PDA

View Full Version : Best explanation for Great Pyramid(s)



David Ragan
07-21-2015, 8:00 AM
The Tesla thing reminded me that I saw a program that said the purpose of the tunnels in the great pyramid, and it's location over a running aquifor and location on a certain geometric magnetic line over the surface of the planet, was something along the lines of an acid was poured down the chute/tunnel, and them mixed with another chemical in the bottom. This resulted in a chemical reaction, combined with the geographic location resulted in the pyramid emitting usable energy. I dont' recall whether the energy was used to power things in the surrounding area, or re-fueling alien spacecraft, or what. but they did find traces of the supposed chemicals in the structure and chutes, and have replicated the whole thing in the labs.

Interesting or not?:cool:

Karl Andersson
07-21-2015, 8:37 AM
Is this a theory from that guy on "ancient aliens", you know the one with the hair? It would have to be power for space ships - otherwise we'd see evidence of a power distribution system -aka cables (although Tesla did try energizing the Earth so that wires wouldn't be needed). Maybe the Nubians developed a drug habit from traders on the silk road and had to steal the cables and sell them for scrap?

It's a similar question to the Baghdad battery and other potential ancient technologies; did they build it for the purpose it could have been used, or are people just stretching their imaginations to make the world seem more interesting (or make more money for their books, museums, etc.?) The traces of acid found in the tunnels could well be remains of wine or other foods thrown down as some sort of sacrifice - there would be much more buzz in the non-tv archaeological world if there was any hint at this being significant.

Check out this site: http://archyfantasies.com/2012/06/22/the-10-most-not-so-puzzling-ancient-artifacts-the-baghdad-battery/

Don't mean to be to negative, though - I'm probably just jealous because I was never abducted by aliens nor met a Grey or anything like that.
Karl

Julie Moriarty
07-21-2015, 8:49 AM
Q: Why were the Pyramids built in the desert?
A: They weren't.

Q: Why are there no dinosaur bones in the K-T boundary?
A: They died off before the Chicxulub impact.

Science can be such a bummer. :rolleyes:

Wade Lippman
07-21-2015, 10:13 AM
Not the least bit interesting.

It could have been almost anything, but there is not a hint of evidence for any of it.
Most of the so-called evidence is simply made up.
Would you build the Pyramids to mix two chemicals together?

Rick Potter
07-21-2015, 12:43 PM
When a 'discovery' program starts of with..........Could it be?, Is it possible?, etc. that is about the point where I turn it off. My experiences with schlock like this started with Von Daniken in the 1960's when he managed to get a movie like it, "Chariots of the Gods", in theaters.

Gotta go meditate. Anybody see my pyramid shaped tin foil hat?

Phil Thien
07-21-2015, 2:25 PM
Of course it was a limitless source of power, but big oil and the gov't don't want us to know about it. All the details are locked up in the library of congress, written in invisible ink.

David Ragan
07-21-2015, 4:01 PM
Don't mean to be to negative, though - I'm probably just jealous because I was never abducted by aliens nor met a Grey or anything like that.
Karl

I thought that if one were abducted by aliens, you would not remember it? like Guys in Black?


Q: Why were the Pyramids built in the desert?
A: They weren't.

Q: Why are there no dinosaur bones in the K-T boundary?
A: They died off before the Chicxulub impact.

Science can be such a bummer. :rolleyes:

As I said recently, I always thought the P<.05 a bit arbitrary- pretty much the basis of all modern scientific 'proof'.

Why is it significant or not that they were or not built in the desert?

Tom M King
07-21-2015, 4:25 PM
I don't think they had tin foil back then.

Chuck Wintle
07-21-2015, 4:31 PM
I am trying to imagine the mindset of those ancient people who somehow had the idea to build these huge pyramids. I keep asking why would they undertake such a task?

Wade Lippman
07-21-2015, 4:44 PM
I am trying to imagine the mindset of those ancient people who somehow had the idea to build these huge pyramids. I keep asking why would they undertake such a task?

Well, that's easy. The same reason we build stupidly tall buildings today, or stupidly big houses, or stupidly big yachts; to show how special we are.

Raymond Fries
07-21-2015, 4:53 PM
I have studies the pyramids and other ancient structures for years. The pyramids are the most precise structure ever created. We cannot replicate it today. Imagine starting with a 13 acre base that is level to within 1/2" from one corner to the other. On the interior, there are some 70 ton stones that were lifted to about 150' as I recall. In the Aswan quarry where the stones were cut there are core drill holes. Examining these shows that the bore rate is 500 times faster than anything we have today. I could go on and on. An excellent book on their construction is The Giza Power Plant by Christopher Dunn. You may not agree with his theory buy you will walk away knowing that there were not tombs for some king. There are pyramids in many countries with some larger than the ones at Giza. Odd that those never make it to main stream media. I believe the pyramids were somehow used for energy .

Pat Barry
07-21-2015, 6:05 PM
I have studies the pyramids and other ancient structures for years. The pyramids are the most precise structure ever created. We cannot replicate it today. Imagine starting with a 13 acre base that is level to within 1/2" from one corner to the other. On the interior, there are some 70 ton stones that were lifted to about 150' as I recall. In the Aswan quarry where the stones were cut there are core drill holes. Examining these shows that the bore rate is 500 times faster than anything we have today. I could go on and on. An excellent book on their construction is The Giza Power Plant by Christopher Dunn. You may not agree with his theory buy you will walk away knowing that there were not tombs for some king. There are pyramids in many countries with some larger than the ones at Giza. Odd that those never make it to main stream media. I believe the pyramids were somehow used for energy .
We all know that they weren't built by hordes of slaves. Its really time for all of us to quit the denial of the obvious and admit we have no idea how they got there, when they got there, why they got there, etc. We will never know

Brian Kent
07-21-2015, 6:32 PM
My sister the Egyptologist has a theory (for humor's sake only) that they were made of poured limestone cement. Later they drew pictures of a multitude of slaves pulling the stones just to throw everybody off. :)

Wade Lippman
07-21-2015, 7:56 PM
I have studies the pyramids and other ancient structures for years. The pyramids are the most precise structure ever created. We cannot replicate it today. Imagine starting with a 13 acre base that is level to within 1/2" from one corner to the other. On the interior, there are some 70 ton stones that were lifted to about 150' as I recall. In the Aswan quarry where the stones were cut there are core drill holes. Examining these shows that the bore rate is 500 times faster than anything we have today. I could go on and on. An excellent book on their construction is The Giza Power Plant by Christopher Dunn. You may not agree with his theory buy you will walk away knowing that there were not tombs for some king. There are pyramids in many countries with some larger than the ones at Giza. Odd that those never make it to main stream media. I believe the pyramids were somehow used for energy .

We might not have all the details yet, but there are really no mysteries about the pyramids. You are just reading the wrong books; the ones that just make up "mysteries".

Harold Burrell
07-21-2015, 11:04 PM
We all know that they weren't built by hordes of slaves.

No. We don't "all know that"... :)

Kent A Bathurst
07-21-2015, 11:22 PM
No. We don't "all know that"... :)

True Harold. There is a small group of us whom are not convinced, but it is we few, we happy few, we band of brothers, who also believe the Earth is round. Though we be few, our cause is just.

Cry - Good Grief !! for Harry, England, and St George !!!!!

Pat Barry
07-22-2015, 7:48 AM
True Harold. There is a small group of us whom are not convinced, but it is we few, we happy few, we band of brothers, who also believe the Earth is flat. Though we be few, our cause is just.

Cry - Good Grief !! for Harry, England, and St George !!!!!


Corrected a typo above - Freudian slip -

Dan Hunkele
07-22-2015, 8:41 AM
Maybe we could get Geraldo Rivera on the case. Then we would know.

Frank Drew
07-22-2015, 9:35 AM
I have studies the pyramids and other ancient structures for years. The pyramids are the most precise structure ever created. We cannot replicate it today. Imagine starting with a 13 acre base that is level to within 1/2" from one corner to the other.

Current GPS grading equipment is accurate on the order of 1-2 mm.


In the Aswan quarry where the stones were cut there are core drill holes. Examining these shows that the bore rate is 500 times faster than anything we have today.
No. Now you're drifting from fanciful speculation to outright fantasy. IMO.

Raymond Fries
07-22-2015, 11:19 AM
Mr. Dunn is an engineer with 35 years experience. The book was written as he measured the accuracy of the construction and tried to make the point that they could not have been built with copper chisels. There are pictures in his book of the core drill samples with the measurements to back his statement. Please read the book and come back and tell me if he is having a fantasy.

Is it possible that something that heavy could have settled a little bit? There are ball and socket joints at the corners to account for movement.

David Ragan
07-22-2015, 1:24 PM
Do we have a consensus that we do not know how they were built?

I mean, in order to poo-poo the notion that they definitely were not built by aliens, or some long-forgotten mystery technology--don't we have to propose/hypthesize a way in which they were constructed?

Is it possible that hordes of folks with copper chisels did it?

Note-this is a variation of my original question of the what was their purpose, which is still up for grabs.

Wade Lippman
07-22-2015, 4:08 PM
Mr. Dunn is an engineer with 35 years experience. The book was written as he measured the accuracy of the construction and tried to make the point that they could not have been built with copper chisels. There are pictures in his book of the core drill samples with the measurements to back his statement. Please read the book and come back and tell me if he is having a fantasy.

He made up everything in the book. Why would anyone spend time reading it?


Is it possible that hordes of folks with copper chisels did it?
I mean, in order to poo-poo the notion that they definitely were not built by aliens, or some long-forgotten mystery technology--don't we have to propose/hypthesize a way in which they were constructed?


Yup, that's how they did it. We don't know all the details, but yes it was chiefly done by thousands of men with copper tools over the course of 20 years or so.
An no, we don't have to have the faintest idea how they did it to reject the idea that non-existent aliens did it.
The list of things we have no understanding of is very long, but it is perfectly reasonable to reject the idea that aliens had anything to do with them.
If we allowed Aliens to be an explanation rather than ignoring that nonsense and looking for the truth, we would still be living like they did 10,000 years ago.

Frank Drew
07-22-2015, 4:39 PM
Raymond, David,

How about the great medieval cathedrals of Europe, built without any modern equipment or technology?

Ancient builders were highly skilled for their times, and celestial or supernatural explanations for their masterpieces work aren't necessary.

One other thing: the world's museums are full of thousands of artifacts from ancient Egypt, everything from shards of pottery to the treasures from the pharaoh's tombs, and yet not one "exotic" tool or machine or "alien" artifact has turned up. Why would that be?

Rick Potter
07-22-2015, 7:45 PM
While I cannot claim any expertise at all, I have been to an Egyptian quarry where they slabbed rock for Pyramids. There are slabs that broke when they were moved still there, as well as marked off slabs that were never cut. As I remember, the guide showed us how they drilled using the equivalent of what we would call a star drill and a hammer. Doing it this way would not leave any core samples, just dust.

The guide told us they scratched a line on the rock (some still visible) where they wanted it to split, drilled holes along the scratch, drove wooden pegs into the holes, and added water to the pegs. This would make the pegs swell in the holes, and eventually the rock would split along the line.

And that is how they explained it to us touristas. An interesting trip. Our group was escorted around by a pickup with six soldiers carrying AK47's in front our bus, and a guard riding in the bus with us, armed with a small machine gun under his sport coat. Made us feel real safe, kind of like a moving target.

David Ragan
07-23-2015, 7:22 AM
Raymond, David,

How about the great medieval cathedrals of Europe, built without any modern equipment or technology?

Ancient builders were highly skilled for their times, and celestial or supernatural explanations for their masterpieces work aren't necessary.

One other thing: the world's museums are full of thousands of artifacts from ancient Egypt, everything from shards of pottery to the treasures from the pharaoh's tombs, and yet not one "exotic" tool or machine or "alien" artifact has turned up. Why would that be?

True enough


While I cannot claim any expertise at all, I have been to an Egyptian quarry where they slabbed rock for Pyramids. There are slabs that broke when they were moved still there, as well as marked off slabs that were never cut. As I remember, the guide showed us how they drilled using the equivalent of what we would call a star drill and a hammer. Doing it this way would not leave any core samples, just dust.

The guide told us they scratched a line on the rock (some still visible) where they wanted it to split, drilled holes along the scratch, drove wooden pegs into the holes, and added water to the pegs. This would make the pegs swell in the holes, and eventually the rock would split along the line.

And that is how they explained it to us touristas. An interesting trip. Our group was escorted around by a pickup with six soldiers carrying AK47's in front our bus, and a guard riding in the bus with us, armed with a small machine gun under his sport coat. Made us feel real safe, kind of like a moving target.

True also. but, really expect the Egyptians to say, 'hey, these here national monuments, we didn't make them. Aliens did.' that is some kinda bias, I'm sure, right?

Of course, when the aliens land/ed here-you know what they said? "hey, who are these here aliens?"

Bruce Pratt
07-23-2015, 7:57 AM
To those who support the alien theory, please consider the generalized case of Russell's teapot (look it up on Wikipedia).

David Ragan
07-23-2015, 8:25 AM
To those who support the alien theory, please consider the generalized case of Russell's teapot (look it up on Wikipedia).

Also a good rebuttal

Julie Moriarty
07-23-2015, 8:49 AM
I think consideration should be given to the possibility the pyramid builders had technology that, to modern day man, is so far out of the box thinking we haven't considered it yet. And then there's a catastrophic event that took place that could resulted in that technology being lost.

We know there was an event that led to great famine and probably the fall of both the Egyptian and Akkadian empires. Both were highly advanced, though the Egyptians seem to get all the limelight. The 4.2 kiloyear BP aridification event (about 4,200 years ago) is believed by many scientists to have been caused by a rapid change in the ocean currents. But some scientists believe there is evidence of a meteorite being the culprit. There was a giant landslide that centered at K÷fels in Austria that has been dated around the same time. The theory is a meteorite passed closely overhead and caused the top of a mountain to collapse, creating the landslide. Of course, if there was an impact that followed (and there have been craters found along the theorized path), you get ash spewed up that would block sunlight, etc, etc.

Egyptologists have interpreted ancient writings as telling of a time of horrific famine when people were eating their young. (The assumption is, after the children died, cannibalism was seen as the only means for survival.) When you imagine things being this bad, it's easy to see how their technology could become unimportant and be lost. If there is anything to the theory of a deep space impact, the technology could have been destroyed. And all evidence with it.

The area where the pyramids are was once a lush paradise. Maybe the aridifcation event turned it into a desert. And wind and sand have a way of eroding and erasing everything in its path.
Whatever the cause of the lack of evidence, we know that so far we haven't uncovered anything solid enough to know how they did what they did.

Thus far, the ancient engineers have proven they were more ingenious that we.

Wade Lippman
07-23-2015, 10:08 AM
I think consideration should be given to the possibility the pyramid builders had technology that, to modern day man, is so far out of the box thinking we haven't considered it yet.

Without a shred of evidence for such technology, or any need for an explanation beyond copper chisels, you would certainly be wrong for considering that possibility.

Anything is possible, but consideration is best reserved for those explanations that are reasonable. Quantum mechanics allows the possibility that the pyramids simply "appeared", but it is as improbable as the high technology concept and disregarded.

Mark Blatter
07-23-2015, 10:32 AM
Do we have a consensus that we do not know how they were built?


Note-this is a variation of my original question of the what was their purpose, which is still up for grabs.

I saw a series of documentaries showing that they were built as landing pads for space ships. It was a ten year series of documentaries hosted by Richard Dean Anderson. They later did a follow-up on possible life in another galaxy. Naturally some were better than others, but they had this expert on the show that was very knowledgeable about the various Egyptian gods and how they all interacted.

Mike Ontko
07-23-2015, 11:05 AM
I think consideration should be given to the possibility the pyramid builders had technology that, to modern day man, is so far out of the box thinking we haven't considered it yet. ... Thus far, the ancient engineers have proven they were more ingenious that we.

...or at least more ingenious than we've given credit for.

That is the one key item left starting back at us (present day human)--that something so large was constructed and with a precision purportedly beyond even our present day capabilities (assuming that knowledge and technology alone are the limiting factors and not simply money/control).

The true value in the books, shows, and conversations on topics like this isn't that they provide answers (so far to date, I don't believe any actual factual answers have been revealed), but that they stimulate us to at least ask questions that challenge...or that should challenge...current perceptions of who, what, and why we are.

Mel Fulks
07-23-2015, 12:35 PM
Seems strange that the experts buy the tomb purpose. I think the astronomy observation and alignments have more proof and there are early writings about people going to that area to study the stars.

Mike Ontko
07-23-2015, 12:48 PM
Seems strange that the experts buy the tomb purpose.

That would depend on which experts you're referring to and what potentially they were expecting to gain from their a$$ertions :)

Julie Moriarty
07-23-2015, 1:57 PM
Without a shred of evidence for such technology, or any need for an explanation beyond copper chisels, you would certainly be wrong for considering that possibility.

Anything is possible, but consideration is best reserved for those explanations that are reasonable. Quantum mechanics allows the possibility that the pyramids simply "appeared", but it is as improbable as the high technology concept and disregarded.

One of the things every person alive today has in common is that none of us was there to witness how the pyramids were built. To close doors on possibilities prevents us from exploring those possibilities further. I can't subscribe to that kind of thinking. There are too many instances where we were sure we had the answers only to find later on that we were wrong. Closed minds stifle innovation.

Pat Barry
07-23-2015, 2:57 PM
We simply could not build the pyramids today. There was a show on PBS a year or two ago where they actually tried and failed -they had to bring in the heavy equipment (because of time allowances). Certainly then, we could not build them today not without heavy equipment. The only generally accepted explanation is that hordes of slaves pulled those stones into position using ropes and maybe rollers. That is farfetched enough as to be unbelieveable. Not only to build one pyramid, but many many pyramids. Don't ask why the mayans also built pyramids - great minds think alike even though separated by an ocean they could not cross.

Stilll, there is no evidence of otherworldy intervention so that leaves us with the fact that the slaves were incredibly industrious and committed for a very long time.

I think if I were the alien beings that built those things, I would take my tools back home with me when the job was finished and leave mankind to scratch their heads til eternity trying to figure out how those things got there.

Wade Lippman
07-23-2015, 2:59 PM
One of the things every person alive today has in common is that none of us was there to witness how the pyramids were built. To close doors on possibilities prevents us from exploring those possibilities further. I can't subscribe to that kind of thinking. There are too many instances where we were sure we had the answers only to find later on that we were wrong. Closed minds stifle innovation.

Could be built by pixies, intelligent beavers, aliens, or ants; or they could be fallen asteroids, or completely natural phenomenons. If I had a shot at a show on the History Channel I am sure I could come up with 1000 other possibilities.
If you don't close the door on the solutions that are foolish, you will just spin your wheels aimlessly.

Many ideas we now accept were originally rejected as far-fetched. (plate tectonics, quantum mechanics, extraterrestrial organic chemistry, etc. etc.) But they were merely far-fetched; not foolish. If you can't tell the difference, you are doomed to watching "Ancient Aliens".

Personally I like the theory that the Sphinx was build much earlier than the pyramids. I mean come on, that tiny head on that huge body can't be right; it much have originally have been an equally huge lion's head. That every responsible expert disagrees makes it far-fetched; but until some convincing evidence comes along, it isn't foolish. Sadly "can't be right" just isn't evidence; maybe the rock simply didn't have enough material to allow a proper head. Who knows.
But to say aliens must have built it is just plain foolish.

David Ragan
07-23-2015, 3:35 PM
One of the things every person alive today has in common is that none of us was there to witness how the pyramids were built. To close doors on possibilities prevents us from exploring those possibilities further. I can't subscribe to that kind of thinking. There are too many instances where we were sure we had the answers only to find later on that we were wrong. Closed minds stifle innovation.

Total agreement.


Could be built by pixies, intelligent beavers, aliens, or ants; or they could be fallen asteroids, or completely natural phenomenons. If I had a shot at a show on the History Channel I am sure I could come up with 1000 other possibilities.
If you don't close the door on the solutions that are foolish, you will just spin your wheels aimlessly.

Many ideas we now accept were originally rejected as far-fetched. (plate tectonics, quantum mechanics, extraterrestrial organic chemistry, etc. etc.) But they were merely far-fetched; not foolish. If you can't tell the difference, you are doomed to watching "Ancient Aliens".

Personally I like the theory that the Sphinx was build much earlier than the pyramids. I mean come on, that tiny head on that huge body can't be right; it much have originally have been an equally huge lion's head. That every responsible expert disagrees makes it far-fetched; but until some convincing evidence comes along, it isn't foolish. Sadly "can't be right" just isn't evidence; maybe the rock simply didn't have enough material to allow a proper head. Who knows.
But to say aliens must have built it is just plain foolish.

I do love the sarcasm so much:D!

But-considering how much we know about how much we have no idea of (like the huge % of our multiverse that is dark matter, we know it is there, but can't see it or detect it but only indirectly)--how can you possibly say that it is foolish to say there is no one else 'out there'?

I mean, we know that out of the entire electromagnetic spectrum we can 'see' only that little area:
http://www.skidmore.edu/~hfoley/images/EM.Spectrum.jpg (http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRxqFQoTCIKav-f68cYCFcRuPgodPVQHow&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.skidmore.edu%2F~hfoley%2FPerc 3.htm&ei=uzyxVcLQDcTd-QG9qJ2YCg&bvm=bv.98476267,d.cWw&psig=AFQjCNG8ulbOHWVJZuS_rVicRXA-a2qdrg&ust=1437765163918000)

Out of the audio frequency, like from 500 to 20Khz:
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/e0/cb/9a/e0cb9afe01a50e3ce51f304e55315812.jpg (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRxqFQoTCPTg2bD78cYCFYEVPgodnRsIDg&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pinterest.com%2Fpin%2F482800 022527330728%2F&ei=VD2xVfTmLYGr-AGdt6Bw&bvm=bv.98476267,d.cWw&psig=AFQjCNEJNifLFQvmiaE6p64hDqcbjRHxTQ&ust=1437765295832973)

Science has shown us over and over again that what we see and think that we can't percieve isn't necessarily the truth.

Around the turn of the century, if you told a guy on the street that a steel beam is mostly empty space, they would say that is foolish, or that a plane could fly.

Some of the mathemeticians now think that travel faster than speed of light is possible. We know that particles can be teletransported (Star-Trek--pls note, I am not a Trekky), on and on. What is foolish today, could be far-fetched in 50 years, and old news in a hundred.

The bottom line is, my personal opinion, and as one who places a great deal of faith in The Scientific Method, that just because we don't see how it could be done, doesn't mean it is foolish or impossible.

Wade-I would respond specifically to your well-grounded point by saying that is why basic research in Science is so important. For instance, put the $$$ for research into understanding the basics more, then, we will make progress on understanding the improbable. In that way, the foolish then becomes the far-fetched.....

Frank Drew
07-23-2015, 6:50 PM
There isn't a thing wrong with having some fun speculating about various events and phenomena, indulging in thought experiments, but neither those nor watching a tv show or reading a book or just letting our minds wander is hardly an adequate basis for embracing an extraordinary theory in the absence of any supporting physical evidence.

Think about this: We have actual teeth and bones from the dinosaurs, even foot prints captured in rock, and they lived from 65 million to 250 million years ago. Archaeologists have discovered hundreds if not thousands of stone-age tools, some of which are from 2 to 3 million years old. There are numerous cave paintings that survive from 40,000 years ago, and yet we have nothing, not one single thing, from the time of the pyramids that's not recognizably human and indigenous, and that was only 5,000 to 6,000 years ago. If they packed up and took all their stuff home with them, those were some mighty tidy aliens!

Julie, you're right that not one of us has any direct experience with the construction of the pyramids, but to go from that to suggest that all hypotheses are equally plausible is... well, quite a leap. I haven't actually been on the moon, but I'm pretty confident saying that it isn't made of green cheese :).

Nicholas Lawrence
07-23-2015, 8:45 PM
Sometimes the most obvious answer is the correct one. The purpose of the pyramids was to serve as a tomb. If there was only one huge pyramid, maybe some other explanation would make sense, but there are dozens in Egypt. People just focus on the ones at Giza because they are the largest. Why would aliens build dozens of pyramids of all different sizes scattered all over Egypt and fill them with dead Egyptians and hieroglyphics?

And why would aliens come across the galaxy to build pyramids out of limestone. Wouldn't they have used some cool space age material instead?

And the fact that we can't do it today doesn't mean it was not done by humans. We can't land on the moon today, but that doesn't mean it was not done.

Lee Schierer
07-23-2015, 11:03 PM
On the interior, there are some 70 ton stones that were lifted to about 150' as I recall.

I've been in the pyramid at Giza and I can state for a fact there is no room 150' tall. Most of the tunnels are small and a person 5'-11" has to duck in most of them. The largest room I saw was maybe 12 feet high and 20-25 feet long. They are located in the desert just outside of Cairo.

Julie Moriarty
07-24-2015, 8:19 AM
Julie, you're right that not one of us has any direct experience with the construction of the pyramids, but to go from that to suggest that all hypotheses are equally plausible is... well, quite a leap. I haven't actually been on the moon, but I'm pretty confident saying that it isn't made of green cheese :).

I'm not talking about plausible or probable. I'm only taking the position that the lack of evidence does not support eliminating possibilities. If you move to plausible or probable, things change.

We simply don't know how the Egyptians built the pyramids with the technology the scientific community generally agrees they had available at the time. If all those brilliant minds can't figure it out, maybe there's a stone they have yet to turn. My position is leaving that possibility open is preferable to closing the door. No one is hurt by that. No one is mislead by that because no conclusion can reasonably come from that. There are those who fabricate conclusions based on lack of evidence but I see that as meaningless, unless their motive is profit.

Scientists can be a stubborn bunch. It was many years ago that noted paleontologist Robert Bakker said that not a single dinosaur bone has been found in the K-T boundary. I have yet to hear anyone disagree with him. I think the closest they have come has been finding bones dating back around 8,000 years before the impact. There is plenty of scientific evidence indicating dinosaurs were dying off thousands to hundreds of thousands of years before the impact. Yet even today, scientists freely say dinosaurs were wiped out by the same event that created the K-T boundary.

I'm not saying the lack of evidence means no dinosaur was killed as a result of the impact but I am saying that lack of evidence should not have allowed anyone to conclude the impact wiped out the dinosaurs. Arriving at a conclusion with absolutely no evidence makes no sense to me. Then you're just guessing.

As for the moon, if there was green cheese and it was edible, there would be shuttles there and back if they could make a profit selling it here. ;)

David Ragan
07-24-2015, 9:02 AM
I'm not talking about plausible or probable. I'm only taking the position that the lack of evidence does not support eliminating possibilities. If you move to plausible or probable, things change.

We simply don't know how the Egyptians built the pyramids with the technology the scientific community generally agrees they had available at the time. If all those brilliant minds can't figure it out, maybe there's a stone they have yet to turn. My position is leaving that possibility open is preferable to closing the door. No one is hurt by that. No one is mislead by that because no conclusion can reasonably come from that. There are those who fabricate conclusions based on lack of evidence but I see that as meaningless, unless their motive is profit.

Scientists can be a stubborn bunch. It was many years ago that noted paleontologist Robert Bakker said that not a single dinosaur bone has been found in the K-T boundary. I have yet to hear anyone disagree with him. I think the closest they have come has been finding bones dating back around 8,000 years before the impact. There is plenty of scientific evidence indicating dinosaurs were dying off thousands to hundreds of thousands of years before the impact. Yet even today, scientists freely say dinosaurs were wiped out by the same event that created the K-T boundary.

I'm not saying the lack of evidence means no dinosaur was killed as a result of the impact but I am saying that lack of evidence should not have allowed anyone to conclude the impact wiped out the dinosaurs. Arriving at a conclusion with absolutely no evidence makes no sense to me. Then you're just guessing.

As for the moon, if there was green cheese and it was edible, there would be shuttles there and back if they could make a profit selling it here. ;)

Thank you so much, Julie!

Gotta love females and those verbal skills:)

I didn't realize the dinosaur part, or that the archeologic record is that precise.

Lee Schierer
07-24-2015, 9:32 AM
There was another PBS program a few years back where there was a single guy that was building things with huge blocks of stone or concrete that weighed tons, using only levers, fulcrums and cribbing. Unfortunately I don't recall the name of the program or the largest size block he was moving, but they were immense. He lifted these huge blocks up into the air all by himself. Imagine what a group of 30 guys that all knew the right techniques could do working together.

Phil Thien
07-24-2015, 10:00 AM
There was another PBS program a few years back where there was a single guy that was building things with huge blocks of stone or concrete that weighed tons, using only levers, fulcrums and cribbing. Unfortunately I don't recall the name of the program or the largest size block he was moving, but they were immense. He lifted these huge blocks up into the air all by himself. Imagine what a group of 30 guys that all knew the right techniques could do working together.

Yeah it seems a common thread in this thread is that we don't know how they did it with the tools available.

But I don't think there is any mystery left to how they were built (just as Lee states).

Or application (they're tombs).

Or why (basically public works efforts).

Jerome Stanek
07-24-2015, 10:08 AM
It was supposed to be a big square box but it was a union job and each shift did just a little less until the last shift. The foremen said put a block up there and take a break

Brian Kent
07-24-2015, 10:21 AM
This "copper chisels" thing is just silly. They were built during the Bronze Age. The Bronze Age could also be called the "Copper Alloy" age. Various other metals like tin and zinc were added, significantly strengthening the tools.

Add to this a very plausible idea that I heard on my last trip to the Giza Pyramids - random impurities. Metallurgy in this context would include the accidental introduction of random alloy materials. All the users know is out of the thousands of tools in Egypt, this one over here holds an edge longer. They don't need to know why - it just works better.

Then the Pharaoh's workers would tend to get the best tools because he holds the power and money. Who knows what alloys may have turned up in the best tools!

Pat Barry
07-24-2015, 12:16 PM
Julie says the area of the pyramids used to be a lush forest. It would make sense that in order to roll all those big blocks of rock across across the ground from the Nile barges to the building location they must have needed a lot of logs. They would have naturally stripped the forest at the building site first, then the pathway to the river and back, ultimately cut down everything. Deforestation therefore led ultimately to local climate change and the present desert. It all makes so much sense.

David Ragan
07-24-2015, 12:29 PM
There was another PBS program a few years back where there was a single guy that was building things with huge blocks of stone or concrete that weighed tons, using only levers, fulcrums and cribbing. Unfortunately I don't recall the name of the program or the largest size block he was moving, but they were immense. He lifted these huge blocks up into the air all by himself. Imagine what a group of 30 guys that all knew the right techniques could do working together.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coral_Castle

See the above.

David Ragan
07-24-2015, 12:32 PM
Julie says the area of the pyramids used to be a lush forest. It would make sense that in order to roll all those big blocks of rock across across the ground from the Nile barges to the building location they must have needed a lot of logs. They would have naturally stripped the forest at the building site first, then the pathway to the river and back, ultimately cut down everything. Deforestation therefore led ultimately to local climate change and the present desert. It all makes so much sense.

That is when global warming started, then. Wow......does Al Gore know about that?

Wade Lippman
07-24-2015, 4:13 PM
We simply don't know how the Egyptians built the pyramids with the technology the scientific community generally agrees they had available at the time. If all those brilliant minds can't figure it out, maybe there's a stone they have yet to turn.

The Egyptians started with in ground burial, evolved to mastabas, and then pyramids over thousands of years. They very very gradually developed skills for moving heavy materials that we can't duplicate. They didn't just say one day "hey, lets build a pyramid with huge stones!" It is unreasonable to expect a current brilliant mind who has never moved any stone to come up the same method. If anyone really cared precisely how it was done and wanted to invest 50,000,000 man hours in it, I am sure we could knock a pyramid using nothing that wasn't available to the Egyptians. It isn't all that mysterious.

That's the way it is with technology. Someone mentioned that just because we can't send a man to the moon now doesn't mean we couldn't have done it 30 years ago. In fact, it would take a decade to build a Saturn V rocket; the plans were disposed of and no one know how it was built. Just because our technology has advanced significantly doesn't mean we can just dash one off, any more than it means we can recreate a pyramid.
But there is no reason to assume the Egyptians has some superior technology, any more than it does to assume that aliens helped build the Saturn V.

Mel Fulks
07-24-2015, 4:40 PM
No remains ,at least of any of the big shots, have been found in the pyramids. The stone chambers that some call tombs could be something else. Maybe hot tubs.

Wade Lippman
07-24-2015, 5:35 PM
No remains ,at least of any of the big shots, have been found in the pyramids. The stone chambers that some call tombs could be something else. Maybe hot tubs.


It is well documented that priests removed and reburied all remains when society broke down and their security could not be maintained.

Do aliens like hot tubs?

Mel Fulks
07-24-2015, 6:05 PM
That's the trouble with pyramids, too easy to break in. They should have put them in some big stone structure with no doors or windows.

David Ragan
07-24-2015, 6:08 PM
What if they found a hieroglyph of a flying saucer in one of the rooms?

Mike Ottenbreit
07-24-2015, 6:53 PM
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pCvx5gSnfW4

Wade Lippman
07-24-2015, 6:53 PM
That's the trouble with pyramids, too easy to break in. They should have put them in some big stone structure with no doors or windows.
Doesn't stop them. When the entrances are blocked up, the robbers just tunnel through. Er, I mean the aliens just tunnel through. Grave robbers couldn't possibly do that!

Moses Yoder
07-24-2015, 8:09 PM
Do you ever think about the fact that 4000 years from now they won't be able to figure out how we built our banks? Or what purpose they served? Technology will change so much, just imagine if it continues changing at the speed it is now. Most people today do not know how to use a pressured white gas Coleman lantern or how they are made and that technology is only a hundred years old. The majority of people today cannot drive a car with a manual transmission. I found a camel back wooden trunk wrapped in steel in the landfill one time. I read of people finding old tools taken to the land fill all the time. History is eventually just flushed down the toilet.

Julie Moriarty
07-24-2015, 10:41 PM
Do you ever think about the fact that 4000 years from now they won't be able to figure out how we built our banks? Or what purpose they served? Technology will change so much, just imagine if it continues changing at the speed it is now. Most people today do not know how to use a pressured white gas Coleman lantern or how they are made and that technology is only a hundred years old. The majority of people today cannot drive a car with a manual transmission. I found a camel back wooden trunk wrapped in steel in the landfill one time. I read of people finding old tools taken to the land fill all the time. History is eventually just flushed down the toilet.

And in the next 4000 years there could be any number of different kinds of events that would challenge man's ability to survive. When there's no food, we won't care much about our Twitter account or building tall buildings even Superman can't leap.

Raymond Fries
07-24-2015, 10:58 PM
The 70 ton blocks are located at the top of the king's chamber. They are the gable blocks and are at the height of about half way to the top of the pyramid which is around 150' above ground level.

David Ragan
07-25-2015, 5:38 AM
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pCvx5gSnfW4

That is really something.

I suppose lifting the stones could have been done. Now, about the carving.




Doesn't stop them. When the entrances are blocked up, the robbers just tunnel through. Er, I mean the aliens just tunnel through. Grave robbers couldn't possibly do that!

Remember, all that we see around us isn't really there-it's an illusion. It's all empty space, the reason why objects don't simple merge into one another is electrostatic repulsion.

The reason why you 'see' something is the electron cloud throwing back wavelengths of visible light.

So, get around that, yes, the little guys can just move right on through.

The physicist out there can back me up on this?

Enough fantasy. I'm meeting Mike Holbrook for breakfast and a lesson on greenwoodworking and chairs:D!

Mel Fulks
07-25-2015, 9:49 AM
I thought that when they robbed a tomb they just wanted the gold and lapis lazuli ... (they loved Italian food). And that only museums wanted the mummies.

Art Mann
07-25-2015, 11:26 AM
There is always a predominant contemporary opinion that people of ancient times, and even 20 years ago, are not only ignorant of modern technology but also somehow mentally retarded or culturally crippled. History is a profound witness to the contrary.

Ole Anderson
07-25-2015, 12:22 PM
That is the one key item left starting back at us (present day human)--that something so large was constructed and with a precision purportedly beyond even our present day capabilities (assuming that knowledge and technology alone are the limiting factors and not simply money/control).


How in the world did they level each corner to within 1/4"? Wouldn't be difficult. Dig a moat just outside the proposed structure's base, fill it with water and drive a stake to just the top of the water on a calm day and you now have four stakes (benchmarks if you will) that meet that criteria. And as previously stated, you would be surprised how accurately modern surveyors can lay out construction. Modern digital levels will get you within 0.2 mm in elevation over distances.

And how would they know if it was beyond our ability of precision if we have to first measure it to see how precise it was?

Mel Fulks
07-25-2015, 12:37 PM
Yeah, seven hundred years of using ground up mummies as medicine is being completely ignored by the drug companies. What a contemptuous ego driven waste of science.

Art Mann
07-25-2015, 1:07 PM
Yeah, seven hundred years of using ground up mummies as medicine is being completely ignored by the drug companies. What a contemptuous ego driven waste of science.

Sorry, but I don't follow your point. Are you saying that modern physicians finally have it all figured out? I think it more likely that in 100 years medical professionals will look back on 2015 medical technology and be amazed at how crude, barbaric and ineffectual the medical treatments were. Does that mean that the best medical technologists of this day are mentally retarded? You are demonstrating my original assertion quite effectively.

Rick Potter
07-25-2015, 1:09 PM
Mike O.

Great video. Very interesting seeing what a non-engineer construction worker can accomplish. Imagine, if he had a few thousand slave workers.

Tom Stenzel
07-25-2015, 2:43 PM
Do you ever think about the fact that 4000 years from now they won't be able to figure out how we built our banks? Or what purpose they served?


They would look at the construction of the bank, examine our culture. If they were perceptive they would correctly call them places of worship.

-Tom

Tom Stenzel
07-25-2015, 2:49 PM
Losing the contents of the Great Library of Alexandria sure didn't help us in understanding ancient Egyptian culture.

Nowadays the big danger is DRM (digital restrictions management). Reading only by permission means that one day no one will read it. Ever.

-Tom

Art Mann
07-25-2015, 4:45 PM
They would look at the construction of the bank, examine our culture. If they were perceptive they would correctly call them places of worship.

-Tom

That is a very insightful thought.

Bruce Pratt
07-25-2015, 9:39 PM
If the thread is going down this road, check out the "Weans" by Robert Nathan 1960.

Brian Ashton
07-25-2015, 10:13 PM
There is always a predominant contemporary opinion that people of ancient times, and even 20 years ago, are not only ignorant of modern technology but also somehow mentally retarded or culturally crippled. History is a profound witness to the contrary.

It is quite an eye opener when you dig into historical documents from various "civilised" societies going back as far as ancient greek... The problems and issues being written about sound surprisingly like todays. How to solve congestion in cities, dealing with waste, what to do on your free time, how to deal with the influx of immigrants, financial matters... and all the usual issues people face. I'm one of those, when I was really young who latched onto common phrases and always wondered what they meant for years after first hearing them (didn't have google back then), such as: "it's all relative" and "the more things change the more they stay the same". The last one the penny dropped when I was reading some sort of document from some ancient civilisation and realised they faced the same issues of today and they simply used different technology to over come them, but over all they thought just like we do today. I think the only real difference between us today and those from most if not all histories is things now are more immediate. Going 30 miles could take a few days where as now it takes half an hour, news and correspondence took weeks or months back then or never arrived at all, today it takes seconds...

Wade Lippman
07-25-2015, 11:04 PM
I think the only real difference between us today and those from most if not all histories is things now are more immediate. ..

There are lots of differences. We can create daylight 24 hours a day, we have more calories than we know what to do with, we can be reasonably confident of reaching old age, we have safe water, we can end all life on earth in a matter of hours (and have to live knowing that can happen); I could go on for pages.

Brian Ashton
07-25-2015, 11:31 PM
There are lots of differences. We can create daylight 24 hours a day, we have more calories than we know what to do with, we can be reasonably confident of reaching old age, we have safe water, we can end all life on earth in a matter of hours (and have to live knowing that can happen); I could go on for pages.

I thought I may have not clarified my thoughts well. Obviously technology has changed a lot but our ways of thinking and what or concerns and interests... are has changed very little.

Moses Yoder
07-26-2015, 4:29 AM
There are lots of differences. We can create daylight 24 hours a day, we have more calories than we know what to do with, we can be reasonably confident of reaching old age, we have safe water, we can end all life on earth in a matter of hours (and have to live knowing that can happen); I could go on for pages.

Those are all minor differences. Our brain is still essentially exactly the same as it was 4000 years ago. They had exactly the same issues then as we do now. For instance, even though we can be reasonably certain now of reaching "old age" people still fear death and are looking for ways to extend life. I am not a historian but at some point steel was invented and imagine what ensued; the equivalent to our atomic age today would be when knives and spears began being made of steel. They had exactly the same issues as we do. We have no reason to build a pyramid therefore we are not working on building one. If we put our minds to it we would build one. We have walked on the moon you know.

Julie Moriarty
07-26-2015, 7:10 AM
Here's another guy's theory. But it brings up questions about buoyancy requirements, pumping systems, channel construction and lock construction and operation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJcp13hAO3U

Julie Moriarty
07-26-2015, 7:33 AM
This explains the theory the above video presents

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1y8N0ePuF8&amp;feature=iv&amp;src_vid=TJcp13hAO3U &amp;annotation_id=annotation_2659645015

Wade Lippman
07-26-2015, 3:20 PM
I thought I may have not clarified my thoughts well. Obviously technology has changed a lot but our ways of thinking and what or concerns and interests... are has changed very little.

you missed my point. Knowing that there is an abundance of food, water, etc. completely changes one's way of thinking. Yes, the ancient Greeks despaired of how their children were rowdy just like we do today; but they were more concerned about starving to death during the next drought.

Art Mann
07-26-2015, 7:59 PM
Wade, I don't think you have an accurate concept of the way advanced ancient cultures lived. These people were not struggling to survive. If you study their society a little closer, that will become obvious. They had leisure time. They devoted surprising amounts of time to the arts. They played games. There is ample evidence of all these things. That is not the behavior of people who are at the edge of death.

Pat Barry
07-26-2015, 9:42 PM
Here's another guy's theory. But it brings up questions about buoyancy requirements, pumping systems, channel construction and lock construction and operation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJcp13hAO3U
He's thinking way outside the box. Inventing locks and dams even. Not to mention the elaborate floaties. LOL

Raymond Fries
07-26-2015, 10:11 PM
We may never know how they were built. The fact remains that they are the most precisely built structure on the earth. The precision goes beyond hand tools. The blocks fit perfectly to within 1/100th of an inch. They are glued together with a mortar that cannot be duplicated today. The mortar is stronger than the stone. The sides are convex and this can only be seen from the air. Look at the cross section pictures. It is a very complex structure. There are also below ground tunels and rooms that are never shown in pictures. The granite coffer in the kings chamber was cut from a single piece of solid granite which cannot be cut with copper chisels. It is also to big to fit through any passage way so it had to be cut in place. All of the surfaces are perfectly flat with a perfect radius at every corner on the inside. It is also a chocolate color which geologists say had to come from extreme heat. In the room where it sits all of the walls are pushed out about an inch and the cracks have been patched. Some say this was from an explosion. At the bottom of the shafts where there is chemical residue there is a small hole from each that empites out in. the queens chamber. There theories that the air shafts are wave guides as their dimensions duplicate those requires for a frequency that is alluding me at the moment. Ever notice that the top is missing on all of them?

This had to besome kind of a machine.

Brian Ashton
07-26-2015, 11:54 PM
We may never know how they were built. The fact remains that they are the most precisely built structure on the earth. The precision goes beyond hand tools. The blocks fit perfectly to within 1/100th of an inch. They are glued together with a mortar that cannot be duplicated today. The mortar is stronger than the stone. The sides are convex and this can only be seen from the air. Look at the cross section pictures. It is a very complex structure. There are also below ground tunels and rooms that are never shown in pictures. The granite coffer in the kings chamber was cut from a single piece of solid granite which cannot be cut with copper chisels. It is also to big to fit through any passage way so it had to be cut in place. All of the surfaces are perfectly flat with a perfect radius at every corner on the inside. It is also a chocolate color which geologists say had to come from extreme heat. In the room where it sits all of the walls are pushed out about an inch and the cracks have been patched. Some say this was from an explosion. At the bottom of the shafts where there is chemical residue there is a small hole from each that empites out in. the queens chamber. There theories that the air shafts are wave guides as their dimensions duplicate those requires for a frequency that is alluding me at the moment. Ever notice that the top is missing on all of them?

This had to besome kind of a machine.

Some intriguing ideas being bantered about but I subscribe to the law of simplicity. The more simple the explanation the more accurate it is. In other words a few guys with enormous egos with crap loads of money wanted to build temples for themselves when they died. They also had pyramid envy so kept building them bigger than the last. The next guy in line ran out of money and settled for a hole in the ground...

Dennis Asp÷
07-27-2015, 3:40 AM
They where built by the Goa'uld, everyone who's seen MacGyver in Space With Guns knows this.

Julie Moriarty
07-27-2015, 8:40 AM
He's thinking way outside the box. Inventing locks and dams even. Not to mention the elaborate floaties. LOL

Way outside the box for those who's thinking goes to powered machinery, hydraulics, electricity, steel and so many other technologies we have available to us today. But maybe not for the ancient Egyptians. He took what was available to them back then and came up with a possibility for another way the pyramids could have been built that didn't include massive numbers of men toiling in the heat, using brute force instead of ingenuity. But this is the kind of thing I was thinking when I said scientists today may have not turned all the stones.

The problems I have with his theory starts with the building of the pipe from the raised lake, the one he said could have fed pressured water to the building site. That would have taken a lot of time and probably manpower, unless they figured out another way to implement the laws of physics to their advantage.

Another concept that would be very challenging is making the rectangular stone pipe risers on the pyramid water tight and capable of handling the pressure. Each lock gate would have to withstand the pressure of two pipe sections without leaking or breaking apart. And the size of the pipe would have to be substantial to allow the stone and whatever means were used to make it buoyant. That's a lot of pressure for a temporary stone structure to handle.

Next is knowing where the floating blocks are in the riser so as to prevent the blocks from jamming or smashing through the lock gate above. And initially filling and then maintaining the water level at the top level would present more challenges, if one wanted to keep manpower numbers down.

Since scientists have been able to determine that this area wasn't a desert when the pyramids were built reduces the difficulty factor. Trying to keep thousands of slaves hydrated would be a challenge unto itself. But it would probably still have been pretty warm there, like working in Mexico. The "water transport" theory solves that problem too. It's the kind of out of the box thinking necessary if we don't want to give the aliens all the credit. :rolleyes:

Julie Moriarty
07-27-2015, 8:48 AM
Some intriguing ideas being bantered about but I subscribe to the law of simplicity. The more simple the explanation the more accurate it is. In other words a few guys with enormous egos with crap loads of money wanted to build temples for themselves when they died. They also had pyramid envy so kept building them bigger than the last. The next guy in line ran out of money and settled for a hole in the ground...

The Egyptians thought their Pharaohs were gods. When famine struck, they turned to their gods for help. The Pharaoh at the time was no match for Mother Nature and the people realized he was just like them. So they made a hole in the ground for him. It's very hard to remain a deity when you're still alive. Your followers are always asking for miracles. ;)

Mel Fulks
07-27-2015, 12:44 PM
Did you know?....the Washington monument is a pyramid ...not an obelisk! There was no engineer to spec the foundation so they used the "...there! That o'tah be deep enough!" method. There is a congressional sub committee trying to decide which friends to give the back fill job. No word as to whether tourists will be allowed to take the elevator to the basement.

Art Mann
07-27-2015, 1:10 PM
Mel, where are you getting your information? The sources I read on line indicated that the structure was designed by engineers. I actually found a source from which to obtain the original drawings. I don't know much about the Washington monument, but civil engineers and architects have been around for at least 800 years. How do you suppose the magnificent cathedrals of Europe or mosques in the Middle East were designed?

Mel Fulks
07-27-2015, 1:35 PM
Art,I got that info from my set of encyclopedias and they list their source as a bubble gum wrapper. Yes, engineers have been around a long time. And "over building" has been around a long time.

Pat Barry
07-27-2015, 1:45 PM
The basic idea of engineering is to size things appropriately, not overbuild. Of course, safety factors will always be employed, more so for bridges and less so for fences.

Ole Anderson
07-27-2015, 1:57 PM
Civil engineering the world's second oldest profession.

James Baker SD
07-27-2015, 5:22 PM
Civil engineering the world's second oldest profession.
3rd oldest. I think we astronomers have them beat for 2nd place. :)

James Tibbetts
07-27-2015, 6:13 PM
I think the engineer builds what the architect asks for.


The basic idea of engineering is to size things appropriately, not overbuild. .

Jeff Raefield
07-27-2015, 7:15 PM
They where built by the Goa'uld, everyone who's seen MacGyver in Space With Guns knows this.
I thought that the Goa'uld co-opted the technology of the Ancients , but didn't actually build them. Kind of like the Romans did with the Greeks.

My theory is that ancient astronauts had warp drive technology which, as a byproduct of the energy it took to accomplish it, produced huge blocks of limestone "waste" that was left behind when they took off. The Egyptian Pharaohs just took advantage of the situation by claiming it was their tomb, rather than a space turd, that way they didn't have to figure out how to clean it up...

Wade Lippman
07-27-2015, 7:32 PM
The basic idea of engineering is to size things appropriately, not overbuild. Of course, safety factors will always be employed, more so for bridges and less so for fences.

Incredible straight line.
An optimist says the glass is half full, a pessimist half empty, an engineer that the glass is too large.

Wade Lippman
07-27-2015, 8:43 PM
Did you know?....the Washington monument is a pyramid ...not an obelisk!

I did not know that. I looked it up on Wikipedia and it said it was an obelisk. I then googled "obelisk versus pyramid" to see what the difference was. The one site that seemed on point said that obelisks were 2 sided and pyramids 4 sided, then my computer started shrieking and told me I was infected with viruses and couldn't use my computer without paying them.
I ended internet explorer with task manager and ran Super Antispyware. It found nothing. I ran Windows Defender which found the Trojan. Just for fun I reinfected the computer and ran Panda Antivirus. It found the infection, but didn't know what it was. But I suppose that is good enough.
But why didn't Windows Defender prevent the infection?
Why does Wikipedia think the Washington Monument is a pyramid?
Is Mel responsible for spreading the Trojan.
Inquiring minds want to know.

Pat Barry
07-28-2015, 7:38 AM
I did not know that. I looked it up on Wikipedia and it said it was an obelisk. I then googled "obelisk versus pyramid" to see what the difference was. The one site that seemed on point said that obelisks were 2 sided and pyramids 4 sided, then my computer started shrieking and told me I was infected with viruses and couldn't use my computer without paying them..

A 2 sided structure is impossible

Karl Andersson
07-28-2015, 8:12 AM
The reality probably does include use of water power, at least for transporting the blocks (I have seen scientific documentaries that show remains of canals through the pyramid sites) and for determining the exacting degree of level that many people claim ancient people couldn't achieve, but the technological hurdles Julie mentions are just a scratch on the surface of all the problems that would face people trying to use the film's hydraulic theories. Add to all the physics issues, you'd need a team of hardhat divers to go fix problems when they arose, such as jams in the transport columns, dropped blocks, etc.- or you'd have to de-water large sections when common incidents occurred. You'd think that if they did use complicated water power, they would have left more proof, or maybe instructions laying around - but ancients tended not to show too many construction shots in their art. I once tried to show the history of crane use for a safety class I was teaching and, although the Romans used cranes often (powered by water wheels or human-powered treadmills) there are only a couple accurate portrayals of them - one of them being from the sarcophagus of a wealthy building contractor. Maybe someone will find some papyrus with contract specs in a cave some day.
Karl

Julie Moriarty
07-28-2015, 10:01 AM
The reality probably does include use of water power, at least for transporting the blocks (I have seen scientific documentaries that show remains of canals through the pyramid sites) and for determining the exacting degree of level that many people claim ancient people couldn't achieve, but the technological hurdles Julie mentions are just a scratch on the surface of all the problems that would face people trying to use the film's hydraulic theories. Add to all the physics issues, you'd need a team of hardhat divers to go fix problems when they arose, such as jams in the transport columns, dropped blocks, etc.- or you'd have to de-water large sections when common incidents occurred. You'd think that if they did use complicated water power, they would have left more proof, or maybe instructions laying around - but ancients tended not to show too many construction shots in their art. I once tried to show the history of crane use for a safety class I was teaching and, although the Romans used cranes often (powered by water wheels or human-powered treadmills) there are only a couple accurate portrayals of them - one of them being from the sarcophagus of a wealthy building contractor.
Karl

No doubt the water riser columns present a number of challenges. I hadn't thought of divers going into them to dislodge a jam but that could be very dangerous to the diver. Those riser columns would most likely be devoid of any light. I can't think of any possible solutions where the top cap on the riser columns would be clear or even translucent. The guy with the water-power theory showed how his idea would work with a clear plastic pipe. He knew exactly when to open and close the gates. From the structures that remain, it appears the Egyptians used massive stone walls to channel the water. If they used that as a cap on the riser columns, no light would be able to penetrate and they wouldn't know when to open the lock gate until the first stone hit it.

But your post got me to thinking of some sort of water powered lift. A water wheel would provide power to a rope lift, something along the lines of a ski lift. Building that would be less of an ambitious project than the riser column presents.


Maybe someone will find some papyrus with contract specs in a cave some day.
Would that be a green print?

Art Mann
07-28-2015, 3:57 PM
The methodology in the film would necessitate the pumping of millions of gallons of water to the upper most level and for the initial fill and to compensate for leakage and evaporation. Leakage would probably have been significant without the use of metal gates and pipes. Pumping that volume of water in a short time without the use of metal pipe and power driven pumps would have been quite an accomplishment.

Pat Barry
07-28-2015, 7:43 PM
The methodology in the film would necessitate the pumping of millions of gallons of water to the upper most level and for the initial fill and to compensate for leakage and evaporation. Leakage would probably have been significant without the use of metal gates and pipes. Pumping that volume of water in a short time without the use of metal pipe and power driven pumps would have been quite an accomplishment.


I doubt they had the technology to actually pump the water, let alone make a lock and dam

David Ragan
07-29-2015, 10:19 AM
I was going to throw in they had the Archimedes screw:
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcShf4n6D7qYy-WdAeD1-6UGpbYvz-PdfAc6qYTZVCHqYBjAZEViKw3XYxPU (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAMQjRxqFQoTCL-R0frBgMcCFQbTgAodkpMH9w&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FArchim edes'_screw&ei=Yt64Vb_YJYamgwSSp564Dw&bvm=bv.98717601,d.eXY&psig=AFQjCNFNB6kkyVj0Gn_WNV--8-m8L29gqA&ust=1438265314689363)

But, that is dated to 300 BC, a few hundred years after the pyramids were built.

I find the theory of water filled canals, facilitating the leveling, and moving/working of the limestone blocks to be interesting. Seems like a lot of you think that is not viable-I don't have a working knowledge of that kind of thing.

I do like the water involvement better than the ET proposal.

Mel Fulks
07-29-2015, 10:37 AM
There is guy who says the blocks were cast and the proof is he has found "hair" and debris in them.

Art Mann
07-29-2015, 12:04 PM
I was going to throw in they had the Archimedes screw:
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcShf4n6D7qYy-WdAeD1-6UGpbYvz-PdfAc6qYTZVCHqYBjAZEViKw3XYxPU (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAMQjRxqFQoTCL-R0frBgMcCFQbTgAodkpMH9w&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FArchim edes'_screw&ei=Yt64Vb_YJYamgwSSp564Dw&bvm=bv.98717601,d.eXY&psig=AFQjCNFNB6kkyVj0Gn_WNV--8-m8L29gqA&ust=1438265314689363)

But, that is dated to 300 BC, a few hundred years after the pyramids were built.

I find the theory of water filled canals, facilitating the leveling, and moving/working of the limestone blocks to be interesting. Seems like a lot of you think that is not viable-I don't have a working knowledge of that kind of thing.

I do like the water involvement better than the ET proposal.

When talking about that far back in time, historians are only guessing as to when such a thing was invented. It could easily have been a thousand or two years earlier and no evidence remains. Still, that kind of device would move maybe several gallons a minute and lift it several feet per minute. I can't imagine scaling it up to hundreds or thousands of gallons a minute and having enough to these to lift the water in the hundreds of feet straight up.

Raymond Fries
07-29-2015, 11:21 PM
Ever hear of Coral Castle? Edward Leedskalnin, a 97 lb imigrant from Latvia, built it all by himself at night. He said he knew how the pyramids were built. Many of the stones in his creation were much larger than most of them in the pyramids.

It is a pretty amazing place and I would love to visit there someday.

Brian Ashton
07-30-2015, 4:14 AM
Incredible straight line.
An optimist says the glass is half full, a pessimist half empty, an engineer that the glass is too large.

And then the intelligent person asks if the glass is emptying or filling and gives the appropriate answer.

Brian Ashton
07-30-2015, 4:18 AM
I doubt they had the technology to actually pump the water, let alone make a lock and dam


Maybe not to pump water to the top of a pyramid but I'd be surprised if they didn't have the ability to pump water.