Ancient Reality

[Dan From Smithville]

And I watch people who couldn't figure out the meaning of an experiment until someone tells them and can't tell a fact from a unicorn's anus. They know absolutely nothing except what Siri tells them and believe they know everything. The world gets sadder every day as people who know everything have been taking over from those who learn something new every day for more than a century now.

We can't blame 19th century scientists for leading us into the abyss. It was we whom bought into the nonsense and turned off our brains. We wouldn't have followed them if we were thinking. History tells us that current beliefs have always been wrong but we're just that smart now.

Just ask Siri.

It looks like you have lost the plot. What you describe is exactly what I see from you. You reveal no apparent expertise in any science I am aware of. You make up baseless claims out of belief. You present those claims as fact and then meander into this mode when what you are doing is challenged.

It has just gotten repetitive and boring.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

But this is the modern reality that doesn't exist until a Peer says so.

I'm not posting in this thread again until it gets back to ancient reality; the one that invented agriculture and cities.

The evolution of life occurring slowly, with small changes over time is ancient reality.

Do you mean you are not going to post until we start lauding your fan fiction?

 

[tas8831]

And he never did...

Show me this second motor speech area.

Show me the experimental evidence that behavior alone causes speciation, which is "sudden."

Show me that there is a genetic difference between natural and man-made bottlenecks.

Show me that you actually know what is meant by "survival of the fittest."

Define "peer" as in 'peer review".

Do these things, do not just re-assert the same tired verbiage with no support at all.

Your rambling diatribes are not evidence, regardless of how much it has convinced you.

 

[gnostic]

But metaphysical language by definition becomes more complex as more is learned and this universal language became too complex except for a very few so the official state language was changed everywhere from it to the local version of the new pidgin languages that had arisen all over the world in an event we confusedly call the "Tower of Babel".

The pyramids exist, the Tower of Babel don’t...except in Hebrew myth. And Babel was invented at the time when exiled Jewish hostages were living in Babylon during 6th century BCE, where they were inspired to write about Babel based on what they saw of Babylon’s ziggurat, contemporaries to Nebuchadnezzar II and successors. But this ziggurat, called Etemenanki, wasn’t that old at all.

Etemenanki’s construction started with Nebuchadnezzar’s father, Nabopolassar in the late 7th century BCE, and wasn’t completed until Nebuchadnezzar reigned.

So Etemenanki was really the source for the Babel story, but Babel itself never existed, nor did single language prior to the mythological Babel.

The notion that Babel was the source of many languages started during construction of Babel, is just plain fantasy.

The reality is that Sumerian language predated this imaginary Babel and one language spoken turned into many, as do the Egyptian language, with writings of cuneiform and hieroglyphs starting in the late 4th millennium BCE.

Primitive cuneiform inscriptions were found in Uruk (biblical Erech) were discovered in the Eanna district, and dated to 3300 BCE.

More cuneiform were found later during the Jemdet Nasr period (3100 - 2900 BCE) were found at minor Sumerian town called Jemdet Nasr. Modern archaeologists and historians say the Sumerian civilization started with in this period, but some cities like Eridu (c 6500 BCE), Uruk (c 5000 BCE) and Ur (c 3800 BCE) predated the Jemdet Nasr period and Sumerian proper.

And by 2300 BCE, Semitic-speaking Akkadians, starting with Sargon the great, had conquered Sumer, but have adopted Sumerian culture, religion and even adopted Sumerian cuneiform as their writing system, but spoke Akkadian not Sumerian.

Other languages that were contemporary to the 3rd millennium BCE Sumerian, were Early Elamite and the Amorite. But Amorite didn’t become language in Mesopotamia, when the Amorites invaded Sumer and made Babylon their capital around mid-19th century BCE, thereby establishing the 1st dynasty at Babylon, the Amorite dynasty. The Amorite dynasty like that of the Akkadian dynasty before them, adopted Sumerian customs and religions, including adopting Sumerian cuneiform, however the Amorite dynasty spoke Akkadian language, not their native Amorite language, which Akkadian became Old Babylonian to modern historians.

When the Amorite dynasty fell to the Kassite invaders around 1550 BCE - the 2nd dynasty of Babylon or the Kassite dynasty, the Kassites too adopted Akkadian or Old Babylonian as their spoken language (Middle Babylonian), but Sumerian cuneiform continued as the written language in Babylon. This dynasty, lasted until around 1100 BCE, where they were conquered by the Assyrians.

Primitive glyphs that predated Egyptian hieroglyphs were discovered dated between 3200 and 3100 BCE, in the predynastic Abydos. Other slightly later hieroglyphs were also found in the predynastic Nekhen (later known as Hierankonpolis) on the Scorpion Macehead and the Narmer Palette.

There were certainly no evidence of Hebrew writing during the Bronze Age, let alone existing around your date for Babel in 2000 BCE (which you had claimed to be the date for the Tower of Babel, and there were never any Babel):

Language became increasingly complex because it was metaphysical and fewer and fewer people could understand it until about 2000 BC when the official language was changed to its pidgin form in an event we know only as the "tower of babel".

Most of what we think and believe are confusions of ancient science and Ancient Language. Even comedy is closely tied to Ancient (natural) Language and the deviation from it. When speaking of pre-history (-2000BC) there is far more truth in ancient literature and the Bible than ANY book on anthropology or history. We have it all wrong. Language is programming and the programming in which leadership was conducted changed in 2000 BC in an event we know only as the story of the "Tower of Babel". Up until 2000 BC people were much more like a termite or a bee than like any Egyptologist. Of course by this time a large percentage of the population spoke the pidgin languages so they were just like any Egyptologist.

Around 2000 BCE, Babylon was just a poor minor town with no palaces, temples or towers to speak of, hence no Tower of Babel. Babylon didn’t become important city until the reign of Hammurab in the early 18th century BCEi, who was either the 5th or 6th king of the Amorite dynasty.

Your pre-Babel/one language turning into post-Babel/many languages is just fake history and pure fairytale BS.

 

[cladking]

The notion that Babel was the source of many languages started during construction of Babel, is just plain fantasy.

I've explained how this fanciful notion has come down to us dozens of times yet no one has ever actually addressed my argument or any of the facts.

"Babel" wasn't real. It was part of nobody's reality so every time you pretend I think it's real you're just ignoring the argument. And you WILL ignore it again because your beliefs won't even allow you to see and understand what I'm saying.

Ancient reality had NO abstraction at all of any sort and words were REPRESENTATIVE just like a bee's waggle dance. "Babel" is a modern language SYMBOL for the collapse of Ancient language and its reality. The languages that arose at babel are PIE. It is the damn PIE in the sky that linguists know is there but can't see and they can't see it because PIE originated in the ancient vocabulary and not in various places. There was one language and it was the origin of all modern languages because it splintered and splintered again until today we have seven billion different languages.

Now you can go argue about something else but you'll use words like "Babel" and language as though you're addressing my argument. Just as one poster can't find two speech centers you can't find anything I'm saying.

The evidence clearly states that stones were pulled straight up the sides of five step pyramids and my understanding Ancient Language was instrumental in finding this, disproving current "theory", and in showing the real reason the pyramids were built. My understanding of Ancient Language had to be accomplished by modeling it and its rules because I can't think like the Ancient Language speakers either. I can understand it and even generate it but I use a different means because I think one dimensionally just like you do. I can't think like a creature that thought in four dimensions and had no word for "thought".

There is a REASON abstraction is lacking in Ancient Language AND there is a reason that Egyptologists NEVER EVEN NOTICED IT. I'm sure you won't propose an hypothesis since you already know everything just like all Homo Omnisciencis.

 

[cladking]

People (Homo Omnisciencis) seem to think that knowing one fact or one experiment or one friend named "Siri" will tell them everything they need to know about something or everything.

NO reality works this way because EVERY experiment applies simultaneously in EVERY single instance. Having a "theory" about how speech works or how ramps mustta been configured means NOTHING AT ALL IN THE REAL WORLD because in the REAL WORLD ALL LAWS, ALL PROCESSES, ALL CYCLES, AND EVERY PRECEDENT AND CAUSE APPLY ALL THE TIME. I'm confident you can't understand this but the fact is it is true by definition and you might have understood this sentence if you ever looked up "metaphysics".

I'm sorry you don't want to understand and I'm sorry people can't see evidence even after it bites them on the nose but THIS REALITY has always existed and it even exists for every single individual life form on earth and, probably, in the entire cosmos. Until someone disproves cause and effect this is obviously all of reality. It doesn't matter if any individual knows it or not.

 

[paarsurrey]

Ancient Reality

Is reality ancient, please?

Regards

 

[cladking]

Reality, not the reality we perceive nor the reality that mirrored the ancient human brain has ever changed. It is logical, digital, and unwinds from cause and effect eternally. Ancient people saw only glimpses of a single reality but it was undistorted by beliefs and confusion as are our realities. Ancient reality was wholly recognizable to people but they could see only bits and pieces. Indeed it is recognizable to every singly individual life form on earth though most is beyond comprehension. A bird can not understand elliptical orbits (it is an abstraction) but if it needed to for migration or some purpose the orbit would be genetically encoded. I seriously doubt this exists. Bees must "understand" the movement of the sun where it rises in the east to communicate. This is because "sunrise", "season", food, and direction are all critically important to their ability to survive, or more accurately, their ability to survive derives from this understanding and it is expressed representationally rather than symbolically, abstractly, or based on beliefs like our communication.

Reality is what is. It is the goal of every individual organism to strive to understand it. Animals lack complex language and every individual must start at square one. Humans with Ancient Language and then modern confused languages can pass learning from generation to generation so each individual human stands on the shoulders of each giant that came before. But the original language failed and humanity had to start all over in 2000 BC when history started and the modern languages arose. It was not until the advent of modern EXPERIMENTAL science that ignorance and superstition began to come under attack. What we think is ignorance and superstition is WRONG and the reality is the only thing necessarily wrong is certainty and human omniscience. Much of what we call "science" has degenerated into nonsense generated by Peers who believe that experts can see reality directly and know reality and that there is no God. They believe that given sufficient knowledge, mathematics, or expertise an individual can simply devine reality through some sort of magic because experiment has become too difficult or expensive.

Never have so many believed in so much that has no basis whatsoever in reality. These beliefs interfere not only with hypothesis formation but with perception itself. Even scientists often can't see evidence after it bites them on the nose and they can't reason their way out of a paper sack. My favorite way to express this is to say we now live in a world with an infinite number of pyramids built with an infinite number of ramps. The fit carry whips and the unfit drag stones and die.

 

[cladking]

Even scientists often can't see evidence after it bites them on the nose...

A couple years ago a scientist noticed the triangles at the base of G1 (the pyramid on the left);

They are at the bottom and isosceles. Even after they were found Egyptologists won't admit their existence because they don't appear in the literature and weren't measured by Flinders Petrie who also couldn't see them. They Are caused by usage of a different kind of stone and are indicative of the complexity of the structural, engineering, and materials used by the builders.

Pictures of these triangle seem to be getting harder and harder to find.

The list of evidence that can't be seen by Egyptologists grows longer with each passing day. People can't see evidence that doesn't fit their beliefs.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

People (Homo Omnisciencis) seem to think that knowing one fact or one experiment or one friend named "Siri" will tell them everything they need to know about something or everything.

NO reality works this way because EVERY experiment applies simultaneously in EVERY single instance. Having a "theory" about how speech works or how ramps mustta been configured means NOTHING AT ALL IN THE REAL WORLD because in the REAL WORLD ALL LAWS, ALL PROCESSES, ALL CYCLES, AND EVERY PRECEDENT AND CAUSE APPLY ALL THE TIME. I'm confident you can't understand this but the fact is it is true by definition and you might have understood this sentence if you ever looked up "metaphysics".

I'm sorry you don't want to understand and I'm sorry people can't see evidence even after it bites them on the nose but THIS REALITY has always existed and it even exists for every single individual life form on earth and, probably, in the entire cosmos. Until someone disproves cause and effect this is obviously all of reality. It doesn't matter if any individual knows it or not.

No such thing as Homo Omnisciencis. You just made that up.

You seem to think that redefining terms to mean what they do not and pretending your speculation is fact tells you everything need to know.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

People (Homo Omnisciencis) seem to think that knowing one fact or one experiment or one friend named "Siri" will tell them everything they need to know about something or everything.

NO reality works this way because EVERY experiment applies simultaneously in EVERY single instance. Having a "theory" about how speech works or how ramps mustta been configured means NOTHING AT ALL IN THE REAL WORLD because in the REAL WORLD ALL LAWS, ALL PROCESSES, ALL CYCLES, AND EVERY PRECEDENT AND CAUSE APPLY ALL THE TIME. I'm confident you can't understand this but the fact is it is true by definition and you might have understood this sentence if you ever looked up "metaphysics".

I'm sorry you don't want to understand and I'm sorry people can't see evidence even after it bites them on the nose but THIS REALITY has always existed and it even exists for every single individual life form on earth and, probably, in the entire cosmos. Until someone disproves cause and effect this is obviously all of reality. It doesn't matter if any individual knows it or not.

I cannot see your evidence, because you never ever supply evidence. You just move the goal posts or apply some other logical fallacy.

Of course, you will never explain what THIS REALITY is or recognize that no one is claiming the reality we perceive does not exist.

You claim bees, beavers and termites utilize science and that all change is instantaneous. Except you never ever back that up with any evidence. Whether it has teeth to bite or not. No experiments that support your claims. Just claims without benefit of support.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Reality, not the reality we perceive nor the reality that mirrored the ancient human brain has ever changed. It is logical, digital, and unwinds from cause and effect eternally. Ancient people saw only glimpses of a single reality but it was undistorted by beliefs and confusion as are our realities. Ancient reality was wholly recognizable to people but they could see only bits and pieces. Indeed it is recognizable to every singly individual life form on earth though most is beyond comprehension. A bird can not understand elliptical orbits (it is an abstraction) but if it needed to for migration or some purpose the orbit would be genetically encoded. I seriously doubt this exists. Bees must "understand" the movement of the sun where it rises in the east to communicate. This is because "sunrise", "season", food, and direction are all critically important to their ability to survive, or more accurately, their ability to survive derives from this understanding and it is expressed representationally rather than symbolically, abstractly, or based on beliefs like our communication.

Reality is what is. It is the goal of every individual organism to strive to understand it. Animals lack complex language and every individual must start at square one. Humans with Ancient Language and then modern confused languages can pass learning from generation to generation so each individual human stands on the shoulders of each giant that came before. But the original language failed and humanity had to start all over in 2000 BC when history started and the modern languages arose. It was not until the advent of modern EXPERIMENTAL science that ignorance and superstition began to come under attack. What we think is ignorance and superstition is WRONG and the reality is the only thing necessarily wrong is certainty and human omniscience. Much of what we call "science" has degenerated into nonsense generated by Peers who believe that experts can see reality directly and know reality and that there is no God. They believe that given sufficient knowledge, mathematics, or expertise an individual can simply devine reality through some sort of magic because experiment has become too difficult or expensive.

Never have so many believed in so much that has no basis whatsoever in reality. These beliefs interfere not only with hypothesis formation but with perception itself. Even scientists often can't see evidence after it bites them on the nose and they can't reason their way out of a paper sack. My favorite way to express this is to say we now live in a world with an infinite number of pyramids built with an infinite number of ramps. The fit carry whips and the unfit drag stones and die.

I have no idea what ancient language means. I have never seen evidence for this "ancient language".

How do you know what is recognized by every single individual life form on Earth? How do you know that bees understand the movement of the sun? Where is the evidence for these claims and all the others you have here?

What does any of this mean? It sounds like you are building a conspiracy theory.

 

[cladking]

It sounds like you are building a conspiracy theory.

The only "conspiracy" is that imposed by the beliefs we each accept without reason or contrary to experiment.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The only "conspiracy" is that imposed by the beliefs we each accept without reason or contrary to experiment.

People have beliefs, but they are not a conspiracy. The conspiracy occurs when people start claiming things they believe are facts and impose those manufactured facts as evidence for what they believe. Homo omniscience, ancient language and bees using science are examples of that sort of conspiracy.

 

[cladking]

You seem to think that redefining terms to mean what they do not

Read it again. I NAMED modern humans, not redefined them. Humans are "defined" by their characteristics as determined by experiment and to a far lesser extent; experience.

Of course, you will never explain what THIS REALITY is or recognize that no one is claiming the reality we perceive does not exist.

Read it again. I am claiming that every Homo Omnisciencis experiences a different reality Every bee and every Homo Sapien experienced the exact same reality to the degree the individual was capable of understanding reality.

Of course, you will never explain what THIS REALITY is or recognize that no one is claiming the reality we perceive does not exist.

The single ancient reality is not that difficult to understand and is disclosed in their writing. It has no abstraction and individuals did not experience "thought". They did not build models of reality from beliefs and this is apparent all through the writing as it concentrates on perception and has no words that mean "belief".

It's going to be utterly impossible for you to understand ancient reality when you can't even recognize that each human today sees something entirely different as shown in EXPERIMENT and you have no idea of the nature of consciousness which experiment proves is unique to each modern human. Observation shows bees share essentially the same consciousness where their perspectives are identical. This is an easy enough experiment and is shown in the contraptions the government builds to find explosives in airports. This device has several bees glued in a line with a laser before their proboscises. When they each and all detect explosives the laser in interrupted.

There are many realities for us but one for other life forms and to a very real extent and in a very real way this reality is shared by every single individual of every single species that ever existed on earth until the advent of "Homo Omnisciencis" which was a product of the success of ancient man and the enormous complexity which Ancient Language achieved by 2000 BC. Humans went from caves to pyramids because of SCIENCE not because of ignorance and superstition as we have been told. History didn't start until 1200 years AFTER the invention of writing because Ancient Language CAN NOT be translated and couldn't be translated even when it was still being spoken.

Please don't ignore and talk all around this post again. If you disagree with something or have ANY kind of experiment or logic based evidence to show I'm wrong then SAY IT. I present evidence and logic and then you (et al) just say ignore it and deny it. Show one fact of one piece of logic here is flawed. You can't but none of it fits your BELIEFS so it's hard to even see.

I actually have deduced a great deal about "ancient reality" but it's hard to talk about any of it while even the most obvious and important facts and the characteristics of humanity are being gainsaid.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Read it again. I NAMED modern humans, not redefined them. Humans are "defined" by their characteristics as determined by experiment and to a far lesser extent; experience.

I have read your stuff. You redefine terms. You make terms up.

Read it again. I am claiming that every Homo Omnisciencis experiences a different reality

Homo Omniscience is something you made up and call modern humans as if it means something.

Every bee and every Homo Sapien experienced the exact same reality to the degree the individual was capable of understanding reality.

I have no knowledge of what every bee or every human experiences. I have no knowledge that bees perceive reality as humans do. This just seems like a bit of word salad that got stuck in your teeth.

The single ancient reality is not that difficult to understand and is disclosed in their writing. It has no abstraction and individuals did not experience "thought". They did not build models of reality from beliefs and this is apparent all through the writing as it concentrates on perception and has no words that mean "belief".

More conclusions hanging in space without any evidence.

It's going to be utterly impossible for you to understand ancient reality when you can't even recognize that each human today sees something entirely different as shown in EXPERIMENT and you have no idea of the nature of consciousness which experiment proves is unique to each modern human. Observation shows bees share essentially the same consciousness where their perspectives are identical. This is an easy enough experiment and is shown in the contraptions the government builds to find explosives in airports. This device has several bees glued in a line with a laser before their proboscises. When they each and all detect explosives the laser in interrupted.

More of we cannot understand what you understand and you can't help, because you have no evidence, experiment or reason that you can apply to provide understanding. You just make something up. Believe it is true. Then declare it is true here.

There are many realities for us but one for other life forms and to a very real extent and in a very real way this reality is shared by every single individual of every single species that ever existed on earth until the advent of "Homo Omnisciencis" which was a product of the success of ancient man and the enormous complexity which Ancient Language achieved by 2000 BC. Humans went from caves to pyramids because of SCIENCE not because of ignorance and superstition as we have been told. History didn't start until 1200 years AFTER the invention of writing because Ancient Language CAN NOT be translated and couldn't be translated even when it was still being spoken.

More fan fiction.

Please don't ignore and talk all around this post again. If you disagree with something or have ANY kind of experiment or logic based evidence to show I'm wrong then SAY IT. I present evidence and logic and then you (et al) just say ignore it and deny it. Show one fact of one piece of logic here is flawed. You can't but none of it fits your BELIEFS so it's hard to even see.

There is nothing to deny. You have no experiment or evidence for anyone to agree or disagree with.

I actually have deduced a great deal about "ancient reality" but it's hard to talk about any of it while even the most obvious and important facts and the characteristics of humanity are being gainsaid.

No one talks about Fight Club. How do you know your deduction come anywhere close to being correct without the evidence or experiment? How do you know the logic you use is even internally consistent? From here it looks like you have built a belief system and declared it is reality.

 

[cladking]

I have read your stuff. You redefine terms. You make terms up.

I've made up no terms. TELL ME what you BELIEVE I made up and HOW it impacts my argument!

Homo Omniscience is something you made up and call modern humans as if it means something.

NO! I am merely stating what I BELIEVE separates us from Ancient Language speakers. If you don't agree then you need to address MY ARGUMENT, NOT THE WORDS!!!

We have two speech centers and one is in a different place in each individual. My argument is that this is acquired by babies who must unlearn the natural human language in order to acquire our modern confused languages. My argument is that ancient people didn't need (or have) the second speech center. A great deal of logic supports this contention. There is no evidence that contradicts it. Address the argument, not repeat what you believe or how I CHOOSE MY WORDS!!! If I'm in China and someone asks me where Nashville is I say it's in the center of the country. I don't care if it's down US-41 or Tennessee. These are mere words. I try to choose words that show what I'm thinking not words that you would use.

I have no knowledge of what every bee or every human experiences.

You're trying to be obtuse. Every human is as different as a bee and an elephant. Ancient people used to share a reality.

You just make something up. Believe it is true. Then declare it is true here.

I understand your frustration but there's little I can do about it. I believe if you just suspend your doubt for a moment and read what I write it will actually make sense.

I believe that while we're each very different there are many beliefs we tend to share. I'm simply saying many of the fundamental beliefs are false. Humans are not "intelligent". We mistake our beliefs and models for intelligence. We mistake technology for knowledge and we mistake science for understanding and we mistake religion for truth. Reality is fixed but our understanding of it is highly incomplete and much of what we do "know" is distorted by belief and poor modeling. No individual bee, ancient human, nor scientist can see reality but rather every individual catches glimpses of it. Science, modern science, sees many details but we still lack the overall framework. We have a puzzle with many pieces filled in but no edge pieces and the picture is hazy. Since religion is based on ancient science they have the entire framework but a lot fewer pieces with every piece clear.

I speak in tautologies to help people understand me. Show one of my tautologies is wrong if you want to argue against me. Don't fixate on words and semantics. There are an infinite number of ways to say anything in modern language but 42 x 10 ^ 806,999 monkeys can find all of them. If you don't understand ask for elaboration.

Believe it or not I don't have too much trouble getting this across in a face to face communication because I can respond immediately to objections and elaborate at any time. This isn't to say many people agree but they understand the argument.

There is nothing to deny. You have no experiment or evidence for anyone to agree or disagree with.

My contention is every experiment and all observation agree with me.

Show me I'm wrong. What experiment shows me wrong? What do you know or believe that says I'm wrong?

No one talks about Fight Club. How do you know your deduction come anywhere close to being correct without the evidence or experiment?

I do experiments continually. Anytime I see an opportunity to directly check an hypothesis or make an observation to check hypotheses, I do. Some I've done accidently like the time I created "upside down flies". Obviously I can be wrong about anything at all. But I believe my theory explains reality and the nature of consciousness better than any other of which I am aware.

 

[exchemist]

A couple years ago a scientist noticed the triangles at the base of G1 (the pyramid on the left);


They are at the bottom and isosceles. Even after they were found Egyptologists won't admit their existence because they don't appear in the literature and weren't measured by Flinders Petrie who also couldn't see them. They Are caused by usage of a different kind of stone and are indicative of the complexity of the structural, engineering, and materials used by the builders.

Pictures of these triangle seem to be getting harder and harder to find.

The list of evidence that can't be seen by Egyptologists grows longer with each passing day. People can't see evidence that doesn't fit their beliefs.

Where exactly in the photograph are these isosceles triangles? The only thing I can see that could be one is the very shallow triangular discolouration visible along the bottom of the right hand side of the left hand pyramid. Is that what you are referring to? It looks to me like the way the sand has accumulated.

 

[cladking]

Where exactly in the photograph are these isosceles triangles? The only thing I can see that could be one is the very shallow triangular discolouration visible along the bottom of the right hand side of the left hand pyramid. Is that what you are referring to? It looks to me like the way the sand has accumulated.

Yeah, those are it. And they are on all four sides.

I'm proud to say I had seen them, too, and even tried to get a conversation started back in 2006 but everyone agreed with me that they looked like sand and discoloration from being buried for many centuries. The sides are each two parts leaning inward a little so they funnel sand right toward the very middle of the pyramid.

Of course Egyptologists don't care one whit about evidence so they were never even looked at by Egyptologists to ascertain their nature. Egyptology already has a theory that says evidence is redundant because it is established fact that the great pyramids were tombs dragged up ramps by ignorant and superstitious bumpkins who never changed for 3500 years. When you have the answers facts are irrelevant. It turns out these are not merely stains or optical illusions. They are actually a different kind of stone used for whatever purpose they serve. Most people would be aghast if they knew all the facts about the pyramids that Egyptology considers "irrelevant" and have never actually studied. No real science has been done at Giza since Petrie's work in the 19th and very early 20th century. They've never even used century old infrared technology to prove their nonsensical ramp "theories". People believe they are scientists but in actuality they are linguists who never even noticed the language breaks Zipf's law and has no words for "thought", "belief" or any words of reductionism. They don't even have true synonyms!!!

If people understood that Egyptological beliefs are simply assumptions that I have already shown to be false and contradicted by the builders' own words things would be very different. The builders said over and over that the pyramids were representative of the dead king (mnemonics by which he could be remembered) and that they were NOT TOMBS. But Egyptologists believe their own press and won't consider alternatives or do the actual science to show what exactly they were.

I don't know or have a viable hypothesis yet what these were. More accurately I have a dozen hypotheses but rarely will say anything until I'm reasonable sure of one. There are no direct clues but the builders were familiar with the nature of earthquakes and static stresses. It is likely that these are related to the reason the pyramid was constructed in such a manner. There are other possibilities as well, including some that haven't occurred to me yet.


The triangles lie on their long side in the middle of the bottom of each side of G1.

 

[exchemist]

Yeah, those are it. And they are on all four sides.

I'm proud to say I had seen them, too, and even tried to get a conversation started back in 2006 but everyone agreed with me that they looked like sand and discoloration from being buried for many centuries. The sides are each two parts leaning inward a little so they funnel sand right toward the very middle of the pyramid.

Of course Egyptologists don't care one whit about evidence so they were never even looked at by Egyptologists to ascertain their nature. Egyptology already has a theory that says evidence is redundant because it is established fact that the great pyramids were tombs dragged up ramps by ignorant and superstitious bumpkins who never changed for 3500 years. When you have the answers facts are irrelevant. It turns out these are not merely stains or optical illusions. They are actually a different kind of stone used for whatever purpose they serve. Most people would be aghast if they knew all the facts about the pyramids that Egyptology considers "irrelevant" and have never actually studied. No real science has been done at Giza since Petrie's work in the 19th and very early 20th century. They've never even used century old infrared technology to prove their nonsensical ramp "theories". People believe they are scientists but in actuality they are linguists who never even noticed the language breaks Zipf's law and has no words for "thought", "belief" or any words of reductionism. They don't even have true synonyms!!!

If people understood that Egyptological beliefs are simply assumptions that I have already shown to be false and contradicted by the builders' own words things would be very different. The builders said over and over that the pyramids were representative of the dead king (mnemonics by which he could be remembered) and that they were NOT TOMBS. But Egyptologists believe their own press and won't consider alternatives or do the actual science to show what exactly they were.

I don't know or have a viable hypothesis yet what these were. More accurately I have a dozen hypotheses but rarely will say anything until I'm reasonable sure of one. There are no direct clues but the builders were familiar with the nature of earthquakes and static stresses. It is likely that these are related to the reason the pyramid was constructed in such a manner. There are other possibilities as well, including some that haven't occurred to me yet.


The triangles lie on their long side in the middle of the bottom of each side of G1.

Sand, I expect. You'd expect the wind to blow the sand more vigorously off the sides towards the corners and less so towards the centre of each side.

If you have not visited the pyramids yourself and physically inspected them, you are in no position to make up hypotheses just from photos. These things have been pored over by archaeologists for over a century. What evidence do you have that there was a "different kind of stone" used. Have you read this somewhere? Are there analyses you can cite that show this?

Or have you simply made it up, from looking at the photos?