|“Gizapower: The Official Chris Dunn Website”, “Chris Dunn”, “Dunn”, “The Giza Power Plant”, “Coast to Coast” (a popular AM radio show hosted by Mike Siegel), “Sightings” (a popular radio show hosted by Jeff Rense), “advanced machining in ancient Egypt”, “Atlantis Rising”, “Giza On-Line”, and “Christopher Dunn” are keywords and key phrases you can search on the Internet to learn more about Chris Dunn and his incorrect assertion that advanced machining existed in ancient Egypt. However, below I summarize Chris Dunn’s claims for the benefit of those unfamiliar with them.
In June of 2000, I (Margaret Morris) challenged Chris Dunn to a debate in the Skeptical Inquirer.
The real technology used to produce the enigmatic stone artifacts that Chris Dunn takes issue with is fully presented in The Egyptian Pyramid Mystery Is Solved! This book eliminates the need for the kind of advanced machining and “Gizapower” in ancient Egypt that Chris Dunn asserts must have existed.
|Chris Dunn raises a legitimate problem in that he is qualified to recognize the difficulties of manufacturing certain hard stone artifacts, such as those Chris Dunn observed among the ruins of ancient Egypt. Chris Dunn has considered a number of stone artifacts that would be difficult to re-create with the most advanced modern machine tools. For instance, Chris Dunn examined monolithic sarcophagi in the Serapeum in Egypt. Chris Dunn was later informed by a granite cutting company that it could not re-create the sarcophagi Chris Dunn examined.
The pioneering founder of Egyptology Sir William Flinders Petrie argued with Alfred Lucas over their long careers about similar issues. Thus, it is fair to say that Chris Dunn is furthering the work of W.M.F. Petrie with regard to the long-standing mysteries of ancient Egyptian stone masonry. It is also fair to say that Petrie would be aghast by Chris Dunn’s poor historical and scientific methodology.
Chris Dunn has, therefore, made a contribution to Egyptology by identifying masonry enigmas that an Egyptologist would not be qualified to identify without the assistance of an expert like Chris Dunn. Chris Dunn is a trained machinist, and Chris Dunn is in important ways more qualified than the machinists Petrie relied on in the 1800s because of the advances in technology since Petrie’s time.
Chris Dunn may have avoided the scorn of the Egyptological and archaeological community if he simply published the enigmatic features he observed in artifacts. But Chris Dunn went further by suggesting that the highly advanced machines needed to make these stone artifacts must have existed, and, on the surface, this may seem like a reasonable claim for Chris Dunn to make.
Chris Dunn attracts scorn from Egyptologists, however, because the archaeological record strongly opposes the existence of high technology during any period of ancient history or pre-history. As every Egyptologists knows, and as Chris Dunn knows, the archaeological record shows that only primitive stone and copper tools and abrasives (like sand) are known from the time unexplained artifacts were made. Iron was available when the sarcophagi in the Serapeum was made, but as Chris Dunn knows, iron tools cannot produce the features in hard stone that Chris Dunn observed.
Thus, Chris Dunn proposes that all direct evidence of advanced machines somehow disappeared without a trace, and Egyptologists correctly believe this to be impossible. To account for the missing tools, Chris Dunn invents a cataclysm like a vast nuclear winter caused by an asteroid hit to the Earth. Chris Dunn speculates that such a catastrophe wiped out all traces of the advanced machines and threw mankind back to a primitive level.
The sort of high technological advancement Chris Dunn has in mind is the mark of a space traveling civilization. In a July 21, 2000 interview with Mike Siegel, host of the Coast to Coast AM radio show, Chris Dunn suggested to Mike Siegel that the pyramid builders were a space traveling civilization. According to Chris Dunn: “whoever built the Great Pyramid had the technology for space travel.”
In short, Chris Dunn’s methodology is so poor that he has resorted to inventing a cataclysm that cannot be scientifically substantiated and he elevates the pyramid builders to the technological level of space travelers, with no physical evidence at all for either assertion.
Chris Dunn uses the artifacts themselves as proof of method. This is unsound scientific method to say the least. Indeed, a different kind of technology was used to produce these artifacts and this is a proven fact that does not rely on speculation.
By inventing a catastrophe that wipes out all traces of advanced machines, but somehow magically leaves the artifacts and primitive tools intact, Chris Dunn forces a theory that has no basis in fact.
Why is Chris Dunn wrong about the cataclysm? The fact is that any such cataclysm would necessarily have spanned about seven thousands years of history, much of which is known history. The reason is that enigmatic stone artifacts in the world’s museums and remaining at ancient sites span this broad range of time. For instance, well-made objects of hard diorite date to as early as 7000 B.C. A diorite statue of a Theban priest in the Boston Museum of Fine Arts dates to thousands of years later, during Egypt’s 25th Dynasty. Many of the diorite artifacts that cannot be cut with primitive tools, have inscriptions that serve to date them.
We see that the technology that was really used to make these items was well known for a very long period spanning thousands of years. The real technology did not disappear in a cataclysm, nor did it disappear without physical traces. The long period over which enigmatic stone artifacts were made throws a monkey wrench into Chris Dunn’s advanced machining idea.
Chris Dunn’s theory is so poorly developed that it pretends that enigmatic artifacts appear around the area of Giza and were produced during a relatively short window of historical time. The archaeological record proves otherwise. Chris Dunn’s theory ignores part of a diorite palette dating to the Neolithic Period and diorite vessels from this time. Chris Dunn’s theory ignores seven story high monolithic quartzite colossi made thousands of years later, in the 18th Dynasty (not long before the time most scholars ascribe to the Hebrew Exodus). Is is difficult to drill quartzite using a modern tungsten carbide bit [second in hardness to diamond], although thousands of pounds of pressure are applied to the tool bit. Chris Dunn’s theory ignores granite colossi of Pharaoh Ramses the Great, weighing a thousands tons and more, constructed during the 19th Dynasty. Thus, the technology used to create enigmatic stone artifacts did not disappear in a cataclysm.
Chris Dunn’s theory is inconsistent because the Serapeum sarcophagi he takes issue with, although they are located not far from Giza, date to the 19th Dynasty and later. There is no controversy about the date of the Serapeum and the installation of the sarcophagi there. Why does Chris Dunn illogically claim that the technology used to make the sarcophagi in the Serapeum disappeared in a cataclysm?
Chris Dunn spent about four hours in the interview with Mike Siegel of Coast to Coast. during which Chris Dunn spread misinformation to a wide audience of millions of people who deserve consistent theories grounded in good research. In that same four hours, Chris Dunn could have read almost any book or paper that discusses or even mentions Egyptian stone artifacts. If Chris Dunn would have spent his time this way, he would have known that many enigmatic stone artifacts exist from all periods of Egyptian history. No cataclysm could have spanned the entire history of ancient Egypt so that machine tools were wiped out. Indeed, a different special technology created these objects, which range from enormous to very small, and this special technology does clearly show up in the archaeological record.
Chris Dunn can find no writings or drawings to support advanced machining in ancient Egypt. On Chris Dunn’s web page titled: Giza On-Line – Stone Technology – Advanced Machining in Ancient Egypt, by Christopher Dunn, he prominently displays at the top of the page a temple scene that any Egyptologist would interpret as a celebration of the rise of the Nile. But this scene is taken totally out of historical context and tortured in true Von Daniken style by those who wish to see the scene as displaying modern light bulbs.
Chris Dunn needs a source of power for his advanced machining theory. Thus, Chris Dunn goes further astray in the opinion of the academic and science communities by turning the Great Pyramid itself into the power source for advanced stone-cutting tools.
Another problem is that Chris Dunn has not demonstrated in practice how the Great Pyramid might function to power tools. So far, Chris Dunn is engaging in wild speculation on this point. If Chris Dunn thinks that a small scale model might not function the same way as the Great Pyramid, we would expect Chris Dunn to appeal to physicists who might support his hypothesis. Chris Dunn has not gained support from physicists.
During an interview with Jeff Rense, host of the Sightings radio show, Chris Dunn suggested that the Great Pyramid holds the Earth itself in balance. Any physicist would simply roll his/her eyes at Chris Dunn’s idea. Thus, Chris Dunn is at odds with both Egyptologists and physicists.
Chris Dunn also tends to support an earlier date for the construction of the Great Pyramid (see my book excerpt 7 at this website, which is devoted to this topic), as he stated during his July 21, 2000 interview with Mike Siegel of Coast to Coast. Chris Dunn indicated to Mike Siegel that he “sees a totally different culture associated with the pyramids, a culture of technology.”
Of course, no one would blame Chris Dunn for such speculation or for falling out of the good graces of physicists, Egyptologists and others in the academic community, if his theory about advanced machining in ancient Egypt could be proved correct. But, like others engaged in research, Chris Dunn has the responsibility of researching the scientific record to determine if there is scientific data that negates his interpretation of the evidence. Chris Dunn’s methodology is extremely poor because it does not include such research.
The fact is that all of the problems with enigmatic stone masonry quickly vanish when one thinks within the correct masonry and construction paradigm, which is presented in The Egyptian Pyramid Mystery Is Solved! As a theorist involved in Egyptology, Chris Dunn has known about the body of research documented in The Egyptian Pyramid Mystery Is Solved! for many years. Chris Dunn simply did not bother to consider the published scientific and/or Egyptological literature that forms the basis for The Egyptian Pyramid Mystery Is Solved!, nor did Chris Dunn contact me or any of my colleagues in order to confer with us on our body of scientific and historical research.
This poor methodology on the part of Chris Dunn has led to his erroneous notions about how the Great Pyramids and other enigmatic monuments and artifacts were constructed. Chris Dunn’s poor methodology has led to his wild speculation about the Great Pyramid being a power source for highly advanced machines, which holds the Earth in balance. Chris Dunn’s poor methodology has led to his untenable notion that the ancient Egyptians were space travelers possessing high technology. In short, proper research of existing scientific data and information could have spared Chris Dunn’s the sort of embarrassment he faces as people learn how the Great Pyramids and smaller enigmatic stone objects were really made: The Egyptian Pyramid Mystery Is Solved! leaves no doubt about their method of manufacture.
To summarize, once we understand the special masonry technology of ancient Egypt, we quickly recognize that there is no need for advanced machining to produce the artifacts Chris Dunn takes issue with. There is no need for Chris Dunn’s Gizapower. The masonry enigmas described in Chris Dunn’s The Giza Power Plant, when considered within the proper paradigm, supports the proof of how enigmatic stone artifacts were really made that is offered in The Egyptian Pyramid Mystery Is Solved! The proven technology offered in my book is not speculative; it is fully supported by science and by the archaeological record.
Thus, if Chris Dunn debates me, and if Chris Dunn is intellectually honest, then I am confident that Chris Dunn will have to retract his claims that advanced machinery existed during antiquity.
If Chris Dunn avoids this debate, then I will use the material at Gizapower: The Official Chris Dunn Website or in Chris Dunn’s interviews on Coast to Coast, Sightings and The Laura Lee Show to execute the debate.
|In June of 2000, I challenged Chris Dunn to a debate. Chris Dunn accepted my challenge, but Chris Dunn informed me that he was leaving town and would contact me upon his return.
Below is the pertinent correspondence with Chris Dunn showing that on June 30, 2000, Chris Dunn accepted my challenge. Will Chris Dunn follow through and meet my challenge or has Chris Dunn now done his homework and realized that there is no way he can win a debate with me? How can Chris Dunn possibly explain to the people why power tools were needed in light of the technology presented in The Egyptian Pyramid Mystery Is Solved?
To answer your question, here is how a debate format can work. You set out your ideas as a list of brief statements. I will respond to each of your statements. (This basic material needs to go to an editor to try to arouse some interest in publishing our debate.) You will respond to each of my objections. Then I have a turn to respond to yours, and then you to mine and so on.
The result will be a debate suitable for publication. The debate should be published in a magazine that is recognized by establishment scholars. I suggest “The Skeptical Inquirer.” If you can hold up in a debate in “The Skeptical Inquirer” you will do yourself a lot of good. The debate will yield all of the objections you will need for your other articles. A debate is the only format that assures that neither of us can complain that we were deprived of the last word or the chance to correct the record. The debate will essentially look like this:
Dunn: (your statements here)
Morris: (my statements here)
Dunn: (your reply here)
Morris: (my reply to you)
and so on until one of us is either stumped or no longer wishes to respond on any particular point. Each point will be formatted as above.
Chris, with a magazine article of the type you suggest, you have the chance to address our objections and we have no chance to say why you may be wrong or to correct the record. We would be at the mercy of the editor, and I have many years of experience with editors and producers who are only interested in promoting their own agendas. Jeff Rense,* who promotes himself as being a cut above other media people, is the latest to be unwilling to even listen to our point of view. He simply accepts your views and confidently assumes that we are wrong.
I do not trust the process you suggest, and if you take my objections second or third hand this will backfire on you when I protest (in other publications) misinformation you are bound to generate if you rely on untrustworthy information and/or if you are wrong about something. Thus, it is clear to me that the debate process is fair and that it benefits the scientific process and readers the most. Do you agree?
If so, just write down three, four, or five short, basic statements that summarize your theories so that I have something to work with. As soon as I get a go-ahead from an editor, we can proceed knowing that our effort will be published. The debate must remain on a polite, professional level so that it cannot be rejected by an editor on the basis of unprofessionalism. Do not take this remark personally–I mention this only because of some of the ugly, unprofessional exchanges that go on, which I trust neither of us wants to be a part of.
Bye for now,
|—–Original Message—– From: CDunn1546@aol.com [mailto:CDunn1546@aol.com] Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 2:28 Subject: Re: Our Debate
This is acceptable to me. I agree with you about rising above the ugly Internet free-for-all….
I am going out of town for a while and will address the subject when I get back.
Judging from your recent interview on Coast to Coast, it would seem that you are back in town. In that case, are you ready to conduct our debate? If yes, just send me a few short statements that summarize your theories. For instance:
1. Certain features of hard stone artifacts prove that highly advanced machine tools were used to manufacture these objects. The features could not have been made by hand. Examples include sarcophagi in the Serapeum, which exhibit overlapping saw strokes.
2. The evidence of advanced machining indicates that the builders of the Great Pyramid were quite advanced, at the level of being able to travel in outer space.
3. The artifacts themselves prove the existence of highly advanced machining, despite the lack of physical evidence of the tools themselves.
4. The machine tools all disappeared without a trace due to a cataclysmic event in our planet’s history, like a nuclear winter caused by an asteroid.
5. The Great Pyramid is (or might be) the power source for running the advanced machine tools.
If these statements adequately describe your theory, then just approve them and return them to me so that I can send them along to the editor of The Skeptical Inquirer. Alternatively, re-write or revise them as you wish, but please keep your statements short.
Bye for now,
I haven’t forgotten about the debate and am looking forward to it. I will get back to you with my statement shortly.
|Will Chris Dunn revise his theory after he sees my critique above? If so, how will Chris Dunn explain the disappearance of advanced machines? Will Chris Dunn hold up in our debate, assuming Chris Dunn really debates me? Please come back soon to find the answers to these questions.|
|*This is a reference to Jeff Rense, host of the Sightings radio program. I suggested to Jeff Rense that he air a debate between Chris Dunn and me, but Jeff Rense interviewed Chris Dunn instead on May 30, 2000.
During that interview, Jeff Rense encouraged students to challenge their teachers with the evidence Chris Dunn presents. Indeed, Jeff Rense has been so seriously misled that he will not even consider our paradigm that negates all of Chris Dunn’s claims. Had Jeff Rense entertained the demonstrable truth, there would be no need for him to urge students to challenge their teachers to entertain the idea of high technology during antiquity.
The Jeff Rense Sightings show of May 30,2000, which interviewed Chris Dunn, is titled: Chris Dunn: The Giza Power Plant. Topics include: Gizapower, Advanced Machining in Ancient Egypt, the Great Pyramid, sarcophagi in the Serapeum
Will Jeff Rense correct the scientific record once he learns the truth? This is an issue of media integrity! Why not contact Jeff Rense and let him know that you expect fairness in media? The e-mail address of Jeff Rense is: firstname.lastname@example.org
|Main Site Menu|
|Read Excerpts of The Egyptian Pyramid Mystery Is Solved!|
|Read Reviews of The Egyptian Pyramid Mystery Is Solved!|
|Order The Egyptian Pyramid Mystery Is Solved!|
|A Special Note to Students and Educators|
|Margaret Morris Challenges Chris Dunn to a Debate|
|About Margaret Morris|
|Search this site|
|Last modified on September 24, 2001|