New home page for the Aset Ka

Jonathan wrote:I don't see things like that myself, like the Gods being in fact beings from other planets and such. Maybe because I have some trouble with all the alien theories, I tend to see things more in terms of different dimensions, like spiritual planes. Not really other planets.
But that's a good thing that we have different views, a set of diverse opinions is more likely to make us all grow and learn new things than if we all thought the same.
Thanks a lot everyone for their input, a lot of activity and discussion lately.

Maktub wrote:

A'nen Sedjet wrote:
But there is so little proof of these origins, scientists to this day all argue between Sumerian, Assyrian, Egyptian, Indian origins of things, there just isn't any positive scientific proof yet.

This assumption is not entirely correct, in terms of modern science as in terms of known history.

Assyria, as the old nation in Mesopotamia, has the oldest Assyrian rulers dating as far back as 2000BC and never older, ruling them out. Before that there was no Assyrian monarchy, or kingdom for that matter. That is, if you are not mentioning Assyria as the province of the Persian Empire, which dates even more modern (around 500BC).

As far as India goes, we assume Indian history from the beginning of the civilization from the Indus Valley, and that settlement does not go further than 3500BC (and this is even stretching a bit some of our carbon-based datations). But if we refer to the Vedic period, from where much of the Hindu occult and metaphysical knowledge flourished, then we are talking about a shifting period between the Bronze Age India and Iron Age India, which is even more modern (between 1000BC and 500BC according to most modern datations).

Now the civilization that so many like to falsely proclaim as the cradle of civilization - Sumer. The Sumerian history is the one that may cause more confusion in this subject, however, it still remains highly modern in terms of history when compared to Ancient Egypt. And yes, I am afraid the proofs you so asked are quite scientifical.

The neolithic period of the Sumerian civilization goes far back, in an extreme maximum of 5500BC (probably less), in what is known as the Ubaid period, followed by the more well known Uruk period after 4000BC.

Now... Egypt.
I can surpass the ages of all those civilizations with a single example - The Great Sphinx of Giza.

The immortal monument was first dated by direct correlation with the Khafre pyramid in the Giza plateau, pointing to an age around 2500BC, not being too precise. This was done by mere assumption that the face of the Sphinx resembled the face of a statue of the Pharaoh Khafre. Clearly not the way how Egyptology should be done and reason why there are still so many misconceptions in modern Egyptology.
Anyways, putting mere assumptions by the side and centering on pure science, we directed to the aid of Geology. The proper analysis of erosion padron on the bedrock of the Sphinx exposed quite a dramatic truth... the monument is at the very least older than 10.000BC. Several theories flourished on the top of that scientific evidence and much speculation, which is out of the scope of this thread. Anyways, without trying to lift much of the veil and bringing too much confusion into the post, that Geological datation acomplishes more than just to reset the date of the Sphinx far back, but fully redesigns medieval Egyptology. Are the 3 Pyramids really correctly dated? Are they really tombs of Pharaohs? Did Pharaohs really give their names to those huge structures? Or did in fact they merely used the name of those Temples as their own Pharaohnic names?

I leave all the answers up to you. But don't mention there is lacking proof, as far as I can tell, the most state-of-the-art research in history and science supports more easily the Asetian history and the Asetian facts, than many theories of most modern Egyptologists.

Maktub