NEW STUDY: IS THE GREAT SPHINX OF GIZA OVER 800,000 YEARS OLD?

NEW STUDY: IS THE GREAT SPHINX OF GIZA OVER 800,000 YEARS OLD?

Ms. S.H. shared this one with me, and I have to share it in spite of my misgivings. And perhaps I should explain those misgivings, for if you've followed by various books over the years on the subjects of "ancient stuff" and "Gizalology", you'll know that the implications of my wild and crazy ideas about the place is that some of the structures there are incomparably old, and by old, I mean old even in terms of the reigning views in the alternative research community and its "heretical historiographical orthodoxies." IN other words, I've been way beyond even those, which like to date the Sphinx to the Egyptian subpluvial period (and hence, to an age of about 8-10,000 BC). If you're following the logic of Allan Alford here and his idea of the three layers and eras of construction at Giza, witht he Great Pyramid representing the oldest layer, then the second pyramid, the Sphinx, and Valley temples representing the next and slightly younger layer, and then (3) a third layer dating from early dynastic Egypt itself, then any such redating of the Sphinx should make me ecstatically happy, right, for that would push the Great Pyramid back into the remote mists of high antiquity and prehistory, and make all my other hypotheses with the chronological cunundrums a bit more manageable, right?

Well, yea, of course, all that's true. And that's why part of me is skeptical when a piece of information appears out of nowhere that seems to corroborate some of the more difficult aspects of my ideas, not the least of which is precisely an extreme antiquity for those firts two layers of Giza construction.

But, nonetheless, here it is:

http://www.ancient-code.com/scientists-geological-evidence-shows-the-great-sphinx-is-800000-years-old/

And here's the original scientific PDF:

308 Geoarchaeology and Archaeomineralogy (Eds. R. I. Ko stov, B. Gaydarska, M. Gurova). 2008. Proceedings of the International Conference, 2930 October 2008 Sofia, Publishing House “St. Ivan Rils ki”, Sofia, 308311. GEOLOGICAL ASPECT OF THE PROBLEM OF DATING THE GREA T EGYPTIAN SPHINX CONSTRUCTION

Now, notably, the Ukrainian authors of this paper start with Dr Robert Shoch's redating of the Sphinx, but then go on to note the strange undulating erosion pattern on the SPhinx's body, which they point out, in contradiction to the "orthodox explanation" of wind erosion, is simply impossible because the same pattern of erosion does not show up on the PShinx's head, which, unlike the body, has been more or less permanently exposed to the elements in the past.

THen comes the clincher:

Manichev and Parkhomenko suggest that the geological composition of the body of the Sphinx is a sequence of layers composed of limestone with small interlayers of clays. Manichev and Parkhomenko explain that these rocks possess different degree of resistance to the water effect and say that if the hollows formation were due to sand abrasion only, the hollows had to correspond to the strata of a certain lithological composition. They suggest that the Great Sphinx hollows are formed in fact within several strata, or occupy some part of the stratum of homogeneous composition.

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.
(Emphasis added)

Now, if all this is true, then what Manichev and Parkhomenko are suggesting is truly stunning: (1) the Sphinx shows signs of water erosion typical of a coastal object exposed to submersion over a prolonged time, and is thus, by any raqtional consideration, a primordial ante-diluvian monument; (2) in order to effect this, the period of time for it to be submersed had to be between 5.2 and 1.6 million years about, and at the terminus post quem, not later than 800,000 years old. Now for those familair with my Cosmic War, the dates being suggested by Mr. Manichev and Parkhomenko clearly fall within the "best guess" parameter I made in that book of a 3.2 million years-ago-date for the "cosmic war."

Of course, we can fairly well predict that there will be howls of protest and rejection from Westen Universities since (1) they are but ideology-manufacturing and orthodoxy-testing centers and (2) they didn't make the argument themselves. And of course, the final howl of protest will be simply because all of this challenges the carefully contrived narrative of human origins, and of the origins of civilization. But if Manichev and Parkhomenko are correct, it's a paradigm changer.

See you on the flip side...

34 thoughts on “NEW STUDY: IS THE GREAT SPHINX OF GIZA OVER 800,000 YEARS OLD?”

    1. https://cdn.preterhuman.net/texts/religion.occult.new_age/occult.conspiracy.and.related/Ellis,%20Ralph%20-%20Assorted%20Articles.pdf

      “So let’s now review the information that Ralph Ellis has assembled in the book ‘Tempest & Exodus’. The references indicate that Mt Sinai should:
      a. Be sharp.
      b. Be difficult to climb.
      c. Be sharply delineated from the surrounding plain.
      d. Be small enough to be cordoned off.
      e. Yet be the highest mountain in the land.
      f. Be on the edge of a desert.
      g. Be surrounded by a black basalt pavement.
      h. Contain a passageway into the mountain.
      i. That the passageway should go steeply downwards so that a rope is required.
      j. That at the bottom of the passageway there is a cave.

      This may appear to be such a diverse list of requirements that no mountain in the whole of the Near East would fulfill them all.

      If you take an electronic Bible and type in a search for the word ‘pyramid’, the machine will grind its way through the long text and it will eventually beep a solemn lament and say ‘nothing found’. Isn’t this a little strange? The biblical patriarchs were resident in Heliopolis, which is just an arrow’s arc away from Giza. The Giza plateau, with its three great pyramids, is not just a wonder of the ancient world, but a stupendous wonder of the modern world too. Here we have, in the form of the Bible, a complete family history of the Israelite patriarchs who lived in Heliopolis and yet it would appear that none of them ever had tea at the pyramids or noticed these great ‘mountains’ on the near horizon.

      So why, then, are there no references whatsoever to the pyramids of Egypt in the Bible? The answer is obvious: the Bible does mention the pyramids, and it mentions them quite often; but the names of all the pyramids have been deliberately obscured by the scribes. The Giza plateau IS mentioned in the Bible, as is the Great Pyramid itself, and the biblical name for the latter is Mt Sinai.

      Take another look at the list of requirements that the real Mt Sinai must fulfil. While the description of a natural mountain would agree with very few of these points, the Great Pyramid of Giza fulfils each and every one of them. The Great Pyramid is both sharp and steep, it contains a steeply inclined passageway that terminates in a rough cavern, it resides on the edge of the desert and it also rises very suddenly from the surrounding pavement area. As mountains go the Great
      Pyramid is rather small and easy to cordon off, yet it is also the tallest pyramid in Egypt. Finally, that pavement that looked like the night sky, corresponds perfectly with the great, black, basalt pavement that originally surrounded the Great Pyramid. (Remember that the upper chambers in this pyramid would still have been concealed in this era, thus the Bible makes no mention of them).”

  1. Dr. Farrell: speaking of ancient history, I haven’t seen any comments from you yet on the digital reconstruction of the damaged Triumphal Arch of Palmyra that will be unveiled in London’s Trafalgar Square next week. I have just now posted a blog about the “imagineers” who are heading up your project. The team leader gave an interview to NPR last week. His words should make everybody shudder. I think we are witnessing Hermeticists hard at work at imposing something akin to a hologram of history upon an unsuspecting public. What say you? Here is my blog with links to the audio interview and a tremendously good source story from the UK Telegraph:
    http://www.roguemoney.net/stories/2016/4/11/palmyra-digital-masons

      1. Thanks for the link DEBRA there is a science fiction story that takes up your idea about falsifying culture and the past. I forgotten it’s title but if you look up anthologies edited by Arthur C. Clarke you will find the short story.

  2. I find it interesting that yet more pyramid/Giza research is coming out of the Ukraine. We had Krasnolovet’s pyramid research and whatever that progressed into, coming out of Kiev, now there’s this. What might they have been up to over there in Kiev? This could mean that the Ukrainian mess fits the pattern we’ve seen in the Middle East, the pattern where the PtB are busy playing the part of Indiana Jones. They destabilize a region and create a pretense for incursion, then invade and search out information pertaining to ancient history and technologies. Plus I think the claims that the Bosnian Pyramids are older than Egypt’s has ruffled the tail feathers of Egyptologists. They have a choice, either come clean about the secrets of antiquity or play second fiddle to Bosnia.

  3. Perhaps slightly off-topic. but just wanted to mention that there are some great new pictures & videos on the Khemitology website (khemitology.com) taken from within the Egyptian museum.
    It was allowed for several weeks to take pictures and record in the museum in December last year and into January.
    Check it out for some amazing footage and expert commentary by Mohamed & Yousef from the Khemit School.

  4. Some 80,000 years ago, the “Ur Nile” (the name given the ancient Nile by German geologists who have studied this epoch) was at least a kilometer in width and its bed was much farther west for most of its course, and if you look at Egypt via Google earth, you can see the traces the old river bed and many oases that mark its path. Indeed Egypt and Libya (North Africa) were vastly different and much more lush, with forests and savannahs.

    There are extensive underground tunnels and pits beneath Giza plateau and some believe these are actually undergorund aqueducts and cisterns, and I have read books which claim that these tunnels run for many kilometers to the bed of the Ur Nile. There is one such “mysterious” pit beneath the Great Pyramid, accessed via interior shafts impossible to navigate by any means but by mountainering or spelunking.

    Now, when the Great Pyramid was first blasted into, it was univerally remarked that the walls of the Great Gallery and all the shafts were covered in salt deposits. In fact, the French geopolymer expert who proposed that the pyramids were built of ancient concrete blocks, cast in place, cited this as part of his evidence, since his proposed slurry would produce such saline deposits as it cured.

    However, if we go back to the descriptions of the Zep Tepi, it states that the primordial mound rose from the receding waters. Well, might it not be that the Great Pyramid and the Sphinx were indeed underwater, and that the Zep Tepi was the fecund period of the Ur Nile, when the sea level receded enough to uncover these ancient monuments left by the gods of the First Time?

    This would certainly explain the salt deposits inside the Great Pyramid much bettter than concrete. It may well be that the casing stones were lost due to ancient flood waters, not to the old saw about scavengers taking them to build modern Cairo. And it could well be that the dynsastic Egyptians never penetrated inside the Great Pyramid at all, since no one has ever found trace of entrances.

    1. Sorry, I meant to write that the **idea** of the Zep Tepi was formed at the time of the Ur Nile and the blossoming of Egypt/Khemet, not that it **was** this period.

    2. Basta, yes, the Ur-Nil is mentioned by Stephen Mehler in his book “The Land of Osiris”.
      It was even larger than the 1-kilomter width you mention, much larger.
      The Ur-Nil is what may have fed the Giza plateau and Sakkara region with water to make the pyramid complexes function.
      The tunnels you mention run all the way from Sakkara to the Giza plateau and from there on to places like Abu Sir north of Giza. Abu Sir, Abu Ghurab and Abu Rhowash are other – little known – pyramid sites dating from the same era as Giza and Sakkara. All these pyramid sites functioned together as one giant complex.
      The tunnels are there, no question about it and they connect the sites.
      I’ve seen the shafts at Sakkara and Giza and the site at Abu Sir.
      And then there’s the Serapeum at Sakkara that also comes into it. An amazing place. How it fits in? Would love to know… My own high octane speculation is that it functioned as some kind of tuning complex, to change the vibration/frequency of the pyramids. I think that based on the different sizes of the granite boxes and their lids. And they were probably under water…

    3. basta, that is a very unique idea! It would reformulate ‘Zep Tepi’ in a very concrete form. I had forgotten about the salt encrustations; a very good observation.

      In a certain way, this could even account for the ‘new look’ on the Sphinx head. If the prior ‘head’ – whatever it looked like – also had the ‘wave-cut hollows’ mentioned in the PDF, it would have naturally been a candidate for re-cutting.

      This re-contouring could have taken place at any time subsequent to the emergence of the Giza complex. (Even more than once.) It could even be the ‘rehabilitation’ that young Prince Tuthmosis (son of Amenhotep II) performed on the Sphinx after his ‘dream’…

    4. basta, I just ran across this over at VT:
      “…Atlantis was a number of islands in what is now the Mediterranean Sea. During this time, the area between the Giza plateau and the delta was a swamp area. The flood occurred when the Straits of Gibraltar were breached by the Atlantic Ocean.”

      I do remember my jaw dropping when I first read of the ‘land bridge’ across the Straits of Gibraltar during 100,000 year long Ice Ages causing the Mediterranean Sea to dry-up, at least twice. And refilling as the oceans rose during 10,000 year long Interglacial Periods. Documented fact by geologists.

      Now, could this re-flooding have anything to do with the purported ‘submergence’ of Giza?

    5. “may well be that the casing stones were lost due to ancient flood”- according to archeologist/researcher/author Graham Hancock the outer casing stones of the great pyramid fell off due to a massive earthquake in 1301

  5. I think the answer is quite simple. How old is a rock? There are many natural rock formations around the world that look like people and animals and through weathering these forms can change through time, much like seeing pictures in the clouds, but these change more rapidly . See:

    https://www.google.co.za/search?q=Natural+ROck+Formations+look+like+people+and+animals&client=opera&hs=mc&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwifhLfdiYHMAhXH7BQKHWjADKUQsAQIGg&biw=1366&bih=630

    In Egyptian mythology we get the story of The First Time. Zep Tepi. This was when the Scarab Beatle arose out of the swamp, in all likelihood the original already well worn rock that now is known as the Sphinx. This rock was aligned with the sunrise and and specifically the constellation of Leo where is was decided that the rock formation looked like the body of a lion facing east. But with the head of person. The sphinx is Zep Tepi the first time, as the waters started to recede and the Giza plateau arose. Obviously something happened to the original head which could have worn away with stand storms. See link with pictures. SO a new head was added.

    So how old is the sphinx? As old as the rock which formed it. Which is basically, the beginning of land formations on the earth and the formations of rock. Zep Tepi.

  6. The structures here and on mars are meant to be decoded and whoever they are or their remnants, are most probably still watching..

  7. To me, I don’t care how old the Sphinx is, it’s the symbolism that counts. In other words “they” didn’t build it for fun, the thing just sits there and says nothing. BUT, it’s who built it and why that should be asked.
    This monument is a shadow of another world, a world who we know very little about really. Consider all the thousands of books that have written about Egypt, I don’t believe any of these thousands of books has “really cracked” IT. Except for maybe Schwaller, in my opinion he “got it”, but just couldn’t use modern language to describe it, try and read any of his books!!!!!
    The Sphinx IS a message, albeit in stone, but a message just like the pyramids, it’s usage is unclear, but it does tell a story, a story of a people who “knew everything”.

  8. I have just read the PDF, and it holds-up – at least to my engineering eyes.

    I would add one thing:

    The authors attribute the Sphinx’s erosion to wave-cut hollows, implying a higher sea-level at the erosion time. They then ‘date’ the erosional period by comparison to sea-level values derived from actual Mediterranean coastal terraces on the African coast (Tseiner, 1963).

    Tseiner obtained his data before Continental Drift was accepted into the geological canon. So, the sea-levels he obtained would have been thought-of as ‘absolute’ values. Today, we know that “local sea-level” is a combination of global-ocean level (which changes due to water removal in Ice Ages, and vice versa) and the height of local land above the center of the Earth (which changes due to the effects of plate movements and collisions).

    The Mediterranean area has been the scene of the collision of the northward-moving African Plate with the Eurasian Plate at about a centimeter per year. The dense rocks of the African seabed were being thrust beneath the European plate. One result has been the Alps, Caucasus, and Zagros mountain ranges. However, lesser effects can happen far-back from the collision zone. Personally, I know of no study that has documented whether northern Egypt has stayed-level, risen, or fallen relative to the Earth’s core in the last few million years.

    The combined-effect is what is really-documented in Tseiner’s data. So, ‘absolute ages’ should be approached with caution until the two effects are sorted out…

  9. I’m sorry but how does this affect the Great Pyramid?

    My work with animation programs has taught me the physics and math of fluid dynamics makes the “traditional” explanation somewhat credible. I understand that yes, the same information can back at least Dr. Schoch’s theory, but I get disgusted listening to both sides insult each other – it’s like reading a Gnostic text

    But we are also told the destruction of the pyramid’s casings is recent. And without it we do have a hard time judging how much wear and tear it has undergone. So yes, I do see a problem here. Not necessarily an insurmountable one but a problem.

    1. My work with Aerospace Engineering has taught me the physics and math of fluid dynamics makes the “traditional” explanation somewhat INcredible. (Bachelors and Masters Degrees in Aerospace Engineering, engineer in USAF, and engineer at Boeing. Aerodynamics and hydrodynamics specialties.)

      Dr. Schoch was right. The fact that he was shouted down in no way renders his scientific arguments invalid. You are on the wrong side of science, my friend…

      1. I said credible, not right. And certainly Dr. Schoch comes off as more wry than self-righteous. I won’t name names there. I have immense respect for Dr. Schoch but while I understand what you are saying, I still want to see more evidence of a link between the two – pre Egypt – before I accept there is one.

  10. The only thing that would remain today of a civilization from high antiquity would be its stonework. Considering that stonework is built on a massive scale with absolute precision, which we cannot duplicate to this day, gives us an indication of how advanced it must have been. Whether it was annihilated during a “cosmic war” or due to some cataclysmic event is unclear, and they do occur over time. It may be our fate one day to succumb to such an event, if we don’t kill ourselves off first.
    It should be obvious, once studied from many different disciplines corroboratively, that these structures are incredibly ancient and were built to last for millennia. The fairy tales we have been fed about them come from shortsighted, narrow-minded “scientists” pushing an agenda or promoting their own careers.

  11. Egyptologist John Anthony West was on the same page for this idea to. I saw a video from 1993 a Charleston Heston classicly narration. He had placed the question to a Geologist and asked ” what do you think caused the erosion” of course he had used a picture of the Sphinx but had tapped off the head and feet only revealing it after the Geologist replied ” definitely water erosion ”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWonNtXu8nE

  12. I also believe that the Sphinx is a lot older than the early Egyptian era, but I just wish it were possible to believe the scientific methods of dating, which have proven to be less than scientific. For example, when the tests link the eruption of Mt Saint Helens to thousands of years ago, I just have to wonder about the whole method since I saw that event with my own eyes and I know I’m not that old. Also, the head is so small for the size of the body, that it almost certainly was recharged at some later date, so the weathering on the face should be different than that on the body.

  13. Some of the uproar about this theory really makes me laugh. People say this is absolutely ridiculous because,there weren’t people back then! Really? There weren’t people back then? How do you know? Are you a time traveler? Yes the theory sounds crazy compared to the standard theory we have been force fed about the history of ancient Egyptian culture but the fact is WE DO NOT KNOW. I don’t understand why human beings are so offended when there historical beliefs are challenged, you’d think you just threatened to kill there family or something. The truth is we don’t dictate history, and if we have history wrong (FACTUAL IMO) then we need to figure it out. And maybe the Sphinx is 800,000 years old and it totally COULD be.

  14. Given how corrupt our historians, scientist, academics are and knowing which side their bread buttered on. We shouldn’t be surprised these bands of liars can’t get their stories straight. I have read that the Neanderthals could be more like different ethnic group than a different species. Which would bring up the question of the Homo Erectus-Peking Man status as well. And the rumors of biped crypto creatures from around the World so this story just adds fuel to the fires burning down the house of cards that is academia.

      1. Yeah, I believe Robert Temple is promoting that idea. Has some merit. I do wonder how many times the ‘head’ has been refashioned or reworked over the millennia. Perhaps ETs or time travelers can give us some photos…

  15. The other day I was thinking about how there used to be multiple hominides living side by side in the distant past. I had an idea that maybe one of these other now extinct hominides that were much older than us were also much more advanced in some ways and possibly in more ways than one. What if they went extinct with the rest during the last great extinction event but some of their lore and perhaps DNA still survives in a limited extent with us today. Perhaps some of them did breed with some homo sapiens sapiens but not often or many because it was frowned upon because we were considered too primitive compared to their older and more refined genus.

  16. The other day I was thinking about how there used to be multiple hominides living side by side in the distant past. I had an idea that maybe we were not the smartest of the bunch at one time and perhaps one of these other now extinct hominides that were much older than us were also much more advanced in some ways and possibly in more ways than one. What if they went extinct with the rest during the last great extinction event but some of their lore and perhaps DNA still survives in a limited extent with us today. Perhaps some of them did breed with some homo sapiens sapiens but not often or many because it was frowned upon because we were considered so inferior and primitive compared to their older and more refined genus.

  17. According to satellite pics, the Nile flowed E/W through the Sahara. It was a lush and tropical place then. A geological upheaval caused the river to change it’s course where it is now. Interesting stuff. The Pyramid pumped water into the fields with a hydrostatic action. All that water could have been converted into H2. A tremendous source of power. Especially, with the Nile fueling it. We have lost much of our Atlantean past.

Comments are closed.