Complex discovered under the great Pyramids

As i don't think you add anything to the discussions that are going on here. I don't think you should feel like you're some special fly that I have to respond to everything you post. As a matter of fact, some other posters on this site don't get angry and go off the handle just because they don't agree with what the other poster has to say.

That is bullshit too. I have been responding to you numerous times on this forum and I have addressed all of your concerns at length. I guess you just don't like the answers I gave you. As a poster said, there is an ignore button for those of you who don't want to hear from me.

To be honest, it seems like you are kingmob who has been around for decades on this site. Stopped answering him back then.

Once that account has been removed, you appear after it has been deleted non stop posts since.

The Style of the poster is very similar. There are a lot of similarities between you and his anger management problems, as well as his way of communicating and writing. Attack someone's character nonstop to make a point. Least when i left this forum returned with the same user name. The fact that you are appearing under a new name shows you have no character at all.

Fact.

Italian professor Bondi Sars topography discovered an internal chamber structure within the Great Pyramid and named it the north face chamber. Provided detailed maps of its actual dimensions and the internal structures near it in 2020

Remember this north chamber was not mapped by Egyptian Archaeology in 2020

In 2023 a completely different team found it by echoscope and matched exactly the internal dimensions of Professor Bondi's north chamber corridor research in 2020. That is mind-blowing and people are just not getting it.

Here the 2023 news. Three years after bondi first research released online.

As i don't think you add anything to the discussions that are going on here. I don't think you should feel like you're some special fly that I have to respond to everything you post.

You don't, that's correct. But every time you do, it just makes you look like more of a crank who doesn't know what he's talking about.

That is bullshit too.

What is bullshit too?

To be honest, it seems like you are kingmob who has been around for decades on this site. Stopped answering him back then.

Once that account has been removed, you appear after it has been deleted non stop posts since.

The Style of the poster is very similar. There are a lot of similarities between you and his anger management problems, as well as his way of communicating and writing. Attack someone's character nonstop to make a point. Least when i left this forum returned with the same user name. The fact that you are appearing under a new name shows you have no character at all.

Fact.

I was here under a different name previously. I changed it after someone I know in real life started dropping hints that they knew my username. I was around at the same time as that other poster, who was unfairly hounded out of the forum IMO. A with-hunt and serious overreach of mod powers, is what I really think about that episode. But rest assured, I'm not Kingmob. I was the one who started the thread about his unfair banning in helpdesk. We only seem similar to you because we both weren't putting up with your BS and we both called you out for being a spoofer. Doesn't mean we're the same person, even if we don't have to rely on AI to get our points across.

I have been responding to you numerous times on this forum and I have addressed all of your concerns at length. I guess you just don't like the answers I gave you.

No, you haven't. Posting a load if inconsequential and irrelevant waffle is not responding. Ignoring the meat of a person's post and just spouting a load of AI waffle is not, and never has been, considered 'addressing your concerns". You are picking bits and bobs to reply to and just dumping loads of irrelevant guff that has nothing to do with the question. IF I ask you what day it is and you reply "42", that's not you answering the question.

I'll give you an example, just one from the past few days:

You said "An independent team that was not part of this group validated the claim" made in the 2022 paper. Who are this team, and where can one view this validation? I've asked you twice now to put up or shut up and you've refused to respond both times. This is not addressing anything at length. It's a lesson in avoiding uncomfortable questions.

So go ahead, show us where the validation was done and by whom, and prove that you're not a liar.

Because that's what I'm calling you. A deluded, dangerous liar.

Take a look at this poster who comes on here totally unaware that just admitted they changed their usernames in order to post, then admitted that he did it because someone got the username and then got worried about it.

It was because you were embarrassed by the fact that you carried on like this with others posters online that you changed the username?

At least we know you post under different usernames.

I see you then started blaming the mods that they upset kingmob and that is why you stepped out of your way to complain to helpdesk. Is it possible that you lack awareness and don't find what you just said odd?

It's all about artificial intelligence, right? That's right, kingmob, AI arguing for a conspiracy that's unbelievable, it's truly amazing, if you ask me. How does AI do that and on what platform does it work?

You don't make any points for me. You piss people off and you attack people's character hardly a good way to behave. In your case you have anger issues and other things going on that show up in your communication. You always think I am lunatic. OK, that's fine by me. What if you put me on ignore instead of replying to me? It really isn't much to ask, isn't it?

I just did it, but it seems as though you lack a sense of awareness.

You can find the BBC news from 2023 in my post. An independent peer review paper published in 2023 confirmed the corridor that Bondi team said was there in its research paper that was published in 2020. At that point, no one had seen or measured the corridor. There was an exact match between what that team saw and what was calculated by Bondi team.

Paper in 2020 and revised edition in 2022.

Take a look at this poster who comes on here totally unaware that just admitted they changed their usernames in order to post, then admitted that he did it because someone got the username and then got worried about it.

It was because you were embarrassed by the fact that you carried on like this with others posters online that you changed the username?

At least we know you post under different usernames.

Believe what you want. I'm open about changing my name (once, in 25 years), but don't you find it a little bit ironic and hypocritical that you're admonishing others for changing their name (again, once) when you do it on the regular? Is it because you struggle with basic reading comprehension and keep forgetting your password, perhaps? Hmmm…..guess we'll never know but it's fun to make up reasons in your head, isn't it?

Anyway, are you now claiming that changing usernames is bad?

I see you then started blaming the mods that they upset kingmob and that is why you stepped out of your way to complain to helpdesk. Is it possible that you lack awareness and don't find what you just said odd?

What did I say that's odd, c'mon lad, spit it out. That I find he was hounded out of here and his treatment was disgraceful? Take a look over that thread and have a look at the number of posters who thanked my posts, I'm hardly alone in that category. Wouldn't really call that odd, however it's a an absolute clusterfcuk when trying to converse with you, so God knows what you're actually trying to say here.

It's all about artificial intelligence, right? That's right, kingmob, AI arguing for a conspiracy that's unbelievable, it's truly amazing, if you ask me. How does AI do that and on what platform does it work?

I'm not Kingmob.

And I'm not claiming that AI is arguing for anything.

I'm claiming that you use AI to write your posts for you because of your tenuous grasp on the English language and all-round failure to produce anything coherent most of the time. You'd understand that if you could, y'know, actually parse information that's put in front of you.

You don't make any points for me.

Case in point. I never said I make any points for you, so WTF are you talking about here?

What if you put me on ignore instead of replying to me? It really isn't much to ask, isn't it?

You'd like that. However, I prefer to shine light on ignorance, hypocrisy, contradiction and spoofers. If you don't want that to happen, the simple solution is to stop posting rubbish and engage with people. You're doing a terrible job of it, and have been doing so for years. 99% of what you post on here is made up waffle, based purely on shi1te you don't understand, that you've copying from elsewhere, that sounds intelligent enough for you to decide "ha, I'll just copy and paste that onto Boards, that'll show 'em", about which you can't even answer the most basic questions. Because, again, you don't understand it and haven't a fcuking clue about the topic most of the time.

I just did it, but it seems as though you lack a sense of awareness.

You can find the BBC news from 2023 in my post. An independent peer review paper published in 2023 confirmed the corridor that Bondi team said was there in its research paper that was published in 2020. At that point, no one had seen or measured the corridor. There was an exact match between what that team saw and what was calculated by Bondi team.

Paper in 2020 and revised edition in 2022.

Now you're changing the goalposts.

You said "An independent team that was not part of this group validated the claim" made in the 2022 paper. The claim made in the 2022 paper, and the title of this thread, is that there are vast, complex, underground structures underneath the pyramids. You yourself have said you believe this and that there are man-made structures kilometres deep beneath them. Are you now claiming that you were only talking about one corridor and that finding one corridor (that was identified in 2015 according to Dohnjoe) means the entire paper has now been validated because of it? And that your claim about stuff being identified kilometres underground, by a technology that simply isn't able to detect that far, is a valid one?

Seems pretty desperate, tbh.

I think that it is pretty obvious from what I post on this site is not artificial intelligence. I don't know of any AI that writes everything for you. If it existed, I would be all over it because it would be a very useful tool for saving time. That's just me.

Nonsensical posts. There is an ignore button there for you too.

There is a difference between the two. I kept the name I didn't go off and choose a different name all together to hide who I was on here. People know who cheerful is on here.

There seems to be a problem between you and the moderators. There is no doubt that this is the case of someone who is angry, and their anger only gets worse with each post. There is no point in wasting my time here, it is not worth it.

In order to debunk, debunkers often claim that they never received a response when, in fact, they have given one. In my explanation, I explained what phonic meant in the context of this research. I find it very silly that you ask me to do a deep dive on it when it's not my study.

There is actually something hilarious about the fact that I am posting information that the debunkers do not have and yet they argue against it. Please take a look at their research and come up with your own definition of what phonic means after reading their research. This is not what you do because you stay in forums and wait for information to appear then, like a pack of wolves, attack posters for being interested in what is being said.

The debunkers don't know if this science is awful because, for the first days, they posted bad claims about ground radar being used when it was actually sar topography and I had to correct them twice for that. Where do the debunkers research? Blogs online.

This is actually a very funny post and the poster with the anger management issues demands everything from me but can't be bothered to do any research on his own.

Done with this thread anger poster sure be in again something to.say. This is a part of the site that deals with conspiracy theories. A big reason why there are very few people who post here is because it has been overrun by angry people who do not allow people to share their views on these topics with each other. There is a lot of pressure to keep up with constant demands. There are times when we feel like we are being interrogated, as if we should know every detail of every irregularity, which is ridiculous.

To be fair to nal and sometimes dohnjoe, even though they may be rude at times, they do post some good information at times, but this other guy has serious anger problems. I am not sure he is capable of making a civil post.

Ai stuff. Believe it whatever. There is no way I want to write like this angry poster, anyway.

Apparently it's quite difficult and sensitive to probe/dig under the Pyramids.

The 3 individuals claiming there is a city/massive thing under that Pyramid (one of whom believes in aliens/demons) would need to do a more scientifically rigorous job. So far what they've produced is dubious

@Yeah Right and @Cheerful S that's enough of the bickering. If you are driving each other mad, step away from the thread and put each other on ignore.

@Yeah Right - if you cannot engage with a poster in a civil manner put them on ignore or do not engage. It's that simple. If you've an issue with moderation, PM the mod, bring it to the CT feedback thread or bring it to the feedback forum. Do not discuss moderation on thread. Any further posting in an uncivil manner or discussing moderation on thread will incur a 2 point warning.

@Cheerful S it has been said to you before by posters and most recently by a moderator that your walls of text, that do not succinctly answer questions put to you are causing an issue with posters. If you cannot engage in a discussion without using walls of text, please do not post. It is not engaging in discussion, it is simply deflecting from what you've been asked. If you have an issue with a poster, report it. Calling out posters as other users is not engaging in discussion and discussing users that have no right to reply is out of order. Any further posts with walls of text or calling out posters as other users will be deleted going forward and will incur a 2 point warning.

If either of you have an issue with any of the above, pm me - do not discuss on thread.

HS

The researchers could actually use peer review so it could be assessed in terms of it's credibility. This would require them to be incredibly detailed with their tests and they would have to be replicable. Pretty standard really.

I'm not sure if he most people particularly care. I did actually post a debunking a page or two back btw.

5 million people don't care about a study that intentionally avoided peer review…so my point stands.

The chat about phonics and the deliberate, contrived and absolutely essay length empty answer from CS has given me a chuckle.

For the rest of us? Especially anyone with kids or siblings that learned to read since the turn of the millenium (or God forbid.. younglings on this thread 😉)

When I hear "phonics" it's all Sammy Snake & Kicking King(What a racehorse BTW) practicing enunciation & pronunciation.

Yet when Italians try and use GPR to make a little woo science? It becomes some fuzzy word without an actual meaning but that somehow ties together a set of frequencies or if I am grasping the claims correctly? A range of bandwidths that somehow their software can interpret to extrapolate structures and voids deep within solid earth and bedrock.

Now peer review is needed as is independent repeating of their method. Proving the method is incredibly simple. All they need do is use their tech to map known subterranean structures. Yet? I can't find even a prospective study seeking to do so using their tech.