Grid of the Gods (54 page)

Close comparison of the construction quality evident in the structures at Giza revealed to Alford that there are at least three levels, or periods, involved, and it is worth citing what I remarked about Alford’s conclusions in
The Giza Death Star Deployed:

The Sphinx, the temples, and the two giant pyramids at Giza were already present at the beginning of the Fourth Dynasty, and (the pharaohs) Khufu and Khafre simply adopted and refurbished them, accounting for the radiocarbon dating anomalies. The society that designed and built the structures disappeared long before the Egyptians occupied them,
with an intervening period where the site was maintained by a small and elite priesthood.
Thus, in Alford’s scenario, there are three distinct levels of the cultural occupation of Giza:

• The first level, responsible for the original construction of the major structures…

•The second level, a “remnant” or elite priesthood left behind at, or that came to occupy, the site…

•The third level, the Egyptian civilization itself.
¹⁷

Thus, adopting Alford’s conclusions and modifying them somewhat, I came to the conclusion that there were three levels, represented by three increasingly
declining
levels of construction perfection evident at Giza:

1) The oldest level, comprising the Great Pyramid itself, antedating ca. 10,000:

    a) since the re-dated Sphinx belongs to the
second
“less perfect” level of construction evident at Giza;

    b) since the Sphinx had been re-dated by Dr. Robert Schoch, based on its water erosion, to ca 5000-7000 BC; and,

    c) since there are ancient traditions that record the fact that when the Great Pyramid did have its casing stones on it, that a water mark was visible halfway up the structure, indicating that it antedated the agreed-upon date among alternative researchers for the flood, ca. 10,000 BC;

2) The second, younger, but still pre-Egyptian level, lying somewhere between 10,000 BC and the Fourth Dynasty millennia later, represented by the Second Pyramid, the Sphinx, the various Sphinx temples, and possibly the third large Pyramid, Menkaure; and,

3) The final, youngest, and purely Egyptian level, represented by the remainder of the structures at Giza, the causeways and the six smaller pyramids and also possibly by the third large Pyramid, Menkaure.
¹⁸

But now the problem of dating grows more acute, for if one dates the first and second levels of Giza to antedate Egypt itself, the problem becomes one of
fixing Giza
within the wider context of the rest of the Grid, and especially in terms of the context and implied technologies
evident at such sites as Puma Punkhu, for one and the same technological skill is implied at both sites, and in both chronological levels of construction.

A closer look at Alford’s logic is in order, for now it obtains truly global proportions. Let us recall his words, and then unpack the logic contained in them, to see how it applies to the question of the world Grid:

Indeed, when we add to these relationships the common use of megalithic-style masonry in the temples of both (sic) Sphinx and pyramids, it is easy to see why Egyptologists view all the structures of Giza as intimately linked, and thus roughly contemporary. The important implication of this is that one reliable dating has the potential to date all structures on the Giza plateau, hence the redating of the Sphinx is not an isolated issue, but has fundamental implications for our understanding of Egyptian history, and particularly the so-called ‘Pyramid Age.’
¹⁹

Unpacking the logic reveals the implications:

1)  Egyptology views the structures of Giza as being intimately related and “roughly contemporary,” i.e., as stemming from Egyptian culture,
because of
the geometrical design of the site and “the common use of megalithic-style masonry” evident in the Sphinx, the Valley Temples, and the three large pyramids;

2)  But redating the Sphinx threw all those structures back into a period
prior
to Egypt, and into what Alford calls a Pyramid Age.

In short, to say, as does Alford, that the Sphinx and Valley temples at Giza represent megalithic constructions is to raise the question of their relationship to other such structures around the world,
for those too are worked out according to a grand plan with respect to Giza itself; they were executed over a prolonged time, and they thus exhibit the same three declining levels of constructional expertise.
It is to highlight the even greater
antiquity of the Great Pyramid, upon whose apex the rest of the Grid was laid out, using it for a prime meridian!

We thus tentatively advance the following expansion of Alford’s thesis, realizing the enormous difficulties that it represents. We do so, however, on the basis that the
levels of constructional expertise and precision
should be the primary determinants of assigning a site and its construction to one of the three periods or “levels”:

1)  The oldest level, comprising the structures
that reveal extreme precision of dressing and fitting stones, and a technology to do so, not obtainable today
, or
exhibiting precision alignments
not obtainable today. This level would thus include sites such as Titicaca and Pumu Punkhu in Bolivia, and the Great Pyramid, both antedating 10,000 BC, since:

     a)  The re-dated Sphinx belongs to the
second
“less perfect” level of construction evident at Giza;

     b)  since the Sphinx had been re-dated by Dr. Robert Schoch, based on its water erosion, to ca 5000-7000 BC;

     c)  since there are ancient traditions that record the fact that when the Great Pyramid did have its casing stones on it, that a water mark was visible halfway up the structure, indicating that it antedated the agreed-upon date among alternative researchers for the flood, ca. 10,000 BC;

     d)  Native traditions in South America place the dating of Pumu Punkhu to a period that also antedates the flood, as was seen in previous chapters;

     e)  It should be noted also that one might be looking at yet a fourth level, represented by structures such as the great henges of Europe and Britain, and sites such as Nabta Playa. One is in the presence of a dilemma here, which we mention, but, at this juncture, do not speculate upon, namely, that of the relationship of these sites to those of the Great Pyramid and Puma Punkhu: which is older? the high-tech productions of Puma Punkhu and the Great Pyramid, or the megalithic constructions of Europe and Nabta Playa?
²⁰

2)  The second, younger, but still pre-Egyptian level, lying somewhere between 10,000 BC and the Fourth Dynasty millennia later. This level is represented by a
decline in the quality of construction, but still exhibiting great sophistication and precision
, and would represented by the Second Pyramid, the Sphinx, the various Sphinx temples, and possibly the third large Pyramid, Menkaure, in Giza, and possibly by Teotihuacan and similar sites elsewhere, since Native American Indian tradition ascribes that site to the construction of “the gods,” and it exhibits correspondingly similar sophistication; and,

3)  The final, youngest, level, represented by the remainder of the structures at Giza, the causeways and the six smaller pyramids and also possibly by the third large Pyramid, Menkaure, and also represented by constructions such as Tikal, Chichen Itza, Anghkor Wat, and the various temples in India.
²¹

The positioning of all three levels with respect to a “Giza Prime Meridian” suggests that there was a continuity of ideology among those building the various structures around the world, and that suggests the presence and continuity of a hidden elite.

There is further testimony of the presence of an elite at Giza, an elite of great antiquity, and this comes, once again, from the astronomical work of Dr. Thomas G. Brophy.

Led by the data of Nabta Playa to consider a similar approach to Giza, Brophy minced no words as to the antiquity, if not of all the
structures
at Giza, then at least of the
design
by which they were laid out, which, like Nabta Playa, were aligned to the Galactic Center:

•  The monuments function as ground and sky maps to signify the time and location in the sky of the culmination of the Galactic Center.

•  The monuments function as a clock to mark the passage of the Zodiac Age of Leo, and to calibrate the start of the precession cycle to the culmination in the sky of the Galactic Center.
²²

These considerations led to the all-important question:

When were the monuments designed? The data evidences that the Giza plateau monuments
design plan was either created more than 12,900 years ago and developed over a several thousand year period;
or it was created by a people a people with astronomical calculation and conceptual design abilities rivaling our own, at some time before or contemporary with the large construction events at Giza around 2,400 BC.
²³

As is now evident, the perfection and technological skills in evidence at the plateau’s first two levels of construction, the redating of the Sphinx, and the presence within the Great Pyramid itself of such overwhelming analogies to modern scientific knowledge point strongly to the first idea, that the site was designed and laid out in high antiquity, by a society or an elite whose scientific and technological knowledge rivaled our own.

C. Petrie and Clues to the Machine:
The Two Large Pyramids of Giza: Imperfections, or Torsion Analogues?
1. The Vedic Clue: Dynamic Torsion

Angkor Wat, as we saw, disclosed a profound clue into the ancient Vedic cosmology, a cosmology that we have also seen was closely mirrored by that of the ancient Mayans, as well as the Egyptians. But as was also observed, the Vedic cosmology was also worked out in close conjunction with the idea of counter-rotation, of
torsion.
There is a further confirmation of this view, again from the Vedic literature, as Brophy points out:

As one example, Vedic Scholar S. Yukteswar noted that the original Vedic description of the yuga ages gave the yuga durations in 2 sets of four periods with ratios 4:3:2:1 (4800:3600:2400:1200). adding
up to 24,000 years. Modern translations of the Vedas insert the word “divine” before “years” to create 360 times 24,000 (or 8,640,000) years as the full yuga epoch. The modern changing of “years” to “divine years” thus allows the denigration of the ancient Vedas to merely symbolic fantasy that can’t have anything to do with actual human cultural history.

    … According to Yukteswar, very ancient Vedic atsronomy conceived of planets revolving around the sun, and “
the sun also has another motion by which it revolves around a grand center called Vishnunabhi, which is the seat of the creative power, Brahma, the universal magnetism. Brahma regulates dharma, the mental virtue of the internal world…
²⁴

The last highlighted portion exhibits the connection to physics in the proper sense, for the most stable means of creating physical systems from the primordial soup is via
rotation
, in this case, the idea of rotating systems within rotating systems is a concept known as dynamic torsion. Yet, the outline of the basic concept is present in the Vedic cosmology centuries if not millennia before, and it is from the rotation of the primordial nothing that everything arises.

2. The Twists in The Two Large Pyramids

With the concept of dynamic torsion, we begin to approach the end of our examination of the Grid, and of the functional nature of at least some of the structures — the pyramidal ones — upon it.

In chapter one, the anomalous yields of early thermonuclear testing led us to speculate that these yields might have other explanations than the standard explanations being given at the time, namely, that those bombs were gating energy, for a brief moment, from higher dimensions. In that respect, the torsion research of Russian astrophysicist Nikolai Kozyrev was mentioned, and it is worth recounting what I wrote about him in
The Philosopher’s Stone
, for the concept now enters the picture as a possible explanation of the functions of pyramids as alchemical machines to manipulate the physical medium itself:

Torsion may be defined as a spiraling motion within the fabric of space and time that folds and pleats the fabric by twisting it. The
simple analogy of emptying a soda pop can, and then wringing it like a dishrag, illustrates what torsion does. The spirals in the can literally fold and pleat, and the can’s length contracts. This, essentially, is what torsion does to space-time.
²⁵