I wrote in my main article dedicated to the Bosnian Pyramids an update stating that: « According to our information, we believe that the sample of concrete that I have examined under the electron microscope comes from a type of cistern or water tank (the drilling report is mentioning a concrete « ceiling » and an empty space of 4 meters depth followed by a « concrete » floor, see the pdf below). The geopolymer concrete analyzed is a kind of Roman concrete, which in no way corresponds to the materials that constitute the casing of the pyramids and look like pudding stone. Consequently, the information published on the Bosnian Pyramids websites are inaccurate. » Read the entire article at Pyramids in Bosnia.
Catégorie : Archaeology
A recent scientific study published in the renown “Europhysics News“, The Magazine of the European Physical Society, (2012), Vol. 43, number 6, described how paleomagnetism study on several pyramid stones demonstrates the validity of Davidovits’ theory on the artificial nature of Egyptian pyramid stones.
Two scientists, Dr. Igor Túnyi from Geophysical Institute SAS – Bratislava (Slovak Republic) and Ibrahim A. El-hemaly from National Research Institute of Astronomy and Geophysics – Cairo, Egypt, made the following assumption (quote from their scientific paper):
In recent weeks, several internet forums discuss my involvement in a documentary made in 1991 by the American channel PBS, famous for it popular science program « NOVA » and entitled This Old Pyramid. The objective of NOVA was the illustration of different techniques proposed by experts in the construction of the pyramids of Egypt. NOVA had decided to build at Giza, a mini-pyramid, according to the « old techniques ». I related my experience in several of my books: in French (Ils ont bâti les pyramides, 2002; La nouvelle histoire des pyramides, 2004 and 2006) and in English more recently (Why the Pharaohs built the Pyramids with Fake Stones, 2009). I shall make it available for the first time on the internet as a pdf file below which reproduces some pages and figures of the English edition of « Why the Pharaohs built the Pyramids with Fake Stones ». At the arrival of the television crew, including myself, the mini-pyramid was practically finished and had two of it sides convered with their casing stones, not dressed. The workers had used trucks, forklifts and steel tools for their work, the material being soft limestone quarried at Tura, on the other side of the Nile. But the use of construction equipment was not shown in the documentary « This Old Pyramid ». The casing stones are absent on the back of the mini-pyramid which was never completed, as shown in the figure above and Figure 3.14 in the pdf file, taken at the end of filming and before the big traditional festival End of construction.
A new scientific analysis demonstrates the artificial nature of Egyptian Pyramid stone. The article titled: « Were the casing stones of Senefru’s Bent Pyramid in Dahshour cast or carved? Multinuclear NMR evidence » was published in Materials Letters 65 (2011) 350–352, by an international team of scientists involving Kenneth J.D. MacKenzie (MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand), Mark E. Smith, Alan Wong, John V. Hanna (Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7Al, UK), Bernard Barry (Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences, Lower Hutt, New Zealand) and Michel W. Barsoum (Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA).
The objectives of this article are twofold. First of all, it presents one information omitted in Chapter 11 of my last book in French language De cette fresque naquit la Bible (The Lost Fresco and the Bible ). Then, it denounces an error, or more probably the forgery of an archaeological document of the greatest importance.
The stele of Merneptah contains the oldest mention of Israel in an extra-biblical document. Flinders Petrie discovered it in 1896, at Thebes, Egypt, in Merneptah’s mortuary temple. Merneptah was the son of Ramses II. The stele describes the military campaign undertaken in 1207 B.C. against the Libyans, and, eventually a campaign to Canaan by which a group of people named Israel would have been destroyed. One reads in lines 26 to 28 of this stele, according to the official translation: The princes are prostrate, they say: let us be in peace! Nobody any more raises the head among the Nine Arcs. Tehenu is destroyed; Khati (Hittites) are in peace; Canaan is captive like its demons, Ashkelon is conquered; Gezer is captured; Yanoam became non-existent; Israel is devastated, it does not have more seed; Kharu became the widow of Egypt. All these countries are pacified. All those, which were in revolt were subdued by the king of Egypt of North and the South…
I am presenting my 5th book on the Egyptian civilization, here in connection with the Bible, published by Éditions Jean-Cyrille Godefroy, Paris, ISBN 978-2-86553-216-2
Released on: 29 september 2009
In 1935 in Karnak, in Egypt, two French Egyptologists discover a fresco in the ruins of the memorial temple of Amenophis (Amenhotep) Son of Hapu, the most eminent scribe and scientist of ancient Egypt, Great chancellor of the Pharaon Amenhotep III, father of the monotheist Pharaon Akhenaton. Recently, 75 years later, I noted that the text of this fresco was reproduced word for word in the Bible, Genesis 41, when Pharaon installs the biblical Patriarch Joseph to rule over all Egypt. Royal scribe Amenophis Son of Hapu and the Patriarch Joseph are thus the same person. Moreover, the fresco contains a surprising detail which underlines its authenticity. Indeed, in Genesis 41, Pharaon names Joseph: çaphenat-paneah (sapnath-panéakh), a name which does not mean anything in Hebrew. Indeed, I discovered that çaphenat-paneah is the Egyptian name Amenophis Fils of Hapou, written reversely, from left to right, the hebrew language being written from right to left. The surprising detail in the fresco is that, precisely, the Egyptian name Amenophis is also written in hieroglyph reversely, from left to right, instead of from right to left like the rest of the text. There is thus absolute agreement between the fresco text and the Bible.
From the photos available, the stone material seems to be natural pudding stone or perhaps man-made stone, a type of Roman concrete, called Opus Caementium. I am waiting for more data.
According to our information, we believe that the sample of concrete that I have examined under the electron microscope comes from a type of cistern or water tank (the drilling report is mentioning a concrete « ceiling » and an empty space of 4 meters depth followed by a « concrete » floor, see the pdf below). The geopolymer concrete analyzed is a kind of Roman concrete, which in no way corresponds to the materials that constitute the casing of the pyramids and look like pudding stone. Consequently, the information published on the Bosnian Pyramids websites are inaccurate.
I have an interesting Film/TV documentary project, and I am looking for a serious producer.
I discovered the most ancient genuine text copied word by word in the Bible.
It is an ancient Egyptian fresco unearthed in 1935, in Karnak, Southern Egypt, dedicated to the greatest scribe and genius of Egyptian antiquity: Amenophis (Amenhotep) Son of Hapu (1437-1356 BC).
This 3,363 year-old document tells how Pharaoh Amenhotep III (the father of the heretical Akhenaton) greatly honored his closest counselor, Amenophis Son of Hapu, Egypt’s foremost éminence grise whose position was second only to Pharaoh’s in power. According to my recent studies already published in French (see my books La Bible avait raison, 1-2 and the english summary et The lost fresco and the Bible), Amenophis Son of Hapu would be the Patriarch Joseph whose fabulous story is outlined in the Bible (Genesis 41, 40-46) and in the Qur’an (Sura 12 (Yusuf), 54-56). It sheds light on the interpretation of the Holy Scriptures (Torah, Bible, Qur’an).
Recently, worldwide medias reported following headline news: “on March 30, 2007, Dassault Systems, one of the first world editors of 3D computer solutions, and architect Jean-Pierre Houdin, reveal the first theory devoted to the construction of the pyramid of Cheops that is scientifically validated, during a news conference presented at the Géode, City of Sciences, Paris ”.
One reads here clearly that 3D computer simulation has scientifically validated this theory of pyramid construction. The system introduces the use of internal ramps, instead of the external ramps previously suggested by Egyptologists. It is common knowledge that a computer works with the data that have been provided on its hard disk. If these data prove to be false or inaccurate, then the computer program will simulate and confirm a false theory. According to Dassault Systèmes, it is the first time that 3D simulation is employed in the demonstration of a theory on pyramids construction. This is wrong. Recently, the Palais de la Découverte, Paris, organized an exhibition dedicated to the Hypothesis on pyramids construction (December 19, 2006 to March 13, 2007, see the monthly magazine Découverte Revue du Palais de la Découverte, December 2006). Three theories were presented there, two bearing on a system of ramps and hewn stones, and my own one (agglomerated limestone concrete, by chemistry, instead of carved stones). These two other theories were based on “a demonstration confirmed by 3D simulation”. Although less sophisticated than the program used by Dassault, they worked on the same guiding principles. The first one, by J.P. Petit, former Research Director at CNRS, recommended an external ramp. The second one, by P. Crozat, architect doctor-engineer, favored an accretion system, external ramps and machines.
Walter Sullivan, science editor and writer at the New York Times, was the first English speaking journalist to write that the Egyptian pyramids may have been cast from plastic rock instead of being hewn. I have been attending the International Archaeometry Symposium, held at the Brookhaven National Laboratory, Long Island from May 18 to May 22, 1981. W. Sullivan covered the symposium and wrote a paper that was published in the Sunday edition of the New York Times, Sunday, May 24., 1981, page 39. I was just starting my archaeological research and the reader will certainly discover how this theory (the cast stone theory as it was called at that time, – to day I prefer to talk about agglomerated limestone concrete, reconstituted limestone block), evolved from an idea, a proposal, into a genuine scientific discovery, 25 years later. (Davidovits and New York Times)
Prague, June 15, 2006
Continuing my visits to the Czech scientific institutions, I met with Professor Miroslav Verner, professor of egyptology, director of the Czech Institute of Egyptology. The Czech Mission in Egypt is in charge of the site at Abusir, north of Saqqarah. One finds there the pyramids of the Pharaons belonging to the Vth Dynasty, small pyramids built after the large pyramids at Giza. They were made with small blocks of hewn stone and they have nothing in common with the enormous masses raised by the Pharaons of the IVth Dynasty: Sneferu, Cheops, Chephren and Mykerinos.
Brno, capital of Moravia, Czech Republic, 17 June 2006
Organized within the framework of my meetings with the scientific institutions of the Czech Republic, this visit to the Brno Anthropology Museum will certainly mark a date in my studies on the technological knowledge of prehistoric mankind. Dr. Martin Oliva, paleontologist, presented to me the collection of Paleolithic artifacts – engraved bones – discovered in Moravia, in particular at Dolni Vestonice. Then, in the presence of the journalist of the local national daily and a photographer of Czech Press Agency, he unveiled the queen of his collection, the Venus. I still had for my eyes the image of the yellow limestone Venus displayed at the Vienna Museum, Austria, to be very surprised by this one. It was not worked in soft stone, but manufactured out of terra cotta. Thus, I was looking at the oldest ceramic manufactured by Homo Sapiens 25.000 years ago. (Davidovits, Venus Dolni Vestonice)
On July 15, 2005, I received the following e-mail from Holland:
Dear dr. Davidovits, I am a journalist of the Dutch leading newspaper de Volkskrant and I am doing an article on the building of the Cheops pyramid. Dr. Menno Blaauw of the Technische Universiteit Delft says he analyzed a piece of stone from Cheops and concluded that it is natural limestone, not a piece of concrete. His main argument is that the inside of the stone has not seen daylight for at least 400 thousand years. Since you are the designer of the concrete-theory, I would appreciate a comment of yours on this.