me here; to prove the Pyramid Texts is written in something like computer code. It was a "natural" language that used a natural grammar and the forces of nature which are the terms they used to communicate have been mistranslated as "gods" for 4000 years. I'm all ears if anyone has any suggestions and I'll defend any part of the theory. It is based strictly on the evidence and all the evidence. It will prevail eventually because it most probably is exactly the way they built pyramids and they spoke using language that couldn't be misunderstood. It could be not understood but it can't be misunderstood.