It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Scientists Discovered Egyptian Secret To Moving Huge Pyramid Stones

page: 10
41
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 11:31 PM
link   
a reply to: sirhumperdink

holy.....
so you talk about something of the same scale of the pyramid but built in an entirely different way (i infer this from your comments on using concrete) but suddenly now youre acting like accuracy to the original is a huge deal...... k

as far as the 9/11 effecting the world economy thats because the building was already in use.... and housed an immense amount of financial information that was never recovered (woops)
again the building itself was worth the materials and the land it was placed on..... the true value came from the fact that it was a center of financial transaction because a bunch of idiots (assuming it wasnt planned) decided to toss all their financial eggs into one basket
if they had been even the slightest bit intelligent all information would have been backed up offsite and you would not have seen nearly the effect you did
there still would be a relatively large effect due to market uncertainty about what was actually happening and the fact that you probably lost a decent number of people that facilitated trade (basically parasites worrying that the larger host parasite they had been living on had died and they would have to venture out into the world and find a new host)
the reasons for the economic effects are numerous and the fact you are boiling everything down to a simple one cause one effect reasoning is very telling

anyway this is all unimportant and starting to veer off topic so..... thats the end of that




posted on May, 2 2014 @ 11:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Thank-you for sharing the link to that fascinating information regarding the Pyramid builders, Arbitrageur. Their society was much different than I envisioned. Too much TV influence I suppose...

Next I'll try to find out why the Pyramid building stopped abruptly. Since the average life span was only 35 years, there had to be new Kings and Queens coming into power and dying with great regularity. You'd think that there would be a bigger pyramid built by each new King, just to best the previous King. Perhaps building Pyramids was just a "fad" at the time that was only popular for a few years?
-cwm



infant mortality rates were fairly high so the average would be low yes
but for people that made it through childhood the average age of death was 54 for men and 58 for women

(assuming they were meant as tombs anyway.... i like to keep an open mind) pyramid building probably became less popular for the same reason gargantuan tombs and monuments became unpopular for royalty in china....... it takes a whole lot of resources and power that could be better spent ( a more informed less pliable public facing rising class inequalities combined with hostile entities on multiple fronts..... and it starts looking like a good idea to scale it back a little)
edit on 2-5-2014 by sirhumperdink because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2014 @ 11:54 PM
link   
I think this post has more information about this theory.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 01:18 AM
link   
a reply to: daaskapital Sometimes I wonder if many of the drawnings by the acient Egyptians are actually thoughts and ideas of how they thought the pyramids were built since they were there long before.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 03:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: mindseye1609

originally posted by: th3dudeabides
a reply to: daaskapital

This may work. I would love to it an example in action.
However it doesn't explain other megalithic stone movements by other cultures. Easter Island statues for example.


wally wallingtons methods could of been used in easter island. the long narrow heads would balance good on a teeter totter and with some simple rocking back and forth they could raise the center up to a height of the center itself and then tip the statue up. they could of even been stood up before carved for balance then carved uneven. might even explain the big hats on some of the statues to maybe compensate for the weight of the base? (Just thinking out loud here)

like this

skip to about 2:30 or so for the teeter totter in action




i know they dug holes underneath some of them to tip the monoliths vertical but not all correct? i seem to remember a lot of them are sitting on their bases? been a while since I've read up on easter isle. what kind of wood do they have locally there anyone know? i know they burned most off and had massive die outs or whatever but was any of it good hard wood?


the guy is working off a cement base.

"give me a place to stand and i can move the world"

try to lift it. lol!

how did these blocks of his get there?
that would be more impressive to see that.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 12:10 PM
link   
a reply to: tsingtao

Did you watch his videos? He filmed them being lifted and moved.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 02:51 PM
link   
A team of elephants probably did a lot of the pulling.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: UB2120

Yes a load barer of magnetised metal, quite large, under another large magnetised piece of metal, on top if a larger magnetised piece of metal...
But all north... Or all south...

The bottom larger one would thrust the large (but smaller) middle one upwards, as would this the top one which would carry the stone...
It would be quite easy to manipulate the middle one in an upward direction to further lift the top one!!!

Hope this made sense... A diagram would be much easier if course...
Hopefully your imaginations will do me a favour



Peace UB!!!



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 05:37 PM
link   
Great topic Daas!!!
S&F!!!


I'm not to into this theory if I'm honest, for the simple reason that many have asked, how did they lift them onto the sled to begin with, let alone 400+ feet vertically to the top of the Pyramid!!!


But then again maybe that's just a seperate equation and the sleds were used in some form!!!



I do find it funny when people say we couldn't build Pyramids now...

If you've ever seen "The Claw"...
...

Or the MV Blue Marlin... Wow... These things are huge and could easily be used in constructing a Pyramid!!!



Peace Daas!!!



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 06:08 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Nothing was ever lifted vertically. An internal ramp appears to have been used. Also, nothing was ever lifted onto the sleds. I linked a page earlier that described, with images, how the stone ended up on the sleds.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 07:43 PM
link   


Just gunna leave this here.



posted on May, 4 2014 @ 12:04 AM
link   
Rolling the stones really is the way to do it. If not carved round, forms can be placed and secured around the stones to allow them to be moved in this manner. Romans documented it, and this was stuff passed on from the Greeks, and I'm sure some of them got their knowledge from elsewhere in the Mediterranean which includes Egypt.

The math also works out that a six man crew can take advantage of rolling resistance to move a stone that a modern crane can't, by putting some forms around it, and levering it at the top so it rolls. Bigger the diameter, the easier it is to get it rolling. Once rolling, even less force may be required to keep it moving.

Metagene's Machine at this link pretty much sums it up:

michaelsheiser.com...

And in chapter two here:

penelope.uchicago.edu...*.html ("*" goes after 10 at end of link before .html, forum breaks it for some reason.)

Smaller items (relatively speaking) could be dragged on the flat sleds as in that one heiroglyph. But some of the round "sleds" are likely leftover parts of the forms that when secured over the sides allows a block to be rolled with minimal effort.
edit on 4-5-2014 by pauljs75 because: problem with one link.



posted on May, 4 2014 @ 12:14 AM
link   
a reply to: daaskapital

This is really interesting but I have my reservations.

1 what about where there is no sand or especially fine desert sand. Elsewhere in the world there are massive structures. I would think a better system existed than water and sleds or else all these civilizations wouldn't go with impossible construction projects that would break their countries back for about 2 hundred years....just saying,

2 is a 50% reduction in required force enough when the sheer amount of force needed would be incredible to say the least...even with that help. Did they need 1,000 men, 10,000, 100,000..more? I would think that the more animals and men pulling a sled the more counterproductive it all becomes. Too many pieces end up working against each other.

3 how did they put the blocks in place once they arrived on the construction site...
Even with sleds, placing them perfectly would be quite the feat.
?




edit on 5 4 2014 by tadaman because: (no reason given)

edit on 5 4 2014 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2014 @ 05:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: tsingtao

Did you watch his videos? He filmed them being lifted and moved.


from where? did he chizzel their butts out of the ground?!

i've seen that vid for years, try that on wet sand or your foot.


edit on 3123545531am2014 by tsingtao because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2014 @ 06:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: pauljs75
Rolling the stones really is the way to do it. If not carved round, forms can be placed and secured around the stones to allow them to be moved in this manner. Romans documented it, and this was stuff passed on from the Greeks, and I'm sure some of them got their knowledge from elsewhere in the Mediterranean which includes Egypt.

The math also works out that a six man crew can take advantage of rolling resistance to move a stone that a modern crane can't, by putting some forms around it, and levering it at the top so it rolls. Bigger the diameter, the easier it is to get it rolling. Once rolling, even less force may be required to keep it moving.

Metagene's Machine at this link pretty much sums it up:

michaelsheiser.com...

And in chapter two here:

penelope.uchicago.edu...*.html ("*" goes after 10 at end of link before .html, forum breaks it for some reason.)

Smaller items (relatively speaking) could be dragged on the flat sleds as in that one heiroglyph. But some of the round "sleds" are likely leftover parts of the forms that when secured over the sides allows a block to be rolled with minimal effort.


yeah, sounds great! lol.

how many did they have?

how do you stop it? 2 rolling tons. human brakes.

how long will it take to roll that puppy up hill and not lose control of it?
still have to set it into place. minor details, i guess.



posted on May, 4 2014 @ 06:09 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

I think the point is that today we would build the pyramids differently (read: cheap). To build it out of millions of solid stones quarried and made from scratch would take not only a very long time with modern technology but probably more money than anyone's willing to invest.



posted on May, 4 2014 @ 06:13 AM
link   
a reply to: tadaman

I love how all the "reenactment" experiment videos show something being moved over perfectly level ground after being hoisted around with a forklift and flatbed off camera.



posted on May, 4 2014 @ 06:20 AM
link   
a reply to: tsingtao
how'd he get the first wooden block under the poured cement block? the crane that unloaded it from the flatbed



posted on May, 4 2014 @ 06:26 AM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

"with images" you guys always say that like they are some kind of technical blueprints. that image of them pulling the sled with the statue is probably showing how they TRIED to move the damn thing with one guy pouring the blood of virgins in front of the sled as an offering. lol



posted on May, 4 2014 @ 06:52 AM
link   
a reply to: bottleslingguy


would take not only a very long time with modern technology but probably more money than anyone's willing to invest.


No doubt pal...
This would be the two main reasons why it's not an architectural indulgence nowadays!!!
Rather than it not being possible it's just not very cost effective!!!

Besides who owns the quarries now?
Back the Ancient Egypt it probably would have been Royalty!

Now it's most likely corporations who want more for less, & to give less for more, if that makes sense!!!


Peace Bottle!!!




top topics



 
41
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join