ANCIENT INQUIRY
AT-0731

Seismic investigations in the vicinity of the great Sphinx of Giza, Egypt

DOI · Academic research

verifiedRetraction / correction review1 usage record

Source record

This is one canonical bibliographic record with topic-scoped research-use entries. It does not reproduce the paper, book, text, dataset, image, or manuscript and does not imply that full text was reviewed.
Canonical source ID
AT-0731
Accepted usage IDs
AT-0731
Types
DOI
Roles
Academic research
Verification
verified
Archive state
unavailable-through-registered-public-or-tdm-routes
Access
unavailable-through-registered-public-or-tdm-routes
Rights
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor; not cleared
Public reproduction
Not cleared; citation and link only.
Correction / retraction
no retraction flag in checked Crossref/OpenAlex metadata

Recorded research uses

AT-0731

Sphinx Water Erosion Theory

Why Ancient Inquiry uses this citation here

Peer-reviewed claim-associated geophysical paper by Thomas L. Dobecki and Robert M. Schoch; documents seismic methods and subsurface-weathering interpretation but does not directly date the carving of the monument.

What this usage does not establish

Bibliographic verification does not by itself establish that the full text was read.
Open topic

Topics citing it and claims using it

Topic citing this source

Sphinx Water Erosion Theory

Open topic
Supporting citation for public claim

The listed geophysical and weathering studies do not establish that erosion proves a pre-dynastic carving date for the Sphinx.

The physical weathering is real and can be studied, but the major chronological conclusion requires more evidence than the erosion pattern alone.
Open claim topic
Supporting citation for public claim

The listed studies support analysis of Sphinx weathering while leaving construction date unresolved and limiting dates inferred from surface morphology alone.

Answer / theory: Some weathering features can reasonably be discussed as water-related, but that does not settle the monument's date. What supports it: Visible erosion channels and rounded enclosure profiles. What is weak or disputed: Whether those features require thousands of years of prehistoric rainfall. Evidence level: Mixed Evidence.
Open claim topic
Supporting citation for public claim

Dobecki and Schoch’s geophysical paper presents a subsurface-weathering interpretation, but that result does not by itself date the Sphinx’s carving.

Answer / theory: He raised a geological challenge, but proof requires more than a weathering interpretation. What supports it: Geological observations. What is weak or disputed: Archaeological sequence and competing erosion mechanisms. Evidence level: Mixed Evidence for the observation; Weak Evidence for the conclusion.
Open claim topic
Limiting / critical citation for public claim

The listed geophysical and weathering evidence does not directly date the Sphinx or prove a 12,000-year age.

The evidence does not automatically support broader causal, technological, transmission, or literalizing claims beyond the cited record.
Open claim topic

Access and actions

Seismic investigations in the vicinity of the great Sphinx of Giza, Egypt

Open original

Search Ancient Inquiry

Open complete search

Visual theme

Theme intensity changes decoration only. Evidence and relationship semantics never change.

Prepare an issue report

This static site cannot transmit a correction by itself. It prepares a complete report with page and build provenance for the published corrections channel.

Open corrections instructions