It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Scientists Discovered Egyptian Secret To Moving Huge Pyramid Stones

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on May, 2 2014 @ 12:25 AM
a reply to: OptimusCrime

They did, at least as far as the Great Pyramid is concerned, Herodotus wrote that the causeway leading to the Khufu's pyramid was paved in polished stone, and seemed to him as monumental a feat as the GP itself. He wrote that Manetho informed him it took 10 years alone.

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 01:06 AM
Misleading news for misleading discovery.

Fake news, from fake scientist. The idea of the water to reduce friction to move slabs of 2 ton already known, but...

This means a HUGE amount of WATER... in the DESERT...?

Desert=Water; Hemmm NO.

And these pseudo-scientist do not explain at all how did the ancient Egyptians to lift stones of 20 tons to 150 meters in height.

Hundreds of waterbeds?

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 01:25 AM
a reply to: Arken

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 01:32 AM
a reply to: freelance_zenarchist

And millions of these Waterbeds to bring up at 150 meters hight several million of stones of several tonns...

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 01:35 AM

originally posted by: audenine
This is very interesting, thank you for posting it! How do they get the stone blocks or monuments into the sled?

a reply to: daaskapital

not my job, i'm just a puller!

the same way they got them off and wayyyyy up there!!

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 01:50 AM

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
one thing they may have overlooked.....Egypt wasn't as much of a desert back when they built the Pyramids.. in fact it was quite Lush.
Trouble with Scientists is they over think things. Maybe they need to ask a builder how they would do it??

My guess would be lots of muscle power and fulcrums.

and clear the vegetation. make roads or something through it. it would be mud when water was added.

anyone know what the ppsi (pounds per square inch) is on a high heel for a 100lb woman? me neither but put 2 tons of rock on a sled in wet sand and see how far ya get. (sled =2 runners) maybe it was a solid bottom?
ice skates work coz the ice can take the pressure.

it's not like moving a heavy shoe cabinet over tile with a couple of socks under the legs.
i just did it monday, with and without the socks and it was no where near 2 tons.

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 01:58 AM

originally posted by: Telos

originally posted by: daaskapital

The question of just how an ancient civilisation — without the help of modern technology — moved the two-tonne stones that made up their famed pyramids has long plagued Egyptologists and mechanical engineers alike. But now, a team from the University of Amsterdam believes they have figured it out, even though the solution was staring them in the face all along.

Scientists have allegedly discovered the way in which the Ancient Egyptians transported their large cargo. It is said that the Egyptians would use sleds, and water, to transport the cargo from one place to another.

And how does that explain 2.3 million rocks being moved through sand in great distance, carved, raised and put in place in 23 years? The egyptologists' calculations suggest the workforce could have sustained a rate of 3 stones/minute, which means 180 block per hours in order to fit the massive number of 2.3 million in 20-23 years time of construction. So to put it roughly into an equation:

No matter how many workers were used or in what configuration, 1.1 blocks would have to be put in place every 2 minutes, ten hours a day, 365 days a year for twenty years to complete the Great Pyramid within this time frame. To use the same equation, but instead assuming the time of completion to be one hundred years instead of twenty, it would require 1.1 blocks to be set every ten minutes.

This equation, however, does not include the time and labor required to design, plan, survey, and level the 13 acre site the Great Pyramid sits on. Nor does it include the construction time for the two other main pyramids on the site, the Sphinx, the temples, networks of causeways, several square miles of paving stones, the leveling of the entire Giza plateau, the 35 boat pits carved out of solid bedrock, or several other highly laborious features. When considering the time it would have taken to build the Great Pyramid alone, it is worth noting that the entire Giza plateau was constructed over the reign of five pharaohs in less than a hundred years. This feat is even more impressive, given that beginning with king Djoser who ruled from 2687-2667 BC, three other massive pyramids were built - the Step pyramid of Saqqara (believed to be the first Egyptian pyramid), the Bent Pyramid, and the Red Pyramid. Also during this time period (between 2686 and 2498 BC) the Wadi Al-Garawi dam which used an estimated 100,000 cubic metres of rock and rubble was built. Beginning with Saqqara, Egyptologist Barbara Mertz estimates nearly 700 pyramids were constructed in Egypt during a roughly 500 year period.

Just saying...

how long did it take to plan in the first place? lol!!

more than 1 a year? really?

they were busy beavers!

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 02:02 AM
I think the picture shown in the OP and related pictures show how Egyptians moved large statues and maybe even stones from quarries to building sites, however I don't believe they build the three pyramids at the Giza plateau.

The pyramids were already there and were (of course) considered a work of the gods by the Egyptians at that time. They have tried to replicate pyramids on smaller scales all over Egypt, which are dated to be younger than the Giza ones, but they never succeeded in even building one as perfect. They either collapsed at the top, forcing them to alter the angle of the top part of the pyramid or they were built using a much easier angle than ~53°.

The fact alone that some of the younger pyramids are utter failures is enough for me to bust the myth that Egyptians around the time of Khufu have constructed these marvels. In 23 years. Without any obvious markings to commemorate the builders. I guess the Egyptians had at least the decency and respect to not claim that they built them.

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 02:03 AM
I'm not subscribing to any "belief" until they actually construct a replica of the Great Pyramid by hand with the methods and timeline they champion.

Shouldn't take them more than a few years work (according to them). All they have to do is mimic something already created. It would be easier than when it was originally built by supposedly mindless, Egyptian drones.... I spent years of my life on projects I've believed in. Why don't they do the same? I guess they want to ignore the elephant in the room and have everyone take their word on it.

edit on 2-5-2014 by TheLegend because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 02:10 AM

originally posted by: MysterX

originally posted by: Yusomad
a reply to: ignorant_ape

How much would reduced friction help you if the sled is not strong enough (hence the strong wood remark) to support whatever you put on it? If the sled becomes crushed because palm trees are not "real" wood, how is reduced friction going to get you anywhere?

BTW, try and read whatever you respond to? Thanks.

The quote says they used slabs for the they too were made of stone, not wood.

that doesn't make a lot of sense.

we just gonna make it heavier. stone doesn't bend either.

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 02:11 AM
Why would anyone fund that endeavor?

a reply to: TheLegend

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 02:26 AM
a reply to: raymundoko
Exactly, the scale of the 3 pyramids on the Giza Plateau is so impractical (economically, mathematically, and in labor) that even in modern times we, as billions of people and a civilization capable of spaceflight, cannot recreate just 1 of them. It is beyond our economic, logistic, and (likely) technical capabilities. Yet we expect a young civilization without the wheel and in a harsh desert to have done it with copper tools and strings for no logical reason without even recording how they did it or why. There should be mountains of evidence in regards to how they constructed these 3 pyramids in particular. They undoubtedly needed to record measurements and building plans at the least. Yet there is nothing. Don't forget, the 3 pyramids on the Giza Plateau were once blindingly reflective and so smooth you could slide down them. They could even be seen as far away is Israel - like planted stars on the horizon. That changed in the 14th century when a series of earthquakes loosened the casing stones and Arabs ransacked them to build homes, mosques, forts, etc.

What is far more likely is a precursor civilization, beyond recorded history, created the 3 pyramids on the plateau and the Egyptians settled in the land long after they left. The ancient people were amazed by these star-like constructs and tried to imitate the 3 pyramids. That is why the first pyramids of Giza are the best built and have no hieroglyphs - this wouldn't be the case if they were all built by the same people (as you would expect the building technique to become better after each one). This is what Plato hinted at with the Hall of Records and the Ancient Egyptians don't even claim to have built the 3 Great Pyramids. I think if anyone here could go back in time to see the 3 pyramids in their prime, there would be no doubt that extremely primitive men could not craft them.

People get really uncomfortable with this subject (got deeply involved with one of these AE Great Pyramid debates before), so I'm ducking out now. Way too busy for ping pong. Peace.
edit on 2-5-2014 by TheLegend because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 03:27 AM
Just a thought, is it possible that the stones where carved round then rolled and then chiseled into blocks on site?

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 03:32 AM
a reply to: MrSpad

unless we were building a REALLY important monument, we probably wouldn't have a reason to build a structure that would stand for thousands of years...but you must take into consideration the significance of the pyramids, to the people who built them.

the fact that we wouldn't have much reason to build something like that, and the fact that you don't see any value to it, doesn't invalidate the fact that what they used worked better than anything we have today, by virtue of the fact that it's STILL there, after all this time..

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 04:44 AM
I am disappointed by this article. The content was good and informative, but I was hoping to find some kind of ancient technology or some scientist remake of the odd object used in the construction of the Coral Castle in Florida.

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 05:59 AM
Wouldn't we see the remains of the aqueducts they'd have built to transport the water?

Back then the Pyramids may have been close to the nile making aqueducts unnecessary, but were there not other pyramids/massive constructions further away from the Nile - too far to transport water any other way?

Would satellite show those aqueducts leading to these sites if this technique was used ?

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 06:16 AM
a reply to: ignorant_ape
Anybody want to figure how much water they would need to do this over the entire distance? Something tells me an urn full wouldn't be enough. Experts say, "look we did it in a lab one millionth the scale. Now all you have to do is scale it up and there's your answer". And it don't work like that.

That one picture is not worth a thousand words

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 06:17 AM
a reply to: Soloprotocol
Carving them round would probably be harder than square

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 06:38 AM
Does this also work for the stones/obelisks at BAALBEK, that are a hell of a lot more weightier than the 2-tonne blocks that where used n construction of the great pyramids? I am sure that I heard some of them weigh in excess of 48 tonnes.... so heavy in fact that one of them was left there as it broke during production!

posted on May, 2 2014 @ 06:48 AM

originally posted by: DARREN1976
Does this also work for the stones/obelisks at BAALBEK, that are a hell of a lot more weightier than the 2-tonne blocks that where used n construction of the great pyramids? I am sure that I heard some of them weigh in excess of 48 tonnes.... so heavy in fact that one of them was left there as it broke during production!

yeah, north of 1100 tons.

phage and others say, it was all downhill to move them.

so a piece of cake, basically.
edit on 3123515631am2014 by tsingtao because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in