> Strona gwna > Artyku³y
T³umacz Strony/Translator Site
Kalendarz
Maj 2017
P W C P S N
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31
ARTYKU£Y - ARTICLES Ab ovo usque ad mala
Nostradamus
MONDE UNIVERS CRÉATION
Materia?y nades?ane
do redakcji portalu
redakcja portalu nie
ponosi odpowiedzialnosci
za nadeslane materia?y




Artyku? pilotuj?cy ksi??k? Watykan Zdemaskowany - Papie? musi umrzec



Afera Banco Ambrosiano



Koniec ery ryb cz.1-tajemnicza wiedza majów
Koniec ery ryb cz.2- Naukowcy dowodza

 

Pedofilia i Satanizm... cz1     
Pedofilia i Satanizm...cz2
  
 


NOSTRADAMUS VATINICIA CODE 





NOSTRADAMUS VATINICIA CODE [ ENG ]



Chro?my nasze dzieci -
Plaga spo?ecze?stwa -
Pedofilia


Prof. Adam Gierek: S?o?ce zniszczy Ziemi?!
 
 

Ks. Piotr Natanek oskar?a Watykan




Afery za Spi?ow? bram?

 

The theory that refers to the time of the construction of the Sphinx and the pyramids in Giza
Data 05/03/2013 00:51  Autor Andrzej_Struski  Klikni 1836  Jzyk Global
 

 How many blocks on the pyramid could have been really put in  20 years time by means of four ramps used for their transport?

 

 

The theory that refers to the time of the construction of the Sphinx and the pyramids in Giza.

The pyramids and the Sphinx older that the civilization of Egypt.

 

 

In order to build the great pyramid in Giza about two million and a three hundred thousand stone blocks were used.  It was necessary to put each day 330 stone blocks in order to deliver and put in a proper place of the construction of the pyramid of Cheops such a number of the stone blocks. The technique of the construction of the pyramids that was described by the archaeologists and researchers consisted in the use of the loading platforms heaped up from sand on which the stone blocks were pulled up. Even if there had been used four loading platforms they would secure only one-eighth of the necessary time for the setting up of two millions and three hundred thousand of the stone blocks. In addition, the setting up of the four loading platforms on the higher levels of  the installation cannot be done from the organisational point of view. If there had been four loading platforms, then, on each of them, every nine minutes one stone block should have been transported. One block every hour – such a frequency of transport on the loading platform is to be accepted, however, if one block is transported every hour and not every nine minutes the time of the process of the construction is seven times longer. Thus, the process of the construction must have taken not twenty years but one hundred and forty years.

 

There are proofs discovered in the archaeological research which unequivocally define the time of the works that were done during the construction of the pyramids. The great pyramid in Giza was constructed at the time of the reign of the pharaoh Cheops. The discovered remains indicate that huge powers and means were used, there were organised large-scale activities and on the basis of this a statement was accepted which defines the time of the construction of the great pyramid.

 

Facts are facts and logic says something completely different. One can count it in a simple way that in such a short time  (twenty years of the reign of the pharaoh Cheops) it was not possible to put two and a half million of the stone blocks on the pyramid of Cheops. However, the great pyramid does exist and this fact cannot be omitted. The archaeological research proves that the pyramid of Cheops was being built at the time of this pharaoh' s life. A fact against a fact. On the one hand there is a sevenfold lack of time to put all the blocks of the pyramid on the other hand at that time the stone blocks were being put on this pyramid. There are proofs that they were transported and worked and there are proofs that they were being put on the pyramid.

But are there  proofs that all the blocks of the great pyramid were put on the pyramid at the time of the reign of the Pharaoh Cheops?

 

How many blocks could have been in fact put on the pyramid in the course of twenty years if for their transport four loading platforms were used?

Let us assume that the works were going on for the whole time that is for  8200 days in the course of twenty years. Each day during the time of twelve hours (the night hours should not be taken into account) 48 blocks were put. In the course of the time of 8200 days the constructors were able to put almost 400.000 blocks.

Such an assumption is very optimistic and it could have been successful only then when each hour on every one of the platforms one block was transported. Such an amount did not have to be put at all and a lot of time could have been spent on the works connected with putting the white polished coat  made from limestone on the whole surface of the pyramid. The existence of such a coat has been proved and there still are on the  Chefren's pyramid the remains of such a coat.

 

In the context of twenty years of the time of the works at the great pyramid one may safely assume an assumption that the constructors put far less than 400.000 blocks. And maybe only the outer layers were put, for some of the reasons that were important at that time?

 

The explanation of this problematic issue is possible if we look at the second in terms of the size pyramid in Giza. The pyramid of Chefren has a different appearance and it is connected with the fact that some amount of the stone blocks in its upper part were taken down.

 

 

 

On the photo that depicts the picture of the side wall of the pyramid of Chefren one can see a specific thing. From under the layer of shapeless blocks of rock that are visible on the surface of both pyramids, here on the pyramid of Chefren one can see a few rows of stone blocks that look totally different than the ones in the outer layers.

This uncovered strip shows a different constructional structure of the stone blocks. The rows of the blocks show a great precision of work. All blocks look as if they were of an identical size, differently than those ones by which they were covered and which once were taken down of this pyramid.

 

The uncovered strip of a several dozen of rows shows us a different construction of the pyramid of Chefren that exists  deep inside which was covered by the additional layers of stone blocks. What is visible here are two technical cultures. The blocks put in the outer layers have different size,those deep inside all have similar size.

 

The appearance of the pyramid that is visible from under the layers of the not very precise coat shows a different construction. What we can see in the uncovered strip is a regular construction of a step pyramid that was made in a precise way. The stone blocks of identical size show the harmony of the construction. One has an impression as if the parameters of the steps were synchronised with the size and shape of the whole pyramid not visible now.

 

One can see at first sight that what is presented here are two styles and different needs:

The first style that is visible in the stepped construction shows a pyramid which can be a tool for the intensification of sound. The successive layers of the stone blocks are proportionally smaller in the circumference, then the identical height of each layer synchronises the length of the sound wave, cumulating sound in the smaller mass of each successive layer. One may assume a theory that the unknown constructors of the pyramid of Chefren wanted to send or to receive the sound information by means of the pyramid or by means of both of the pyramids.

 

The second style that is visible on the surface of the pyramid of Chefren shows us the remains after a smooth and glistening surface of the pyramid. There is not much left from the white limestone coating which covered both of the pyramids, only the faded remains call to mind the splendour from the times of the pharaoh Cheops. The cultural stream that was in force in the ancient Egypt

was characterised by colourful adornments and the outer appearance of the structure was characterised by a finish that was done with a great reverence. The  pharaoh Cheops decided to adjust one of the already existing step pyramids for the tomb. However its appearance did not fit to the trend that was in force in the construction industry. He decided to change the outer appearance of the pyramid, at the same time a huge work involved  authenticated the majesty of the king's tomb. The tomb that was made by the nation and that was built by means of an adequate effort so that the king could be satisfied. Such a project required a huge constructional undertaking. The covering of the pyramid with a few layers of stone blocks was the project that was understood by the archaeologists as the process of the construction of the whole structure. In this case the time of one hundred and forty years could be shortened to twenty years. If the organisation was very good twenty years of intense work was enough to cover the whole surface of the pyramid. Such a theory is the explanation of one  puzzle which consisted in the question how ever did the builders manage to put in the course of twenty years two and a half million of stone blocks ? Yet it does not explain a different puzzle, who built the step pyramids and when were they constructed ?

 

Here, the specific appearance of the surface of the rocky figure of the Sphinx may succour us as regards the time of their construction. There are on the Sphinx the effects of the erosion of the rock in the form of the grooves caused by water and the cavities caused by the sand that was being carried by the blowing wind.

 

The Sphinx is older than our civilization.

How many millenia has the sculpture of the Sphinx stood in Giza?

 


 

 

The fundamental thesis of John West and Robert Schoch from Boston University who carried out the geological research :

“it is the water corrosion that left the signs on the Sphinx and it was rainwater.”

 

“Yes, it is the water corrosion that leaves such signs on the rocks”, however the thesis of John West and Robert Schoch from Boston University, which in words: „and it was rainwater”, is not a complete thesis and it is simply wrong in its fundamental part. In the natural conditions the rainwater carves rock and it creates the grooves in the places where the currents of the water that is gathered are flowing during the rainfalls. In the photo that is presented on the right one can see vertical grooves and they were made by the rainwater during the rainfalls. Then, what is visible on both photographs are the signs of erosion of the rock from which the Sphinx was carved which are much deeper (than those made by the rainwater). They are visible as the horizontal very deep grooves. They are characteristic of the grooves that are created by water that is located in a  water reservoir for example of sea. Could it have been a water reservoir in which gathered the rain waters from the rainfalls that previously were carving the vertical grooves?

 

What is visible here is a specific sequence of this how the grooves were coming into being, on the photo on the right the vertical grooves that are visible exist on the horizontal form that had been carved before. If one assumes a thesis that both the horizontal as well as the vertical grooves came into being from the causes of the activity of the rainwater, then it is necessary to explain a few inaccuracies.

 

1/ There must have been a water reservoir so that the water from this reservoir could have caused the erosion in the layers of the weakened binding material of the rock. This is how the first horizontal groove from the bottom could have come into being.

 

2/ When the level of water in the reservoir has dropped what caused the coming into being of the bottom groove, a period of sufficiently intense rainfalls should have come into being so that the vertical grooves could have come into being on the first horizontal groove.

 

3/ Such a cycle of events must have been repeated as many times as there are horizontal grooves on the figure of the Sphinx.

 

These three conditions illustrate different inaccuracies:

 

1/ The vertical grooves made by rainwater  are on all horizontal grooves and those that are on the bottom horizontal layer are the deepest.

 

2/ In the left photo the effects of the wind erosion are visible where the sand carried by the wind polished the face of the horizontal grooves and of the vertical grooves that are on them, that is to say those made by rain.

 

 

 

In the photo that presents the head of the Sphinx one can see a layer of of the coat that is untouched by water or wind erosion. The lack of this layer visible here is the result of a mechanical damage that was most probably done by a man.

 

Summing up, it is necessary to define  the course of the events in time that were the causes of the erosion and mechanical damage on the figure of the Sphinx.

 

1/ The influences which were the cause of the coming into being of many horizontal layers could have come into being in the successive following each other levels of water that dropped in the reservoir that reached up to the figure of the Sphinx.

 

2/ Then, the vertical grooves could have come into being in one rain period, the premise that indicates such thesis is the character of the grooves caused by rain on all the levels. This premise is the depth of the vertical grooves which increases on the successive  (viewing it down) horizontal grooves. Such a premise says that the sum of the influencing water of each water-course increases when such water-courses join.

 

3/ There are the effects of the wind erosion on these horizontal grooves which are situated the highest, the sand particles that were being carried by the wind were at the same time polishing both kinds of the already existing grooves made by water. The wind could have influenced in such a way only both kinds of the grooves caused by water that had already existed. The wind erosion is the last time period which changed the appearance of the figure of the Sphinx.

 

4/ The influence of the wind erosion is not identical on the whole area that is accessible  for the wind on the figure of the Sphinx. The surface of the figure that must have been accessible for the wind for the longest time that is the head does not show any changes which are characteristic for the erosion that is caused by sand carried by wind.

 

5/ The rainwater that was flowing down the head of the Sphinx did not cause any erosion on its surface. In this premise there is a proof of the fact that it was not possible for the rainwater to cause the erosion in the coat of the Sphinx if the water from the water reservoir had not influenced it before. Then, if there was the rainwater in the water reservoir (the water reservoir would have been freshwater) also such water would not cause erosion in the coat situated on the figure of the Sphinx. 

 

To sum up, it was saltwater that must have been in the water reservoir, the sea salt could penetrate the coat of the Sphinx and it could make the influence of the rainwater and of the wind possible.

 

The conclusion;

The Sphinx was in that place when here up to its figure reached the shores of some sea or ocean.

 

Viewing the known periods of the occurrence of the climatic changes we may assume that the last present period of drought lasts from about 6 to 7 thousand years. There are some indications which say that in this region of Africa in the period that precedes the present period of the desert climate there was a very humid climate there with huge amount of the rainfalls.

 

However there comes to mind a very important question: In which climatic period the sea reached up to the foot of the Sphinx?

Taking into account the time from   6 to 7 thousand years of the desert climate, then one should assume a similar time period for the rainy climate. In the result of such assumptions we may assume  that about 11 to 12 thousand years ago there was no sea here. Looking further back, we may assume   that for the period of time of many thousand years the sea reached up to the foot of the Sphinx,  while washing its figure it was carving the local rock around the rocky syncline in which the Sphinx was hewn out. The proof is visible in the photo which shows the horizontal grooves both on the figure of the sculpture of the Sphinx and on the shores of the rocky syncline.

 

One should assume that the sea waters drew back from the region of Giza to the present form of the Mediterranean sea about 11 to 12 thousand years ago.  However, we do not know the time how long the sea waters were washing the feet of the Sphinx carving at the same time all the horizontal grooves.

 

Viewing logically the climatic changes in a global scale one should assume the global causes which are essential for such changes. The first logical premise and at the same time the premise that has the features of the indications which point to the global changes in the climate of the Earth is the set of the desert period and the humid period which all in all indicate one more bigger climatic cycle which closes within the time of about 12 thousand years.

 

In such a super global time of the climatic changes we may distinguish a humid and dry period, but can we at the same time assume the changes of the coming into being of the sea and its withdrawal?

It will be difficult to find logical premises which are sufficient enough in order to justify this thesis.

 

In conclusion, one may say that there are on Earth climatic periods which are characterised by cyclic changes in the scale of many thousands of years.

Two cycles, a dry one and a humid one may be the component elements of one super global cycle. Super global cycles may or even should have their own time cycle and some cause of such changes. In such climatic cycles the seas may come into being and they may draw back to other forms of land.

 

In the context of all these causes, premises and effects one may assume that during the period of one super global cycle – for about 12 thousand years in the region of the Pyramids and the Sphinx there were two global climatic cycles.

-         the cycle of a dry climate that lasts today.

 

-         the past period of a humid climate, that ended about 6 thousand years ago.

 

Previously in this region of the planet there was a super global cycle during the time of which for 12 thousand years the Sphinx was washed by the sea waves.

 

The next very important question:

When was the Sphinx carved in the rock on which it stands?

The answer that in the period when the sea was up to its figure and when the whole rocky syncline was filled with water would be rather illogical.

 

It would be difficult for the creators of the Sphinx to work under the surface of the water, all the more that in the first period of the existence of the sea here its surface was high and was up to the head of the Sphinx. In the course of years the sea lowered its water-level what is visible on the successive levels of the grooves.

 

 

 

The assumption of the thesis that these works must have been done by the civilization that had an adequately developed technology and a free access to the terrain where the works were carried out seems to be a logical explanation of the issue that refers to  the time of the construction of the pyramids and the sculpture of the Sphinx. It could not have been the time of the occurrence of the two last climatic super cycles thus the time of the last  24 thousand years.

One may assume that these works were done at the end of the third counting it back climatic super global cycle when in this region the climate was dry and the civilization that had an adequate technology developed here.

 

 

 

The photo that presents the figure of the Sphinx and the rocky syncline that surrounds it with the horizontal grooves visible on them.

 

 
 

The satellite photo shows the region of Giza as a scenery characteristic  of a sea-shore.

 

 

 

The satellite photo of a set of the monuments in Giza situated on a elevation above the depression which brings to mind a typical structure of the bottom of the sea and sea-shore.

 
21.06.2005.A.D.

Andrzej Struski de Merowing
cooperation MMagdalenaStruska de Merowing

All Rights Reserved. Copying, distribution only by the permission of the author of the text and giving the link to the original site of the authors.