This is a somewhat shorter episode, just under 20 minutes, where I look into the idea of whether or not the three major Giza pyramids line up with the three main belt stars of Orion. Given the tagline of, “Learn about how two points magically make a line and how three points roughly corresponding to three other points has mystical and profound implications!” you may be able to tell that I was not impressed with the arguments.
If you’d rather not listen to the episode, a summary of the conclusions can be found in the image below:
Thank you so much for taking the time to research and explain it. Because I was just wondering about that as I started to look into pyramidology’s claim the other month.
Astronomer Royal indeed!
Comment by Denis Solaro — May 9, 2012 @ 4:38 pm |
I honestly went into this one not knowing what I would find. I’d heard the claim before and it had always sounded somewhat fishy due to the whole “three points match three other points!” But I did not know what it would actually look like until I did the overlays.
Comment by Stuart Robbins — May 10, 2012 @ 8:51 am |
yes the picture is hilarious and well worth a 1000 words . nice work
Comment by Walter Walkie — May 12, 2012 @ 12:30 am |
Thanks for another interesting episode! Just a quick question; is your star-pyramid correlation overlay based on the present day position of the Orion’s belt stars or what they would have looked like when the pyramids were built (either according to current science or according to the 10000 BC civilization nonsense)? You touched on it in the beginning of the podcast, but either I lost you somewhere along the line or you never elaborated further. I’m going to assume I’m the one lost in space(-time) here.
Would there even be a noticable difference in the constellation’s appearance over a 4800 or 12000 year span?
Comment by Benny L, Stockholm, Sweden — May 14, 2012 @ 9:06 am |
Sorry, Benny. I realized this issue the day after I posted the podcast, and I’ll discuss it during the next episode. Meantime, check out the shownotes and I have posted a version 2 of the collage which shows precession factored in for ~4500 years ago (and you can see that if you follow the trend, it’s still not going to line up).
Comment by Stuart Robbins — May 14, 2012 @ 6:38 pm |