sphinx dating controversy

tools By: Kazile

Great Sphinx Controversy Giza Egypt Zahi Hawass Robert M. Schoch

Strong wind cause wave lets and its agitation can cause errotion. Namespaces Article Talk. Geologist Schoch, despite defending the existence of mysterious lost civilizations in works such as his book Voices of the Rocks , has argued that a prehistoric Sphinx could have been built by indigenous people. Analysis of the Sphinx's bedrock by the Getty Conservation Institute — concluded that "Continual salt crystallization, which has a destructive effect on the stone, would explain at least some of the deterioration of the Sphinx. Somebody replied to me with a claim about rock dating, so I responded to them about it. I believe that intelligent civilizations go back millions of years and it has nothing to do with aliens. David, ed. Yet the tombs around the Sphinx show only the mild wind-blown sand weathering one would expect in Old Kingdom monuments.


One of the most mysterious and enigmatic monuments on the surface of the planet is without a doubt the Great Sphinx at the Giza plateau in Egypt. It is an ancient construction that has baffled researchers ever since its discovery and until today, no one has been able to accurately date the Sphinx, since there are no written records or mentions in the past about it. Now, two Ukrainian researchers have proposed a new provocative theory where the two scientists propose that the Great Sphinx of Egypt is around , years old. A Revolutionary theory that is backed up by science. The authors of this paper are scientists Manichev Vjacheslav I. Geological approach in connection to other scientific-natural methods permits to answer the question about the relative age of the Sphinx. The conducted visual investigation of the Sphinx allowed the conclusion about the important role of water from large water bodies which partially flooded the monument with formation of wave-cut hollows on its vertical walls. Genetic resemblance of the compared erosion forms and the geological structure and petrographic composition of sedimentary rock complexes lead to a conclusion that the decisive factor of destruction of the historic monument is the wave energy rather than sand abrasion in Eolian process. Voluminous geological literature confirms the fact of existence of long-living fresh-water lakes in various periods of the Quaternary from the Lower Pleistocene to the Holocene. These lakes were distributed in the territories adjacent to the Nile. The absolute mark of the upper large erosion hollow of the Sphinx corresponds to the level of water surface which took place in the Early Pleistocene. Manichev and Parkhomenko focus on the deteriorated aspect of the body of the Sphinx, leaving aside the erosive features where the Sphinx is located, which had been studied previously by Schoch. Ukrainian scholars focused on the undulating terrain of the Sphinx which displays the mysterious pattern. Mainstream scientists offer explanations for this sharp feature and state that it is based on the abrasive effect of the wind and sand, the undulations were formed because the harder layers of rock are better at withstanding the erosions while the softer layers would have been more affected, forming voids.


Robert M. An International Networking Educational Institute. I ntellectual, Scientific and Philosophical Studies. Recently I have determined that, in fact, the Great Sphinx was built in stages and I have estimated that the earliest portions of the statue the core body of the Sphinx date back to the period of to B. The evidence for an earlier Sphinx has been duly published in appropriate controverdy [1], discussed at major scientific meetings without being falsified [2] and thus far the hypothesis of an older Sphinx has not been convincingly refuted.

To begin with, one must realize as I did not at first that the dating of the Great Sphinx seems to be a very touchy subject for most modern Egyptologists.

Wallis Budge, and Sir G. Maspero were open to the notion that the Sphinx may be older than the Fourth Dynasty pyramids that it seems to guard, and ancients from New Kingdom Egyptians to Romans circa B. The basis for this attribution is purely circumstantial, the strongest piece of evidence being the reputed similarity between the face of the Sphinx and the face of Khafre as seen on other statues. Yet forensic expert Frank Domingo cating the New York Police Department has definitively proven that controvery face of the Sphinx and the face seen on signed statues of Khafre are not of the same person 4 ; indeed, the face sphinx dating controversy the Sphinx apparently does not pertain to the same race as the face seen on statues of Khafre online dating tips first contact Sphinx has a distinctive "African," "Nubian," or "Negroid" aspect which is lacking in the face of Khafre.

Still, most living Egyptologists maintain newly launched dating sites the Sphinx was built by, or at least around the time of, Khafre. Questioning the age of the Sphinx seems to shake the very foundations of conventional Egyptology. A much older Sphinx sphinx dating controversy into question the conventional wisdom concerning when and how civilization developed in the Nile Valley.

Maybe mainstream Egyptologists will be datting to rethink their traditional story as to exactly who the dynastic Egyptians were and where they came from both geographically and culturally. On the whole, the Egyptologists insist that sphinx dating controversy peoples of Egypt did not have the technology or social organization to cut out the core body of the Sphinx in predynastic times. An older Sphinx implies that a highly sophisticated culture existed along the banks of the Nile at an earlier time than hitherto imagined.

Maybe the whole notion of cultural progress will have to be reconsidered. Thousands of scholars sphinx dating controversy for hundreds of years" [a bit of an overstatement as to eating many persons have seriously studied the Sphinx] have studied this topic. There are no big surprises in store for us. The Egyptological community did little to address my arguments here data.

One of the most cogent statements made against my data was Dr. But of course such a statement lacks any objective basis. The reason this evidence is "not relevant" to my critics is that they cannot accept the implications of the evidence. Since they cannot refute the evidence, it is dismissed as not relevant. Bard has refused to debate me in person on the topic despite an invitation from a neutral branch of Boston University to arrange such a meeting Dr.

West,Serpent revised editionp. Roberts,River in the Desert, p. Boston University consists of some fifteen Schools and Colleges, and over 2, faculty members; perhaps the confusion concerning my affiliation with Boston University is due to the size of the university and the number of different academic units it contains. Contrpversy the Egyptological community was up in arms, and the easiest way to get rid of me or so they thought was with ad hominem attacks on my person. A large part of the problem seemed to be that I was an "outsider" my Ph.

Admittedly some of my early problems with the Egyptological community seem to have stemmed from the fact that I was introduced, by way of a colleague Dr. Robert Eddy, at the time a fellow faculty member dsting my collegeto the problem of the Sphinx by the notorious Sphinx dating controversy Anthony West.

West is also seen by some people as a "New Ager" [5] and, dare I say it, a general crackpot and quack I have come to know West well since I first met him inand he is neither. I begrudgingly got involved in the whole controversy as a favor to a couple of fellow faculty members. Then, much to my surprise, I discovered that West might actually be on to something, even if he got a few details wrong but then West has no formal training as a geologist.

So what if West has authored a book on astrology [6] and propounds other unorthodox views? In the tight, fish site closed world of Egyptology I soon learned otherwise.

It seemed that everything was politically and psychologically charged. Egyptologists strike controvrrsy as overly sensitive about New Agers, psychics, religious fanatics, believers in "pyramid power," and so forth, perhaps with go here reason when you have all sorts of "bizarre" claims as to the meaning and purpose of the pyramids, et cetera [7], including the contention that the two larger Giza pyramids were landing beacons for a spaceport that was built on the Sinai peninsula in ca.

Indeed, even some scholars well entrenched within the Egyptological establishment have New Age connections. It is common knowledge [10] that Dr. Mark Lehner's interest in ancient Egypt and the Sphinx originated due to his connection with the Association for Research and Enlightenment A. Reportedly part of Lehner's college education was subsidized by the A. I have been told that Lehner's book is a "classic" in its field among devotees. According to Edgar Cayce, as reviewed by Lehner, the Sphinx and pyramids were built ca.

Interestingly, not only Lehner server how to use former A. Zahi Hawass was also in sphin supported and patronized by members of the A. I personally click at this page not put any stock in sphinx dating controversy readings, stories of Atlantis, or the like, but Lehner's and Hawass's, for that matter past associations with the A.

Indeed, the A. Given Lehner's and Hawass's A. Maybe it is because of their former connections that they are so sensitive about such issues. I, on the other hand, having never had such connections in the first place, worry little about where the inspiration for scientific hypotheses and analyses come from.

Sphinx dating controversy I might also note that ideology, theology, and controverwy often influence the just click for source in which archaeological data is interpreted [15].

When I first became interested in the dating of the Sphinx a friend who had lived in Egypt for several years warned me that I might run into such hostility if I dared to suggest that the Sphinx could be even older than already believed.

Initially I did not believe him, but now I tend to think he may have been correct. Many of can geologists use dating and absolute ages extrusion Islamic militants and fundamentalists who are currently attempting to take over the government of Egypt want to destroy all the statues and monuments of ancient Egypt.

Fundamental Islam bans representational art, and all civilization that predates the prophet Mohammed is considered idolatrous. To suggest that portions of the Sphinx sphunx even older datong traditionally thought, implying a sophisticated society that existed even earlier in time, sphinx dating controversy rubs salt in the open sores of fundamentalists who must face at least until they can destroy them the magnificent remains of pharaonic culture. Over all, I have found that Egyptology is a fascinating, but emotionally charged, discipline.

My training as a scientist did not fully prepare me for the strong personalities that I would confront among the ranks of Egyptophiles. Since becoming involved in research concerning the age of the Sphinx I have discovered that I am not the only scientist to have had a less than positive initial experience when dealing with Egyptologists. Germer [16] has astutely noted that "In the past, cooperation between the natural sciences and Egyptology has not necessarily been successful in every case.

The Egyptologist is initially suspicious; he often rejects results out of hand, and is unwilling to work with scientific data. He believes that he can do better with his own methodology. If there are different scientific results obtained from the same material, the Egyptologist is often not in a position to determine which is most probable. Often sphlnx is a matter of choosing those 'scientific' data datihg best suit a particular theory, without really knowing whether they are reliable or not.

Here I do dating zambian free mean to posit a blanket criticism against all Egyptologists. Rather, I believe it is important to note that the traditional methodologies used sphinx dating controversy many Egyptologists often differ in a fundamental manner from the approaches and methodologies used by practitioners in the natural sciences. At the American Association for the Advancement of Science debate on the age of the Shpinx, for instance, I became quite aware that my adversary, Dr.

Lehner, may be a very bright and competent Egyptologist, but he does not "think like a scientist. Lehner is an Egyptologist and approaches problems and data from that bias. Perhaps it is time to inject a little more science into Egyptology and see what happens. We might witness some interesting developments. Dobecki and R. Schoch and J. A; R.

The latter paper was an invited contribution to a symposium convened especially by the AAAS to discuss my redating of the Great Sphinx. Mark Lehner and K. Lal Gauri, were unable to successfully refute sphinx dating controversy older date for the Datjng Sphinx. The editors of OMNI realized how controversial the topic was, so they invited my critics, in the form of Lehner and Conyroversy, to write a rebuttal to my work.

At first they eagerly agreed to write such a piece, but after months of delay, they refused. Schoch,Clntroversy the Sphinx. OMNI, v. While most Egyptologists have violently disagreed, at least initially, with my conclusions regarding the antiquity of the Great Sphinx, there have been exceptions.

Nakagawa, and S. Tonouchi, and T. Tonouchi, T. Nakagawa, and K. See especially J. West is the person who first got me involved in redating the Great Sphinx; in this article he succinctly tells the human story behind the Sphinx research. This article also includes a sidebar and two photographs that I contributed p. This is only a partial sphinx dating controversy reputedly the story was covered or reprinted in hundreds of papers around the world, and also mentioned on a number of radio and television shows.

This video was aired over various television stations in May and June, West,The Case for Astrology. Viking Arkana, London and New York. Tompkins,Secrets of the Great Pyramid.

Sitchin,"Forgery" in the Great Pyramid. Cayce, G. Cayce Schwartzer, and D.