Ms. Kelly M. shared this article with me, and given my fascination for all things Egyptological, I simply am compelled to blog about it, because as the title of this blog indicates, I was simply stunned at the dating now being proposed, and oddly, somewhat satisfied. I'll explain the satisfaction in a moment, but first  the article itself:

Now as the article itself indicates, the redating of the Sphinx became a subject of considerable controversy when Dr. Robert Shoch, a geologist, examined the weathering on and around the monument, and concluded that the structure showed signs of water erosion, a fact first suggested by the renowned esotericist and "alternative Egyptologist" Rene Schwaller DeLubicz:

The starting point of these two experts is the paradigm shift initiated by West and Schoch, a ‘debate’ intended to overcome the orthodox view of Egyptology referring to the possible remote origins of the Egyptian civilization and, on the other, physical evidence of water erosion present at the monuments of the Giza Plateau.

Because of these water weathering and erosion features, Dr. Schoch concluded that the Sphinx had to be a far older structure than standard Egyptology was willing to grant, for significant rainfall could only be dated to its most recent period in that region of the world, the so-called sub-pluvial period, and thus the Sphinx had to be approximately 8000-10,000 years old. In other words, it was older than ancient Egypt itself(at least, by standard Egyptological chronologies). Needless to say, Dr. Shoch's conclusions were met with a storm of denunciation from the "science" of Egyptology.

But the re-dating being proposed exceeds Shoch's by an order of magnitude:

Manichev and Parkhomenko propose a new natural mechanism that may explain the undulations and mysterious features of the Sphinx. This mechanism is the impact of waves on the rocks of the coast. Basically, this could produce, in a period of thousands of years the formation of one or more layers of ripples, a fact that is clearly visible, for example, on the shores of the Black Sea. This process, which acts horizontally (that is, when the waves hit the rock up to the surface), will produce a wear or dissolution of the rock.


Manichev and Parkhomenko firmly believe that the Sphinx had to be submerged for a long time under water and, to support this hypothesis, they point towards existing literature of geological studies of the Giza Plateau. According to these studies at the end of the Pliocene geologic period (between 5.2 and 1.6 million years ago), sea water entered the Nile valley and gradually creating flooding in the area. This led to formation of lacustrine deposits which are at the mark of 180 m above the present level of the Mediterranean Sea.

According to Manichev and Parkhomenko, it is the sea level during the Calabrian phase which is the closest to the present mark with the highest GES hollow at its level. High level of sea water also caused the Nile overflowing and created long-living water-bodies. As to time it corresponds to 800000 years.

What we have here is evidence which contradicts the conventional theory of deterioration caused by Sand and Water, a theory already criticized by West and Schoch, who recalled that during many centuries, the body of the Sphinx was buried by the sands of the desert, so Wind and Sand erosion would not have done any damage to the enigmatic Sphinx.

However, where Schoch clearly saw the action of streams of water caused by continuous rains, Ukrainian geologists see the effect of erosion caused by the direct contact of the waters of the lakes formed in the Pleistocene on the body Sphinx. This means that the Great Sphinx of Egypt is one of the oldest monuments on the surface of the Earth, pushing back drastically the origin of mankind and civilization.

Some might say that the theory proposed by Manichev and Parkhomenko is very extreme because it places the Great Sphinx in an era where there were no humans, according to currently accepted evolutionary patterns. Furthermore, as it has been demonstrated, the two megalithic temples, located adjacent to the Great Sphinx were built by the same stone which means that the new dating of the Sphinx drags these monuments with the Sphinx back 800,000 years. In other words, this means that ancient civilizations inhabited our planet much longer than mainstream scientists are willing to accept.  (Emphasis added)

Now why do I find this both stunning and somewhat satisfying? Well, I've long been on record as having suspected that the other famous monument of the Giza plateau, the Great Pyramid itself, is a far older structure than even most "alternative" research is willing to entertain. Years ago, the late George Ann Hughes of the Byte Show asked this question of my, and I responded that the structure might be quite old, and proposed various dates in this range. If one recalls the arguments Alan Alford which I reviewed in The Giza Death Star Deployed, he discerns three different chronological layers of construction at Giza: (1) the oldest layer, with the most precise construction, represented by the Great Pyramid, (2) a more recent, but still very ancient and pre-ancient-Egyptian layer, represented by the Sphinx, the various Giza temples, and the Second Pyramid, and finally (3) the most recent and purely ancient Egyptian layer, showing a distinct decline in construction. Thus, if one combines the paper of Manichev and Parkhomenko redating the Sphinx to ca. 800,000 years ago, with Alford's "three chronological layers of construction" hypothesis of the plateau, then one ends with an age for the Great Pyramid considerably older than that.

Of course, I don't expect for a moment that Manichev's and Parkhomenko's paper will be met with anything but extreme derision in the Egyptological community, any more than Shoch's was, and there's every possibility that it will be too much and too extreme even for the alternative research community. But if it eventually should be corroborated by some other finding or research, then it does perhaps constitute a kind of loose corroboration of Mr. Christopher Dunn's machine hypothesis  - and let it be noted that Mr. Dunn, to my knowledge, has never advanced such an extreme antiquity for the Great Pyramid - and more importantly, such extreme antiquity would seem to corroborate the types of hypotheses I was advancing my Giza trilogy and in The Cosmic War.

See you on the flip side...

Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and "strange stuff". His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into "alternative history and science".


  1. Doc Skinner on December 28, 2015 at 5:05 am

    Perhaps the this new theory doesn’t account for rapid changes in geology? The kind that raises mountains almost overnight, or similar galactic or cosmic level electrical phenomena causing isotropic compression/rebound as might have happened during the Younger Dryas…

  2. TRM on December 22, 2015 at 12:19 am

    Or the simplest explanation is that the rock that became the lion was submerged and weathered underwater 800k years ago then became above water as the geology of the area changed.
    If enough of the rock looked like a lion then carving just the parts that needed to be carved would leave a lot of the original underwater weathering in place.
    I still side with Dr Shoch that the lion was carved around 10,000 BC or 12k before present.

  3. DownunderET on December 19, 2015 at 3:32 pm

    WHY IS IT…that main stream archeology and Egyptology poo poo any new theories, is this still this old cover up story that has been telling us lies for all these years. Joseph’ theory of a ancient Cosmic War is one of the most compelling theories I have ever heard. The fact is, that this war was fought at either 3.2 million years ago, OR 65 million years ago between two sides of the Annunaki family, and they used the great pyramid as a weapon. So the great pyramid has to be at LEAST 3.2 million years old, right, let that sink in for a while. This is just part of the story of a very high ancient civilization in antiquity that were here on Earth, and for whatever reason, they were wiped out OR left, BUT THEY WERE HERE !!!!

  4. goshawks on December 19, 2015 at 3:15 pm

    Interesting! I did not know of the rising sea level (or possible-lowering of the local crust) in that area, “…180 m above the present level of the Mediterranean Sea.” Wow! (That would put-paid to any organic items in deeply-buried chambers within porous-limestone rocks…)

    In one way, the claim that 800,000 years puts this beyond what we know of as humanity may be right. The hidden-assumption here is that the Sphinx was built by humans (or even the Anunnaki). It may have been built by some unknown race, perhaps as an Apollo 11 ‘placque’ à la a ‘we reached this far’ memorial. Or even a Viking ‘we claim this land’ stone. Etc.

    Various authors have noted the aesthetic mismatch of head-size to body-size in the Sphinx. A carving-down is the usual explanation. Given that the rest of the Sphinx is of leonine (Robert Temple would say jackal-ine) proportions, the most-obvious inference is that the head originally was also leonine. The next step, verboten to most, is that the entire Sphinx was carved by some ‘race’ in THEIR likeness.

    These aliens may have just been passing-through, been ‘marking their territory’, or who-knows-what’ motivation. They have likely been gone for a looong time. I suspect the Anunnaki re-cut the head when they finally-arrived…

  5. zephyr on December 19, 2015 at 12:18 pm

    This is fascinating. Egyptologists only look at evidence with eyes wide shut. I have thought that your view of the Great Pyramid is sound and sensible. Before reading your books I already thought it was constructed in the very distant past for an unknown purpose. I was naïve for many years thinking that scientists, researchers, archaeologists, etc. had inquiring minds wanting to understand and discover the essence of their discipline. I didn’t realize it was a “done deal”!

  6. Nathan on December 19, 2015 at 11:50 am

    This is great news! I always held the belief that mankind has been around a lot longer than we are told, also that mankind has greater technology then we do today and that it was a world linked together, and he’s Marcos indeed TPTB luciferian methodology is crumbling away

  7. Robert Barricklow on December 19, 2015 at 11:44 am

    Scientific ventures into the ancient truths of our planet have suffered their own delusional floods of corrupted science by vested interests. These purposed erosions of truths, through time, have been biblical.

    • Nathan on December 19, 2015 at 11:51 am

      Absolutely! Although I do believe a handful of people know the truth , this is why brainwashing the masses on all levels is a must

  8. Aridzonan_13 on December 19, 2015 at 11:36 am

    Saw a recent video that highlighted the inconsistencies of the Sphinx. How long the body was buried in the sand would definitely push back it’s construction a long way. The head has definitely been re-furbished. How many times is the question. However, in the same video. There was a board walk at the front and obvious core drillings around the body. Apparently, someone has finally gone looking for the Caycian chambers.. Maybe this is a sign our true history might finally be coming to the fore. See link for more details:

    • Nathan on December 19, 2015 at 11:57 am

      Thanx for the link

      • marcos toledo on December 19, 2015 at 2:31 pm

        I will second that thanks for the link Aridzonan

    • TRM on December 23, 2015 at 1:37 am

      Dr Shoch found a chamber under the Sphinx’s paw but the opposite one that Cayce had said. Nobody knows what’s in it if anything. Very interesting though. It might be the angle that Cayce was visualizing from. If he was facing the Sphinx then he was correct but if it was the Sphinx’s perspective then wrong. Lottsa Fun.

  9. marcos toledo on December 19, 2015 at 11:20 am

    The Sumerian King lists anyone pyramids in Bosnia OOP artifacts from around the World. Science no better than religion just as dogmatic then there is that shoe print fossil crunching trilobites the list goes on. The academic, religious, political house of cards is imploding around the World and our elites bleat they know everything and they have it all under control.

    • Nathan on December 19, 2015 at 11:52 am

      Their luciferian methodology is crumbling before our eyes

  10. Lost on December 19, 2015 at 10:59 am

    Robert Temple points to strong evidence that the Sphinx was surrounded by a moat; this explains why the water erosion is confined to the paws and lower body. From this Temple keeps the Sphinx dating within what would be called conventional Egyptology.

    He also posits that the head was recarved from a jackal, dog, to that of a pharaoh.

    • goshawks on December 19, 2015 at 2:47 pm

      I have read that book by Temple. He actually does make a good case for a moat around the Sphinx. (I would see the modifications for a moat as a later-addition, reflecting the Nile River’s gradual movement away from the base of the Sphinx.)

      Where Temple overreaches is in attributing the higher-up weathering around the Sphinx enclosure to natural water-runoff collected from minor rains on the Giza Plateau in ‘dynastic’ times. Robert Schoch did an elevation-analysis of the Giza Plateau in response to this criticism, and found that most runoff-water does not reach the Sphinx enclosure.

      • Lost on December 19, 2015 at 5:34 pm


        I don’t have the Temple book to consult.

        Don’t remember much comment on the higher up water effects. But as I say, don’t have the book.

    • TRM on December 22, 2015 at 12:23 am

      Dr Shoch spent an entire appendix in his most recent book addressing that theory. I encourage you to read it. In short, I side with Dr Shoch on that one “the moat theory doesn’t hold water”


  11. Angelo on December 19, 2015 at 7:16 am


  12. WalkingDead on December 19, 2015 at 5:53 am

    There are some biblical scholars who believe that there was a pre Adamic civilization which was destroyed by God prior to the creation of mankind. This doesn’t sit well with others, but the book of Genesis may offer some proof of this in its first chapter.
    The fact that these structures are antediluvian seems highly likely, but as to how much older than that may continue to be a mystery.

    • DanaThomas on December 19, 2015 at 7:23 am

      This was in Jeremiah 4:26, with its “broken down” cities, also cited by Dr. Farrell.
      One of these days, the Church of Egyptology will have to start looking more at the evidence – as the early archaeologists did in fact do – and less at the academic dogmas. Which are of course pitifully recent even when compared with the millennia of “recognized” Egytian Dynastic history.

      • WalkingDead on December 19, 2015 at 1:42 pm

        It may well be that the first denizens of the earth were the sons of God (AKA Angels) under the leadership of Lucifer. These were most likely some of the ones who followed him in the war in Heaven and who were later cast down to earth. It may be that whatever cities were constructed by them were destroyed in that war, indeed the entire earth may have been laid waste for it was without form and void. Other planets within our system appear to bare evidence of similar destruction.
        It isn’t just our fellow man we are doing battle with but “principalities and powers” as well. One could argue that these are extraterrestrial in nature.
        Mankind has known from the beginning that he wasn’t alone in the universe. The gods/titans of old may well have been fallen angels and their offspring. The exceptionally long reigns of the first Sumerian kings may be evidence of this as well as the megalithic structures found world wide.
        That war continues to this day and we are now caught up in it, so it would seem.
        The true history of the earth has long been suppressed, but by whom and for what reason. Only time will answer this question. There are many ancient texts with as many versions of what once was and may yet come to be.
        It’s easy to believe in gods who have walked amongst us with human attributes and frailties, quite another to take on faith something unseen and incomprehensible. Who among us can lay claim to the answer.

Help the Community Grow

Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.

Upcoming Events