An A-Z Guide To The Search For Plato's Atlantis

Latest News

  • Joining The Dots

    Joining The Dots

    I have now published my new book, Joining The Dots, which offers a fresh look at the Atlantis mystery. I have addressed the critical questions of when, where and who, using Plato’s own words, tempered with some critical thinking and a modicum of common sense.Read More »

Recent Updates

Archive 6401

The Giza pyramids were not built by ancient Egyptians

by our guest author Gernot L. Geise

We have to distance ourselves from all beloved theses, hypotheses, auxiliary reconstructions with their sub-theses that have ever been put forward in the course of time by Egyptology , archeology and historians about the pyramids of Giza (Al Jzah) and their construction. The reason: it couldn’t possibly have been that way.

Fig. 1: Pharaonic Egypt only gradually reveals its technological secrets. In the picture: rock graves near the Chefren pyramid

All theses assume that the pyramids were built by ancient Egyptians . Exceptions are “exotic” theses that the pyramids were hundreds of thousands of years old or were built by some kind of ghostly beings or Atlanteans, but they are not proven and mostly quite nebulous or “channeled”. And yet, in future research, we should at least keep an eye on the possibility that there may be more truth in this than in the theses taught. Let’s start with the impossibilities:

The construction: floating stones!

Herodotus also claimed that Egyptian priests had told him that the Great Pyramid had taken twenty years to build. This claim has never been proven or disproved, but all Egyptologists have willingly adopted it. Georges Goyon [1] quotes Ahmed-al Maqrizi (around 1360-1442) from his “Topographical and Historical Description of Egypt” [2] , which I would like to reproduce here: “… The workers had leaves covered with (magical) characters with them, and as soon as a stone was cut to size and hewn, one of these leaves was placed on it and given a blow, and this blow was enough to remove 100 creams (200 arrow shooting ranges = 26000 m), and this continued until the stone reached the pyramid plateau. “ [3] But Goyon also leaves this quote uncommented and immediately turns to the more imaginable but wrong construction methods in order to fill an entire book with them. Only in the closing words does he say: “ The method reported by the Arab authors of making the stones float with magic spells is of course not to be taken seriously. ” [4]

Peter Tompkins [5] mentions a 12th century Navarre Rabbi Benjamin ben Jonah who is said to have written: “ The pyramids seen here were built with the help of magic. “However, magic was and is always referred to as a process that cannot be explained based on one’s own circumstances and experiences.

These traditions are deliberately ignored or not taken seriously, and so over the centuries the most daring methods imaginable how the pyramids could have been built have been devised. This sometimes degenerated into hair-raising calculations, according to which hundreds of thousands of workers who – depending on the viewer, sometimes in bondage, sometimes voluntarily – toiled for decades to lift the stone blocks weighing tons over the most impossible auxiliary structures. [6] Only the most obvious method, which has also been handed down, is ignored.

Fig. 2: The traditional idea of ??building a pyramid: workers heave huge stone blocks ‘by hand’ over the construction site.

Why not take into account, at least on a trial basis, that the stone blocks weighing tons could have been transported weightlessly, as the ancient legends tell? Just because you can no longer imagine today that something like this should be possible? But it is possible! I do not want to make the claim that the stone blocks for the construction of the Egyptian pyramids were actually only transported in this way. It’s all about: it is actually possible to transport stone blocks weighing tons weightlessly!

The Swedish doctor Dr. Jarl observed the transport of heavy building materials in Tibet around fifty years ago on the basis of resonance alone. Monks wanted to build a wall in front of the entrance to a cave that was behind a ledge on a steep rock face at a height of 250 meters. There was no access to the ledge. The stone blocks used were each one meter long and 1.50 meters high. A “bowl” was placed on level ground 250 meters from the foot of the rock face. This is where the stones dragged by yaks were placed.

63 meters away from the bowl, monk musicians had lined up in a quarter circle. The musicians, the bowl and the rock face were in a straight line with each other. The instruments commonly used in Tibetan sacred music were used, and at a signal the musicians began beating their drums and blowing their horns. The priests sang their mantras, and after four minutes the boulder in the bowl began to sway gently back and forth. Then it lifted off the ground and floated up in a parabolic curve. After another three minutes, it landed gently on the ledge. In this way, the monks were able to transport around five blocks per hour. Dr. Jarl had the action filmed by two different cameras at the same time. He later showed these films to the British Scientific Society,who explained to him that the films were to be classified as “top secret” and had to be locked away for at least fifty years (until 1990).[7]

Fig. 3: The Cheops cartridge in the Great Pyramid – probably a cheap fake!

It remains to be seen whether the builders of the pyramids used sound, ultrasound or other techniques to make the heavy stones float. Only: it is completely wrong to shift the fact into the realm of fairy tales that stones can be made to float. Who knows that as early as our sixties, Professor Prudhomme from the Pasteur Institute in Paris was able to lift cork balls with weak ultrasound waves? [8th]

And as early as 1958, the American physicist Hooper succeeded in making a ferrite ring partially weightless by rotating it in a magnetic field at more than 15,000 revolutions per minute. [9] Sure, these are not the techniques that were used by the builders of the pyramids (these must have been mature), but they show that it is entirely possible even for us to partially neutralize gravity.

The Japanese “replica”

In 1978 Japanese scientists tried to “prove” how the pyramids were built using a twenty-meter high pyramid they wanted to build. The Egyptian government allowed a replica southeast of the Mykerinos pyramid on the Giza plateau, on the condition that the pyramid would be torn down after completion and the old condition would be restored. The Japanese wanted to use the same techniques in construction that our scientists allow the Egyptian builders to use.

The first problem arose with the transport of the stone blocks, which were to be delivered from the same quarry, about fifteen kilometers on the east bank of the Nile, just like the original stones of the Great Pyramid. It was impossible to transport the stone blocks, which weighed (only) about a ton, across the Nile in a barge. Ultimately, this was only possible with the help of a steamer.

Next, groups of a hundred workers tried unsuccessfully to drag the stones across the sand. The stone blocks didn’t move an inch. Finally, the blocks were transported to the construction site using modern construction vehicles. There, too, none of the working groups succeeded in lifting a stone block higher than thirty centimeters, so that a crane and helicopter had to be used to build it. The entire construction process was filmed, after which the mini pyramid was torn down again. The knowledge from the experiment was that all theories assumed so far for the construction of the pyramids are largely inaccurate. [10]

“The mini pyramid of Giza”

In June 1995 the report “The Mini-Pyramid of Giza” flickered on the screens [11] . This film showed how an American group of archaeologists tried to prove how it would be possible to recreate a pyramid, albeit only a few meters high, using the (assumed) ancient techniques.

Fig. 4: Experimental archeology? From the attempt to replicate a “mini-pyramid” it is difficult to draw any conclusions about the methods with which its great role models were once built.

Somehow this report made me feel pretty ridiculous. Because in this broadcast neither “maybe” nor “… could have been” was used. No, all the old, well-known prejudices, some of which have definitely been refuted several times, had been dug up again here and presented as hard facts: the Great Pyramid was of course built by Pharaoh Cheops ; the forged hieroglyphs in the Great Pyramid were once again presented as real; the pyramids were tombs again; And it did not end with the fact that the stone blocks weighing several tons were naturally broken and worked with copper tools, since the Egyptians “of course” could not have known iron.

A stone block every three minutes (as calculated for the construction of the original), but the Americans couldn’t do that, even though their stone blocks weighed only a fraction of the original stones. They were happy to be able to move a handful of stones to the construction site in one day. In return, they claimed that all the stone blocks of the pyramids (!) Had “naturally” been broken out right next to their location. You could still see some traces of this demolition work today. In this way, the American actors saved themselves an explanation for the impracticable transport by ship, and were able to save themselves the embarrassment of an unsuccessful stone transport with the help of replica ships …

The construction of this small pyramid was only completed on two sides – the time frame was too short for completion. It all looked so very simple, at least the way it was shown in the film. That only relatively small stone blocks were used – the pyramidionLying on two beams, some workers finally carried them up on their shoulders because they lost patience: the scientific method with ropes and grease to reduce friction had not worked as it should – that even the prefabricated stones were not in the ” old “way (only the first to demonstrate that it is supposedly possible), that neither a time frame nor the specified material frame could even come close to being adhered to, this was then paradoxically taken as evidence that the pyramids of course so and could not have been built otherwise. This film was the clear proof that it couldn’t have been like that. Nothing against practical experiments, but why isn’t there an objective report on ancient Egypt?

Why are all previous speculations about building the pyramids nonsense?

All previous speculations, hypotheses and theories are based more or less on the statements of our Egyptologists. Traditions – like Herodotus – are only partially taken into account, where they fit into the prepared opinion. Even the traditions described by Herodotus must have been so old that they could hardly have had anything in common with the truth. But as soon as the considerations drift into the apparently fantastic (weightlessness), they are described by the “experts” as unrealistic, probably because there are no more records of the construction of the monuments.

Fig. 5: Who were the builders of the Sphinx and the Great Pyramid? Do they come from the same historical epoch?

A pharaoh – who in all probability never lived – tries to initiate the construction just because a successful forger painted a cartouche on the wall of one of the “relief chambers” in the twenties , from which there is a connection with fantasy can be read out into a khufu. An Egyptologist should have noticed this immediately as a forgery, because the “orthography” comes from a completely different time epoch than the one given. No, it wasn’t noticed until about thirty years later, but by then “Cheops” had already taken a permanent place in textbooks as a pyramid builder.

Hair-raising calculations are made (still and again and again) about how many hundreds of thousands of people were probably employed, where and with what they had to be fed. The fact that such postulated host of ghosts of human beings never found even the most pathetic remains or waste products – which must be present, at least in fragments, even from their (broken) tools – is deliberately ignored. One thinks up adventurous ramp constructions on which the stone blocks on wooden trunks – which it has been proven never to have been available in the required amount on the Nile – were pulled up over inclined planes, the volume of which would have swallowed up the multiple amount of building material as it would for the actual pyramid was needed.And where have the ghost ramps gone? They are undetectable, neither the former ramps nor the immense building material required for them, which then had to be disposed of somewhere. But nowhere in the area are there any terrain structures that could consist of the former ramp construction material.

Fig. 6: The constellation of Orion. Will the builders of the Great Pyramid align the structure with these stars? Photo: NASA

So an extremely laborious and material-intensive scenario has been constructed in order to grant a tomb to a probably somewhat megalomaniac king, in which alleged air shafts gave that deceased person a brief glimpse of the just risen Sirius sometime four thousand years ago …

Air shafts for stargazing?

There are researchers who go to an incredible amount of effort and make measurements and highly complex calculations as to when the pyramids should have been built [12]. Robert Bauval and Adrian Gilbert used computers to use astronomy programs to calculate back when which star should have risen above the so-called air shafts of the Great Pyramid. And – who is surprised? – They reach dates which roughly agree with the school science doctrine. One would like to shudder in awe, which stars were before which time in which place in the sky. Unfortunately, however labor-intensive it was, this theory has little in common with practice. Nobody denies that Egyptians were living in Egypt at the given time. But not in connection with the building of the pyramids!

Through their extremely labor-intensive research and calculations, Bauval & Gilbert come to the conclusion that the three Giza pyramids are around the year 2450 BC. been built. They justify this statement with the construction of the “air shafts”, which at that time were aligned with the belt stars of Orion.

Fig. 7: Reconstruction of the alignment of the four shafts in the Great Pyramid around 4000 years ago on different stars, calculated by Robert Bauval and Adrian Gilbert.

Here the two researchers proceeded meticulously, in contrast to others who made claims without calculations that the “air shafts” or other components would point to some star (or just next to it). If they point just off the mark, it is argued, but tens of thousands of years ago they would have pointed to another star. The general opinion is now: if one only calculates enough (the proponents of this thesis then leave the calculations to others) and precession (the tumbling motion of the earth around its poles) as an aid, then it could already be calculated at what time that “air shaft” (or similar) was aligned with this star and not another. And you’ve already calculated the construction date, it’s that simple. If only it were that easy! Who actually tells us that it was once the purpose of the “air shafts” to be aimed at this or that star?

In my opinion, this is one of the stupidest explanations you can think of. Are we aligning our air ducts with the stars these days? But of course! At least that is how archaeologists will argue in 2000 years if they have not become a little more intelligent than ours today. Because everything fits and everything fits on any star, at all times, and there are and there were (visibly) thousands of stars – including those conspicuous like Sirius or Orion . Also: who is able to prove that our earth rotated for millennia in the same way as it does today, with the north and south poles where they are today? [13] There were – also in recent history – cataclysmic catastrophes[14] , and only one is enough for those “air shafts” to point to completely different stars.

Fig. 8: The proponents of the thesis that the “air shafts” are oriented towards a star could have come to this: As the earth rotates, the stars do not stand still for us, but move, as this long-term image shows (NASA ).

However, these are objections that are not taken into account in today’s calculations of the construction date of the pyramids – Bauval & Gilbert also do not even begin to think of this possibility. Why actually? Perhaps because there are no surviving records of the global disasters? Not true, there are! Peoples from all over the world hand down their memories of these catastrophes, sometimes wrapped in legends. But they are not taken seriously and pushed into the realm of fairy tales. Because the narrators unfortunately forgot to include an exact date when it happened. Why not take them seriously when they come from the most diverse races, completely independent of each other?

But that’s all just a fogging tactic, turning a blind eye to the obvious: As in the rest of the world, in practice, through a hundred meter long “air shaft” with a diameter of 20 x 20 cm, you should be able to see a star, no matter how good it is would be aligned? This is probably only theoretically possible, because: The full disk of the sun can shine in and maybe, with a lot of luck, you will just be able to see a tiny point of light! The Egyptologists then argue, however, that this is only meant symbolically, because the pharaoh’s soul took this route out of the pyramid – through the “air shaft” that was once closed on both sides?

Fig. 9: Cheops’s boat, which was excavated in the 1950s on the east side of the great pyramid. It is about 32 meters long, consists of different types of reed and wood and is assembled without any metal. Photo: Goyon

But let’s stick with the calculations by Bauval & Gilbert, according to which the Orion Belt and Sirius and a few more stars were present over Egypt 4000 years ago. I do not want to doubt that it was so – apart from the fact that the academic chronology – i.e. the calculated historical periods – cannot be correct. Let us assume a scenario in which the coveted and allegedly adored stars were up there in the sky. And now the Egyptians are said to have aligned the so-called air shafts with such stars when building their pyramids. I immediately ask myself: Has none of these theorists ever looked up to the sky themselves?

Probably only when the sky is clear and for a few minutes. Otherwise they should have noticed that our earth is turning and that it does not care whether the stars are turning or not! So you build a shaft and align it, and so – at the given point in time – the – allegedly – targeted star will actually appear in it, for a brief moment. Because immediately afterwards it disappeared again from the manhole mouth. And for such a brief moment, which can only be observed on a few days a year anyway, such a gigantic amount of work should have been driven?

Fig. 10: Quarry in the Mokattam Mountains, in which the blocks of the pyramids are said to have broken Photo: Vogl

Completely without any other use? No, with the greatest imagination, to assume such narrow-mindedness to the builders of the pyramids, that would be an insult to their building knowledge and would contradict them completely. Due to the lack of practical use, the so-called air shafts may inevitably have nothing to do with stargazing, and even a “symbolic” orientation towards certain stars is pure nonsense, because this orientation only applies for seconds. A kind of stargazing would just be conceivable with the so-called Great Gallery, at the time of construction, when it was still open above.

But even this consideration must remain of a purely theoretical nature, because the layout of the Great Gallery speaks completely against such a use. The builders of the pyramids were not impractical-minded people, otherwise they would not have been able to create these masterpieces. If they had wanted to construct a stargazing facility, they would have built a practical device, not a narrow, inclined ramp. The technique used by the pyramid builders is also only known to a very small extent. If it were unraveled, then one would – perhaps – know how the pyramids were built and would not have to come up with any hair-raising auxiliary structures.

Why doesn’t anyone notice what nonsense is being produced in this area ?!

Egyptology still assumes that the ancient Egyptians – technologically speaking – knew at most copper tools, although there are certainly high-quality steel tools from that time [15] . Any technology that may have existed in our present-day sense, however, is completely unthinkable. The fact is, however, that the monumental pyramids are there. They stand there so they must have been built.

Fig. 11: This picture shows how precisely or imprecisely you can cut stones with the most modern laser saws today. Compared to the grouting of the pyramid blocks, this technique seems almost bungled. Photo: Vogl

Only: they could never have been built using the stone age methods of the ancient Egyptians. It is totally impossible. You can turn and turn and do arithmetic tricks however you want: the ancient Egyptians definitely couldn’t build pyramids! It is quite logical: if we are not able to recreate a pyramid with today’s relatively high-quality technology, then it was certainly not possible with more primitive means.

Today we can break comparable stone blocks from comparable quarries, but we need our crane technology to get them out and lift them onto corresponding heavy trucks. It is possible that this work process could still be granted to Egyptian technology, with complicated lever cranes made of wood, but the question would arise as to how many of these stone blocks, which weigh tons, would break such a crane.

Like the stone blocks then over the Nilesupposed to have come remains a secret of the Egyptologists. With the boats they unearthed and reconstructed at that time, it was completely out of the question to transport even a single cube, let alone hundreds of thousands, how the stone blocks were supposed to have been piled up to form the pyramids, so that tolerance limits were not exceeded, which our high technology does not can be achieved remains a further, as yet unsolved secret. The ramp theory is still favored. But such a ramp requires – as I said – several times the volume of the final pyramid as filler material. Where is the material supposed to have come from and where did it go after construction? There are no remains to be found! Ramp remnants that the Egyptians wanted to declare as remains,come from the valley temples and access roads built in much later times, which have nothing at all to do with the actual pyramids.

For this purpose, Dieter Vogl, a competent natural stone expert, has the theories of Dr. HA Nieper checked [16] , which have not been considered so far, perhaps because they seem too speculative? Dr. In various essays, Nieper has expressed the opinion that the stones used to build the Giza pyramids were dismantled using devices that work with vacuum field energy. Nieper has not only added a new theory to the existing ones, but also researched on site.

He compares the machining marks on the stone blocks of the Gizeh pyramids with melting sintered waves, such as those created when machining stones that are cut with the help of a Seike solenoid developed by the Japanese physicist Prof. Shinichi Seike in 1978. This is a cut-off saw for cutting rock by means of a Tachyon beam, i.e. with vacuum field energy. Rock cut in this way evaporates without leaving any residue.

Fig. 12/13: These two pictures show two possibilities of so-called stick hammer machining. Many pyramid stones show clear features that indicate a stick hammer processing. A specialist knows, however, that a jackhammer and a compressed air device are necessary for working with a mallet Photo: Vogl

Vogl developed the theories of Dr. Never checked and confirmed on the spot. According to this, all “common” theories of stone processing using Stone Age methods should finally be thrown away. But it goes on. Above we see the image of a so-called pit hole in the Mokattam Mountains, where, according to scientific doctrine, the largest blocks of the pyramid stones are said to have broken. However, the archaeologists are silent about how the stones weighing tons were supposed to have been brought up from the quarry. In any case, this was completely impossible with the means and tools of the time.

Accordingly, there is only one valid alternative: the pyramids were inevitably built by master builders who had mastered a high technology against which our current one is in its infancy. When a few nomadic peoples got together in ancient Egypt and founded their first kingdom, the pyramids must have already been there in their full glory. Later pharaohs used them as a symbol of their power, for cultic purposes or whatever. But they had no idea about the construction. This is shown by the many miserably primitive replicas, most of which have already crumbled, often during construction.

It is by no means enough if you know how something works that you can then build it! An example from our day may illustrate this: Today everyone knows how a television set works, that in a wooden box there is a picture tube , a lot of transistors and wires. But who can, even if they have all the individual parts (for example as a kit) together, build a functioning device out of them? This example can also be extended to simpler things: who can make a pair of shoes from a piece of leather? (Who can even make a piece of leather themselves?)

Fig. 14: Stone grouting inside the Great Pyramid. Photo: Eickhoff

What I mean by that: even if the ancient Egyptians had the pyramids ready-made and ready to show, they were never able to recreate them, even if they had been provided with detailed blueprints! And so we are not aware of too many attempts at replica of this scale, they soon switched to the construction of palaces and temples. At least that was feasible without them collapsing again – and also cheaper.

As much as school science sticks to its theses, in view of the obvious facts we cannot avoid assuming high technology for the construction of the pyramids. When that was, where this technology came from, who mastered it, these are questions that have to remain secondary for the time being, because all the relevant indications seem to have vanished at first glance. But if you take a closer look you can see:

There is absolutely nothing to prevent the pyramids from being tens of thousands or possibly even hundreds of thousands of years old! On the contrary, some facts speak definitely in favor of it: The stones cut with high technology were massively glazed at the interfaces, due to the effects of the plasma jet. And this glazing is eroded away except for remnants. However, extremely long periods of time are required to erode glazing to that extent. In the case of the Sphinx figure, there is now a tendency to assume that it may be at least ten thousand years old, due to the water erosion damage on its flanks.

With the Sphinx there is also the fact that the processed stone material is not [karstified] – a completely unusual process! For this reason, the figure slowly but surely crumbles under today’s aggressive environmental conditions. Comparable stone buildings (castles, churches, etc.) show karstification on the stone surface, which makes the material resistant to environmental influences. Karst cannot form if the stone material used has been impregnated with chemical substances (according to today’s technical processes). However, stone impregnation only lasts a certain time. Now back to the Sphinx: If the giant figure was built by the builders of the Giza pyramids, it could well be that they – they had the technical possibilities – had impregnated the stones.

In order not to have to use some extraterrestrials to build the pyramids, an early human civilization can be assumed. The time available for the development of such cultures is completely sufficient after Cremo & Thompson have shown that “modern man” is already millions of years older than school science would like us to believe.

The pyramids of Giza show me the following picture: The builders of the pyramids – whoever they were, wherever they had their knowledge and wherever they came from – had a high level of technology that was much higher than ours today. This is an inevitable fact, because the pyramids prove it: we cannot (yet) build any with our current technology. Pharaoh Cheops (if he existed) would probably have laughed uproariously if he had been told at the time that future archaeologists would have interpreted his temples around the pyramid as a sign that he had built the gigantic structure …

Notes, literature and sources

This article by Gernot L. Geise (© 1997) was first published in EFODON-SYNESIS No. 20/1997. It initially appeared online at:

Bauval, Robert & Gilbert, Adrian: “The Secret of Orion”, Munich 1994.

Charroux, Robert: “Fantastic past. The unknown history of mankind for a hundred thousand years ”, Munich 1969.

Goyon, Georges: ,, The Great Pyramid of Cheops. Mystery and History “, Herrsching.

Illig, Heribert / Löhner, Franz: “The construction of the Cheops pyramid. Rope pulleys on the pyramid flank – or how the pharaohs really built ”, Gräfelfing 1993.

Kin, L .: “God & Co. To whose whistle do we dance?”, Wiesbaden 1994.

Munt, Hartwig: “Cheops pyramid: Structural engineering decrypted and reconstructed”, in: EFODON SYNESIS No. 9/1995.

Munt, Hartwig: “The Cheops pyramid. Herodotus was right! ”, EFODON DOCUMENTATION DO-28.

Munt, Hartwig: “King Narmer and the Sphinx of Gise”, EFODON DOCUMENTATION DO-13.

Munt, Hartwig: “About the building of the Cheops pyramid – Herodotus was right after all -”, in: EFODON SYNESIS No. 2/1994.

Naudiet, Armin: “Noahs Erben”, EFODON DOCUMENTATION THU-11.

Tompkins, Peter: “Cheops – The secrets of the great pyramids”, Klagenfurt 1973. Toth, Max: “The secret of the pyramid power”, Goldmann, 1988.

Vogl, Dieter: “The pyramid material of Giza, seen through the eyes of a Cavatori”, in: EFODON SYNESIS No. 19/1997.

  1. Hochspringen? Georges Goyon, “The Great Pyramid”, Herrsching.
  2. Hochspringen^ “Mémoires publiés par les membres de la Mission archéologique française au Caire”, Le Caire 17,1; P. 323.
  3. Hochspringen? Georges Goyon, “The Pyramid of Cheops”, p. 39.
  4. Hochspringen? ibid., 216.
  5. Hochspringen? Peter Tompkins, “The Secrets of the Great Pyramids,” p. 37.
  6. Hochspringen? Good thoughts on the construction of the pyramids, which, however, must remain purely theoretical, have been made: Heribert Illig / Franz Löhner: “The construction of the Cheops pyramid”, loc. Cit .; Hartwig Munt: “Cheops pyramid: Structural engineering decrypted and reconstructed”, in: EFODON SYNESIS No. 9/1995); ders .: “The Great Pyramid of Cheops. Herodotus was right! ”, Op. Cit
  7. Hochspringen? L. Kin, pp. 102, 135.
  8. Hochspringen? Robert Charroux, “Fantastic Past”, p. 80.
  9. Hochspringen? ibid.
  10. Hochspringen? Toth, p. 76 f.
  11. Hochspringen? broadcast by Bayerischer Fernsehen Bayern 3
  12. Hochspringen^ Robert Bauval & Adrian Gilbert: “The Secret of Orion”, Munich 1994.
  13. Hochspringen? It is now scientifically proven that the Sahara desert was once a pole of the earth. Another former polar point is the North German Plain, which has been sunk by the ice masses of the former polar point. In the history books this is called the ” Ice Age “. However, every pole glaciation has an “Ice Age”!
  14. Hochspringen? See for example the work of Armin Naudiet: “Noahs Erben”, EFODON-DOCUMENTATION DO-11; ders .: “The secret of precession”, in: EFODON-SYNESIS No. 9/1995; or the works of Immanuel Velikovsky. Representative here: “Worlds in collision”.
  15. Hochspringen? see Gernot L. Geise: “Iron tools in ancient Egypt – yes or no?”, In: EFODON SYNESIS No. 2/1994.
  16. Hochspringen? Cf. Dieter Vogl: “The pyramid material of Gizeh, seen through the eyes of a Cavatori”, in: EFODON SYNESIS No. 19/1997.

Image sources



(3) (no longer online)

(4) (no longer online)

(5) (no longer online)

(6 – 14) (no longer online)