Second Sphinx Exposed In Egypt?

There are a number of features hidden within ancient Egypt, many areas across the plateau, that one is unlikely to be taught an accurate account of by any tour guide or academic alike. Not only do these features escape modern understanding, but, as our argument strengthens, in regards to our posit of there having been past yet once highly advanced and thus incredibly capable ancient civilizations having once flourished not only across ancient Egypt, but many other parts of the world as well. One cannot disagree. Ancient Egypt, with its enormous pyramids, and indeed their guardian the Sphinx, are clearly some of, if not the most impressive ancient ruins still in existence on our ancient planet. Yet our next feature of interest could, in all possibility, begin the rewriting of massive chapters of our already claimed as concluded historical human studies of antiquity. We have previously covered the intriguing ruin of yet another Sphinx found in Pakistan. However, would one be surprised to hear of a possible doppelganger? Another Sphinx? Once of the same scale as our long-claimed sole pyramidal guardian? A Sphinx that can actually be found upon the plateau itself? Yet due to the extraordinary age which the sculpture clearly is, along with the possibility that this second Sphinx had likely remained submerged within the sands of time throughout Giza's re-inhabitation, one which we claim is academically used to pin the creation of the plateau on a more recent permitted ancestor. According to a Dr. Rita Abdel-Halim, who previously published an article titled, A Second Sphinx at Giza Plateau, both Sphinxes are located on the west bank. The first Sphinx is considered as the guardian of the plateau. However, the second Sphinx is located in the southern area of the causeway, leading to the pyramid of King Khafre. On the north side of the second Sphinx, one can see the tombs of King Khafre's children, and on the south, the tombs of Queen Kentkaos, wife of the King Khafre and mother of King Mekernos. Measurement of the second Sphinx indicate it was once a near-carbon copy of our long-claimed sole guardian, long academically argued as the one and only Great Sphinx of Egypt. Both Sphinxes have a length of about 73 meters, from front paws to tails. The length of the still-surviving front legs of the second Sphinx is 15 meters, and the width of the whole body is 19.3 meters when measured on the surface. However, after the hopeful cleaning and subsequent exposure of the area surrounding the second Sphinx, the doctor believes that measurements might indeed change. How could we ever be expected to believe such limited views of Earth's history? Views such as that of the mainstream paradigm, which is consistently funded and constantly peddling deliberately ignorant, incredibly biased, conformist selective beliefs, now the cornerstones of many institutions. Our history is for all, and we all deserve the truth. It is a journey of discovery, which we find highly compelling. In our last video, we explored the astonishing discovery recently made upon the Giza Plateau. Hidden in plain sight, another Great Sphinx. However, this doppelganger of the better-known, long-claimed sole guardian of the Great Pyramids, seemingly possesses a greater level of undiluted erosion, indicative of both sculptures' tremendous age. The questions are, however, just how great is their age? How long have the Sphinx, or indeed the Great Pyramids, been here on our planet? Furthermore, the tremendous levels of erosion seen on the pyramids themselves. Not only do the pyramids display a level of erosion, indicative of a prehistoric timeline, but they have seen many additional efforts, by a number of now-lost civilizations, each far more capable in regards to stonework than the modern man, created a number of layers of far less eroded casing stones, each displaying a varying age, this evidence indicative of several attempts at conservation. These factors all but support the following posit, made by a number of researchers, all claiming that the Sphinx, and indeed, we feel, the pyramids themselves, are in actuality as much as 800,000 years old. The most recent studies were surprisingly presented at the International Conference of Geoarchaeology and Archaeomineralogy held in Sofia, titled Geological Aspect of the Problem of Dating the Great Egyptian Sphinx Construction. The authors of this paper, mainstream scientist Manichev Vacheslav from the Institute of Environmental Geochemistry of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, and Alexander G. Parkhomenko, Institute of Geography of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, have blown the whistle regarding what we have supported for a number of years. The starting point of these two experts is the paradigm shift which has been initiated within the, quote, debate, which has been intended to overcome the orthodoxy within Egyptology, referring to the possible remote origins of the Egyptian civilization, and, on the other, physical evidence of water erosion present at the monuments of the Giza Plateau, which, although suspiciously mainstream researchers such as West and Scoche have made over the years, specifically titles the water erosion controversy, which deliberately overlooked that the Sphinx, having once been recorded as having been surrounded by a body of water, namely Anabas Lake, meaning that the enclosure was once designed with the intent of holding water, itself in turn concealing the Sphinx's possible true identity. Instead, focuses on the erosion clearly made by rainfall and ancient water levels, features we indeed claim were later additions. According to Manichev and Parkhomenko, quote, the problem of dating the Great Pyramid Sphinx construction is still valid despite the long-term history of its research. Geological approaches and other scientific methods permits us to answer the question about the relative age of the Sphinx. The conducted visual investigation of the Sphinx allowed the conclusion regarding the important role of water from large bodies which partially flooded the monument, with the formation of wave-cut hollows on its vertical walls. The morphology of these formations has an analogy with similar such hollows, formed by the sea in the coastal zones. Genetic resemblance of the compared erosion forms and the geological structure and petrographic composition of sedimentary rock complexes leads to the conclusion of the existence of long-lived freshwater lakes within various periods of the Lower Pleistocene era. These lakes were distributed in the territories adjacent to the Nile. The absolute mark of the upper large erosion hollow of the Sphinx corresponds to the level of water surface which took place in this early Pleistocene age." End quote. A link to the research can be found in the script. It is a vindicating exposure of ours and others' work, one which we find highly compelling. Many of you will be aware of the interstellar traveler which visited our Solar System from a galaxy far, far away a few years ago. Named Oumuamua, it is now recognized as the first known interstellar object ever successfully detected as it passed through our Solar System. Formally designated 1-2017-U1, it was discovered on the 19th of October 2017 by Robert Work while using the Pan-STARRS telescope at the Haleakala Observatory within Hawaii. He spotted the mysterious object 40 days post-solar transit on the 9th of September that year. Many people have wondered about the true origins and indeed true identity of the object. Yet few have received the backlash which Avi Loeb experienced on November of 2018 when he published a new research paper in an astrophysics journal. Scientists publish thousands of research papers every year. These papers will often attract little public attention. However, Loeb's latest work gained a suspiciously high level of controversy and rejection when he dared to cover the rather taboo subject within this so-called official field – aliens. The subject of the paper was the mysterious supposed space rock. He posits that it likely traveled for billions of years past countless other stars before reaching our own. Eventually, it will cross the edge of our Solar System and into interstellar space again. The leading hypothesis among astronomers is that Oumuamua is an odd-looking comet, a remnant of another Solar System kicked out by natural forces and sent barreling through the Loeb, however, offered a rather different explanation. Oumuamua could be a probe, one deliberately sent to our Solar System by an alien civilization. The detection of extraterrestrial beings – the most significant scientific discovery in human history – if we were ever told about such discoveries, of course. One must remember that as a civilization, many believe systems openly objective to the possibility of alien life, many of which are over a millennial old. The thought of finding sapient life beyond Earth, of learning that we are not alone, however, is the pursuit of countless individuals within the modern world, so it is no surprise that his opinions have been so widely debated. But additionally, there is seemingly another possible reason for why the paper was so widely reported on. This being the fact that Loeb is, in fact, a tenured Harvard professor within the astronomical department. Quote, if this was some random astronomer that you had never heard of from, say, Equatorial Guinea, you probably wouldn't write a story on it, says Brian Gensler, the director of the University of Toronto's Dunlap Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics and a former colleague of Loeb's at Harvard. He continued, there's a lot of astronomers that have outlandish ideas, and most of them aren't taken seriously by the community, and most of the time the media don't really give attention to them. End quote. Loeb has two decades' worth of experience and is well regarded in the field. So, regardless of what others would like him to believe, his opinions matter. Was Oumuamua really an ancient alien's exploratory craft, one spying on ours and many other solar systems? If it is, it means we are indeed not alone. What's more, it means we have undoubtedly been found. So, the professor's opinions, no matter how controversial, we find highly compelling.