Hi Jan ,
If you are referring to: "river runs through it.....
...Gheorghiu it was published in 2015 Schmidt does not endorse it because he is dead as of 7/20/2014.
Re: the link you reference is far from convincing
It says nothing of how material was gathered to age the great pyramid. The fact that Dr Zahi Hawass was involved is to me similar to Al Gore funding a legitimate Global Cimate report ,not a chance! Hawass is an ass and he is the Czar of Egyptian antiquities he is biased. He has shut down archeological projects to protect his narrative. These sites once built are often used by later generations. IE.could the material have been later generations. Stone cannot be carbon dated.
I don't know the age of the great pyramid nor do I know the purpose but I am certain they were not built as mausoleums and to attribute it to Khuffu lacks sufficient evidence.
In the America's when I was in school America became inhabited by people crossing the land bridge in Alaska to Russia aprx 1500 to 2000 years ago now we know they were off by at least 25000 years. Now it is a hard push to get things aged properly and most folks who discovered evidence that is inconsistent with the mainstreams
dating find themselves ridiculed ,discredited and maligned. If that was not such a recurring theme I would believe the leaders of these fields want to seek the truth.

Jan, one of the primary basis for the claim is that if you look at the pyramids (the main ones on Gaza), all of them have a tunnel that goes up to the top, and they all align to Orion's belt. However, the only time that they all lined up so that they matched in relative position, and reflected the belt in their position on earth and to each other, is approx 12K years ago. Otherwise there is always a variation. If you would like an alternative interpretation of a lot of the "accepted" history, look up Graham Hancock's "Magicians of the Gods". He makes a very convincing case, and it all ties together with Gobekli Tepe as well as a rather astounding discovery that many major megalithic sites through out the world. all have this alignment built into them. I am watching UFO Files, The Lost Evidence" on AHC channel, and they have just been discussing many of these topics and some new information on artifacts released by the Mexican government. They are also very, very cautious with their statements and assumptions, but the examples they use are very interesting.

Hi Jan ,
With all due respect, the link listed above lacks sufficient evidence to conclude the dating of the great pyramid is correct. Stone cannot be radiocarbon dated . Organic material is what can be dated.Where was this material obtained to date. Sites such as these are used by successive generations. The biggest problem I have is it is a study that Dr. Zahi Hawass was involved with. He is a biased ass! As the Csar of Egyptian antiquities
He is very biased. He has thrown out or shutdown "digs" that don't conform to his narrative. He refuses to have dialogs with opposing views.
I would have the same opinion of a paper proving global warming that Al Gore was involved in.
Schmidt does not endorse? Of course he didn't.
Dragos Gheorghiu "River runs through it.... Was published in 2015 . Klaus Schmidt died 7/20/2014

Indeed, and the various cycles of clearing and burying was one reason they did the sampling at various locations to try to incorporate that issue into the data, which is more proof of the fact people with alternative theories that match facts are just as interested in the truth, and the mainstream are, and why they should give all view equal weight until it is conclusively proven. A lot of "conclusively" to day is based on political maneuvers made in the 1900's and 20th century to appease certain funding sources and university positions.

Velikovsky had a hypothesis which needed to be tested over and over with evidence before it would become a theory. continental drift was a hypothesis until enough evidence was found for it to become a theory and thus become accepted. Sagan and others could not accept something mainly based on interpretation of myths and extreme speculation. He, by definition, was not a pseudo-scientist who use myth and unsubstantiated speculations as their proofs. Over time as evidence increases, scientists, sometimes needing older generations to die out, get closer toward the truth, unlike those who use myth and other religious faith directed arguments do.
Every human brain, due to biases in programing and experiences, can, without a herculean effort, become rigidly full of mental myths and create the beliefs of knowing the truth. That is the reason for needing an actual scientific process to eventually get closer to the truth about objective reality.

Thank you.