Sandokhan's date of the great flood

Today, Sandokhan posted that 1706 AD is when the great Flood occurred.  I thought I remembered reading a different number in the past, so I ran a quick search.  Here are my findings:


In 2009, he asserts that the flood occured in 1600.
Bonus fact: this was eighty years before Jesus was born.

In 2010, the flood is still asserted to have occured in 1600.
Bonus fact: The Great Pyramid of Gizeh was used to modify the rate at which positive tachyons are absorbed by the human body.

Suddenly without warning, in 2013, the date of the flood is moved to about 1700!
No explaination is given for this change.

But then in 2014, it is again asserted that the flood occured before 1662.
Bonus fact: This is to explain why nobody wrote about the eclipse in 1662.  (PS, that eclipse was over northwestern Australia over a hundred years before its colonization.)

Now in 2019, the flood was moved forward again to 1730-1740.
Bonus fact: The Iliad and Odyssey were written after the invention of the printing press.

Today, we are told to believe that the flood occured in 1706.

Sandokhan, I'm worried that you may just be making up nonsense as you go.  Surely this isn't true, is it?  What's the explaination of this?

Take a look at the mass of data amassed since 2009-2014.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.240

Now, we have the definite proof that the Giza pyramid was submerged under water:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2225892#msg2225892

A single simple fraction proves the new radical chronology of history and that there were no historical/astronomical recordings of Earth's supposed axial precession (Hipparchus to Kepler):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2221986#msg2221986

Again I find myself wondering if any alleged flat earthers here are actually serious?

Wasn't the great flood BC?

Dendrochronology would seem to prove otherwise.

Yes, BC in the new radical chronology of history means before the year ~1765.

If you want BC to mean before 1 AD you are going to have to explain how the ancient egyptians knew that 60 sacred cubits = 38.18 meters.

Dendrochronology would seem to prove otherwise.

No.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1640735#msg1640735 (isotopes vs. comets)

Now, we have the definite proof that the Giza pyramid was submerged under water:

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe that humidity in the pyramid is definite proof that it was built in an antedeluvian era (much less that the antedeluvian era was before the 1700s).

A single simple fraction

Did the antediluvian builders use 360 degrees in a circle?  (Maybe they did, I don't know.  But I doubt you do.)  Did the antediluvian builders use meters?  Seems fairly unlikely, since that was a French invention.  Is it reasonable to convert degrees into meters?  No, never.  You're just taking the base-ten representation of one convention and dropping it into an unrelated convention of unrelated units.  Does one sacred cubit = 0.636363 meters?  Even according to your own writings it does not.  Your conversion factor can change as you like, from about .5 to about .7, or maybe further still.  You say 60 sacred cubits is significant because sexagesimal uses base 60, but then you use the base 10 representation of miscellaneous values in your numerology, including freely multiplying or dividing by 10 to get the numbers you want.  Your theories are inconsistent with themselves.

Let me give you a parody of your writings so that hopefully you see what we see.  I can't do your writing style justice, but I'll do my best.

I was born on March 22.  That's 3/22 in the American convention of writing the month first.

3/22 = 0.1363

arccos(0.1363) = 82.16°

8216 sacred furlongs = exactly 100000 steps!

How did the founding fathers of America aware of the arccos function?  It requires advanced  understanding of generalized continued fractions, a technique not fully understood under Gauss in the 1800s! 


But without the American convention, this series of steps would be, what, some crazy cosmic coincidence?  Preposterous!

This PROVES without a shadow of a doubt that Gauss was born in the 1600s.

See how silly that all sounds?

Wasn't the great flood BC?

It was!  Didn't you read?  Jesus was born 80 years after the flood.  So let's see, 1706+80+33 = a crucifixion date of about 1819.  You know what else happened in 1819?  Haim Farhi, the Jewish adviser to the Ottoman Empire, was assassinated.  Obviously, this just further embroiled tensions within the Romans occupation of the Jews, I assume.

One reason why we don’t know how the pyramids were built is due to written language was still new. How did no one write anything in 1765?

Why is there a group of people who trace there family history to the mayflower but not to pyramid builders?

but I don't believe that humidity in the pyramid is definite proof that it was built in an antedeluvian era

You must.

The study was conducted by Stanford University.

"Limestone from all over Egypt was tested against Cheops limestone for water content.

The results were that Great Pyramid limestone is UNIQUE because it is saturated with MOISTURE and not found anywhere else in the world.

It is antediluvian limestone."


http://www.ldolphin.org/egypt/egypt1/index.html

Electromagnetic Sounder Experiments at the Pyramids of Giza

Stanford University

During its autumn 1974 electromagnetic sounder experiments the joint Egyptian-American research team established that high attenuation due to high water content in the limestone of the Giza area precluded many practical applications of radio-frequency sounding for archaeological purposes in that area.

Did the antediluvian builders use meters?  Seems fairly unlikely, since that was a French invention.

They sure did.

The angle that each face of the Pyramid makes with the base is exactly 51.8554°.

90° - 51.8554° = 38.1446°

All of the inner and outer measurements of the Gizeh pyramid were determined using three circles each having a radius of 60 sacred cubits = 38.18 meters (one sacred cubit = 0.636363 meters).



The value of 38.18 can only be inferred if, and only if, the 60 sacred cubits are expressed in meters.

51.85/38.1 = 1.361

5.23 (masonry base) + 136.1 (pyramid frustum w/o the masonry base) + 7.28 (apex) = 148.61

Is it reasonable to convert degrees into meters?  No, never.

The same figure, 38.18, comes up again and again. Explain how the ancient Egyptians knew that the angle had to equal 38.15 degrees.

Does one sacred cubit = 0.636363 meters?

You haven't done your homework.

The sacred cubit is designated in the form of a horseshoe projection, known as the "Boss" on the face of the Granite Leaf in the Ante-Chamber of the Pyramid. By application of this unit of measurement it was discovered to be subdivided into 25 equal parts known now as: Pyramid inches.



I can't do your writing style justice, but I'll do my best.

That is not parody, but trying your best to deflect and dodge the issue being discussed here.

In order to find the values of the two angles, 51.8554° and 38.1446°, the architects had to solve these equations:

TAN X = 1.27330478216 = 0.636652 x 2

SIN X = 0.617648

To find the final value of 51.8554 degrees, the architects MUST have used the extended arctangent series to achieve the final result.

Just a "very good approximation" won't do it.

One needs the correct value to the fifth decimal, something that can be achieved ONLY by using advanced calculus.

There is no way that Euler's extended arctangent series would have been used 4,500 years ago by the civilization which built the Gizeh pyramid: the entire development of the accepted chronology of history would be defied on a monumental scale.

The architects of the pyramid did use the extended arctangent series exactly in the 17th century, when they also infused the knowledge about calculus into mainstream science in Kerala, France, Italy, and England.


In case you haven't noticed, 2.3 million blocks of stone were used to build an edifice which is precisely based on these angles: 51.8554 and 38.1554 degrees.

These angles, in turn, were derived using the fundamental distance of 60 sacred cubits.

But 60 sacred cubits = 38.15 meters.

This is what you are desperately trying to dodge.

Quote from: NotSoSkeptical on December 27, 2019, 07:13:45 AM

Wasn't the great flood BC?

It was!  Didn't you read?  Jesus was born 80 years after the flood.  So let's see, 1706+80+33 = a crucifixion date of about 1819.  You know what else happened in 1819?  Haim Farhi, the Jewish adviser to the Ottoman Empire, was assassinated.  Obviously, this just further embroiled tensions within the Romans occupation of the Jews, I assume.

So is Sando saying that the current year isn't 2019 but more like 3805?

You have me confused.  Is the magical number 38.14, 38.15, or 38.18?  You've used all of them in your above post.

Also, what source do you have that the exterior angle of is exactly 51.8554°?  I've googled "pyramid of giza angle" and I'm getting results that are mostly 51.4 and 51.5.

Furthermore, even if the stone had been soaked in the past, which isn't a wild claim considering the normal Nile flooding, that doesn't mean that it must have been soaked in the waters of the great flood.

Finally, correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems your entire argument is dependent upon the ancient builders being aware of the unit of meter.  Your insistence of their knowledge of the meter is based on your conversion factor to sacred cubits.  But you're making up that conversion factor.  It's completely your own invention.  What's worse is that the conversion factor can be nearly whatever you want it to be, especially since your numerological analysis allow you to multiply and divide by 10 whenever you want.  If you google "sacred cubit", you get numerology websites that use different conversion factors still.  Are they part of the NASA conspiracy as well?

PS, before fixing it to the speed of light, length of the meter was based on the curvature of the earth.  You know, the round one.  But I know you already know that.

So is Sando saying that the current year isn't 2019 but more like 3805?

My understanding is that he's claiming the entire history of the world is like, I dunno, one or two thousand years total?  And all established history is part of the grand conspiracy.

Here are the facts:

The 10-MHz transmitter and antenna were carried 100 m up the south face of Cheops' pyramid, and placed by the air shaft from the King's chamber:



Even when the receiving antenna in the portable receiver was placed next to the air shaft on the south wall of the King's chamber, no sounder signals could be heard through the intervening 50 m of rock.

You cannot invoke the Nile to come to your rescue.

The entire pyramid was submerged under water. No such incident is known to have occurred in ancient Egypt, during the reign of Khufu (fourth dynasty Egyptian pharaoh), or for that matter, during the period of rule of the kings of the first dynasty.

The Giza pyramid was built before the Flood.

No ancient egyptians had the knowledge to construct such a magnificient structure.


The most precise ever measuremets of the Giza pyramid were taken by D. Davidson (beyond Piazzi or Petrie):

http://www.magia-metachemica.net/uploads/1/0/6/2/10624795/davidson_the_great_pyramid_its_divine_message.pdf

Page 75

51° 51' 14.3"
= 51° + 51'/60 + 14.3"/3600
= 51.85397°


60 sacred cubits = 38.18 meters.

Height of the Giza pyramid, without the masonry base, equals 136.1 meters.


90 -  51.854 = 38.146

51.85/38.1 = 1.361

http://www.magia-metachemica.net/uploads/1/0/6/2/10624795/davidson_the_great_pyramid_its_divine_message.pdf

Page 75

51° 51' 14.3"
= 51° + 51'/60 + 14.3"/3600
= 51.85397°

I do not see that on page 75, although that may be just because our PDF readers count pages differently.  Alas, the PDF is an image scan only, and cannot be searched from text.

While skimming around for your figure, I did see on page 70 that the author uses figures from the earth's orbit around the sun, the distance from the sun (surprise: it's more than 30 km or whatever your belief is), the radius of the round earth, etc.

Sandokhan, are you peddling NASA lies???  Here on a flat earth forum??

Nevertheless, I find it questionable that anyone measured the pyramid angle to within a tenth of an arcsecond, and that the sides are all within a tenth of an arcsecond.  But perhaps that is merely my own incredulity.  I also find it suspicious that I can't find corroboration for that figure online, and in fact find contradictory ones.  For example, this weirdo site claims 51.8539761°, even more precise still!  The absurd precision is used for the author's numerological inclinations, how convenient.

Height of the Giza pyramid, without the masonry base, equals 136.1 meters.

Actually 138.8 meters, currently.  But it was 146.7 before weathering and other destruction, from what I understand.

The Giza pyramid was built before the Flood.

Do you have anything else to support this conclusion, or is the humid limestone your sole piece of evidence?  Some people have a different idea of what's going on, without resorting to mass conspiracies.



If I didn't know better, I'd probably assume you're just grasping at straws.

But regardless of the fabricated numerology of the Giza pyramid, I'm actually more interested in the date of the great flood.  How confident are you of the year 1706?  And, just to make sure, 1706 was indeed 313 years ago, right?

Now, we have the definite proof that the Giza pyramid was submerged under water:

No we don't. We have your baseless claim, which makes no sense at all.
Just how would a flood change it?
If they were built before a mythical flood, then the outside would have been covered in water, just like the outside of the rest of the limestone in Egypt, and then it would have dried after the flood like the rest.
Your argument literally makes no sense at all.

A single simple fraction proves

Absolutely nothing about history.

If you want BC to mean before 1 AD you are going to have to explain how the ancient egyptians knew that 60 sacred cubits = 38.18 meters.

Well first you would need to show that they did know.

Especially as the m only came into existence quite some time after them, the cubits they produced ranged in length from 52.35 cm to 52.92 cm, so hardly exact and not even matching your claim.
Coincidence doesn't prove knowledge.

And who really cares if it did equal 38.18 m?

But what does any of that have to do with a mythical flood?

Dendrochronology would seem to prove otherwise.

Your dismissal of radiometric dating, based upon nothing more than your own prejudice, in no way refutes radio carbon dating and in no way even addresses dendrochronology refuting your claims.

Did the antediluvian builders use meters?  Seems fairly unlikely, since that was a French invention.
They sure did.

Then prove it. Saying your nonsense only works if you use m shows that you have no case and need to rely upon circular reasoning.
If they used m why does the evidence indicate they used cubits?

All of this just seems to be a massive distraction form the actual issue at hand, which is how you seem to just repeatedly make up numbers to suit your fancy.

Why don't you clearly explain how you arrived at each of the numbers, especially with you changing your numbers. You gave 1600 as a definitive number, and then changed several times.

Are you just making up the numbers? If not, why have you been wrong so often?

But regardless of the fabricated numerology of the Giza pyramid, I'm actually more interested in the date of the great flood.  How confident are you of the year 1706?  And, just to make sure, 1706 was indeed 313 years ago, right?

This is where a lot Sandokhan's material seemed to come from: SECRETS OF THE GREAT PYRAMID REVEALED AT LAST!! and it claims that:

The Great Pyramid, built around 4,700 BC, was designed to be watertight and withstand the great geological upheavals of the Great Flood.

Copies of all the books from the corrupt pre-Flood civilization were stored in the Secret Archives.

The Pyramid was the precursor of the Secret Archives of the Vatican . . . but above ground.

But, of course, Sandokhan knows better than the "experts".

What the hell is a ”sacred cubit”? And what does it have to do with the mythical flood?

What the hell is a ”sacred cubit”? And what does it have to do with the mythical flood?

No, the “Sacred Cubit” is a very real measure and it has an interesting story behind it:

The Dimensions of Paradise in Light of the “Sacred Cubit”
Sir Isaac Newton defined the “sacred cubit” as 25 pyramid inches.  Based on his research of the ancient texts he postulated the length of the sacred cubit to be between 24. 90 and 25. 02 inches (as distinct from the Royal Cubit equal 25.62 inches believed to be the measurement employed by the Egyptians in construction of the Great Pyramid.)

1 Sacred Cubit = 25 pyramid inches = 25.0265 modern (British/American) inches (or 63.5 cm)
A pyramid inch is about 1.001 of a British or American inch.
(1 : 25) x  sacred cubit =1 inch =2. 54 cm

Heavenly (astronomical) origin of the Sacred Cubit
The pyramid inch exhibits a special relation to the size of the Earth

Geodesic measurements of the polar radius of the Earth show that the Earth has a radius of 3,949.89 miles. Converting that to feet and then inches, we see that the Earth’s radius is very close to 250,000,000 actual inches. 250,000,000 pyramid inches is exactly the polar radius of the Earth.

The Earth’s polar radius is 250,000,000 pyramid inches translates to 10,000,000 sacred cubits.
In other words, a sacred cubit, when defined as such, is 1/10,000,000 the polar radius of the Earth. If that sounds strange, then consider the so-called definition of the meter. That unit of measure is 1/10,000,000 of a quadrant of the Earth along a predetermined meridian. In other words, the quarter circumference of the Earth. If this were the case, then the ratio of the meter to the sacred cubit would be PI/2 (3.14159/2).

1 meter =39.37 inches
1 sacred cubit = 25.0265 inches
Ratio:  1 sacred cubit/1 meter = 1.5731
2 x 1.5731 = 3.146 (very close approximation of “Pi”)

This would not be an exact ratio since the Earth is an oblate sphere, but it is a very close approximation. Dividing the meter by 100 yields a centimeter, and dividing the sacred cubit by 100 yields (very closely to) the quarter inch.

And the information on Newton's work probably came from A Dissertation upon the Sacred Cubit of the Jews and the Cubits of the several Nations by Isaac Newton!
Interesting . . . . .

Live and learn!

Still a bit confused what it has to do with the flood, though.

Live and learn!

Still a bit confused what it has to do with the flood, though.

Sorry, in my haste I forgot about, "And what does it have to do with the mythical flood?"
As far as I know, nothing at all !

Fair enough!

Excuse me, what does all this have to do with the shape of the earth? Flood it and in Africa flood. And the shape of the land doesn 't play a role at all. Another thing is an alternative story. Neither does it refer to the shape of the earth.

Excuse me, what does all this have to do with the shape of the earth? Flood it and in Africa flood. And the shape of the land doesn't play a role at all. Another thing is an alternative story. Neither does it refer to the shape of the earth.

You are quite right but Sandokhan has this massive thread called "Advanced Flat Earth Theory" in the "Flat Earth Believers" forum.
He thinks that all these do play a role.

It starts with this post Advanced Flat Earth Theory « on: July 15, 2009, 12:59:41 AM ».

That might make it clear.

Quote from: Heavenly Breeze on December 29, 2019, 08:39:57 AM

Excuse me, what does all this have to do with the shape of the earth? Flood it and in Africa flood. And the shape of the land doesn't play a role at all. Another thing is an alternative story. Neither does it refer to the shape of the earth.

You are quite right but Sandokhan has this massive thread called "Advanced Flat Earth Theory" in the "Flat Earth Believers" forum.
He thinks that all these do play a role.

It starts with this post Advanced Flat Earth Theory « on: July 15, 2009, 12:59:41 AM ».

That might make it clear.

Thanks for the explanation. I personally am in an expeditionary club to study our past. And I know all these theories not by hearsay, because I know their authors. In the English-speaking sector, this is an interpretation of them. And the primary sources are in Russian, and you need to know the language in order to understand what is at stake. That's why Sandokhan dates are floating - since all the time new theories have been put forward with the appearance of artifacts discovered in expeditions. Let Sandokhan first gain his mind and then write about the flood. Or in extreme cases, ask people what they are doing research.
The actual dates of the flood that destroyed the past world are 1600, the second cycle is 1800. But the bottom line is that time is cyclical, and reality is changeable. In this period of time, our reality itself is changing - therefore no one will now say what really happened. Changing reality is confirmed by documents and artifacts. But again, this has nothing to do with the shape of the earth.
Rather Sandokhan - proves that the earth is a sphere, since all the research of our club says that such a flood was possible only on the earth's globe, when permafrost and Antarctica appeared from the fall of a celestial body on the earth and its rotation! Sandokhan will never be able to explain the physics of the last flood on flat earth. He sat in a puddle, just like with a gyrocompass.

1600 and 1800?  How do you figure?  My great grandfather was alive in the mid 1800s.  You'd think there'd be some stories passed down.  What's going on here?

1600 and 1800?  How do you figure?  My great grandfather was alive in the mid 1800s.  You'd think there'd be some stories passed down.  What's going on here?

Logic doesn’t apply when you are sandokhan.

1600 and 1800?  How do you figure?  My great grandfather was alive in the mid 1800s.  You'd think there'd be some stories passed down.  What's going on here?

He changed up his mind as more "evidence " came in.

Quote from: Yes on December 30, 2019, 12:23:04 PM

1600 and 1800?  How do you figure?  My great grandfather was alive in the mid 1800s.  You'd think there'd be some stories passed down.  What's going on here?

He changed up his mind as more "evidence " came in.

I concluded about Sandokhan - I heard a ringing, but I don’t know where it is. Vivat the great thinker Sandokhan 
 
+++

Sandokhan - come to us in Russia or Ukraine, and you will understand how wrong you are. Since it is here that research is being conducted about which you write. You listen to bloggers who want money, this is populism for making money. Those who are engaged in research, on the contrary, damp money in their expeditions, and they have really interesting research and explanation, without a general nuclear war of 1812

An important update.  As established, 1706 was the year of a world-wide flood.
Today we learn that 1769, a mere 63 years later, was the year of a world-wide fire.

Just to keep this in context, remember that Jesus was born 80 years after the flood, so 17 years after the world-wide fire.

The 1700s were a wild time to be alive!