The amount of non-cardinal orientated temples and pyramids in Latin-America, from Mexico down to Peru, is often attributed as the result of a possible orientation to the magnetic pole. It is argued in several researches (Fuson 1969, Carlson 1975, Klokočník, 2010) that structures could have been oriented by means of a lodestone compass or a similar instrument.
However, by gathering and analyzing 157 separate sites in Latin-America, from Mexico down to Peru, it appears there is, in contrast to former researches, no distinct relation to be found between orientation and the location of the wandering magnetic pole (McElhinny and McFadden, 2000).
Over 90% of the ancient sites in Latin-America are oriented East of True North (clockwise oriented), which cannot be caused by coincidence or topography. That made researchers believe magnetic compasses could have been used to orient the structures. Because the magnetic pole wanders around the geographic pole, when using a compass this could be the cause of such a deviant orientation.
A square or rectangle building can be uniquely oriented within a range of 90°. We cannot know other than as an assumption which side of a pyramid or temple is the main side. It is assumptive to argue that an alleged main side of a temple was for example oriented to the East of the rising Sun. These kind of assumptions pollutes many of the researches done in this field making most conclusion useless. Therefore is this research solely focused on the orientation of the Latin-American pyramids and temples as a square or rectangle in regard to the cardinals, without making assumptions towards the conclusions.
There is no correlation found between orientation of the Latin-American pyramids and temples and the wandering magnetic pole. This research concludes that the Latin-American pyramids and temples were oriented to an astronomical or geological phenomenon other than the wandering magnetic pole.
The pyramids of Giza are all three very precisely oriented to the cardinals, and therefore ultimately to the geographic North pole. Egyptologists have oversimplified methods to explain how the builders must have done this. But while doing so they overlooked a few crucial topics which makes their work more amateurish and unscientific than it appears at first hand.
How Did They Do It?
There are in the mainstream circles two competing ideas as to how the builders of the pyramids of Giza might have aligned their tall structures so accurately, within 0.06° to True North.
The proposed methods are:
Indian Circle Method,
Pole Star Method.
The question of the precise orientation of the pyramids to the cardinals seems to be solved already long time ago. On top of that it is said that orienting that accurate is not such a big thing. So what’s the point of this article? The point is that the widely accepted theories are based on false assumptions and wrong ideas, and therefore must be labeled as the work of amateurs. It is this work of amateurs that has become the standard – a believe system.
The proposed methods by archaeologists are based on what the “Egyptians” were supposed to know about devices, instruments, methods, and mathematics. They lived in the Bronze age and there were no devices found, so archaeologists started to speculate wildly within their constrained paradigm. Many experiments are performed to “simulate” the Egyptians’ method with simple tools.
Achieving such high accuracies with large structures cannot be done with the simple proposed tools. This article will disprove the presented methods with facts.
Both methods will be discussed in this article. But we will first tackle the two most important starting positions which are wrong in the ruling theories.
The Indian Circle Method in Short
What is Wrong in the Ruling Theories?
There are basically two important issues neglected in the currently ruling theories, which are:
the original orientation of the pyramids at the time they were supposed to be built. The Nubian plate (African plate) on which the pyramids are built moves a little bit. It moves counterclockwise and the pyramids are slightly counterclockwise oriented. So, there’s clearly a point of correction. The question is only how much? Valuing these tiny movements is important because they add a significant portion to the current deviation of the pyramids.
archaeologists measure the specs of the pyramids as built but only after 4,500 years, and base their theories upon it without giving it a second thought. Any measuring device must be more accurate than the process requirements, at least by a factor of two. The general accepted international standard is a ratio of 4 to 1, meaning that the equipment must be 4 times as accurate as the manufacturing process requirements itself, in order to prevent out of spec errors in the end products. For gauges even counts a ratio of 10 to 1. We can easily see that archaeologists have insufficient knowledge of this subject while constructing their theories.
These are the two most important issues which are neglected when archaeologists reconstruct the builders’ surveying and building methods. We will examine how these two very important issues must have impacted the builders’ processes.
Nubian Plate Movements
We can estimate the amount of rotation the Nubian (African) plate has made since the time the pyramids were built. The results differ depending on which plate tectonics model we use. Note that the different models generate different results (!). After studying on this issue we’ve chosen to use HS2-NUVEL1 as the reference. This model generates for the Nubian plate the following data:
Location of Interest: 29.979°, 31.134°
Location Euler Pole: -5.50°, 3.60°
Angular velocity: -13.0″/kyears
Direction = -48.9 degree
To understand how the African plate has moved relative to the geographic pole, and so the pyramids as well, you need absolute data. It is the best data we can get for this purpose.
The conclusion is that the Nubian plate rotated 59″ counterclockwise since the time the pyramids were built. The pyramids are nowadays aligned at -205″ relative to True North, the geographic pole. So, based on the calculated tectonic plate movement we can conclude that the pyramids were aligned within a range of error of: -205 + 59 = -146″ (or 0.041° West of North).
Like already mentioned before was their surveying instrument at least 2 to 4 times as accurate as the errors we observe in the building’s orientation. That means that the builders used an instrument able to detect True North within 0.01 to 0.02° (or 36″ to 72″), which is just beyond the angular resolution of the human eye. Compare it with a sniper hitting a basketball at a distance of 1 kilometer. Show us one ancient instrument able to do that. Not only that, you must reproduce that also three times.
How Plate Movements Affected the Current Orientation
Theoretical Age of Pyramids at Breakeven Point
The pyramids of Giza were never reliably dated, so the first grandiose assumption was already made by pinpointing them at about 4560 years old. Because radiocarbon datings are pointing to an older age, it forced archaeologists to construct difficult theories how that could have happened, because it contradicts the time the alleged builder of the great pyramid, pharaoh Khufu (Cheops), reigned over Egypt.
What would you trust more, scripture or mathematics? Graffiti or Numbers?
By using the movement of the Nubian plate, we can calculate a theoretical breakeven point date at: 205 ÷ 13 ≈ 15,800 years. The age of the pyramids could be well around 15,800 years.
There is a good reason why we should take this date seriously, which is the following: if you are able to built something that withstood “4,500 years” of environmental influences like earthquakes and floods, and still stand that tall and accurately like it obviously still does, then what might have prevented them to built with almost 0 tolerance?
In a future article we will show the mathematical likelihood for this date to be accurate and true based on a set of converging data.
Indian Circle Method
The bar, to detect True North, is set at 0.02° or 72″. Without making too much fuzz about the Indian Circle Method, we can say this method is good for finding North during bush camping. When we use this method we accumulate in about 8 steps so much errors that we are able to find North within ±2°. A well trained professional might be able to achieve outliers within ±1°. When we repeat this method 3 times we have to count with errors that lie between ±2-3°. It is simply impossible to orient within an accuracy of less than 0.02° with this primitive method.
It’s a troubling idea that archaeologists who regard themselves as objective scientists are not able to understand these basic principles.
This method is accurate enough to align just a building close to the cardinals or for finding your way in the wild. But to explain the orientation of the pyramids with this method is amateurish.
We accumulate at least 8 errors in the following procedures:
levelness of surface,
verticality of pole,
registering 1st point,
registering 2nd point,
drawing line between two points,
finding midst on line,
drawing line between mid pole and mid line,
copying the direction of that line to the actual building process.
Pole Star Method
The Pole Star Method is in principle the same as the Indian Circle Method only with the differences that it is performed at night and it is more accurate because it more directly aims at the virtual spin axis of the Earth, the geographic pole. Because the Pole Star is never exactly on top of the spin axis so to speak, are we also relying on a division step similar as with the Indian Circle Method (step #6).
The Pole Star Represents the Spin Axis
This method is about 2 times more accurate as the Indian Circle Method, because it cuts the first four steps. A well trained professional could be able to find North somewhere between ±0.25° to ±0.5°. But the difficulty is to displace that direction to the actual construction.
Let’s assume this last step takes place with 0 error, which in fact will never happen, we are still left in the best case with a method that’s even unable to measure the current orientation of the pyramids with a factor of 5 to 10, let alone to be able to serve as a master measuring device. According to the international standards the device must be able to measure within ±0.02°. Even if we don’t correct the Nubian plate movements, we will still end up close to the aforementioned ±0.02°. That is not something you can do with just sticks, stones, and some ropes. For that you will need something far more advanced.
On top of that, when archaeologists construct their theories they are accompanied with advanced theodolites which the “Egyptians” weren’t suppose to have to confirm their surveying.
Which device they might have used? That questionis still open to any speculation. I know the answer to that. Do you?
: The standard for the uncertainty of measurements is defined as the root ofthe sum of the squares, for example √(a2+b2+c2+d2+e2). The sum as a whole determines the accuracy of the measuring process.This is the international standard as accepted by the BIPM.
For example, we want to measure the diameter of a aluminum disk which has the specifications ∅498±0.02 mm. We measure the disk with a micrometer which has the following specifications and influences: a. uncertainty micrometer 5μm; b. uncertainty calibration 6μm; c. temperature variations 10μm; d. placement errors 5μm; e. reading error 2μm. Sum = 190 ⇒ √190 = 13.8μm. Process = 13.8÷5 = 2.76 times less accurate as the instrument itself
This simple example shows why we are not dealing solely with the instrument itself but with the measuring process as a whole. The final result, which is the final orientation of the pyramids as built must be back-engineered by using this method.
: The mentioned data are converted from relative data to absolute data. The alleged absolute methods like NNR-NUVEL-1, NNR-NUVEL-1A, HS3-NIVEL-1A, and NNR-MORVEL are absolute in relation to the so called hotspot frames, which are active volcanic areas, like Hawaii and Iceland. The reason why we don’t use these methods is because they make the assumption that these hotspot don’t move.
: The location of Giza is close to a vault zone with the Arabian plate, which makes this part of the African plate less stable. The Egyptian Mountain Ranges are a result from the push of the vault zone between the African plate and Arabian plate.
This is the first video in a series of videos. The series is a precursor of the book “Atlantis is Here”. The video starts with the simple question why Greenland is covered in ice. This simple question has never been sufficiently answered by mainstream science.
New, ground breaking research has found out that Earth Crust Shifts, Ice Ages, and ancient structures like pyramids and temples are intimately entangled. This new theory proves mathematically 4 former geographic poles with certainties of 99.99% and higher.
The crust never shifted so wildly as Hapgood suggested in his theory. The earth had major shifts over the last 340,000 years. Hapgood also suggested that the crust shifted in the longitudinal direction. That also didn’t took place.
The crust shifted in the latitudinal direction, which is a direct cause of the fact that earth is a rotating sphere, similar as a spinning top which reacts on an external force. This external force is a high eccentric orbit around the Sun, which causes a large tidal oscillation. That is the reason why the curves of eccentricity and ice ages fit one on one onto each other.
New research proves that most pyramids and temples around the world were built before fatal earth crust shifts. The orientation of large amounts of pyramids reveal former geographic poles. The proof has been delivered mathematically that the correlations are coincidental. Most pyramids are much older than always was assumed, way beyond our imagination.
Common Used Dating Methods
Determining the age of a pyramid is not as simple as it appears to many people. Most people believe that archaeologists are absolutely right in their conclusions. But stones cannot be dated to determine the age of the structure, because what the researchers will find is the formation date of the rock material itself, and not when the stones were piled on top of each other.
Scientists believe they have found a reliable way to date stone structures, while they only make associative, assumptive and subjective connections between the organic materials found in and around the buildings. They claim it is reliable, while there’s no way for anyone to validate that claim. We cannot associate one thing to another with absolute certainty.
And that appears to be the major problem in dating any stone structure: validation of the dating methods. There is not a single validation possible to back up any of the claims. Archaeology is very sure about their methods, but a new mathematical dating method suggests that all datings of ancient structures which have been done of the last decades are incorrect.
The most common way is to Carbon date organic artefacts left by ‘builders’ found inside and around pyramids, or organic materials that slipped between the stones. This method of dating is believed to be fairly accurate. It is often claimed as ‘evidence’ of the age of the structure. That appears to be a major mistake.
What is Evidence?
According to the Oxford dictionaries can evidence be defined as: the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
The words ‘scientific evidence’ are often misused to emphasize a certain belief or to label a certain theory.
We believe that the sun and the moon are the cause of tides on earth. But how do we know that for sure? The only evidence we have are clear patterns between the moon phases, orbits and the tides. From that we are able to develop a theory which predicts what will happen next. When we can verify it multiple times with our senses, we might become more certain the theory is complete and correct.
Proof is the final verdict that removes all doubts whereas evidence only leads one in the direction of a fact or statement. The foundations of pyramids are hundreds of thousands of years old: mathematically proven.
Classifying Pyramids in Time Frames
If we can relate pyramids around the world somehow, can we then classify them in a certain time frame? Yes, it appears we can. And this is the first step to take before we dive into the intimidating mathematicaldetails. We can do that by analyzing the orientation patterns of pyramids spread around the world.
Analyzing the orientation of more than 535 pyramids and temples around the world, made it possible to classify the foundations within certain time frames. The biblical and mythical deluges and the Ice Ages appear to be one and the same event as you will see further on in this article. And it even happened more than once in history.
The occurrence of multiple deluges are also to be found in the translations of the Sumerian tablets. The time frames which are written down in the tablets appear to correlate one on one with the mathematical time frame.
Deluges and Crustal Shifts Are One and the Same Event
Is there evidence for a Deluge? Yes, there is in fact overwhelming evidence for a Great Flood. If we just look at the effects the melting water of the great ice sheets had on the coastlines some 12,000 years ago. All coastlines were flooded around the world because of this melting water.
The sea level rose about 120 meters. There are so many sunken cities all around the planet that it’s easy to understand they are older than 12,000 years. If you imagine that today, this would affect more than 60% of the Human population around the world.
Virtually all cultures speak about deluges in their sagas. Whatever scholars want to say about sagas, or even ridicule them, they hold a deep hidden truth in them. As I will show in this series of articles, the most probable cause of the floods were Earth Crust Shifts. Every shift marks the beginning of a new ice age.
It appears that because pyramids are square they can be used to find mathematical patterns in their orientation, especially when we examine them worldwide at a large scale.
Note: with North pole is always meant the geographical North pole. The theory of Earth Crust Shifts is not dealing about the magnetic poles. The geographical pole is the rotation axis of the earth.
Orientation of Giza
The statement that the pyramids of Giza are oriented to the current North pole (cardinally oriented) doesn’t knock people off their feet anymore. More important to know is that Giza is oriented to the current geographic North pole and therefore built after the Great Flood.
A Great Flood which was caused by an Earth Crust Shift which ushered the beginning of the last ice age.
There’s no doubt about the classification of these pyramids: they were built after the latest crustal shift. Which can be interpreted as after the Great Flood. The time frame we have here to classify Giza is between the current estimations, which is 4,500 years, and 26,000 years. That means that nothing which is precisely oriented to our current geographic pole is older than 26,000 years.
Finding Our Current Geo Pole: How Triangulation Works
Pyramids at Xi’an, China
China has over 300 pyramids which are oriented in just a few groups. Most of the pyramids can be found in the center of China, near Xi’an.
These are real pyramids, that’s for sure. It took scientists many centuries to figure this out. They call them “tombs”, because we’re simply groping in the dark what they were used for. There are people who suggest they were used to focus energy, but that’s all very hard for anyone to verify.
The pyramids in China are massively oriented in just a few different configurations:
Oriented to the current North pole;
Oriented at an angle of about -8° (to Greenland);
Oriented at an angle of about -14 to -15°.
Why are they oriented like this? The precision of the ones which are oriented to the current geographic pole is so precise that the other ones which were oriented towards to Greenland suggest it was not something coincidental. But to prove this requires much more than just a few of these Chinese pyramids. That’s why we collected as much data as we could possibly find.
The 8 degrees oriented Chinese pyramids cluster on a massive scale to the same area as the pyramids of Latin America, and form a enormous mathematical node. The odds for this node to be coincidental, which we’ve named Pole II, is 1 to 2.98×1016, which is incredibly high.
Pole II for example is proven with 100% accuracy and certainty.
Orientation of Chinese Pyramids
These different orientations of the Chinese pyramids imply that this culture has survived an Earth Crust Displacement. Crustal displacements moved the geographical North pole on Greenland to its current location. Greenland moved to an area where it would start to melt very slowly.
There are pyramids in China which were built before the Great Flood and after the Great Flood. This cultures somehow survived it, adapted to it, and built another series of pyramids oriented to the new, current geo pole.
This would mean that the ones oriented to the current North pole are of the same time frame as the ones of Giza, younger than 26,000 years. But the other ones oriented under an angle of 8° are therefore older than 130,000 years. Yes, there is a huge gap between the stable periods of the geographic pole. The migration of a geographic pole took tens of thousands of years and wiped many advanced civilizations off the face of the Earth.
Is this why this culture is so advanced in medicine, religion, philosophy and many other areas, because it’s so old and the traditions survived the Great Flood?
The whole perspective becomes more interesting when we go to Mexico.
Locations of Some Chinese Pyramids
Oriented to Current Pole (0°)
Oriented to Greenland (8°)
34°23’53″N / 108°42’44″E
34°21’48″N / 108°37’51″E
34°23’26″N / 108°44’21″E
34°21’43″N / 108°38’26″E
34°24’03″N / 108°45’53″E
34°20’18″N / 108°34’10″E
Pyramids of Teotihuacan, Mexico
One of the most important aspects of scientific evidence is that it is reproducible and verifiable. It’s even better when everyone can look over your shoulder what it is what you’re doing, and talks in simple language.
When we draw a line from the pyramids in China (oriented at 8°) and the pyramids of Teotihuacan in Mexico, the lines will intersect each other on Greenland. This is reproducible and verifiable by anyone who has access to Google Earth. The question we could ask ourselves: what could this mean?
Read in this case the article “Why is Greenland Covered in Ice?” again, and the penny might drop that the pyramids of Mexico and these ones of China are both constructed beforethe Great Flood. These pyramids were built when the North pole was still on Greenland, and that is a very long time ago.
The crust appears to have shifted like Hapgood suggested only in another way, that is to say latitudinal. The crust didn’t shift as wildly as Hapgood suggested. It shifted slowly over a period of tens of thousands of years. The cultures that built these pyramids are much older than we ever imagined possible. But that would explain a lot, wouldn’t it?
How Teotihuacan and Pyramid Wu of Han Intersect at Greenland
Verification Data of Intersection Point
China (Wu of Han)
Mexico (Sun Pyramid)
The More Intersections, the More Proof
Just a few intersections like shown above proves nothing. It could be just luck. To rule out any coincidence, the data of 538* ancient constructions and sites were examined and extensively processed. The results are staggering. It smashes all believes about the ancient past in relation to the Earth to pieces.
Since there was already a hunch that Greenland was once located on the North pole, we drew a line over Greenland from the current North pole to the current South pole, at a longitude of 45°W, and calculated roughly the amount of intersections with that reference line. The results were spectacular. Later in the process the exact longitude of this line was calculated to be at a longitude of 47.1°W. The results along this line were even much better.
Former geographic poles revealed themselves sharply at a few locations on Greenland. The probability of this event can be calculated by using the binomial formula. With the used data set, and with the amount of found intersections, the probability on mere chance is less than 0.000000001%. The probability that it was done on purpose, and that it was therefore the formergeographic North pole is certain for more than 99.999999999%.
In scientific terms: we can be sure this is true, which has a very deep impact. As you will see, a puzzle starts to fall into place.
The Earth’s crust has shifted in the past, when the civilizations who built ancient pyramids and temples were already present. We are not speaking of a few thousand years ago. We are speaking of periods of hundreds of thousands of years.
* February 2018
The Earth’s Crust Has Shifted Multiple Times in the Past
We can safely claim that Greenland was on the North pole, without having any geological knowledge or evidence. We don’t even have to go anywhere. We don’t need to walk on pyramids, or on glaciers, or to be a specialist in any of these areas. We even don’t need a shred of ‘evidence’. We can now understand why Greenland is melting, and why we find so many mysterious sites around the world, and why these cultures disappeared.
In the book which is currently in the making under the working title “Atlantis is Here”, is the location of this intersection line calculated at a precise location of 47.091°W, for the ease of communication: 47.1°W. It is in this article too far fetched to explain how this figure is accomplished.
The book won’t expose you, like scientists love to do, to intimidating mathematical equations which forms the basis of this new theory. But if you are interested in it, there will be extensive appendices in the book dedicated to the mathematics behind it together with tons of data.
Reference Line to Measure the Amount of Intersections
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:
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:
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.