# New Pyramid Found in Egypt?

## Prediction of a New Unearthed Massive Structure in Egypt

Finding ancient, yet unearthed structures is like finding undiscovered planets; we can do this by using mathematics. The new theory predicts an unearthed structure in Egypt close to Nabta playa.

The probability there won’t be a yet unearthed structure is: 0.021% or 1 to 4,765. There is still a chance, although small, it’s a mare’s nest. The unearthed structure shares the same geographic pole as Teotihuacan. It was probably a pyramid, but that has to be verified at the location itself.

## Same Base as Khufu and Teotihuacan

The size of the base of this unknown structure is equal to the base of the Great Pyramid of Khufu and that of Teotihuacan. It is probably destroyed long time ago or maybe it was never finished, but the contours of the foundations seem to be clearly present.

Because the size of the base is similar to that of the other two big pyramids makes it even more likely it is/was a pyramid.

The highlights:

• the structure has the same orientation (±1°) as the Nabta Playa Calendar Circle,
• the structure is oriented to the same former geo pole as Teotihuacan,
• the structure has the same base size as Teotihuacan and Khufu,
• the contours of the structure are too square to be coincidental.

When we add up all these facts the odds are very good we have found something new.

## A New Player in the Game

This unearthed pyramid is approximately of the same age as the Nabta Playa Calendar Circle: between 210,000 and 225,000 years. I know, that is way off the map of historians.

It’s not a theory stitched together by mythos stories like historians and Egyptologists like to do, it’s a mathematical theory that covers most of the known ancient structures all around the globe. A brand new powerful player in the game.

If you know nothing about the theory that predicts this unearthed “pyramid”, you can read the articles on this website. There is a book in the making about this theory; it turns history upside down as we know it. It won’t be very popular among the mainstreamers, like historians who believe in Mythos stories and have no idea what the Logos is about.

## Who Takes the Challenge?

The chances for two independent objects to share exactly the same orientation pattern are low. To share their orientation with a mathematical proven geographic pole is even lower. And finally, to have a base of the same size as Khufu’s pyramid makes it even more probable it’s an ancient structure of that same size. But it has been destroyed or was never finished.

Archaeologists, take your shovels with you and go find it in the desert of Southern Egypt! The location is given at the bottom of this article. Who takes the challenge?

If there is something there, it shows that the theory is able to predict and therefore most probably correct. But that will turn so much upside down, that we are not assured that historians, scholars, governments, archaeologists, and so on will cheat on the game. They have been caught cheating before. Why has the Vatican a secret archive? Because it contains secrets that can not bear the light of day.

## Specifications

Item
Location
22.5335N, 30.6995E
Dimensions
225m
Orientation
-22° (or 338°)
Estimated age
210,000 – 225,000 years

## 7 thoughts on “New Pyramid Found in Egypt?”

1. Mario Buildreps says:

Hi Terry, thank you for your interesting comment.

The Younger Drias Impact Theory does not conflict with the mathematical approach. It is even likely that such events took place, and that it caused ripples in the climate. A theory that excludes other events to be in combination can be shifted aside as invalid. Science is already stuffed with such “egoic” theories.
As you might know the YDIT meets a lot of criticism due to many inconsistencies in this theory. But let’s assume the impact took place, it had minor impact on the global climate, and if it impacted in the Northern ice sheets, it would have disintegrated the massive ice sheet only partially.

The crust is deformed substantially over the last 440,000 years in several stages. Would a comet be able to deform the crust? Only a comet of a considerable size (>100 km) that would end most life on Earth for millions of years to come, would damage the crust heavily. This hasn’t happened over the last millions of years.

The YDIT is a theory which claims to be solely responsible for major events, which makes this theory irrational and thus weak.

I understand your wish to leave out aliens or Anunnaki, it’s the freedom of the author to make hints to such ideas. Some have suggested it weakens the theory, but there are too many indicator which are pointing into that direction to ignore this. I agree that the area of aliens have been stained and soiled by so many irrational fools, and so are many “rationals” afraid to go there as well, afraid to be called an idiot as well. But because the area has been stained does not mean it’s not true; it only requires another more rational approach.

2. Terry O'Connell says:

I have been fascinated with ancient history for a long time and the capabilities of (recent) past empires (Greek, Roman etc) but have always questioned how the engineering and sciences developed over a relatively short period of time (5000 yrs) and the time required to study the stars, transition, the sun its equinoxes and how that was passed down during ancient times (3500BC- 450AD) to a relatively ‘dark age’ 450AD-1600AD (approx).
Having looked at the infrastructure and how these structures were built the knowledge base was phenomenal and not something that could have been ‘Knocked up’ in the last 1500 yrs such as the Incas when we can even protect against the weather today. So i’m of the opinion that this knowledge of the sun and stars, of the earth and construction took much longer than previously believed.
However until proven by science and mathematics which you appear to have done or actual evidence of date-able finds by archaeologists or even geologists it would do the whole case of re-writing history a favour if aliens or Anunaki were not mentioned.
Finally what is your thoughts on the comet collision theory for the Younger Dryas Impact Theory which is interesting; does it conflict or affect your mathematical approach?

I truly enjoy looking through on this website, it holds superb content.

4. Science magazine says:

Hi, Hi to every one, since I am actually keen of reading this website’s post to be updated regularly. It carries good information. many thanks

5. Bablofil says:

Thanks, great article.

6. Mario Buildreps says:

That could be, Earl. Although the odds it could be something are much lower – about 1 to 5 it’s nothing.

7. Earl says:

is that a second oval shape structure to the immediate right? Temple complex maybe?