07-22-2011, 09:10 PM
(07-15-2011, 01:04 PM)Cracker Wrote: You should look that guy up, clad. He still speaks the original language and has a different view of what the hieroglyphics mean. He says his oral tradition (Souf, I think, is the language) is waaaaay different than the view Egyptologists are pushing on the public. And he says the pyramids are NOT tombs. I didn't realize they have never found a mummy in any of the big pyramids (only the stepped pyramids were intended to be tombs).
He is more of the view that the pyramids were a type of Leyden jar to store electrical charge and energize the people.
I think I did run into him shortly after I started working on this. He does have a more accurate view of the builders than orthodoxy, I believe. There is ample reason to believe women were considered real people and that the society might have been matriarchal. There are numerous references to the maternal instinct in vultures which were venerated.
I believe the language is misunderstood and mistranslated. If the literal meaning of the PT is the intended one than all the supposed grammatical errors disappear and it becomes clear that objects all have masculine and feminine characteristics. The Egyptians viewed things from "inside" . A bottle is always masculine but becomes feminine when referring to the properties of the inside. One's feminine mouth drinks from a masuline bottle that is feminine internally. I believe the different tricks they used led to a generally far higher level of understanding in conversation. If you didn't grasp the intent you probably knew it. Egyptology has just completely misunderstood everything because they've tried to force the ancients' words into their own preconceptions. They've analyzed the words metaphorically when they were meant literally.