What is wrong with the Sphinx?

[xsicbastardx]

I recommend Graham Hancock to anyone who likes Real Rabbit Holes than he is the man for you. I read fingerprints of the Gods last year.


Amazing.

[xsicbastardx]

And as for the lack of the Sphinx in the ancient texts problem, that could be explained too. The Sphinx was often mentioned in the Pyramid Texts, but not in a way which the Egyptologists could recognise. I quote the many references in the Pyramid Texts and the Coffin Texts to a giant Anubis at Giza, which is twice specifically described as sitting beside a causeway, and which was surrounded by a body of water with various names, the most famous of which is Jackal Lake, and another being the Winding Waterway.

That sounds like a pretty promising angle... I wonder what the conventional explanation for the "giant Anubis at Giza" might be?

When anyone can ever explain to me how the ancients built the great pyramid, and then why the later ones all fell down, then I'll start trusting theories about the Sphinx.

Anubis my ass.

If you read Fingerprints of the Gods, you will learn that the Egyptians had some kind of "Diamond Tip Drill" that bored out the Granite Sarcophagus Covers that not only were advanced for their time but removed material at a rate that we even have a hard time achieving.

I think it is quite amazing that folks haven't focused on Egypt more. IT's like all these "experts" profess their theories yet half of them don't even really believe them.

Explain what happened at Giza and you unlock a door to a long lost past of humanity.

Case in point......can't exactly remember them name....The Kings Scroll I think.....Supposedly it's etched on some Kings wall and it goes back 40,000 years thru Egypt History and the Kings that ruled"..... Yet scientists say that they had the same problem with dating time periods a la the Bible.

Fucking Bullshit.


These people built the Pyramids and the Sphinx.....and they couldn't tell time. I'm not buying it at all.

[Jeff]

I've been impressed by Robert Schoch's geological argument for a very old Sphinx. Currently reading his Pyramid Quest. A recent interview with him is posted here. Has some interesting things to say about consciousness and paranormal phenomena.

[OP ED]

definitely a dog.

...

good dog. space dog.

...

several sumerian texts give histories going back in excess of 150,000 yrs.

anubis is the best psychopomp. Jesus can eat my shorts.

[nathan28]

OP ED, what is the source for the 150,000 year-old histories?

I've been impressed by Robert Schoch's geological argument for a very old Sphinx. Currently reading his Pyramid Quest. A recent interview with him is posted here. Has some interesting things to say about consciousness and paranormal phenomena.

Schoch, though, says the Sphinx dates to 5000-8000 BCE. Hancock says 10,500 BCE to match it up with his Edgar Cayce timeline, which is the repurposed(?) St. Yves timeline. Oddly enough, Hancock & Co.'s opponent, whose name escapes me (the Egyptian official overseeing the Giza necropolis) and who insists on the orthodox picture, is associated with the Cayce people. Regardless, that Hancock and West take Schoch's findings as "proof" when he explicitly disagrees is a testament to how you can make a small fortune in niche writing.

That's not to say I buy the orthodox line. Just that the accepted "alternative" explanation sucks.

I'm undecided on the mystery of the Sphinx. Maybe it's just a really bad sculpture. Anubis sounds more likely to me, though--it is, after all, a necropolis.

[Jeff]

Schoch, though, says the Sphinx dates to 5000-8000 BCE.

5000-8000 BCE sounds like Schoch's range for minimum possible age. I think he does allow that it could be still older, just that the weathering doesn't permit it to be younger.

[2012 Countdown]

Didn't mean to sound so dismissive earlier. I saw a discovery special on the older, water damage based theory. The tie in w/ the age of 'leo' was pretty convincing, as other cultures have done things with monuments during 'ages'. Again though, if indeed the text of the period mention a giant Annubis and NOT mention a sphinx, I think this theory has some merit.

In regard to the 'diamond drill bit', yes, I recall this info as well. Some also believe they powered it by some sort of battery power. The lines so crisp, the angles so precise.

I think no matter how the various theories come down, most all think the face has been recarved during a later period. I think it has. The one visual observation the original article makes that I agree with is that the head is disproportionately small to the body.

[seemslikeadream]

apologies if this was already mentioned but don't forget the head was redone and is not the original head

I'd just point out that the vast majority of egyptologists would disagree with that statement.

yes especially when they would like to keep their history, as they believe it, to be the true history. A whole lot of reputations to keep in tact.

[nathan28]

And as for the lack of the Sphinx in the ancient texts problem, that could be explained too. The Sphinx was often mentioned in the Pyramid Texts, but not in a way which the Egyptologists could recognise. I quote the many references in the Pyramid Texts and the Coffin Texts to a giant Anubis at Giza, which is twice specifically described as sitting beside a causeway, and which was surrounded by a body of water with various names, the most famous of which is Jackal Lake, and another being the Winding Waterway.

That sounds like a pretty promising angle... I wonder what the conventional explanation for the "giant Anubis at Giza" might be?

When anyone can ever explain to me how the ancients built the great pyramid, and then why the later ones all fell down, then I'll start trusting theories about the Sphinx.

Anubis my ass.

If you read Fingerprints of the Gods, you will learn that the Egyptians had some kind of "Diamond Tip Drill" that bored out the Granite Sarcophagus Covers that not only were advanced for their time but removed material at a rate that we even have a hard time achieving.

I think it is quite amazing that folks haven't focused on Egypt more. IT's like all these "experts" profess their theories yet half of them don't even really believe them.

Explain what happened at Giza and you unlock a door to a long lost past of humanity.

Case in point......can't exactly remember them name....The Kings Scroll I think.....Supposedly it's etched on some Kings wall and it goes back 40,000 years thru Egypt History and the Kings that ruled"..... Yet scientists say that they had the same problem with dating time periods a la the Bible.

Fucking Bullshit.


These people built the Pyramids and the Sphinx.....and they couldn't tell time. I'm not buying it at all.

That 40,000 year history is also the official gov't press release, suspecting it of some inaccuracy wouldn't be uncalled-for.

[2012 Countdown]

Yes, the 'Egyptologists'. Very odd bunch. They don't seem to be open to new information. Very closed minded. The opposite of what I would think any scientist or researcher to be.

BTW, off topic... anyone familiar with a book called "The Flight Into Egypt" by Timothy C. Ely? He was buddies with McKenna. Very RI-centric- This thread made me pull out my copy to review.

FYI...

he Flight into Egypt $60.00 + 12.00 shipping and handling in USA

First Edition, published in 1995 by Chronicle Books as a facsimile of a unique manuscript book by Timothy C. Ely. Full color throughout. Includes Foreword by Terence McKenna, Introduction by Timothy C. Ely, and an interview of Ely by Steven Clay of Granary Books in New York City. 56 pages, 14 1/4 x 11 1/8 inches. ISBN: 0-8118-0620-0


Here is more of his work-
http://www.timothyely.com/pdf/TimothyCEly.pdf


TIMOTHY C. ELY
Timothy C. Ely (b. 1949), manuscript bookmaker, found early his inspiration in UFOs, comic books, and arcane religious artifacts. After work in painting and design, he traveled to Japan and Europe with a grant from The National Endowment for the Arts (1981), training in traditional eastern and western methods of bookmaking.

Engaging techniques both traditional and unusual, from watercolor and embossing to metalwork and tooling, Ely makes books inspired by conceptual art and the mind-bending landscapes of sacred geometry, alchemy, and particle physics. His published titles include The Flight Into Egypt: Binding the Book (Chronicle, 1995) and Synesthesia (Granary Books, 1992), with text by the late ethnopharmacologist Terence McKenna. Ely's unique and editioned books can be found in museum and library collections worldwide. He lives and works in eastern Washington state.
www.centerforbookarts.org/archive/bio.asp?artistID=12

[Cosmic Cowbell]

From Andrew Collins...

"Redating the Sphinx

The Forbidden Legacy of a Fallen Race

Thanks for that, are you familiar with Graham Hancock and his series on the underwater ruins near Japan?

You're welcome. Thanks for the thread. I am familiar with the ruins near Japan through the documentary featuring Hancock. A strong case, as in the that of the Sphinx, for the existence pre-"civilization" civilizations.

It could well be that Temple is correct. It's just that in the short OP, he fails to overwhelm. And strives a bit to hard to sway the reader with claims such as:

Why is it that the Sphinx, which we have always been told is a lion does not actually look like a lion at all? Do lions look like that? You have to ignore the lion-like paws, because they are a more recent construction, purposely made to resemble lion's paws by people doing what they call 'restoration'. We have no idea what the original paws looked like, since they had been rendered unrecognisable by Roman times. But if anyone has ever been to the zoo, he or she knows that lions do not look like that. When Olivia and I first saw the Sphinx we both blamed ourselves, we thought we did not have a certain ability which other people obviously had, an ability for seeing lions. We thought that we must be lion-dyslexic. We looked and we looked and no matter how hard we looked there was still no lion. Continuing to stare did not help. There is no rising chest, no mane, there just is nothing there which is remotely leonine at all.

We should "ignore the lion-like paws" that were somehow planted there because "there just is nothing there which is remotely leonine at all." There was to somebody at some point apparently.

He also attempts to explain the removal or damage of the original head by stating...

"The human head was carved out of the neck and stump of the Anubis head, which was vandalised during the First Intermediate Period at the end of the Old Kingdom, when chaos reigned and the Giza Plateau was sacked by rampaging violent mobs."

Hopefully there would be documents or a semblance of proof to back up the claim, but I wonder how long it would take for a "violent mob" to become organized long enough to inflict the kind of damage that renders a "stump" of the head and neck of Anubis. Whatever it was, Lion or Jackal, it was huge and would have taken some time and effort to bring down. And I'm not convinced that such an impressive monument would be the target of such a mob. But hey, the Taliban blew up the Buddhas so go figure (even then, it took them some time and a large load of modern explosives).

Then the explanation of the "Moat" causing the erosion damage. It seems he agrees it was water that done the deed.

As for the erosion, that was caused as a result of the Moat. The Sphinx itself has horizontal erosion, because it was sitting in a lake, the level of which rose and fell with the seasons. But the walls of the pit have both horizontal and vertical erosion, hence the earlier suggestion that the vertical erosion must have been caused by descending rain. But what I believe really caused this was the continual dredging of the moat, which was always being filled with windblown sand which had to be removed. As everyone knows, when you dredge, the water pours down as you remove the solid things. And as this happened, particularly on the south side, the dredging water poured down heavily, scouring out the vertical crevasses.

Really a stretch if the contention is that the Sphinx was inspired by and -originally- built in the image of Anubis (isn't the concept of Anubis in the pantheon some 3000 years old (BC) at the earliest?). Which would have made it almost brand new when the head was destroyed by an "old kingdom" mob? Is there a hieroglyphical historical record of the dredging of a "moat" around the monument? Maybe I missed it...

It was all very well to come to these conclusions, but we could not just write them down on a page of A-4 and hand them round to our friends and consider our job done. Clearly there was a lot of work to be done. And when I say a lot, I mean a lot.

It took ten years.

Sorry to hear that...but it explains the blind spots.

[seemslikeadream]

From Andrew Collins...

"Redating the Sphinx

The Forbidden Legacy of a Fallen Race

Thanks for that, are you familiar with Graham Hancock and his series on the underwater ruins near Japan?

You're welcome. Thanks for the thread. I am familiar with the ruins near Japan through the documentary featuring Hancock. A strong case, as in the that of the Sphinx, for the existence pre-"civilization" civilizations.

I like that Handcock is doing this author of the month, more ideas more theories, it's a good thing.

I'll post his video, I love this one and have to watch it again right now, all 16 parts

Quest for Lost Civilization
http://www.disclose.tv/viewvideo/15881/ ... ock__1_16/

[Perelandra]

[OP ED]

OP ED, what is the source for the 150,000 year-old histories?

no, the number itself doesn't appear anywhere, and its only an approximation, though not particularly controversial. Since its "myth" it doesn't have to be taken into account whatsoever.

it is the result of basic addition and looking at the Sumerian Kings List, among other things [including the varying dates in the numerous copies of the creation myth] and appyling these numbers as they originally exist, that is, without the "modern" scientists' technique of "adjusting" the numbers to fit their Bible-based history of civilization.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_king_list

even the "adjusted" numbers have to be considered "myth" as they couldn't possibly be true...

"After the kingship descended from heaven, the kingship was in Eridug. In Eridug, Alulim became king; he ruled for 28800 years."

so no, i do not have specific references, but it isn't really all that controversial. i easily could've picked a much bigger number.
[millions of years even]

[those are the Human Kings only, and we weren't even Their second attempt at a viable slave race]

[seemslikeadream]

Thanks for posting the photos, note that the head is in proportion to the body, actually a little bigger