Перейти к содержимому



Is The Age Of Great Sphinx More 26 Thousand Years?

  • Чтобы отвечать, сперва войдите на форум
2 ответов в теме

#1 В.Юрковец


    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 1 347 сообщений

Опубликовано 26 Февраль 2014 - 16:04

The material below was published in the "Proceedings of the Academy of DNA genealogy" exactly four years ago. It presents the paleoclimatic data that allow to assume the age of Great Sphinx more than 26 thousand years.



1. The complete chronicle of "The Flood" on our planet imprinted in the structure of marine slopes in the form of terraces, which are the result of wave-cut action of the sea. Last time "flood" we are experiencing now: after the end of the last glaciation (about 10,000 years ago), the level of water in the oceans has risen by more than 100 meters.

Penultimate "flood", according to the Quaternary geology and related sciences, was about 25,000 years ago (Lazukov and others, 1981). In the northern hemisphere it is marked by a terrace, coeval Karghinskaya left (north coast of Western Siberia) and Onega (north Russian plains) transgressions. This terrace is located at an altitude of about 25 meters in areas not experienced post-glacial dislocations (Polyakov, 1995). This means that the sea around the world at this altitude then lapped.

Thus, marine terraces are now at the height of 25 meters, mark coeval global event - an increase of about 25 thousand years ago, the ocean level by 25 meters relative to the current level.





Fig.1. Image of the Great Sphinx, combined with the scale of heights.


2. The most interesting object subjected to wave-cut erosion is the Great Sphinx of Giza. It is located in a stable area and is handmade witness to distant past. Absolute marks of its heights - from the foot up to top - are in the range of about 10.5 to 31 meters (Fig. 1). I.e. they cover the lifting height of the ocean level during the time of the Onega (Karghinskaya) transgression.

The first, who in the fifties of the last century drew attention to the water erosion of the Great Sphinx, was a French scientist, mathematician, philosopher and amateur Egyptologist Schwaller de Lubicz. Great Sphinx eroded just to a height of 25 meters - sometime his head above the chin protruded out of the water only. Therefore, the head does not show signs of water erosion (Fig. 2).

As described above, the water last time rose to this level about 25 thousand years ago. Are it turns out that the Great Sphinx, and, consequently, the entire architectural complex of Giza, constituting a single whole with it, is older 25 thousand years?




Fig.2. Erosion of the Great Sphinx. Abrupt transition from body to head clearly visible on the degree of destruction.


3. This is certainly true because these sea-level rise was not observed later. After Onega transgression to early Holocene (about 10,000 years ago) the last phase of the Valdai glaciation occurred. Huge masses of water were accumulated in glaciers. This has led to lowering of the sea level more than 100 meters. Sea level gradually returned to the current state only after the melting of glaciers, but so far has not reached the level of the Onega transgression.

Of course, for a such bold conclusion need a precondition – the erosion on the body of the Great Sphinx is undoubtedly aquatic, and no any other.


4. Robert Schoch, a professor at Boston University, a geologist, a specialist in erosion of light rocks investigated the sphinx in April 1991. Exploring the obvious traces of water effects on the body of the Sphinx, he put forward an alternative hypothesis, contrary to the traditional chronology. According to him, the cause of the destruction of the Sphinx are the rains of wet period 7 - 5 millennia BC (Schoch, 2002). But why does the head of the Great Sphinx was not eroded by the same rains left without explanation.


(to be continued)

#2 В.Юрковец


    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 1 347 сообщений

Опубликовано 26 Май 2014 - 10:04

Schoch opponents who hold the traditional chronology of ancient Egypt, for example, the famous Egyptologist Mark Lehner (Lehner, 2008), geologist Alex Bordeau (Bordeau, 2009) and others, deny water erosion of the Sphinx and offer other reasons for visible weathering body of the Sphinx - eolian (sand and wind ) weathering, acid rain, temperature fluctuations, the salt destruction. However, some authors in the search for explanations that do not contradict common view of Egyptology, in my opinion, fall to the other extremes - "alternative" geology because water erosion is obvious here.


The known Lehner’s explanation relatively well preserved head is also no exception. He believes that the limestone massif from which the Sphinx was sculpted, is not uniform and it contains at the base a lower quality rock than in the top. So head, allegedly so well preserved.


However, this argument is also weak. The upper section of any complex of sedimentary rocks is always less dense and less cemented layers, since the time interval between the formation of the upper and lower layers is many millions years, during which the underlying layers undergo several stages of transformation into a dense and more solid rock. In addition, the Lenner’s hypothesis is indifferent to reasons of weathering and is suitable for anyone, including water erosion.



Figure 3. Great Sphinx, rear view. From this point the head looks like an ancient hydrographic bench mark.


Despite the fact that the Schoch did not explain why the head of the Great Sphinx in the past millennium has remained relatively whole (Fig. 3, back view), his conclusions in any way refute the generally accepted chronology of the construction of the Giza complex. At the same time, the arguments of his opponents do not look convincing enough.


5. Sand- wind erosion should be considered in detail. According to Alex Bordeaux (Bordeau, 2009), even the strongest wind able to pick up a sand only to any particular height, which depends on their size (granulometry). The greater the mass of individual grains of sand, the more the intense of sand-wind weathering, but below its level. Great Sphinx in its history was buried in sand up to his neck a few times, and was unearths a few times - both now and in the past (Fig.4). Consequently, different portions of the body were exposed in different periods. Therefore, according to Bordeaux, sandstorms, walking up and down through the body of the Great Sphinx so uniformly had worked it surface. Without affecting, however, the head which always stuck out above the reach of any sand grains raised by wind.




Figure 4. Great Sphinx, sanded. Photo of the 19th century.



These considerations are do not in themselves unobjectionable, but they are not applicable to the specific situation observed on the Giza plateau. The fact that are in the 80 meters to the east-northeast (literally across the road) tombs of the Old Kingdom, in an era which is believed to have been created Giza complex, though cut in the same layer of limestone, but have not undergone such erosion (Fig. 5).




Figure 5. Old Kingdom tombs, located near the Great Sphinx.



But that's not all. In fact, the degree of destruction of the head of the Great Sphinx is not much inferior to his body, although it was not subjected to direct influence the sea. This is especially noticeable in the old photographs made before the restoration of the head (Fig. 4, 6). Here we see the narrow weathered layers on the face of the Sphinx and their extensions - significant eroded areas on its hood. No less distinct wind erosion is on the back of the hood - decayed soft layers is plastered with cement mortar and therefore appear as dark bands (Fig. 3).


Thus, both the head and the body of the Great Sphinx subjected to the damaging effects of erosion much longer than the Old Kingdom tombs on which is not observed the prepared by wind or water layers. And the observed difference in the appearance of the head and body of the Great Sphinx is a perfect illustration of different effects on the same strata different agents of erosion - wind and water.

#3 В.Юрковец


    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 1 347 сообщений

Опубликовано 28 Май 2014 - 23:18

6. Finally, the sea has left another clear mark on the body of the Great Sphinx, which is known to all experts, Egyptologists. We are talking about a noticeable asymmetry of the body relative to the head. True, Egyptologists used to speak about the asymmetry of the head relative to the body, but this is not true - it is asymmetrically body, even if we consider it at all without a head (Fig. 6).




Figure 6. Great Sphinx before the restoration of the head. Clearly visible asymmetrical erosion of body.


The fact that the largest wave-cut destruction upon the occurrence of the sea should be subject to that part of the body, which is open for sea waves. In our case it should be the left side of the Sphinx (pictured right), who turned to the north - towards the sea. It is really so. Despite the fact that the left side was partially protected by rock outcrops, which later became the burial place of the ancient kingdom, however, this protection does not exclude the wave-cut activity in general. In any case, the right side was protected from the sea by the left side, which took the brunt of the entire range of rough seas, therefore, it should have better preserved, as we see in the picture.

0 пользователей читают эту тему

0 пользователей, 0 гостей, 0 скрытых

Copyright © 2020 Академия ДНК-генеалогии. Климатический филиал