Orientation of Ancient Structures to Current Geographic North Pole
Why Are Temples and Pyramids Cardinally Oriented?
There are many ancient structures, like pyramids and temples, around the world positioned in such a way that their footprint points precisely to the current North pole.
The majority of the temples and pyramids were built in the middle of nowhere.
Now what would you do when you’ve all the space to position a pyramid? Unless you’ve no idea what you’re doing, there’s only one logical answer to that question is: you would orient it to the geographical poles.
When you want to study and predict solar cycles, moon cycles, solar eclipses, equinoxes, earth’s motions (obliquity, precession, eccentricity of orbit), or any other phenomenon in the sky, you must point your instrument to the only sure point – the rotation axis of the earth. Which is the geographical North pole. If you don’t do that you will introduce another variable into the equations, which makes them much harder to solve.
But besides this, it also appeared that many other structures of importance are oriented to the geographical North pole without a clear reason. Pure symmetry between sunrise and sunset might have been one of the reasons. We simply love the sun for many different reasons.
This article is probably difficult for many readers. When you’re able to work your way through it, you might become aware how wrong our history is taught to us.
Earth crust shifts are real, and pyramids are much, much older. By using mathematics our real history reveals itself razor sharp.
How Mathematics Proves Our History is Wrongly Interpreted
What does it mean when the majority of the pyramids and temples are not oriented to the current North pole? How likely is it then that they were oriented to former North poles? This can be sorted out by using the power of mathematics.
In this series of articles we will prove that the former (geographic) North pole was on Greenland. The structures that are oriented to this former pole are therefore older than assumed by archaeologists.
Because these pyramids from all over the world were collectively oriented to another geographic pole. And that was a very long time ago. We are here not talking about some few thousand years. No, we are talking about hundreds of thousands of years. The foundations of most pyramids are way older than 100,000 years. The top layers might have been renovated many times – the orientation was left intact.
The claim is extraordinary, the proof is extraordinary as well. The mathematics behind the proof is extremely powerful, and will be published in a book that is currently in the making under the title “Atlantis is Here”. The title points to the fact that we are living in Atlantis right now. It’s everywhere around us, but we fail to see it. Our consciousness is dramatically failing.
How Two Separate Bearings Can Intersect With Each Other
Believe is Strong
Believe is strong. We believe that the history as it is taught to us is correct. Even when mathematics proves it is wrong, we tend to keep believing that the history as it is pounded in our brains is correct.
This is what we call conditioning. A conditioned mind has troubles to interpret outcomes of mathematics that deviates from the programmed believes. No matter how solid the proof is, we tend to fall back into our old believe of the trusty old thing. To get used to another idea takes time. Much time.
How Two Cardinally Oriented Pyramids Intersect at the Geo Pole
Temples and Pyramids Exactly Oriented to the Current North Pole
- Lintong +12 other structures in China (pink line)
- Borobudur on Central Java (dark blue line)
- Angkor Wat +12 other structures in Cambodia (yellow line)
- Konark Sun Temple in India (orange line)
- Sri Rangam temple +1 other structure in India (red line)
- Harappa in Pakistan (green line)
- Bar’am +2 other structures in Israel (white line)
- Pyramids of Giza and Temple of Horus in Egypt (green line)
- Tiwanaku in Bolivia (purple line)
- Naranjo in Quatemala +3 other structures in Mexico (light blue line)
- Conimbriga (Portugal) and Lumbini (Nepal)
- Three pyramids in Mexico, Mayapan and Ek’ Balam
- 24 other structures around the world
The question is: What is the probability that 70 of the randomly selected global 538 (ancient) structures are coincidentally oriented to the current geographic pole (within a range of 3 degrees)? To be precise it is 1 to 1.79×1021, which is an incredible small chance.
What does that actually mean? It means that the orientation of a large amount of structures to the geographic North pole is NOT coincidental, hence it was done on purpose. The reason? Why is the White House perfectly cardinally oriented? Or why is the Taj Mahal perfectly cardinally oriented? Or why is the Vatican cardinally oriented? Or why are most observatories cardinally oriented? If you have found out that reason you will start to understand more. That is your homework for this week. 🙂
Thus the orientation of these 70 temples and pyramids was done on purpose, and thus can we say with 100% certainty that the geographic pole is where it is based upon the orientation of these pyramids and temples. It is crucial to grasp this part. We can extend the same methodology to other ancient structures which are not cardinally oriented, and examine how they relate to each other. We appear to be able to distill former geographic poles from the orientation patterns. The powerful mathematics delivers 100% proof of former geographic poles.
Don’t Pick Just Some Buildings
When you want to prove a theory of this magnitude, it makes no sense to pick just some structures. No, the structures you must pick must be monumental, big, ancient, and perhaps religious of nature. Don’t pick just some random buildings, like the Notre Dame in Paris or some other cathedral somewhere.
But did you know that the Vatican is almost perfectly East-West oriented, and therefore oriented to the current geographic poles? Whatever the reason was, it seemed important enough to orient it this way in the middle of a crowded metropolis. The Vatican isn’t on the list however. It’s much too young.
Picking just some church in the middle of a town, proves nothing. The location of the sun and stars didn’t matter for them, let alone the North pole. The church had to be fitted in the spatial possibilities of the city at that time.
The criteria of the ancient sites:
- undoubtedly ancient
- square or rectangular,
- the larger the better (= of more importance),
- preferably isolated (= not influenced in orientation),
- orientation is measurable.
Seemingly Criss-Cross Oriented
During the research there were 4 other orientation clusters found. An orientation cluster is an indication of a possible former geographic pole. But to be more sure about that conclusion much more research was done to verify this. You can read the other articles on this website to get a full picture of the method.
Pyramids from all over the world are oriented to just a few locations that forms clusters on a so called NORTH-SOUTH reference line. This line is explained further on.
Some sites in Mexico comprise a large collection of pyramids that are criss-cross oriented as if they were just dumped down there. But the chance that a few structures on one site cross other alignment cluster(s) is very, very small. It’s almost zero. But if that occurs, it means it was not accidental. The ancient site was reoriented to another pole.
These sites can be interpreted as sites that were rebuilt after a catastrophe – a crustal shift. These structures can tell us an interesting story what might have happened in the past.
The Accuracy of Measurement
We know where the current geographical North pole is. We can measure in Google Earth the angle under which structures were constructed in relation to the geo pole. Thus we can verify the accuracy of our measurements.
The first thing you need to know is how accurately a structure can be measured in Google Earth.
Take for example the Great pyramid of Giza. We know it is perfectly aligned to the geo pole (within ±0.05°). So, we can verify our framework on this.
Experimental measurements on different parts of Giza showed that the average accuracy of measurement of Giza in Google Earth resulted in an error of ±0.20°. The pyramids of Giza are relatively easy to measure; the satellite footage is sharp and the basis of the pyramids are relatively clear.
Choosing the Error of Measurement
There are structures which are harder to measure accurately, because the satellite footage is blurry, or the angle under which the objects were photographed was not vertically (the baseline is the most safe area to measure).
For some of these sites archaeological maps with a North arrow indicator were used as a cross reference to verify the outcomes of the measurement in Google Earth.
Experiments with measurements in Google Earth compared to maps of ancient sites showed a standard deviation of:
- σ=68.2%: ±0.5°
- 2σ=95.4%: ±1.1°
- 3σ=99.7%: ±1.5°
3σ (99.7%) was accepted as reliable enough for the calculations: ±1.5°. This also includes the error of measurement and glitches in the footage. Although Giza could be measured much more exact, only ±1.5° (total angle is 1.5+1.5=3.0°) was accepted as the standard accuracy for the whole project, and that counted for Giza as well.
Accumulation of Errors
When we intend to find former geographical poles, we have to be aware of the possible accumulation of errors, like:
- When the pyramid builders established the geo pole many thousands years ago, they made a little error in their measurements. Even with our GPS systems today we have to deal with a potential error of about ± 15 meters.
- When the pyramid builders constructed their pyramids, they again made a small error between their perception of true North and the actual orientation of the stones.
- When we measure the pyramid many thousands years later, the position of the pyramid might have changed a little bit, due to geological processes, especially when earth crust displacements appear to be real.
- When we measure the pyramid many thousands years later, we again make small errors in our measurements.
It is possible that all these errors cancel each other out and nicely result in some perfection, but it is most likely that we’ll find an erratic pattern of ‘noise’. This noise is the build-up of the above mentioned errors, and is ultimately the root of the sum of squares: the combined error Δn = (√(x12+x22+x32+x42 …+…xn2).
Cardinal Versus Non-cardinal Orientations
Probability That Giza Was Meant to Point North
The chance that one of the pyramids of Giza is coincidentally cardinally oriented is 1 to 30 (90÷3.0).
The chance that all three of them are coincidental oriented to the North pole is almost ZERO. To be exact: 0,0037% ((3.0/90)3 × 100%). So, Giza altogether was no coincidence.
The claim that all three were meant to be oriented to the current geographic pole is 99.9963% sure.
How to Define the Chances on Intentional Orientation
How to Define the Chances on Intentional Orientations
Most pyramids have four sides. Since we don’t know for sure the purpose of a pyramid we cannot discriminate one side over another. So, the angle in which it can be uniquely arranged is 90° (360°÷4). We cannot tell which orientation in regard to the geographic pole has a higher priority, so we can only define a structure 45 degrees left of the geo pole and 45 degrees right of the geo pole. This is the mathematical unambiguous basis for the method.
With the average accuracy of ±1.5° in which we could measure the structures, there are within the angle of 90° 30 discriminating steps, which makes a standard chance of 3.33% in the defined framework that a pyramid is accidentally pointing to the North pole.
There are currently 538 measured structures in the database. Hence there’s a standard chance that 18 of the structures (538×3.33%) are pointing to the North. So, when we find 18 structures clustering within an area of 3 degrees along the intersection line we cannot derive a special status from that. But when this amount of random clustering exceeds for example 30 or even 40, the probability that it is coincidence dives rapidly towards ZERO. We can distill from these combinatorial patterns the ultimate proof that the crust, ultimately the North pole, has shifted and that pyramids are much older.
Why much older? Because such a devastating and catastrophic event wouldn’t have happened completely unnoticed over the last millenniums.
Of the randomly selected structures, there were 70 ancient structures in the database pointing to the current geographical North pole. Like already shown above the chance on mere luck is ZERO.
When another cluster of this magnitude shows up it is surely one of the former North poles, with a certainty of almost 100%. Let’s have a look.
Finding the Other Poles
You can find former geo poles by following the orientation patterns of ancient structures, and calculate the probability that it actually is a former geo pole location. Just follow the patterns of pyramid orientations which are not pointing to the current geo poles.
But since we only know the current geo poles for sure, and we are not sure where to look, it is best to go from coarse to fine. If there are hints that the former geographic North pole might have been on Greenland, the first thing that could be done is looking for the amount of orientations that intersect Greenland as a whole.
The amount of (pyramidal orientations) intersections on Greenland is 230 of the total of 538. The probability for such large amount of data to cluster in such a way is insanely small: 1 to 4.95×10210. We can be very sure that the former geo North pole(s) was somewhere on Greenland. Or better, Greenland was once situated on the geographical North pole. We can claim this with 100% certainty, even if we don’t know anything about geology, archaeology, or some other study. We only need mathematics to find out what is true and what is false.
We don’t know yet where to look on Greenland, but that can be done by following a simple logic. How? By connecting the pyramids by using an ‘independent intermediator’ – the intersection line. This line represents the rough path the pole took over the last 400,000 years.
: n=538; x=230; p=0.24; q=0.76
Creating an Intersection Line Over Greenland
Why Not Connecting Pyramids Directly
It happens often, especially on the internet, that people claim to have found a connection between ancient objects by drawing some lines between them. In most cases that means absolutely nothing, and we cannot draw any conclusions from it.
With 538 pyramids we can have (538-1)2 possible connections. That are 288,369 intersection points. It would be an immense unreadable scatter plot with over 90% of useless noise in it. What conclusions could we draw from that? And why wouldn’t we organize the research logically at first hand?
We can find an intersection point between two of the most enigmatic pyramids on the planet, Teotihuacan and Giza. They intersect near Kongsfjord that lies in Northern Norway. We won’t find anything useful at that location. Maybe even more important, we don’t know why these pyramids and temples were “uncardinally” oriented in the first place.
The intersection line will lead us to groups of pyramids that we can safely connect to eachother, which leads us to a definitive location of a former pole. These pyramids all belong to the same time frame.
Former Pole Locations
How Probability is Determined
On the reference line we found, for example, 52 intersections between latitude 71 and 73. The standard probability is 18 intersections. We can calculate the likelihood that such a large cluster can be formed coincidentally by using the binomial formula.
- n = number of trials = 538
- p = probability of success = 0.03333 (3 degrees out of 90 degrees)
- x = number of successes = 52
P(x) = 1.05×10-11
The probability that a cluster of this magnitude is formed coincidentally is 1 to 95.1 billion. Conversely we can say it is artificially constructed. Why? Because the probability it was intentional is ≈ 100%. All these random distributed ancient structures were clearly pointing to one location, and therefore a former geographic North pole, because the geographic pole is the only transcending geographical feature wherever you are on the globe.
The same situation was emulated by using Monte Carlo simulations, which gave the same results. We can be sure this method expresses this situation correctly.
Intersection Clusters = Proximity of Former Geo North Poles
Intersections with 47.1W Lon line
Probability Former Geo pole
Mathematical Clustering Over Greenland
Intersection Clusters on Greenland
Another thing that becomes clear when we look deeper into this issue; the older the cluster, the larger the area over which a dynamic group is formed. It might sound difficult, but it is easier than it seems. The older the geo pole is where the pyramids were once oriented to, the more deformations the crust had to endure. Plates were apparently deformed and thus also the accuracy of the oriented groups of related pyramids; they form a group over a larger area.
This mechanism shows itself in a larger spread of the oriented pyramid to this ancient geo pole. From this we are able to roughly recalculate the amount of deformation of the tectonic plates due to the crustal shifts.
Greenland went in a few steps over the North pole. It is possible to correlate the magnitude of the steps with the temperature proxies, δD or δ18O, respectively found in ice cores of Vostok and Dome-C (Antarctica). The similarities are clear. From this we can directly derive the time frames of the crustal shifts which are clearly related to the Milankovitch cycles.
The article on the main page tells the full essence of the theory.
© 2016, 2017 by Buildreps
First published: February 21, 2016