Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/MysteryHistory Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MysteryHisto... Steemit: https://steemit.com/@mysteryhistory Twitter: https://twitter.com/Mysterytweetery The severe, undulating erosion upon the walls of the Sphinx's enclosure, undoubtedly show that the Sphinx had been heavily weathered, long before the Sahara became a desert. Therefore, one must suspect, that it could indeed be over 9000 years old… Not knowing exactly how much rainfall there has been in the distant past, the Sphinx could indeed be even far older than this. The most notable scholarly advocates, Robert Schoch, argues that the sphinx be far older than 12,000 years, Robert Bauval and Graham Hancock propose that the Sphinx may have been built around 10,500 BC, during the last Age of Leo. Anthony West believes everything on the Giza Plateau testifies to an advanced, secure, and long-settled civilization, therefore he suggests that the Sphinx may have been built not during the Age of Leo, but a whole processional cycle earlier in around 36,000 BC, a date he feels is more in keeping with the history of Egypt as chronicled by certain Egyptian kings. Regardless of an exact date, all of these talented Egyptologists, propose a date set much further back within history than currently accepted, and they have provided considerable evidence to back up such conclusions. At the time of disclosure, the argument sent shock-waves through the Egyptologist establishment, not because of the dating’s, Egyptologists and mainstream historians have grown quite inept at ignoring data, but more because it was realised that there is indeed, no other explanation for their arguments… There is little doubt that the Sphinx enclosure was subject to severe erosion within its life-time, and although it could have been explained away as a naturally formed enclosure, we fortunately know from analysis, that the limestone blocks dug out from there, were then used within the building of nearby Sphinx temple. Interestingly, no other site in Egypt shows the same type, or degree of erosion. Was the evidence hidden away? Concealed from the public in what could only be called, a conspiracy? Sediments surrounding the base of the monuments, and a once existing watermark upon the stones halfway up the great pyramids sides, indicate just that… 2-inch-thick salt incrustations once found within inner chambers, silt sediments rising to fourteen feet around the bases of the pyramids, found to contain seashells and fossils that have been radiocarbon-dated at nearly twelve thousand years old, have indeed slowly vanished of over the years. These sediments could have only been deposited in such great quantities by major sea flooding. A watermark was also once clearly visible on the limestone casing stones of the Great Pyramid, these stones were unfortunately, unknowingly removed by invading Arabs. These watermarks were halfway up the sides of the pyramid, or about 400 feet above the present level of the Nile River, 200 feet above the base. It seems the last remaining shred of evidence, the enclosure, survived due the talented individuals that were required to spot it. Individuals who are thankfully, on our side.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét