ProtoQuant.com

I. Introduction

It is with great delight that we discovered in the WWW the existence of a new interpretation of the texts of the pyramids by Clesson H. Harvey (see www.pyramidtexts.com ), whereby these texts seem to be reconsidered as a kind of “user manual” and not merely religious incantation texts as they are usually accepted. This is really a great progress, inasmuch as we are accustomed to the idea, entertained by the academic circles, that, as far as archeological remains indicate, the old social organizations of this planet are mainly religious. But our main point here is that Harvey even evaluates the age of pyramids, based exactly on the same principles used by us to evaluate here their ages: creep-like deformation starting from the ideal half octahedron as initial state. However, while we are limited to pure scientific speculations, Harvey has the advantage of his translations of old texts, where he finds strong favorable arguments. In the following we take this opportunity to bring a necessary demarcation of what was really achieved, by a comparison with Harvey. Not necessarily for the clarification of priority – we openly acknowledge Harvey’s priority! Come to think of it, the idea of creep has been around for about one and a half century. It is thus quite improbable that, during this stretch of time, someone has not thought along the same lines in order to date the pyramids. We acknowledge in advance his/her priority in the matter! No, is not the priority we are seeking here, but the clarification of what we think is a common important task of the humanity. The truth of the matter is that such a dating is not seriously taken into consideration by academic circles, in spite of the crude reality that the “hard facts” for “scientific dating” are so … soft, that they can lead anywhere! Harvey himself takes the dating by slow deformation only as a side argument, his hard point being the configuration of the skies as indicated by his own deciphering of the Pyramid Texts. A little browsing on the WWW shows however that his translation raises, within the general community, the very same doubts and possibly long lasting arguments, that any academic translation raises. The academic circles themselves seem to adopt the very same attitude they started to adopt mainly in the last half of the previous century: ignore, it will go away one way or another; in any case, our position is secured! The modern Scribes and Pharisees of the Temple of Science don’t expect that a Christ can do any damage to their position, so they don’t even bother to crucify him!

     Being completely ignorant in hieroglyphs, or in any glyphs for that matter, we don’t share the crowd’s opinion. (There is an ethical reason for this: in Science you bring arguments; speaking here in the virtue of one’s constitutional rights is a crime, rarely ascribable to an individual, but dearly paid by the society as a whole! The “Sutor, ne ultra crepidam!” of old Lucullus has no better place to be applied than here!) Rather, we declare bluntly that Harvey is right, based on our own arguments as presented in this page. May be the details of the age of pyramids are not the correct figures, but the order of magnitude of the ages is certainly there! And if this is taken into consideration as a ground for logical arguments, the benefit of humankind will be enormous!

Pages: 1 2 3 4