LVL39 Forum - Investigating Paranormal, UFO, Alien and Above Top Secret UFO Conspiracy - View Single Post - The Real Truth About Abydos, Visitors (Just not what you were expecting)

7redorbs · 11-19-2009, 01:46 PM

Hey KA-Bar!

1. I agree, the archaeological evidence collected and presented by geologists were a smoking gun, the water erosion theory, to hold this theory would have to account for 12,000 years ago of erosion (mostly because it didn't rain much the last 6000-8000 years in that location) an inconsistency with current archaeology.

2. The astrological alignment is 12,000 years, I have heard about this, and have read a little on this (Hancock, Dunn, Melchizedek, et al). I agree. Again much like with the palimpsest issue, archaeologists are quick to make theories that are contradicted in dipole to scientific facts (in the case of the abydos glyph we would specifically referring to Janku), in the case of Hoagland, I do not believe the RV theory is based on archaeology. A major problem, but in fact the hypothesis and line of questioning I have presented can be based on other Archaeology

Just to be clear, I am not condoning Janku or Hoagland theories, or confirming, but applying current research to show that the current conclusions about Abydos are subject to the same 'cover up' as the Sphinx Geological data is, as well as the truth about the Sumerian empire (specifically how they knew about pluto).
('cover up' as in the bias/ misrepresentation of (by purposeful or non purposeful actions) and direct suppression, and sometimes intentional discrediting of an expert witness or archaeologists)

It was my intention to point out that the remote viewing hypothesis was a nice idea, but incomplete and somewhat unfounded, as was Janku's. By comparing and contrasting this research, the conclusion that, in fact, it is not the device that is to be conceived in the future that determined the Egyptian Writing via Hoaglands remote viewing, but something far more deeper and surprising, that in order to achieve certain configurations of flight in the atmosphere and space, it is the nature of space determining the optimal layouts, and not the technology

My article is attempting to challenge the broken hypotheses of Janku and Hoagland, which are not holding up to all scrutiny, and put forward a much more archaeologically backed, reviewable expose that the nature of our craft do not have to be from traded alien technology (now), or the Egyptians remote viewing our future craft.

As is often the case in science, the simplest and most obvious answer is usually correct, and the simplest scientific answer for me would have to be

the universe dictates design, not design dictates universe

Until we get out of that way of thinking, I think a lot of people are going to look at the Abydos glyphs thinking much like yourself, 'this is old news' or 'this is not important' - that may end up being so, but not as a result of prior erroneous and incomplete/broken theories of Janku/Hoagland - but it isn't. Just like any other archaeological finding they are not treated separately but held in account of other archaeology, so the Sphinx and the Abydos tablet, if postulation allowed, could indeed be extremely relevant and counter-confirmatory, the only problem being the limited access allowed by the Cairo Archaeological Institute. In contrasting re-inspection of accepted theories or interpretations with archaeological data , without postulation and assumption, as shown to be the case with the previous exposures of this Abydos theory, any explanation couldn't be further from remote viewing, or the reworking of a palimpsest, in my opinion. This is HIGHLY significant

Given that most of the Sumerian archaeology supports a premise for visitors not from earth, and a plethora of knowledge including the existance of pluto , not discovered till the early 20th century, one is forced to assume, since the archaeological presence of high technology has not found or presented by either by archaeology or reference in hieroglyph one must be forced to consider the possibility that they were either told stuff, had some kind of help, or had witnessed 'stuff' that wasn't theirs, now how much more likely is that than remote viewing? Or sloppy hieroglyphs? You know what if I'd seen a UFO (which I have) I might be in a rush drawing it down too (conjecture)

. This article actually 'plays NASA and the archaeologist at its own scientific quoting' game, and although usually a bad thing - I really hope this article will get some people thinking.

In fact, the sumerians stated that they're knowledge wasn't made up by them, but given to them by the Annunaki. Precident exists archaeologically for the Abydos tablet, and it is unfortunate that it is seen as an 'un-unique' peice, which is close to shameful, yet not surprising given the exposure of the RV hypothesis, or Janku's, neither are archaeologically sound or supported.

3. Incas? I know a lot of the prophecies are shared between the tribe's, even in seemingly isolated cultures, I believe this could be related to these glyphs. In fact I believe these glyphs and the comparative NASA pictures will one day be some form of smoking gun in an archaeological and scientific way.

4. Yes, this is very interesting isn't it? What do you think this means, as I said, no archaeology seems to remain, or be made public about such technology. My article is attempting to get at what you are (they had some form of help), and this is archaelogically supported by many tribes i.e. Sumerian Culture (iraq), as well as the Dogon tribe (look just like the STS smoking gun NASA footage)

5. Extremely interesting, I believe civilizations grow and die faster than we realise. As do ELE's. Few days ago asteroid missed us by 6000miles. Thats damn close!

6. All traces always do vanish. I cant remember if it was Melchizedek, Dunn or Hancock, but he was invited to open the sphinx if he would discredit another archaeologists work. This is the sort of world we live in. I'm trying to uncover the conspiracy of the Abydos glyphs with an article designed to make people think. Perhaps I need to be more direct? but then it wouldn't be based on scientific or archaeological evidence, but assumption too. I have tried to limit assumptions in my article, and here. However I have somewhat been forced to directly state what this could 'mean', (abydos glyphs) , and how important they could actually be, as previously mistaken and postulated by other researchers.

7. I didn't know that to be quite honest.

I know Hoagland received a lot of discrediting on this, I see why completely, mainly for the problems with his RV hypothesis, It's flawed, Hoagland is an extremely clever man, and I hope he hasn't been 'got to by them' - that is, the popularization of this tablet via Hoagland and the likes of egyptologists such as Janku, is not only contradicted by a body of archaeology, but actually contradicted by the assumption that design precedes physics,

no, physics determines design, THATS why they look familiar, because they HAVE to be similar, or they don't do the job of moving through space properly, look at the designs of modern aircraft..

it doesn't - so for those who have studied Hoaglands work, yes the likes of Janku are mistaken about the palimpsest, that's real archaeology, but no the Egyptians weren't seeing the future, that's hard to believe. What's less difficult to believe, and more scientific (especially if you are a dedicated UFO researcher) , is that there are presences of other civilizations that did interact with mankind, and probably has for a very long time indeed.

I don't believe man never reached the moon, I do believe in remote viewing, I've done it, I don't believe in Janku or the lies of the elitist egyptological researchers, I do believe that Hoaglands hypothesis (and any person with some sense) can see what the diagrams are, the question is without the sophistication of our aerospace and military technology, the things only present in advanced civilizations, would we recognize these symbols?

I think not.

So I will say again

This is important.. at least as important as the 7 other things you listed, most especially if more evidence can be added or carried over from this small article.

Design is determined by Physics, not physics determined by our designs

Thanks so much for posting KA-Bar, I really enjoy reading your posts, and I hope to hear more from you soon. Would be interesting to have a quick chat on the LVL39 instant messenger if you feel up for it one day,

Thanks so much,
A

11-19-2009, 01:46 PM	#4 (permalink)
7redorbs Contribution: LVL20 Thread Clarity: +54 Post Clarity: +39 Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: London Posts: 877	Hey KA-Bar! 1. I agree, the archaeological evidence collected and presented by geologists were a smoking gun, the water erosion theory, to hold this theory would have to account for 12,000 years ago of erosion (mostly because it didn't rain much the last 6000-8000 years in that location) an inconsistency with current archaeology. 2. The astrological alignment is 12,000 years, I have heard about this, and have read a little on this (Hancock, Dunn, Melchizedek, et al). I agree. Again much like with the palimpsest issue, archaeologists are quick to make theories that are contradicted in dipole to scientific facts (in the case of the abydos glyph we would specifically referring to Janku), in the case of Hoagland, I do not believe the RV theory is based on archaeology. A major problem, but in fact the hypothesis and line of questioning I have presented can be based on other Archaeology Just to be clear, I am not condoning Janku or Hoagland theories, or confirming, but applying current research to show that the current conclusions about Abydos are subject to the same 'cover up' as the Sphinx Geological data is, as well as the truth about the Sumerian empire (specifically how they knew about pluto). ('cover up' as in the bias/ misrepresentation of (by purposeful or non purposeful actions) and direct suppression, and sometimes intentional discrediting of an expert witness or archaeologists) It was my intention to point out that the remote viewing hypothesis was a nice idea, but incomplete and somewhat unfounded, as was Janku's. By comparing and contrasting this research, the conclusion that, in fact, it is not the device that is to be conceived in the future that determined the Egyptian Writing via Hoaglands remote viewing, but something far more deeper and surprising, that in order to achieve certain configurations of flight in the atmosphere and space, it is the nature of space determining the optimal layouts, and not the technology My article is attempting to challenge the broken hypotheses of Janku and Hoagland, which are not holding up to all scrutiny, and put forward a much more archaeologically backed, reviewable expose that the nature of our craft do not have to be from traded alien technology (now), or the Egyptians remote viewing our future craft. As is often the case in science, the simplest and most obvious answer is usually correct, and the simplest scientific answer for me would have to be the universe dictates design, not design dictates universe Until we get out of that way of thinking, I think a lot of people are going to look at the Abydos glyphs thinking much like yourself, 'this is old news' or 'this is not important' - that may end up being so, but not as a result of prior erroneous and incomplete/broken theories of Janku/Hoagland - but it isn't. Just like any other archaeological finding they are not treated separately but held in account of other archaeology, so the Sphinx and the Abydos tablet, if postulation allowed, could indeed be extremely relevant and counter-confirmatory, the only problem being the limited access allowed by the Cairo Archaeological Institute. In contrasting re-inspection of accepted theories or interpretations with archaeological data , without postulation and assumption, as shown to be the case with the previous exposures of this Abydos theory, any explanation couldn't be further from remote viewing, or the reworking of a palimpsest, in my opinion. This is HIGHLY significant Given that most of the Sumerian archaeology supports a premise for visitors not from earth, and a plethora of knowledge including the existance of pluto , not discovered till the early 20th century, one is forced to assume, since the archaeological presence of high technology has not found or presented by either by archaeology or reference in hieroglyph one must be forced to consider the possibility that they were either told stuff, had some kind of help, or had witnessed 'stuff' that wasn't theirs, now how much more likely is that than remote viewing? Or sloppy hieroglyphs? You know what if I'd seen a UFO (which I have) I might be in a rush drawing it down too (conjecture) . This article actually 'plays NASA and the archaeologist at its own scientific quoting' game, and although usually a bad thing - I really hope this article will get some people thinking. In fact, the sumerians stated that they're knowledge wasn't made up by them, but given to them by the Annunaki. Precident exists archaeologically for the Abydos tablet, and it is unfortunate that it is seen as an 'un-unique' peice, which is close to shameful, yet not surprising given the exposure of the RV hypothesis, or Janku's, neither are archaeologically sound or supported. 3. Incas? I know a lot of the prophecies are shared between the tribe's, even in seemingly isolated cultures, I believe this could be related to these glyphs. In fact I believe these glyphs and the comparative NASA pictures will one day be some form of smoking gun in an archaeological and scientific way. 4. Yes, this is very interesting isn't it? What do you think this means, as I said, no archaeology seems to remain, or be made public about such technology. My article is attempting to get at what you are (they had some form of help), and this is archaelogically supported by many tribes i.e. Sumerian Culture (iraq), as well as the Dogon tribe (look just like the STS smoking gun NASA footage) 5. Extremely interesting, I believe civilizations grow and die faster than we realise. As do ELE's. Few days ago asteroid missed us by 6000miles. Thats damn close! 6. All traces always do vanish. I cant remember if it was Melchizedek, Dunn or Hancock, but he was invited to open the sphinx if he would discredit another archaeologists work. This is the sort of world we live in. I'm trying to uncover the conspiracy of the Abydos glyphs with an article designed to make people think. Perhaps I need to be more direct? but then it wouldn't be based on scientific or archaeological evidence, but assumption too. I have tried to limit assumptions in my article, and here. However I have somewhat been forced to directly state what this could 'mean', (abydos glyphs) , and how important they could actually be, as previously mistaken and postulated by other researchers. 7. I didn't know that to be quite honest. I know Hoagland received a lot of discrediting on this, I see why completely, mainly for the problems with his RV hypothesis, It's flawed, Hoagland is an extremely clever man, and I hope he hasn't been 'got to by them' - that is, the popularization of this tablet via Hoagland and the likes of egyptologists such as Janku, is not only contradicted by a body of archaeology, but actually contradicted by the assumption that design precedes physics, no, physics determines design, THATS why they look familiar, because they HAVE to be similar, or they don't do the job of moving through space properly, look at the designs of modern aircraft.. it doesn't - so for those who have studied Hoaglands work, yes the likes of Janku are mistaken about the palimpsest, that's real archaeology, but no the Egyptians weren't seeing the future, that's hard to believe. What's less difficult to believe, and more scientific (especially if you are a dedicated UFO researcher) , is that there are presences of other civilizations that did interact with mankind, and probably has for a very long time indeed. I don't believe man never reached the moon, I do believe in remote viewing, I've done it, I don't believe in Janku or the lies of the elitist egyptological researchers, I do believe that Hoaglands hypothesis (and any person with some sense) can see what the diagrams are, the question is without the sophistication of our aerospace and military technology, the things only present in advanced civilizations, would we recognize these symbols? I think not. So I will say again This is important.. at least as important as the 7 other things you listed, most especially if more evidence can be added or carried over from this small article. Design is determined by Physics, not physics determined by our designs Thanks so much for posting KA-Bar, I really enjoy reading your posts, and I hope to hear more from you soon. Would be interesting to have a quick chat on the LVL39 instant messenger if you feel up for it one day, Thanks so much, A 1 members found this post helpful.