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.
originally posted by: redchad
And il ask you the same question why didn't the Romans, Greeks medieval castle builders or the builders of Angkor Wat not use stones of these sizes or precision cuts or drill holes through granite simple it couldn't be done.
originally posted by: redchad Because as you know what you couldn't get a slab that size into the workshop
"Whereas the largest stone in the great pyramid weighed 60 tons"
originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: Marduk
To be fair, I'd consider a difference in timeframe of almost two thousand years to be relevant.
originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: Marduk
I'm not sure if it's implicated somewhere, but all he talks about is the "Modern Tools" supposedly being necessary to precisely drill and cut Granite, not modern machinery for movement. Though it's anyone's guess as to what "Modern" stands for in this context.
originally posted by: redchad
a reply to: Marduk
Mr or Mrs Marduk I'm not really sure what your going on about!
...but by the look of what your posting anyone reading will be getting the impression your sat in an asylum or similar.
Please calm down and give a coherent comment...
originally posted by: redchad
a reply to: Marduk
Ok mr or Mrs Marduk 1st question why didn't stone builders in the past use 500+ ton stones in their building I'm talking about Romans Greeks ancient castle builders and the builders at Angkor Wat
originally posted by: redchad
a reply to: Marduk
Ok mr or Mrs Marduk 1st question why didn't stone builders in the past use 500+ ton stones in their building I'm talking about Romans Greeks ancient castle builders and the builders at Angkor Wat
originally posted by: redchad
a reply to: Harte
I'm sorry but these aren't exactly examples of 500+ ton stone workings.
In respect of the Greek blocks that's exactly what they are blocks of stone of a size that the builders at the time would be able to cut, transport and man handle. I'm not exactly sure why you've used this as an example
As for Pompey's pillar! The fact that the Romans were able cut and sculpture granite is not the argument after all you just have to go to Rome. I fully accept that this 248 ton piece of stone could have been cut and erected by the builders at the time. But how on earth you can compare this with the 120 foot 1168 ton obelisk at Aswan is beyond me.
originally posted by: redchadGo back to the video on page two posted by Cyruay and look at these examples, this is the type of stone cutting and precision I am talking about. my original post was in respect of the granite coffer in the GP. But it would remiss of me not to mention the other megalithic sites around the world such as Baalbeck, Israel, Ethiopia Mexico and Peru.
originally posted by: redchadA fellow Mancunian Chris Dunn a machinist and toolmaker for 30+ years compared some of the cuts in granite from Giza with cuts from modern day laser and diamond cutting discs under a microscope and formed the opinion that the Giza cuts were made by some form of high powered disc.
originally posted by: redchad
Probably best if you read this
Advanced machining in Ancient Egypt at gizapower.com
Dunn rightly points out that archeologists are not experts in machining or engineering and can easily miss or misinterpret important evidence (in my opinion many times this is done deliberately.) If I feel unwell and want advise on getting better I listen to a doctor before I listen to a mid-wife, if I want to know how a car engine works I will listen to a mechanic before I listen to a car salesman ...... if I want to know how the pyramids where made I will listen to a machinist, builder and engineer before I listen to an archeologist.