Ah....the Rouge Archaeologist!!!!

As first things, I bring this post published in 2009 on the http://generazionediarcheologi.myblog.it by maraina81, which I think is perfect to explain my new blog.

Are all around us... the rogue archaeologists!

"I firmly believe in a forgotten episode from the history of humanity," says Graham Hancock, about the flood. According to our friendly rogue instead of Noah with the Ark who colonised the Egypt was saved, the Andes and Mexico.

However, anyone who survived the flood must have received help from a higher civilization. But what, dear Robert Bauval? AH, Yes, the so-called "people " that disappears, but in 3400. Perhaps because of climate change, perhaps because, I think, was kicked in the ass by the Egyptians. But that's another story. The people of the stars makes cromlech that make Stonehenge, to see what the proud Bauval shows us. And then, by dint of kicking ass, and cromlech culled, the megalithic “people of the stars” disappears and Egyptians appear.

And if I say Egyptians say Pyramids, no?

And behold the pyramids of the 4th dynasty, dynasty in just 70 years has built 10 (10?) pyramids. And here's the usual leitmotiv: how? Before the pyramids were built with blocks. Then come Cheops Co and & are built the great pyramids in huge blocks. And in the fifth dynasty back to the (nerdy people) planking pyramids. BUT Hancock, has God in glory, gives us an idea: the pyramids have finite Cheops and descendants, BUT were actually started thousands of years ago!!! 10,000 years before some child stars people started to build the pyramids in prehistoric times, then after millennia of silence and nothingness, Cheops one day woke up and did finish his pyramid.

But here's the leit-motiv of leitmotiv: the belt of Orion! And the Sphinx is situated exactly where in the sky, is now a beautiful Nebula in front of the three stars of Orion, which naturally reflect the position of the three pyramids, for those who missed the last 20 years of speculation that fill the mouth (and pockets) friendly rougue. And here's an idea: as we were told those evil genii of the Egyptians when it was dedicated the Valley of Giza Pyramids and Sphinx full? Not with an inscription or a hieroglyph which says "on the day that I did this (besides the Egyptians never wrote anything, no?) but simply by placing the various monuments in order to place them on the model of Orion's belt in the sky. I haven't figured out how we would understand so so easy and immediate this phantom data, but in fact ...

And then comes a geologist named Schoch: according to him, the Sphinx of today is not the original, because the head too small, due to a long and endless erosion. So our Schoch tells us that the Sphinx is older than you think. But the question "and who built 5000 years before Christ?" our hero responds candidly "I'm a geologist. This question must meet others.

And here everything back at the beginning, the flood: the Sphinx presents traces of erosion due to rain unequivocally. Not a drizzle of March light, no, but the deluge above (doesn't have the courage to say it, but in the meantime all of us with a minimum of deductive intelligence we did two plus two ...)!

I am amazed. I, ugly bitch official archaeologist I don't believe a word of what I heard up here. Says our hero Giacobbo, mediator of this insane asylum, that is the line of reasoning of these archaeologists-rogue. The line of reasoning? Then, from that world is the world, and that if God wants archaeology has become a scientific discipline, the archaeologist thinks so, Dear Miss Hancock, Bauval, Schoch and Giacobbo: archaeologist sees signs, tests, material evidence of what he studied and then pulls his interpretations, which seeks to try looking for comparisons (because the lectio facilior, who teaches Philology be winning thing, is that it is easier to occur the norm rather than the exception), then reach conclusions that will be well-documented and scientifically proved. Our heroes instead reason thus: have an idea who is crazy or not doesn't matter, then seek in evidence subject of their interest receipts of their idea. If not then are confirmations but a "we can stand" or a "why not?" Okay, so just write books and go to RAI hosts that are (taxpayers ') money.