List of Erroneous, Illogical and Fictitious Systems in Astrology

JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
david starling said:
Okay, I'm going with modern archeologists and their hard evidence.
The one thing modern science is good for is studying the material world.
Click to expand...
Siriusly :smile:
New research shows, that
some estimates based on carbon may have erred by thousands of years.
Since the rate of depletion has been accurately determined
half of any given amount of carbon 14 decays in 5,730 years
scientists can calculate the time elapsed since something died from its residual carbon 14.

ERRORS ARE FEARED IN CARBON DATING https://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/31/us/errors-are-feared-in-carbon-dating.html
 
Opal

Opal

Premium Member
JUPITERASC said:
Siriusly :smile:
New research shows, that
some estimates based on carbon may have erred by thousands of years.
Since the rate of depletion has been accurately determined
half of any given amount of carbon 14 decays in 5,730 years
scientists can calculate the time elapsed since something died from its residual carbon 14.

ERRORS ARE FEARED IN CARBON DATING https://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/31/us/errors-are-feared-in-carbon-dating.html
Click to expand...

😄 I agree with this too! 😄😄😄
 
R

rahu

Banned
david starling said:
They carbon-dated the material the Sphinx was fashioned from. If you use ancient stone to build your fireplace, does that make it an ancient fireplace, built by ancients? :biggrin:
Click to expand...



david you have several faults in your logic.
first off carbon dating can not used on stone past a few thousand years.
there is artifact called narmers palette that shows the unification of the two Egypt's by the first king of both lower and upper Egypt . this artifact is on one side a geological representation of Egypt. this artifact predates the age of pyramids by many centuries. on the back side there is a pyramid on the geological representation at near the delta and giza. so how could there be a pyramid noted when pyramids were not existent then?

the ancient Egyptians did not know how to make a pyramids with a slope of 51 degrees. all Egyptian pyramids have a slope of 43.5 degrees, except the Giza pyramids.
The bent pyramid was created at the same time as the collapsed pyramid of King Sneferu .
These pyramids had a slope of over 51 degrees. After the collapsed pyramid collapsed….. the bent pyramid ‘s slope was changed to 43.5 degree slope. The bent pyramid had sated with a slope of over 50 degrees but when the first pyramid collapsed the bent pyramids slope was change from over 50 degrees to 43.5 degrees.
There are no hieroglyphs in the giza pyramids so there no evidence that the Egyptians built the pyramids. These are the only Egyptian pyramids that have no hieroglyphs.
No sarcophagus was found in any of the pyramids, but there was fraud involved in the identification of the kings with the pyramids.
The only reference to Cheops is a stela in front of the sphinx in which he acknowledges that he cleared the sand away from the sphinx in return he was made king.
the geological fact is that on the sphinx there is evidence of a great amount of water erosion.
water erosion tends downward and wind erosion gives stratified levels of erosion./ the water erosion is severe.. thousands of years. but there has not been enough precipitation in the nile valley to cause this much erosions for over 10,000 years when the Sahara desert was an vast inland sea.

these are geological facts. the sphinx has to be over 10,000 at the very least.
of course 300 gallons of kerosene brought down a 100 story building so.....so any fraud can be pasted off.

and of course, there is the small problem that using modern technology, the pyramids could not have been built except maybe within the last 50 years of modern technology.,
rahu
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
rahu said:
david you have several faults in your logic.
first off carbon dating can not used on stone past a few thousand years.
there is artifact called narmers palette that shows the unification of the two Egypt's by the first king of both lower and upper Egypt . this artifact is on one side a geological representation of Egypt. this artifact predates the age of pyramids by many centuries. on the back side there is a pyramid on the geological representation at near the delta and giza. so how could there be a pyramid noted when pyramids were not existent then?

the ancient Egyptians did not know how to make a pyramids with a slope of 51 degrees. all Egyptian pyramids have a slope of 43.5 degrees, except the Giza pyramids.
The bent pyramid was created at the same time as the collapsed pyramid of King Sneferu .
These pyramids had a slope of over 51 degrees. After the collapsed pyramid collapsed….. the bent pyramid ‘s slope was changed to 43.5 degree slope. The bent pyramid had sated with a slope of over 50 degrees but when the first pyramid collapsed the bent pyramids slope was change from over 50 degrees to 43.5 degrees.
There are no hieroglyphs in the giza pyramids so there no evidence that the Egyptians built the pyramids. These are the only Egyptian pyramids that have no hieroglyphs.
No sarcophagus was found in any of the pyramids, but there was fraud involved in the identification of the kings with the pyramids.
The only reference to Cheops is a stela in front of the sphinx in which he acknowledges that he cleared the sand away from the sphinx in return he was made king.
the geological fact is that on the sphinx there is evidence of a great amount of water erosion.
water erosion tends downward and wind erosion gives stratified levels of erosion./ the water erosion is severe.. thousands of years. but there has not been enough precipitation in the nile valley to cause this much erosions for over 10,000 years when the Sahara desert was an vast inland sea.

these are geological facts. the sphinx has to be over 10,000 at the very least.
of course 300 gallons of kerosene brought down a 100 story building so.....so any fraud can be pasted off.

and of course, there is the small problem that using modern technology, the pyramids could not have been built except maybe within the last 50 years of modern technology.,
rahu
Click to expand...

Good evidence the pyramids at Giza were built using concrete, poured into plywood forms. No modern technology needed.
 
R

rahu

Banned
david starling said:
Good evidence the pyramids at Giza were built using concrete, poured into plywood forms. No modern technology needed.
Click to expand...

you totally off line, the material is the least of the problem.

the orientation of the axis, the nearly exact orientation of the sides of the pyramid. these are all archeological standards that could not have been built in modern times until the advent of laser's. the sides which extended over 400 yards were nearly perfectly aligned to a fraction of a inch. this is simply impossible to achieve with or without modern technology.

the mathematics of the pyramid are as much an enigma as the actual construction.

modern concrete has a life of just a little over 100 years before it decays. the romans that a better concrete that we do in modern times. the roman coliseum is nearly 2 thousand years old, some aqueducts are that age and still are functional. I have read the theory that the "Egyptians"used concrete but the quarries that match the rock used in the pyramids are known.

rahu
 
Last edited:
R

rahu

Banned
david starling said:
That's how they determined the age of the Sphinx material as being far older than the Egyptian civilization. So, maybe they got that wrong.
Click to expand...

again you reveal you don't know what you are talking about. stone can not be radiocarbon dated so this technique couldn't give a age of the sphinx or the pyramids
 
R

rahu

Banned
david starling said:
There are Egyptian records concerning the building. But, hey, why not say they were built by ETs or Atlantians? Way more esoteric, right!? :whistling:
Click to expand...

again you are mistaken. there are no records of the pyramids building. there are records of the period supposedly when the pyramid was built but these records are of the labors who built the other structures on the gaza plateu. we are not usually made aware that every square foot of land around and between the pyramids cover ancient tombs of nobles. the pyramids were sacred so nobles wanted to be buried among the pyramids. and therefore there were builder who lived at giza to work on these later tombs. but they did not build the pyramids.
rahu
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
rahu said:
you totally off line, the material is the least of the problem.

the orientation of the axis, the nearly exact orientation of the sides of the pyramid. these are all archeological standards that could not have been built in modern times until the advent of laser's. the sides which extended over 400 yards were nearly perfectly aligned to a fraction of a inch. this is simply impossible to achieve with out modern technology.

the mathematics of the pyramid are as much an enigma as the actual construction.

modern concrete has a life of just a little over 100 years before it decays. the romans that a better concrete that we do in modern times. the roman coliseum is nearly 2 thousand years old, some aqueducts are that age and still are functional. I have read the theory that the "Egyptians"used concrete but the quarries that match the rock used in the pyramids are known.

rahu
Click to expand...

My point of view is that people in past astrological Ages had abilities beyond our comprehension in our own Age. It really was a different world, not just a "primitive" time with less modern technology.
 
Last edited:
R

rahu

Banned
passiflora said:
Thanks to all of you esp. Opal and david starling for this discussion! I wonder if Velikovsky was familiar with any non-monotheistic scriptures? Anyway his work sounds very interesting psychologically.
This book sounds fun:
Baillie, Mike (1999). Exodus to Arthur: Catastrophic Encounters with Comets
Click to expand...

velikovsky's father was a eminent Talmudist and there are books older than the torah. velikovsky believed that true monotheism did not come into being until the reign of king Hezekiah

worlds in collision by velikovsky is the source book that these other collision theorists write from.
rahu
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
rahu said:
velikovsky's father was a eminent Talmudist and there are books older than the torah. velikovsky believed that true monotheism did not come into being until the reign of king Hezekiah

worlds in collision by velikovsky is the source book that these other collision theorists write from.
rahu
Click to expand...

Baillie uses evidence from tree-rings to correlate with disasters to human civilization.
 
Opal

Opal

Premium Member
I am trying to locate a video that I watched years ago, maybe on the Discovery or History channel. Some guy was looking at a ancient children's tool kit. There was a tool that no one knew what it was for. He looked at it and had a Eureka moment.

I have tried, and will try to find the video, but shy of that I will try to describe it.

Picture a solid wheel made of stone. For my ease, we will make it 3 feet thick and wide.

Now make a two foot square in the center of the circle.

From the surface of the square draw a line out to the edge of the circle.

Repeat with all four sides of the square.

Now you should have four separate sort of sail looking shapes surrounding the square.

On the 3 foot wide surface of the wheel, there is two grooves that go around the circumference of the wheel, placed 1 foot in on each side.

Now ropes can be placed in these grooves, and two men can easily maneuver a large weighty rock in the center, rather quickly too.

The video shows the test of the theory. I was impressed. It took it to a labour of love, instead of being slaves being whipped and abused to create the masterpieces lost in the time of the ages. :biggrin:

I'll see if I can locate the video. It's better than my telling of it.:pouty:
 
Opal

Opal

Premium Member
There is always a cornerstone located in the North East corner of every ancient building so that we can tell where North East exactly was at the time of the creation of the building.
 
Top