YouTube auto-generated algorithms are pretty bad

I have added the actual words in the video description rather than relying on ai, for most of my poems and songs on my YouTube channel, click here 

PLEASE LEAVE A LIKE AND MAYBE EVEN A COMMENT ON YOUTUBE

Silence - a song by Prem Rawat

My Life in Pics

CLICK TO WATCH

FEATURING songs "Lucky Lucky" by Prem Rawat
and
"A Unique and Clever Hat" and "Between Two Walls" by Alun Buffry

Norfolk Broads Paddle Boat trip from Horning - a few minutes with commentary

Kindle, paperbacks, readings, videos, songs and free mp3s

 

KINDLE LIST

COP THE LOT

Eclipse in Norfolk 12 Aug 2026

 

"A Unique and Clever Hat" : MYAT video, watch on YouTube

 Watch on YoutTube - please give it a like and leave a comment on YouTube to give it a boost.

‘Twas in a shop, on a peg I sat, 

Me, the clever unique hat,

Until the day I went instead,

Upon man Al’s hairy head.

I went with him to many places,

Met people of such different races,

So now if I may be so bold,

I ask you to read my stories told.

We went upon the Hippy Trail,

We went by car and bus and rail. 

We travelled wide, I know what for,

 Life was hard as Al was poor.

On to India, up north until, 

In Haridwar Al became quite ill, 

So off to England, then we went, 

With little money Al was sent.

One day I found a different head,

This time the man’s name I learnt was Ed.

With Anna to Egypt new and old,

Another story to be told.

They travelled back four thousand years,

Solved a mystery and felt the fear,

Saw a man they knew was dead,

And all the time upon Ed’s head.

To come again to Al’s head,

And to his mind my memories I fed.

Now please do read the words I wrote,

Enjoy the tale of times remote.

Here is the book on Amazon and Kindle

ABeFree Publishing 

 

Medical Cannabis in the UK: Legalisation, Unequal Access and Human Rights, an article by Lydia Kitchen

 

Medical Cannabis in the UK: Legalisation, Unequal Access and Human Rights

Lydia Kitchen

Drug Science

Wednesday 05 Aug 2026

Lydia Kitchen is a PhD candidate in Law at the University of Leicester. Her research examines human rights, healthcare decision-making and structural inequality, with a particular interest in drug policy and access to treatment.

Since 2018, cannabis-based products for medicinal use have been available on prescription in the UK. However, NHS access remains exceptionally limited. NHS figures reported to Parliament show that fewer than five patients have received prescriptions for unlicensed products, while more than 1.4 million people are estimated to use cannabis for medical purposes. Private clinics are the main lawful route outside the NHS, but many cannot afford the ongoing costs. People outside the prescription system may still rely on cannabis to manage their health and risk criminalisation.

My recent article in Amicus Curiae, Barriers to Medical Cannabis in the UK: Human Rights Implications of Criminalization and Inequitable Access, examines the gap between legal recognition and practical access from a human rights perspective. It considers whether criminalisation can be justified when people use cannabis therapeutically but cannot obtain a prescription. The central issue is who the system protects and who it leaves exposed to criminalisation. Income, disability and gender can shape access to a prescription, while racial inequalities in drug law enforcement affect who bears the consequences of remaining outside it. A legal distinction shaped by these inequalities becomes increasingly difficult to justify.


Legalisation Without Meaningful Access

In 2018, the law changed to allow specialist doctors to prescribe cannabis-based products for medicinal use. This created a lawful route to treatment, although access remains tightly restricted. A small number of licensed cannabis-based medicines are available through the NHS for certain forms of severe epilepsy, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, and spasticity caused by multiple sclerosis. Private treatment largely involves unlicensed products, including cannabis flower and oils, which are closer to the forms commonly used outside the prescription system. They can be prescribed lawfully, but NHS access is almost non-existent because NICE guidance shapes NHS prescribing and does not recommend them for routine use.

NICE follows established evidence standards that place substantial weight on randomised controlled trials. These remain important, but cannabis can be difficult to assess through this model. Unlike single-compound medicines, cannabis-based products contain varying combinations of active compounds and may affect patients differently, while psychoactive effects can reveal whether participants received the active treatment. Real-world evidence can therefore complement clinical trials. Drug Science’s Project Twenty21 collected longitudinal data from more than 4,500 patients prescribed cannabis for a range of conditions, yet evidence of this kind still carries less weight in NICE guidance.

A 2019 NHS England review identified gaps in specialist education, governance processes, funding and supply as barriers to NHS prescribing. Private clinics remain the main lawful route to unlicensed products, but access requires specialist assessment, medical records, a diagnosis and evidence that conventional treatments have been tried. This can be especially restrictive for conditions such as endometriosis, which takes an average of nine years and four months to diagnose in the UK. Patients may therefore manage symptoms for years before meeting these requirements.

For those who qualify and can sustain the costs, a prescription provides lawful access and protection from possession offences. Without one, possession remains an offence under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. Therapeutic use alone is not a defence, so two people may use cannabis for similar health reasons while only the prescribed patient is protected from criminal sanction.


How Limited Access Deepens Inequality

Limited access does not affect everyone in the same way. Private prescriptions can cost hundreds of pounds each month once medication, consultations and clinic charges are included. For people whose health affects their ability to work or creates additional costs, private treatment may be particularly difficult to sustain. Those needing ongoing treatment may therefore be among the least able to pay for lawful access.

Outside the prescription system, criminalisation compounds that disadvantage. A conviction can affect employment, housing and social inclusion. There is also the immediate stress of relying on something illegal to manage a health condition. Patients prescribed cannabis have reported that, despite legal protection, prohibition still produces stigma and anxiety around using medication in public.

These harms are not distributed equally. Research in England and Wales has consistently documented that Black people are disproportionately stopped and searched, prosecuted and convicted for drug offences, including cannabis possession. The ability to pay privately therefore shapes access to legal protection within an already unequal enforcement system.

People with disabilities and chronic illnesses may face lower incomes and additional costs. Those growing cannabis for medical reasons have described how failures in conventional care, criminalisation and reliance on illicit markets can overlap. Women face related barriers because endometriosis and fibromyalgia disproportionately affect them, while diagnosis can take years and effective treatments remain limited. If lawful access depends on diagnosis and previous treatment, existing healthcare inequalities can influence who receives legal protection.

Intersectionality helps explain how income, race, gender and disability can interact so that one person faces several barriers at once, affecting both access to a prescription and exposure to criminalisation. Equality cannot be understood simply as applying the same criminal law to everyone. A rule may appear neutral while placing a heavier burden on groups already disadvantaged. Where lawful protection is unequally accessible, treating everyone outside the prescription system in the same way can reinforce those inequalities.


Autonomy, Equality and Criminalisation

Restricted access and continued criminalisation raise questions about autonomy and equality under the European Convention on Human Rights. Although the Convention does not create a specific right to medical cannabis or guarantee access to a chosen treatment, the current framework must still comply with the rights it protects.

Article 8 protects private life, including personal autonomy, self-determination and bodily integrity. Criminal law is a serious form of state interference in decisions about managing a health condition. The risk of arrest or prosecution can affect how cannabis is obtained and used, discourage disclosure to healthcare professionals and add to the anxiety of managing a condition outside the law. However, Article 8 is not absolute. Governments may interfere with private life to protect public health, but any interference must be lawful, necessary and proportionate. The 2018 reforms make blanket criminalisation harder to justify because the law now recognises cannabis as a legitimate medical treatment. Someone outside the prescription system can still be criminalised without considering why they use cannabis or why a prescription was unavailable. Concerns about unregulated cannabis remain relevant, but they must be weighed against the harms of criminalisation and less restrictive alternatives.

Article 14 prohibits discrimination in the enjoyment of Convention rights, including Article 8. This includes indirect discrimination, where an apparently neutral rule has disproportionately harmful effects. A prescribed patient and someone outside the prescription system may be managing comparable health problems, yet only one is protected from criminal sanction. Access to a prescription can depend on income, diagnosis, previous treatment and the ability to navigate specialist private healthcare. These barriers interact with disability, gender and socioeconomic disadvantage, while those outside the lawful system also face racial inequalities in drug enforcement. The European Court of Human Rights gives particular weight to discrimination involving disability and health status, recognising that vulnerable groups may require stronger protection. Where access has been shaped by structural disadvantage, criminalisation cannot easily be treated as an individual choice not to comply with the law.

Governments have considerable discretion over health policy and public spending, making it difficult to argue that human rights law requires universal NHS provision. Human rights principles nevertheless strengthen the case for Parliament to reform the law. Decriminalising possession is narrower than universal NHS provision and offers the most realistic starting point for a rights-based approach.


Formal Decriminalisation and Wider Reform

Here, decriminalisation means removing possession for personal use from criminal law. It would not create a commercial market or remove controls on production and supply. Some police forces already use diversion schemes and other out-of-court responses for low-level possession. These may prevent prosecution, but the offence remains. Protection therefore depends on local practice and police discretion, creating inconsistency and legal uncertainty.

Legislative reform would provide clearer and more consistent protection. Stevens, Eastwood and Douse propose repealing sections 5(1) and 5(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. The London Drugs Commission has recommended removing cannabis from that Act so possession would instead fall under the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016, where it is generally not an offence outside custodial settings.

A narrow medical exemption would risk reproducing barriers already present in the prescription system. People may use cannabis for several reasons or recognise its therapeutic value before receiving a formal diagnosis, so medical and recreational use do not always divide neatly. Requiring proof of medical need would disadvantage those whose conditions are difficult to diagnose or whose symptoms have not been taken seriously. Decriminalising possession would avoid making legal protection depend again on medical documentation and healthcare access.

Reform must also address how personal possession is distinguished from supply. Someone using cannabis regularly for a chronic condition may keep a larger quantity to reduce costs, maintain a reliable supply or limit contact with the illicit market. Fixed quantity thresholds could expose therapeutic users to supply allegations even where the cannabis is intended for personal use.

International experience highlights the importance of health and social support alongside legal reform. Portugal, for example, removed criminal penalties for possession of small quantities of drugs for personal use in 2001, alongside investment in treatment, harm reduction and prevention. In the UK, decriminalisation would not expand NHS prescribing or make private treatment affordable. Wider NHS access, better education for healthcare professionals and the police, and further research would still be needed. Reform should also consider expunging previous cannabis possession convictions to address past harms. Decriminalisation would nevertheless be an important first step, preventing people excluded from lawful medical access from also being criminally punished.


Beyond the 2018 Reforms

The 2018 reforms recognised cannabis as a legitimate medical treatment, but legal protection is limited to those able to obtain a prescription. People using cannabis for similar health reasons can therefore face starkly different legal consequences when cost, delayed diagnosis or other healthcare barriers prevent access. The central problem is the relationship between restricted access and continued criminalisation. Decisions about managing illness engage autonomy, while unequal access and enforcement place a heavier burden on those already disadvantaged. Where people unable to obtain lawful treatment remain exposed to criminal sanction, the current framework does not provide equal protection in any meaningful sense.

Decriminalising possession for personal use would remove one of the clearest harms of the current system. Wider reform is still needed to improve NHS access and affordability, support further research and build public and professional understanding. The 2018 reforms should be judged by the protection they provide in practice. Access and criminal justice policy must be addressed together so that people are not punished because lawful treatment was beyond their reach.

Good to see you then, a short song by Alun Buffry

Prem Rawat - Guru Puja, India, opening night 32 July 2026

Heart Knocking - a song by Prem Rawat

Lucky Lucky - a song by Prem Rawat

Silence - a song by Prem Rawat

 

All About My Hat, The Hippy Trail 1972, a book by Alun Buffry

 

Cannabis Did Not Always Produce THC and This Study Shows How Evolution Figured It Out

Cannabis Did Not Always Produce THC and This Study Shows How Evolution Figured It Out

Tibi Puiu

ZME Science

Friday 31 Jul 2026

Ancient enzymes reveal how evolution shaped cannabis chemistry, and how scientists may harness it.

Cannabis did not evolve THC with a single, elegant molecular stroke.

Instead, the plant appears to have stumbled toward it by “experimenting” chemically, copying useful genes, and slowly refining a messy process into the precise cannabinoid assembly line we recognize today. According to a new study from Wageningen University & Research, the familiar compounds THC (tetrahydrocannabinol), CBD (cannabidiol), and CBC (cannabichrome) emerged from such an evolutionary period of biochemical improvisation.

By resurrecting long-extinct enzymes and testing them in the lab, researchers have reconstructed how cannabis acquired the ability to make its signature molecules (including those that can make you high). This is the first experimental evidence for how cannabinoid biosynthesis originated and diversified within the cannabis lineage.

The results also hint at something unexpected: the oldest versions of these enzymes may be better suited for modern biotechnology than their highly specialized descendants.

When Cannabis Enzymes Did Not Pick Sides

In living cannabis plants, cannabinoid production looks tidy. Different enzymes handle different jobs. One mostly produces the precursor to THC. Another focuses on CBD. A third leads to CBC.

But evolution rarely starts with tidy systems.

The Wageningen team shows that the earliest cannabis-specific enzyme involved in cannabinoid biosynthesis was a generalist. Rather than making a single product, it converted the same starting molecule into several different cannabinoid acids at once.

That starting molecule, known as CBGA, is sometimes called the “mother cannabinoid.” Modern enzymes push it down narrow chemical paths. The ancestral enzyme did not. It generated a mixture: THCA, CBDA, and CBCA together.

Rebuilding Enzymes from Deep Time

To uncover this history, the researchers used ancestral sequence reconstruction, a technique that allows scientists to infer ancient proteins from modern DNA.

They compared cannabinoid-related genes from cannabis with those from close relatives such as hops. Using evolutionary models, they predicted what key enzymes must have looked like millions of years ago. Then they synthesized those genes and expressed them in yeast, effectively bringing ancient plant enzymes back to life.

This approach let them test not just what the genes looked like, but what they actually did.

The results revealed a clear sequence. Enzymes predating cannabis showed no ability to process CBGA. The first enzyme unique to cannabis could process it, but did so broadly, producing multiple cannabinoids. Only after later gene duplications did enzymes emerge that strongly favored THC or CBD pathways.

This pattern — generalists first, specialists later — is common in evolution. It gives organisms room to explore chemical possibilities before natural selection locks in the most useful ones.

Copying Genes, Inventing Chemistry

Gene duplication seems to have been key in the cannabis plant’s journey towards molecular specialization.

When a gene duplicates, one copy can maintain its original function. The other gains freedom to mutate. Sometimes that freedom leads nowhere. Sometimes it leads to entirely new chemistry.

Cannabis appears to have used this evolutionary trick repeatedly. Duplications of a single ancestral enzyme allowed different copies to drift toward different cannabinoid products. Over time, those copies became increasingly specialized.

This challenges earlier assumptions that CBD-like compounds came first. Instead, the ancestral enzyme already produced THC precursors alongside others, suggesting that psychoactive chemistry emerged early — and only later became finely tuned.

For the plant, these compounds were unlikely to matter because of their effects on humans. More likely, they played roles in defense, stress response, or microbial resistance. Chemical diversity itself can be an advantage when threats are unpredictable.

Ancient Enzymes, Modern Advantages

The study’s evolutionary insights come with a practical twist.

The resurrected ancestral enzymes turned out to be easier to work with than modern ones. In yeast cells, they expressed more readily and functioned more robustly.

“What once seemed evolutionarily ‘unfinished’ turns out to be highly useful,” says Robin van Velzen in a Wageningen University & Research press release. “These ancestral enzymes are more robust and flexible than their descendants, which makes them very attractive starting points for new applications in biotechnology and pharmaceutical research.”

This matters because demand for medically relevant cannabinoids keeps rising, while plant-based production remains slow and variable. Biotechnological approaches—such as using microbes instead of crop fields—promise consistency and scale, but enzyme performance often limits progress.

Ancient enzymes may offer a shortcut.

Rethinking Rare Cannabinoids like CBC

One cannabinoid stands out in the study: CBC.

CBC has drawn scientific interest for potential anti-inflammatory and pain-related effects, yet it appears only in small amounts in most cannabis plants. According to the researchers, this scarcity stems from enzyme specialization that favored other pathways.

“At present, there is no cannabis plant with a naturally high CBC content. Introducing this enzyme into a cannabis plant could therefore lead to innovative medicinal varieties,” van Velzen says.

In the lab, the team engineered intermediate enzyme forms that produced CBC with striking specificity. That opens two possible futures: cannabis plants redesigned to favor rare cannabinoids, or microbes engineered to produce them efficiently.

What Evolution Still Keeps Hidden

Despite the clarity and elegance of the experiments, gaps remain.

The researchers note that limited genomic data from hop leaves open the question of whether early cannabinoid activity arose just before or just after cannabis split from its relatives. Evolutionary reconstructions also cannot perfectly capture the order of ancient mutations.

Still, the study marks a shift. It moves cannabinoid evolution from speculation to experimental testing.

By replaying evolution in the lab, scientists can now see how cannabis chemistry took shape. In this view, THC is not just a cultural artifact or a pharmacological tool. It is the product of evolutionary trial and error, refined over millions of years. And some of the most promising tools for tomorrow may come not from cannabis’s present, but from its deep molecular past.

The findings appeared in the Plant Biotechnology Journal.

https://www.zmescience.com/science/news-science/cannabis-evolution-of-thc/

Biography of Alun Buffry

For Biography CLICK HERE

New video song: Between Two Walls

 

8-minute reading from IF ONLY SUOMI, a book by Alun Buffry

Listen here

 

IF ONLY SUOMI BOOK COVER

Book and Kindle on Amazon

 

Al in 1972

LEEDS STREET

 

Paddy

Woolworths (Woolies)

Woolies Kwik Cafe

SUOMI

Woolies Record Bar

Jimi Hendrix album

Donovan album

Leeds Roundhay Park lake

Donovan in Concert

 

Introducing some of my books - Alun Buffry

 

You can find links to the books on Amazon HERE

The Unspelling of Words

The Effie Enigma, The Motherless Mothers

When I wrote this book, I thought it was fiction.  Now I wonder?  SMILEY IS COMING!

 The Effie Enigma explores future space colonisation, time entanglement, and a mystery involving a character named Effie.

 

Setting the Scene: Humanity is ready to colonize the galaxy using advanced tech like portable wormholes and mind downloads, led by an artificial super-intelligence.

The Conflict: After years of sabotage against a space project, characters named ZX, FE, and QT meet to find connections.

The Mystery: Past and future cross paths, forcing them to choose whether to stop humanity from being enslaved, while questioning who Effie is and how LSD fits into the plot.

The Effie Enigma: The Motherless Mothers, a science fiction novel, blends speculative science, adventure, and philosophical questions about artificial intelligence, identity, and humanity's future. 

The story follows three young protagonists—ZX, FE, and QT—who become involved in a mystery surrounding Effie, a figure whose true identity is gradually revealed over the course of the novel. As they investigate, they encounter futuristic technologies and ideas that challenge their understanding of life and consciousness. ZX, FE, and QT (Effie, Cutie and Zedex), discover that powerful groups are competing to control these technologies. One side sees them as a way to preserve and improve humanity, while another seeks to use them for control.

Some of the book's major themes include:

Artificial intelligence and whether machines can become truly sentient.

Time travel and wormholes, used to connect events across different eras.

Cloning and identity, particularly through the concept of "Pure Information Clones."

Freedom versus control, exploring whether advanced technology should guide or govern humanity.

Family and origin, reflected in the subtitle The Motherless Mothers, which raises questions about how life might be created without traditional biological parenthood.

Rather than focusing solely on action, the novel uses its science fiction concepts to explore ethical and philosophical questions about what it means to be human and how technological progress might reshape society.

Effie is the key to the entire story. She is far more than an ordinary person and is intimately connected to humanity's future through advanced technologies involving AI, cloning, and information-based life.

The title "The Motherless Mothers" refers to a future in which new forms of reproduction no longer require traditional biological mothers. Instead, consciousness, genetic information, and artificial intelligence become intertwined to create new generations.

By the end of the novel, the mystery surrounding Effie's identity is resolved, revealing that she represents a bridge between present-day humans and a future form of existence in which consciousness can transcend ordinary biology.

The ending leaves readers with the question of whether humanity should embrace this technological evolution or preserve its traditional, imperfect human nature. Rather than providing a simple victory, the novel concludes on a philosophical note about freedom, identity, and what it means to be human.

Anunnaki

 The Anunnaki, also transcribed as Anunaki, Annunaki, Anunna, Ananaki and other variations) are a group of deities of the ancient Sumerians, Akkadians, Assyrians and Babylonians . In the earliest Sumarian writings about them, which come from the Post-Akkadian period, the Anunnaki are deities in the pantheon descendants of An (the god of the heavens) and Ki (the goddess of earth), and their primary function was to decree the fates of humanity.

The Anunnaki are chiefly mentioned in literary texts and very little evidence to support the existence of any cult of them has yet been unearthed. This is likely because each member of the Anunnaki had their own individual cult, separate from the others. Similarly, no representations of the Anunnaki as a complete group have yet been discovered, although a few depictions of two or three individual members together have been identified. Deities in ancient Mesopotamia were almost exclusively anthropomorphic. They were thought to possess extraordinary powers and were often envisioned as being of tremendous physical size  The deities typically wore melam, an ambiguous substance which "covered them in terrifying splendor". Melam could also be worn by heroes, kings, giants, and even demons. The effect that seeing a deity's melam has on a human is described as ni, a word for the tingling of the flesh Deities were almost always depicted wearing horned caps, consisting of up to seven superimposed pairs of ox-horns. They were also sometimes depicted wearing clothes with elaborate decorative gold and silver ornaments sewn into them.

The earliest known usages of the term Anunnaki come from inscriptions written during the reign of Gudea  (c. 2144–2124 BCE) and the Third Dynasty of Ur.  In the earliest texts, the term is applied to the most powerful and important deities in the Sumerian pantheon: the descendants of the sky-god An. This group of deities probably included the "seven gods who decree": An, Enki, Enlil, Ninbursag, Ninhursag, Nanna, Utu and Inanna. 

Although certain deities are described as members of the Anunnaki, no complete list of the names of all the Anunnaki has survived nd they are usually only referred to as a cohesive group in literary texts. Furthermore, Sumerian texts describe the Anunnaki inconsistently and do not agree on how many Anunnaki there were, or what their divine function was.^[Originally, the Anunnaki appear to have been heavenly deities with immense powers. In the poem Enki and the World Order, the Anunnaki "do homage" to Enki, sing hymns of praise in his honor, and "take up their dwellings" among the people of Sumer. The same composition twice states that the Anunnaki "decree the fates of mankind.

More on Wikipedia  

THE CREATORS: Anunnaki, Gods, Ancient Aliens (Documentary)

 

 

Changing Times. Timeless Truths.

 Changing Times. Timeless Truths.

Celebrating 60 years of Prem Rawat's enduring invitation to discover the peace that already exists within.

 

 

RECURRING ILLNESSES - a NEW video reading by Alun Buffry

 VIEW on YOUTUBE  please leave a like and maybe a comment.

 

 

I asked chatGPT what evidence is there to say that the Great Pyramid was built in the reign of Khufu

I asked chatGPT what evidence is there to say that the Great Pyramid was built in the reign of Khufu?

 

it said:

There isn't one single inscription saying, "Khufu built the Great Pyramid in year X." Instead, the case comes from several independent lines of evidence that fit together.

 1. Khufu's name appears inside the pyramid

In the small, inaccessible relieving chambers above the King's Chamber, 19th-century explorers found red ochre quarry marks and graffiti left by the construction crews. Some contain cartouches with the name Khufu.

These marks appear to be work-gang markings, rather than a formal dedication. One famous example refers to a crew associated with Khufu. Because the chambers were sealed and inaccessible after construction, the markings are strong evidence connecting the monument's construction to Khufu's reign.

2. Ancient Egyptian records connect Khufu with the pyramid

The Inventory Stela, discovered at Giza in the 19th century, mentions Khufu and the Great Sphinx area. However, it is much later than Khufu's reign and is not considered reliable evidence that Khufu himself built the Great Pyramid. It is better viewed as evidence of a later Egyptian tradition associating Khufu with Giza.

3. The pyramid fits the chronology of Khufu's dynasty

The Great Pyramid's architectural style, surrounding temples, boat pits, and the development of the Giza pyramid complex all fit the Fourth Dynasty, specifically the period around Khufu's reign (c. 26th century BCE).

The pyramids of Khufu's successors, Djedefre and Khafre, provide a broader chronological sequence. The Great Pyramid is the earliest and largest of the major Giza pyramids, consistent with Khufu's position in the royal succession.

4. Radiocarbon dating supports the period

Radiocarbon dating of organic material associated with the pyramid and its construction has generally produced dates consistent with the Old Kingdom and the Fourth Dynasty. The results have some variation and are not precise enough to say "this was built in Khufu's Year 17," but they broadly support the accepted chronology.

5. The Diary of Merer provides a remarkable contemporary connection

One of the most important discoveries is the Diary of Merer, a roughly 4,500-year-old administrative papyrus found at Wadi al-Jarf. Merer was an official who supervised a team transporting limestone from Tura to Giza.

The diary mentions work

 question: what evidence to argue that the Great Pyramid was not built by Khufu?

 There are arguments used by some alternative-history writers to claim the Great Pyramid was not built during Khufu's reign, but it's important to distinguish between legitimate uncertainties and evidence that actually contradicts the mainstream chronology.

Here are the main arguments and how archaeologists generally assess them:

1. The Khufu inscriptions could be later additions

The most famous evidence linking Khufu to the Great Pyramid is the red ochre quarry marks in the relieving chambers above the King's Chamber, including markings containing Khufu's name.

Critics argue that:

• The marks were discovered by Howard Vyse in 1837.
• Vyse was accused by some contemporaries of questionable archaeological practices.
• Therefore, the markings might have been forged.

Problem with this argument: There is no convincing evidence that they were forged. The markings are consistent with construction graffiti found elsewhere in ancient Egyptian monuments, and the use of Khufu's cartouche fits the archaeological context. The forgery theory remains highly speculative.

2. The Great Pyramid has no formal inscription naming Khufu as its builder

Unlike some Egyptian monuments, the Great Pyramid doesn't contain a prominent inscription saying, essentially, "Khufu built this pyramid."

This is true. But it isn't particularly unusual. Egyptian pyramids were primarily royal funerary monuments, and the absence of a dedicatory inscription isn't evidence that Khufu didn't build it.

The argument is therefore better described as an absence of direct evidence, rather than evidence against Khufu.3. The pyramid's dating is partly based on conventional chronology

Some critics argue that the dating of the Great Pyramid depends on the established Egyptian chronology, which itself has uncertainties.

There is some truth here: ancient chronology is not precise to the exact year, and different dating methods have margins of error.

However, the chronology is supported by multiple independent sources, including:

 Egyptian king lists and historical records

• Archaeological sequences
• Radiocarbon dating
• Stratigraphy
• Architectural development
• Contemporary administrative documents

So there is uncertainty about the exact date, but not strong evidence that the pyramid belongs to a completely different period.

4. The Great Pyramid appears to have been built on a much older site

The Giza Plateau contains evidence of earlier activity, and the bedrock itself is obviously much older than the pyramid.

Some researchers have argued that the site—or even parts of the complex—could have been constructed much earlier and later modified by Khufu.

This is sometimes connected to claims about water erosion on the Sphinx and a proposed much older age for the Sphinx.

 The difficulty is that there is no comparable archaeological evidence showing that the Great Pyramid itself existed thousands of years before Khufu. The geological and archaeological evidence for the pyramid is consistent with Fourth Dynasty construction.

5. The pyramid's precision is argued to be beyond Fourth Dynasty capabilities

Another argument is that the Great Pyramid is so precisely aligned and engineered that ancient Egyptians supposedly could not have built it around 2600 BCE.

Examples cited include:

• Its extremely accurate cardinal alignment
• The precision of its stonework
• Its enormous scale
• The sophisticated internal architecture

This is an interesting question about how it was built, but it isn't evidence that it wasn't built by Egyptians of Khufu's era. Archaeology shows that Fourth Dynasty Egypt had:

• Large organized labor forces
• Copper tools
• Stone-working techniques
• Surveying methods
• Extensive quarrying infrastructure
• Highly centralized administration

The precise methods used are still debated in some details, but the overall engineering is within the demonstrated capabilities of the period.

6. The Great Pyramid may have had a purpose other than a tomb

There is no mummy of Khufu in the Great Pyramid, and the King's Chamber contains only an empty granite sarcophagus.

This has led some people to argue that it wasn't a tomb at all.

The counterargument is that the pyramid was probably looted in antiquity. The absence of a surviving burial isn't surprising given the enormous amount of time that has passed. Other Egyptian royal pyramids were also found empty.

The pyramid's architecture and its relationship to the surrounding temples, causeway, and funerary complex are strongly consistent with a royal tomb complex.

 7. The Great Pyramid may have been built by an earlier civilization

This is the most radical alternative hypothesis. Proponents sometimes suggest that:

• An unknown advanced civilization built it.
• The Egyptians inherited or modified it.
• It dates to the end of the last Ice Age or earlier.

The main evidence cited includes astronomical interpretations, geological arguments, and the pyramid's engineering sophistication.

The major problem is lack of archaeological evidence. There is no demonstrated earlier civilization at Giza that left behind the enormous industrial footprint that such a project would require. By contrast, there is extensive evidence of Fourth Dynasty Egyptian activity at the site.

 At present, no.

There are legitimate questions about the exact construction date, the construction techniques, and the precise role of the pyramid in Egyptian religious practice. But the evidence that the Great Pyramid was constructed during Khufu's reign is considerably stronger than the evidence for an alternative date.

The most reasonable conclusion is:

The evidence doesn't prove beyond every conceivable doubt that Khufu personally "built" the Great Pyramid—he almost certainly didn't lay the stones himself—but it strongly supports the conclusion that the monument was commissioned and constructed as part of his royal funerary complex during his reign.

One important nuance is that "built by Khufu" can mean two different things. If you mean "Khufu personally designed and supervised the construction," the evidence is weak. If you mean "the Egyptian state under Khufu commissioned and constructed it," the archaeological evidence is strong.

END ... BUT ...
 

Scientists may have finally cracked how the Egyptians built the pyramids

 

 

Some of my Egyptian pyramids and statuettes

 

VIDEOS: some ABEFREE Publishing books

 

INTRODUCING SOME OF THE BOOKS ON YOUTUBE (videos)

ALL ABOUT MY HAT THE HIPPY TRAIL 1972 INTRODUCTION

ALL ABOUT MY HAT VISUALISATIONS:

Part 1: ENTERING GREECE 

Part 2 BOILED EGGS IN KABUL

Part 3: A DIP IN THE GANGES 

Part 4: A TRIP IN KABUL 

If ONLY SUOMI

THE UNSPELLING OF WORDS

FROM DOT TO CLEOPATRA A CONCISE HISTORY OF ANCIENT EGYPT  INTRODUCTION

MYHAT IN EGYPT INTRODUCTION

MYHAT IN EGYPT VISUALISATION

WORDS OF WEED AND WISDOM THE AUTHORS

INSIDE MY HAT AND OTHER HEADS THE AUTHORS

 

 

"I LAND": spontaneous poetic words from Melissa Doordaughter whilst on the Isle of Arran

 Here on YouTube

There's more of Melissa's poems in the book
Words of Weed and Wisdom

As the Mind Flies ... a poem by Alun Buffry, Pokhara, Nepal 1985

 

The Unspelling of Words

 Watch on YouTube  

 

The Curious Door of ABeFree

 The Curious Door of ABeFree

There’s a curious door at ABeFree.

It doesn’t ask for a password, a subscription, or a secret handshake. It simply creaks open and whispers, “Come in—you might leave knowing something you didn’t know you wanted to know.”

Inside, history rubs shoulders with poetry. Egypt nods politely to justice. Fiction quietly winks at memoir, while somewhere in the background an MP3 clears its throat, hoping someone will press play.

The books don’t seem to mind whether you read one or twenty. They have the relaxed confidence of old friends in a second-hand bookshop, content to wait until curiosity does the introductions.

ABeFree isn’t trying to trap you in an algorithm. It would much rather tempt you with an idea, a forgotten story, or an unexpected smile.

After all, the best journeys rarely begin with a map.

They begin with an open door.

abefreepublishing.com

Avery interesting, as you may know I have always been sceptical about astrology although I have seen many times when it looks like it works, but I am a great believer that collective human consciousness, the harmonic convergence, can change the world drastically for the god or the bad. So over the last however long, maybe since the days of tribes, people, I think, have always prepared for and feared war, starvation, disasters etc, which has led human mass consciousness in that direction (which is why so many countries have weapons they say they hope never to use, ministries of war and not peace, laws to stop us doing stuff that people always break, stockpiles of food whilst people starve and a media that focusing on the bad stuff to scare people into submission and greed). SO, I think any article that says "things are going t get better", even if the planets and stars are the cause, if people start to think that way, is going to make positive changes, even if the stars have little to do with it or not. Just like positive affirmations like I say to people - say out loud, three times, three times a day "I m glad I feel good today" will help improve people's lives, even if it seems like it will never work or is not true. IE, we make our own world, we make our own life, we make our own destiny etc. SO spreading articles like this WILL help. If we emanate light, love and people, like the smiling, it will effect others - even one candle can light hundreds - Prem's cause and mine. SO I am going to post the article on here.

THE WORLD WE HAVE KNOWN ENDS THIS JULY. A NEW ONE BEGINS. THE BARBAULT BASKET

By Mark A. Shryock

In July 2026, five planets will lock into a geometric pattern that a French astrologer named André Barbault spent his entire life trying to understand. He called it a basket. It is a rare alignment where the slow outer planets cluster in one section of the zodiac wheel while one planet sits apart, like a handle on a basket. Barbault believed this formation marks periods when civilizations reorganize themselves, when the old order breaks apart and something new tries to take its place. He died in 2019, three months before COVID-19 proved one of his predictions correct. He had forecast a pandemic for 2020. He was 89 years old when he wrote it, working from decades of cycle data and historical correlation. This July, the basket he theorized will appear for the first time in the 21st century.

The physics behind this is real. When the four giant planets, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune, gather on one side of the Sun, the solar system’s center of mass shifts. NASA calls this the solar system barycenter. It can move more than 800,000 kilometers from the Sun’s center. That is over one solar radius outside the Sun’s surface. Jupiter accounts for most of this pull. Jupiter is two and a half times the mass of all other planets combined. The barycenter is not theoretical. NASA uses it for deep space navigation. The International Celestial Reference System is barycentric. In 2024, researchers using NANOGrav pulsar timing data pinpointed the barycenter to within 330 feet above the Sun’s surface. The lopsidedness is measurable. Barbault’s claim was that this physical lopsidedness correlates with human events. He did not claim to know the mechanism. He claimed the correlation was robust across centuries.

Barbault identified the Black Death in 1347, the Great Plague of London in 1665, the Spanish Flu in 1918, and the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 as all occurring during periods of low Cyclic Index values. In 1347, Jupiter, Pluto, and Uranus formed a triple conjunction in Aries while Saturn and Neptune sat nearby in Pisces and Aquarius. Only 73 degrees separated the outermost framing planets. In January 2020, Saturn and Pluto conjoined in Capricorn with Jupiter close by. All five slow planets gathered within about 100 degrees. Barbault had predicted this in 2011. He wrote in L’Astrologue that the period 2020 to 2022 could accompany a pandemic based on the lowest cyclical reading of the 21st century. He died on October 7, 2019. He did not live to see the prediction fulfilled.

The exact configuration peaks July 19 to 21, 2026. The five outer planets align at approximately 4 degrees of their respective signs. Jupiter sits at 4 degrees Leo. Pluto sits at 4 degrees Aquarius, opposite Jupiter. Neptune sits at 4 degrees Aries, trine to Jupiter. Uranus sits at 4 degrees Gemini, sextile to Jupiter and trine to Pluto. Saturn sits at 14 degrees Aries, having conjoined Neptune on February 20, 2026, slowing ahead of its retrograde station and leaving a 10-degree separation from Neptune’s anchor at 4 degrees Aries, sextile to both Pluto and Uranus. This creates what astrologers call a Minor Grand Trine among Pluto, Neptune, and Uranus, two trines and two sextiles, with Jupiter activating the figure from Leo through opposition to Pluto and trine to Neptune. The result is a cradle or basket pattern. An opposition at the top. A cluster of supportive aspects beneath it. The shape of a basket.

Barbault’s own words on this period were specific. In his 2014 book The Value of Astrology, translated into English by Kate Johnston and Roy Gillett of the Astrological Association, he wrote that the Saturn-Neptune conjunction of 2026 is the most benefic configuration of the century and its interplanetary partnership will work for the best in a splendid re-launch of civilization. He wrote that it contains a harmonious relationship between primordial polar opposites, the coming together of the external and internal, rational and spiritual mind and soul and human beings surpassing themselves while experiencing life on a higher level. In his broader analysis of the 2026 to 2028 period, he described the new world civilization, the beginnings of which appeared around the year 2000, as being in full flight. He wrote that this entry into the second quarter of the century bears the stamp of the achievement of a new age of humanity. He specified that the central and harmonic position of the Saturn-Neptune conjunction is especially expressive of a promotion of the lower strata of the world population, a significant rise in the standard of living of the poor, a victory over misery won in unprecedented solidarity.

On the collective level, astrologers interpreting the basket emphasize several themes. The end of the crisis period. The 2020 Saturn-Pluto-Jupiter conjunction in Capricorn initiated what Barbault called a world crisis. The 2026 basket marks its resolution phase, not the absence of difficulty, but the pivot toward rebuilding. Civilizational reset. The Saturn-Neptune conjunction at 0 degrees Aries in February 2026 is the pure potential seed. The basket in July is its activation. This is the threshold to the new world. Once we pass through it, there will be no return to the way it was. Promotion of the lower strata. Barbault specifically predicted that the Saturn-Neptune conjunction would bring a significant rise in the standard of living of the poor, a victory over misery won in unprecedented solidarity. Technological spiritual paradox. The configuration presents a significant choice point. Whether humanity will follow the invisible and mysterious stream of spiritual evolution or the denser reality of technological expansion. The question of whether these can harmonize is, in Barbault’s view, the foremost existential question of the new era.

Whether this achievement manifests as liberation or as a more subtle form of control, as spiritual awakening or technological sedation, as solidarity or fragmentation, the geometry does not dictate. It describes the field of possibility. The rest is human choice.

Read the Full Article here