YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
I don't see that you have discovered anything. You have simply succeeded in letting your imagination take you down a rather deep rabbit hole.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Ancient Reality
- Thread starter cladking
- Start date
cladking
Well-Known Member
No, I haven't really discovered much of anything. Most of what I've done is really rediscovery.
Though there is some original work like solving the meaning of Ancient Language and being the first to be able to explain much of 4000 years of human history. Of course the meaning was there before I found it so, this too is rediscovery.
I think I'm proudest of rediscovering how they computed the speed of light (comparing rainbows to moonbows). Solving pyramid construction was a cakewalk in comparison.
I'm guessing there'll be a long string of scientists who will appropriate my discoveries one by one and I'll be no more than a footnote here and there. Everyone will act like they knew it all along.
I don't care really. I'm far more interested in seeing our species survive the next century and that all men have a chance at liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I'll be happy just letting the air out of homo omnisciencis. We'll be better people and less dangerous to ourselves and others. Plus ancient science can probably be manipulated by computer and might lead to machine intelligence.
The world isn't what we imagine. All we have to do is access the "Cool is the NT-Crown Path" and we'll see the nature of homo sapiens as seen by the eyes of nature itself. We'll be better able to see ourselves thereby.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
I know I will probably regret this, but can you explain this line?:
"I think I'm proudest of rediscovering how they computed the speed of light (comparing rainbows to moonbows). Solving pyramid construction was a cakewalk in comparison. "
"I think I'm proudest of rediscovering how they computed the speed of light (comparing rainbows to moonbows). Solving pyramid construction was a cakewalk in comparison. "
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
I'm not the only one who laughed at this nugget of absurdity?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Shhh. I want to hear the answer.
cladking
Well-Known Member
I hope I didn't make too big a deal out of this.
There was just one tiny little clue and I didn't know it was a clue until I had worked on trying to figure out how they knew the speed of light for more than five years. It was a pretty difficult solution though it looks easy enough after the fact. The clue was that they alluded to the rainbow cast by the moon in the Pyramid Texts. This wasn't obviously a clue because rainbows were of great interest to the ancients and there are several references. Indeed, I call #570 'The rainbow Utterance" since there are repeated references.
The rainbow and moonbow are fundamentally different because the rays of light which create the rainbow are essentially parallel. The curvature of the moon makes the rays that create the moonbow not parallel. This distorts the colors in the moonbow which can easily be identified by a woman (metaphysician) with four types of cones in her eyes. This affects ~.001% of women. The degree of distortion is proportional to the diameter of the moon and the speed of light.
The science was quite sophisticated. They had 40,000 years and the entire human population to work on this. Our understanding of nature is in many ways inferior to theirs. The nature of a tool determines the job it does and ancient science was a distinctly different tool than modern science.
gnostic
The Lost One
It isn’t semantics, because it is the ways real mathematicians and scientists today define “proof” and “evidence” are not the same things.
Only law courts, novelists and Hollywood used proof and evidence synonymously.
Only a creationist with no background in mathematics or/and science, would call it semantics.
Does scientists use proof?
Yes, they do, because many do include mathematical proofs, in the form of equations or formulas into scientific theories, but they are not what verify science or the scientific theory as true. There are relations between science and mathematics, but mathematical proof is never absolute.
Only scientific evidences (observation) can refute a theory or hypothesis, or verify and validate theory or hypothesis.
In empirical science, it is the amount of testable or verifiable evidences that strengthen a theory, such as the test results of experiments (in lab environment) or finding independent evidences in the fields.
But this isn’t the real topic, is it?
You have quoted my post saying “proof isn’t evidence”, but the real topic is about the religious funerary texts the Old Kingdom Pyramid Texts.
I don’t mind you using my posts to start a new topic, but you quoted something that is completely unrelated to the real topic.
It is misleading the readers to this thread.
I was responding to one of your replies to Mostly Harmless too in the thread "Creation and Evolution Compatible....Questions", where you wrote:
I was responding to your claim that there are no evidences of religion or belief before 2000 BCE.
I responded with providing some archaeological evidences,
- like temples to Inanna (Ishtar) and An (Anu) in Uruk (Erech) of ancient Sumer,
- the Sumerian poems or hymns to gods,
- artworks of Predynastic Egypt (4000 - 3100 BCE) sharing the same symbols Bronze Age Egypt (3rd to 2nd millennia BCE,
- the 1st pyramid (Djoser's Step Pyramid, 3rd dynasty),
- and of course, lastly, the hieroglyphs of Pyramid Texts in the tombs of rulers (Unas, Teti, Pepi I and Pepi II) of the 5th and 6th dynasties (Old Kingdom).
Since you didn't quote anything relating to the Pyramid Texts in your OP, your attacking my position without the relevant quotes, is taking my view out of context.
gnostic
The Lost One
That's because he is taking what I have said out of context from a different thread.
He quoted something from me that have nothing to do with the Pyramid Texts.
cladking
Well-Known Member
No! None of this is evidence. All you have are words. ...Semantics.
Why is none of that evidence?
You are appearing to be very delusional about this.
cladking
Well-Known Member
This is really very simple. Take the word "temple" for example. This is a place that people go to pray to gods which don't exist so merely using the word "temple" proves that superstitious people appealed to non-existent entities. Using the word 'temple" proves that there was religion.
This is the very definition of a semantical argument.
Let's take another more relevant example. Egyptologists believe there was a temple at the base of the G1 causeway. This is truly remarkable to a degree that will astound people in the future. Egyptologists presume there was a place to go at the bottom of a sacred walkway that people congregated to pray to their gods. They presume this temple was right on the river. Here we have what is the perfect place for a "port" with a ramp leading from it to the pyramid. But they believe it is a temple and the builders dragged stones over wet sand from a much greater distance!!!
This is your madness right here. We are using words instead of reason. There is no evidence any pyramid building Egyptian ever prayed to any god. There are semantics and interpretations of text that is just incantation to support this but no EVIDENCE. The PT nowhere says "we went to the Valley Temple to pray". Nothing at all like this exists. All that exists is evidence a building once stood next to the pyramid and they call it a temple as well.
Meanwhile the facts don't agree with Egyptology. There is no word for "belief" and it is illogical in the extreme to suppose they built a temple right where a port was needed and another one right where the "Saw Palace" was needed and with a ramp connecting them. This is the reality, a port, a ramp, and a masons shop. Yes, they might be temples and sacred walkways but it is up to Egyptology to show it and up to them to show how they got stone from the river to the pyramid top if there was no infrastructure. The infrastructure is right before our eyes but they use semantics and words to support existing beliefs. Meanwhile the evidence, the reality, all points in another direction altogether.
I can't help that most people can't understand that what we call reality is more akin to a circular argument supported by nothing but words and semantics. But all the infrastructure sits before our eyes as Egyptologists call it sacred, holy, temples, and religious. There's nothing holy here. All the infrastructure can be understood from the air shafts to the pavement, to the port. Even the builders village and the wall it sits behind are explained by the actual means they used to build and the actual people who built it. we are deluded. We are deluded by our beliefs and omniscience and we sit behind our semantics ready to defend our superstitions.
cladking
Well-Known Member
These very texts show that the word "belief" didn't exist. They didn't even have any opinions.
This thread is about exactly these words and the fact that they are coherent and logical yet here they are cited as though they are somehow evidence that they are something else.
It is simple madness to say that these words are incantation and can be understood. Logically they are either not incantation or they are not understood. Only a madman would claim to understand magic and incantation but this is the Egyptological argument.
I hope someone is reading my posts.
cladking
Well-Known Member
The WORD we translate as "god" was "neter". You believe that "neter" meant "god" but I can SHOW that the word "neter" meant theory.
You must engage in the same argument I do or it's just semantics. You can quote wiki until you're blue but it doesn't have any relevance to my argument. Wiki is wrong. Egyptology is wrong. I can show they are wrong.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Not "quite sophisticated" merely quite a bit of nonsensical hand waving. I am sorry but your claim is pure nonsense. Whether or not the rays of the Sun or the Moon have any difference in how parallel they are is directly related to the angle they subtend (the size that they appear to be here). Since the angle is almost identical they will also have rays that are just as paralleel.
You might fool someone that has never taken a geometry course, but that is about it.
gnostic
The Lost One
The PT was written in the tombs of the last king of 5th dynasty (Unas), and few kings of the 6th dynasty (Teti, Pepi I and Pepi II) from the Old Kingdom period (c 2686 - 2.
At that time, the belief in the afterlife, centred around the sun god Re or Ra, with the pyramids were liken to the appearance and creation of the 1st dry land, a mound from primeval water.
The Old Kingdom period was known as the Age of Pyramids, because the first pyramid was built for Djoser (reign 2686 - 2666 BCE), the 1st king of 3rd dynasty, the Step Pyramid.
But by the Middle Kingdom period, the focus of in the belief of afterlife moved away from Re to Osiris, with the Coffin Texts, and later in the New Kingdom with Book of the Dead.
They are all funerary texts, but since the Egyptian religions evolve, the PT and CT wouldn't be exactly the same. But the belief in the afterlife is still there. All the gods mentioned in the PT is the same as Egyptian gods worshipped during Hellenistic and Roman periods.
I don't give a crap if the word "belief" don't exist.
A lot of ancient religions have no names to their religions.
The hieroglyphs of Re, Osiris, Seth, Horus and many others appeared in the Pyramid Texts, just as they also mentioned in the Coffin Text, and the Book of the Dead, and in various creation texts written on papyri.
In the tomb of Seti, the 2nd king of 19th dynasty (reign 1290 – 1279 BCE), have not only hieroglyphs of Osiris, Horus, Re, Thoth, Anubis, etc, but also have paintings, on how the gods were supposed to guide them in the afterlife.
i would have no evidence of the pyramids don't exist, and only then would be right. Not only do pyramids exist, they have been around over 4000 years.
I would have no evidences of the Pyramid Texts only if there were no hieroglyphs on the walls inside of the pyramids of Unas, Teti, Pepi I & II, then you would be correct. But you are wrong.
(PS. I have no claimed that the Pyramid Texts existed inside of the great pyramids of Giza, which were built in the 4th dynasty. No, that's your straw man; I only said they are written in pyramids of the 5th & 6th dynasties. So please don't tell lies.)
I would be wrong and you right if the temple complexes at Uruk didn't exist. But they are there.
And if there are no clay tablets, written in Sumerian hymns to gods and goddesses, then you would be correct to say there are no evidences. But you are wrong again.
Clearly you don't understand the concept of evidences. Your metaphysics are only based on circular reasoning and your delusions.
cladking
Well-Known Member
So... ...on the basis of the facts you can't understand the PT and they were translated in terms of the book of the dead you know they are incantation.
On the basis of the fact they are incantation you can say the authors were religious.
I accept this makes perfect sense to you. I've seen this argument so many times and have seen that it is considered airtight by believers that perhaps I should do some kind of work around. Showing the illogic and bad methodology of this argument gets me nowhere.
So let's try something a little different. Explain to me why the PT are full of words of life instead of death. Explain to me the exact process by which you believe the dead king gets to heaven. Tell me not only what magic he's supposed to recite but also his path. You see, I only ask this because this is EXACTLY what Egypotologists BELIEVE the PT is about and no two Egyptologists agree on a single detail!!!! They can't say what happened to his body nor his soul.
Meanwhile the PT explicitly states the king is cremated and thereby becomes the pyramid and a star in heaven. It says this over and over but it's hard to see if you are parsing the words. Ancient Language can't be parsed because it only means EXACTLY what is says. And it says the "grave" of the king is in the sky, in nut;
1361a. The double doors of heaven are open for thee; the double doors of ḳbḥ.w are undone for thee;
1361b. the double doors of the tomb are open for thee; the double doors of Nut are unfastened for thee.
While you're thinking of how you can explain away what they actually wrote you might want to consider I have a lot more of these. I know what all these words mean which is why I can understand EXACTLY what it says, that the kings "lives" in heaven as the pyramid and a star. It doesn't say the pyramid is a tomb and it certainly doesn't say that these people were stinky footed bumpkins.
You might be interested to know (well, someone might be interested to know) that the exact means to build the great pyramids is also mentioned many times in the Pyramid Texts. I'll give you a clue, they had no word for "ramp" and what it says agrees exactly with ALL OF THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE. This acts as a sort of check on my theory and is proof by the standards of ancient science. Obviously though until the existence of ancient science is established this has little importance. I'm not the one engaging in circular arguments here.
On the basis of the fact they are incantation you can say the authors were religious.
I accept this makes perfect sense to you. I've seen this argument so many times and have seen that it is considered airtight by believers that perhaps I should do some kind of work around. Showing the illogic and bad methodology of this argument gets me nowhere.
So let's try something a little different. Explain to me why the PT are full of words of life instead of death. Explain to me the exact process by which you believe the dead king gets to heaven. Tell me not only what magic he's supposed to recite but also his path. You see, I only ask this because this is EXACTLY what Egypotologists BELIEVE the PT is about and no two Egyptologists agree on a single detail!!!! They can't say what happened to his body nor his soul.
Meanwhile the PT explicitly states the king is cremated and thereby becomes the pyramid and a star in heaven. It says this over and over but it's hard to see if you are parsing the words. Ancient Language can't be parsed because it only means EXACTLY what is says. And it says the "grave" of the king is in the sky, in nut;
1361a. The double doors of heaven are open for thee; the double doors of ḳbḥ.w are undone for thee;
1361b. the double doors of the tomb are open for thee; the double doors of Nut are unfastened for thee.
While you're thinking of how you can explain away what they actually wrote you might want to consider I have a lot more of these. I know what all these words mean which is why I can understand EXACTLY what it says, that the kings "lives" in heaven as the pyramid and a star. It doesn't say the pyramid is a tomb and it certainly doesn't say that these people were stinky footed bumpkins.
You might be interested to know (well, someone might be interested to know) that the exact means to build the great pyramids is also mentioned many times in the Pyramid Texts. I'll give you a clue, they had no word for "ramp" and what it says agrees exactly with ALL OF THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE. This acts as a sort of check on my theory and is proof by the standards of ancient science. Obviously though until the existence of ancient science is established this has little importance. I'm not the one engaging in circular arguments here.
cladking
Well-Known Member
All evidence has to be interpreted. This is why observation and metaphysics are so important and this goes a million times over when there is no experiment possible. Egyptology uses horrible metaphysics.
All the evidence for the real means to build pyramids is there but Egyptology simply dismisses all of it as irrelevancies because none of it agrees with ramps. They dismiss foreign sand and they dismiss vaterite in the walls of the horizontal passage. They dismiss or misinterpret the gravimetric scan which clearly shows a five step pyramid and discloses that stones were pulled up one step at a time. They dismiss the pavements around the pyramid and the ports attached to them. They ignore the words of the builders themselves that says the stones flew up the side. They ignore gathering the evidence that will prove how the pyramids were actually built.
People who aren't familiar with Egyptology and those running the "investigation" would be aghast to know their methodologies and mindsets. These people are more akin to priests of the 14th century than real scientists. It took them more than a century to even bother to do infrared scanning and they still have no intention of doing ultraviolet. They've never even done microscopic forensics in any of these structures. They haven't done chemical testing that would show up the copper hydroxide predicted by my theory. They won't test or investigate the ben ben growing on the primeval mound in the walls of the Sphinx "Temple". They won't run a simple chemical test on the water in the Osiris Shaft. They've never bothered to do huge swathes of testing that would add immeasurably to our understanding.
And they won't do it because they already have all the answers. They won't do it because they are too busy inventing a culture that never even existed. They are studying phantoms and ghosts and things of Hollywood imaginations. ...Animated mummies and things rising from crypts. There were no "ancient Egyptians". Egyptologists have invented them through their assumptions. They ask what did these people have to believe to do and say what they did but the people HAD NO BELIEFS. Egyptology couldn't be more wrong and everyone has bought into it because they erroneously believe Egyptology is science.
cladking
Well-Known Member
It's the fact that no two Egyptologists agree on details that should alert everyone to the fact the whole "science" of Egyptology is a circular argument. Imagine if no two physicists agreed on a single law of nature. We'd still be living in the 14th century.
The only facts that they agree on are the the great pyramids were tombs dragged up ramps by highly superstitious people who were just like their progeny.
These are the four basic assumptions around which Egyptology is formed. The PT says they were not tombs. The word "ramp" is unattested from the great pyramid building age. There is no evidence they were superstitious other than interpretation. It is illogical to analyze a culture that isn't understood in terms of a later one that is well understood and then pronounce them the same culture.
The only facts that they agree on are the the great pyramids were tombs dragged up ramps by highly superstitious people who were just like their progeny.
These are the four basic assumptions around which Egyptology is formed. The PT says they were not tombs. The word "ramp" is unattested from the great pyramid building age. There is no evidence they were superstitious other than interpretation. It is illogical to analyze a culture that isn't understood in terms of a later one that is well understood and then pronounce them the same culture.
gnostic
The Lost One
The problem with you, cladking, is that you are hung up on metaphysics, which is nothing more than rationalising claim of existence.
Metaphysics is a failed 19th century philosophy, which failed to be relevant today, in the real world.
Metaphysics has nothing to do with evidences. In fact, metaphysics avoid empirical evidences altogether. Metaphysicians only seek reasoning alone, as the only validation required for any premise of existence. Meaning, for example, even tooth fairy or the Easter bunny can exist, if they can apply circular reasoning for their existence.
And in your case, you have been rationalising your personal belief in your nonexistent Ancient Science (AS) and nonexistent Ancient Language (AL), which supposedly existed before the nonexistent Tower of Babel (ToB).
You started this in the other thread - Creation and Evolution Compatible...Questions - and now you are continuing these imaginary AL, AS & ToB. Any time, anyone you to provide evidences, you go all evasive and use circular reasoning to justify your imaginary and personal belief.
Where is this imaginary Ancient Language, it’s writings?
Where are your evidences for this Ancient Science that predated 2000 BCE? Are their ancient writings (literary evidences) that documented this Ancient Science?
I just don’t think the benefit of you preaching your imaginary AS or AL in this new thread, here, other than to justify your belief and delusion, and to satisfy your ego.
gnostic
The Lost One
I have not mention any engineering of the pyramids, nor did I mentioned any “ramp”.
What do any of these had to with pyramid existing. It is there, in Saqqara, Dahshur, Giza and other necropolis, from the 3rd dynasty to the 6th dynasty.
In only two of those dynasties - 5th and 6th - contained the corpus of hieroglyphs on the inside of the tombs walls.
I have never claimed that the Pyramid Texts are written on every pyramids, only 1 in the 5th dynasty (Unas), and about half-a-dozen in 6th dynasty (the main ones being Teti, Pepi I and Pepi II; some PT are found in the pyramids of queens).
Some of the Utterances are repeated in the Middle Kingdom’s Coffin Texts.
All texts existing are literary evidences, which is more than I can say for your invisible Ancient Language.
So where are the primary sources of your Ancient Language?