The Giza Power Plant (34 page)

Some readers may think Cayce's psychic speculations have no place in a serious book on Egypt. But in light of the fact that the Cayce foundation funded Egyptologist Mark Lehner in his studies in Egypt in the 1970s—though Lehner ultimately moved away from the foundation and he became a staunch supporter of the orthodox view—I feel justified in discussing Cayce's work and, perhaps, putting it into a different perspective. I should add, though, that I do not include this discussion to endorse Cayce's readings, nor have Cayce's readings held up as support for my theory. This is included because Cayce dealt a great deal with ancient Egypt, and his description of ancient technology while in his altered state cannot be ignored.

Cayce's son, Edgar Evans Cayce, does an admirable job explaining his father's psychic readings, which were produced while Cayce was in trance. A series of readings by Cayce-known collectively as reading number 440—with an engineer, referred to in the reading as "the entity;' describes technologies used in Atlantis and Egypt that have an amazing similarity to the technology described in the Giza power plant theory. These readings described the ancient Atlantean power plants, which on the surface seem far removed from the Egyptian pyramids; however, an interpretation of the readings becomes more meaningful when we compare (what Cayce described as) the "firestone" with granite, out of which the King's Chamber, the power center in the Giza power plant, is constructed:

About the firestone—the entity's activities then made such applications as dealt both with the constructive as well as destructive forces
in that period. It would be well that there be given something of a description of this so that it may be understood better by the entity in the present.

In the center of a building which would today be said to be lined with nonconductive stone—something akin to asbestos, with. . . other nonconductors such as are now being manufactured in England under a name which is well known to many of those who deal in such things. The building above the stone was oval; or a dome, wherein there could be . . . a portion for rolling back, so that the activity of the stars—the concentration of energies that emanate from bodies that are on fire themselves, along with elements that are found and not found in the earth's atmosphere.

The concentration through the prisms of glass (as would be called in the present) was in such manner that it acted upon the instruments which were connected with the various modes of travel through induction methods which made much the [same] character of control as would in the present day be termed remote control through radio vibrations or directions; though the kind of force impelled from the stone acted upon the motivating forces in the crafts themselves.

The building was constructed so that when the dome was rolled back there might be little or no hindrance in the direct application of power to various crafts that were to be impelled through space—whether within the radius of vision or whether directed under water or under other elements, or through other elements.

The preparation of this stone was solely in the hands of the initiates at the time; and the entity was among those who directed the influences of the radiation which arose in the form of rays that were invisible to the eye but acted upon the stones themselves as set in the motivating forces—whether the aircraft were lifted by the gases of the period; or whether for guiding the more-of-pleasure vehicles that might pass along close to the earth, or crafts on the water or under the water.

These, then, were impelled by the concentration of rays from the stone which was centered in the middle of the power station, or powerhouse (as would be the term in the present).

In the active forces of these, the entity brought destructive forces
by setting up—in various portions of the land—the kind that was to act in producing powers for the various forms of the people's activities in the cities, the towns and the countries surrounding same. These, not intentionally, were tuned too high; and brought the second period of destructive forces to the people in the land-and broke up the land into those isles which later became the scene of further destructive forces in the land.
(440—5; Dec. 20, 1933)
⁶

Though Edgar Evans Cayce interprets the reading to mean that when the Atlantean power house was in operation the "firestone" was on fire, or influenced by heat, another more accurate interpretation can be made. The firestone to which Cayce refers is actually an accurate description of igneous rock—or granite (igneous, in this sense, means "produced by or resulting from the action of
fire").
⁷
When I read the word "firestone" in reference to the Atlantean power house, I immediately thought of the King's Chamber's thousands of tons of granite that were prepared by those who would have possessed a higher knowledge of the sciences and arts. The crystal Cayce refers to, however, is contained within the granite itself in the Great Pyramid, in the form of quartz crystals—though there very well may have been an additional solid crystal that was cut and polished to amplify the microwave input signal. The application of Tesla technology using wireless transmission of electricity also is suggested in this passage, although Tesla's Wardencliffe tower research came thirty-three years before Cayce's reading, and one could argue that Cayce may have heard of this research and could have been influenced by it during the reading.

What is interesting about Cayce's reading is his reference to the energy of the stars and the use of these energies in conjunction with the energies he discussed in a reading in 1930: "in city of Peos in Atlantis—among people who gained understanding of application of nightside of life or negative influences in the earth's spheres, of those who gave much understanding to the manner of sound, voice and picture and such to peoples of that period."
(2856–1; June 7,1930)
⁸

As I said, I have not been a follower of Cayce. During the early days of the research for this book, I was ignorant of what he had written on the subject. It is only recently that I have maintained a mild interest in what has
been reported by him with respect to advanced cultures in prehistory. His description of the power system of the Atlanteans, though, is remarkably similar to what is found within the Great Pyramid. The only thing that does not seem to fit is the shape. Cayce's power plant has a domed structure with the awesome firestone located in the center of the structure. Perhaps the Great Pyramid originally had such a structure. Consider, also, Cayce's statement about the conversion of energy through the firestone. He says the energies were tuned too high and caused widespread destruction. This description certainly gives us pause to consider what changes would take place or what forces could be unwittingly unleashed within the Earth if such a power system was replicated. What unknown changes might we be setting in motion? Would we be faced with annihilation? Would we find ourselves on the threshold of our past?

In this chapter we have asked a lot of questions, only sometimes finding an answer. But our speculations are worthwhile nonetheless. All the evidence found clearly shows that the ancient Egyptians were technologically advanced and that the Great Pyramid provides us with a guidepost, a geodetic marker, that leads us not only to reconsider what we know about past civilizations but also to wonder where our own technology may ultimately lead us. If Cayce's reading has any basis in truth, we are faced with the realization that technology—no matter what the technology is or in what epoch it is developed—can have both positive and negative consequences for the civilizations that pursue its benefits. That is the subject we turn to next.

Chapter Fifteen

LESSONS FROM THE PAST

W
hile in Egypt, I was surprised to learn from an Egyptologist at the
Citadel that the outer casing stones of the Great Pyramid were not plundered to construct the mosques of Cairo, as it has been reported, but were eroded by sandstorms over time. I questioned him as to why the Second Pyramid still had its casing stones intact at the top if this was true, but he didn't have an answer. My impression, while walking around the nine-pyramid complex, was that the stones had actually been shaken loose by some event that caused a buildup of vibration to the point that the pyramids became runaway vibrators. The pyramid at Meidum, with its outer casing stripped and piled high around its base, would certainly fit this description of events. The stones on this pyramid were stripped off through the action of forces other than the picks of mosque builders. So which theory is correct? Perhaps the question really is, Which theory is more likely? The evidence can be interpreted many ways. When I look far into the past, I can discern the existence of sciences of which there are no surviving records. They have either been destroyed or complete records never existed. Did science account for the amazing artifacts I had seen throughout Egypt? And did science also explain, at least in part, this culture's demise? When I looked for an event in Egyptian history that would explain the destruction of this culture and at the same time explain the erosion of the pyramids, I found a clue in the 1985 discovery of volcanic ash twenty feet underground in the Nile delta. This ash was found to be identical to that from an enormous eruption that occurred approximately 3,500 years ago on the Greek island of Santorini. The eruption is estimated to have been 22,000 times more destructive than the atomic bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima. Here was a partial answer. However, it was becoming clearer to me that another reason for the
destruction of a civilization can be related to its use and/or abuse of the technology it develops.

It is reasonable to assume that if we were to destroy ourselves through nuclear holocaust, the geological and biological record would bear witness to it and reveal that knowledge to future archaeologists as they became more advanced in their science. At the same time, some of our civil engineering projects might survive, and the occasional archaeological anomaly might turn up to promote some thought in that direction. Perhaps a granite surface plate would be found, and someone would puzzle over the positioning of the holes drilled into it. Who knows, maybe some future "primitive" tribe would see some significance to this plate and make a ritual object out of it.

When we predict the events that might transpire in the future, we can only draw upon our own experiences and how we interpret our ancestors' behavior. Therefore, many of our assumptions may not have any relationship to the truth at all. Our understanding of the past, however, is supported not only by our understanding of human behavior, but also by what the earlier humans have left behind. From archaeological remains, modern humans are constantly evaluating the progress of human development on this planet.

Because of the ample evidence that the ancient Egyptians accomplished enormous engineering feats, especially the mighty pyramids, we can begin to fashion a different picture of their civilization. This picture becomes even clearer when we evaluate the methods they must have used to create some of their stonework: machining methods largely unknown until just before the beginning of the twentieth century, and one that has only recently joined the family of machine tools—ultrasonics. All this evidence commands that we take a closer look at this society we have long thought to be primitive.

And yet there is so much that is missing! So much, in fact, that we have to ask ourselves if it is possible that they had the knowledge and scientific capability to destroy themselves, just as we have today? And did this destruction actually come to pass?

World history records the rise and fall of many empires and, with their endings, the vast destruction of property. It occurred to me that in the case of the earlier Egyptians, the cause of their demise was perhaps a little more
catastrophic than any other historically recorded downfall or disaster. How catastrophic? If we look closely at the following evidence, perhaps we will begin to understand what such an event could have been.

We now know that the ancient Eygptians had a higher level of science and technology than what has been previously supposed. We also know that the development of technology and machines that harness and control the forces of nature holds negative—perhaps even catastrophic—consequences to those who do not control or use them wisely. When we consider the development of the atom bomb, nuclear power plants, even the automobile, it is clear that the potential for harm is present with every machine in existence.

But how far did the ancients develop their technology? Some researchers have suggested that civilizations in antiquity had actually developed and used atomic power! On the surface it may sound rather incredible, but then there is so much that has not survived the ancient pyramid builders, it would not be out of order to see what these researchers have to say about it.

Brad Steiger presented a forceful argument that in prehistory nuclear explosions had affected several areas of the Earth. He cited the discovery of fused green glass in deep stratas of the Earth, and in Gabon, Africa, the Euphrates Valley, the Sahara Desert, the Gobi Desert, the Mojave Desert, and Iraq. These vast wastelands of melted sand can be compared with White Sands, New Mexico, where the sands were fused as a result of nuclear bomb testing. Steiger wrote, "Perhaps the most potentially mind-boggling evidence of an advanced prehistoric technology that might have blown its parent-culture away is to be found in those sites which ostensibly bear mute evidence of pre-Genesis nuclear reactions.... At the same time, scientists have found a number of uranium deposits that appear to have been mined or depleted in
antiquity."
¹

The Sahara Desert was at one time fertile, not the arid wasteland it is today. Geological and archaeological evidence shows that this 3.3-millionsquare-mile tract of land once received ample rainfall, and the rock paintings found in the Tassili N'Ajjer Mountains show that antelopes, elephants, and many other types of animals once occupied the previously lush area. For unknown reasons, the rainfall pattern shifted, and the subsequent imbalance between rainfall and the rate of evaporation (the rain was dried up
by the sun faster than it fell from the clouds) turned the area into a desert.

Since vast regions of the globe still remain unexplored, it is impossible to say how many glassy areas there are just in the Sahara. If we are looking for areas where tremendous heat influenced terrestrial characteristics—like the heat that could be produced by nuclear forces—we have to only look in the previously mentioned deserts. Although these may not in themselves "prove" that prehistoric nuclear war had created them, there are many people who believe this was the case.

If our world were affected by a cataclysmic event—such as a polar displacement, comet strike, or self-inflicted nuclear war—after 10,000 years future generations would have few clues about the level of sophistication we had achieved. It would be fair to say that many of our artifacts would be misinterpreted and misunderstood. What would remain of the "concrete jungles" we call cities? Would they reveal to future archaeologists the full scope of our technological achievements? Future civilizations would be busy developing their own technology. Their development might be along a completely different path than ours has followed, and in its early stages it would not be as advanced. At what stage in their evolution would future archaeologists recognize a computer chip for what it really is?

The artifacts that survived thousands of years following the demise of a highly developed civilization would, in large part, depend on the level of technology that had been achieved. After the ravages of time, many of our artifacts will have crumbled into dust. If future archaeologists are able to analyze and interpret surviving artifacts correctly, some of our plastics and high-tech exotic alloys may provide clues that form a rather rough sketch of the life we now enjoy. It is safe to say, though, that any high-tech artifacts under study by a future generation will be misinterpreted until the technology needed to correctly identify them has been redeveloped.

But clues to what happened to us could be discerned from sources other than humanmade objects. Nature would retain the imprint of a nuclear holocaust. For example, the release of neutrons would sharply increase the amount of carbon 14 in the atmosphere, and it would show up in biological remains, like wood, bone, and other organic material from that period of time. C
₁₄
is created when the reaction of cosmic rays with the ionosphere precipitates neutrons through the atmosphere. These neutrons react with
nitrogen 14, creating C
₁₄
. Immediately upon its creation, C
₁₄
starts to decay. Originallyitwas determined to have a half-life of approximately 5,568 years. (The half-life of radiocarbon was redefined from 5570 ± 30 years to 5730 ± 40 years in 1962.) Organic material takes in C
₁₄
at a constant rate, and, knowing what the level of
C
in an object was before it died, scientists can measure the amount left in it and calculate its age. Apart from normal variations, C
₁₄
stays at a constant level in the Earth's atmosphere. However, modern nuclear activities have increased the level of C
₁₄
in the atmosphere, and subsequently in everything that lives and breathes.

When Willard F. Libby first discovered radiocarbon dating in 1947, archaeologists, and especially Egyptologists, ignored it. They questioned its reliability, as it did not coincide with the "known" historical dates of the artifacts being tested. David Wilson, author of
The New Archaeology,
wrote, "Some archaeologists refused to accept radiocarbon dating. The attitude of the majority, probably, in the early days of the new technique was summed up by Professor Jo Brew, Director of the Peabody Museum at Harvard. 'If a C
₁₄
date supports our theories, we put it in the main text. If it does not entirely contradict them, we put it in a footnote. And if it is completely out-of-date we just drop
it.' "
²

The radiocarbon time scale contains other uncertainties, and errors as great as 2,000 to 5,000 years may occur. Contamination of the artifact may be caused by percolating groundwater, incorporation of older or younger carbon, and contamination in the field or laboratory.
Willard Libby
³
addressed the problem of contamination, and the ability to distinguish between the chemistries of life and death (the chemistries of death being the contamination). Washing techniques were then developed to separate the two.

Egyptologists have generally agreed on the dates that had been established for the time of the pharaohs. Consequently, when radiocarbon dating came back with results showing artifacts to be between two hundred and five hundred years younger than their established historical dates, the experts were not impressed. In other words, articles with a "known" date of 5,000 years were tested and, according to radiocarbon dating, were found to be only 4,500 years old. For instance, some of the wood that was found in King Tutankhamen's tomb, historically dated at around 1350
B.C
., gave a C
₁₄
reading of 1050
B.C
.

The further back into history the C
₁₄
researchers went, the larger the discrepancies became. The original assumption on which C
₁₄
dating was based was that its level in the atmosphere is the same at all times. Egyptologists and the carbon-dating scientists were, therefore, in contradiction with each other. The Egyptologists and the archaeologists would not budge, and so the scientists were forced to reevaluate their findings, and they searched for an accurate method of calibrating C
₁₄
to validate its usefulness as an archaeological tool. Until that was accomplished, doubt prevailed.

The answer came in the form of tree-ring dating, and the tree that eventually provided the means to accomplish this accurate C
₁₄
dating was the bristlecone pine, indigenous to the southwestern United States. As the oldest living tree on Earth, the bristlecone pine enabled scientists to develop the chronology to calibrate carbon dating and "adjust the clock." The results are noteworthy. It turned out that the Egyptologists and the archaeologists were correct in their dates and the original C
₁₄
results were in error. In some cases, for distant dates, the error was as much as eight hundred years. But this finding had more than one interpretation: The Egyptologists may be correct in their historical timeline; or there may have been an unexplained "infusion" of C
₁₄
into the atmosphere at some prehistoric time. David Wilson summed up the argument this way: "If present day measurements of the radiocarbon remaining in objects which died in, say, 2,500
B.C
. give a date of 2,000
B.C
., then there is 'too much' carbon 14 left undecayed—perhaps it is that there was 'too much' carbon 14 in the object originally in 2,500
B.C
. This is now generally accepted as being the case, but that still leaves the question open as to why there was more carbon 14 in the atmosphere and
biosphere."
⁴
The question is still open, although scientists have speculated that if the latter scenario is true-there was more C
₁₄
in the ancient atmosphere than they would expect—the answer might be that variations in the Earth's magnetic field allowed increased amounts of cosmic rays to react with the ionosphere.