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.

 

Did the ANCIENT BUILDERS Know How to SOFTEN SOLID STONE?

page: 5
51
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 01:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: douglas5
a reply to: JamesTB

S & F James for excellent photographs that blew me away when looking at them , i never bought the official line of how stones were moved or shaped in the past



Well considering there is no 'official line' but I presume you mean you don't agee with the consensus opinion of those who study this sort of stuff.

So tell how was it done (if you don't believe the locals did it with muscle powered tools, cleverness and craftsmanship)?




posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: JamesTB

originally posted by: Hanslune
a reply to: JamesTB

The long bands may have been caused by their use of scaffolding. reset at different levels, look at the metal railing to get an idea of size.

The site at Aswan has excellent examples of how the 'pounders' art was done to include lots of diorite hammer stones abandoned in situ.


I'm not as sure about that as you are. How do you explain this gigantic cut?

Stone pounders?





I could think of a method.

Notice the water next to the stone.
Suppose they damn the water up so they can control the rising and lowering of water level next to a stone face.
Next suppose they take a massive log and attach cutter chisels to it
Next suppose they float the log by the stone surface over and over and lower the water and repeat and repeat till they get a massive flat verticle surface.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

That's a lot of supposing and never mind the water needed in the desert.

That would take years to do, They'd have to wait each year for the Nile to flood to get a single pass/slice/rub..


I suppose it's possible though







edit on 27-10-2014 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 02:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: SLAYER69
a reply to: TinfoilTP

That's a lot of supposing and never mind the water needed in the desert.

That would take years to do, They'd have to wait each year for the Nile to flood to get a single pass/slice/rub..


I suppose it's possible though








Just imagine a little tiny continuous wave action with a log with hundreds of chisels protruding, it could do the work of hundreds of chislers effortlessly and you don't have to feed them. Then use your scraping log to smooth.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

I would have thought that the use of bone-dry wooden wedges hammered in and then packed with wet rags would do it, with a few rinse and repeats and maybe some finishing. I'm guessing that it's limestone, which is pretty easy to work.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 02:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: zatara
a reply to: JamesTB

It seems to me too.. I refuse to belief that these structures were made with pounding boulders and copper tools. And I can not fathom that the mainstream scientist in that field do not concur. On second thought I do fathom............. they are $*#@!♫♪.

I'm assuming that you have done your own objective analysis on these structures that goes beyond simply looking at pictures on the internet. You must have if you are insulting the intelligence of scientists that actually have done those type of tests. I'm not saying it's wrong or impossible, but looks can be deceiving. You need more than online pictures of something if you wish to insult scientists who have studied the physical sculptures and rocks for decades along with the associated cultures.


Come now... I do not insult those scientists the way you think I do. I just want to express with those symbols that they do not deserve much credit in my opnion and that I strongly disagree with their conclusions.

Because these mainstream proffesionals are no fools it can be that it is very dangerous for these scientists their careers if he.. or she .. come up with an explanation other than the consensus among their established peers.

Their stuborn conclusion in this matter amaze me, more so because they are high educated proffesionals. These scientists can not produce a satisfying explanation other than pounding these rocks into shape with boulders and soft metals.

I do not need to go on-site in Peru or Bolivia when use of simple common sense is sufficient for making a reasonable assessment in this case. I do not say these blocks are made soft with plantextraxts, bird doo-doo or with alien technology. But I am open for the possibillity if it is so. I am open for anything reasonable, anything except pounding with boulders or chisel them into shape with copper ... that is just unreasonable and not realistic.


edit on 27/10/2014 by zatara because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 02:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: TinfoilTP

I would have thought that the use of bone-dry wooden wedges hammered in and then packed with wet rags would do it, with a few rinse and repeats and maybe some finishing. I'm guessing that it's limestone, which is pretty easy to work.


If you look at the pic, it is cut into the rock face not cleaved off.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

So one establishes the top horizontal cut as a deep groove, make slots vertically at the side to fit wedges into and Robert is your father's brother.


edit on 27-10-2014 by skalla because: bleh, brother nicht uncle, dolt




posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

How would the other quarry workers and stone-masons carve their daily quota whilst under water? Snorkels?


FTR - the image appears to have been taken in the area adjacent to the 'Unfinished Obelisk.'



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 02:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Hanslune

I do not believe the locals did it the way we are told , it is one thing moving a rock but quite another to drill a round hole in anything back in pre history


It is the fact WE CANNOT recreate some of those structures today if we are so bright why is that

it even stumped the great Sir Flinders Petrie



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: zatara

Why is it unreasonable to suggest copper (or more importantly, copper alloys, possibly naturally high in arsenic) chisels and stone pounders cant (eta, bleh, i meant to type can) do this?

These tools categorically can work these materials and have been found in situ and represented in art.


edit on 27-10-2014 by skalla because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: douglas5



I do not believe the locals did it the way we are told , it is one thing moving a rock but quite another to drill a round hole in anything back in pre history


You're entitled to hold that belief, but it flies in the face of the actual evidence. There are images of AEs using drills painted on walls and in the old texts. I'll post a couple in a while.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 03:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: douglas5
a reply to: Hanslune

I do not believe the locals did it the way we are told , it is one thing moving a rock but quite another to drill a round hole in anything back in pre history


Flint tipped hand/bow/pump drills routinely drilled through many materials in prehistory. A river-cane and sand will enable one to drill through rock.

Add a copper sleeve at the business end of the drill as a bit, and the process is much faster.




It is the fact WE CANNOT recreate some of those structures today if we are so bright why is that



Artisans guarded the more intricate details of their processes to maintain their closed shop and protect their income and position in society. Their techniques were learned from childhood and perfected over a lifetime. I would expect that many top craftspeople were murdered upon various changes in regime and all of this knowledge died out by the dark ages.

Don't forget that a little over a hundred years ago no white man knew how to knap flints into blades and items such as Eccentrics were a complete mystery. Then thanks to Ishi, Bordes, Crabtree et al we now have thousands of hobbyists who can make *any* type of point, including the sculptural eccentrics



it even stumped the great Sir Flinders Petrie


Give the guy a break, he almost created archaeological method and typology (iirc?) on his own - we cant expect him to know everything!
edit on 27-10-2014 by skalla because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 03:22 PM
link   
a reply to: JamesTB

I don't think they softened anything.. They could be normal holes and erosion and/or previous rivers etc. softened their edges over the years.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 03:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: douglas5
a reply to: Hanslune

I do not believe the locals did it the way we are told , it is one thing moving a rock but quite another to drill a round hole in anything back in pre history.

It is the fact WE CANNOT recreate some of those structures today if we are so bright why is that
it even stumped the great Sir Flinders Petrie


Easily done with a copper tube drill - there are examples of cores shaped in this manner in the Egyptian museums.

We can build anything that the ancient did, however there is a caveat to that statement - we can build something that looks amazingly close to Khufu tomb BUT we could not do so using AE techniques, we could do so in our own way. Those AE techniques and the craftsmen who did it are obviously long gone and recreating them would take generations and I'm sure thousands of people don't want to bash out rocks and drag them into position for many many years.

It stumped until he asked masonry experts and then he nodded his head and went, ah!
edit on 27/10/14 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 03:26 PM
link   
a reply to: skalla

Those 'eccentric flints' could make a decent thread topic. Incredibly peculiar and intricate.

I wouldn't be surprised if they demanded many fails before one was successfully completed.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 03:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

I honestly think that i ramble on about flint a bit too much, people roll their eyes when i mention the "F" word and get all frothy at the mouth. It would be a discussion free thread anyway i reckon, i can post heaps of awesome modern ones and vids of peeps making them



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 03:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: zatara

Why is it unreasonable to suggest copper (or more importantly, copper alloys, possibly naturally high in arsenic) chisels and stone pounders cant do this?

These tools categorically can work these materials and have been found in situ and represented in art.



The other day I watched a mainstream proffesional Mark Lehner and a rock carver.. try to use the common ancient egyptian tools on carving a rock. They got nowhere.... not even with the much softer limestone.




edit on 27/10/2014 by zatara because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

I took stone tool making in college using Crabtree's book and obsidian. Took two years of often interrupted practice to get where I could make a passable looking spear point in a reasonable amount of time, preferred making burins and later flints for flintlocks.

Skalla's point is a good one - that a skill which was relearned and took a generation or two. The skills for building a pyramid in the 'ole style' would involve thousands of men working together and you're looking 2-3 generations of full time work on how to figure it out. Of course with knapping we also had living experts - pyramid building nada & zilch.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 03:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: zatara

The other day I watched a mainstream proffesional Mark Lehner and a proffesional rock carver.. try to use the common ancient egyptian tools on carving a rock. They got nowhere.


Your comment "got nowhere' is unsupported by the evidence presented. The were able to work the stone - slowly - no one has ever claimed that the AE did their work fast plus they had generations of experience. The guy restoring the Parthenon estimates his mason work 3 times slower than the ancients - mainly due to a lack of experience as none of them started as young boys to learn the trade.

The entire program on the Sphinx
edit on 27/10/14 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
51
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join