Thread: The 2012 'Paradigm Shift.' Is it in its beginning stages?

How do you know they're translating those people honestly? What if they're really saying "They stacked stones, it's a complete mystery to me why you people keep asking, truly confounding"

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

SECRETS OF THE PYRAMIDS REVEALED - YouTube

I am basing my argument, almost entirely, upon what I have learned from this video.

Well I guess that's the difference between you and I, I am not basing my claims entirely on a video called "SECRETS OF THE PYRAMIDS REVEALED" (in all caps)...

You do know that there is an entire field of science called Egyptology right? Why must you migrate towards the ooga booga stuff, there is plenty of fascinating, legitimate research out there.

Originally Posted by Xei

Civilisations come and go. Nobody said it was a smooth pattern. The trend up till the present day has however been upwards, unequivocally. When have we ever taken a step backwards? The idea that the history of the universe is based on reverting to a primitive stage and starting all over again is utter nonsense; complexity has risen up and up and up. Do you expect humans to turn back into chimp like creatures? Do you think we are going to stop farming and return to hunter gathering? Forget how to use language, or tools? Do you think life is going to turn back into simple bacteria?

http://www.dreamviews.com/f96/2012-p...ml#post1804566

Do you dispute that post or something? Would you like to label the breaking of some other paradigms? Or are you seriously saying that the pattern there is not of telescoping timescales but a steady cycle?

Exponential increase is not sustainable, but it doesn't imply collapse either, and it certainly doesn't imply a cycle. This is something you have made up.

Ok so it's gone up for a while if you ignore everything else which hasn't gotten more advanced.
Civilisations have collapsed and you're saying it doesn't matter we still kept getting more advanced. What about the Antikythera device which is a pretty obvious sign that there were more advanced civilisations and then that level of technology didn't occur again until the 1400's.

We went backward.

Originally Posted by Xei

What about Moses parting the red sea? Let's talk about that too.

I wasn't saying it was true, you just said that there are no records which talk about an advanced post-industrial technological society.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

To assume that the pyramids and other ancient granite structures could be built with anything less than industrialized technology is evidence that you have not done enough research into ancient society.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Well I guess that's the difference between you and I, I am not basing my claims entirely on a video called "SECRETS OF THE PYRAMIDS REVEALED" (in all caps)...

You do know that there is an entire field of science called Egyptology right? Why must you migrate towards the ooga booga stuff, there is plenty of fascinating, legitimate research out there.

I suppose that's the difference between you and I, you judge things at face value and automatically trust the consensus. How's the flat earth treatin ya?

Just so you know the actual name of the documentary is called The Revelation of the Pyramids but copyright protection motivated them to change the name. It was uploaded by a user who decided all caps was a good idea, that doesn't mean the creators of the doc write in all caps. Furthermore, about half the people who are interviewed in the Documentary are Egyptologists and other sorts of specific Archaeologists. The other half are mathematicians and engineers.

If you aren't going to bother investigating my sources yourself, you have no place participating in this thread. Feel free to exclude yourself from further debate.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

How's the flat earth treatin ya?

According to scientific consensus (and common sense at this point), the Earth is not flat. The people who still claim that the Earth is flat are the same paranoid wackos who tote government conspiracies and corrupt scientists.

Consensus is not a bad thing, proper science depends on it. One result is meaningless, hundreds of identical ones start painting a picture. Fringe science that has become legitimate over time has only done so through consensus.

Why do you trust the lesser-backed claim other than the psychological appeal and fascination we all have for the far-fetched?

If you aren't going to bother investigating my sources yourself, you have no place participating in this thread. Feel free to exclude yourself from further debate.

Right, cause you're going to watch every 2 hour video I send your way... I watched the intro, read the various tags such as "extraterrestrial", "UFO", "conspiracy" and decided it wasn't an appropriate use of my time.

If this video is all you base your ideas on, how do you even know that the facts presented within are accurate?


Question: What do you think about the obvious evolution of Egyptian pyramids in the span of a few hundred years? From simple Mastabas, to the Step Pyramid of Djoser, to the Bent Pyramid, to the Great Pyramids of Giza... Kind of reminds you of the architectural progress and one-upmanship that was seen in American skyscraper construction during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, no? It's an old school version of "I want my building to be bigger than his building".

What UFOs are you talking about? Just goes to show you have no fucking clue what the video is about. Were this the 1500s, you'd be arguing the earth is flat right now and calling that Columbus guy a wacko. Consensus =/= truth.

You don't even have the patience to spend an hour and forty minutes learning something new, and yet you call me uninformed.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

What UFOs are you talking about? Just goes to show you have no fucking clue what the video is about. Were this the 1500s, you'd be arguing the earth is flat right now and calling that Columbus guy a wacko. Consensus =/= truth.

Do you know what Youtube tags are? One of the tags for this video is "UFO".

You don't even have the patience to spend an hour and forty minutes learning something new being bombarded with inaccurate claims and pseudoscientific theories

In the time that you would have preferred I watch that video, I was actually reading up on Egypt's Old Kingdom out of pure self-interest.

Did you know that we still have statues or figurines of most of the pharaohs who built the pyramids? This man built the largest of them all:

Spoiler for Khufu:

Fascinating, no?


Feel free to respond to the rest of my post that was far more intellectually stimulating.

P.S. The Flat Earth Myth

I have given you all the tools you need. If you still wish to believe the great pyramid of giza was built in 20 years, using handheld copper and stone tools... there's nothing I can do for you.

The only sure barrier to truth is to assume you know it already.

Good bow out, archaeology's a bitch.

Answer this question: How did they build the pyramid in 23 years with stone and copper?

Also, a follow up question, how did they know which direction was true north in?

And a follow up question, how did they know of Pi and Phi

And another question, how did they use handheld tools to make the measurements so precise?

And another question, how did they carve completely symmetrical statues by hand?

How did they build monuments with precision we couldn't even accomplish now, with modern technology?

All I ask from you right now, Spartiate, is to keep an open mind. That's it. You refuse. You're worse than a Mormon.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

Answer this question: How did they build the pyramid in 23 years with stone and copper?

Copper cuts limestone rather easily. The granite was cut using a heat-quench technique.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

Also, a follow up question, how did they know which direction was true north in?

Geographic north is easy...just look for the star that doesn't move. It would have been more impressive if they found magnetic north, which they did not.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

And a follow up question, how did they know of Pi and Phi

You're going to be more specific. Being able to draw a circle doesn't mean you "know pi". Wow, you're looking dumb.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

And another question, how did they use handheld tools to make the measurements so precise?

How do you dress yourself in the morning?

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

And another question, how did they carve completely symmetrical statues by hand?

They used tools.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

How did they build monuments with precision we couldn't even accomplish now, with modern technology?

Be more specific. Which monument(s) are NOT POSSIBLE with modern technology? Keep in mind, you said NOT POSSIBLE.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

All I ask from you right now, Spartiate, is to keep an open mind. That's it. You refuse. You're worse than a Mormon.

You make real open-minded people look bad. You make it seem like open-mindedness is akin to psychosis and paranoid delusion. In fact, it is you that are most closed-minded, as you refuse to accept objective reality. You're starting to look like this guy:

Originally Posted by tommo

Ok so it's gone up for a while if you ignore everything else which hasn't gotten more advanced.
Civilisations have collapsed and you're saying it doesn't matter we still kept getting more advanced. What about the Antikythera device which is a pretty obvious sign that there were more advanced civilisations and then that level of technology didn't occur again until the 1400's.

We went backward.

Yes, like I said, it's not perfect. Everybody knows that the Greeks were a civilisation of unprecedented advancement, and after the fall of Greece a lot of that knowledge was put on hold. The Antikythera device demonstrates their skill, but to say it is an anomaly is very much to overstate things; it just models the motions of the planets which are easily available to observation. The Greeks came up with intellectual autonomy, but they never really came close to the scientific method, or make much lasting philosophical progress; their cosmological model, as a pertinent example, was still heliocentric.

The point we are at now, with respects to complexity and knowledge, is far beyond anything that came before. The point we were at a century ago far exceeded anything before that. The same for the Greeks. The same for the agricultural revolution. The same for the emergence of culture. The same for the emergence of language. And so on and so on and so on; these facts are inherently contradictory to to notion of a wave, in which we would expect to see these paradigms being broken time and again. They weren't: they have been broken once, and once broken, they have extremely strong sticking power.

I wasn't saying it was true, you just said that there are no records which talk about an advanced post-industrial technological society.

Oh I see, sorry. Well, distinguishing correct historical sources from religious ones is a job I will leave to historians. But note the lack of any historical records describing any industrial processes or devices.

I bet you guys don't even know how many sides there are to the pyramid of Giza

I bet you don't even know how many pyramids are at Giza.

96 or 98, now how many sides does Giza have?

No, and I'm also inclined to believe that you don't know what Giza is either.

138, I guess more have been discovered since I was in school. Now how many sides does the pyramid of giza have? I don't even know why I bother, you obviously don't know.

I have another question, since the egyptians documented themselves and their kings with such scrutiny, how come there's no record of them building the pyramids? You seem so sure you know how they were constructed, and yet egyptologists can't even agree. The only thing they can agree on is that all their theories are impossible.

Also if you take the perimeter of the pyramid and divide it by two times the height, you get a number that is exactly equivalent to the number pi (3.14159...) up to the fifteenth digit

And that's just the tip of the iceburg.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

96 or 98, now how many sides does Giza have?

Giza is a place, OD.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

138, I guess more have been discovered since I was in school.

There are 3 major pyramids in Giza with about a half dozen satellite pyramids.

Now how many sides does the pyramid of giza have?

Including extra dimensions?

I have another question, since the egyptians documented themselves and their kings with such scrutiny (not really but OK), how come there's no record of them building the pyramids? You seem so sure you know how they were constructed, and yet egyptologists can't even agree. The only thing they can agree on is that all their theories are impossible.

I never once talked about how they were built, and I don't pretend to know. There are a few realistic theories floating about that have been alluded to earlier in this thread. As for who built the pyramids, there is little disagreement on that.

Egyptian pyramids - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also if you take the perimeter of the pyramid and divide it by two times the height, you get a number that is exactly equivalent to the number pi (3.14159...) up to the fifteenth digit.

This kinda works. Khufu's Pyramid is accurate to the 2nd digit, Khafre's Pyramid only gives 3.0, so again your facts are wrong. If it's relevant, Egyptians did have a rudimentary approximation for pi.

And that's just the tip of the iceburg.

Warn the Titanec!

I don't really care to name the Great Pyramid after a king that used it second hand, so I don't use the word Khufu to describe the Great Pyramid of Giza.

And I'm still waiting to hear how many sides it has.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

This kinda works. Khufu's Pyramid is accurate to the 2nd digit, Khafre's Pyramid only gives 3.0, so again your facts are wrong. If it's relevant, Egyptians did have a rudimentary approximation for pi.

It's not related. There just happens to be certain dimensions that work given the materials you're working with. Anyone who claims that some ratio is pi really has to demonstrate that it's extremely close to pi. 3 is not that close. Apparently OD realizes this, since he lied and said it fit pi to 15 digits, so he knows that 1 or 2 digits wouldn't be impressive.

Also, how would OD explain the Bent Pyramid? Did the Egyptians change their value of pi half way through?

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

And I'm still waiting to hear how many sides it has.

4 above ground, plus a floor. So 5 sides total. Now you're going to tell me that it's actually 13, right?

There are 8 sides above ground





I'll be making a new thread about this topic, I don't really feel like compiling all the coincidences and engineering impossibilities just so a couple dumbasses can close their eyes and sing lalala. Expect it in the next couple of days.

Umm...I'm not sure where you're getting this information that the pyramids are concave or convex on the sides. I need to see a reputable source on that. Your assertions =/= source.

Also, the picture you posted doesn't seem to indicate any concavity whatsoever.

EDIT: I can see how you might see an illusion of concavity due to the vertical lines going down the sides, but those are just due to erosion and the way the blocks were laid. If you pay careful attention to the base of the pyramid (the lines where it touches the ground), you'll notice that it does indeed have 4 sides. Use a ruler if you don't believe me.