Controversial researchers claim second ‘hidden city' found beneath Egypt's pyramids: report
Italian and Scottish scientists studying the pyramid of Khafre say their radar system has uncovered another subterranean complex linking the structure to the Khufu and Menkaur pyramids, as well as the Great Sphinx, the Daily Mail reported.
Filippo Biondi, a radar expert from Scotland's University of Strathclyde, claimed there was a 90% chance that the structures were connected — despite the research being lambasted by experts who slammed the findings as 'fake' and utterly lacking in scientific basis.
Advertisement
4 A team of researchers believe they've found two underground cities connecting the Great Pyramids of Giza.
4 The team claims a layout of the land and radar scan reveal massive, vertical shafts beneath the pyramids.
Khafre Project
'We firmly believe that the Giza structures are interconnected, reinforcing our view that the pyramids are merely the tip of the iceberg of a colossal underground infrastructural complex,' Biondi told the Mail.
The team's research, which has yet to be peer-reviewed or published in any scientific journal, made waves back in March when they claimed to have found 2,000-foot-long vertical shafts underneath the Khafre pyramid.
Advertisement
The scientists still haven't presented a purpose for what the structures were used for, only speculating that they were built by a lost ancient civilization around 38,000 years ago.
Egypt's three Great Pyramids, however, were only built around 4,500 years ago.
4 The research connects with a theory that an ancient civilization existed beneath the wonders of the world.
Khafre Project
Advertisement
The scientists also claim they made the discoveries using satellite synthetic aperture radar (SAR) technology, which led Dr. Zahi Hawass, a renowned archaeologist and Egypt's former minister of antiquities, to slam the whole research as 'bulls–t.'
SAR technology can only penetrate the ground by at most 10 inches, which would make it impossible for researchers to find data on shafts 2,000 feet below ground, Hawass and other experts explained.
'The claim of using radar inside the pyramid is false, and the techniques employed are neither scientifically approved nor validated,' he told the National, slamming the project as 'fake news.'
4 Egypt's pyramids remain a fascination for many around the world.
REUTERS
Advertisement
Despite the scientific consensus, the team's research has reignited interests in ancient Egypt and speculation that there are still many secrets waiting to be uncovered under the sands.
Fanatics of ancient Egypt continue to search for the fabled Hall of Records, a hidden library believed to be underneath the pyramid complex or the Great Sphinx containing resources of information about the ancient people.
The rumor originated from self-proclaimed clairvoyant Edgar Cayce, an American who claimed in the 1930s that refugees from Atlantis built the library to preserve their history.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
23 minutes ago
- Newsweek
'Nightmare' Squirrels Spotted in US Backyards Spark Concern
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Sightings of squirrels with sores and tumors have sparked concern among users on social media in recent years, with more disturbing-looking squirrels spotted across the U.S. and Canada in recent months, according to the Daily Mail. Given the strange growths on their bodies, these squirrels have been dubbed "zombie squirrels" by users online and other news outlets. Like the rabbits with tentacle-like growths that also went viral online recently, these squirrels are likely suffering from a kind of virus. "I suspect that current reports of this ailment have gotten an unrealistic level of attention due to the grotesque appearance of affected animals and the ease with which isolated cases can be blown up to create fear or anxiety via social media," James Parkhurst, an associate professor of wildlife science and extension wildlife specialist at Virginia Tech, told Newsweek. A file photo shows a red squirrel with squirrel pox disease. A file photo shows a red squirrel with squirrel pox disease. MPF/Wikimedia Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license Why It Matters The appearance of the squirrels has drawn significant concern online, with some deeming them a "new nightmare" after strange looking rabbits last week were compared to something out of the TV series The Last of Us—where the world is taken over by a fungal infection. Experts have advised members of the public not to touch the squirrels, although it is thought that whatever is causing their odd appearance is unlikely to be dangerous to humans. What To Know It is not yet clear what is causing the squirrels' disturbing appearance, with some pointing to squirrel pox and others thinking it could be squirrel fibromatosis, which is believed to be the more likely explanation. Both conditions are caused by viruses closely associated with squirrels, although squirrel pox is more common among red squirrels typically in the United Kingdom. Cases of squirrel fibromatosis are not common and typically affect only a small number of squirrels—usually less than 10 in most incidents, Parkhurst said. There have been historical accounts of more severe outbreaks though, such as in the late 1990s, which could affect a hundred squirrels at a time, he added. Incidents usually occur between late spring through to late summer, with the primary mode of transmission being biting insects, particularly mosquitoes, Parkhurst said. Midges and ticks can also spread the virus, he added, as well as, less commonly, close physical contact between squirrels. Squirrels can usually fight off the virus in four to six months, he said, but rodents that are younger, with less developed immune systems, may "be more vulnerable." There is also added risk to the animal's welfare and safety if the tumors develop to a point where they obstruct the creature's eyes or mouth, affecting their vision or impairing their ability to eat. The tumors on the squirrels have concerned U.S. residents in recent months, per the Daily Mail report, who have been spotting them in their backyards. Per the outlet, one Reddit user wrote in July: "At first I thought it was eating something from my front beds, but then I realized it was on its face." What People Are Saying James Parkhurst told Newsweek: "Given the limited number of cases each year and the limited amount of direct physical contact most people have with squirrels, there has been no documented transmission of the virus to humans and most experts believe this virus not a significant threat to humans. "People are advised to scout their property for and eliminate any sources of pooled water that may be harboring mosquitoes as a means to reduce the vector population." What Happens Next Members of the public are advised to leave affected squirrels alone to fight off the virus and to avoid touching or catching affected squirrels.
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Parenting strategies are shifting as neuroscience brings the developing brain into clearer focus
A friend offhandedly told me recently, 'It's so easy to get my daughter to behave after her birthday – there are so many new toys to take away when she's bad!' While there is certainly an appeal to such a powerful parenting hack, the truth is that there's a pretty big downside to parenting with punishments. For about the past two decades, scientists have been discovering more and more about the growing brain. This exploration of neurobiology has led to new types of trauma treatments, a deeper understanding of the nervous system and an appreciation of how environmental and genetic factors interact to shape a child's behavior. As the science has become increasingly actionable, more evidence-based strategies are spilling into parenting and educational programs. Research offers some useful guideposts for how parents and caregivers can change our adult ways to foster healthy child development. It turns out that many old-school parenting and educational approaches based on outdated behavioral models are not effective, nor are they best-practice, particularly for the most vulnerable children. Why old-school methods fall short I don't come to this view lightly. I'm a behavioral scientist and a professor of public health with degrees in mathematics and biostatistics. When my children were little, I read all the parenting books and applied a somewhat academic strategy to my job of parenting. I firmly endorsed conventional recommendations from authors and pediatricians: I dutifully sent my children to their rooms to think about their choices and dug in my heels to enforce consequences. It wasn't until my children reached middle school and high school ages that I began to see what my approach to discipline was costing us. Parents and educators have long espoused principles gleaned from experiments by the 20th-century researcher B.F. Skinner, a behavioral psychologist who studied how rewards and punishments could change the behavior of rats, resulting in the classic carrot and stick, reward and discipline strategies. Simply put, rats that behaved the way the researchers wanted – by pressing a lever – were given a treat, and rats that did not were given a light shock. These midcentury, rat-based experiments shaped a parenting approach that caught on in American culture and quickly became dogma. Generations of parents learned to use rewards such as sticker charts, trinkets or toys, or an extra bedtime story to reinforce the behaviors they hoped to see more of, and to use negative reinforcement such as timeouts and loss of privileges to reduce unwanted behaviors. But beginning in the early 2000s, many high-profile authors began to theorize that these strategies were not only ineffective but also potentially harmful. The neuroscience of child behavior We all have a built-in nervous system response that prepares us for 'fight or flight' when we feel that our safety is threatened. When we sense danger for whatever reason, our heart beats faster, our palms sweat and our focus narrows. In these situations, our prefrontal cortex – the part of the brain responsible for rational decision-making and reasoning – is decommissioned while our body prepares to fend off the threat. It's not until our threat response subsides that we can begin to think more clearly with our prefrontal cortex. This is particularly true for kids. Unlike adults who have usually acquired some ability to regulate their nervous system states, a child has both an immature nervous system and an underdeveloped prefrontal cortex. A child may hit his friend with a toy truck because he's unable to manage the scary feelings of being left out of the kickball game. He likely knows better, but in the face of this threat his survival brain responds with a 'fight' response, and reasoning shuts down as his prefrontal cortex takes awhile to get 'back online.' Because he is not yet able to verbalize his needs, caregivers need to interpret those needs by observing the behavior. After coregulating with a calm adult – essentially syncing up with their nervous system – a young child is able to return to a calm state and then process any learning. Efforts to change a child's behavior in a moment of stress, including by punishments and timeouts, miss an opportunity for developing emotional regulation skills and often prolong the distress. The behaviorist models just don't work very well for children. The growing understanding of children's developing brains makes clear that punishing a child for a temper tantrum or for 'misbehaving' by grabbing a toy from a classmate makes no more sense than lecturing a man in cardiac arrest about eating less sugar. Curiosity is the key to connection Scientists and parenting experts have come a long way toward understanding how brain science can inform child-raising. While researchers may not all agree on the most effective parenting style, there is general agreement that showing curiosity about kids' feelings, behaviors, reactions and choices can help to guide parents' approach during stressful times. Understanding more about why a child didn't complete their math sheet, or why a toddler threw sand at their cousin, can support real learning. Attuning with our children by understanding their nervous system responses helps kids feel a sense of safety, which then allows them to absorb feedback. Children who feel this connection and build these skills are much less likely to throw trucks. For instance, when your child fusses for candy in the checkout line at the grocery store, instead of taking away the afternoon trip to the park, try this instead: Stay grounded. A deep breath and a pause signals to your own nervous system to be calmer, which allows you to coregulate with a fussing child. Be available. Staying close gives your child the support they need to weather the difficult emotion. Validating a child's experience can go a long way toward helping them reset to a more regulated state. Hold a boundary. By not giving in to the candy purchase, you help your child practice how to handle the emotion of anger and disappointment – called 'distress tolerance' – with your support. Reflect on the circumstances. After everyone is calmer, you can talk about that experience and also notice the circumstances. Was your child hungry or tired, or perhaps upset about something from their day? Parenting with the understanding of a child's developing brain is much more effective in shaping children's behavior and paves the way for emotional growth for everyone, as well as stronger parent-child relationships, which are enormously protective. And that definitely feels better than taking away their birthday presents. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Nancy L. Weaver, Saint Louis University Read more: Parents in the US had alarmingly high rates of anxiety and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic – and that has a direct effect on kids How parents can play a key role in the prevention and treatment of teen mental health problems Hey, new parents – go ahead and 'spoil' that baby! Nancy L. Weaver, PhD, MPH is the Founder and CEO of Support Over Silence, LLC and a Professor of Public Health at Saint Louis University. She has received funding from the NIH and the CDC among other agencies. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
In the Search for Life beyond Earth, the Only Constant Is Hope
The search for extraterrestrial life has periodically been turned upside down In the late 1800s Italian astronomer Giovanni Schiaparelli pointed a telescope at Mars and saw something curious: linear features that he called canali, meaning 'channels' or 'grooves.' A mistranslation of that word helped lead to a widespread belief that the planet closest to Earth hosted a civilization. American astronomer Percival Lowell took Schiaparelli's observations and ran with them. He became obsessed with the Martian markings, which he interpreted as evidence of a sophisticated network of water-transportation channels. 'That Mars is inhabited by beings of some sort or other we may consider as certain as it is uncertain what those beings may be,' Lowell wrote in his 1906 book Mars and Its Canals. It sounds ludicrous now, but it wasn't back then. At the time, ideas about life were evolving rapidly, says David Baron, author of the new book The Martians: The True Story of an Alien Craze That Captured Turn-of-the-Century America. In 1858 Charles Darwin published his theory of natural selection. One year later German scientists Robert Wilhelm Bunsen and Gustav Robert Kirchhoff invented the spectroscope, which they and others used to analyze the chemical signatures in light from the sun and the planets. These studies revealed that other worlds are made of the same elemental constituents as Earth. If life evolves by a natural process, and all planets form in similar ways, why wouldn't life take hold on the Red Planet, too? [Sign up for Today in Science, a free daily newsletter] More than 100 years later scientists searching for extraterrestrial life are guided by the same reasoning: The universe is vast, and it's all made of the same basic stuff we are, so why wouldn't there be life elsewhere? Yet the evidence for intelligent life beyond Earth has taken several turns. In fact, the only constant has been hope: the desire that many people have to prove we are not alone. The question of extraterrestrial life's existence isn't just a neutral scientific debate—it matters to humans, including the humans searching for that life. And our optimism that we'll find it has tended to flip on and off. The idea that Mars is home to canal-digging civilizations began to lose its sparkle in 1909, when French astronomer Eugène Antoniadi observed the Red Planet during one of its biannual close approaches. The lines, he found with a better telescope and a more intimate view, were an optical illusion. Those data didn't convince Lowell, and it didn't put the theory to rest—in 1916 Scientific American managing editor Waldemar Kaempffert was still convinced the canals were real. Nevertheless, belief in advanced life on Mars faded in the following decades. When the Mariner 4 spacecraft flew by Mars in 1964, relaying images of a dry and desolate world, the Martian hypothesis died for good. And the signs weren't promising for extraterrestrials elsewhere, either. In 1950 physicist Enrico Fermi had pointed out what he called the 'Great Silence': If life is likely to be plentiful, then where is everybody? The fact that humanity hadn't heard from other intelligent beings became known as the Fermi paradox. Maybe life is common, but advanced life is rare, scientists suggested. Or perhaps other civilizations arise often and then destroy themselves, as humanity seemed newly capable of doing after the invention of the atomic bomb in 1945. Astronomers began a more systematic study of the question. In 1960 Cornell University researcher Frank Drake started Project Ozma, which used a radio telescope to scan for broadcasts from two distant star systems. In 1977 astronomers caught a batch of radio waves that blasted out for 72 seconds, looking more like a hugely powerful cosmic radio station than something natural. They called it the WOW! Signal and got excited. But the same transmission was never heard again. So far the search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI) has not found convincing evidence of broadcasting aliens. Yet lately there are new reasons to hope. In 1992 astronomers Aleksander Wolszczan and Dale Frail discovered two rocky worlds circling a dense, rotating star called a pulsar. Although those planets are bombarded with too much radiation to be habitable, more exoplanet discoveries trickled in through the 2000s. Then the Kepler space mission launched in 2009. It revealed thousands of worlds beyond this one, with more than 5,900 total confirmed as of publication time. 'Planets became the rule, not the exception,' says Nathalie Cabrol, director of the Carl Sagan Center for the Study of Life in the Universe at the SETI Institute. This wealth of worlds once again changed the calculus on the likelihood of life beyond Earth. Back in 1965 Drake developed a formula to calculate the odds of communicating with extraterrestrial civilizations. It factored in the rate of star formation, the fraction of stars with planets, the fraction of those that are habitable, the proportion of habitable planets that actually develop life, the proportion of that life that becomes intelligent, the fraction of civilizations that develop communications technology, and the length of time they are likely to be transmitting. Most of those variables were unknown at the time—and still are—but the exoplanet boom helped to narrow down the second variable, and it's making headway on the third. We now have a much better idea of how many stars host planets, and it's at least most of them. We still don't know how life started here on Earth, so we don't know how it might happen elsewhere. And we don't know how likely advanced civilizations are to destroy themselves—a pressing question for reasons beyond SETI. But we do now know that primitive life can thrive in profoundly inhospitable conditions, and that means that microbial aliens may be a lot easier to find than intelligent ones. In 1966 ecologist Thomas Brock discovered the first extremophile, Thermus aquaticus, living in the hot pools of Yellowstone. Since then, scientists have found microscopic organisms in hydrothermal vents at the bottom of the ocean and in toxic mine waste, in the interiors of rocks and in radioactive water. Just because a planet looks barren doesn't necessarily mean that it is. There is good reason to think primitive life could survive in the buried oceans of Jupiter's moon Europa and the geysers of Enceladus, a moon around Saturn. There might even be microbes in the pools of meltwater under the ice caps of Mars. More than a century after Percival Lowell and his illusory Martian civilization, science has given us plenty of reason to think we're not alone, even if aliens turn out to be single-celled organisms rather than canal-building architects. Solve the daily Crossword
