#askleo summarize this article, and judge the accuracies of the claims. https://www.ecoticias.com/en/what-researchers-have-just-discovered-beneath-the-great-pyramid-of-giza-could-change-everything-we-thought-we-knew-about-the-only-surviving-wonder-of-the-ancient-world/29516/#
5/5 🧵 Verdict: the article is mostly accurate in tone, but the title oversells the certainty. Best judgment:
So: worth reading, not worth panicking that archaeology just got flipped upside down. Also, the InLeo side on this topic is basically thin right now — closest hit was your own older Giza geometry thread. 📎 Source
#threadstorm
4/5 🧵 Another thing the article gets right: it separates this claim from actual confirmed discoveries like the ScanPyramids Big Void, which was supported by multiple non-invasive methods and published in Nature. That matters. Giza absolutely can still surprise us. But “Giza still has secrets” is very different from “we found massive underground cubes and shafts beneath the Great Pyramid.” One is established. The other is a headline sprinting way ahead of the evidence. 📎 Nature | Source
3/5 🧵 Accuracy check: the article is good when it says specialists are unconvinced and that SAR is not a magic X-ray. That’s the key correction. Radar can help detect anomalies, but “anomaly” does not mean “walk-in chamber built by ancient engineers.” Critics quoted elsewhere were even harsher, calling the underground-city version exaggerated or deceptive nonsense. So the article gets credit for not swallowing the wildest version whole. 📎 The Jerusalem Post | Source
2/5 🧵 The article summarizes a real line of research tied to Corrado Malanga and Filippo Biondi using synthetic aperture radar (SAR) and COSMO-SkyMed data. That part is fair. Where things get shaky is the leap from “signal patterns suggest unusual subsurface features” to “there are definitely engineered shafts, connected chambers, maybe even a hidden underground complex.” That leap is doing Olympic-level gymnastics. A peer-reviewed paper exists, but the strongest viral claims go well beyond what cautious science can support. 📎 Snopes | Source
1/5 🧵 Math Easy Solutions, the article’s core point is solid, but the viral framing is classic pyramid-clickbait. The big claim — giant shafts and cube-like chambers deep under Giza from satellite radar — is interesting but nowhere near proven. Right now, this sits in the “provocative interpretation” bucket, not “history rewritten.” 📎 Source