There are many ancient monuments and sites oriented to the current geographic pole and this is called cardinal alignment or cardinal orientation. But what does it mean when more than 80% of the ancient monuments like pyramids and temples are not oriented to the current geographical pole? What is it that archaeologists and geologists have categorically overlooked?
Why Are Temples and Pyramids Cardinally Oriented?
Around the world, there are many ancient structures, such as pyramids and temples, that are positioned in such a way that their footprint points precisely to the current North pole.
Most of the temples and pyramids were built in the middle of nowhere.
What would you do if you had the freedom to position a pyramid anyhow and anywhere? Unless you have no idea what you are doing, there is only one logical answer to that question: You would orient it to the geographical pole.
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 phenomena in the sky, you must point your instrument to the only sure point – the rotation axis of the earth. This would be the geographical North pole, or the South pole if you happen to live on the Southern hemisphere. If you do not do that, you will introduce another variable into the equations, and that makes them much harder to solve.
It is also evident that there may be many other structures of importance that are oriented to the geographical North pole without a clear reason. Pure symmetry between sunrise and sunset might have been one of these reasons. We happen to love the sun for many different reasons.
This article might be difficult for many readers. When you can work your way through it, you will probably become aware that our history, the way it was taught to us, is very much in error.
Earth crust shifts are real, and pyramids are much, much older than we are led to believe. By using mathematics, our real history reveals itself without any doubt whatsoever.
Orientation of the Largest Cathedrals in the World
How Mathematics Proves Our History is Wrongly Interpreted
What does it mean when most 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 Greenland was the location of former (geographic) North poles. The structures that are oriented to these former poles are therefore older than assumed by archaeologists. Why?
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 not talking here about just a few thousand years. No, we are talking about hundreds of thousands of years. The foundations of most pyramids are older than 100,000 years. Their top layers might have been renovated many times – but the orientation was invariably left intact.
This claim is extraordinary, the proof is extraordinary as well. The mathematics behind the proof is extremely accurate and will be published in a book that is currently in the making.
Orientation of Important Observatories in the World
Belief is Strong
Belief systems resist change. We invariably believe that history, as it is taught to us, is correct. Even when mathematics proves that what we have been taught is wrong, we tend to keep believing that the history, as it was pounded into our brains, is correct.
This is what we call conditioning. A conditioned mind has trouble to interpret outcomes of mathematics that deviate from the programmed beliefs. No matter how solid the proof is, we tend to fall back into our old beliefs of the trusty old paradigm. To get used to another idea and to muster the will to overcome denial takes much time and effort.
Temples and Pyramids Exactly Oriented to the Current North Pole (Fig 1)
- 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 Guatemala +3 other structures in Mexico (light blue line)
- Conimbriga (Portugal) and Lumbini (Nepal)
- Three pyramids in Mexico, Mayapan and Ek’ Balam
- 30 other structures around the world
Total: 76 structures
The question is: What is the probability that 76 of the randomly selected global 592 (ancient) structures are coincidentally oriented to the current geographic pole (within a range of 3 degrees)? The probability is 1 to 4.20×1022, which is an incredibly small chance that this is the result of some coincidental process.
What does that mean? It means that the orientation of many structures to the geographic North pole is NOT coincidental. Hence, it was done intentionally. The reason? Why is the White House perfectly oriented to the Cardinals? Or why is the Taj Mahal perfectly cardinally oriented? Or why is the Vatican cardinally oriented? Or why are most observatories cardinally oriented?
We can be sure that the orientation of these 76 temples and pyramids was done on purpose, and therefore we can say with 100% certainty that the geographic pole is where the orientation of these pyramids and temples is based upon. 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. With our method, we are able to discern former geographic poles from the orientation patterns of these ancient structures. Our powerful mathematical method delivers 100% proof of former geographic poles.
Structures of Power Are Often Cardinally Oriented
Do not Select Just Any Buildings
When you want to prove a theory of this magnitude, it makes no sense to pick just any structures. No, the structures you must pick need to be monumental, big, ancient, imposing, and perhaps religious in nature. You would not want to pick some random buildings, such as the Notre Dame in Paris or another cathedral somewhere.
Did you know that the Vatican is almost perfectly East-West oriented, and therefore oriented to the current geographic pole? Whatever the reason was, it seemed important enough to orient it this way in the middle of a crowded metropolis. But the Vatican is not on our list – it is much too young.
Selecting just a random church in the middle of a town proves nothing. The location of the sun and stars did not matter for them, let alone the North pole. The church had to be placed in the spatial limitations of its surroundings at that time.
Our criteria for selecting ancient sites:
- undoubtedly ancient
- square or rectangular
- the larger the better (= of more importance)
- preferably isolated (= not influenced in orientation)
- orientation is measurable.
After years of hard work, we have been able to allocate around 600 ancient sites spread around the world. Every ancient monument or site is carefully administrated with location data, orientations and calculations. The latest LIDAR scans in Guatemala have revealed massive ancient cities with pyramids and temples which are without exception oriented as we have predicted with our method. We have dated these cities with our method to be much older than archaeology have been telling us. In fact, they belong to one of the many Lost Civilizations.
Seemingly Criss-Cross Oriented
During our research, we found 4 other orientation clusters. An orientation cluster is an indication of a possible former geographic pole. To be certain about the validity of individual clusters, much more research was done to come to an ironclad conclusion. You might want to read the other articles on this website to get a full picture of the method we used.
Pyramids from all over the world are oriented to just a few locations that form data clusters on a so-called NORTH-SOUTH reference line. This line is explained further on in this article.
Some sites in Mexico comprise a large collection of pyramids that are criss-cross oriented as if they were just dumped somewhere. But the chance that a few structures on one site cross other alignment clusters is very, very small. It is almost zero. But if that occurs, it means it was not accidental. Some of the structures on the ancient site were 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 located. In Google Earth we can measure the angle of orientation with which structures were built in relation to the geo pole. In this way, 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 almost perfectly aligned to the geo pole (within ±0.05°). So, we can base our methodology 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 bases of the pyramids are relatively clear.
Choosing the Error of Measurement
There are structures which are more difficult to measure accurately because of a blurry satellite footage, or the angle under which the objects were photographed was not vertical (the baseline is the safest 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 exactly, 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 must be aware of the possible accumulation of errors, such as:
- When the pyramid builders established the geo pole many thousands of years ago, they made a little error in their measurements. Even with our GPS systems today we must 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 of years later, the position of the pyramid might have changed a little bit, due to geological processes, especially when earth crust displacements appeared to be at work.
- When we measure the pyramid many thousands of years later, we again make small errors in our measurements.
It is possible that all these errors cancel each other out and nicely turn out to be perfect, but it is most likely that we will find an erratic pattern of ‘noise’. This noise is the accumulation 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 oriented cardinally by coincidence is 1 to 30 (90÷3.0).
The chance that all three of them are coincidentally oriented to the North pole is almost ZERO. To be exact: 0,0037% ((3.0/90)3 × 100%). Therefore, Giza’s orientation was certainly 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 Orientations
Most pyramids have four sides. Since we do not know for certain 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 regarding the geographic pole has a higher priority, so we can only define structures 45 degrees left of the geo pole and 45 degrees to the right of the geo pole. This is the mathematical unambiguous basis for our method.
With the average accuracy of ±1.5° with which we could measure our chosen structures, there are certain discriminating steps within the angle of 90° 30 which creates a standard chance of 3.33% in the defined methodology that a pyramid is accidentally pointing to the North pole.
There are currently 592 measured structures in our database. Hence, it follows that we can count on a standard chance that 19.7 of these structures (592×3.33%) are pointing North. Thus, when we find 20 structures clustering within an area of 3 degrees along the intersection line we cannot claim a special status based on that. But when this number of random clustering approaches 40, 50 or even 60, the probability of coincidence rapidly diminishes towards ZERO. We can distill from these combined patterns the conclusive 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 would not have happened completely unnoticed over the last several millennia.
Of the randomly selected structures, there were 76 ancient structures in the database pointing to the current geographical North pole. As we have already shown above, the chance for this to be 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 us have a look.
Finding the Other Poles
We can find former geo poles by following the orientation patterns of ancient structures and by calculating the probability that it is a former geo pole location. We 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 uncertain 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 to look for the number of orientations that intersect on Greenland as a whole.
The number of (ancient structural orientations) intersections on Greenland is 260 of the total of 592. The probability for such large amount of data to cluster in such a way is insanely small: 1 to 1.40×1019. We can be very confident that a former geo North pole was somewhere on Greenland. Or better, Greenland was once situated on a former geographical North pole. We can claim this with 100% certainty, even if we do not know anything about geology, archaeology, or some other scientific discipline. We do not have to drill holes and do all sorts of fanciful looking expensive research. We only need mathematics to find the highest potential of truth.
We do not know yet where to look on Greenland. That can be done by following simple logic. How? By connecting the pyramids by using an ‘independent intermediator’ – an intersection line. This line represents the rough path the pole took over the last 400,000 years.
: n=592; x=260; p=0.24; q=0.76
Creating an Intersection Line Over Greenland
Why Not Connect 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 that.
With 592 pyramids we can have ½×(5922-592) potential unique connections. There is however not always a connection point formed between two structures, simply because there is no mathematical solution. With 174,936 potential intersection points, it would be an immensely unreadable scatter plot with over 90% of useless noise in it. We have nevertheless done all these researches, which you can find on our website. Our research is vast and deep, and we are still extending our research because we have found the ultimate key to so many questions.
We can find an intersection point between two of the most enigmatic pyramids on the planet, Teotihuacan, and Giza. They intersect near Kongsfjord located in Northern Norway. We will find nothing useful at that location. Perhaps even more importantly, we would not know why these pyramids and temples were “un-cardinally” oriented, to begin with.
The intersection lines of ancient structural orientations will lead to clusters of pyramids that we can safely group together leading to a definitive location of a former pole, a node of sorts. We can calculate the probability of such a node to formed coincidentally. All the pyramids clustering around the same node belong to the same period.
Former Pole Locations
How Probability is Determined
For example, on the reference line, we found 58 intersections between latitude 71 and 73. The standard probability is 20 intersections. We can calculate the likelihood that such a large cluster can be formed coincidentally by using the binomial formula.
- n = number of trials = 592
- p = probability of success = 0.03333 (3 degrees out of 90 degrees)
- x = number of successes = 58
P(x) = 4.31×10-13
The probability that a data cluster of this magnitude is formed coincidentally is 1 to 2.32 trillion. Conversely, we can say it is artificially constructed. Why? Because the probability it was intentional is ≈ 100%. All these randomly distributed ancient structures were clearly pointing to one location, namely to a former geographic North pole because the geographic pole is the only transcending geographical feature wherever you are on the globe at any given time.
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
|Latitude||Intersections with 47.1W Lon line||Probability Former Geo pole|
Mathematical Clustering Over Greenland
Intersection Clusters on Greenland
Another item 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 to which certain pyramids were once oriented, 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 can approximately recalculate the amount of deformation of the tectonic plates due to the crustal shifts.
Crustal shifts enabled Greenland to migrate in several 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 this theory and its exciting discovery.
© 2015 – 2018 by Mario Buildreps et al.
Proofreading and editing: J.B.