“two hidden chambers”
we can go deeper
2 Likes
The belief that the world was only 6000 years old caused a telescoping of the understanding of human history. The Biblical chronologies led to the idea that the population of the rest of the world was the descendants of Ham, or of the Lost Tribes. These were once mainstream ideas.
At one time excavation wasn’t really archaeology or geology - it was prescientific. People went on hunts for the remains of Noah’s Ark, for instance. The realisation that the Earth had to be much more than 6000 years old resulted in “unconventional” ideas that are now mainstream. But at the time they were strongly opposed by the establishment because they went against Biblical chronology.
Yeah, I understand the biblical theology leading to the young earth theory, my point was more that archaeology is concerned with the study of ancient civilizations, not the dating of the earth, that would be geology. It is good to keep the ologies sorted, that’s all. Cheers! 
What is the source of the Hotep Twitter map? It’s not from the article linked in the BB post and not mentioned in Reeves’ paper (he calls this chamber “(y) potential continuation of the tomb”).
haha!
1 Like
It is a lot more than that; it is the study of all past human activity, ranging from the early flint chippings of *homo erectus to modern industrial archaeology. Civilisation is a relatively small part of human activity, it only happened in the last 1% of the period covered by archaeology.
That is why the accepted dating of the Earth is so important to archaeology. Anyone who has been following the literature at all for the last 50 years (as I have) will be aware of how the “Biblical” prejudice led to early human activity being dated far too recently (just as it has led to artificial distinction being made between the great apes and the hominids which geneticists are now trying to correct, and a persistent desire to treat Neandertals as being “primitive”.) This also leads to people who have a vague idea that “Egyptian civilisation” was some sort of monolithic entity related to the Pyramids, or, in the ultimate, that human beings coexisted with therapod dinosaurs.
Hence my observation that the fundamentally wrong ideas of the age of the Earth meant that archaeological ideas based on a new understanding of geology and biology were initially regarded as being bizarre.
1 Like
It is a lot lot lot more then that, I agree, humans have only been on the planet a very short time compared to the age of the planet. Even the oldest ancestors to humans, are a blip on the earth’s timeline.
The earth is approximately 4.543 billion years old, the earliest fossil of homo erectus is 1.9 million years old. So when talking about the age of the earth, geology could certainly influence archaeological dating, but archaeology has very little to do with the age of the earth or dating the earth’s age. Archaeologists do not date the earth, archaeological findings have not pushed back the date of the earth or influenced our understanding of the age of the earth. Geology did. Geology influenced archaeology. Hence the initial correction.
I don’t think we disagree. Your last assertion is the exact same as my initial correction:
Or Schrödinger.
I thought so originally, but now I’m not so sure.
1 Like
This is how we get zombies.
1 Like
Oh great, now they will find the Goa’uld in one of the stasis pods and they will open it and they will be taken over by Osiris. Doesn’t anyone remember their TV history anymore?
1 Like
“I’ve had it with these monkey fighting snakes on this monkey fighting Al’kesh!”
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
