Scientists Discovered Egyptian Secret To Moving Huge Pyramid Stones

a reply to: sirhumperdink

Right, and what value does the One World Trade building bring to the global economy? Do you know how many corporations want to be based out of it??

Who would want to be based out of a pile of concrete? My point is more than valid. Why fund something that would never give an ROI?

Edit: And sorry for the confusion, that was my fault. I was intending the term to be "Slave Labor"

any coerced or poorly remunerated work: Typing at that salary is slave labor.

Not that they were actually slaves. Having thousands or so people working 10-12 hours a day pulling rocks would not be a fun job.

a reply to: th3dudeabides

Easter island is still a mystery?

www.youtube.com...

That was solved.

a reply to: raymundoko

the one world trade building brings about as much to the world economy as a tar paper shack of the same size could (it may be a place where trade can be facilitated but those trades are going to happen whether that particular building is there or not)

are you kidding?
youre seriously asking how many corporations would base themselves out of a giant pyramid
half the douchers already think theyre pharoahs reborn and use the pyramids as symbology for their company in one way or another

but yeah what was i thinking
who would want to be associated with a giant pile of concrete (and youre the only one talking about concrete)

a reply to: OneManArmy

300 ton slab at Pumapunku? Care to source. I believe the heaviest stone there is 130 Tons and it is made of Sandstone.

I already know your source is Ancient Aliens btw as Von Daniken is the guy who claimed there was a 300 Ton Granite Stone. There is no granite or hard stone at Pumapunku. It is all Sandstone.

ancientaliensdebunked.com...

a reply to: sirhumperdink

How many rent-able compartments can be in the the current Pyramid? So if you made a replica of it would it not stand that you could only house the same amount of rent-able space? Why would anyone do that?

There is no fiscally responsible reason to make a replica of the Pyramid. It would not pay itself off in the lifetime of the benefactors. One World Trade will pay itself off within a decade or two.

And if you think the One World Trade center won't affect the world economy, you weren't paying attention to 9/11.

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: tsingtao

What 1100 pound cut stone has ever been moved? The only stones that ever weighed that much was NEVER moved because it broke under it's own weight while still being carved in the ground:

www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk...

Ones that came close broke under their own weight once erected (See the Colossus)

en.wikipedia.org...

The heaviest stone in the Pyramid of Giza is 70 Tons.

As an example of a statue like the one in the OP, The Colossi of Memnon, which weighed 600 tons each. They were carved from solid pieces of stone and dragged to their location. So if they were carried on a sled as the picture purports, then everything else probably was too. We KNOW the statues are Amenhotep and were built around 1300 BC.

How did they get the stones on the sled?

Such an interesting mystery..

That sled depiction is exactly how the Egyptian's of our world timeline
did infact move stones...but that's not how the pyramids were built as
they were built by a prior civilization. (sorry no Aliens involved)

Now Ed ol' boy..that man had a secret!
Reading his book the suggestion is that the universe is numerical and our earth is also
and with earth being a magnet, he discovered that if you change the pole's of each magnet in the stone
(each atom? is it's own magnet) and run them apposing each other - the earth would repel the stone
making it slightly levitate. It has to do with earth's magnetosphere, that's why he had a hand cranked
generator..needed the slight spark to change the stone's atoms..that's what Ed's 'little wires' did, make
a path for the atom's to follow.

Now here's Ed's kicker - sound..that's why he sang softly. The vibration acted as a 'shove' on the stone.

Poor Ed, wouldn't of needed the hand-crank generator if he only built himself a couple Bagdad Batteries.

The illustration above of the statue being moved by the ancient Egyptians is a reproduction of a painting on the wall of the tomb of Djehutihotep. This original source below is the best place to decipher what this image is all about:



The wall painting of the tomb of Djehutihotep

For one, notice that what is on the sled is not clear, the news article is working off of an artist's impression of the origianal painting, not the painting itself. The contents of the original painting have been massively redrawn in the news illustration, which may or may not be accurate. (hence the term "artistic license")

Below the sled are men carrying water yokes containing what is obviously far less water than what would be necessary to wet the sand in the manner described in the news story.

Also below the sled are men carrying a wooden log, which may be more in line with other theories that heavy stones were transported over wooden rails or logs that were lubricated with a combination of water and oil.

One thing that stands out in the "artists impression" version from the news story are the ropes used to hold the statue down, the rope just in front of the man spreading the water and also the ropes that the many workers are presumably pulling. Now look at the original - where did all the ropes go? Are these workers even pulling anything?

On the original painting in the tomb, below the last line of workers are more images. It's hard to make out what they are, but to me they look like boats. What may be the most important clue in the entire image is completely missing from the news report and its accompanying illustration!

An interesting facet of the original painting are what appears to be coptic crosses in a reddish hue. These were left by coptic hermits that occupied the caves.

But here's the kicker, the original painting is not the original painting! That's right, what is painted on the wall of the tomb is itself an "artist's rendering" a reproduction created in the 1800's. According to this article, the tomb and painting was a tourist draw that was destroyed by zealous tourists of the 19th century and then later repainted during a restoration.

The world famous scene of the transportation of a monolithic statue

The painting served as a magnet to draw visitors to this out-of-the-way place, but unfortunately such people wreaked havoc on the tomb, wantonly cutting away the important inscriptions behind the relief of the colossus and mutilating other parts of it.

Djehutihotep himself follows his statue on foot together with his three sons and attendants. Then follows a long passage describing the event which was fortunately transliterated before its destruction in the early nineteenth century. The artist who decorated the tomb, and who features on this painted relief, is titled "Lector, mummy-painter, decorator of this tomb ... Ameni-ankhu".

Did "Lector the Mummy Painter" get the details of this painting correct when he repainted it during the restoration in the 1800's? Or did he take an artistic license? And what of the modern illustration used in the news story? Clearly that has its own inaccuracies.

At the end of the day we have a copy of a copy. Hardly the rock solid proof that the mysteries of the pyramid stones have been finally solved...

originally posted by: troubleshooter
Egyptologists say that the Giza pyramids were built for three pharaohs over the course of a hundred years.

There are over 2.5 million stones, so if you built 24 hours a day for 100 years that means fitting one (average 3.5 ton) stone into place every 8.5 minutes.

and that means even at night, rain or shine.
no set backs in 100yrs?

what is that, 4 generations? 5?

logistics;

i have a problem with the production of the stones, they'd have to cut and move them out of the quarry plus travel time.
how'd they even keep up with the assembly demand?

i think we don't wait for every piece to come from the "factory" today.
did they just pile them up near the building site? waiting to be used?

and think of the division of labor for 100yrs. i understand it probably was all in the family but come on, not everyone is the same.
who was growing the foods for everyone? taking care of everyday life while this was going on?

someone somewhere really knew what they were doing, for a long time.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: tsingtao

What 1100 pound cut stone has ever been moved? The only stones that ever weighed that much was NEVER moved because it broke under it's own weight while still being carved in the ground:

www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk...

Ones that came close broke under their own weight once erected (See the Colossus)

en.wikipedia.org...

The heaviest stone in the Pyramid of Giza is 70 Tons.

As an example of a statue like the one in the OP, The Colossi of Memnon, which weighed 600 tons each. They were carved from solid pieces of stone and dragged to their location. So if they were carried on a sled as the picture purports, then everything else probably was too. We KNOW the statues are Amenhotep and were built around 1300 BC.

i believe we were talking about baalbek. yes, that one broke but what about the weight of the other 2?

anyway, i'd like to see it done, old school.
start to finish.

a reply to: Chronon

The rope is seen in the original attached to the base of the statue, just like in the redraw. You can also clearly see a foot as the man with the bucket is standing on a toe. You can see part of the base of the statue as well making it evident it is at least some type of sitting being, whether it is a man, Pharaoh or animal headed god can't be accurately determined.

However, based on the MANY MANY MANY statues that exist in Egypt that appear to be this same type of creation, I think it was very reasonable for the artist to complete the drawing the way he did. You would only disagree if you refuse to accept facts.

a reply to: tsingtao

The heaviest used stone at Baalbek is 800 tons. Similar stones have been moved on record before the modern area and are well documented in History.

en.wikipedia.org...
ancientaliensdebunked.com...

The stones larger than that were never removed from the quarry.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Chronon

The rope is seen in the original attached to the base of the statue, just like in the redraw. You can also clearly see a foot as the man with the bucket is standing on a toe. You can see part of the base of the statue as well making it evident it is at least some type of sitting being, whether it is a man, Pharaoh or animal headed god can't be accurately determined.

However, based on the MANY MANY MANY statues that exist in Egypt that appear to be this same type of creation, I think it was very reasonable for the artist to complete the drawing the way he did. You would only disagree if you refuse to accept facts.

The point is there is no "original painting". The original painting painted by the ancient Egyptians was destroyed in the early 1800's by tourists. What is in the tomb today is a copy, and what is in the news article is a copy of a copy. We will never know the accuracy of this image, there is no original to compare it to.

a reply to: mymymy

www.cheops-pyramide.ch...

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: tsingtao

The heaviest used stone at Baalbek is 800 tons. Similar stones have been moved on record before the modern area and are well documented in History.

en.wikipedia.org...
ancientaliensdebunked.com...

The stones larger than that were never removed from the quarry.

i am aware of all that.

a reply to: Chronon

The point is that we see those Colossus all over Egypt, so enough of the painting is original to make a pretty darn good guess as to what it is. To deny that just seems intellectually irresponsible.

I also think you are very confused. "Lector the Mummy Painter" was the original artist...And it is actually:

Lector, mummy-painter, decorator of this tomb, Ameni-ankhu

As in: "Yo, what's up, my name is Ameni-ankhu and I decorated this ish. I'm a priest, you dig?"

en.wikipedia.org...

I think you are confused because of the year 1842...that's BC, not AD.

I'm going to again go back to Wally Wallington, because I'm convinced he's solved how they did it. Here's a quote from his webpage -

I found that I, working alone, could easily move a 2400 lb. block 300 ft. per hour with little effort, and a 10,000 lb. block at 70 ft. per hour. I also stood two 8 ft. 2400 lb. blocks on end and placed another 2400 lb. block on top. This took about two hours per block. I found that one man, working by himself, without the use of wheels, rollers, pulleys, or any type of hoisting equipment could perform the task.

He goes on further to say:

I could build The Great Pyramid of Giza, using my techniques and primitive tools. On a twenty-five year construction schedule, (working forty hours per week at fifty weeks per year, using the input of myself to calculate) I would need a crew of 520 people to move blocks from the main quarry to the site and another 100 to move the blocks on site. For hoisting I need a crew of 120 (40 working and 80 rotating). My crew can raise 7000 lb. 100 ft. per minute. I have found the design of the pyramid is functional in it’s own construction. No external ramp is needed.

Whether his calucations are correct or not, I cannot say, but he sure has me convinced. Certainly seems much more plausible than aliens being involved.

Wally's website - www.theforgottentechnology.com...

a reply to: raymundoko

Thanks for link Ray!

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