This is a copper tube, and some magnets...
Why does a copper tube have any effect on magnets?
There is more going on than we are being told.

Attached Files

  pipe.flv (Size: 2.12 MB / Downloads: 1)

"The Boeing 767 is capable of carrying up to 23,980 gallons of fuel and it is estimated that, at the time of impact, each aircraft had approximately 10,000 gallons of unused fuel on board (compiled from Government sources)."

Quote from the FEMA report into the collapse of WTC's One and Two (Chapter Two).
Since the aircraft were only flying from Boston to Los Angeles, they would have been nowhere near fully fueled on takeoff (the aircraft have a maximum range of 7,600 miles). They would have carried just enough fuel for the trip together with some safety factor. Remember, that carrying excess fuel means higher fuel bills and less paying passengers. The aircraft would have also burnt some fuel between Boston and New York.

"If one assumes that approximately 3,000 gallons of fuel were consumed in the initial fireballs, then the remainder either escaped the impact floors in the manners described above or was consumed by the fire on the impact floors. If half flowed away, then 3,500 gallons remained on the impact floors to be consumed in the fires that followed."
Quote from the FEMA report into the collapse of WTC's One and Two (Chapter Two).

What we propose to do, is pretend that the entire 3,500 gallons of jet fuel was confined to just one floor of the World Trade Center, that the jet fuel burnt with the perfect quantity of oxygen, that no hot gases left this floor and that no heat escaped this floor by conduction. With these ideal assumptions (none of which were meet in reality) we will calculate the maximum temperature that this one floor could have reached. Of course, on that day, the real temperature rise of any floor due to the burning jet fuel, would have been considerably lower than the rise that we calculate, but this estimate will enable us to demonstrate that the "official" explanation is a lie.

Note that a gallon of jet fuel weighs about 3.1 kilograms, hence 3,500 gallons weighs 3,500 x 3.1 = 10,850 kgs.
Jet fuel is a colorless, combustible, straight run petroleum distillate liquid. Its principal uses are as an ingredient in lamp oils, charcoal starter fluids, jet engine fuels and insecticides.

It is also know as, fuel oil #1, kerosene, range oil, coal oil and aviation fuel.
It is comprised of hydrocarbons with a carbon range of C9 - C17. The hydrocarbons are mainly alkanes CnH2n+2, with n ranging from 9 to 17.

It has a flash point within the range 42° C - 72° C (110° F - 162° F).
And an ignition temperature of 210° C (410° F).
Depending on the supply of oxygen, jet fuel burns by one of three chemical reactions:
(1) CnH2n+2 + (3n+1)/2 O2 => n CO2 + (n + 1) H2O
(2) CnH2n+2 + (2n+1)/2 O2 => n CO + (n + 1) H2O
(3) CnH2n+2 + (n+1)/2 O2 => n C + (n + 1) H2O

Reaction (1) occurs when jet fuel is well mixed with air before being burnt, as for example, in jet engines.
Reactions (2) and (3) occur when a pool of jet fuel burns. When reaction (3) occurs the carbon formed shows up as soot in the flame. This makes the smoke very dark.

In the aircraft crashes at the World Trade Center, the impact (with the aircraft going from 500 or 600 mph to zero) would have throughly mixed the fuel that entered the building with the limited amount of air available within. In fact, it is likely that all the fuel was turned into a flammable mist. However, for sake of argument we will assume that 3,500 gallons of the jet fuel did in fact form a pool fire. This means that it burnt according to reactions (2) and (3). Also note that the flammable mist would have burnt according to reactions (2) and (3), as the quantity of oxygen within the building was quite limited.

Since we do not know the exact quantities of oxygen available to the fire, we will assume that the combustion was perfectly efficient, that is, that the entire quantity of jet fuel burnt via reaction (1), even though we know that this was not so. This generous assumption will give a temperature that we know will be higher than the actual temperature of the fire attributable to the jet fuel.

We need to know that the (net) calorific value of jet fuel when burnt via reaction (1) is 42-44 MJ/kg. The calorific value of a fuel is the amount of energy released when the fuel is burnt. We will use the higher value of 44 MJ/kg as this will lead to a higher maximum temperature than the lower value of 42 (and we wish to continue being outrageously generous in our assumptions).
Cont'd

For a cleaner presentation and simpler calculations we will also assume that our hydrocarbons are of the form CnH2n. The dropping of the 2 hydrogen atoms does not make much difference to the final result and the interested reader can easily recalculate the figures for a slightly more accurate result. So we are now assuming the equation:
(4) CnH2n + 3n/2 O2 => n CO2 + n H2O

However, this model, does not take into account that the reaction is proceeding in air, which is only partly oxygen.
Dry air is 79% nitrogen and 21% oxygen (by volume). Normal air has a moisture content from 0 to 4%. We will include the water vapor and the other minor atmospheric gases with the nitrogen.

So the ratio of the main atmospheric gases, oxygen and nitrogen, is 1 : 3.76. In molar terms:
Air = O2 + 3.76 N2.
Because oxygen comes mixed with nitrogen, we have to include it in the equations. Even though it does not react, it is "along for the ride" and will absorb heat, affecting the overall heat balance. Thus we need to use the equation:
(5) CnH2n + 3n/2(O2 + 3.76 N2) => n CO2 + n H2O + 5.64n N2
From this equation we see that the molar ratio of CnH2n to that of the products is:
CnH2n : CO2 : H2O : N2 = 1 : n : n : 5.64n moles
= 14n : 44n : 18n : 28 x 5.64n kgs
= 1 : 3.14286 : 1.28571 : 11.28 kgs
= 31,000 : 97,429 : 39,857 : 349,680 kgs
In the conversion of moles to kilograms we have assumed the atomic weights of hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen and oxygen are 1, 12, 14 and 16 respectively.

Now each of the towers contained 96,000 (short) tons of steel. That is an average of 96,000/117 = 820 tons per floor. Lets suppose that the bottom floors contained roughly twice the amount of steel of the upper floors (since the lower floors had to carry more weight). So we estimate that the lower floors contained about 1,100 tons of steel and the upper floors about 550 tons = 550 x 907.2 ≈ 500,000 kgs. We will assume that the floors hit by the aircraft contained the lower estimate of 500,000 kgs of steel. This generously underestimates the quantity of steel in these floors, and once again leads to a higher estimate of the maximum temperature.

Each story had a floor slab and a ceiling slab. These slabs were 207 feet wide, 207 feet deep and 4 (in parts 5) inches thick and were constructed from lightweight concrete. So each slab contained 207 x 207 x 1/3 = 14,283 cubic feet of concrete. Now a cubic foot of lightweight concrete weighs about 50kg, hence each slab weighed 714,150 ≈ 700,000 kgs. Together, the floor and ceiling slabs weighed some 1,400,000 kgs.

So, now we take all the ingredients and estimate a maximum temperature to which they could have been heated by 3,500 gallons of jet fuel. We will call this maximum temperature T. Since the calorific value of jet fuel is 44 MJ/kg. We know that 3,500 gallons = 31,000 kgs of jet fuel

will release 10,850 x 44,000,000 = 477,400,000,000 Joules of energy.
This is the total quantity of energy available to heat the ingredients to the temperature T. But what is the temperature T? To find out, we first have to calculate the amount of energy absorbed by each of the ingredients.
That is, we need to calculate the energy needed to raise:
39,857 kilograms of water vapor to the temperature T° C,
97,429 kilograms of carbon dioxide to the temperature T° C,
349,680 kilograms of nitrogen to the temperature T° C,
500,000 kilograms of steel to the temperature T° C,
1,400,000 kilograms of concrete to the temperature T° C.
To calculate the energy needed to heat the above quantities, we need their specific heats. The specific heat of a substance is the amount of energy needed to raise one kilogram of the substance by one degree centigrade.
Substance Specific Heat [J/kg*C]
Nitrogen 1,038
Water Vapor 1,690
Carbon Dioxide 845
Lightweight Concrete 800
Steel 450
Substituting these values into the above, we obtain:
39,857 x 1,690 x (T - 25) Joules are needed to heat the water vapor from 25° to T° C,
97,429 x 845 x (T - 25) Joules are needed to heat the carbon dioxide from 25° to T° C,
349,680 x 1,038 x (T - 25) Joules are needed to heat the nitrogen from 25° to T° C,
500,000 x 450 x (T - 25) Joules are needed to heat the steel from 25° to T° C,
1,400,000 x 800 x (T - 25) Joules are needed to heat the concrete from 25° to T° C.
The assumption that the specific heats are constant over the temperature range 25° - T° C, is a good approximation if T turns out to be relatively small (as it does). For larger values of T this assumption once again leads to a higher maximum temperature (as the specific heat for these substances increases with temperature). We have assumed the initial temperature of the surroundings to be 25° C. The quantity, (T - 25)° C, is the temperature rise.
So the amount of energy needed to raise one floor to the temperature T° C is
= (39,857 x 1,690 + 97,429 x 845 + 349,680 x 1,038 + 500,000 x 450 + 1,400,000 x 800) x (T - 25)
= (67,358,330 + 82,327,505 + 362,967,840 + 225,000,000 + 1,120,000,000) x (T - 25) Joules
= 1,857,653,675 x (T - 25) Joules.

Since the amount of energy available to heat this floor is 477,400,000,000 Joules, we have that
1,857,653,675 x (T - 25) = 477,400,000,000
1,857,653,675 x T - 46,441,341,875 = 477,400,000,000
Therefore T = (477,400,000,000 + 46,441,341,875)/1,857,653,675 = 282° C (540° F).
So, the jet fuel could (at the very most) have only added T - 25 = 282 - 25 = 257° C (495° F) to the temperature of the typical office fire that developed.

Remember, this figure is a huge over-estimate, as (among other things) it assumes that the steel and concrete had an unlimited amount of time to absorb the heat, whereas in reality, the jet fuel fire was all over in one or two minutes, and the energy not absorbed by the concrete and steel within this brief period (that is, almost all of it) would have been vented to the outside world.

"The time to consume the jet fuel can be reasonably computed. At the upper bound, if one assumes that all 10,000 gallons of fuel were evenly spread across a single building floor, it would form a pool that would be consumed by fire in less than 5 minutes"

Quote from the FEMA report into the collapse of WTC's One and Two (Chapter Two).
Here are statements from three eye-witnesses that provide evidence that the heating due to the jet fuel was indeed minimal.
Donovan Cowan was in an open elevator at the 78th floor sky-lobby (one of the impact floors of the South Tower) when the aircraft hit. He has been quoted as saying: "We went into the elevator. As soon as I hit the button, that's when there was a big boom. We both got knocked down. I remember feeling this intense heat. The doors were still open. The heat lasted for maybe 15 to 20 seconds I guess. Then it stopped."

Stanley Praimnath was on the 81st floor of the South Tower: "The plane impacts. I try to get up and then I realize that I'm covered up to my shoulder in debris. And when I'm digging through under all this rubble, I can see the bottom wing starting to burn, and that wing is wedged 20 feet in my office doorway."
Ling Young was in her 78th floor office: "Only in my area were people alive, and the people alive were from my office. I figured that out later because I sat around in there for 10 or 15 minutes. That's how I got so burned."
Neither Stanley Praimnath nor Donovan Cowan nor Ling Young were cooked by the jet fuel fire. All three survived.
Summarizing:

We have assumed that the entire 3,500 gallons of jet fuel was confined to just one floor of the World Trade Center, that the jet fuel burnt with perfect efficency, that no hot gases left this floor, that no heat escaped this floor by conduction and that the steel and concrete had an unlimited amount of time to absorb all the heat.

Then it is impossible that the jet fuel, by itself, raised the temperature of this floor more than 257° C (495° F).
Now this temperature is nowhere near high enough to even begin explaining the World Trade Center Tower collapse.
It is not even close to the first critical temperature of 600° C (1,100° F) where steel loses about half its strength and it is nowhere near the quotes of 1500° C that we constantly read about in our lying media.

"In the mid-1990s British Steel and the Building Research Establishment performed a series of six experiments at Cardington to investigate the behavior of steel frame buildings. These experiments were conducted in a simulated, eight-story building. Secondary steel beams were not protected. Despite the temperature of the steel beams reaching 800-900° C (1,500-1,700° F) in three of the tests (well above the traditionally assumed critical temperature of 600° C (1,100° F), no collapse was observed in any of the six experiments."

Quote from the FEMA report (Appendix A).
Recalling that the North Tower suffered no major structural damage from the intense office fire of February 23, 1975, we can conclude that the ensuing office fires of September 11, 2001, also did little extra damage to the towers.

Conclusion:

The jet fuel fires played almost no role in the collapse of the World Trade Center.

London (PRWEB UK) 8 October 2013
American Biblical scholar Joseph Atwill will be appearing before the British public for the first time in London on the 19th of October to present a controversial new discovery: ancient confessions recently uncovered now prove, according to Atwill, that the New Testament was written by first-century Roman aristocrats and that they fabricated the entire story of Jesus Christ. His presentation will be part of a one-day symposium entitled "Covert Messiah" at Conway Hall in Holborn (full details can be found at http://www.covertmessiah.com).
Although to many scholars his theory seems outlandish, and is sure to upset some believers, Atwill regards his evidence as conclusive and is confident its acceptance is only a matter of time. "I present my work with some ambivalence, as I do not want to directly cause Christians any harm," he acknowledges, "but this is important for our culture. Alert citizens need to know the truth about our past so we can understand how and why governments create false histories and false gods. They often do it to obtain a social order that is against the best interests of the common people."
Atwill asserts that Christianity did not really begin as a religion, but a sophisticated government project, a kind of propaganda exercise used to pacify the subjects of the Roman Empire. "Jewish sects in Palestine at the time, who were waiting for a prophesied warrior Messiah, were a constant source of violent insurrection during the first century," he explains. "When the Romans had exhausted conventional means of quashing rebellion, they switched to psychological warfare. They surmised that the way to stop the spread of zealous Jewish missionary activity was to create a competing belief system. That's when the 'peaceful' Messiah story was invented. Instead of inspiring warfare, this Messiah urged turn-the-other-cheek pacifism and encouraged Jews to 'give onto Caesar' and pay their taxes to Rome."
Was Jesus based on a real person from history? "The short answer is no," Atwill insists, "in fact he may be the only fictional character in literature whose entire life story can be traced to other sources. Once those sources are all laid bare, there's simply nothing left."
Atwill's most intriguing discovery came to him while he was studying "Wars of the Jews" by Josephus [the only surviving first-person historical account of first-century Judea] alongside the New Testament. "I started to notice a sequence of parallels between the two texts," he recounts. "Although it's been recognised by Christian scholars for centuries that the prophesies of Jesus appear to be fulfilled by what Josephus wrote about in the First Jewish-Roman war, I was seeing dozens more. What seems to have eluded many scholars is that the sequence of events and locations of Jesus ministry are more or less the same as the sequence of events and locations of the military campaign of [Emperor] Titus Flavius as described by Josephus. This is clear evidence of a deliberately constructed pattern. The biography of Jesus is actually constructed, tip to stern, on prior stories, but especially on the biography of a Roman Caesar."
How could this go unnoticed in the most scrutinised books of all time? "Many of the parallels are conceptual or poetic, so they aren't all immediately obvious. After all, the authors did not want the average believer to see what they were doing, but they did want the alert reader to see it. An educated Roman in the ruling class would probably have recognised the literary game being played." Atwill maintains he can demonstrate that "the Roman Caesars left us a kind of puzzle literature that was meant to be solved by future generations, and the solution to that puzzle is 'We invented Jesus Christ, and we're proud of it.'"
Is this the beginning of the end of Christianity? "Probably not," grants Atwill, "but what my work has done is give permission to many of those ready to leave the religion to make a clean break. We've got the evidence now to show exactly where the story of Jesus came from. Although Christianity can be a comfort to some, it can also be very damaging and repressive, an insidious form of mind control that has led to blind acceptance of serfdom, poverty, and war throughout history. To this day, especially in the United States, it is used to create support for war in the Middle East."
Atwill encourages skeptics to challenge him at Conway Hall, where after the presentations there is likely to be a lively Q&A session. Joining Mr.Atwill will be fellow scholar Kenneth Humphreys, author of the book "Jesus Never Existed."
Further information can be found at http://www.covertmessiah.com.
About Joseph Atwill: Joseph Atwill is the author of the best-selling book "Caesar's Messiah" and its upcoming sequel "The Single Strand."

“In 1933 Charles Nelson Pogue made headlines when he drove a 1932 Ford V8, 200 miles on a gallon of gas during a demonstration conducted by The Ford Motor Company in Winnipeg, Manitoba using his super-carb system.” The Pogue Carb went into production and was sold openly. [317 were sold?] In the opening months of 1936, stock exchange offices and brokers were swamped with orders to dump all oil stock immediately. His invention caused such shock waves through the stock market, that the US and Canadian governments both stepped in and [successfully] applied pressure to stifle him.

http://fuel-efficient-vehicles.org/energ...age_id=986

The Great Pyramid a true masterpiece and has rightly earned the title of a “Wonder”. It was built with such precision that our current technology cannot replicate it.  Historical analysis shows suggests that the Pyramids were built between 2589 and 2504 BC. The problem with "Facts" is they are often presented authoritatively when it is sometimes only conjecture and assumption that generate these conclusions.It is more fun to read when people tell a story, but this doesn't make the story true.
Did the Egyptians of 2589 BC actually make this structure, absolutely not. Did they take credit for it?.. YES.
It isn't the construction of the pyramid that tells me they didn't build it, it's the math involved that could only be achieved by a knowledge of the planet that was simply unavailable at the time.
Here are the some facts:

• The pyramid is estimated to have around 2,300,000 stone blocks that weigh from 2 to 30 tons each and there are even some blocks that weigh over 50 tons.
  
• The Pyramid of Menkaure, the Pyramid of Khafre and the Great Pyramid of Khufu are precisely aligned with the Constellation of Orion.
  
• The base of the pyramid covers 55,000 m2 (592,000 ft 2) with each side greater than 20,000 m2 (218,000 ft2) in area.
  
• The interior temperature is constant and equals the average temperature of the earth, 20 Degrees Celsius (68 Degrees Fahrenheit).
  
• The outer mantle was composed of 144,000 casing stones, all of them highly polished and flat to an accuracy of 1/100th of an inch, about 100 inches thick and weighing approx. 15 tons each.
  
• The cornerstone foundations of the pyramid have ball and socket construction capable of dealing with heat expansion and earthquakes.
  
• The mortar used is of an unknown origin (Yes, no explanation given). It has been analyzed and its chemical composition is known but it can’t be reproduced. It is stronger than the stone and still holding up today.
  
• It was originally covered with casing stones (made of highly polished limestone). These casing stones reflected the sun’s light and made the pyramid shine like a jewel. They are no longer present being used by Arabs to build mosques after an earthquake in the 14th century loosened many of them. It has been calculated that the original pyramid with its casing stones would act like gigantic mirrors and reflect light so powerful that it would be visible from the moon as a shining star on earth. Appropriately, the ancient Egyptians called the Great Pyramid “Ikhet”, meaning the “Glorious Light”.  How these blocks were transported and assembled into the pyramid is still a mystery. – http://www.gizapyramid.com/general.htm
  
• Aligned True North: The Great Pyramid is the most accurately aligned structure in existence and faces true north with only 3/60th of a degree of error. The position of the North Pole moves over time and the pyramid was exactly aligned at one time.
  
• Center of Land Mass: The Great Pyramid is located at the center of the land mass of the earth. The east/west parallel that crosses the most land and the north/south meridian that crosses the most land intersect in two places on the earth, one in the ocean and the other at the Great Pyramid.
  
• The four faces of the pyramid are slightly concave, the only pyramid to have been built this way.
  
• The centers of the four sides are indented with an extraordinary degree of precision forming the only 8 sided pyramid, this effect is not visible from the ground or from a distance but only from the air, and then only under the proper lighting conditions. This phenomenon is only detectable from the air at dawn and sunset on the spring and autumn equinoxes, when the sun casts shadows on the pyramid.
  
• The granite coffer in the “King’s Chamber” is too big to fit through the passages and so it must have been put in place during construction.
  
• The coffer was made out of a block of solid granite. This would have required bronze saws 8-9 ft. long set with teeth of sapphires. Hollowing out of the interior would require tubular drills of the same material applied with a tremendous vertical force.
  
• Microscopic analysis of the coffer reveals that it was made with a fixed point drill that used hard jewel bits and a drilling force of 2 tons.
  
• The Great Pyramid had a swivel door entrance at one time. Swivel doors were found in only two other pyramids: Khufu’s father and grandfather, Sneferu and Huni, respectively.
  
• It is reported that when the pyramid was first broken into that the swivel door, weighing some 20 tons, was so well balanced that it could be opened by pushing out from the inside with only minimal force, but when closed, was so perfect a fit that it could scarcely be detected and there was not enough crack or crevice around the edges to gain a grasp from the outside.
  
• With the mantle in place, the Great Pyramid could be seen from the mountains in Israel and probably the moon as well.
  
• The weight of the pyramid is estimated at 5,955,000 tons. Multiplied by 10^8 gives a reasonable estimate of the earth’s mass.
  
• The Descending Passage pointed to the pole star Alpha Draconis, circa 2170-2144 BCE. This was the North Star at that point in time. No other star has aligned with the passage since then.
  
• The southern shaft in the King’s Chamber pointed to the star Al Nitak (Zeta Orionis) in the constellation Orion, circa 2450 BCE The Orion constellation was associated with the Egyptian god Osiris. No other star aligned with this shaft during that time in history.
  
• Sun’s Radius: Twice the perimeter of the bottom of the granite coffer times 10^8 is the sun’s mean radius. [270.45378502 Pyramid Inches* 10^8 = 427,316 miles]
  
• The curvature designed into the faces of the pyramid exactly matches the radius of the earth.
  
• Khufu’s pyramid, known as the great pyramid of Giza, is the oldest and largest, rising at 481 feet (146 meters). Archaeologists say it was the tallest structure in the world for about 3, 800 years.
  
• The relationship between Pi (p) and Phi (F) is expressed in the fundamental proportions of the Great Pyramid.
  
  The Pyramid of KheopsThe Pyramid of Kheops
  
  Reference:
  
  The Great Pyramid: A Miracle in Stone, 1973, Joseph A. Seiss
  
  Secrets of the Great Pyramid, 1978, Peter Tompkins
  
  Back in Time 3104 B.C. to the Great Pyramid, 1990, S. G. Taseos
  
  The Authorship and Message of the Great Pyramid, 1953, Julian T. Gray, E. Steinmann & Co.
  
  Our Inheritance in the Great Pyramid, 1891, C. Piazzi Smyth
  
  http://www.timstouse.com
  
  http://www.gizapyramid.com/general.htm
  
  FAIR USE NOTICE: This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.
  

THE
GREAT PYRAMID FORGERY ?

The following information can be found here: Link

I have no intention of ripping off the informaiton, merely duplicating it for archival purposes. Often this kind of research can be lost for the sake of political correctness or to "help" keep history the one the authorities want you to know.

Of all the monuments of ancient Egypt, the Great Pyramid of Giza is by far the granddaddy of them all, and the only one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World to survive to this day.

It is NOT my intent to prove who built the Great Pyramid and when, but to share compelling evidence that strongly suggests the cartouche of Pharaoh Khufu (Cheops in Greek) that is inscribed inside the relieving chambers of the Great Pyramid (see image below) may have been fraudulently planted (painted.)

Edit | Delete | Order:  

I conclude with compelling evidence (or lack thereof) and reasoning why the Great Pyramid was NOT a tomb. If the GP was not a tomb, then what was its purpose? you ask. Although my jury is still out debating that question, I am inclined to believe the original purpose of the Great Pyramid was lost, forgotten, unknown, or simply ignored over the years.

What is a Cartouche?

A cartouche is an ornate or ornamental oval or oblong figure (as seen on ancient Egyptian monuments) that encloses a sovereign's name, such as a Pharaoh.


Cross-section diagram of the Great Pyramid depicting a descending subterranean passage, an ascending passage (the Grand Gallery) two chambers named the "Queen's Chamber" and the "King's Chamber" and four (air?) shafts.

Located directly above the King's Chamber are five, granite, stress relieving chambers. Their structural function was/is to prevent the collapse of the King's Chamber from the tremendous weight of several million tons of the superincumbent masonry above the chamber area.


These four upper chambers were discovered by Col. Howard Vyse in 1837 and named by him.

We will be examining the hieroglyphic inscriptions in the uppermost relieving chambers, namely 'Lady Arbuthnot' and 'Campbell's Chamber.'

Recorded May 10, 1837


The drawings below are the red, ochre-painted cartouches, hieroglyphic inscriptions, quarry marks, leveling lines, axis markers, directional notations, names of workgangs in the form of Khufu's name? and graffiti? that were found in Lady Arbuthnot's Chamber and drawn by Colonel William Howard Vyse in his journal on May 10, 1837, EXACTLY AS THEY WERE DISCOVERED on May 10, 1837.



This not only depicts what the inscriptions looked like on the day they were discovered, it also establishes an authentic historical record of the discovery.

This date is very important.

In 1837, Samuel Birch, a hieroglyphics expert at the British Museum in London wrote
(please read this):

What Samuel Birch (and others) had discovered was that the inscriptions were NOT hieroglyphic but written in a semi-hieractic (linear) hieroglyphic characters (script) which was a form of shorthand that did not appear until the beginning of the Middle Kingdom (2000 BC.)


Additionally, Birch identified two royal names: Saufou or Shoufou (Suphis) and Khoufou (Cheops) and Senekhuf or SENeshoufou (that included the ram symbol of the God Khnum.)



Two different names identifying the same Pharaoh? And, as Birch explains, the presence of the Pharaoh's name "as a quarry mark in the Great Pyramid is an additional embarrassment."

Were these two people co-regents? Did they reign together?
These observations raise many RED flags.
Please continue. It gets more interesting.

 

NO.
No sieve is present.

There are no inscriptions of a sieve in these cartouches. Instead, they are clearly drawn with ONE crosshatch and ONE DOT.

Note the sieve? (Kh?) in the cartouche on the far right. The circle has only ONE DOT in the center. A circle with one dot in the center depicts the Solar Disk, the hieroglyphic symbol and phonetic sound for RA, the sun god, the supreme god of Egypt, NOT "Kh." This cartouche spells, Raufu, NOT Khufu.

What in the world is the symbol of "Ra" doing in this cartouche? How could this happen?

Had someone uneducated in hieroglyphics misspelled the Pharaoh's name?

Who would/could make such a misspelling mistake? Someone living during Khufu's reign? or someone living in the 1830s?

And why is this cartouche inconsistent with the other cartouches inscribed in the same chamber? Why is it incomplete?

More RED FLAGS.

The opening verses unmistakably identify Khufu by his cartouche: 

This was a terrible time, a terrible incident. Using children for political gain is a pretty common action by slimy politicians. Using the death or the presumed death of children to push your political narritave is beyond low, sleazy and down right distasteful.
So if it happened, or if it didn't is entirely based on your perception of the events.
The following PDF provides some insight to the idea that this event might just be a very poorly constructed, poorly executed attempt at a political gun control grab.

Attached Files

  NobodyDiedAtSandyHook.pdf (Size: 6.58 MB / Downloads: 0)

God and Spousal Abuse:
It’s common for Christians to compare the relationship between humanity and God to that between husband and wife. God is the “man” of the house to whom humanity owes obedience, respect, and honor. Usually this relationship is portrayed as one of love, but in far too many ways, God is more like an abusive spouse who only knows how to love through intimidation and violence. A review of classic signs and symptoms of spousal abuse reveals how abusive the “relationship” people have with God is.

Victims are Afraid of the Abuser:
Abusers instill fear in their spouses; believers are instructed to fear God. Abusers are unpredictable and given to dramatic mood swings; God is depicted as alternating between love and violence. Abused spouses avoid topics which set off the abuser; believers avoid thinking about certain things to avoid angering God. Abusers make one feel like there is no way to escape a relationship; believers are told that there is no way to escape God’s wrath and eventual punishment.

Abusers Use of Threats and Intimidation to Force Compliance:
Violence is a primary means by which abusers communicate, even with their spouses whom they are supposed to love. Abusers aren’t just violent towards their spouses — they also use violence against objects, pets, and other things to instill more fear and to force compliance with their wishes. God is portrayed as using violence to force people to comply with certain rules and Hell is the ultimate threat of violence. God might even punish an entire nation for the transgressions of a few members.

Abusers Withholds Resources from Victims:
In order to exercise greater control over a victim, abusers will withhold important resources in order to make the victim more dependent. Resources used like this include money, credit cards, access to transportation, medications, or even food. God is also depicted as exercising control over people by controlling their resources — if people are insufficiently obedient, for example, God may cause crops to fail or water to turn bad. The basic necessities of living are conditioned on obeying God.

Abusers Instill Feelings of Inadequacy in Victims:
A further means of exercising control over a victim is instilling feelings of inadequacy in them. By getting them to feel worthless, helpless, and unable to do anything right, they will lack the self-confidence necessary to stand up to the abuser and resist the abuse. Believers are taught that they are depraved sinners, unable to do anything right and unable to have good, decent, or moral lives independent of God. Everything good that a believer achieves is due to God, not their own efforts.

Victims Feel they Deserve to be Punished by Abusers:
Part of the process of encouraging the victim to feel inadequate involves getting them to feel that they really do deserve the abuse they are suffering. If the abuser is justified in punishing the victim, then the victim can hardly complain, can she? God is also described as being justified in punishing humanity — all people are so sinful and depraved that they deserve an eternity in hell (created by God). Their only hope is that God will take pity on them and save them.

Victims are Not Trusted by Abusers:
Another part of the process of making the victim feel inadequate is ensuring that they know how little the abuser trusts them. The victim is not trusted to make her own decisions, dress herself, buy things on her own, or anything else. She is also isolated from her family so that she can’t find help. God, too, is depicted as treating people as if they were unable to do anything right or make their own decisions (like on moral issues, for example).

Emotional Dependency of the Abuser on the Victim:
Although abusers encourage victims to feel inadequate, it is the abuser who really has problems with self-confidence. Abusers encourage emotional dependency because they are emotionally dependent themselves — this produces extreme jealousy and controlling behavior. God, too, is depicted as dependent upon human worship and love. God is usually described as jealous and unable to handle it when people turn away. God is all-powerful, but unable to prevent the smallest problems.

Blaming the Victim for the Abuser’s Actions:
Victims are typically made to feel responsible for all of an abuser’s actions, not just deserving of the punishments inflicted. Thus victims are told that it’s their fault when an abuser gets angry, feels suicidal, or indeed when anything at all goes wrong. Humanity is also blamed for everything that goes wrong — although God created humanity and can stop any unwanted actions, all responsibility for all evil in the world is laid entirely at the feet of human beings.
Why Do Abused People Stay With Their Abusers?:
Why do women stay with violent, abusive spouses? Why don’t they just pack up and leave, making a new life for themselves elsewhere and with people who actually respect and honor them as equal, independent human beings? The signs of abuse described above should help in answering these questions: women are so emotionally and psychologically beaten down that they lack the mental strength to do what is necessary. They don’t have enough confidence to believe that they can make it without the man who keeps telling them that only he could possibly love such an ugly and worthless person such as they.

Perhaps some insight on this can be gained by rephrasing the question and asking why people don’t abandon the emotionally and psychologically abusive relationship they are expected to develop with God? The existence of God isn’t relevant here — what matters is how people are taught to perceive themselves, their world, and what will happen to them if they make the mistake of trying to leave the relationship in order to make a better life for themselves elsewhere.

Women who are abused are told that they can’t make it on their own and if they try, their spouse will come after them to punish or even kill them. Believers are told that they can’t accomplish anything of value without God, that they are so worthless that only because God is infinitely loving does he love them at all; if they turn their backs on God, they will be punished for all eternity in hell. The sort of “love” which God has for humanity is the “love” of an abuser who threatens, attacks, and commits violence in order to get his own way.

Religions like Christianity are abusive insofar as they encourage people to feel inadequate, worthless, dependent, and deserving of harsh punishment. Such religions are abusive insofar as they teach people to accept the existence of a god which, if human, would have long ago been shut away in prison for all his immoral and violent behavior.
 
http://atheism.about.com/od/whatisgod/p/...busive.htm

Orwell vs. Huxley... who was right?

Although people long ago began to wonder whether the "canals" on Mars
were the creation of cosmic engineers, for some odd reason it has not
occurred to look with the same eyes upon the peculiarities of the lunar
landscape much closer at hand. And all the arguments about the
possibilities of intelligent life existing on other celestial bodies
have been confined to the idea that other civilisations must necessarily
live on the surface of a planet, and that the interior as a habitat is
out of the question.
Abandoning the traditional paths of "common sense", we have plunged into
what may at first sight seem to be unbridled and irresponsible fantasy.
But the more minutely we go into all the information gathered by man about
the Moon, the more we are convinced that there is not a single fact to
rule out our supposition. Not only that, but many things so far considered
to be lunar enigmas are explainable in the light of this new hypothesis.
AN ARTIFICIAL SPUTNIK OF THE EARTH?
The origin of the Moon is one of the most complicated problems of cosmogony.
So far there have been basically three hypotheses under discussion.
HYPOTHESIS I. The Moon was once a part of the Earth and broke away from it.
This has now been refuted by the evidence.
HYPOTHESIS II. The Moon was formed independently from the same cloud of
dust and gas as the Earth, and immediately became the Earth's natural
satellite.
But then why is there such a big difference between the specific gravity of
the Moon (3.33 grammes per cubic centimetre) and that of the Earth
(5.5 gr.)? Furthermore, according to the latest information (analysis of
samples brought back by the U.S. Apollo astronauts) lunar rock is not of the
same composition as the Earth's.
HYPOTHESIS III. The Moon came into being separately, and, moreover, far
from the Earth (perhaps even outside the Solar system).
This would mean that the moon would not have to be fashioned from the same
"clay" as our own planet. Sailing through the Universe, the Moon came into
Earth's proximity, and by a complex interplay of forces of gravity was
brought within a geocentric orbit, very close to circular. But a catch of
this kind is virtually impossible.
In fact, scientists studying the origin of the Universe today have no
acceptable theory to explain how the Earth-Moon system came into being.
OUR HYPOTHESIS: The Moon is an artificial Earth satellite put into orbit
around the Earth by some intelligent beings unknown to ourselves.
We refuse to engage in speculation about who exactly staged this unique
experiment, which only a highly developed civilisation was capable of.
A NOAH'S ARK?
If you are going to launch an artificial sputnik, then it is advisable to
make it hollow. At the same time it would be naive to imagine that anyone
capable of such a tremendous space project would be satisfied simply with
some kind of giant empty trunk hurled into a near-Earth trajectory.
It is more likely that what we have here is a very ancient spaceship, the
interior of which was filled with fuel for the engines, materials and
appliances for repair work, navigation, instruments, observation equipment
and all manner of machinery... in other words, everything necessary to
enable this "caravelle of the Universe" to serve as a kind of Noah's Ark
of intelligence, perhaps even as the home of a whole civilisation envisaging
a prolonged (thousands of millions of years) existence and long wanderings
through space (thousands of millions of miles).
Naturally, the hull of such a spaceship must be super-tough in order to stand
up to the blows of meteorites and sharp fluctuations between extreme heat and
extreme cold. Probably the shell is a double-layered affair--the basis a
dense armouring of about 20 miles in thickness, and outside it some kind of
more loosely packed covering (a thinner layer--averaging about three miles).
In certain areas--where the lunar "seas" and "craters" are, the upper layer
is quite thin, in some cases, non-existent.
Since the Moon's diameter is 2,162 miles, then looked at from our point of
view it is a thin-walled sphere. And, understandably, not an empty one.
There could be all kinds of materials and equipment on its inner surface.
But the greatest proportion of the lunar mass is concentrated in the central
part of the sphere, in its core, which has a diameter of 2,062 miles.
Thus the distance between the kernel and the shell of this nut is in the
region of 30 miles. This space was doubtless filled with gases required for
breathing, and for technological and other purposes.
With such an internal structure the Moon could have an average specific
gravity if 3.3 grammes per cubic centimetre, which differs considerably from
that of Earth (5.5 grammes per cubic centimetre).
A BATTLESHIP THEY COULDN'T TORPEDO?
The most numerous and interesting of the formations on the lunar surface are
the craters. In diameter they vary considerably. Some are less that a yard
across, while others are more than 120 miles (the biggest has a diameter of
148 miles). How does the Moon come to be so pockmarked?
There are two hypothesis--volcanic and meteoric. Most scientists vote for
the latter.
Kirill Stanyukovich, a Soviet physicist, has written a whole series of works
since 1937 in which he expounds the idea that the craters are the result of
bombardment of the Moon for millions of years. And he really means
bombardment, for even the smallest celestial body, when it is involved in one
of those fastest head-on collisions so common in the cosmos behaves itself
like a warhead charged with dynamite, or even an atomic warhead at times.
Instant combustion takes place on impact, turning it into a dense cloud of
incandescent gas, into plasma, and there is a very definite explosion.
According to Professor Stanykovich, a "missile" of a sizable character (say 6
miles in diameter) must, on collision with the Moon, penetrate to a depth
equal to 4 or 5 times its own diameter (24-30 miles).
The surprising thing is that however big the meteorites may have been which
have fallen on the Moon (some have been more than 60 miles in diameter), and
however fast they must have been travelling (in some cases the combined speed
was as much as 38 miles per second), the craters they have left behind are
for some odd reason all about the same depth, 1.2-2 miles, although they vary
tremendously in diameter.
Take that 148-mile diameter crater. In area it outdoes Hiroshima hundreds of
times over. What a powerful explosion it must have been to send millions of
tons of lunar rock fountaining over tens of miles! On the face of it, one
would expect to find a very deep crater here, but nothing of the sort: there
is three miles at the most between top and bottom levels, and one third of
that is accounted for by the wall of rock thrown up around the crater like
a toothed crown.
For such a big hole, it is too shallow. Furthermore, the bottom of the crater
is convex, following the curve of the lunar surface. If you were to stand in
the middle of the crater you would not even be able to see the soaring edge--
it would be beyond the horizon. A hollow that is more like a hill is a
rather strange affair, perhaps.
Not really, if one assumes that when the meteorite strikes the outer covering
of the moon, this plays the role of a buffer and the foreign body finds
itself up against an impenetrable spherical barrier. Only slightly denting
the 20-mile layer of armour plating, the explosion flings bits of its
"coating" far and wide.
Bearing in mind that the Moon's defence coating is, according to our
calculations, 2.5 miles thick, one sees that this is approximately the
maximum depth of the craters.
A SPACESHIP COME TO GRIEF?
Now let us consider the chemical peculiarities of the lunar rock. Upon
analysis, American scientists have found chromium, titanium and zirconium in
it. These are all metals with refractory, mechanically strong and
anti-corrosive properties. A combination of them all would have envitable
resistance to heat and the ability to stand up to means of aggression, and
could be used on Earth for linings for electrical furnaces.
If a material had to be devised to protect a giant artificial satellite from
the unfavourable effects of temperature, from cosmic radiation and meteorite
bombardment, the experts would probably have hit on precisely these metals. In
that case it is not clear why lunar rock is such an extraordinarily poor heat
conductor--a factor which so amazed the astronauts? Wasn't that what the
designers of the super-sputnik of the Earth were after?
From the engineers point of view, this spaceship of ages long past which we
call the Moon is superbly constructed. There may be a good reason for its
extreme longevity. It is even possible that it predates our own planet. At
any rate, some pieces of lunar rock have proved older than the oldest on
Earth, although it is true, this applies to the age of the materials and not
of the structure for which they were used. And from the number of craters on
its surface, the Moon itself is no chicken.
It is, of course, difficult to say when it began to shine in the sky above
the Earth, but on the basis of some preliminary estimates one might hazard a
guess that it was around two thousand million years ago.
We do not, of course, imagine that the moon is still inhabited, and probably
many of its automatic devices have stopped working, too. The stabilisers
have ceased functioning and the poles have shifted. Even though the moon
keeps that same side turned towards us, for some time it has been unsteady on
its own axis, on occasion showing us part of its reverse side which were
once invisible to observers on the Earth--for example, the Selenites
themselves if they made expeditions here.
Time has taken its toll. Both body and rigging have disintegrated to some
extent; some seams on the inner shell evidently diverged. We assume that
the long (up to 940 miles) chains of small craters formerly ascribed to
volcanic activity were brought about by eruptions of gas through cracks
appearing in the armour plating as a result of accidents.
No doubt one of the most splendid features of the lunarscape--a straight
"wall" nearly 500 yards high and over 60 miles long--formed as a result of
one of the armour plates bending under the impact of celestial torpedoes and
raising one of its straight, even edges.
The Moon's population presumeably took the necessary steps to remedy the
effects of meteorite bombardment, for example, patching up rents in the
outer shield covering the inner shell. For such purposes a substance from
the lunar core was probably used, a kind a cement being made from it. After
processing this would be piped to the surface sites where it was required.
Not long ago astronomers discovered variations in the gravitational fields
near the large "seas". We believe the reason to be this: the Moon's dry seas
are in fact areas from which the protective coating was torn from the armour
cladding. To make good the damage to these vast tracts, the installation
producing the repair substance would have had to be brought immediately
beneath the site so that it could flood the area with is "cement". The
resulting flat stretches are what look like seas to the terrestrial observer.
The stocks of materials and machinery for doing this are no doubt still where
they were, and are sufficiently massive to give rise to these gravitational
anomalies.
What is the Moon today? Is it a colossal necropolis, a "city of the dead,"
where some form of life became extinct? Is it a kind cosmic Flying Dutchman?
A craft abandoned by its crew and controlled automatically? We do not know
and we shall not try to guess.
WAITING FOR THE EVIDENCE
We have put forward in this article only a few of the reasons--unfortunately
the evidence is so far only circumstantial--for our hypothesis, which at
first glance may appear to be crazy.
A similar "crazy" idea was put forward in 1959 by Professor Iosif Shklovsky,
an eminent scientist, in relation to the "moons" circling around Mars.
After carefully weighing up the evidence he concludes that they are both
hollow and therefore artificial satellites.
We feel that the questions we have raised in connection with our Moon provide
sufficient food for serious thought on the matter; the result may be the
illumination of our many lunar riddles.
Now, of course, we have to wait for direct evidence to support our idea. Or
refute it.
Probably there will not be long to wait.