Posted: 1/24/2026 10:26:25 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Dominion21][Edited]
|
The recent GD topic on structures possibly buried below the pyramids of Giza lead me on a simple search (which turned more complicated): - to what depth can “ground penetrating radar” retrieve cognizable data? Most generic data on Google will emphatically claim “1 to 3 meters.” Doubters parroted this claim to attempt to discredit entirely the recent Giza findings, even though the team of Italian scientists clarified they used artificial-aperture radar techniques, and not the little commercial ground radars with max 3 meter depth. But is “ 3 meters” the end of the story? Apparently not: AI led back to one of the most dense Wiki pages I’ve ever encountered. AI revealed: Typical Depth Ranges High Frequency (1000-2000 MHz): ~0.5 to 1 meter (used for concrete scanning). Mid-Frequency (200-500 MHz): 3 to 6 meters (standard utility mapping). Low Frequency (10-100 MHz): 15 to over 30 meters (geological/ice surveying). Specialized, very low-frequency systems, such as those used in space exploration (e.g., Apollo 17 lunar mission), have achieved depths of over 1 km. “ Pay attention to that last line: it lead to Wikipedia, and the key part is: “ Further developments in the field remained sparse until the 1970s, when military applications began driving research. Commercial applications followed and the first affordable consumer equipment was sold in 1975.[4] In 1972, the Apollo 17 mission carried a ground penetrating radar called ALSE (Apollo Lunar Sounder Experiment) in orbit around the Moon. It was able to record depth information up to 1.3 km and recorded the results on film due to the lack of suitable computer storage at the time.[5][6] Think about that: - 1.3 kilometers underground - in 1972 (more than 50 years ago) - from orbit The next time you encounter the claim “ground penetrating radar only works to 3 meters,” please call it out as FALSE. Theoretically, images can penetrate far deeper into the earth or other surfaces. |
|
The trouble is two fold: the discerning resolution of long wave radar, sonar and seismic wave systems, and how it responds in grossly non-homogeneous materials like the earth. There has been some interesting work on increasing resolution by using multiple origin and collection points over long periods of time. Simply saying “GPR can go to 1.3km” is not the whole story. I do think it would be cool to find rooms beneath the pyramids or even hidden cities. Derenkuyu (sp) in Turkey (IIRC) makes for a good read. Imagine finding a hidden door in your basement leading to a millennia old underground city. |
Filippo is a lot more than he let's be known. One interview that I forget which host mentioned he works for an Italian aerospace company and the Italian version of our CIA. He was not pleased that info was disclosed but he never disclaimed it. The software they are using seems to be the very real deal. Maybe we will find out if these scans are true in our lifetimes, maybe we won't. IDK. but I'm not holding my breath.I think we'd have a lot more luck digging under some pyramids on other countries where they see the same than those in Giza controlled by the Egyptian army. |
|
No one is saying that GPR can't go deep...at least, I don't think they are around here. The issue is the software-generated images they keep showing. I've never seen GPR that looks anything like that, with any sort of resolution approaching that. GPR just...doesn't. Those are software-generated, not reality. Their interpretation of their own data. Like how NASA continuously alters photos, everything is suspect. Could it look like that under the pyramid? Sure. Could their images be accurate? Sure. But extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and so far they haven't provided any proof, much less extraordinary. In all likelihood, we'll never know until someone digs...and we know that ain't gonna happen. The Egyptian government will never allow it. So, for now, it's a story based on one teams interpretation, altered, stemming from said teams own data. Do I want it to be true? Hell yes. What an amazing thing that would be. The find of all finds throughout history. It would be like aliens landing on the White House lawn. |
Pope Gregorius Billingsgate Callipygian Quimtickler, First of His Name
Chakravartin of the Feculent Multiversal Litterbox
Protodeacon of the Iniquitous
Gurkhan of the Illimitable Feline Hordes
Chakravartin of the Feculent Multiversal Litterbox
Protodeacon of the Iniquitous
Gurkhan of the Illimitable Feline Hordes
|
Ok, here's a great example of the pictures we're talking about. Yes, it's Daily Mail, but ignore that and just take a peek. Mystery of Egypt's Giza pyramids deepens as hidden megastructure 4,000 feet below is revealed | Daily Mail Online Now, tell me how they got from the first picture of elaborate underground megastructures or all of the other pictures they had their software make up from the actual data that they're working with (the rest of the pics). You know, I'll just save everyone the trouble unless they want to read the article (which is somewhat interesting). Here. Attached File |
Pope Gregorius Billingsgate Callipygian Quimtickler, First of His Name
Chakravartin of the Feculent Multiversal Litterbox
Protodeacon of the Iniquitous
Gurkhan of the Illimitable Feline Hordes
Chakravartin of the Feculent Multiversal Litterbox
Protodeacon of the Iniquitous
Gurkhan of the Illimitable Feline Hordes
|
Actually, the proper response to people's skepticism is "they didn't use GPR", because they didn't. The scan used "synthetic aperture radar doppler tomography". All the debunks and hand waving about ground penetrating radar are immediate proof the person talking about it hasn't done even a basic dive into the claims being made and are just dismissing it because "it can't be true". Biondi has described how the technology works on multiple podcasts. He says they've used the exact same methods to successfully map known underground structures. The technology was used by the Italian military to map some shit Biondi can't talk about. The technology works. Now, what exactly is underneath the pyramids is debatable, but there's SOMETHING that deserves to be researched. |
Everything posted above is factual. Maybe.
|
Originally Posted By Kagetora: Ok, here's a great example of the pictures we're talking about. Yes, it's Daily Mail, but ignore that and just take a peek. Mystery of Egypt's Giza pyramids deepens as hidden megastructure 4,000 feet below is revealed | Daily Mail Online Now, tell me how they got from the first picture of elaborate underground megastructures or all of the other pictures they had their software make up from the actual data that they're working with (the rest of the pics). You know, I'll just save everyone the trouble unless they want to read the article (which is somewhat interesting). Here. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/254435/GPR_Pic_jpg-3702173.JPG At the end of the day, people are saying "it can't be true" based on preconceived notions that keep being proved wrong. There are ancient sites all over the world that don't make any fucking sense if you believe the mainstream narrative about history. Gobekli Tepi should have been enough to convince people we're pretty clueless about ancient history but the goal posts keep moving. |
Everything posted above is factual. Maybe.
|
Originally Posted By Cypher214: Now, what exactly is underneath the pyramids is debatable, but there's SOMETHING that deserves to be researched. I'll agree with that statement. Also in the pyramids still. But those images are so far from definitive. Only shovels in the ground will solve this until we have Star Trek-levels of scanning tech. |
Pope Gregorius Billingsgate Callipygian Quimtickler, First of His Name
Chakravartin of the Feculent Multiversal Litterbox
Protodeacon of the Iniquitous
Gurkhan of the Illimitable Feline Hordes
Chakravartin of the Feculent Multiversal Litterbox
Protodeacon of the Iniquitous
Gurkhan of the Illimitable Feline Hordes
|
Originally Posted By Kagetora: No one is saying that GPR can't go deep...at least, I don't think they are around here. The issue is the software-generated images they keep showing. I've never seen GPR that looks anything like that, with any sort of resolution approaching that. GPR just...doesn't. Those are software-generated, not reality. Their interpretation of their own data. Like how NASA continuously alters photos, everything is suspect. Could it look like that under the pyramid? Sure. Could their images be accurate? Sure. But extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and so far they haven't provided any proof, much less extraordinary. In all likelihood, we'll never know until someone digs...and we know that ain't gonna happen. The Egyptian government will never allow it. So, for now, it's a story based on one teams interpretation, altered, stemming from said teams own data. Do I want it to be true? Hell yes. What an amazing thing that would be. The find of all finds throughout history. It would be like aliens landing on the White House lawn. GPR doesn't give you photo quality images of what lies below, but it excels at one thing: Finding anomalies, density changes, and transitions (that all boils down to one thing, anyway: non-homogeneous areas/edges beneath the surface.. Example is the dam in CA that had the spillway collapse because it was all hollow underneath. If they'd' had a GPR to scan once a year, they could have seen the holes the clogged seep holes were making under the spillway, then repair damages earlier than being critical. An extra $50k for a towed high resolution GPR for all the dams, or at least for all the dams in the northern area and one for southern area would find things that aren't supposed to be there, especially y compared to earlier scans. I guess I mentioned this in a different thread and it's something that wouldn't happen in CA though it does happen here. Forgot the reason they run their dams on shoestring budget and expect them to function forever without any maintenance. I will say that reading and interpreting a GPR scan is a bit like magic, think back to the moving paper plotter sonar systems of the 80s or the fast spinning fiber optic to give you blips of light near a sort of calibrated dial to "see" a fish. Today's systems remove much of it, though both cleaned up scans and the "dirty" raw scans. I don't know about interpreting them as coils or any other definitive definition is a good idea. I think of it more as "we have more information but we don't know what it is and they won't allow physically looking. There is obviously something under the ground there but I can't really see how they get that answer. I odd understand how they see a hollow area/cave underground. The borders of the anomalies are very crisp and straight, and at that depth, it kind of blows the current "Conventional Wisdom" out of the water unless they can explain what these anomalies are. I don't see the scans as springs at all. They are pillar shaped abnormalities a far as I can tell. On other subjects, it can clearly show bones buried around 6 ft so you know what you are looking at but that takes a bunch of scans and then computer correlation of the date to really get an idea on it. These scans are taken at oblique angle to see if they can see under the pyramid so image quality and range is different depending on angle. Lot of correlation there with scans from different angles. They did a great job but the jumping to conclusions as to purpose I don't understand why people get hung up on that or even upset (though I know you mentioned some academics having their life's work shot down in one photo). With the whole UAP/True Disclosure coming around the corner, I think that if any information is contained under the pyramids, I know one interview a long while ago that crawled down to the "pedestal" surrounded by shallow pool of water that stayed at the same level no matter how high the river was. I'm curious if all or any part of these holds the method for that hydraulic control? They did achieve great things with hydraulics which wouldn't be seen or used until a few thousand years passed. Why is that? The basic Hydraulics of Egypt/Greece/Rome with the aqueducts and running water toilets (well, toilets placed over a scream of the dirty water from bathhouses). and the like just sort of went away for 1500 years for the concepts to e common again I like more information. I just don't like new data curated, selected, missing scans, interpreted, labeled, and then handed to me. |
The person who complains most, and is the most critical of others has the most to hide.
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
|
Originally Posted By brass: I like more information. I just don't like new data curated, selected, missing scans, interpreted, labeled, and then handed to me. This. Show something, or don't. Otherwise everything is up to "interpretation." What they're doing is the definition of bad science...confirmation bias. Are they doing it on purpose? Probably not. But a proper scientific theory would have them say "We think there are anomalous readings under several structures on the Giza Plateau. We need more studies, and independent ones at that, to confirm. We're petitioning the Egyptian government to allow us to do some more detailed research, including possible digging." But no. It's straight to hundreds of meters of hollow columns with odd spirals, huge chambers underground, etc. That's bullshit conjecture...not science. |
Pope Gregorius Billingsgate Callipygian Quimtickler, First of His Name
Chakravartin of the Feculent Multiversal Litterbox
Protodeacon of the Iniquitous
Gurkhan of the Illimitable Feline Hordes
Chakravartin of the Feculent Multiversal Litterbox
Protodeacon of the Iniquitous
Gurkhan of the Illimitable Feline Hordes
|
Originally Posted By Kagetora: This. Show something, or don't. Otherwise everything is up to "interpretation." What they're doing is the definition of bad science...confirmation bias. Are they doing it on purpose? Probably not. But a proper scientific theory would have them say "We think there are anomalous readings under several structures on the Giza Plateau. We need more studies, and independent ones at that, to confirm. We're petitioning the Egyptian government to allow us to do some more detailed research, including possible digging." But no. It's straight to hundreds of meters of hollow columns with odd spirals, huge chambers underground, etc. That's bullshit conjecture...not science. Originally Posted By Kagetora: Originally Posted By brass: I like more information. I just don't like new data curated, selected, missing scans, interpreted, labeled, and then handed to me. This. Show something, or don't. Otherwise everything is up to "interpretation." What they're doing is the definition of bad science...confirmation bias. Are they doing it on purpose? Probably not. But a proper scientific theory would have them say "We think there are anomalous readings under several structures on the Giza Plateau. We need more studies, and independent ones at that, to confirm. We're petitioning the Egyptian government to allow us to do some more detailed research, including possible digging." But no. It's straight to hundreds of meters of hollow columns with odd spirals, huge chambers underground, etc. That's bullshit conjecture...not science. We'd have never heard about the scan if they presented it the way you're suggesting. The data presented *with the model* is so incredible, it became global news and even people who don't care about Giza stuff are saying "if this is true, holy shit!" |
Everything posted above is factual. Maybe.
|
Originally Posted By Cypher214: Which of those methods do you think forces people to put pressure on the Egyptian authorities? We'd have never heard about the scan if they presented it the way you're suggesting. The data presented *with the model* is so incredible, it became global news and even people who don't care about Giza stuff are saying "if this is true, holy shit!" Originally Posted By Cypher214: Originally Posted By Kagetora: Originally Posted By brass: I like more information. I just don't like new data curated, selected, missing scans, interpreted, labeled, and then handed to me. This. Show something, or don't. Otherwise everything is up to "interpretation." What they're doing is the definition of bad science...confirmation bias. Are they doing it on purpose? Probably not. But a proper scientific theory would have them say "We think there are anomalous readings under several structures on the Giza Plateau. We need more studies, and independent ones at that, to confirm. We're petitioning the Egyptian government to allow us to do some more detailed research, including possible digging." But no. It's straight to hundreds of meters of hollow columns with odd spirals, huge chambers underground, etc. That's bullshit conjecture...not science. We'd have never heard about the scan if they presented it the way you're suggesting. The data presented *with the model* is so incredible, it became global news and even people who don't care about Giza stuff are saying "if this is true, holy shit!" He is correct. It woke up millions if not billions of normies to the fact things may be much stranger than we ever knew. |
|
AI is not literally “translating messages” under the pyramids; it is helping scientists interpret extremely complex radar data into a best‑guess map of underground structures. Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) uses microwave pulses from satellites or aircraft, which penetrate the ground and then bounce back differently depending on the materials, density, and presence of voids like tunnels or chambers. By collecting passes from many angles and at different times, researchers build something like a 3D CT scan of the plateau, but in radar form instead of X‑rays. On top of that, they analyze tiny natural vibrations in the rock and pyramids (from seismic noise, wind, etc.), because those micro‑motions subtly shift the radar signal (Doppler effect) in ways that change if the wave is going through solid rock versus a cavity. AI comes in to handle the enormous volume of noisy data, clean it up, align multiple passes, and fuse them into a single 3D model. Machine‑learning methods are tuned on known or simulated patterns—what a solid block, a void, or a corridor would “look like” in SAR plus vibration space—so when similar patterns appear in the real data, the system flags them as likely voids or structures rather than random noise. The end result is a probabilistic 3D map where some zones are interpreted as dense bedrock and others as possible chambers or passageways, and that is what people are calling “findings under the pyramids.” However, this is still an interpretation, not a direct picture of finished rooms or an underground city, and many archaeologists remain cautious because resolution limits, noise, and lack of excavation‑based confirmation mean some of the more sensational claims could be over‑reads of what the data really supports. Compared to ground‑penetrating radar (GPR), which is usually operated on or very near the surface, SAR works from aircraft or satellites and covers huge areas but with less direct control over depth and positioning. GPR often gives higher‑resolution views of shallow features because the antenna is close to the ground, but it is slow, labor‑intensive, and limited in how deep it can see depending on soil conditions. SAR can penetrate dry sand and rock to meaningful depths over an entire plateau, making it great for mapping large‑scale patterns and anomalies, but its signals are more indirect and require heavy processing and modeling to interpret. In practice, SAR is better for regional “x‑ray vision” and spotting likely targets, while GPR is better for detailed, local follow‑up once a specific area has been identified. ETA: Skip to 3m46s to hear the more detailed explanation of the methodology straight from the horses mouth on an AA podcast posted in the Jesse thread:  Meet the Scientist Who Scanned Beneath the Pyramids |
|
Originally Posted By tnriverluver: And SAR can't be prevented from happening unlike GPR that scientist have to have permission from the Egyptian or other gov'ts to perform. They can't control space. In his tiny little brain, he is the king of all things Egypt and nothing happens without his involvement. Which is totally understandable when you realize he wants credit for every discovery so he can make money off of it. |
Everything posted above is factual. Maybe.
|
Originally Posted By Cypher214: That didn't stop Zahi Hawass' stupid ass from saying "they should have asked for permission before doing this!" In his tiny little brain, he is the king of all things Egypt and nothing happens without his involvement. Which is totally understandable when you realize he wants credit for every discovery so he can make money off of it. Originally Posted By Cypher214: Originally Posted By tnriverluver: And SAR can't be prevented from happening unlike GPR that scientist have to have permission from the Egyptian or other gov'ts to perform. They can't control space. In his tiny little brain, he is the king of all things Egypt and nothing happens without his involvement. Which is totally understandable when you realize he wants credit for every discovery so he can make money off of it. Not to mention he takes claim for every discovery. |
Lots of interesting facts in here, some I wasn't aware of, but too much AI figured this and that to all be believable. Not all is about AI though such as about the relief cuts being nearly impossible even today so worth the watch. And why did they bury this huge complex so carefully to begin with? AI 3D-Scans FINALLY Exposed Göbekli Tepe's 12,000-Year-Old Pillars — And The Truth Is HORRIFYING |
|
https://arstechnica.com/science/2026/01/this-67800-year-old-hand-stencil-is-the-worlds-oldest-human-made-art/ The world’s oldest surviving rock art is a faded outline of a hand on an Indonesian cave wall, left 67,800 years ago. On a tiny island just off the coast of Sulawesi (a much larger island in Indonesia), a cave wall bears the stenciled outline of a person’s hand—and it’s at least 67,800 years old, according to a recent study. The hand stencil is now the world’s oldest work of art (at least until archaeologists find something even older), as well as the oldest evidence of our species on any of the islands that stretch between continental Asia and Australia Attached File |
|
Originally Posted By Cypher214: Which of those methods do you think forces people to put pressure on the Egyptian authorities? We'd have never heard about the scan if they presented it the way you're suggesting. The data presented *with the model* is so incredible, it became global news and even people who don't care about Giza stuff are saying "if this is true, holy shit!" So, we should throw science out the window because Egypt is intransigent? No. Neither one of them are going to make the Egyptian government start digging under the last remaining Wonderous Cash Cow of the Ancient World. The more people like this scream and stamp their feet, the deeper the Egyptians dig in their heels instead of in the dirt. Maybe it it had been done in a scientific manner, it may have gained some traction. Look at the shafts they found the Upuaut crawler robot, etc. But I guess we'll never know now, because of the ridiculous hype-driven narrative of a giant underground complex. |
Pope Gregorius Billingsgate Callipygian Quimtickler, First of His Name
Chakravartin of the Feculent Multiversal Litterbox
Protodeacon of the Iniquitous
Gurkhan of the Illimitable Feline Hordes
Chakravartin of the Feculent Multiversal Litterbox
Protodeacon of the Iniquitous
Gurkhan of the Illimitable Feline Hordes
|
Originally Posted By tnriverluver: And SAR can't be prevented from happening unlike GPR that scientist have to have permission from the Egyptian or other gov'ts to perform. They can't control space. SAR (Radar/radio based) and and Optical (Infrared/other bandwidths that punch through clouds) ranging equipment are a given to be able to see where changes happened, but resolution is down to "only" 1 meter blocks and about ½" surface height changes. GPR doesn't work good from space, potentially only the density of the top 150 meter cube and that's the limit. Getting a vehicle to move the tx/rx along the ground like the several moon missions have failed To-Do is downright shocking. When dealing with GPR, I helped a friend of mine with calculating vehicle speed to tag with the data, and this was GPR in the mid 90s in a tow-behind trailer that had 3 axles of it's own + the GPR unit off the back which could get surface to 15 ft deep to alert people of potential wash outs. That turned into this state having some of the smoothest roads in the middle of nowhere and spectacular main roads. All of our dams also scan basically everything they can get to, down to behind a 4 wheeler now but uses IR to determine speed/position in addition to GPS information to help make the records fit much easier. It really isn't that expensive and there's no excuse (besides graft/theft/nepotism) for California not having all their bridges and roads inspected for damage from water incursion. They balk at the costs when ignoring the trillion dollar "emergency loan" from FedGov which make me think they intentionally have disasters happen to increase. Same mindset as the "if you don't use it you lose it". |
The person who complains most, and is the most critical of others has the most to hide.
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
|
Originally Posted By tnriverluver: Not to mention he takes claim for every discovery. He's got a gigantic ego, and he likes his position. This is a few years old, but definitely worth a read: THE EGYPTOLOGIST, THE SPHINX AND THE COVER-UP |
"I assure you, Mr. Mowry, that I am quite serious when I ask you to oblige by walking bow-legged."
|
Originally Posted By tnriverluver: Not to mention he takes claim for every discovery. Originally Posted By tnriverluver: Originally Posted By Cypher214: Originally Posted By tnriverluver: And SAR can't be prevented from happening unlike GPR that scientist have to have permission from the Egyptian or other gov'ts to perform. They can't control space. In his tiny little brain, he is the king of all things Egypt and nothing happens without his involvement. Which is totally understandable when you realize he wants credit for every discovery so he can make money off of it. Not to mention he takes claim for every discovery. 5 mins spliced from JRE episode w/him:  The Worst Joe Rogan Guest In 5 Minutes (Supercut) |