By Liaf
OK folks; so I've shown in the previous message how one can verify the pyramid's passage lengths by calculation. The idea there was to confirm through geometry and trigonometry that some "kook" was not just throwing amazing numbers at us while laughing all the way to the bank from money earned by writing fantastic books. With these mathematical tools, we can indeed see that the measurements cited agree with mathematics. Yes, these passages really are so-and-so inches long and in turn, we can see that these so-and-so inches translate to specific intervals of time (in previous pyramid messages, this inch-to-a-year concept was derived from the "Enoch circle").
As I stated, it is not enough to set a timer. That will only tell time relative to the starting time. We must also establish a benchmark stating an absolute (as opposed to relative) time. In other words, if we set a timer for one hour to bake a cake, that tells the next person nothing as to when it will be done if we were to run an errand and ask a family member to remove it from the oven. However, if we said that it was put into the oven at 9:00 AM and ask them to remove it one hour later, then they would know to remove it at 10:00. When that time occurred, they would know something significant was to take place (it would be done!). But if we only told them that it would be in for one hour but failed to tell them when it was put in, that would tell them nothing. Rest assured, it would be underdone or burnt. The 9:00 AM benchmark would be the needed absolute time.
The same idea applies to the pyramid. The passage lengths in and of themselves make no sense except we have a reference point where we can state an absolute time. From that point we can add or subtract the lengths (times) and see what year we end up. When we see that significant events occurred at these times such as the dispensation of the Law, the birth and crucifixion of Christ, the Reformation and other events such as wars, we can then say, "There's something to this." My goal in this message is to show the layman how he or she can be assured of this absolute datum. This starting point is the famous "scored lines" (somewhere between points A and B of the previous message's diagram). We are told that on the vernal equinox of 2141 B.C. the star Alpha Draconis shown down the passageway while the scored lines aligned with the Pleiades (the 'Seven Sisters'). No other astronomical alignment with any other bodies at any time were this precise.
The concept expressed here to verify this is quite brief (maybe not much longer than this introduction). Actually, all authorities agree that Alpha Draconis was their Polar Star back then and that it shown down the passage. Today, Polaris (a.k.a. the "North Star") lies closest to the celestial pole. So all we have to do to prove this is to ask "when" this star shone so perfectly down the passageway. If this agrees closely to the 2141 B.C. date, then there is no reason to doubt the claims. Any layman can access an astronomy program. There is a good freeware one out that I use. It goes from 9999 B.C. to 9999 A.D. Is this accurate? Not really super-duper accurate, but it is close enough to see if these are merely fantastic claims or possibly real (I assure you, hand calculations are accurate enough to see the general truth to the claims, and my astronomy program is a little more precise than hand calculations). I found slight differences in the results between my old computer and new computer when going this far back in time. So I know this program is not perfect (or I should say the computers are not perfect). The very precise details we'll let to the experts to figure down to the day, hour and minute. I'm just here to show that these are not just fantastic numbers thrown at us to oooh and aaah us into believing something utterly fantastic while being all wet (and making fools of us).
The first thing we notice is that the descending slope of the passageway is the "Christ angle" of 26o 18' 10". However, The pyramid lies at 29o 58' 51" North latitude. Obviously, the pyramid's passageway is not pointing exactly to the North celestial pole. We must take the difference to find out how may degrees from the pole this is.
In other words, in order to shine down the descending passageway Alpha Draconis would have been 03o 40' 41" from the pole. Since the pole is 90o declination by definition, the star would have to have had a declination of 90o-03o 40' 41"=86o 19' 19". Incidentally, the star would have made little circles around the pole and would have only aligned once per day for a short time with the passageway, but it would still have shown down it. See the diagram below that illustrates this.
From this point, we have the information we need. Once we know the needed declination, we just plug the date into the computer program and see if indeed Alpha Draconis had this declination at 2141 B.C. Most good programs such as mine will allow you to zoom in on any celestial object and right click on it or select from a bar information about it. Listed amongst that information should be its declination. Chances are, it will not be exact, but if you are persistent enough, you can plug in various dates to see which year is closest to this declination. You ought to find that it will not be far off from the 2141 B.C. date.
Do you want to know the results from both of my computers? In both cases the date that Alpha Draconis was 86o 19' 19" was March 17, 2146 B.C. This is within five years. My guess based on some experience with manual calculation is that the programmed value for the precession of the equinoxes (for those of you who know what that means) is different than the value depicted by the pyramid. If the pyramid's value was accepted by faith (based on the assumption that the other multitude of measurements substantiate it), then the value may very well be different and we may get the 2141 B. C. date. My chief purpose in this exercise was to merely show all of us common folks that these claims are not far off base--- not to calculate exactly. An author's claim that the alignment with the passageway and scored lines took place in 2141 B.C. when it really took place in say, 1547 B. C. is clearly NOT the case. Therefore, I have no reason to doubt the claims. The five-year error is caused by the limitations of my resources when in fact, professionals have much better resources to calculate more accurately. So from my end, 2 B.C as the birth of Christ is closer to 7 B. C. (assuming we agree with the passage lengths) and 33 A. D. death date is closer to 28 A. D. Ironically, these "new" values agree more closely to the accepted birth/death dates than the 2 B.C./ 33 A.D. dates!