I WAS RIGHT finger-pointing-down-animation-gif

when in earlier posts I murmured that the wildly enthusiastic Dr Zahi Hawass was being too emphatic (and a bit presumptuous) when he kept/keeps identifying with the ‘ancient Egyptians’?

(CNN)Ancient Egyptians and their modern counterparts share less in common than you might think. That is, at least genetically, a team of scientists have found.

Researchers from the University of Tuebingen and the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History in Jena, both in Germany, have decoded the genome of ancient Egyptians for the first time, with unexpected results

Publishing its findings in Nature Communications, the study concluded that preserved remains found in Abusir-el Meleq, Middle Egypt, were closest genetic relatives of Neolithic and Bronze Age populations from the Near East, Anatolia and Eastern Mediterranean Europeans.

Modern Egyptians, by comparison, share much more DNA with sub-Saharan populations.

The findings have turned years of theory on its head, causing Egyptologists to re-evaluate the region’s history while unlocking new tools for scientists working in the field …



I SAY AGAIN    buitre162.gif

that although Hawass calls the people who built the pyramids (and other such stuff) ‘Egyptians’ he may be desperately cashing in on someone else’s legacy (and glory)~?


simply living there doesn’t make you one of ‘them’. Never did, never shall—even if you do hold the passport. (How many American citizens were rounded up and popped into concentration camps in WW2—for having Japanese ancestry?)


a lot of stuff about the ancient Middle East but in the course of quite extensive readings have become a ‘Pyramid nutter’. If you have even the slightest inclination you might be stirred by reading about the GP of Giza, the Serapeum, the temple of Abydos, the uncompleted obelisk and many other such. Let’s leave those fanciful ‘space aliens’ out of it, and ask “How?” rather than just accepting that they are there. (Ask ‘who’ and ‘when’ while you’re at it.)

Or, if you listen to professionals like Hawass (and any others who’ve put in the time and distance to earn the degrees) you might like to carry one of these with you—


—and keep it handy at all times. History, it is said, it written by the victors … and the victor is the guy in possession of the field.

Holding turf doesn’t necessarily make you right …



13 thoughts on “PERHAPS …

    1. Discuss it, no. I think (memory) that we’re referring to Davidovitz (or something similar?).

      His notions (about ancient binding-cements) seem spot on, but ‘casting the blocks in situ’ (or even in situ casting) just don’t ring my bell.

      I often state that the blocks, as large as they are, mainly look like builder’s rubble, taken up and dumped as infill.
      Only the casing (what’s left of it) and the inner linings are precise.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Ark: when I say ‘rubble’ I don’t mean literally. I mean that compared with the precision of other stones, the layers/levels/courses do look like ‘rubble’. Just roughly hacked out and shoved up there (by whatever means).

      Liked by 2 people

  1. OK, call me clueless and out to lunch but what are you trying to say here. Other than the people living there now might not have been the people who were occupying the space centuries ago? What time frame, where did the originals go, why did the invaders want the place and why did they not use the fancy looking big buildings for their own designs. Speaking of that , what are those big things for. ??? Hun? Oh and so if I understand you and Ark above correctly you think the outer and inner block layers are precision fit but the insides of the blocks is rubble and mortar mix? Be well. Hugs


    1. It’s a long and disputatious story that goes waaaay back, Scottie.
      In essence Hawass represents the Establishment, which claims that the Giza pyramids were built by Egyptian rulers about four thousand years ago—but although theories abound, nobody knows how they were built.

      The lunatic fringe (folks like me) believe that they may well be one helluva lot older than that … but no-one can prove how old, or when. Bugger …

      The Great Pyramid has some impressive statistics, estimated two and a third millions (I’ll say that again: millions) of stone blocks averaging about two and a bit tons each. Each, to a height of four hundred and umpty* feet (top is missing, dammit).
      Inside some impressive chambers that are lined and roofed over with blocks of granite of about seventy tons each … you should really have a wee look; and when you think that until recently The Establishment claimed that they were built by herds of ignorant guys (slaves) dragging stones on rollers it makes the old gagging reflex kick in.

      Hawass is very firmly of The Establishment and stifles any research that may disprove his beliefs; or show the Egyptians-as-builders in a poor light. He is (or was, I lose track) the guy to whom wannabe researchers must make supplication so nothing will change. (You could do worse than Google the name ‘Gantenbrink’ as a starting point … ol’ Rudolph had his run-ins with Zahi.)

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Hello Argus. You realize you just gave me a homework assignment that will take up the better part of two days and limit my already failing attempt to get to email and blogs I like. I did look up the name and got the upuaut project. I have one question so far. How do they pronounce those horribly spelled names? OK I did see a documentary years ago where they sent a probe down a shaft, and found a tiny block like door or closed window. It had what appeared two spikes sticking out of it that may have been handles. IF so how and why. They were going to try some more but I never heard any more about it. The fat guy who is in charge of the egyptian antiquities says the builders were cherished workers, not slaves. So my friend, as I have not studied the data around the big things there, who and how do you think they were made? Thanks. Off to more comments and then….my homework. Hugs

        Liked by 1 person

      2. OK hot dang. I have watched two youtube videos of the robots exploring the shafts. One I had seen as I told you and ended at that “door”. OK now there are a ton of videos on YouTube about the shafts and secrets and lots of woo. I want good science. Any suggestions on ones to watch. Thanks for the info on this, it is a fascinating subject. I am loving learning of it. Hugs


      3. You won’t get good science until all the contenders can have their say. Which means proper open access—not to every man and his dog, but to reasonable people who will take due cares.

        So who defines ‘reasonable’? Good ol’ Hawass …

        Liked by 1 person

      4. Don’t go there, Scottie—it’s a subject that if you get hooked will lead you all over the world and completely rewrite your world view.

        As far as I can tell Upuaut is pronounced something like ‘wepwooet’ (but don’t quote me on that).

        In summary: no-one knows when the GP of E was built or who by. Theories abound, most of which smash headlong into even the simplest knowledge of human nature and some of which are fanciful (space aliens? Aaaaaawe, why not~?).

        Hawass want the GP to be ‘Egyptian’. He is (or was?) in a position to defend that view against all comers because he is/was the person in charge. Easy peasy.

        There are (quoted) still some unrecovered artefacts in the GP, out of reach. Some were recovered earlier by archaeologists and sent to the Brit Museum where some were ‘lost’ (thers merely misplaced for generations). (Good fodder for us CTs~!)

        But we are told there is still a wooden stick/pole up one of the shafts that perhaps could be carbon dated—but when Gantenbrink offered to recover it he was promptly banned from the site. (We Conspiracy Theorists have a real ball with this stuff, I tell you~!)

        On the construction of it—why not a few dozen/score/hundreds/thousands of slaves dragging those wee blocks? How else do you fill in a farmer’s off-season?
        Some say the priests had magic ways of floating the blocks into place. I like that, it’s fun.
        Others suggest that the blocks were floated up to position by the builders, having built tubes up the sides filled with water and attaching flotation devices to each block which is then popped in via an airlock and floated to higher levels. They even show wee models of their system on u-toob to show how very feasible the idea is … (I loooove a wee bit of lateral thought).

        One theory gaining traction is that the blocks were dragged up internal ramps, ‘spiralling’ up the outside but just inside the outside.
        Two million three hundred thousand two-plus ton blocks; I love it! (And all the seventy ton ones, waaaaaay up inside—they were strong, them slaves, I tell you. (Oops, them workers … current thinking has them as not slaves.)

        It’s a long and involved topic, Scottie. Don’t go there … and don’t even think of querying The Sphinx. Brrrrr … Dr Robert Schoch slipped them a fish* on that one at a time when the current ‘thinking’ was that the Sphinx was made by Khafre in his own image …

        * Naval expression for ‘torpedoed’.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Oh tell me about the Sphinx……Please. I love that thing. It is in several of my video games. As for the Pyramides. I love learning. I love science. I love something new. I hate when politics, the need to save face, need to prove a point, when all that crap gets in the way of real science and answering questions it hurts all of us. We could learn so much that if we wait too long it will be too late. Oh well. Thanks for sharing what you did. What do you think the “doors” are. Why would they be there? Why we are on it have you read any other science info on the oceans or other places you want to share. Be happy and well. Hugs

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Gantenbrink’s ‘door’ appears to me to be a simple purpose-made blockage. Someone went to an awesome amount of bother to make the shaft and then block it…

      We are told it is a portcullis door, which means lowered into place. So the means to lower it must be above it. Intriguing thought.

      We are told that the two copper/bronze (?) things are ‘handles’. This doesn’t ring true with me—but copper is an excellent electrical conductor. I’d like to see the results of the electrical continuity tests they (surely!) must have carried out~?

      Nobody knows the purposes of the shafts but theories abound. The most logical is also the least acceptable: ventilation.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. There’s a rich and abundant literature on the topic(s), Scottie. Stay very wary of Von Daniken (although he does raise some good issues).

      I’m ploughing through Hapgood’s ‘Maps of The Ancient Sea Kings’ right now; dry, dusty, involved. He had a wacky theory that the crust of the Earth may have slipped at one time. But given the oral and other traditions, how wacky, really?

      Everywhere you look you will find gems and much rubbish. Try taking a look at Tiahuanaco (aka Tiwanaku); especially ponder how ‘they’ did these things—in places quite apart. South America is a real doozy …

      A good start is Graham Hancock. He has a substantial presence in the literature and on u-toob; not everyone’s cup of tea but he at least has been there and done that; and admits when he just doesn’t know. (Bloody amateur, just out to sell his books, no?)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s