Healthypages

Huge discoveries of ancient Egypt from satellites

Discussion in 'Scientific Matters' started by Venetian, May 25, 2011.

  1. Venetian

    Venetian New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2003
    Messages:
    10,398
    Likes Received:
    10
    Two new and probably extremely old pyramids (if those words make sense?), 1,000 tombs, and 3,000 settlements have been discovered in Egypt, buried beneath the soil and sand, but visible to satellite infra-red imaging.

    BBC News - Egyptian pyramids found by infra-red satellite images

    There's a TV documentary on this next Monday. And it may only be the beginning of such research as many structures will be buried deeper. Exciting times for Egyptology.

    V
     
  2. tigress

    tigress New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Messages:
    6,844
    Likes Received:
    1
    I noticed that yesterday , was excited myself, so the archeologists must be like a dog with 2 tails
     
  3. jbarry

    jbarry New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    1,027
    Likes Received:
    0
    Outstanding!
     
  4. Venetian

    Venetian New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2003
    Messages:
    10,398
    Likes Received:
    10
    Yes, outstanding. I get the impression that though virtually all ancient Egyptian tombs have long-since been raided, before modern times, many of these, being buried beneath soil or sand naturally, may be untouched ....

    I also get the impression there's a lot more there, or the culture was larger - more people and settlements - than had been realised.

    V
     
  5. CarolineN

    CarolineN New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Messages:
    4,758
    Likes Received:
    28
    Very exciting indeed!! Hope the programme does it all justice. I often find they put things forward as interesting, then when the programme comes out I am disappointed as it tells one very little.

    Amazing to think all that evidence of civilisation is still out there to be uncovered! About 8000BC apparently the sahara was savannah grassland and had plentiful rainfall. I always thought that a young civilisation couldn't have constructed the pyramids - it had to be one that had matured.

    I shall not be missing the programme however. :D
     
  6. Venetian

    Venetian New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2003
    Messages:
    10,398
    Likes Received:
    10
    Well, you probably, I'm guessing, know about the geological studies of the Sphinx, or studies of the Sphinx by geologists anyway. That they say it shows signs of weathering from frequent rainstorms which mean it was around - according to them - at least as far back as 8,000 BC, and hence not a part of the ancient Egyptian civilisation we know of.

    V
     
  7. CarolineN

    CarolineN New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Messages:
    4,758
    Likes Received:
    28
    Absolutely! Weather patterns change as does the vegetation - but the archeologists don't recognise it and say the Sphinx is a lot newer. To me it was obviously a lion, facing East, and for the age of Leo! It was then altered at a very much later date. I also believe the pyramids (Giza) were built about the same time as the sphinx and was no more a tomb than the pyramid attached to the Louvre - but then I am being controversial.;) I am thinking at least 10,000 years ago.

    There are some assumptions that archeologists make that infuriate me - like when they find something that they don't recognise it is always attributed to being used for worship of some unknown deity!
     
    #7 CarolineN, May 26, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: May 26, 2011
  8. Venetian

    Venetian New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2003
    Messages:
    10,398
    Likes Received:
    10
    I know, I know .... archeology, if it can be called a science at all, has to be up there (or down there) as a contender for the most badly conducted science of all. I don't know if you've read Forbidden Archeology? Hundreds of examples in a very thick tome of where something has been found which is completely out of the current archeological world-view, and therefore is discounted, not reported. ("That stainless steel implement must have fallen into the hole while we were digging.")

    V
     
  9. CarolineN

    CarolineN New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Messages:
    4,758
    Likes Received:
    28
    Hi V

    I believe I have read quotes from it - like the gold necklace found in a lump of coal in Northumberland which has since disappeared. Oh and the iron bits in the so-called Khufu pyramid. The exquisite gold jewelery found at Ur was not the product of a young civilisation, etc. Oh and the maps of Antarctica which show it as two large islands with a channel between them and rivers running to the sea ... and the like.

    Looks like I have some more reading coming up!!
     
  10. Venetian

    Venetian New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2003
    Messages:
    10,398
    Likes Received:
    10
    The map isn't in the Forbidden Archeology book but is amazing all the same. It's thought to be copied from an earlier map. But the point is that it accurately shows the real land-mass of Antarctica as it would be if not covered with an immensely thick icecap. The ice extends out to sea, so only modern technology can show us the real coastline. But that map has the coastline, and where now it's ice a mile (?) thick, the map shows rivers and mountain chains accurately as they would exist without the ice.

    Unless there's another explanation, and I don't think anyone's come up with one, the original map, logically, is from a time so ancient that Antarctica had no ice. Yet it must have taken untold ages to build up an icecap like that.

    V
     
  11. CarolineN

    CarolineN New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Messages:
    4,758
    Likes Received:
    28
    That's certainly my understanding. You have reawakened my interest in such things and I'm itching to get back to see what has been uncovered recently. It's not that long since I read Graham Hancock's Underworld - Flooded Kingdoms of the Ice Age - not that many subaquatic archeologists. His hypothesis is well supported by information from academic geographic departments, and makes a lot of sense. Perhaps there were floods when Antarctic defrosted too.

    But I'm veering off topic. There has to have been more of Egyptian civilisation than is obvious today.
     
  12. Follicular

    Follicular New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2011
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    0
    I heard they were turning up ruins in Cambodia in the same way as well, very exciting.
     
  13. Follicular

    Follicular New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2011
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    0
    You can kind of understand them though, its one of those things where you can get professionally ruined by making a misjudged remark, because there really are a load of wackos trying to push their own ideas as well. Its a terrible pity that they miss so many discoveries by being conservative though.
     

Share This Page

This site uses XenWord.