Towers under pyramids
Executive summary
Claims that radar or satellite scans have revealed a vast “underground city” or megastructures beneath the Giza pyramids originated from a March–April 2025 publicity push by a small team of Italian and Scottish-affiliated researchers and have been widely challenged by experts; independent fact‑checks say there is no credible evidence for the sensational claims [1] [2]. Some legitimate geophysical work has found localized anomalies near Giza using ground‑penetrating methods, but those findings are far more modest and have been published or described in different contexts [3] [4].
1. How the story began — a sensational press push
A group including Corrado Malanga and Filippo Biondi presented publicised radar-based images and livestreamed claims of multiple “large structures,” spiral staircases and pathways extending hundreds to thousands of feet below Khafre’s pyramid; the announcement was broadcast via YouTube and generated headlines and social posts that framed the discovery as a hidden city beneath Giza [5] [4].
2. What the investigators said they used — SAR tomography claims
The team described using synthetic aperture radar (SAR) tomography to probe beneath the pyramid and released 3D renderings and dramatic descriptions — for example structures stretching “over 6,500 feet” or wells descending “648 meters” — language that amplified the scale of the announced finds in media accounts [6] [2].
3. Expert reaction — mainstream archaeologists push back
Egyptologists and field archaeologists immediately expressed skepticism: specialists note the pyramids sit on a relatively flat limestone plateau and there is no corroborating evidence for the deep, extensive networks the proponents claimed; critics pointed out the presenters lack Egyptology credentials and that extraordinary claims require strong, peer‑reviewed evidence [1] [4].
4. Independent verification is missing — fact checks and journalistic scrutiny
Multiple fact‑checks and news outlets report there is no credible, peer‑reviewed study supporting the “underground city” narrative and question the existence of an organised Khafre Project beyond its YouTube presence; Snopes and AFP concluded that the sensational claims are unfounded or unproven in current reporting [2] [1].
5. What legitimate surveys have found — modest anomalies, not cities
Separately, legitimate geophysical surveys around the Giza plateau have detected anomalies and previously unknown chambers or “anomalies” using ground‑penetrating radar, electrical resistivity tomography and muon tomography; those findings are localized and have been published or discussed by mainstream teams, but do not equate to the vast subterranean complexes being claimed by the Khafre presenters [3].
6. Fringe narratives and agendas — why the story spread
The dramatic visuals and talk of lost civilizations fit a ready-made audience for grand narratives; outlets from tabloid press to conspiracy sites amplified the claims, and some commentators tied the purported discoveries to speculative ancient‑energy or underworld legends — a pattern noted in coverage that connected the claims to fringe researchers and online promoters [7] [8].
7. Methodological gaps — why experts remain unconvinced
Critiques focus on the lack of peer review, limited disclosure of raw data and unclear methodology for applying SAR tomography in this way to complex, shallow archaeological settings; experts stress that noninvasive methods can reveal anomalies but require transparent methods, reproducibility and cross‑validation with established archaeological techniques [1] [2].
8. How to read future announcements — what credible evidence would look like
A credible claim would include: publication in a peer‑reviewed journal, clear methodological detail and open data, corroboration from independent teams using different methods (e.g., muon tomography, ground‑penetrating radar, targeted excavation approved by Egyptian authorities) and input from Egyptologists — none of which is present in the contentious announcements reported so far [1] [2] [3].
Limitations and final note
Available sources document the controversy, the publicised claims, expert skepticism and separate legitimate geophysical anomalies near Giza; they do not provide verified, peer‑reviewed evidence of a vast subterranean city under the pyramids [1] [2] [3]. Readers should treat dramatic renderings and livestreamed press events as unverified until independent, peer‑reviewed science and archaeological oversight confirm any extraordinary subterranean structures [1] [2].