PROOF OF GOD

We still have not established that the Egyptians had this sacred inch

since they neither had access to the IGY data nor did they have anyway of determining the length of the Earth's axis.

I would postulate that the sacred inch is a fabrication since it is easily fabicated by manipulating the data to arrive at the sacred inch.

Now in 2141 B.C. Thuban{Alpha Draconis} was more than 2.5 degrees from celestial north so there is no way they could have used this to establish anything of accuracy.I also came across this in reviewing our posts.

There is what is called the "Precession of the Equinoxes". A twenty four to twenty six thousand year cycle, when, as this earth is spinning like a top, there is a wobble, the true north point in space, rotates, completing a circle in the heavens. Thus every so often the North star changes. Embodied within this pyramid is that knowledge. We're just starting to figure these things out. How in the world did the builders of the pyramid know these things? They did. On one day, at the Vernal Equinox in the year 2141 BC, Alpha Draconus, the "Dragon Star" in the Draco constellation, was the pole star and it was so perfectly aligned with the descending passage, that if someone was at the bottom holding a mirror, that star would reflect that light. A seeming total impossibility, but they did it

Sidelined writes:What do you mean the star would reflect the light? How on Earth do you suppose they determined that?

Now if you would please present the star maps your sources used to establish their claims I will be delighted to see them presented to us all.

No, but it is longer than the meridian of the Great Pyramid, which is all that is required to refute the claim.

"Pyramidology Book 1" by Dr. Adam Rutherford, pages 34, 36, 37:"The GP is built at the geographical center of the land surface of the Earth (refer to map of the World on a homolographic projection, i.e., an equal area map).It stands on the longest land-contact meridian on the Earth's surface.It is situated on the longest land-contact Earth-circuit bearing (rhumb) on the Earth's surface.As stated by Abbe Moreux, Director of the Bourges Observatory, France: "The meridian of the Pyramid - the line running north and south, passing through its apex - is the ideal meridian; it is that which crosses the greatest amount of land and the smallest amount of sea".The GP's opposite or nether meridian, at the same time, crosses the greatest amount of sea and smallest amount of land. Hence, the meridian of the GP is the natural zero of longitude for the entire globe and would be the most suitable for international reckoning. As measured from the Greenwich (London) zero, it is Longitude 31 degrees 9' 0" E. The GP stands at the center of the land surface of the Earth: this was first observed by the astronomer, Prof. C. Piazzi Smyth. END RUTHERFORD QUOTE.

Percy writes:You didn't answer the first question. Petrie established that the purpose of the socket stones was to serve as footings for the bottom of the casing stones below pavement level, and I asked why Rutherford concluded they had a different purpose. Addressing your answers one by one:

responding Percy writes:This isn't true, they're only a yard or so away. Continuing the casing down at a 53o angle for only a yard or so below pavement level would bring it in contact with the socket stones.

responding Percy writes:Of course surveyors can do this, but those extrapolations only make sense if the socket stones were part of a different design, and you haven't offered any evidence for this yet.

responding Percy writes:Again, this isn't evidence of a different design.

responding Percy writes:This is just an assumption. Where is your evidence that the hypothetical original design was to be of the same proportions as the actual pyramid?

responding Percy writes:You've misread the diagram. The brown slice is the side of the pyramid to add an appearance of three dimensionality to the diagram. Realize that if it were actually the hypothetical "original design" that it has a different angle from the actual pyramid, and you just finished claiming it had the same angle.

The LLM claim remains refuted.

For those that have reviewed the research of Livio C. Stecchini concerning ancient Eygpt, the Pharaoh's of that land knew exactly where they were on this planet. He does not speculate how they knew, but they had precise knowledge on the exact size of the earth, something we did not determine until 1957.

"HE DOES NOT SPECULATE HOW THEY KNEW"

Current historical evidence supports the above statement.

Message 155 http://www.geoman.com/jim/pyramid.htmlThis excerpt is from a non-supernaturalist. I am posting the site because it gives an excellent complete overview of the history of the Pyramid. No one site agrees with any other. The purpose here is to establish that the Pyramid contains impossible evidence of knowledge that ancient egyptians/humans did not have YET the author arbitrarily concludes they must of built it anyway and somehow.
The boldface in the text evidences that Egyptian writings and the Pyramid's sophistication are incongruent.This secular author concludes that priests concealed the secret know- how of which he admits there is no evidence.EXCERPT:Indeed, one could even devise a thought experiment in which it is assumed that the first rule among those who receive initiation into the highest knowledge is that the knowledge may not be written down explicitly. This knowledge might be maintained by an initiate priesthood who would continuously evaluate the trustworthiness of initiates, including pharaohs. The high priests might then initiate each individual only to the degree to which they demonstrated their capacity and dedication to maintaining the integrity of the secret. At first glance this may seem an absurd proposition, but it may fit the observed phenomena better than any other explanation. Particularly where we do already know that someone maintained a great deal of knowledge over the span of long intermediate periods between dynasties, which only flower during certain phases. Such a model might explain how, or why, the evidence we do find in texts is frequently inferior to the sophistication of the knowledge implicitly embodied in the geometry of the architecture. I am not arguing that this can actually be proven, or even that it is rigorously correct in all cases, but I do suspect that the depth and sophistication of all dynasties was not equal, and that this may be due in part to variations in the degree to which different pharaohs, or lines of pharaohs, inspired the confidence of the perennial priesthood who may well have been the seat of real knowledge. END EXCERPT

So Petrie formed a hypthesis about the purpose of the sockets*, then he found evidence supporting that hypothesis in the form of actual casing stones below pavement level.

You need some evidence for Rutherford's claim that the socket stones were actually for a different pyramid that was never built. Christian numerological arguments like your rectification factor are not evidence.

If for the sake of discussion we assume the socket stones *do* represent a different pyramid design, then the most important of the remaining questions is how you know the proportions of a pyramid not built?

The socket stones are not placed in a true square, and using them yields a slightly awkward pyramid.

The dimensions of the capstone are not known.

The height is not known.

WT cites evidence in Smyth's book as an important basis of his argument, but he does not point out the all consuming hatred Smyth had for anything Egyptian,

This statement is introducing his theory that divine guidance was needed to built the pyramid the way it was. Another quote cuts directly to the chase,

In Chapter 4, Smyth titles a section thus,"The Great Pyramid before Science", and that is a whole of his premise, the Ancient Egyptians knew nothing and he fills his book with Biblical quote after quote to support his contention.

Smyth's views had considerable influence on those that later investigated the pyramid,

To isolate the Great Pyramid from its surroundings, as "Proof of God", is placing oneself in the position of the blind men, each, with conviction, describing an elephant by examining just one part.

Can you point out to me the post where Percy confirms a height of 5813PI? I must have missed it.

Percy writes:Message 562 I've verified these figures. For a right triangle with an angle of 51.854o and a base of 9131.05/2=4565.53 PI", the height is 5813 PI".

WT/post 556 writes:Message 556From "Pyramidology Book 3", page 1109 by Dr. Adam Rutherford"Before we are in a position to check the accuracy of the GP's chronograph and ascertain the degree of precision therein, it is necessary to ensure that we have the dimensions of the passages and chambers as constructed by the ancient builders. Should there have been any distortion of any parts through subsidence, earthquakes, etc., then we must ascertain the original positions and measurements.The geometric construction of the original angle of the sloping passages, and proved by four independant methods to be 26 degrees 18' 9.72609", the trigonometrical ratios of which are all expressible in terms of pi, hence can be stated to any number of decimal places desired. Any deviation from that angle in the passages as they are found today would show that movement had taken place since the GP's erection." END RUTHERFORD QUOTEFrom "Decoding the Great Pyramid" pages 235-243, by Peter Lemesurier (2000) NOTE: The above page numbers are incorrect. The correct page numbers are as folows: 224, 225, 235, 236PAGE 235:"The data which follow, are based throughout on figures supplied by Rutherford. Readers surprised by the extraordinary degree of precision claimed would do well to consider the following facts:1) During the last century or so the GP has been measured ad nauseam, both inside and out, not merely by amateur archaeologists, but by numerous professional surveyors, some of whom have spent literally months on the site using the most up-to-date equipment available - parts of it specifically designed with the GP in mind. Due and precise allowance having been made for the effects of observed temperature-variation on the instruments themselves, for subsidence-distortion, and for wear and exfoliation of the ancient stone, the result has been a series of figures already of outstanding accuracy, and expressed in each case to clearly defined tolerances.Rutherford's own figures for the GP, almost without exception, well within the stated tolerances of the most authoritative surveys.Some of the measurements involved turn out to be clear and direct functions of the distance 365.242 PI" and the quantity pi. The fact that pi can theoretically be calculated to an infinite number of decimal places once again produces figures in which fractions figure prominently.In side elevation, the GP and its passageways present a clear geometric figure composed largely of straight lines and based on known angles and levels, these too have been meticulously surveyed on many occasions. Trigonometrical calculation therefore makes it possible finally to check many of the "raw" measurements against each other, thus exposing even the slightest inaccuracy. For this, absolutely precise data are essential, and any prior rounding up or down would invalidate the results.PAGE 236: Rutherford's final figures, as listed below, are almost alone in passing this crucial test in flying colors, in that they "fit" each other trigonometrically to make a perfect and self-consistent system - as any correct assessment of the GP's measurements ultimately must do. There seems to be no alternative, therefore, but to accept Rutherford's figures as they stand, as representing the best available assessment of the GP's intended dimensions.PAGE 224: Rutherford: Base square of side: 9131.05 PI" (365.242 Sacred Cubits)(SC=25 sacred inches/one sacred inch is 1/1000th of a sacred inch longer than the British inch) Square base perimeter: 36524.2 PI"
On this basis, the observed angle of slope of 51 degrees 51' 14.3" would total a height of just over 5813 PI"PAGE 225:In 1925, professional surveyor J.H. Cole produced "Determination of the Exact Size and Orientation of the Great Pyramid" [Cairo, Government Press, 1925]West Side: 9059.5766 PI"North Side: 9055.4078 PI"East Side: 9060.9137 PI"South Side: 9063.3914 PI"Total Perimeter of Base: 36239.2895 PI"Cole himself suggests an average tolerance of some 1 1/4 inches per side.Lemesurier: Extrapolating from Cole's figures, which are based on a concavity of 35.762 PI" the base square would thus be:West Side: 9131.1021 PI"North Side: 9126.9333 PI"East Side: 9132.4392 PI"South Side: 9134.9169 PI"Total Perimeter of Base: 36525.3915 PI"Cole and Rutherford therefore are 1 1/4 inches apart, with the total distance involved to be well over a half of mile. For all practical purposes these two figures can be regarded as identical.
END LEMESURIER QUOTE.

From "Pyramidology Book II" by Dr. Adam Rutherford:Base side length, as-built, including, of course, the projected casing stones = 9059.53 PI"The distance from the outside western edge of the southwest socket to outside eastern edge of the south-east socket, which measurement defines the south side of the square base of the Pyramid according to the full-design, is 9140 British inches, which is equal to 9131 PI"; hence the designed measurement right round the four sides of the base was 4 times 9131, that is, 36524 PI", whereas the distance round the GP as actually constructed was 36238 PI", which is 286 inches less.286 PI" is the distance the original entrance was to the left of center axis north.When Arab treasure hunters hacked their way into the GP they assumed the entrance would be in the center - they missed by about 24 feet.(286 inches approx.)The placement of the entrance 286 PI" to the left of center is therefore considered intentional.

You haven't said anything here that you haven't said before.

Especially puzzling is your return to the accuracy issue.

It would be helpful if you could move the discussion forward by responding to the rebuttals instead of just repeating your unsupported assertions.

Your mind too clouded to consider and weigh the counterarguments, you instead just repeat, "It must be divine."