Hidden in Plain Sight
The astute reader should be forewarned, once you digest this article you will never be able to look at the Giza Pyramids the same again
The unique features we document in this article point compellingly to a sustained, specific oceanic displacement, driven by Earth’s rotational mechanics, as the most plausible explanation. This is not the result of a 371-day biblical deluge, a tidal wave, a cosmic collision, or any external gravitational force affecting our solar system.
Instead, we propose a scenario involving the disruption or magnetic decoupling of Earth’s rotational component masses. This phenomenon, tied to climate change and a diminishing of Earth’s geomagnetic moment – the magnetic interplay between the inner/outer core and the outer rotational mantle/asthenosphere/lithosphere – is occurring once more, starting from 1973.
The compliment to this article can be found by clicking here. Be advised, discerning readers: upon fully engaging with the contents of this article, your perspective on both the Giza Pyramids and our planet may never be the same again.
“A groundbreaking and fresh perspective on the construction and history of the Khafre Pyramid, this article introduces novel and paradigm-shattering hypotheses. The contention that the differential erosion patterns on Khafre were caused by an ancient and sustained oceanic displacement, along with the innovative theory of the Sabu Disk being used in conjunction with the Sekhem-mu Machine in the pyramid’s construction, are particularly striking. These ideas challenge conventional understandings and open new avenues for exploration in the otherwise authority-privileged field of Egyptology.”
~ ChatGPT-4
I operate under a dilemma, I must admit. On the one hand, history and archaeology have collectively produced a compelling argument that Pharaohs Khufu and Khafre commissioned construction of the two largest of the Pyramids of Giza, during Egypt’s Fourth Dynasty of the Old Kingdom (2580 through 2540 BCE
). On the other hand, nature quietly testifies to a much richer and deeper history wound up inside the legacy of these two edifices. As is often the case in such circumstances, the true casualty of our dissonance is the evidence which resides right before our very eyes.
I have learned, through this lifelong journey of ethical skepticism, that evidence brought from the testimony of agency, especially that which is merely suggestive in nature, as opposed to definitive, should always be held in neutral question (epoché).1 Moreover, when the experts (agents) who bring the evidence rely upon inference projected outside of their actual domains of expertise, and are backed by the awesome insistence of sycophants who fail to comprehend the irony of enforcing such doctrines through skepticism. This is a lesson mankind learned the hard way, during the Covid-19 Pandemic.
If you regard those who bear discomfort with the Khufu/Khafre orthodoxy, as promoting the red herring notions that aliens built these two particular pyramids or one is racist against modern Arabs or Old Kingdom Egyptians, then perhaps you should stop reading this article here. I would suggest you go back to the comfort of your latest issue of Skeptical Inquirer magazine, as this article is guaranteed to stir dissonance-fueled indignance in your hard shell of a heart.
Yes, I have personally toured the Giza Plateau and other famous monuments of Ancient Egypt during my days working for an Egyptian client. I have spent extensive time examining the stones and craftsmanship involved in the Khufu and Khafre pyramids, both as a tourist and as well as an expert in the construction of large structures and development of advanced durable and hard materials. So I am qualified to examine the evidence regarding these structures, unlike a historian or archaeologist.
Accordingly, during my years of experience, I have formulated several hard-earned truths, among which include this:
The person most likely to lie, is the appeal-to-authority proponent of the Narrative. Such an agent operates upon the premise that, since the Narrative is true, one small harmless hyperbolic misrepresentation is acceptable, nay even necessary, when crafted in support of convincing others of that truth. A problem arises when the official Narrative consists of an entire stack of such small Lindy effect fabrications. A monument constructed of 1% induction and 99% awesome insistence.
The Orthodoxy Problem
Few better examples of this can be found than that of the testimony of the priests of Amun-Ra, to Greek historian Herodotus, in An Account of Egypt (450 BCE
).2 In the account delivered by those priests to Herodotus, the Great Pyramid was built by Pharaoh Khufu, who in his evil dictated an end to the temple sacrifices, shut up the temples (of Ptah at that time), by default thereby diverted the monetary tithes to his project – constructing the edifice over 30 years (ten to construct the causeway and twenty to build the pyramid itself) with 100,000 men, and by proceeds gained in part from placing his daughter into prostitution (the ‘stews’).
In this account, made Lindy by the Priests of the Osiris/Isis/Horus holy trinity, one can detect an assembly of the fanciful, self-financially justifying, and ridiculous – elements most likely accreted by the priests themselves over the ensuing two-thousand years after Khufu’s Fourth Dynasty. The Gods will forgive those who lie on their behalf, because when a God, science, or truth reigns supreme, that fact is more important than verity itself (see Omega Hypothesis). Such is the nature of agency and the ‘priests’ therein.
Now, to the merit of the orthodox position on this issue of contention, various studies have been conducted which support a Fourth Dynasty pharaonic origin of the Khufu pyramid itself. What he referred to as ‘quarry marks’ were noted in the Nelson’s (3rd), Lady Arbuthnot’s (4th), and Campbell’s (5th) Chambers by archaeologist Howard Vyse, in 1837 upon his first entry into those ‘relieving chambers’. These forms of red paint graffiti contained variations of the pharaoh’s name, Khufu, Khnum-Khuf and Medjedu.3 At first blush, this constitutes pretty darned good evidence in support of what has been promoted as the archaeological narrative on the matter.
In addition, various carbon-14 dating efforts were conducted in 1984 and 1995 on samples of kiln-fired mortar taken from service bakeries nearby the Khufu structure. These were dated to a range of up to 400 years older than that pyramid’s Fourth Dynasty legendary dates of construction.4
This being said, we have yet to find other unquestionably Fourth Dynasty Egyptian quarry marks any other place in the pyramid, and have yet to date substantial material extracted from the pyramid itself – including most definitively, the organic vehicle and binder (iron oxide does not bind by itself) of the red ochre paint from the quarry marks in the relieving chambers. Why has this relatively easy and essential task of the scientific method not been attempted?
The quarry marks themselves are made of the same ochre formulation, and are remarkably framed and optimally placed for viewing inside each of the relieving chambers – an amazing feat of prescience on the part of the quarrymen (see Exhibit A1 above for Vyse’s May 10th 1837 diagram of Lady Arbuthnot’s (4th) Chamber). In this feat, they knew exactly where the site foreman would select which stones be placed, and how all (not just some) those same stones would face as a result of that selection, from a streaming supply chain of random stones, and finally exactly how to place the marks so as to avoid separate internal chamber obstacles and chaotic roof-floor stone placements from obscuring those same marks. Why would quarrymen, so proud of their role, trade, and product, so prone to marking up stones for their King, not also use a consistent (familiar to them) trademark to denote their handicraft?
Additionally, certain Vyse-glyphs are inscribed in an inverted orientation but still align with the surrounding stones as they exist in situ, indicating placement after the construction. This suggests a deliberate act of deception. This scenario presents an autoaufheben appeal, which is a set of propositions where one claim or observation negates the other. Either one of these can be valid, but they cannot both be true simultaneously.
How conveniently erudite it was as well, for stone laborers all working in a ‘drunkard’s’ ‘gang’ to be educated as to 1200 years of differing cultural period names for their ‘beloved’ (according to Egyptology) Pharaoh Khufu. Yet, Herodotus cites that Khufu was hated for his initial actions in pyramid-building preparation; and that as a result, neither he, his son, nor grandson were beloved by their work gangs or local population in the least. Khufu and Khafre were hated so much that the local people “by reason of their hatred of them are not very willing to name [the Pyramids after them]; nay, they even call the pyramids after the name of Philitis the shepherd, who at that time pastured flocks in those regions.”
In addition, Vyse’s red ochre markings do not match the red ochre (non-hieroglyph, non-hieratic) markings found on the other side of the limestone door at the end of the Queen’s Chamber south ‘airshaft’ by the Djedi Project in 2011. A comparison between what verifiably-aged red ochre markings on a limestone surface should look like, versus what Vyse found, can be seen by clicking on Exhibit A2 to the right. Vyse’s quarry marks are in far newer (and glossy) condition than are the Djedi Project marks (no gloss remains whatsoever) – exhibiting none of the requisite chalking of both limestone block and ochre paint itself, as demonstrated by the Djedi Project markings. The contrasting pristine condition of the Vyse quarry markings is extraordinary given the 30 to 100 degree temperature swings in the relieving chambers over a purported 4,500 years.
In the end, it becomes clear from the depiction in Vyse’s own work, that the ‘quarry marks’ were not affixed in the quarry at all. Instead, they were made by one highly-educated non-engineer, by a right-handed person who had to turn the ochre brush because his hand was restricted by nearby perpendicular stones (see Exhibit A2), by means of one red ochre batch, by that one person laying on their side on the floor stones and having to avoid the roof stone, and in a setting post-construction, attempting to make it appear as if the marks were painted pre-construction.
Why did the stone workers not sparingly sketch small (by practice discipline) quality or trade marks, construction benchmarks, or in uneducated hieratic script, by means of several penmanship styles, with low-quality field ochre stashed out in the hot sun? Things that would occur in the real world (and indeed did occur in the Queen’s Chamber airshaft as shown in Exhibit A2 above).
Instead, they ‘lathered on’ the ochre as if one overzealous, overeducated PhD in Egyptology from the modern era, with little knowledge of engineering or construction, fully unaware of the accountability to be soon brought by photography, mass spectrometry, and radiocarbon dating science, by means of a single high quality, plentiful and sealed jar of red ochre, decades of practice at hieroglyph drawing, a single penmanship style employing grotesquely oversized and ochre-inefficient symbols – with far too much knowledge of both this formal written script and esoteric pharaonic traditions as they were understood in the Nineteenth Century CE.
Before I actually saw Vyse’s journal entry, I considered his discoveries to constitute irrefutable evidence. However, once I saw the placement of these quarry marks, along with noting the fact that only Vyse entered these chambers first, even going so far as to fire his colleague, Giovanni Caviglia, for the mere risk that Caviglia might enter one of the newly detected chambers first, and the fact that some of the incorrect markings conveniently ‘disappeared’ in the intervening years, my hackles were unexpectedly raised.5 Exhibits A1 and A2 closely and these idiosyncrasies become painfully obvious to the skeptical mind.
Finally, a cedar wood plank found sealed within one of the Khufu Queen’s Chamber ‘air shafts’ was carbon dated to 900 years before the Fourth Dynasty construction hypothesis period.6 Such presents a falsifying observation for this inductively-inferred and agency-imbued hypothesis.
These issues all constitute significant problems, even falsifications, of the Fourth Dynasty Khufu/Khafre origins of the two largest pyramids of Giza. That being said, I have no hypothesis of construction/origin by which to counter the Khufu-Khafre origin hypothesis, so that remains my lead theory. However, this is inherently the fault of the field and not me. Unfortunately, Egyptology has played the epistemological sleight-of-hand of doubling-down upon a theory they know has a high probability of being wrong, through continuously juxtaposing and foisting red herring and ludicrous competing alternatives (aliens, racists, giants, internal and external ramp solutions to a workload dilemma which does not even apply), such that there never exists any real challenge to their prevailing dogma. Stooge posing, as one does to prop up a less-talented boxer.
Is it any wonder therefore, why none of the observations which I am about to broach from this point on, have ever been raised regarding this topic? The fact that these ideas are 'novel', is a factor which casts nothing but doubt and shame upon the entire field. One may observe an example of why archaeology is a failed science by reading this article link.
Neither Aliens, Ramps, nor Giants – But Human Fingerprints
I’ve been the design engineer in charge of development of over 100 buildings in excess of 100,000 square feet in size. The largest facility my teams have engineered was 4.4 million square feet (that is large, take my word for it), and was much more complex than the Great Pyramid in its engineering challenge. Unlike an archaeologist, I am an expert in construction, scaling, cost and more importantly, the direct labor involved in the assembly of large structures under a variety of working conditions and construction equipment scenarios. My teams estimated these project costs, in part, based upon that principle of systems engineering cost measurement called work content (Wc).
Under this, a tried and true principle of engineering applies to the Khufu pyramid construction, which is shown by the escalating red parametric intersection line in Exhibit B to the right:
In absence of leverage, compound advantage, or machine, work content accelerates as a function of distance and structure used to overcome both vertical loft and that total friction which results from the employed solution.
In other words, the more ramp you build (internal, external, or otherwise) in order to attain vertical loft or make friction easier, the more total work content (both direct and indirect) you create for the overall project. The more cooks, garbage haulers, housing, and logistics/support persons you need arithmetically. If the ramp surface is compromised, all work must stop until that problem is fixed, across a mile of ramp surface suffering 2.3 million stone passes. This would be fatal to the project’s critical path of completion. One also has to disassemble and/or mitigate the structural harm from this putative ramp, once the principal building effort is completed. That effort in itself could take decades to complete. Ramps therefore, constitute a losing game - they are the fantasy of historians, archaeologists, and Hollywood. Another advantage must be taken instead.
Horizontal stone movement was a matter of trade in production surplus versus work content. “You mean to tell me Mr. Thoth, that you will give my village guaranteed food all year long, as long as we cut up pieces of the hillside and give them to your food delivery boats? Where do I sign?”
Vertical stone movement on the other hand, was a matter of slave work content alone. Risk of rebellion, disease, and especially expense – all needed to be minimized. Bored armies present risk.
Indeed, the challenge of the Great Pyramid resides not in the handful of 40 tonne precision stones which were involved, but rather in the 2.3 million 2.5 tonne stones which had to be vertically lifted into position – before famine, war, pestilence, drought, or economic collapse could cause a premature termination of the political will necessary to resume such an endeavor each year.
Enter, the Sekhem-mu Machine and the Disk of Prince Sabu.
The Sekhem-mu Machine and Its No-Longer-Missing Key Element
Therefore, under the non-recoverable principle entailed with work content vs friction as shown in Exhibit B, the Khufu and Khafre pyramids have to have been built through vertical mechanical advantage, using compound pulleys, with high saline content water (and manpower for marginal fine tuning, speed, and control) as the counterweight for each stone lifted. The salt water could be pumped to the top of the structure being built by means of a cleverly-engineered, Mohs scale 7 (measure of extreme mineral durability), impeller from the Hor-Anedjib pharaonic period (400 years before the reputed building of the Khufu pyramid), called the Disk of Prince Sabu.7 ‘Sekhem-mu’ as a portmanteau means in Egyptian, ‘the power of water’.
Such leverage-water could be held in large (as much as 27 gallon/300 lb) containers used to 16:1 compound-advantage-lift one stone per level as the container(s) of water descended in its role as counterweight at each level of the pyramid (by means of four, four-fold purchase blocks). The water would then be either poured out at the bottom or even pumped back to the top, while the now-empty container could be easily hoisted back up (dead-heading) to the top again. Here, to be filled again with water to act as the counterweight for the next journey downward – each container of water lifting as many stones, as there were 4 level-steps (four times the length of pulled-rope is required in a four-fold purchase) upward in each single-leg trip. In this method, less scaffolding and zero ramp is required, while manpower is minimized for each stone-lift. The stones are in essence ‘pumped’ to the top of the structure by the gravitational-potential-energy of water instead.
Underpinning such a conjecture is this: to my educated eyes, the Sabu Disk is a water pump impeller, like the one’s I replace and repair on my boat, and not an out of place artifact (nor ‘alien hyperdrive’). The Disk simply involves a ring with exterior mounted impeller blades (example can be found here – save for the normal-curve taper which imparts smoothness more compatible with muscle power as opposed to gas-operated machine) instead of a spindle outfitted with center mounted and flexible impeller blades. The normalized shape of the torroidal fins equates to the flexible action of a neoprene, nitrile, or urethane Jabsco impeller blade. This is brilliant, and no accident. The torroidal compression blades placed every 120 degrees on the Disk serve to displace the water, just as does an impeller blade in a Jabsco pump housing, which only has one path of escape, through the outlet pipe. The inlet is offset by 120 degrees, so that only a suction remains there, which serves to draw water in (once the infeed line is primed). In no way was this Disk a stone bowl, gigantic oil lamp, flying toy or weapon, flywheel, nor ancient astronaut artifact.9 These are all ridiculous notions. The Sabu Disk is clearly and unequivocally, a fluid impeller.
The reason the Sabu Disk would preferentially be made of Mohs 7 schist, is because the bronze metals of the day would not have performed under stress. They are too soft. Ferrous based metals as an option, would have compromised quickly through electrochemical, chloride ion, conductive, and oxygen-based deterioration in the high-salinity (or even high-sediment content) water. Metals as a group absorb heat under high-friction, sun-heated, and dynamic stress conditions. As a heat sink – this would render them even softer under such steady all-day demand. Eventually metal impellers would deform after thousands of rotations, or when a small object came cascading through the pipes and jammed between the impeller and the pump housing. This all causing a disastrously low and more importantly, unprogrammable mean time between failure (MTBF) as compared to a stone device, which would feature none of these weaknesses.
I speculate that this is the reason why the Disk of Prince Sabu was regarded to be of such critical importance that it was placed in Sabu’s very own tomb. Just imagine the social impact he had with this prescient device.
Herodotus describes such stone lifting machines in his work, An Account of Egypt (sans the necessary compound advantage and counter-weighting):11
This pyramid was made after the manner of steps which some called “rows” and others “bases”: and when they had first made it thus, they raised the remaining stones with machines made of short pieces of timber, raising them first from the ground to the first stage of the steps, and when the stone got up to this it was placed upon another machine standing on the first stage, and so from this it was drawn to the second upon another machine; for as many as were the courses of the steps, so many machines there were also…
As previously mentioned, I toured and climbed off-limits locations (not illegally) both inside and on the larger Giza pyramids while working with my Egyptian client. During these observational visits I could detect the pyramid construction foreman’s use of fieldstone stacked slate placement technique – a technique used in particular by New England farmers to build pasture fences in the 1800’s or decorate homes today.12 Except this was done in the horizontal plane and not the vertical. The foreman only need ensure discipline in the vertical plane surface – a highly level (Fl) and flat (Ff) surface in the engineering vernacular.13 However in contrast, the foreman exploited the ‘convenient chaos’ of the arriving stone stream to provide him the shape resources he needed to fill in the horizontal plane puzzle. Just like one would construct a slate stone or stack stone fence.
In short, it is absolutely clear that the Khufu and Khafre pyramids were built by humans. But if it was not the humans of Khufu’s Fourth Dynasty, then which humans indeed constructed these monuments? And why would the Orthodoxy work so hard to ensure that we remain in abject ignorance over the matter? A matter so panic-inducing that they would be willing to cast every single person who dissented, as alien-theorists or racists.
Perhaps there exists another clue in this regard, a clue which portends an answer to both of these questions.
Natural Tapestry Belies an Insistent Narrative
As mentioned in this article’s preamble, I don’t have a problem with a Pharaonic Old Kingdom origin for Khufu and Khafre. We’ve shown above that a classic Egyptian context for development of the Giza Complex is certainly appropriate from a technological and labor resource perspective. What I have a problem with, is being lied to, being gaslighted, or intellectual stagnation being passed off as ‘the scientific method’. I have a problem as well when directly falsifying and irrefutable evidence is ignored by those same actors who are doing the lying.
Fortunately, nature has taken pity on mankind and preserved for us a rather informative spectacle in Tura and Mokkatam limestone demarcation on the Khafre pyramid at Giza (the highest elevation of the three primary pyramids at Giza). Mokkatam limestone, quarried from the Mokkatam formation directly underneath the Giza Plateau, is a dense and durable form of limestone, highly resistant to both the action and chemistry of ocean water, or what is called karst geomorphology.14 For this reason, the builders of the Khafre pyramid employed Mokkatam limestone as the structural blocks which compose the main load-bearing courses (layers) of the pyramid.
Tura limestone in contrast, is a relatively soft form of limestone, which easily dissolves in seawater, by means of the following equation:
CaCO3 (limestone) + CO2 (carbon dioxide) + H2O (water) → Ca(HCO3)2 (calcium bicarbonate)
This carbonic acid process plays a significant role in the natural weathering of limestone and other carbonate rocks. It is also crucial in the formation of karst landscapes, where the differential dissolution of various hardness limestone by acidic water leads to the creation of caves, sinkholes, and other karst features, especially along coastlines. The builders of the Khufu and Khafre pyramids chose the softer limestone for the decorative casing, because of its beauty and ease of workability into a smooth outer casing surface. But this had also rendered the casing vulnerable to karst erosion by ocean water, an event which the builders understandably had not felt the need to anticipate.
As a qualified Officer of the Deck, Navigator, and lifelong sailor, I have grown used to observing the effects of ocean water erosion, including karst and seawall erosion, on a variety of structures around ports and along coastlines. As we toured the Giza complex, I inquired of my driver/guide the reason for the removal of the Tura casing stones from both the Khufu and Khafre pyramids. He responded “Mr. G, they say that the stones are reused in ancient buildings down in the local community; but in truth, no one knows what happened to them. As you can see, if indeed the [Tura limestone casing] stones were scavenged, I find it odd that none remain laying along the bottom of the pyramids themselves. Also, why did they stop at that cap?”
In fact, there are some remaining casing stones which were not carted off and still reside at the base of Khafre: they are all made of granite (Mohs 7+).14 Such is a Sherlock Holmes worthy deductive clue, as only the seawater-solvable blocks had disappeared from both the pyramid itself, as well as the entire Giza complex.
Then it hit me. The Tura limestone casing blocks had not been scavenged at all. The patterning and undercut nature of the stone depletion made that notion a ridiculous fairy tale (see Exhibit D above). The Tura limestone blocks had been dissolved, dissolved through both the ferocious kinetics, as well as carbonic acid chemistry – of ocean water. Just as in the case of the Leo Stela at Nimrud Dag while working in Turkey, or King Solomon’s Lost Mine of Ophir while working in Africa, the realization hit me like a ton of bricks (or in this case, a 2.5 tonne limestone block).
The Metrics and Evidence
Accordingly, I have outlined the measures and dynamics of this particular form of karst erosion, in Exhibits F, G, and H below. The grey area in Exhibits F and H, represents an ocean level which is 576 feet higher than our current day normal. This represents the height of ocean above current sea level which is required to create this fast-paced karst erosion visible on both the Khufu, and especially the Khafre, pyramids.
A 576 ft pause in this sea level is the origin of that light colored karst erosion band shown in the Exhibit E photo to the immediate right above – as well as in Exhibits F and G below. This erosion band was caused by a highly energized ocean, averaging a sea state of 6 to 8, over a significant period of time. I have sailed a ship in sea states 7 and 9 before. These were terrifying events, with waves taller than my bridge wing and ship.
Thereafter, the waters appear to have retracted almost as quickly as they encroached. This is a warning flag that we should heed and understand as mankind. Take your time in examining Exhibit F below, as it is packed with relevant deductive observation.
Below, one can observe the horizon-disciplined (as in water-level) karst erosion which is centered around the 312′ level (576′ above sea level) of the Khafre pyramid. There is only one factor which can cause such an erosion pattern. In a Holmesian sense, even though this factor may seem like an implausibility, the characteristics of these marks serve to eliminate every other possibility, and we are left with only one possible answer. This was caused by a global or regional flood.
Of course the natural question arises, ‘Why did this same uneroded Tura limestone cap not occur on the Khufu pyramid as well?’ The first part of this answer lies in the relative altitudes of each pyramid’s peak. The Khafre pyramid, despite being slightly less tall than the Khufu pyramid, nevertheless, sits upon a higher Giza plateau section than does Khufu. This turned out to be just high enough to preserve 110 feet of Tura limestone casing, which extended above the level of this catastrophic ocean condition.
In answer to this question however, the Tura cap (or pyramidion) on Khufu did exist. First, there is a minimal Tura structure viable which can support its own weight long term (earthquakes, weathering of mortar, etc.). Plus, the cap of Khufu was renowned to conceal a quantity of gold or at least, gold plating. The entire cap was removed and purportedly reassembled on the ground level on the southeast side of Khufu.15 I have seen this pyramidion up close, but have no idea whether or not it is the original.
So, there is no doubt that, unlike the case of Khafre, the Khufu Tura cap was manually removed.
Accordingly, we are left with a sustained and specific sea level oceanic displacement as the only viable explanation for the unique features we document in this article. Not a 371 day biblical flood, not a tidal wave, not a cosmic impact, and not an interloping gravitational visitor to our solar system – but rather, a long-term and Earth rotational mechanics derived, oceanic displacement. Something befitting a disruption or magnetic decoupling of our planet’s rotational component masses commensurate with a weakening of the Earth’s geomagnetic moment (inner/outer core magnetic coupling with the outer rotational mantle/asthenosphere/lithosphere). An event which is happening once again, from 1973 until now.
In fact, desert sand base shaped calcium carbonate re-concretions at the foot of the Pyramids (click on image above), confirm that the Tura limestone was dissolved, not removed.16 In this circumstance the Tura limestone dissolved, plummeted to the foot of the pyramid as the waters receded, and then formed re-concretions into the sand at the base of the pyramid (at that time). Hence the chaotic and sand-plumed bottom shape of the re-concretions in the photo.
As well, salt encrustations found within the Queen’s Chamber of the Khufu pyramid serve to confirm the overarching seawater inundation construct.17
…but beyond this, on to the Queen’s Chamber, the very thick and hard incrustation of salt which entirely covers the walls of this passage, made it impossible for us to locate the joints with any certainty. This salt incrustation is peculiar to the Horizontal Passage and Queen’s Chamber, although a little of it may also be seen on the walls of the First Ascending Passage.
~ John and Morton Edgar, Great Pyramid Passages Vol 1 1910 edition
Such evidence suggests an entirely new possible rationale behind the existence of the myriad ancient stone circles which track the seasonality, rising, and setting of the sun and moon. Perhaps they were not a calendar, as much as they might have been a warning indicator - that it was high time to get to higher ground. Archaeology, perhaps inadvertently and in an effort to avoid any evidence that might even hint at supporting a biblical flood, has created an echo chamber of sorts inside their own profession, leading to an overall ignorance vacuum regarding this topic.
Impossible? Think Again…
The reality is that this natural tapestry doesn’t merely express it self upon the Khafre and Khufu pyramids alone. In fact, it shows throughout the entire landscape of the Arabian desert and into northern Africa. I spent a couple years off and on traveling the Arabian peninsula and Saudi Empty Quarter – surveying the region during a national strategy I conducted for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. There I observed the ancient receding shoreline structures in the Empty Quarter for months before it finally hit me as to what these indeed were. They are recent (less than 12 kya) ocean shorelines. If you were indoctrinated as I was, and believed for decades that since we did not know about it that such a flood was impossible, this will serve to limit your perceptive abilities. Once you see this however, you will not be able to forget it thereafter.
Now compare Exhibit I to the Google Earth satellite composites of the region (Exhibit J below), displaying washways, saline flats/deserts, and iron oxide (orange) depositions at high-water marks.
The only reason something this obvious would be ignored, is if it serves to introduce a history which is threatening to the powers that rule over us. Watch patiently over the coming years. You will find that denial of this history is the common motivating theme behind most enforced historical and archaeological Narrative.
Epilogue
As a side note, I find it curious that whatever the mechanism is that caused this rise in sea level, it appears to be cyclic as opposed to chaotic in nature. In other words, aside from an initial quick surge of maybe 1500-2200 ft, the oceans in this case settled at a specific height (576′ above sea level and 312′ up the pyramid height), stayed there for some amount time, and then returned more gradually to their current context in a machine-like manner. The only global-scale mechanism I can think of which could cause such an iron oxide infused surge, overlain upon a normal curve in sea level retreat (to the necessary exclusion of plate tectonics and celestial interlopers), is the mechanics of Earth’s rotation – an effect generated by a chaotic Earth core perhaps.20
Thus in the period of eleven thousand three hundred and forty years they said that there had arisen no god in human form; nor even before that time or afterwards among the remaining kings who arise in Egypt, did they report that anything of that kind had come to pass. In this time they said that the sun had moved four times from his accustomed place of rising, and where he now sets he had thence twice had his rising, and in the place from whence he now rises he had twice had his setting;
~ Herodotus, An Account of Egypt22
Is it possible that, the reason Earth took 800 million years to host a comprehensively advanced civilization from more complex forms of Eukaryote life, is that the Earth tends to topple every so often and set things back quite a bit? Rendering us a semi-stable planet, as opposed to our assumed stable planetary profile? A garden paradise with one essential disqualifying flaw. Perhaps this made our planetary resource ideal to serve in the role as genetic farm, but unsuited for permanent large scale habitation by higher-order beings (unless they were fleeing as outlaws)?
Owing to the pervasive influence of narrow-minded skepticism and a rigidly controlled narrative, humanity often finds itself disconnected from a true comprehension of its own nature and origins. The dating and age of the pyramids at Giza appears to play a pivotal role in unraveling the obscured chapters of human history. Consequently, these insights seem to have been deliberately omitted from our collective understanding by authoritative entities.
Had it not been for the distinct erosion patterns on the Khafre pyramid, I might have readily accepted the official narrative, relegating theories of an older pyramid age to the realm of mere speculation. However, my trust lies more firmly in my own ability to identify corruption, to infer and deduce, and to unravel mysteries, than in those who craft and uphold prevailing dogma. The reluctance of scientists to perform carbon-14 testing on the seemingly over-cooked red ochre paint within the Khufu pyramid’s relieving chambers raises significant suspicions. This hesitance regarding something so important, yet so straightforward, strikes me as a telling indicator of underlying malice.
I am not inclined to immediately conclude that this inundation and the biblical flood are one in the same. I am not ruling that out certainly, but we need a lot more information first. However, I also find it hard to believe that a flood of such magnitude — as evidenced by these undeniable erosion patterns — could have occurred within the last 4500 years without being more prominently recorded in history, beyond the accounts of Noah’s Flood or the Sumerian Epic of Utinapishtim. It seems more plausible that this event took place far earlier than our documented history, or what has been permitted to be recorded. This leads to a necessary questioning of the inductive science that supports the prevailing narrative. Indeed, none of these scientific interpretations appear to be as compelling as the natural tapestry in evidence plainly set before us.
While I do not claim to hold the definitive answers regarding the architects or the underlying purposes of these enigmatic structures, one thing seems increasingly clear: significant secrets have been obscured, lost not only in the realms of ancient engineering but also in the deeper rendering of humanity’s origins. These pyramids, standing as silent witnesses to a forgotten epoch, challenge us to look beyond accepted narratives, urging us to rediscover and reconnect with lost chapters of our collective and yes, spiritual past.
Everyday day, brings us closer. Every night, my soul sees
A troubled mankind, suffering blindlySo let the traces linger on. Many years have come and gone.
Oh how lonely man has been, without a trace of the Traceless Friend~ Seals & Crofts, ‘The Euphrates’
In their enduring mystery, they remind us as skeptics that history is not just a record of what we know, but a testament to the vast expanse of what we have yet to understand, along with the responsibility to resist agency and winnow the unknown.
The Ethical Skeptic, “Hidden in Plain Sight”; The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 18 Dec 2023; Web, https://theethicalskeptic.com/?p=78023
Are you familiar with this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMAtkjy_YK4? I'm curious to know what you think of it.
I liked this article, but I did not read it thorougly, I recommend that you check out Bob Greeneyer's (Martin Fleichman Memorial Project) video on the purpose of the Pyramids at Youtube: "O-Day - New dawn of an old age"