Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   PROOF OF GOD
Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 706 of 739 (129399)
08-01-2004 7:27 PM
Reply to: Message 691 by FrankM
08-01-2004 2:58 AM


Re: Pyramid education
Hi Frank:
Your emergence in this topic has one very noticeable trait: Your posts go out of their way to sound calm while making theoretical opinions matter-of-factly.
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.
If this isn't pure dogma based upon naturalist worldview then I don't know what is.
IOW, they knew (assertion/bare opinion) offered without ANY support of evidence or facts.
"HE DOES NOT SPECULATE HOW THEY KNEW"
Now that is a gem worth blue boxing again.
This is the whole issue.
Ancient camel riding humans did not know. Naturalists ASSERT because the alternative is not allowed per Romans 1 incapacitation.
Current historical evidence supports the above statement.
This was your opinion concerning the "cycles of technology" theory.
The key to your opinion is the word "current". IOW, revisionists who have had the time to dream up theories to explain the ancient wonders.
Cycles is an admission to the preposterous - already defended to the death evolutionary premise of life evolving "step by tiny step".
When unavoidable evidences this nonsense you evos make up exceptions to fit your dogma.
Please review these posts fom this topic:
Message 300
Message 306
Message 155 http://www.geoman.com/jim/pyramid.html
This 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
Once again, an admission as to the "texts" of ancient Egypt not matching the "architecture" of the GP.
You are comforting yourself contrary to the evidence according to your worldview.
This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 08-01-2004 06:33 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 691 by FrankM, posted 08-01-2004 2:58 AM FrankM has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 708 by FrankM, posted 08-01-2004 8:17 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 707 of 739 (129402)
08-01-2004 7:43 PM
Reply to: Message 705 by AdminNosy
08-01-2004 4:33 PM


Ned, Willowtree included Isaiah 19, to be a part of the topic, you however have changed the topic to exclude this prophecy (or any prophecies in respect to the Pyramid of Giza being an altar, etc...), about the Savior coming out of Egypt, the middle of the earth prophecies, the location of the Great Giza Pryamid in respect to prophecy, etc...
P.S. I only made a couple of posts, so please go and read the two Books of Adam and Eve, someone else already provided a link that support the Giza pyramid was built on a large mountain plateau, with Issiah 19 references to the altar, and a pillar on the border, I provided the scriptures, that it was simply a roof over the altar that Seth built, and that this roof was built on a large mountain plateau. I posted on topic, you however changed the topic to exclude prophecy, but hey were on a Free for All thread, where some latitude is required by moderators, if not then your implying my several posts represented a threat to being proof of God, but prophecy is like that, the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy, which appears what your gripe is all about, to exclude any prophecies, to make it off topic, which is what you've done with post 400, to change the topic, etc...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 705 by AdminNosy, posted 08-01-2004 4:33 PM AdminNosy has not replied

FrankM
Inactive Member


Message 708 of 739 (129410)
08-01-2004 8:17 PM
Reply to: Message 706 by Cold Foreign Object
08-01-2004 7:27 PM


Borchardt and Stechinni
Willowtree writes:
Ancient camel riding humans did not know. Naturalists ASSERT because the alternative is not allowed per Romans 1 incapacitation.
One of the issues presented by Jim Fournier in
http://www.geoman.com/jim/pyramid.html
is whether the ancient Egyptians had any geodetic knowledge. This is quoted from the above URL:
The result, as those measurements were soon ruled to be incorrect, was to discredit that entire line of thinking for over a century; confirming the prejudice in the eyes of mainstream Egyptologists that the ancient Egyptians could not have had anything more than primitive astronomy and mathematics. This position has been built on a foundation which presupposes a priori that one must dismiss any line of thinking which asserts that the ancient Egyptians might have possessed accurate geodetic knowledge. The following assertion made by the preeminent Egyptologist, Ludwig Borchardt is typical. He is commenting here on an Egyptian inscription stating that the distance between Behdet (at the northern tip of the Nile Delta) and Syene (at the first cataract near Aswan in the south) was 106 atur, "one must absolutely exclude the possibility that the ancients may have measured in degrees." Borchardt gives absolutely no grounds for this assertion. It is instead invoked as an article of faith. It is ironic that it was Cole's survey of the Great Pyramid, commissioned by Borchardt himself, which provided Stecchini with his best evidence to refute this long standing prejudice. It should be pointed out, however, that Stecchini derived his knowledge of Egyptian geodetic measurement from his reading and interpretation of hundreds, if not thousands, of hieroglyphic texts. In the case of Borchardt's quote cited above, if one simply checks the distance, it does in fact measure 106 geodetic atur. An atur was 15,000 royal cubits, which was also equal to 17,000 of the older geodetic cubits. The figure 106 atur is significant because it is 1/12 of the length of the meridian from the equator to the pole.
You have to know the size of the earth to be able to establish benchmarks that are 1/12 of the length of the meridian from the equator to the pole.
Gilgamesh used the term "cycles of technology", and my quotation of Gilgamesh brought forth an "admin" chastisement that I was deviating from the post subject. Do expect to receive an appropriate chastisment from "admin".
This excerpt is from a non-supernaturalist.
I have no idea if Jim Fournier is or is not a "non-supernaturalist", but you do seem to give a lot of weight to "them" and "secularists" to support your contentions.
This message has been edited by FrankM, 08-02-2004 01:05 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 706 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-01-2004 7:27 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Lindum
Member (Idle past 3396 days)
Posts: 162
From: Colonia Lindensium
Joined: 02-29-2004


Message 709 of 739 (129414)
08-01-2004 9:01 PM
Reply to: Message 688 by Cold Foreign Object
07-31-2004 8:02 PM


Re: LLM
WT writes:
This claim completely avoids the content of the post you responded to.
Please correct me if I missed it, but the post I responded to contained no evidence supporting Smyth’s LLM claim. As Ned has already mentioned, I have not yet addressed the land area claim, nor is it my intention to do so at this time.
WT writes:
The moment I offer a claim without corroborating source it is dismissed as unsupported assertion.
Correct. You’ve offered no source able to quantify Smyth’s claim, only sources which repeat the same bare assertion. You need to supply a source with some numbers to support it. You wouldn’t accept a drawing of the pyramid with an attached claim of its height being x as being evidence now would you? This is no different from what we have with Smyth’s LLM map and claim.
WT writes:
When opponent does it - it is given an exemption to the evidence and source standard.
I have given you the evidence and I am the source — I wasn’t aware that sources must explicitly be third party. Ned gave you similar data to my own in post 144 and pink sasquatch gave a link in post 377: No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.catchpenny.org/pyramid.html which shows two additional meridians longer than Smyth’s. These were posted several weeks ago, have you reviewed them?
According to your sources, what is the length of the land meridian through the Great Pyramid?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 688 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 07-31-2004 8:02 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 710 of 739 (129828)
08-02-2004 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 694 by sidelined
08-01-2004 5:10 AM


It doesn't matter if there are two stars in the entire universe,
whether you are a professional astronomer or not.
In an anonymous debate forum only evidence with source qualifies.
I was TOLD no website qualifies as evidence unless the link contains sources and how the conclusion is determined.
My sources say your subjective conclusions are incorrect.
Whats the point of being required/having sources ?
Answer: to prevent what you are doing: subjectively asserting.
But it doesn't matter, because the 2141 BC date can be independantly verified.
Christ died: 33 AD, every scholar accepts this as the date of the crucifixion.
WW 1 began: 1914, want to challenge this date ?
Backtrack 1 inch to 1 year from these points in the GP TO the Scored Line intersection in the Descending passage/2141 BC and you arrive at 2141 BC.
BTW:
When did the Exodus happen ?
1453 BC
I can prove this date too independantly.
It is irrefutable.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 694 by sidelined, posted 08-01-2004 5:10 AM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 717 by sidelined, posted 08-02-2004 7:22 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 711 of 739 (129835)
08-02-2004 3:53 PM
Reply to: Message 663 by Percy
07-29-2004 9:58 AM


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.
Agreed.
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.
I will shortly be providing additional evidence about the socket stone perimeter and the 286.1 differential figure.
You know that I have not posted any numerology arguments/evidence.
You categorize the 286.1 as such only because you are smart enough to know exactly what is being evidenced.
Numerology is the representation of words/symbols via numbers, naturalists never participate in numerolgy arguments because there is nothing to gain for their persuasion.
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?
I will get to this.
The socket stones are not placed in a true square, and using them yields a slightly awkward pyramid.
True.
I will get to this.
The dimensions of the capstone are not known.
Only if you ignore post 572.
The height is not known.
It is 5813 PI".
You have already confirmed this figure - have you changed your mind ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 663 by Percy, posted 07-29-2004 9:58 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 713 by pink sasquatch, posted 08-02-2004 4:59 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 714 by Trixie, posted 08-02-2004 5:02 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied
 Message 718 by Percy, posted 08-02-2004 8:47 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 712 of 739 (129843)
08-02-2004 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 701 by FrankM
08-01-2004 1:39 PM


Re: Topic
Hi Frank:
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,
Absolutely untrue. You are resorting to a racial bigotry argument - the refuge of the defeated.
Your hatred of Smyth is apparent.
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,
This is what I have claimed from the OP and Smyth is a famous supernaturalist - nothing here is in dispute.
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.
IOW, you assert via your worldview that the Bible is inferior as a trusted source for information.
Smyth is absolutely correct - the ancient Egyptians were at the least beneficiaries of knowledge they inherited from Divine origins.
Smyth's views had considerable influence on those that later investigated the pyramid,
That is the ultimate intent of any scientist - to influence others with the truth of the evidence.
By this logic, anyone who visits the Galapogos Islands and comes away embracing Darwinism is somehow wrong/incorrect/biased.
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.
IOW, the actual evidence contained in the GP must be the product of Egyptians.
The assertions of Egyptologists which assume egyptians built the GP IS ONLY maintained because the evidence is irrefutable otherwise.
Frank:
Thousands of years from now someone like you will postulate that egyptians built the Suez Canal.
How do you explain the interior passage system matching the claims of the Bible ?
You also conveniently ignore Peter Lemesurier's hostlity of Rutherford's christian renderings yet his absolute endorsement of his measurements.
This objective admission by Lemesurier is not impeachable.
70 ton blocks and their placement 40 stories up cannot happen without modern cranes unless the supernatural is involved. We know naturalists are devoted to dogma because they assert ancient human beings could do this contrary to evolutionary scenario and common sense.
The GP could not be built without modern machinery.
Ancients were riding camels and rubbing sticks together - Joshua THOUGHT the sun stood still (it was really the Earth but he reported what he thought had happened).
But naturalists, driven by evidence (supposedly) ignore all of this and say North Africans had the ability and technology to build the 8th wonder of the world.
Romans 1 is absolutely true - when God disables the ability to comprehend Him as the penalty for pre-meditated rejection - it is irrevocable. Violators will capriciously conclude the scientific genius of the GP to be the work of ancient superstitious sun worshippers.
This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 08-02-2004 04:02 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 701 by FrankM, posted 08-01-2004 1:39 PM FrankM has not replied

pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6022 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 713 of 739 (129845)
08-02-2004 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 711 by Cold Foreign Object
08-02-2004 3:53 PM


double-standards in thought and measurement
Hi WILLOWTREE - I haven't been posting in the thread, but I have been keeping up waiting for something interesting to happen.
I was TOLD no website qualifies as evidence unless the link contains sources and how the conclusion is determined.
True. Also, a "source" like Smyth's map and accompanying assertions ALSO needs to include "how the conclusion is determined". Otherwise we have no way to examine his "evidence".
I agree with Ned and Lindum that the LLM claim should have been examined first, and remains to be evidenced properly - though this should be simple since it is perhaps the simplest claim.
Do you have any source that gives exact coordinates for Smyth's rather vague claims? If noone can come up with coordinates that support his claim, then the LLM claim must be dropped, because essentially there is no claim without coordinates.
And a clarification:
WILLOWTREE writes:
Numerology is the representation of words/symbols via numbers, naturalists never participate in numerolgy arguments because there is nothing to gain for their persuasion.
American Heritage Dictionary writes:
Numerology = The study of the occult meanings of numbers and their supposed influence on human life.
It doesn't matter if the numbers are equated to words or years or religious meaning, it is still numerology.
Since the entire work of Rutherford is assigning occult/supernatural meanings to numerical measurements of the pyramid, Rutherford is practicing numerology.
Most of your arguments are numerology.
And a general remark on various statements you've made in multiple posts:
The fact that a measurement is repeated throughout a structure does not equate to the presence of a supernatural or superintelligent designer or architect. You repeatedly mention the 286.1 Rectification Factor as somehow existing as an internal proof of a superintelligent architect.
Why isn't the plausible alternative true - that a measurement/number equivalent to 286.1 SI was of some importance to Egyptian measurement, mathematics, philosophy, aesthetics, or spirituality?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 711 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-02-2004 3:53 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Trixie
Member (Idle past 3705 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 714 of 739 (129847)
08-02-2004 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 711 by Cold Foreign Object
08-02-2004 3:53 PM


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 711 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-02-2004 3:53 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 715 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-02-2004 7:10 PM Trixie has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 715 of 739 (129857)
08-02-2004 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 714 by Trixie
08-02-2004 5:02 PM


Re: Where does Percy say this?
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".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 714 by Trixie, posted 08-02-2004 5:02 PM Trixie has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 716 by jar, posted 08-02-2004 7:19 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 716 of 739 (129858)
08-02-2004 7:19 PM
Reply to: Message 715 by Cold Foreign Object
08-02-2004 7:10 PM


Re: Where does Percy say this?
Actually, Percy was saying that figure was WRONG.
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". All this proves is that Rutherford can do math, since the 5813 PI" figure is derived, not measured. Had Rutherford measured all the angles and sides and found they agreed trigometrically, that would be a different story, but he didn't. He couldn't - the original capstone is no longer there to measure. It can only be inferred.
Unfortunately, Rutherford's height is wrong. {emphasis added}
Percy went on to ask:
Why did Rutherford feel the need to use the incorrect base length to obtain a higher height?
Selective quoting again?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 715 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-02-2004 7:10 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5907 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 717 of 739 (129859)
08-02-2004 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 710 by Cold Foreign Object
08-02-2004 3:31 PM


Willowtree
It doesn't matter if there are two stars in the entire universe,
whether you are a professional astronomer or not.
In an anonymous debate forum only evidence with source qualifies.
I was TOLD no website qualifies as evidence unless the link contains sources and how the conclusion is determined
You never even bothered to check the website did you? If you had you would have easily been able to check the sources for yourself.Must I do your footwork for you?Very well.
Your Sky was implemented by John Walker in January and February of 1998. The calculation and display software was adapted from Home Planet for Windows.
The GIF output file generation is based upon the ppmtogif module of Jef Poskanzer's pbmplus toolkit, of which many other components were used in creating the images you see here.
ppmtogif.c - read a portable pixmap and produce a GIF file
Based on GIFENCOD by David Rowley [mgardi@watdscu.waterloo.edu].
Lempel-Zim compression based on "compress".
Modified by Marcel Wijkstra [wijkstra@fwi.uva.nl]
Copyright 1989 by Jef Poskanzer.
Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its
documentation for any purpose and without fee is hereby granted, provided
that the above copyright notice appear in all copies and that both that
copyright notice and this permission notice appear in supporting
documentation. This software is provided "as is" without express or
implied warranty.
The Graphics Interchange Format is the Copyright property of
CompuServe Incorporated. GIF(sm) is a Service Mark property of
CompuServe Incorporated.
Steven Grimm's uncgi made the task of processing form arguments in the server immeasurably easier.
The algorithms to calculate the positions of the Moon, planets, asteroids, and comets are given in:
Meeus, Jean. Astronomical Algorithms . Richmond: Willmann-Bell, 1998. ISBN 0-943396-63-8.
Stars in full-sky maps and horizon views are plotted using "The Bright Star Catalogue, 5th Revised Edition" [Yale: Hoffleit & Warren 1991], which contains position, magnitude, spectral type, and proper motion data for 9096 stars brighter than magnitude 6.5. It is the most widely used digital star database, since it includes comprehensive information for all naked eye stars. The master versions of this catalogue is distributed on the NASA Astronomical Data Center CD-ROM, were specially processed for use in Your Sky, annotating them with star names, Bayer letters and Flamsteed numbers, and other information. You can obtain copies of this and other astronomical catalogues from the Astronomical Data Center's Archives.
The Virtual Telescope uses the definitive Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory Star Catalogue [SAO: 1966], updated to epoch J2000.0 and corrected by Roman and Warren in 1990. The SAO catalogue is the fundamental professional astrometric reference: it lists more than a quarter of a million stars, providing position, visual and photographic magnitude, proper motion, spectrographic information, and a wealth of other data. The SAO catalogue contains stars as faint as twelfth magnitude, but is generally considered to have a limiting magnitude (the point at which as many stars are missed as are included) of about 9.5. The master versions of these primary references, distributed on the Astronomical Data Center CD-ROM, were specially processed for use in Your Sky, annotating them with star names, Bayer letters and Flamsteed numbers, and other information. Visit the Astronomical Data Center's Archives for your own copy of this database.
The images used in the Your Sky welcome page and the help logo were synthesised using the "noao/artdata" artificial star field generator module of the National Optical Astronomy Observatories' IRAF system. IRAF is an extremely powerful professional image analysis and processing program, and it's free. To generate your own custom star fields and planets, check out our Terranova Screen Saver for Windows. The shadow was added using the Fourmilab Shadow Server.
My sources say your subjective conclusions are incorrect
You have no sources do you? You cannot provide me with their data because either you do not have it or they do not. I am tired of the bullshit.Either put up or shut up.
Backtrack 1 inch to 1 year from these points in the GP TO the Scored Line intersection in the Descending passage/2141 BC and you arrive at 2141 BC.
This is meaningless since it obviously does not correlate with what your sources have claimed it would which is Thuban occupying the polestar position to a very close proximity of the CNP.
How about you give us your sources and the way they determined the position of Thuban in 2141 B.C.?
But it doesn't matter, because the 2141 BC date can be independantly verified
Alrighty now. Let us hear the independant verification seperate from both your sources and mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 710 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-02-2004 3:31 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 718 of 739 (129869)
08-02-2004 8:47 PM
Reply to: Message 711 by Cold Foreign Object
08-02-2004 3:53 PM


Hi WillowTree,
Your points have already been rebutted by others, and I see no need to add anything, though I would like to comment on your claim that you're not making numerological arguments:
I'll wait for your response to the rebuttals, as well as for your addressing the issues you said you would.
By the way, it is long past the time when you said you would address the specific numbers posted regarding the LLM claim in Message 617. These numbers provided by Lindum show that a meridian through the Great Pyramid does not cross more land than any other meridian. The numbers are either right or wrong. If right then your claim fails. Could you please either rebut or confirm them so we can move on? Here are the numbers again:
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 711 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-02-2004 3:53 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 719 of 739 (129877)
08-02-2004 9:42 PM


CHECKMATE
WT/post 556 writes:
Message 556
From "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 QUOTE
From "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, 236
PAGE 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.
NOW I CONTINUE QUOTING LEMESURIER ON PAGE 225 - I WILL REPEAT THE LAST PARAGRAPH AND THEN CONTINUE ON:
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.
....as well as providing impressive checks on each other's accuracy.
Both views of the full-design pyramid, in other words, lead to the conclusion that the base-perimeter was intended to be directly related to the length of the mean solar tropical year (365.242 days).
As to whether we should regard the full-design Pyramid (with Rutherford) as standing on a perfectly square base, or (with Cole) on a slightly distorted one, this must remain a matter for personal preference, since the actual construction was never undertaken. Yet perhaps this fact itself is significant in the context. Had the full-design Pyramid ever been completed, then EITHER Rutherford's Pyramid or that based on Cole's measurements would have been ruled out of account. However, both possibilities exist: the architect has succeeded in having his cake and eating it too. The fact that BOTH perimeter- measurements are for all practical purposes identical suggests that both Rutherford's version AND Cole's were present in the architects mind, the one being merely another version of the other. In this case it is clear that the BASIC design must have been the simple square as proposed by Rutherford.
Here, among other things, we have evidence for the signature of God.
Indigenous to Biblical doctrine is the claim of Divine duality:
omnipresence: two places at the same time.
nature of Christ: God AND man at all times in all expressions.
These are a paradox: Two mutually contradicting realities co-existing at the same time - yet true = signature of God.
Mosaic/O.T. law said by the mouths of "two or three witnesses are things confirmed".
Both secular surveyor Cole and evangelical Rutherford are confirmed correct.
Message 572 contains the missing capstone data and determination.
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.
Post 572 evidences the total area of the missing capstone to of been 286 PI" in overall larger perimeter than the 203rd course/summit platform - based upon the full-design socket edge perimeter.
286 PI" is the distance from the bottom of the Well Shaft to the edge of the pit/abrupt drop off.
286 PI" is the distance the Grand Gallery expands upwards where the Well Shaft breaks in the Grand Gallery.
The Architect intentionally built this precise number into all these specific measured areas.
Message 572 demonstrates that in three other areas of the GP that the height of the GP from the ground to the summit platform to be 5448.736 PI"
This is also obviously intentional by the Architect. Like Lemesurier said, the "architect seems to have devised a way" to guard against the upper courses and their height from being lost.
There is no way around it.
Petrie confirmed and created the diagram exhibiting the 203 courses.
Lemesurier brilliantly shows how the GP incorporates 3 other measurements which confirm the figure 5448.736 AND the 203 courses.
No rational person who generically considers the GP to be a "World Wonder" can dismiss the exact measurement figures of 5448.736 and its multiple appearance, AND the exact measurement figure of 286.1 and its multiple appearance to be nothing other than designer intent.
These figures are measurements AND they contain a message which is undeniable.
5448.736 = 5449 = the grand total of Isaiah 19:19, 20.
That object "in the midst of the land of Egypt and on the border thereof" is thus evidenced to be the Great Pyramid.
Its passage ways perfectly depict the central claims and message of the Bible.
All the layers of evidence as a whole and by themselves prove the whole and the whole proves any individual layer to be true and insulated from being untrue.
Only a Divine being could of amassed this type of evidence.
Edit: spelling errors.
This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 08-02-2004 10:08 PM

Replies to this message:
 Message 720 by Percy, posted 08-03-2004 10:10 AM Cold Foreign Object has replied
 Message 721 by Percy, posted 08-03-2004 10:23 AM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 726 by Trixie, posted 08-03-2004 5:07 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 720 of 739 (129979)
08-03-2004 10:10 AM
Reply to: Message 719 by Cold Foreign Object
08-02-2004 9:42 PM


Re: CHECKMATE
You haven't said anything here that you haven't said before. Especially puzzling is your return to the accuracy issue. I suggest you follow my suggestion of many messages ago and try measuring something on your desk to a 10,000th of an inch. Try measuring the diameter of something circular. If it's small and you have a micrometer you may be able to get as accurate as a 100th of an inch. Let's say the diameter is .87 inches. Now multiply by pi to get the circumference, which would give us 2.73318561. But we only have accuracy to the 100ths of an inch, so the best we can say is that the circumference is 2.73 inches.
You can carry the value 2.73318561 forward for other calculations if you like and postpone the rounding to significant digits for the later stages, but you still don't have accuracy beyond 100ths of an inch.
It would be helpful if you could move the discussion forward by responding to the rebuttals instead of just repeating your unsupported assertions. We already know what you're asserting. What we're seeking is the evidence supporting those assertions. To the black knight analogy I think I'll now add the "Dave's not here" routine from Cheech and Chong. Your mind too clouded to consider and weigh the counterarguments, you instead just repeat, "It must be divine."
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 719 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-02-2004 9:42 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 722 by GVGS58, posted 08-03-2004 2:32 PM Percy has not replied
 Message 723 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-03-2004 3:16 PM Percy has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024