Get some sort of a scientific grip!

“There is a feature of this 10,500 BC correlation which suggests strongly that coincidence is not involved. The pattern that is frozen into monumental architecture in the form of the pyramids marks a very significant moment in the 25,920 year procession cycle of the three stars of Orion’s belt – one that is unlikely to have been selected at random by the Pyramid builders... The question reduces to this: is it a coincidence, that the Giza necropolis as it has reached us today out of the darkness of antiquity, is still dominated by a huge equinoctial lion statue at the east of its horizon and by three gigantic pyramids disposed about its meridian in the distinctive manner of the three stars of Orion’s belt in 10,500 BC?”
“And is it also coincidence that the monuments in this amazing astronomical theme park manage to work together – almost as though geared, like the cogs-wheels of a clock – to tell the same time?”
When this information was coupled with the West and Schoch water erosion evidence, the picture was complete for them. But when West and Schoch completed testing their theory and first excitedly announced the results of their investigations to the world, the outcry was almost deafening and the barrage of criticism overwhelming. Egypt’s top Archeologist Dr Zahi Hawass and another renowned Egyptologist Dr Mark Lehner who is considered the world foremost authority on the Sphinx, were quick to launch scathing personal attacks on the pair and publicly discredited the theory as much as possible. Dr Lehner even went so far as to accuse West and Schoch of being “ignorant and insensitive”.
Now just think about that for a moment – science, insensitive? It is a somewhat unusual remark to come from a scientist don’t you think? His sole intent was to remove the issue from the scientific arena and place it on a more personal playing field. As usual in many such cases it was a public display of a most unscientific attitude that completely failed to address any of the evidence that was being presented. The whole affair was similar to a school boy who had a drawing criticized by one of his peers rather than a scientist debating evidence. For heaven's sake... “insensitive’? Get some sort of a scientific grip!
These personal attacks we are now seeing so frequently are actually a highly political strategy that has recently been adopted by Academia and are fast becoming the standard final move. The method is often employed by cunning politicians when losing an argument. If an issue becomes too obvious to argue against, the best tactic is to discredit anyone who dares to call ‘that which is accepted’ into question thereby shifting attention away from the actual issue and turning it into a more personalized attack against the presenter. It’s the ‘Emperor’s New Clothes Syndrome’.
In the case of the Giza complex, rather than having to argue a case they are aware they could not possibly win, Hawass and Lehner again simply invoked the demeanor of ‘untouchable authority’ that is presumed by their positions in the academic hierarchy. It should be mentioned here that Anthony West himself actually holds no credentials, being a self-taught archeologist and so is not part of the 'club' so to speak. Though even with this being the case, his research on the Sphinx was nothing short of excellent and his finding were backed up by a considerable amount of scientific, geological and astronomical data. (It probably should also be pointed out that Albert Einstein was just a patent clerk when he destroyed many of Newton’s theories. Back then, intelligence was intelligence. Things are not quite that simple now.)
Shortly after the theory was put forth, the American Association for the Advancement of Science invited a debate on the issue, but only Lehner and Schoch were allowed to participate while West, who held most of the evidence, was not, due to his lack of credentials. As was discussed in chapter one, this is another method the Academic community constantly employs to keep credible new information and theories out of the public information loop:
Academia decrees that only people with degrees and doctorates are permitted to practice science and they have two very important and quite simple filters in place to ensure that independent research is suppressed: One, credentials and two, peer review. Because no matter what your evidence or theories are, nothing gets past peer review. But you cannot receive peer review without first having credentials. But of course in order to get credentials you need to tow the party line and embrace the accepted theories or you simply won’t get your degree in the first place. So what do you do? Remember 'Catch 22'? It’s actually quite brilliant in its simplicity – in some scary way.
Again this is a ridiculous and extraordinarily unscientific approach to science because science is something that anyone can study and learn. All that is needed is for one to possess a keen and analytical mind. A person does not need a degree to educate oneself or record facts or to conduct experiments, observe their outcomes and think about them in a critical way. In a truly free and open society where the pursuit of true knowledge is nurtured, science by its very basic fabric, needs to be part of the free democratic process and all theories examined. Science was never designed to be an 'elitist club' presided over by closed minds. Such behavior is truly irresponsible and can only ever serve as a hindrance to legitimate research and the genuine pursuit of real truths. Science cannot properly function as an 'authoritarian regime'.
The thing is that the entire debate over the real age of the pyramids and the Sphinx could very easily be put to rest once and for all if the Egyptologists really wanted to settle the dispute. They
simply need to hire a team of independent and impartial investigators to either prove or disprove the theory once and for all.
Why hasn’t this been done? And why are they so against anyone doing it?"


Max Igan