The Ancient Archaeology Hoax

RSS Feed

The Ancient Archaeology Hoax

May 1st, 2017

Awake Goy

Have We Been Lied to About Ancient Architecture?

I have to give the credit to Jan Irvin for posting this on social media. I don’t know what to make of this video. I’m still debating with myself which parts of this exposé might be ‘true’ and which parts might be plain rubbish, or in other words, if this is a legitimate investigation on the real origin of these very ancient monuments or the whole thing is just another disinfo shit sandwich to muddy the waters, another blind alley to deceive us even more about the true origins of our civilization. Someone said that this could be another attempt at discrediting Aryan achievements of the ancient past, to which I do agree completely, but could this be a similar case to the one which has been presented by the NASA Flying Circus up until now?

I have to warn people the video (Published on Mar 14, 2017 by Awake Souls on YouTube) is a bit hard to watch since the information given is all written text with very little voice-over added to it, also I don’t think English is the author’s first language. I have noticed the author tends to rush too prematurely to conclusions without bringing more additional information to support his case. I find the comments about desert vegetation and so on very flimsy since vegetation, specially palm trees, grow very quickly without the need of much moisture. Some other comments seem kind of misleading; if these people were supposed to be ‘reconstructing’ those ancient buildings with scattered remnants would not they need scaffoldings and other types of construction tools to achieve such purpose after all?

On the other hand I find some other points quite legitimate, like the one presented by this Russian scientist when checking the raw material with which those pyramid blocks were made. Also that structural steel C-beam (04:22 minutes in) is practically a give away. I admit that is precisely when I start doubting. Regardless, keep this in mind; not all ancient structures were created equal; pyramids from the Fourth Dynasty in Egypt were of much better quality than the pyramids which were built by the end of the Egyptian civilization (at least this is the official version of events). Of course this should be attributable to the fact that the Egyptian society had race-mixed itself to oblivion, to the point of not being able to match the technological miracles of its past. These blocks with interiors made of sand in the pyramid of Giza might be later additions. Regardless this is what the official Egyptologists have to say about pyramid bricks:

The pyramids of the 12th dynasty were made from mudbricks that contained straw as a reinforcement. Each pyramid would have contained millions upon millions of these mudbricks which were about 24 inches by 12 inches by 6 inches in size. The 12th dynasty pyramids thus had a core that was made of mud bricks but the outer veneer was made of limestone which was becoming more difficult to quarry by the 12th dynasty and therefore in short supply. Over the centuries, the outer veneer of limestone has fallen down and been pilfered exposing the inner mudbrick core. – From the article ’13th Dynasty’ by Could Joseph and Imhotep have been the same person? wordpress

Taking into account that pyramids, like the ones at Giza, might have been restored several times over the centuries the question that remains is how much might be left of the original monuments. As an addition to that we have to take into account that even monuments like the Great Sphinx probably went through many changes over the centuries as well:

One of the main oddities about the sculpture is that the head is out of proportion to its body. It could be that the head was re-carved several times by subsequent pharaohs since the first visage was created, though on stylistic grounds this is unlikely to have been done after the Old Kingdom period in Egypt (ending around 2181 BC). Perhaps the original head was that of a ram or hawk and was recut into a human shape later. Various repairs to the damaged head over thousands of years might have reduced or altered the facial proportions. Any of these explanations could account for the small size of the head in relation to the body, particularly if the Great Sphinx is older than traditionally believed. – Taken from the article ‘The Mystery of The Great Sphinx’ by Brian Haughton (Ancient Mystery Encyclopedia) Published June 2011.

But I will leave it at that.

By no means I am supporting what is presented on this video, my only purpose is to raise questions about the validity of this hypothesis. I insist it could all be part of this trend to downplay White civilization’s achievements (which in itself is an open conspiracy in my opinion). Watch the video with an open mind, but not as open as to let disinfo garbage filter in. By the way, can anyone tell me what that ‘Pizza’ logo at the top right corner means? (09:50 mins in)

Your thoughts…