Unless maybe they built it from the top down.
Moving the goal posts, my point that stands is that PT were used also in engravings and paintings on coffins and jewlelry related to burial places and mummies, in essence to “help the dead arrive to their destination safely”, not in the context of soda drinking or geyser building.
Well, I guess the ancient egyptians loved to obfuscate you.
Again, if you were correct we should see a lot of references and quotes from the PT in other watery or “geysery” locations, like around fountains. Do you have any?
Not to defend cladking’s crazy views, but the wear in the lower levels could have been while the pyramid was incomplete above that point.
However, in that case I would expect the most wear at the lower levels and less as you go up. In that scenario, if you go down twice as far from the top, there should be four times the wear, with hardly any near the top. That’s not the pattern we see.
Agreed. The features are interesting and demand an explanation, but this isn’t it.
Bob Wilson Shoots a gremlin on the wing of a Gold Star Airline jet at 20,000’ and Rod Serling said; “Happily his conviction will not remain isolated too much longer for happily, tangible manifestation is very often left as evidence of trespass, even from so intangible a quarter as the t(T)wilight z(Z)one.”
I have this pet theory that most “woo” arises from the interaction of the natural function of the brain conflicting with very unnatural thought in modern language. Even the “Twilight Zone” itself might arise indirectly from the original zone of the same “name”;
1679b. ---------------- he rests alive in the West (or, he is satisfied in living in the West),
1679c. among the Followers of Rē‘, who make the way of twilight mount up.
The three pyramid’s SW corners align with the sunset on the winter solstice. The shadows cause the twilight to mount up.
Serling may not have been aware of this and only listed a single “twilight zone” of which he was later aware.
Be this as it may the fact is this post isn’t so much intended as a manifestation of woo as it is to call attention to a manifestation from the Twilight Zone. None of the lines are the result of wear from stones going up or down. They simply mark the path the stones took straight up the side. The causes are unique and individual to the specific line in question. As a rule they are caused by the simple fact that the stones were laid sequentially as they came up from the quarry. Since no stones could be laid at the point they came up or it would block the flow this area was skipped and was the very last spot on each course to have stones emplaced. These stones were unlike the stones that had been sequentially laid leaving faint vertical lines that are a manifestation from another place and time that is wholly dissimilar to anything we know. They are a manifestation of the very means of construction that employed men on the wing of geb.
Cue music.
[/Music](one pellet of natron)
Your point does not stand.
There are no PT or any other writing (of note) on anything from the great pyramid building age. The PT doesn’t show up until the tiny pyramids and the Coffin Texts are even later. Many of the CT are even written in modern language.
I don’t know what you mean.
One of the reasons that Egyptologists went so wrong is sample bias. Almost everything that’s known was pulled out of a grave. It’s not surprising that Egyptologists believe the ancients were obsessed with death.
Only one other “watery location” is known from such ancient times and that is known today as the “Well of Joseph” which is near Giza and believed to date back to about 1800 BC.
It isn’t even a groove down the face of the pyramid - in fact it’s where 2 faces meet. It’s an 8-sided pyramid.
No they aren’t. If someone says “I believe in ghosts” that is not “nonsense”. You might believe the belief is nonsense but the statement itself is perfectly comprehensible. If it isn’t you can ask for elaboration or clarification. Does he believe in trick or treating ghosts, the will of the dead, or apparitions from beyond the grave?
If myth were nonsense it wouldn’t survive. The PT would be far better known and more widely read but Egyptologists and everyone else believes it’s incomprehensible gobbledty gook. In my entire schooling I heard of it only once and that in college. Of course I was studying science so naturally it didn’t figure prominently. Esssentially I was told it was more babbling from sun addled bumpkins which is exactly what it looks like to modern language speakers who don’t know it’s not modern language.
I’ve figure out a way to use acidic geysers that explains everything, mostly. The Giza plateau started out as a limestone mountain and the geysers were redirected and used to carve the mountain into pyramids. What appear to be seams and gouges were just the paths the spent water followed, which explains how tightly the “blocks” fit together. Later earthquakes split the rock along those seams, giving the appearance of individual blocks.
You spurned my help, claddy, and now I must out-crackpot you. 
I don’t know what you mean.
There was nothing at all wrong with the system I designed and it ran like a top. I wrote the instruction manual and most operators seemed to get it OK. It was what was written by the programmers that was incomprehensible to me and my boss.
I can’t prove you wrong, so it must be true.
Feh! Try as you might, you’ll never disprove it to my satisfaction, and I will repeat it until you give up and leave me to wallow in my triumph.
Sorry about that. It was probably just friendly fire. 
I’m a tough man to out-crackpot though. I often wonder if the “cement” in the fine gaps between the stones is actually deposited calcium carbonate from the degassing water. The only “science” I know about it is it was tested long ago and was believed to be “burnt lime” which is chemically very simnmilar to calcium carbonate.
I’m mostly just saying things I’m relatively confident about in this thread. There are many more things that I’m far less confident about like the cemnent and some of them sound outrageous. They’re gonna hafta wait. I don’t like speculation when Egyptologists do it and I like it less when I do it.
In the meantime it might be wise to practice up on your “woo”.
So why assume that they are talking about a geyser from the great pyramid building age?
Do you have any consistency left?
Miserably missing the point. The point stands and you can not explain it away, ancient Egyptians (the ones that should know better) used the text in funerary contexts, again and again. No description about watery tarts moving the stones with watery lifts.
But of course, since realizing what I’m talking about shows how wet your ideas are.
It is clear that when the PT was talking about natron it was about purification or when to apply natron during a mummification. There was no tradition nor any follow up or descriptions regarding the incredible feat of stones moved around effortlessly. The most logical conclusion remains, the PT were about religious ideas about the afterlife.
So indeed, no evidence whatsoever of artwork or notes about the great mojito wellspring on the rocks. 
The biggest logical failure of yours is clear, if the PT was about great geyser stone movers and not about funerary rites and things to do in the afterlife then the ancient Egyptians are indeed giving you the biggest raspberry from the great beyond.
http://www.virtual-egyptian-museum.org/Collection/FullVisit/Collection.FullVisit-FR.html
The PT is not about geysers, incantations, or funerary rites.
It is one thing only and that is a collection of the rituals that were read aloud to the crowds gathered for the king’s ascension ceremonies and various groups of workers who made it possible.
Most of these rituals were held during an eight day long party that kicked off pyramid building season and culminated with the ascension of the king. Many of these rituals were even held on years that there was no king to ascend because he was still young and fit.
This part is really very obvious and I don’t think you even need to understand the writing to know. How Egyptology got “incantation” from this just stymies me.
I doubt the ancients would care about this point though. I think it was the “stinky footed bumpkin” crack that started them spinning in their graves.
First time I see a whole geyser thrown under a bus.
And the cites showed that it was the ancient Egyptians the ones that put that PT text in their burial coffins and mummy jewellery to tell you and everyone else in no uncertain terms where they thought that lines from the PT were appropriate to be engraved or painted.
Not for day long parties, but to remember and guide the dead.
Oh!
I did consider this.
I’m not sure people will come to me when they tend to push me away when I go to them. It’s not only Egyptologists that I’ve apparently offended but a lot of people and experts in the soft sciences. I guess when you say things like “everything people believe is false or true only from a specific perspective” soft scientists feel pretty uncomfortable.
Well, following Jeremy with his ever shrinking circles of influence is easier than doing the work needed to convince experts that you are onto something.
Sure, but when someone writes ‘I believe in Ghosts’, it’s not reasonable to surmise that they are actually documenting the recipe for spaghetti with meatballs. Which is what you have done.