Forbidden History: Prehistoric Technologies, Extraterrestrial Intervention, and the Suppressed Origins of Civilization (38 page)

Striking a line from the vanishing point (3) and bringing it along the side of the rectangular shape, I became confident that I may have indeed discovered the vertical shaft that I had predicted would be there. Interestingly, the line in the floor (4) is also parallel to the walls, which indicates either that the floor is made of two blocks or that a groove is cut in the floor. In this enhanced image, the signs of staining on the floor lead from the vertical shaft end, which is also square with the walls. It appears that the second door is also notched in this area.

Because the chemical flowing into the Queen’s Chamber did not need to be a great torrent or even of the volume that a normal faucet would produce, replenishing the shaft with fluid would not require a large orifice. The notched corner as seen in the bottom right corner of the block would be all that was needed to maintain the fluid level. Moreover, if we look at the size of the vertical shaft behind the door by scale, it is only about one and a half inches wide and four inches long.

The exploration of the northern shaft and what was discovered at the end was predictable and, without any shadow of a doubt, vindicates the purpose for these shafts as outlined in
The Giza Power Plant
. The image of another door with copper fittings and the subtle difference between these fittings and those at the end of the northern shaft support the hypothesis regarding the chemicals used. The electrodes are affected by different chemicals a different way.

In the southern shaft, the action of the dilute hydrochloric acid eroded the copper over time. Because the upper part of the copper was covered with chemical for a shorter period of time than the lower part, as the fluid was always falling, the lower part of the copper was eroded more than the upper part. This resulted in a taper of the copper and the ultimate failure of the left electrode.

In the northern shaft we see a different effect. Because this shaft contained a hydrated metal, such as hydrated zinc, what we see is an electroplating of the left electrode. This is normal and predictable; considering that electricity flows from cathode (+) to anode (-), there would be a deposit of zinc on the anode. What we see in the photograph taken by the Pyramid Rover is a white substance on the left electrode only. There is no erosion on these electrodes, and the thickness of the metal is considerably less than on those in the southern shaft. The stained limestone is on the left and on top of the electrode. Studies on what causes this effect are still being made.

Though Egyptology is not considered to be a hard science, scientific standards should be employed when trying to explain this edifice. Arguments should follow the rules of evidence and conform to scientific principles. While Egyptologists may say the tomb theory is unassailable, my view has been that if the tomb theory cannot follow logical scientific arguments, and be subject to radical revision when new data emerges, then it fails.

These are the standards applied to alternate theorists, such as Hancock, Bauval, and myself, so we should expect no less from those who teach and support the accepted view. Moreover, the theory should be predictable. What was discovered behind Gantenbrink’s door, though not yet brought into full view, was not predicted by Egyptologists and does nothing to support the theory that this edifice was originally a tomb.

Scientific and social progress demands that we all be skeptics and question the accepted mores and theories that have been handed to us. Alternative views need to be discussed. Indeed, they should be welcomed by anyone who is serious about learning what flaws may exist with his or her own ideas. Egyptology should not be immune to these scientific precepts, though its orthodox protectors’ awkward attempt to force contradictory data to fit an unsupportable hypothesis gives little hope for change.

38
The Case for Advanced Technology in the Great Pyramid

What Does the Evidence Really Show about the Advancement of Its Builders?

Marshall Payn

One of the tragedies of life is the murder of a beautiful theory by a brutal gang of facts.

L
A
R
OCHEFOUCAULD

T
he Khufu (Cheops) pyramid defies how we depict ancient technology. Over two million limestone blocks rise to the height of a forty-story building. Each baseline exceeds two and a half football fields. Standing on top, an archer cannot clear the base with an arrow. All this comes from what was supposedly an agrarian society, forty-five hundred years ago.

And that’s not all. The precision and craftsmanship surpass our modern understanding. Occupying an area of thirteen acres, the entire bedrock base has been carved to less than an inch out of level. It is oriented within a tiny fraction of a degree from the cardinal points. Outer casing stones and inner granite blocks fit with such precision that a razor blade cannot be inserted between them. Blocks weighing as much as seventy tons (about what a railroad locomotive weighs) have been lifted to the height of a ten-story building and mated to the next block with wondrous precision.

How did they do these things? We don’t know. Just a few generations before Khufu, there
were
no pyramids. Where did the technology come from? We have no answers. Any method of construction suggested, to date, for this pyramid does not satisfy the accepted standards of technology. But the reality is that the pyramid is real, and regardless of how they built it, they built it. Egyptians built pyramids for another thousand years, but today most of those are unrecognizable rubble. Only the older ones are intact, which argues against the assumption of accrued knowledge. By whatever technological means these older ones were built, the Egyptians themselves somehow lost that technology.

More intriguing is why they were built in the first place. In spite of the fact that
no
body or funerary object—dating to the same time that the fourth-dynasty pyramids were built—has ever been found in any of them, orthodox Egyptology vehemently asserts that
all
pyramids are tombs and
only
tombs, built to house the bodies of pharaohs. Later pyramids had funerary connotations, but no bodies.

Egyptology’s explanation of grave robbers does not address the absence of any evidence of robbers and fails to explain how purported robbers could bypass the barriers constructed to prohibit intrusion. Perhaps funerary considerations introduced after the fourth dynasty were connected to the marked degeneration in construction quality. So let’s test the “tombs-only” conviction with just one of the pyramid’s unique design features.

The descending passage is roughly 350 feet long, of which about 150 feet is through masonry and another 200 feet is through bedrock. A century ago Sir Flinders Petrie, known as the granddaddy of Near East archeology, measured the descending passage. To show his adeptness for precision, he measured the pyramid’s perimeter by triangulation, as the base was covered with rubble. He calculated it to be 3,022.93 feet. Twenty-five years later the Egyptian government hired a professional surveyor after the rubble had been cleared away, and by traditional surveying techniques found it to be 3,023.14 feet. Petrie was off by 2.5 inches in 3,000 feet—off by 0.007%.

The straightness of the passage and the flatness of its ceiling and sides intrigued his penchant for precision. Because the floor had been so damaged, he didn’t consider it. The passage is about four feet high by three and a half feet wide and descends at an angle of 26 degrees. It is oriented due north, and today is aligned to Polaris. Petrie determined that “[t]he average error of straightness in the built part of the passage is only
¹
/
50
inch, an amazingly minute amount in a length of 150 feet. Including the whole passage, the error is under
¹
/
8
inch on the sides, and
³
/
10
inch on the roof, in the whole length of 350 feet.” How on earth did they construct this straightness, this optical precision on the scale of a football field? They didn’t have lasers. Walk through the steps of possible construction methods. How could such precision have been derived?

Answer: We don’t know. They used some sort of technology and/or tools we simply don’t know about. But what we do know, using our own technology, is that they could not have done this by accident.

And obviously, no matter how they
did
do it, it required a huge effort. Thus, one thing now is absolutely clear: They didn’t go through such extreme effort for precision in the passage to carry a body through one time. By any kind of rationale, this should put the tomb-only notion to rest.

This information has been available for a century. It is suggested that the tomb-only theory has persisted because the curriculum for Egyptology has not included fundamental sciences and mathematics, and therefore does not provide the foundation to evaluate such elementary technical matters.

So what, then, could be the pyramid’s purpose? There may be several, but a good bet for at least one use for the descending passage is as an observatory. Astronomy is the oldest discipline of science and the ancients are known to have been astute astronomers. Great deeds by the ancients were motivated by their respective religions, and their religions were derived from astronomy. To them, studying the heavens was not merely a scientific effort; their immortality depended on it.

Along with the measurable movements of the Sun, Moon, planets, and stars, many scholars recognize that the ancients knew about the precession of the equinoxes. Like a top that circles slowly while spinning rapidly around its central axis, Earth makes the slow circle of precession at about one degree every seventy-two years, or a complete circle once every 26,000 years, while spinning around its axis once every twenty-four hours. Usually attributed to Hipparchus, 150
B.C.E.
, the knowledge of this moving of the vault of the heavens is demonstrated by ancients far older than Hipparchus, and their religions reflected this knowledge.

Sighting from the bottom of the descending passage, the upper opening subtends an angle of just over half a degree. It would take a span of thirty-six years for an observer to follow any star close to the true pole (i.e., today’s Polaris) as it enters the opening from the left and continues to the right until it disappears. Thus, seventy-two years would equal one degree of precession and 360 times that would yield a precession cycle of just under 26,000 years.

It is well known that Egypt’s ancients had the ability to deal with such mathematics. So considering religion and astronomy, the precision in design of the descending chamber as an observatory seems more credible than the idea that it had been designed to carry a body through it once, and attributing such precision to happenstance.

Another purpose for the Khufu pyramid (it is the largest and thereby might well epitomize the ancients’ technology) could be to serve as a monument to preserve knowledge—something of a time capsule. A large number of scholars outside of Egyptology believe it preserves dimensions of our planet, whereby the base perimeter is equal to one half of a degree of equatorial longitude. Does it?

Perimeter 3,023.14 ft. = ½ minute
6,046.28 ft. = 1 minute
362,776.8 ft. = 1 degree
so 68.7077 miles = 1 degree
360 degrees = 24,734.78 miles

If you stand on the equator and walk due north for 3,023.14 feet, the theory is that you’ve walked one half of one minute of longitude. The earth’s longitude would then equal 24,735 miles. Satellite measurement is 24,860 miles, or a difference of 125 miles. This is accuracy of 99.5 percent. Egyptology calls this coincidence, and that is certainly possible. But if the theory has merit, then the only other dimension of a sphere, its radius, would have, as its counterpart, the pyramid’s height. If such proves out, the theory would indeed have merit. But does it?

The height of the Khufu pyramid was 480.7 feet. Various measurements differ minutely, but not enough to affect the theory. Using the formula above, 480.7 feet × 2 × 60 × 360 = 3,933 miles. This computes to a polar radius of the earth of 3,933 miles, which, compared to the satellite’s measure of 3,960 miles, yields a difference of 27 miles or an accuracy of 99.3 percent. Ninety-nine point five percent . . . 99.3%. The mathematics of engineering does not allow such accuracy to be dismissed as coincidence.

How could the ancient Egyptians have derived these measurements? Again, look to astronomy (
The Secrets of the Great Pyramid,
Peter Tompkins). There are many other features of the pyramid for which we have no explanations, so this knowledge is but one example of what they knew and what we’ve only known for a few hundred years. But there stands the pyramid.

Then comes the question of the pyramid as a scale of the earth’s dimensions: Why such a big scale? Why not a pyramid half the size—a dramatic reduction of work to attain and preserve the same information?

A hint comes from an unexpected discipline—mythology. The highly esteemed scholar Joseph Campbell, writing about myths of disparate cultures (Icelandic, Babylonian, Sumerian, Egyptian, and others, including biblical scripture) in his book
The Masks of God
—
Occidental Mythology,
found the number 43,200 or its direct multiple or derivative. In fact, he traced this number back to Neolithic times. This engendered in him what he called “ecstatic panic” in that the supposed independent reoccurrence of this number, he reasoned, represented some relationship to cosmic rhythm, perhaps even a universal constant. Remember the Khufu pyramid’s scale: 2 × 60 × 360 = 43,200! Professor Campbell’s ecstatic panic might have been too much for him had he known this. Could this number in some way have been used by the builders to determine the pyramid’s dimensions?

Bottom line: (1) The notion that the pyramids were only tombs is disproved. That they were tombs at all has
never
been proved, even though the younger ones, not the older ones, had funerary characteristics. (2) The ancients demonstrated technology far exceeding what’s been credited to them, far exceeding a simple mausoleum, reaching out with accuracy and methodology unexplained today.

Where did this technology come from? We don’t know. But they had it and then they lost it. And rising above the Giza plateau is the most massive monument to that loss, the great Khufu pyramid, the oldest and only survivor of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World.