I'm with Take3 on calling it a hoax. I took the trouble to search it a bit since I knew that a few claims in the Crystalinks article by Paul White were wrong, even though I'm far from being an expert on ancient Egypt.
For example, he claims that the Australian carvings date to the time of Khufu and are a mix of “archaic” Egyptian, Sumerian, and Phoenician writing. But Phoenicians didn’t even have a writing system at the time of Khufu, not until 1000 years later. When they did develop one, it was alphabetic, not hieroglyphics. Also, the Sumerians used pictographs, and their system was developed around the same time as Egyptian writing (3400 BCE) or slightly later, but the two systems were different. It wouldn’t have worked to combine them within the same words, sentences, or paragraphs.
So I checked out Paul White as a source and looked for opinions of Egyptologists. I know that they’re a very “closed club,” but White’s article claimed that the Australian carvings were translated by an Egyptologist - [W.] Raymond Johnson - who, it turns out, is one of the world’s leading experts on Egyptian hieroglyphics. That makes him not only a member of this closed club himself, but also one who is very highly regarded by other club members. Surely they’d have some comments on it.
Nada. Not even on the website of the University of Chicago’s Oriental Institute, where Professor Johnson is the Field Director of the institute’s Luxor House Epigraphic Project. The Oriental Institute’s purpose is to preserve and record the artifacts, writings, and history of the Near East. The Luxor Epigraphic Project focuses on Egyptian writings. Here’s the Oriental Institute’s website. Perhaps someone else can find something there about the Australian carvings that I missed. I realize that Johnson is a common name, but I doubt that there’s another Raymond Johnson who just happens to also be an expert Egyptologist on hieroglyphics.