Alternative Theories for the Purpose of Pyramids

[Breizh]

Now if someone showed up with some imagery of the electrical equipment connected to the other end of the electrical energy then my interest is piqued.

What do you expect to see and how would you make sense of it?

Well look at what electricity is used for today as a start point. All manner of devices are connected to it and through the battery its become portable and the variety of devices has grown accordingly.

I wouldn't assume that the modern day technological paradigm is equivalent to what existed at the time of the ancient Egyptians and pre-flood cultures. In other words, to reference my original post - you can't make sense of what you're seeing so it's dismissed.

This would assume that you're sufficiently equipped with the appropriate understanding & knowledge to interpret the information available. Are you?

You sound exactly like a former member who posed the same question. Its not about an individuals ability or capability its about the veracity of the evidence presented.

This is assuming you're able to properly interpret the evidence you have seen.

As far as I know there is a single member on here who is physically working to see if so called aetheric and sometimes etheric energy is a thing

"Resonate369" has been doing this for a few years.

...why is it always the 'greater intelligence' that is invoked as a possible answer instead of human genius
...
You are doing it again, second guessing.
I do not have "a position" I do not understand why people run to the divine inspiration as the answer to what to them individualy is inexplicable.

There is no second guessing. You wonder "why is it always the 'greater intelligence' that is invoked as a possible answer instead of human genius".

You don't understand why people 'run' to the divine inspiration as the answer to what to them individualy is inexplicable.

In contrast, you seem unaware of the greater order so see human genius as the more plausible explanation. This would be perfectly justified.

 

[Jd755]

I wouldn't assume that the modern day technological paradigm is equivalent to what existed at the time of the ancient Egyptians and pre-flood cultures. In other words, to reference my original post - you can't make sense of what you're seeing so it's dismissed.

There you go again. We can assume and presume all we want doesn't change the fact of what electricity is used for or perhaps better put enables today. Humans don't change much over the generations. Human needs and requirements don't change based entirely within my readings of books written by people of their experiences such as the one written by Celia Fiennes I am commenting on in the forum, for example.
The only difference betwixt the late 1600's and today is, funnily enough, I live a life enabled (feels like bounded by to be honest) by electricity and she did not.
I note though you push the ether electric back to the undetermined time of "ancient egyptians" which rather knocks out all the antennas on tall building tales of the late 1800's early 1900's.

"Resonate369" has been doing this for a few years.

That person is not a member on here according to the member search.

You wonder "why is it always the 'greater intelligence' that is invoked as a possible answer instead of human genius".

One last time. I am not talking of human genius you are.
I am suggesting our innate ability and curiosity is all thats needed to figure things out and like as not create changes out of "nothing".
I am not talking about greater intelligence. You change the wording quite a lot for reasons I know not.

In contrast, you seem unaware of the greater order so see human genius as the more plausible explanation. This would be perfectly justified.

The greater order. Good grief. Repeating myself again but such is life. I have no idea what, where, why I am. I have no idea of what this place is, why it exists, if it exists, what its pupose is, if it has a purpose none, not a scooby doo.
I am comfortable with accepting "I don't know" for all manner of things instead of passing things off to 'divinity' or "greater intellgence".

My best guess is that I am a product and part of some process that occurs in water probably of water. Whatever that process is I know not. I breathe water vapour ergo this is a water world. I was created in water. Water will be the medium which returns my body to its component parts.
Does this require a divinity, a greater intelligence, a creator, or is it a process in and of itself, I don't know.

To end this I come back to the 369, again.
9 is all that is. The whole, the universe the IS.
It cannot experience itself so it split itself into two unequal parts.
The 6 which is nothing more than a reflection of all that is and as such cannot experience.
And the 3. Every living thing is the 3.
3 is the universe experiencing itself through looking at its reflection and knowing the difference.
Thats good enough for me.

This discussion is going in circles and spiralling off topic so I suggest we leave it spinning on the shelf.

 

[Breizh]

I note though you push the ether electric back to the undetermined time of "ancient egyptians" which rather knocks out all the antennas on tall building tales of the late 1800's early 1900's.

This thread is called "Alternative Theories for the Purpose of Pyramids" which implies the architecture associated with the Egyptians and the previous culture(s). Whether the ether tek was incorporated into the functionality of the architecture (pyramids, obelisks, djed etc) is plausible. The numerous signs of an Egyptian presence in North America is always worth mentioning.

That person is not a member on here according to the member search.

Apologies, he has a website & videos. In many ways he's doing what you haven't seen any proof of.

One last time. I am not talking of human genius you are.

...why is it always the 'greater intelligence' that is invoked as a possible answer instead of human genius

I am suggesting our innate ability and curiosity is all thats needed to figure things out and like as not create changes out of "nothing".
I am not talking about greater intelligence.

The greater intelligence masquerades as innate ability, perhaps that's a key point of contention. Mabyzynn would have elaborated on that but perhaps he did already? The concept of implosion has been introduced by various people (¿most recently? by Dan Winter) to allow for a practical understanding of consciousness; it conveniently relates to the "technology" used world-wide by ancient cultures and some ancient scripts (Hebrew, Sanskrit etc).

This discussion is going in circles and spiralling off topic

Not at all, it led to some good avenues for other readers and ended right on topic.

 

[Breizh]

The basic idea is that all the pyramids in Egypt ... with each one producing an industrial chemical or gas. These chemical products were extracted from the ground below each pyramid, and the placement of each pyramid was specifically chosen to utilize each particular natural resource. Each pyramid required a water source, either from underground or brought from the Nile River. And many had smaller side pyramids for product storage or secondary chemical processes/refinement.

Here's a fantastic video on the pipe channels around the pyramids and beneath the giza plateau itself:


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGJCAy48Yl8

 

[Jd755]

More Mabzynn...

The races developed under different nodal frequencies following past cycles.

Each race bears the skin, eyes, and cranial shape that was ideal for limiting interference while interacting with the "Energy" of their age.

Hmm races eh the current Bête Noire of discussion in society. Should I, should ,I...well of course.

Basically mabzynn seems to be saying that the nodal frequency change, from 117hz up or down, in the "Energy" of their age produced a different kind of human body. One more suited to interacting with the "Energy".
This suggests that the different races/body types/appearances came about over time. How much time is anyone's guess.

Which is all well and good. But mabzynn does not touch on any change in the thought or the mind brought about by frequency changes/body/appearance changes. He might have in his book but only he knows.

As the frequency change brought about an alteration in humans the issue of chicken and egg comes into play. Whichever race was interacting with the "Energy" in one singular frequency, a highly tuned race at that, when the frequency changed, it cannot then have been able to interact with the frequency of the new "Energy".
Until the new race was tuned in by the new frequency the "Energy" cannot have been in operation and crucially there was now a new frequency in play in an environment built around a different frequency. That can't have gone well.

As for the race interacting with the frequency at the instant of change were they aware a change was coming?
Did the "Energy'" let them know what the new frequency was going to be?
So what came first?
Frequency change or the new race tuned to the new frequency or did they arise mutually?

In-breeding or "race-mixing" will quickly take these highly optimized or tuned races away from their ideal state.

So race one lets say "the originals" are all of the same appearance suddenly noticed a race of humans appear that were of a different appearance and both races thought "I'll have some of that' and began crossing the streams to create a detuned 'mule race' aka one not optimised for the former frequency nor the current frequency.
Basically saying "to hell with this frequency bollocks".

Inbreeding is also a detuner which removes the frequency tuned race from interaction with the "Energy". Does this perhaps suggest the frequency of the "Energy" was changed not by the "Energy" but by the inbred nature of the operators?

Giants were condensed to pigs during a past cycle. They preserve their DNA.

DNA has been proven time and again to be a flawed measure. But as giants are no longer around, if indeed they ever, were there is no way to check their DNA against the pigs.

This concept refers to the Bio De-Calibration that occurs when a high-frequency "Giant" (a human iteration from a lower-resistance era) is subjected to the high-interference environment of the Kali Yuga.

So is he talking about the frequency change environment here where the old frequency is instantly replaced by the new and it is the latter throwing everything built during the former into chaos as its all out of sync with the new?

The Loss of Resonance: In earlier cycles, the human body lived for centuries because it was "charged" by the 117Hz life field.

But he said back up the page that
"The races developed under different nodal frequencies following past cycles."
So now I am confused. He seems to be talking at crossed purposes. The frequency change being one and now about the specific 117hz which he now calls "life field".
This suggests the 117 hz is the constant and the frequency change is the variable. If so the "Energy" must be something different to "the life field" and the former can create changes in the latter.

If as he proposes the different races came about due to a change in the frequency of the "Energy" there would be hundreds of years of people ligging about out of tune with the new energy and until that new energy transformed the DNA of the parents? into differently tuned humans ergo ones able to interact with the new frequency the "Energy" would not interact with anyone.

The "Shatter" Effect: When the environment hits 99.9% interference (as in Baktun 13), the high-capacity DNA antenna begins to "leak" information.

The frequency change brings about chaos and decay as it seeks to alter existing DNA, presumably of life, to its frequency? I don't know.

Biological Regression: Without the Instructional Loop, the "Navigators" or "Giants" undergo a rapid de-calibration. Their biology loses its "Divine Geometry" and regresses into a "Low-Frequency" animalistic states as they become slaves to the interference grid."

Given he has just stated the human body can live for centuries in the 117hz field how could the "giant" regress into the "pig" without nobody noticing and wondering what the hell is going on?
Giant people who once brought forth new giant people, that lived for centuries, are no longer doing so they now produce offspring which look less and less like giant people and more and more like a new form of animal.
Giant people who cannot interact with the new frequency of the "Energy" are either transformed into a new race which can or pigs that cannot. Both events occuring mutually.
What a time to have been alive!

 

[Breizh]

But mabzynn does not touch on any change in the thought or the mind brought about by frequency changes/body/appearance changes. He might have in his book but only he knows.

What he knows / has discovered is specifically "accessed" or "downloaded". I'm sure he would have eloquently described the notion of the greater intelligence/greater order in a way favourable to your perception since that concept is fundamental to the change in thought bought about by frequency shifts AND the notion of "accessing" or "downloading" information.

Thus the unacknowledgement of a greater intelligence/greater order is in some ways a direct impedance to developing one's understanding.

 

[Jd755]

Thus the unacknowledgement of a greater intelligence/greater order is a direct impedance to developing one's understanding.

Okay. If you say so. Lets hope the "greater intelligence" instructs him to publish his book or return to the forum or perhaps it could pass the info onto you or even me so either of us could share it in here.

Perhaps you could deign to go through the mabzynn info yourself and post your findings, thoughts, inspirations in here as I am doing instead of choosing to crtic specific aspects of what I write. That course of action would have greater value for all.

Greater intelligence must have told me to write that as it arrived as a thought...

 

[Jd755]

In spite of my alleged "unacknowledgement of a greater intelligence/greater order" 'handicap', which seems to irk a specific member, though why he cares I know not, I will carry on with the mabzynn series.

This is my my Grand Unifying Equation at work. I have a post waiting approval where I have identified the Language of God through the works of the Great Pyramid and the Ancient records. It is quite literally a program that when run - works. I've written a 187 page book about it. I'm working on getting it published. I've started a Patreon in the the meantime - Spencer Stack | Patreon

Sadly that book is not going to be available any time soon and as previously noted mabzynn has left the forum after deleting most of his posts.

So to the "Ancient records" he has left for us.

This is documented in sources:
1. The Mayan Account (The Popol Vuh)
The most explicit reference to an earlier race of "Giants" (wooden people or the predecessors of modern man) being turned into animals occurs in the Popul Vuh.

The Regression: After the failure of the "Second Sun," the gods destroyed the wooden people who had become "empty" and lacked "water memory" (heart/soul).

The Result: The survivors of this race were degraded into wild boars (peccaries).

This is going to take a while to sort out as this account is new to me and its full of allegory intertwined with interpretation. If anyone else has any knowledge of this account and would care to share then be my guest.
As it is I am reading this page so read along if you are so moved.
ch 5 - Esotericism of the Popol Vuh

 

[Breizh]

Okay. If you say so. Lets hope the "greater intelligence" instructs him to publish his book or return to the forum or perhaps it could pass the info onto you

The successful communication of the paradigm & constructs involved in mabzynns writings takes two to tango. It also requires a suitable perceptual foundation between both parties for genuine coherent communication. As an aside, another user who shared a similar POV as mabzynn was Merlynn.

Perhaps you could deign to go through the mabzynn info yourself and post your findings, thoughts, inspirations in here as I am doing instead of choosing to crtic specific aspects of what I write. That course of action would have greater value for all.

My commentary was predominantly for the benefit of everyone reading - to contrast your words, present different perspectives and suggest how it relates to other relevant things (contextualisation).

 

[Jd755]

Done with this thread now. Have fun.

 

[AntiSoof]

Suppose gravity were an ether current. This presses or flows on the mass of the Earth. (Ether would be an almost all-pervading ultra fine 'substance' that has very little friction/resistance.) We would then call this pressure gravity. The less permeable the substance, the more friction, something we also call weight. So lead is heavy because it is less permeable to ether, and a gas the other way around.

This would explain why water flows out of mountains, because the gravitational current is 'held back' by the mass of the mountain:

Water in the centre of the mountain, which holds back/diverts the ether pressure/current, appears lighter at the centre. Thus, it is 'pushed upwards' by the pressure on the water from the ocean, for example.

And the greater the mass (of a mountain, for example), the lighter the water inside appears to be. (Everything is relative.)

And that is why water comes from mountain springs, purified by the long journey it has travelled through the earth and fresh once again. Those are the rivers. Fresh, pure water, with the minerals in it. It is pushed upwards by the pressure of the ether on the surrounding water.

Now imagine the pyramid as a large mountain. This could therefore function as a pump/suction device that could moisten the land. In this way, inhospitable places could be made fertile.

For the Nile used to overflow twice a year, bringing fertile soil to the flood plains, but there may not have been enough water. Hence, perhaps, the pyramids that stood there as water pumps. Perpetual motion machines! (That is/seems true free energy to me.)

Later civilisations perhaps no longer understood that principle and allowed the pyramids to fall into ruin. And so Egypt became (partially) a desert (again). And there are surely people at the top who know all this but keep us ignorant. Wouldn't we just like to be forever free from 'them' for a change?


This would also make sense if gravity originated in matter.
Viewed in this light, the mountain or pyramid would then attract the water, causing it to flow upwards.
I was prompted to consider these aspects because I recently learned that there are 'dips' and 'hills' in the ocean water level. These are caused by a heavier subsoil, so that the water above is, as it were, drawn in more. They can be dips as deep as 100 meters, (if I seem to recall). This is also known from the water level relative to coastal development. (Heavy buildings). These are related.

 

[ViniB]

This one was new to me, i'll call it the elephant of pyramids vecause it's not only the tallest known one, but the largest by volume too, the La Danta pyramid, or El Mirador

Totally fascinating to me, still barelly excavated, a boots on the ground exploration would be a dream in such a place

Narrative wise, it's the same old bullshit (built by the mayans, used for sacrifice, 1000s of years old, bla bla bla), so let's ignore that for now. It's taller than the biggest trees in the background, and quite literally in the middle of nowhere. it looks to be a larger base and 3 smaller temple like structures on top

Officially it was "discovered" in the late "20th century" with excavations still ongoing

El Mirador translates to the one who watches, which is interesting

 

[Frostychud]

I was looking for old books about Pietro Della Valle and stumbled across a French book from 1676 which included a translation of John Greaves' description of the pyramids from 1646. I started reading it and realized it would be easier to just find the original English version. It's available here on the Internet Archive:

Pyramidographia: or a description of the pyramids in Aegypt : Greaves, John, 1602-1652 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

The first thing I noticed was that the French translation from 1676 was very different and left a lot out. "Scythians" was translated into French as "Barbarians".

Check out Page 47:

Greaves claims that Plato lived in Egypt for thirteen years. Huh? Even more strange, he writes his numbers out using Roman numerals. So XIII years instead of 13. And then he writes 2000 as CIƆ CIƆ. Supposedly the CIƆ was streamlined into an M well before the fall of Rome in the "5th century". Why would Greaves resurrect this ultra-archaic numerical system for apparently no reason? This suggests that in 1646, not only were Roman numerals still being used, they hadn't even transformed CIƆ into M yet.

But that's not why I am sharing this. When discussing the ancient Egyptian practice of embalming or "salting", Greaves claims that the process leaves bodies as durable as marble. Not only that, he claims personally to have seen these embalmed bodies two thousand years later and confirms that they are still just as hard.

I think it's Pustogarov who claims that the alchemical secret of the Philosopher's Stone is nothing but the trade secret of artificial stone mastered in Egypt. Kemi, Chemistry, Alchemy. This artificial stone was used to build the pyramids in the 17th century, according to him.

Fomenko claims that the kings of the Horde had their bodies shipped to Egypt to be preserved as mummies (due to the dry climate), hence the practice of embalming and the Egyptian religion more generally. As is often the case with Fomenko's theories, I find this one simultaneously brilliant and incomplete.

But now I find myself wondering if these two functions were identical. Was the world "to embalm" changed at some point? These days it means draining the body of blood and filling it with chemicals to preserve it for a short time.

However, if the word originally meant to petrify, a lot of things fall into place.

Were the chemical factories of Egypt used to transform dead bodies into statues? This would link so many things together. The pyramids can be both chemical factories (Drumm) and funerary installations. The Biblical association of Egypt with idol worship makes more sense. It even fits with Fomenko's hypothesis that Egypt was the mausoleum of the entire empire. A dry climate is not a sufficient reason to ship a dead body from Russia to Egypt to be stored. But a chemical process which promises a form of immortality is.

Greaves suggest that embalming was a form of powdering. Was the body somehow "powdered", mixed into concrete, and then reconstituted into a statue in the king's likeness? One that, presumably, could function as a "home" for the spirit of the dead king?

Remember that "salvation" comes from the word "salt". Supposedly this is a metaphor that refers to the preserving property of salt. But what if the original meaning of "salting" a body was petrifying it into an icon?

This would also explain why they had to fake all those mummies in the 19th and 20th centuries. The history forgers had to provide a plausible alternate explanation for the documented practice of "embalming" to throw everyone off the track.

ADDED: I'm fantasizing about Egypt selling a religion of reincarnation as part of a clever marketing strategy to get rich people from around the world to pay top dollar for their petrification services...something like these cryogenation companies that charge vain elites (like Jeffrey Epstein) millions of dollars to freeze their bodies in the hope of one day reviving them. I could even imagine that a trip to Egypt and an initiation into the Mysteries was part of the package. Greaves mentions the ancient belief that such practices kept the soul attached to the body even after death, preventing it from disappearing back into the heavens. What a money machine!

 

[AntiSoof]

I was looking for old books about Pietro Della Valle and stumbled across a French book from 1676 which included a translation of John Greaves' description of the pyramids from 1646. I started reading it and realized it would be easier to just find the original English version. It's available here on the Internet Archive:

Pyramidographia: or a description of the pyramids in Aegypt : Greaves, John, 1602-1652 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

The first thing I noticed was that the French translation from 1676 was very different and left a lot out. "Scythians" was translated into French as "Barbarians".

Check out Page 47:
View attachment 36183

Greaves claims that Plato lived in Egypt for thirteen years. Huh? Even more strange, he writes his numbers out using Roman numerals. So XIII years instead of 13. And then he writes 2000 as CIƆ CIƆ. Supposedly the CIƆ was streamlined into an M well before the fall of Rome in the "5th century". Why would Greaves resurrect this ultra-archaic numerical system for apparently no reason? This suggests that in 1646, not only were Roman numerals still being used, they hadn't even transformed CIƆ into M yet.

But that's not why I am sharing this. When discussing the ancient Egyptian practice of embalming or "salting", Greaves claims that the process leaves bodies as hard as marble. Not only that, he claims personally to have seen these embalmed bodies two thousand years later and confirms that they are still just as hard.

I think it's Pustogarov who claims that the alchemical secret of the Philosopher's Stone is nothing but the trade secret of artificial stone mastered in Egypt. Kemi, Chemistry, Alchemy. This artificial stone was used to build the pyramids in the 17th century, according to him.

Fomenko claims that the kings of the Horde had their bodies shipped to Egypt to be preserved as mummies (due to the dry climate), hence the practice of embalming and the Egyptian religion more generally. As is often the case with Fomenko's theories, I find this one simultaneously brilliant and incomplete.

But now I find myself wondering if these two functions were identical. Was the world "to embalm" changed at some point? These days it means draining the body of blood and filling it with chemicals to preserve it for a short time.

However, if the word originally meant to petrify, a lot of things fall into place.

Were the chemical factories of Egypt used to transform dead bodies into statues? This would link so many things together. The pyramids can be both chemical factories (Drumm) and funerary installations. The Biblical association of Egypt with idol worship makes more sense. It even fits with Fomenko's hypothesis that Egypt was the mausoleum of the entire empire. A dry climate is not a sufficient reason to ship a dead body from Russia to Egypt to be stored. But a chemical process which promises a form of immortality is.

Greaves suggest that embalming was a form of powdering. Was the body somehow "powdered", mixed into concrete, and then reconstituted into a statue in the king's likeness? One that, presumably, could function as a "home" for the spirit of the dead king?

Remember that "salvation" comes from the word "salt". Supposedly this is a metaphor that refers to the preserving property of salt. But what if the original meaning of "salting" a body was petrifying it into an icon?

This would also explain why they had to fake all those mummies in the 19th and 20th centuries. The history forgers had to provide a plausible alternate explanation for the documented practice of "embalming" to throw everyone off the track.

I think I'm onto something.

Very interesting, Frostychud.

First sentences in the book:

"It is the opinion of some modern Writers, that the Pyramids were erected by the Israelites"

and (bottom)

"But the sacred Scriptures clearly expressing the slavering of the Jewes, to have consisted in making. and burning of Brick (for the original is co34 ‘WLebénim, which the (c) Septuagint renders by ¢ Exod, apis jorrsee aNd wawSea ) whereas all these Pyramids consist of Stone, I cannot be induced to subscribe ro their assertion,"

I just happened to see a nice video explaining that the 'stones' (bricks) of the pyramid are indeed likely made of a type of concrete. So is the Bible correct after all? Very interesting! Then the family of Israel built that beautiful pyramid and surely know even more about it. The bricks are made from mortar/concrete? (I think so)

So I mean that the writers of that book didn't know either that the pyramid was possibly made of concrete. It certainly looks like it. They cast the stones on site and they dried in the sun. That is perhaps how the pyramid was built; with gravel, water, and a binding agent. That is how very many 'stones'—very old structures and monuments—are made of a kind of concrete, I think.

This naturally reminds me of the Freemasons as well. They might work with mortar too. (A type of concrete?) Funny.

 

[Breizh]

It is the opinion of some modern Writers, that the Pyramids were erected by the Israelites

The pyramids in North America are worth considering here as there have been numerous Egyptian artefacts uncovered across the region indicating a significant Egyptian presence, or alternatively that of the culture that preceeded them since scholars say that egyptians inherited the pyramids in Giza:

"We find when we discover Egypt in what we call the First Dynasty, under Menes, that it is at its absolute zenith of culture in painting, sculpture, architecture. From this peak period, the Egyptian culture steadily declines. It is very much as if the Egyptians found themeselves the inheritors of a great ready-made culture of which they could take advantage, which they could utilize and even to some degree emulate, but which they themselves did not create . . . . This very strongly suggests that it drew its greatness from a source higher than itself . . . ."

--Jalandris, The Hall of Records: The Hidden secrets of the Pyramid and Sphinx, 1980"

"The history of Black will remain suspended in air and cannot be written correctly until African historians dare connect it with the history of Egypt. In reviewing Egypt's beginnings, we find an advanced civilization already intact from the earliest Dynasty. This fact has perplexed historians down through the ages. Common sense dictates that if Egypt began fully mature, then its civilization must have originated elsewhere . . . . [Herodotus] The `Father of History' was told that the first man to rule Egypt was Min, who lived so long ago that Egypt was still under water: `in (Min's) time the whole country, except the district around Thebes, was marsh, none of the land below Lake Moeris, was then showing above water. To this place from the sea [Nowe] is seven days passage up the river . . . . "

--Wayne Chandler, Of Gods and Men: Egypt's Old Kingdom, 1989

Bringing in the Israelite aspect, I recently encountered this book by Mordecai Manuel Noah:

Discourse on the Evidences of the American Indians Being the Descendants of the Lost Tribes of Israel (1837)​

​

Some reviews on the book:

• "Proves American Indians to have been originally Jews, and a part of the lost tribes." - History of Long Island, 1839
• "Noah being a Jew himself, gives him great advantage from his personal acquaintance with Jewish opinions, ceremonies, and usages." - Select Circulating Library, 1841
• "Proves that the 'ten lost tribes' were the progenitors of the races and ideas found in the New World." - Western Literary Messenger, 1849
• "Most interesting." - Viewpoint, 1917
• "Perhaps the most distinguished Jew of his time in America." - Israel: The Jewish Magazine 1901

Prior to the 20th Century, it was the opinion of many writers such as James Adair, Elias Boudinot, Timothy R. Jenkins, Thomas Thorowgood, William Penn, and Ethan Smith that the American Indians were descended from the lost tribes of Israel; and this certainly is a very plausible way of accounting for the peopling of the new world, and for some circumstances, such as customs and traditions remarked among its inhabitants.

This reminds me of the narrative that associates the American Indians with the nation of Gad:

The African hebrews aren't considered lost afaik but a Mexican tends to identify with being Spanish.

I just happened to see a nice video explaining that the 'stones' (bricks) of the pyramid are indeed likely made of a type of concrete.
...
They cast the stones on site and they dried in the sun.
...
That is how very many 'stones'—very old structures and monuments—are made of a kind of concrete, I think.

I would agree, people investigating this refer to it as geopolymer. Paul Cook (see YouTube channel) has documented this all over Malta and the Giza plateau, he goes on site and underground. He's found some interesting old tek too (funky electrical kit abandoned in Malta).

This is from the SH thread Liquid stone. How the "ancients" may have built their mega structures.

Just like polymer clay for art. ... I too am pretty artsy so once he was explaining forms and molds I didn't need anymore evidence. I just can't believe how naive I feel to think only clay and concrete were the only compounds used to create. Especially with all the slimes and goo we can make in our kitchen for the kids today. I've even made paw print stones from flour. And that we think they needed tools. Even today you can just throw the powder in your mold add some water and mix right in the spot you want it.

Resource on SH:
ZIP - Geopolymer evidence at pyramids

 

[Frostychud]

But that's not why I am sharing this. When discussing the ancient Egyptian practice of embalming or "salting", Greaves claims that the process leaves bodies as durable as marble. Not only that, he claims personally to have seen these embalmed bodies two thousand years later and confirms that they are still just as hard.

I wanted to add something here.

In French you have a curious word, pétrir, which means "to knead", as in, to knead dough. The word is still used to this day.

Supposedly this word comes from the Latin "pinsere", to crush, via the vulgar Latin "pistrire". The jump from "pinsere" to "pistrire" doesn't seem obvious to me, but what do I know? I'm not a linguist.

We also have the French word pétrin, which you mainly encounter figuratively these days. The precise meaning of the word is a chest or container in which dough is prepared. To be "dans le pétrin" means to be in a tight spot or difficult situation.

The resemblance to the words for "stone" and "petrification" is obvious.

Are these words evidence that stone was once prepared by introducing chemical ingredients into a chest, waiting until the preparation was the consistency of dough, and then working it with the hands like clay until it hardened?

It gets even more interesting when we look at the word "sarcophagus". It literally means "flesh-eating". Supposedly this is because ancient people believed certain types of stone cause the body to decompose in forty days instead of decades. This is obviously impossible if you're just sticking a body in a stone box, but not if you are using some kind of chemical preparation made from this stone. Check out the quote from Pliny the Elder:

At Assos in the Troad we find the Sarcophagus stone, which splits along a line of cleavage. It is well known that corpses buried in it are consumed within a period of forty days, except for the teeth: Mucianus vouches for the fact that mirrors, scrapers, clothes and shoes placed upon the dead bodies are turned to stone as well. There are similar stones both in Lycia and in the East; and these, when attached even to living persons, eat away their bodies.​

So there is some kind of chemical preparation in the box that turns everything to stone!

Note that the objects are turned to stone as well, which suggests that the body too is turned to stone. What chemical would dissolve a body but petrify clothes made of organic material? No, it must have petrified everything.

It's always amazing to see how historians cherrypick these classical authors. They just ignore all the wild stuff like this as if it weren't there. But you can't do that. You can't use these authors as serious sources if half the stuff they say is outrageous fantasy.

Pliny supposedly died in the 79 eruption of Vesuvius. As we've seen, that even actually occurred in 1631. The following engraving by Antonio Tempesta of the pyramids being built (complete with smoking factories!) dates from 1608:

Antonio Tempesta - The Pyramids in Egypt, plate 7 from "The Seven Wonders of The World" - The Metropolitan Museum of Art

Using "dans le pétrin" to mean "in serious trouble" makes no sense if pétrin means breadbox. However, if the original meaning of the word was "sarcophagus full of acid", it makes perfect sense.

Supposedly, "Assos Troadis" is in Turkey, with "Troadis" coming from "Troy". But as we've seen, "Troy" is also Constantinople and Jerusalem.

"Assos" sounds a bit like "Aswan".

In The Jew of Malta, Marlowe describes the siege of Malta in terms reminiscent of both the siege of Jerusalem and the sack of Troy. The city is invaded through the aqueducts. Fomenko thinks that the Trojan Horse legend stems from a confusion between the words "Equa" (mare) and "Aqua". In the Bible, David takes Jerusalem this way. Naples (Neapolis, "new city", same as Novgorod, which could be multiple places) was also famously taken this way.

I bring this up because the word "Malta" reminds me of the words malt and melt. And guess what, Malta is famous for its mysterious cart ruts, which appear to have been cut into soft, melted stone. Not only that, Valletta is one of the most impressive star fortresses in the entire world, and a place that is full of weird archaeology, secret society shenanigans, and esoteric lore. Was Malta some kind of chemical installation as well?

 

[Breizh]

Malta is famous for its mysterious cart ruts, which appear to have been cut into soft, melted stone. Not only that, Valletta is one of the most impressive star fortresses in the entire world, and a place that is full of weird archaeology, secret society shenanigans, and esoteric lore. Was Malta some kind of chemical installation as well?

This has been extensively investigated by Paul Cook (see YouTube channel). He found evidence all over Malta indicating major prior installations (above & below ground), water piping ruts (not cart ruts; the same ruts are found on the Giza plateau), old world electrical tek and clear evidence of geopolymer amongst other things.

The "cart ruts" were not "cut into soft melted stone", they were purposefully introduced as part of moulded geopolymer - likely for utilities aka piping carrying water/used water. This is seen all over the "buildings" in Malta passing both under doorways and higher up entering holes.

 

[Frostychud]

A few more reflections on the ideas I've been developing in my last two posts.

The French word for "melt" is fondre, which connects us with foundries.

Read this:

He mentions the FOUNDERS of the pyramids, not the BUILDERS. Since when does one "found" a giant stone structure?

Did "found" mean "to pour cast stone"?

Were building "foundations" poured in the past?

Note as well that Greaves uses the Hegira date first. Why? It appears here that the new Dionysian count (=Denis Petau) was less authoritative at that time. No mention of Scaliger, who might have been a fictional character projected into the past (I read some of his funeral eulogies and they have that made-up feel).

Not to mention the weird geography in the third paragraph (the pyramids are "a quarter mile west of Aegypt"...huh?).

I suggested that the "statues" made in Egypt might be more than sculptures. Did "statue" once mean "cast icon of a dead person including biomaterial"?

Check out the following passage from that 1646 Greaves book:

"Before the exact art of making statues was found out, the Ancients erect[ed] Columnes"

I would say invented or developed, not "found out".

But think about it. Columns need to be sculpted into shape too. Anyone who can make a column can also make a statue, right? Sculpting a human figure is only quantitatively more difficult than sculpting a statue, not qualitatively. Actually, it's probably even easier since a good column has to be symmetrical whereas a human likeness does not. It makes no sense to consider them two separate technologies, as Greaves does, which suggests to me that "statues" are something else entirely for him.

(Or he may simply be referring to casting bronze statues.)

-> Remember that Gunnar Heinsohn shows that columns were originally hung with the body parts of sacrificial victims

Heinsohn thinks statues evolved to replace sacrificed corpses. What if the connection is even more direct than he believes, and the body parts were used to make the statues?

In a recent post, I shared the hypothesis of Tamansky that movable type printing was only invented around 1700, and all books printed using movable type (as opposed to woodblock printing) dated before then are either backdated forgeries or bowdlerized re-editions.

This allows me to possibly reconcile some of the the contradictions and inconsistencies in the hypothesis I am playing with. I suggested that the pyramids were built in the early 17th century, as evidenced by the 1608 construction engraving. If this were the case, John Greaves would certainly know that the pyramids were only decades old in 1646 and not millennia, and that they functioned as industrial sites of some sort. But he doesn't claim that. His version of their age and function is congruent with today's mainstream history, and relies to a large extent on Herodotus, Strabo, and other "ancient" chronicles. In fact, half of his book, if not more, is just citations. So for this hypothesis to work, we have to assume that Greaves was either engaging in history-lengthening propaganda himself, or that his book was falsified and backdated.

The Tamansky hypothesis rescues us here. It goes something like this:

- At some unknown point after 1700, the pyramid complex no longer works. Chemical production and electricity are protected trade secrets.​

​

- The decision is made to send it back thousands of years into the past, perhaps to keep the tech under wraps without having to demolish the plants.​

​

- The book attributed to John Greaves is either rewritten or completely forged from scratch. The little hints I've highlighted ("durable as marble", "pyramids were founded", "Found out the art of statues") tentatively suggest it was mostly rewritten.​

​

- Recycled material from Herodotus, Strabo, etc. is used to pad out the book and pass the chemical plants off as "granaries of Joseph" (smaller Nubian pyramids).​

​

- The fact that Greaves is an Englishman writing in English suggests that this phase of the falsification was carried out by Britain. However, there is no record of any large-scale British involvement in Egypt in the 18th century.​

So, this hypothesis has a lot of holes, but every hypothesis about the pyramids has holes, so...

Actually, thinking about it, the Tamansky hypothesis is not even strictly necessary. Why? Well, imagine the Giza complex is basically the 17th century version of a nuclear power plant. Presumably it would be strictly off-limits to unauthorized personnel. Well, you're going to need a cover story as a first layer of security against industrial espionage. Look at Area 51 today. It's huge. What happens there? No one knows, but somehow everyone thinks they have aliens there. That's effective cover. I can imagine the people who ran the plant seeding the story that the pyramids were ancient tombstones. Maybe Greaves & co. were paid to spread disinformation. He was from an elite family, after all. And of course if some unauthorized person sees them from the Nile and tries to get a closer look, they will be met at the perimeter by an armed guard and told to turn around. "Nothing to see here, just some old tombs. Now go away before I shoot you."

Lastly, I'd like to share the work of the Russian LiveJournal blogger Selenadia. I first encountered his/her work thanks to @usselo . It's been a few years since I've read through it, but what I remember is that he/she argues that old sarcophagi were used to "brew" what he/she calls "frothy blood" using the remains of the "gods". This frothy blood was drunk ritually and had a possessing effect. Out there, but maybe it is precisely practices like this that the forgers were desperately trying to write out of history, perhaps not unreasonably so.

Here are links to Selenadia's blog as well as a couple of relevant posts from Usselo:

selenadia

Post in thread 'Evidence humans were created and traded as slaves, food, entertainment and material resources (IHASFEMR)' Evidence humans were created and traded as slaves, food, entertainment and material resources (IHASFEMR)

Post in thread 'Evidence humans were created and traded as slaves, food, entertainment and material resources (IHASFEMR)' Evidence humans were created and traded as slaves, food, entertainment and material resources (IHASFEMR)

 

[Breizh]

...the hypothesis I am playing with. I suggested that the pyramids were built in the early 17th century, as evidenced by the 1608 construction engraving.

Are you referring specifically to the pyramidal structures in Egypt or the wider African continent? If you're speaking about Egypt, are you referring to all of them or a subset?

 

[Breizh]

Here's further clues on the geopolymer stonework and "cart ruts" on the Giza plateau.

...evidence all over Malta indicating major prior installations (above & below ground), water piping ruts (same ruts found on the Giza plateau) and clear evidence of geopolymer...

The advantage with this person is he works on present day underground installations (utilities etc) which facilitates the deciphering the old-world:


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lp6ROHLXGCk

I went deep under the city of Valletta, Malta, to explore an off-limits ancient site that challenges history. I expose evidence of ancient cast stone and sophisticated water systems. I gain access to a restricted structure to investigate clues of megalithic engineering. We look closely at the "cast stone" textures and how the ancient builders integrated complex water management into the 'natural' stone.

Good camera work too.