Although we can blame Dr. Hawasse from various lies, even Egyptology itself would deserve spring cleaning. Many might be surprised to learn that, since about 1840, the paradigm of Egyptian history has remained firmly in place. Any scientific evidence that would break the established dogma is discarded and Dr. Hawass and other scientists (such as Dr. Mark Lehner or ours - Prof. Bárta, Prof. Verner, etc.) adhere to this as a religion.

In 1984-85, samples were taken from the Giza Plateau, including five from the Sphinx. The samples were subjected to the radiocarbon dating method. The results showed that the samples came from the period around 3809 to 2869 BCE. This means, however, that the established Egyptian chronology dating the pyramids to the period around 2700 BCE contradicts itself by 200 to 1200 years. Robert Bauval paraphrases Mark Lehner: The Pyramids of Giza are 400 years older than Egyptologists believe.

Similarly, in 1950, Mohammed Zakaria Gonem, the first chief inspector of Egyptian antiquities (the predecessor of SCA), found the intact sarcophagus of the third dynastine of Pharaoh Sechemchet inside his pyramid. When the sarcophagus was opened, no mummy was found inside. The sarcophagus was completely empty. In this case, we certainly cannot blame grave robbers. In fact, there are many cases, including the Great Pyramid, where Egyptologists have claimed that tomb robbers are responsible for empty sarcophagi.

Egyptologists are in the habit of despising inappropriate historical records, such as those from the first century BC by the historian Diodorus of Sicily. He wrote that none of them were buried in the pyramid he had ever created. The pharaohs were buried in another secret place. Nevertheless, Egyptologists prefer to argue that until the opposite is proven, the pyramids are without further discussion of the tomb.

The Dutch author Willem Zitman is wondering why today's scientists do not want to recognize that all the ancient Greeks, as they themselves claim, were trained by ancient Egyptians. Instead, scientists prefer to pretend that the Greeks have discovered everything alone, so they can make a statement that the Egyptians did not do anything for science or that they did not know anything about astronomy. Zitman adds that although archeo astronomy has been taught as a science discipline since 1983, Egypt was scarcely discussed - a striking exception. And it is typical that when such a vacuum is created it will be filled with theories similar to those of Robert Bauvalallusion to OCT). If this fact does not like Egyptologists, they should not blame Bauval.

Zitman, a qualified civil engineer, further notes that the pyramids themselves are the greatest victims of the current state of Egyptology. He argues that when Egyptologists are confronted with problems related to construction technology, their shortcomings are easily detectable. This is evident in the actions of the French material scientist Professor Joseph Davidovits, who is one of the most respected scientists in his field in the world, but who has been called a fool by Egyptologists, especially Hawass. Hawass and another of his colleagues were clearly outraged at understanding what the Davidovits were trying to explain to them. As a result of this lack of knowledge and the reluctance of Hawass and colleagues to invite experts to help them in this matter, very little work has been done during the pyramid era and this era has entered the subconscious as lost era. IES Edwards, a former curator of Egyptian ancient monuments at the British Museum, once remarked that Egyptologists do not like pyramids.

Hawass eventually tolerates the current state of Egyptology and summarizes it. He blames people like West, Bauval and Hancock for their ridiculous statements, but in October 1996 - unsurprisingly in front of the camera - Hawass scrambles through the tunnel that runs under the Sphinx, claiming that no one really knows what's inside the tunnel. But we're about to open it for the first time. This is further proof that his 2009 statement is a complete distortion - if not the truth, then at least his previous statements.

So, in 1996, there were tunnels. However, in March 1999, Hawass appeared on Fox TV - which, as we know from his report on President Bush's jokes, is not known for his neutral or scientific approach - and denied the existence of tunnels leading out of Osiris' tomb and underground structure near the Sphinx. In March 2009, he repeated this story as if he needed to do it every ten years. However, as already mentioned, in August 1996 he was actually filmed walking in a tunnel under the Sphinx!

As Bauval pointed out in his work Secret Chamber, the dispute involving Hawass and Giza's plateau dates back many decades: "In the meantime, something unusual happened that involved Zahi Hawass. For obscure reasons, he began digging in front of the Sphinx Temple, apparently in connection with the Groundwater Institute of the Egyptian Ministry of Irrigation. He drilled through fifty feet [15 meters] of rubble and found red granite in place of the natural limestone found in the area. "

The red granite does not come from the Giza Plateau; its only source is Aswan, which lies hundreds of miles to the south. The very presence of red granite, discovered in 1980 near the Sphinx, proves that something is hidden under the Giza plateau. And if Hawass says anything else, it should be taken with reserve.

 

• Dr. Zahi Hawass: Intrigue in the Background of Egyptology (5.): Suppression and Concealment
• Dr. Zahi Hawass: Intrigue in the Background of Egyptology (4.): Robots and Servants
• Dr. Zahi Hawass: Intrigue in the Background of Egyptology (3.): Scandal in SCA
• Dr. Zahi Hawass: Intrigue in the Background of Egyptology (2.): Sphinx Fingers in the Dry
• Dr. Zahi Hawass: Intrigue in the Background of Egyptology (1.)