Ancient Civilizations and Current Concieved Notions of those Civilizations

a reply to: Marduk

Your opinion of my understanding of the subject is not relevant to the topic.

Again, The Kings chamber is not as it once originally appeared 4,600+ years ago.

I guess the idea of the ravages of time on ancient monuments is simply lost on some.

originally posted by: SLAYER69
a reply to: Marduk

Your opinion of my understanding of the subject is not relevant to the topic.

Again, The Kings chamber is not as it once originally appeared 4,600+ years ago.

I guess the idea of the ravages of time on ancient monuments is simply lost on some.

Well excuse me Mr Wrong, the kings chamber is lined with granite
So its exactly as it appeared 4600 years ago, so your little understanding of the topic has a direct relation to once again, how wrong your claims are.

I can play this game all night long, how much credibility did you want to leave on the floor here ?

a reply to: Marduk

By that logic the THE "Supposed sarcophagus" always looked this great..

Here's a little lite reading for you, enjoy

I'm headed off to bed.

originally posted by: SLAYER69
a reply to: Marduk

By that logic the THE "Supposed sarcophagus" always looked this great..

Here's a little lite reading for you, enjoy

I'm headed off to bed.

It looked fine until Al Mamun broke it open in the twelth century
Maybe its about time you actually studied this subject before you start pontificating all over it in error

Your link seems to credit the long discredited ideas of the French Engineer Houdin, I don't see it mentioning how granite can be affected by erosion when its sealed in the middle of < 2 million blocks of limestone ?

Nice picture though, what are those lines on the wall in the background, why, they wouldn't be seams would they, lol

originally posted by: Marduk
I don't see it mentioning how granite can be affected by erosion when its sealed in the middle of < 2 million blocks of limestone ?

Nice picture though

Thanks, I thought You'd appreciate it.

Who mentioned erosion in the Kings chamber? Not I, BTW, I'm well aware of how the sarcophagus was damaged and by whom, that's all part of the phrase ravages of time, also, one last thing, you do realize the Giza site has had quite a few Earthquakes take place over the past 4,600+ years since it was first constructed eh?

I've noticed how you've repeatedly and very obviously keep side stepping that fact.

originally posted by: Marduk


Wow, incredible, so now its earthquakes that created all the seams which I have already provided evidence were there since its construction

No offense, you haven't shown anything in it's original condition that's been there since the construction, You have shown whats left in the year 2016, not 2,560 BC.

Amazing how earthquakes can time travel like that

Yes, Earthquakes are a modern invention....

Are you drunk or something ?

Haven't had a drop in a few years now, You?

originally posted by: SLAYER69

since its construction

No offense, you haven't shown anything in it's original condition that's been there since the construction, You have shown whats left in the year 2016, not 2,560 BC.

oh really

in the 1830s, Howard Vyse blasted a hole in the center of the south side of Khufu's's Pyramid while looking for another entrance. This wound in the pyramid can still be seen today, and in it, we can see how the builders dumped great globs of mortar and stone rubble in wide spaces between the stones. Here, there are big blocks, small chunks of rock, wedge shaped pieces, oval and trapezoidal pieces, as well as smaller stone fragments jammed into spaces as wide as 22 centimeters between larger blocks.

That will be those wide spaces between the stones which you were claiming were seamless

a reply to: NateTheAnimator

Thanks for your remarks. It doesn't appear as such, but I have not been able to find a source about it, outside of the link I noted.

And I will agree 100% with you. There are thousands of things that be looked at, and can be presented here to discuss.

The Ancient Vedic Texts with schematics of craft currently being built / or have been built, and are fly the skies today.

The depiction of God, moving in mechanical pieces of equipment that do tend to be overlooked by the Church during preparing Service Bullet Points.

The Amazing Artwork and Lore of the Americas Native Peoples that shows and speaks of the gods.

Many excellent examples do exist, that should be spoken to and discussed.

Again, thanks

Ciao

Shane

originally posted by: Marduk

That will be those wide spaces between the stones which you were claiming were seamless

Let's see what I wrote....

"I don't have a dog in this fight but. You and I both know the smooth tightly fitting outer casing stones were stripped away centuries ago leaving us with the exposed blocks weathered and worn. Nowhere near what a marvel of Ancient Engineering it once was in it's original condition.

It's disingenuous to imply otherwise. "

No mention of seamless stones.

originally posted by: Shane
a reply to: [post=20344253]
The Ancient Vedic Texts with schematics of craft currently being built / or have been built, and are fly the skies today.

There are no ancient Vedic texts with schematics of craft, built or otherwise...

originally posted by: SLAYER69

originally posted by: Marduk

That will be those wide spaces between the stones which you were claiming were seamless

Let's see what I wrote....

no, lets see what you were responding to

originally posted by: surfer_soul or the seamless joints?

my response



your response, was to call me disingenuous for posting that as a laughable retort against the claims of seamless

This whole way through this discussion has been about the joints not being seamless, you even brought up an argument about the Washington monument being almost seamless as a retort

Clearly, you are not only disingenuous, but you are debating dishonestly as anyone who reads this exchange will see, your inability to admit when you got something wrong has caused this argument...

originally posted by: Marduk

your response, was to call me disingenuous for posting that as a laughable retort against the claims of seamless

The fact remains that neither you nor I or anybody living knows for sure how it looked 4,600+ years ago. We have clues and theories. Even all the Academically accepted opinion based on archaeological finds people regurgitate as fact are in actuality just theories themselves until we event that time machine you mentioned.

It's undeniable that showing how the pyramid looks presently, all this time after the fact, is nowhere near how it appeared when first completed. Appearing seamless and actually being seamless are entirely two different things. I think those Stone masons were capable of making the outer casing and yes even in the kings chamber appear seamless originally

That's my opinion

a reply to: Byrd

As always you have presented an eloquent and detailed response to the matter, which is appreciated by myself, and likely others seeking to learn more on these sorts of examples.

I am glad that you respond with detail and review materials. It exemplifies your dedication to your studies and the work you have done to further your knowledge on these topics.

But as it has been noted, there are many examples of curious materials that go much further than what I c remarked upon in the opening example, which some, such as Marduk has addressed with excellent clarification, along with others.

I know you will have more to remark upon so I will end for now.

Ciao

Shane

P.S. Harte? Really? Well he's been fortunate, if that's the case.

originally posted by: SLAYER69

originally posted by: Marduk

your response, was to call me disingenuous for posting that as a laughable retort against the claims of seamless

The fact remains that neither you nor I or anybody living knows for sure how it looked 4,600+ years ago.

You are being disingenuous again, I already proved that the backing stones were full of holes and voids, a person would have to be utterly credulous to not already know, that the entire pyramid was filled with holes and was never seamless. Its been reported widely, even to the degree that the type of sand found filling the holes wasn't local, so wasn't blown in there by the wind.
and then there's this, from a passage sealed at both ends until just a few years ago, which required a small robot to access it

Seams again, and this is exactly how it looked when it was built

You appear to think that the workmanship was brilliant, when in fact, by modern standards, its shoddy at best.

originally posted by: Shane
But as it has been noted, there are many examples of curious materials that go much further than what I c remarked upon in the opening example,

I'm sorry Shane, but that's simply not true, I started out believing the fringe side, I am where I am today, because I never saw anything from your side, which wasn't misunderstood, fabricated or just plain ridiculous.

If your op wasn't your best attempt, then please post something which is,

a reply to: Marduk

I have a hard time imagining you ever believing the fringe crap lol.

originally posted by: Marduk

I already proved that the backing stones were full of holes and voids, a person would have to be utterly credulous to not already know, that the entire pyramid was filled with holes and was never seamless. Its been reported widely, even to the degree that the type of sand found filling the holes wasn't local, so wasn't blown in there by the wind.
and then there's this, from a passage sealed at both ends until just a few years ago, which required a small robot to access it

I never made the argument that all the stones in the pyramid were seamless, only that the outer casings and maybe even the Kings chamber possibly appeared seamless, but if you want to flail about arguing that I have, which I haven't, go ahead, it's your fingertips and keyboard taking a beating from all the knuckle mashing not my replies.

originally posted by: SLAYER69

originally posted by: Marduk

I already proved that the backing stones were full of holes and voids, a person would have to be utterly credulous to not already know, that the entire pyramid was filled with holes and was never seamless. Its been reported widely, even to the degree that the type of sand found filling the holes wasn't local, so wasn't blown in there by the wind.
and then there's this, from a passage sealed at both ends until just a few years ago, which required a small robot to access it

I never made the argument that all the stones in the pyramid were seamless,

your initial response was in support of someone who did
I am at work yanno, I'm getting paid to write this, no knuckle mashing required