Secret Door in Great Sphinx leading to the Hall of Records (Cover up!)

originally posted by: Creep Thumper
There are two members here it doesn't pay to argue with regarding ancient history. They both know their stuff. They've both posted in this thread.

Hanslune and Harte.

Thanks but all we actually do is just read what other experts write about what they know - anybody can do exactly the same thing.

originally posted by: bluesfreak

That in itself throws up all sorts of questions that Harte, Hanslune etc wont like.

Please ask them and while you're at if it so hard why could the ancient Egyptian do it?

Now for some questiion bluesfreak won't like:

Or if you believe those poor AE couldn't do who did and why can't we find any evidence of these fine folks -and their equipment - or where they lived how does an invisible civilization make this stuff?

Given the high technology (do you believe they had high technology) why doesn't it show up in other places - like in weapons?

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

These are not fringe ideas. This is our history and it is being kept hidden from us.

By whom and for reason? If they 'kept hidden from you' why do you know about them?

Once upon a time acnient peeps all around the world decided to build massive pyramids and monoliths out of huge stone. Some of which weighing thousands of tonnes.

None of them weighted 'thousands of tonnes' calm down and make rational statements please....

The aligned these structures to very specific alignments. They then all just stopped.

Which no one agrees on - the fringe have concentrated on the pyramids and few other places and have ignored 99.99% of the other buildings in the world - guess what they point at something too. What?



See all those other building - tombs all - that no one in the fringe cares about?

I find it hard to believe that moving a few heavy stones could ever be easier than moving many small stones, at any level of technology.

Yes they came to that point but - you do realize right how rare it was for people to move really heavy stones - a half dozen very heavy ones and about 50 others under 400 tons. The ancient period lasted 2,500 years - they didn't actually move a lot of big stones and later they found the love and delight of using smaller ones.

The fact a theory can't give you all the answers is NEVER a good reason to dismiss it.

The Goddidit theory of creation has all the answers you could ever want, about any question you could possibly pose. But that doesn't mean it is founded on sensible evidence.

Yep the foundation of any discussion of ancient Egyptian stone work is that the archaeological evidence agrees on one point - the Ancient Egyptians were there and there wasn't an invisible civilization sitting there along side them doing all the work but leaving no traces.....

I don't know why you keep talking about "invisible civilization" issue.

I think it is no coincidence that the first Pharaoh Narmer begins his reign at about 3100 BC, while the Green Sahara period is known to have have come to an end at about the same time, between 3500 and 3000 BC.

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

The desertification of the Sahara would have been a period of terrible instability for all the surrounding regions, because droves of economic refugees would be flowing out of the Sahara, trying to find somewhere to live. There would have been constant disputes over land, grazing rights, etc....

The drawings we have of Narmer have him going around a beating people down, to establish his rule and impose order. Then Egypt arises as an apparently multi-ethnic nation united by religion. (Probably because the tribal groups who came there were from many bloodlines, spread out over the Sahara.)

It is totally uncontested at this point, that the people living in the Green Sahara during the wet period possessed agriculture up to at least the level of animal husbandry (with dairy products having been discovered in their settlements). So, even if they weren't yet at the point of planting seeds into rows, they certainly were at the point of tending a herd and allowing it to graze over an area of greenery.

The kind of agriculture that was later practiced by Ancient Egypt may simply have not been necessary during the wet Sahara period, when vegetation grew more readily on its own.



--- My point is, people at a level of advancement sufficient to build large structures certainly did inhabit the surrounding regions a long time prior to Narmer. And we know virtually nothing about them.

Or if you believe those poor AE couldn't do who did and why can't we find any evidence of these fine folks -and their equipment - or where they lived how does an invisible civilization make this stuff? Given the high technology (do you believe they had high technology) why doesn't it show up in other places - like in weapons?

I have never said anything about this invisible civilisation you talk of. I do believe the AE were capable of creating a sturdy basic lathe, as many tool marks on stone objects prove to me. It’s you guys who don’t believe they could.
A lathe wouldn’t be much use on the battlefield,either, I’m afraid. reply to: Hanslune

a reply to: Hanslune

Sorry but lamely claiming something is 'suppressed' doesn't mean it is. Look I understand you have no real counter to the problem - you have denied a body of knowledge you know nothing about and you've been challenged on it. You have no basis for you claim.

I am sorry I cannot use your noggin for you. The writing is on the wall. What was the weekend top OP on ATS. Oh yes i recollect now.

Boom!!!

Fraud in the Great Pyramid - The Final Proof
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I suggest you go and do some reading and studying and most important some learning. The truth is coming like a tsunami.

a reply to: Hanslune

None of them weighted 'thousands of tonnes' calm down and make rational statements please....

I am not here to educate you. That is your job. Nor am I here to repeat myself. There are posts in this thread of megaliths in there thousands of tons. They are well documented. This is not fringe science. If you are not of such things go and do some reading.

a reply to: Hanslune

99.99% of the other buildings in the world - guess what they point at something too. What?

I am not ignoring them. We can talk about them too if you want. There are megaliths worldwide and they all share a lot in common. They all use similar architecture they all encode the same numbers. They all point to the same stars sets.

Why was the number 144000 encoded across the world. Why was the number 432. Why did the ancients measure the great year. You dont know what im talking about. If you are interested go and do some reading.

Is it evident that you can only have a discussion with someone if they can understand the oposing view. This is where you lack.

a reply to: Hanslune

Thanks but all we actually do is just read what other experts write about what they know - anybody can do exactly the same thing

Your no expert your old school Tell me why the sothic cycle was of such importance to the Egyptians. You cant. Dont worry i will put a thread up about it and teach you some.


Are you kidding me. The historians that study Egypt no very little. Answer me this. What percent of hieroglyphs have been deciphered. You stick to your Egyptology and i will stick to my Khemitology,

I will answer it for you. Under ten percent.

You want to understand ancient Egypt. Learn from the Dogon tribe. The priest class of Khem.

a reply to: Hanslune

How do you know that?

Because it cannot be done. Nor do you know how it was done in the past. The expanation that |Bryd gave was so inaccurate that they debunked themselves.

The discusion about the creation the bowls stated very plainly that these techniques could not be used in grananite.

You tell me your the expert you give an explanation on how it was done. With some evidence. Not just a made up story.

You could just be honest and say You dont know.

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Creep Thumper
There are two members here it doesn't pay to argue with regarding ancient history. They both know their stuff. They've both posted in this thread.

Hanslune and Harte.

Thanks but all we actually do is just read what other experts write about what they know - anybody can do exactly the same thing.

My point is you both make that effort. I, too, devour books. It makes a huge difference in what you post.

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Harte

No, it's perfectly clear that you haven't (or won't) acknowledge that exactly the same "problem" exists with the woodwork I linked. What's also clear is that you won't try and find out what kind of turning tool can make a hollow cut like that.

Please stop making stuff up. Granite machinists say they cannot do this. Yet you are telling me it can be in granite. Show me examples or consider yourself

debunked

:-)

"Show me examples!!" ????
Don't stamp your foot at me - I gave you a video of stone being made into a bowl - by hand!
Let's not pretend that I've not provided examples.
Let's just say that you prefer your own appeal to authority - sans any evidence whatsoever that what you claim is true - and when it doesn't fly simply accuse others of not having given examples, even when they have!

Harte

originally posted by: bluesfreak
And ps, Harte, your opinion on the perfection in the bowl that self balances please -in relation to the primitive fabrication method shown a reply to: Harte

My opinion? I like it.
No doubt there were gifted craftsmen then (and now.)

Harte

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Byrd

Two things: 1- The bowls aren't perfectly symmetric or balanced. 2- The problems you describe (flying off the lathe, etc) only occur if you're turning the object quickly.

If you're hand-cranking it, the problem is very minimal. ...and third, there's images of them working these bowls (a nice discussion with images from tombs and so forth on Reshfam) They aren't being done horizontally, but rather vertically. The lathe itself is turning, not the bowl/vase.

You are evading the issue. Experts cannot replicate these today. Did you not read my link.

Other pieces turned out of granite, porphory or basalt are fully hollowed with narrow undercut flared openings, and some even have long necks. Since we have yet to reproduce such pieces it is safe to say that the techniques or machinery they employed to produce these bowls has yet to be replicated.

www.theglobaleducationproject.org...

This artefact was made by granite and by admission of your own link could not have been made.

While metal chisels could be used to shape soft limestone, the metals available to the ancient Egyptians, copper, bronze and during the first millennium BCE wrought iron, were far too soft to work igneous rock.

www.reshafim.org.il...


If your going to link. Link evidence that does not debunk you.

Happy Sunday.

Now, you're trolling.
You misrepresent what was said in both pieces.
Techniques have not been replicated. Not that the vessels themselves cannot be made.

Interested parties will have already noted your dishonest quote mining of Byrd's link. Else why did you truncate the quote before it got to this part?

Hard stone vessels were given their form by pounding them with hammerstones (See Drawing 1 in the diagram below) made of stone harder than the work piece itself. Sometimes copper saws were used, where the sawing action was due to quartz sand particles embedded in the metal [5].

People with eyes that can read readily see through this blatant lie of yours.

You're looking worse and worse with every post you make.

Harte

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Hanslune

None of them weighted 'thousands of tonnes' calm down and make rational statements please....

I am not here to educate you. That is your job. Nor am I here to repeat myself. There are posts in this thread of megaliths in there thousands of tons. They are well documented. This is not fringe science. If you are not of such things go and do some reading.

There may be posts with claims of such stones - but there are no stones that large that were moved.
So now the presence of a claim in a post on a discussion board is evidence?
You aren't actually worth conversing with. My mistake.

Harte

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Hanslune

Thanks but all we actually do is just read what other experts write about what they know - anybody can do exactly the same thing

Your no expert your old school Tell me why the sothic cycle was of such importance to the Egyptians. You cant. Dont worry i will put a thread up about it and teach you some.

Ther's no evidence that the Sothic Cycle held any major significance to the AEs.

It appears that you actually have made an effort to find out what the Sothic Cycle is, but haven't reached the point where you can explain its significance to the AEs.

So, you've half-assed the information.

originally posted by: purplemerAre you kidding me. The historians that study Egypt no very little. Answer me this. What percent of hieroglyphs have been deciphered. You stick to your Egyptology and i will stick to my Khemitology,

All hieroglyphic texts that can be read have been deciphered. That would be 100%.

originally posted by: purplemerI will answer it for you. Under ten percent.

You want to understand ancient Egypt. Learn from the Dogon tribe. The priest class of Khem.

Under ten percent? Dogon tribe? Such ignorance has been rare here lately. Years ago there were people all over this site that were as innocent of rational thought as you.
Now, you're an anachronism.

Harte

www.sci-lib.net...

In Chapter 5, Stocks demonstrates his own making of a limestone vessel with the mouth half the diameter of the vase.
This book is the source mentioned in Byrd's link, where the author stated:

Denys A. Stocks who experimented with ancient Egyptian techniques,[9] produced a limestone vessel almost 11 cm tall, with a diameter of 10 cm and a neck opening of 5 cm. It took him 22½ hours to achieve his task:
1 rough shaping - 6½ hrs
2,3 core drilling - 5 hrs
6-8 boring - 10 hrs
undercutting the vase shoulder - 1 hr.
He reckons that an accomplished craftsman could have done it in half the time, and that the production of a similar hardstone vessel would have taken three to four times longer [1]. This estimate doesn't take into account mishaps. Breakages, according to the great quantity of vase fragments found were seemingly not a rarity.

This is from an old archy - he's not a stonemason and never practiced, yet made a pretty decent vessel on the first try. He did, however, have experience with sawing cores out of stone using copper and sand - including sawing granite - because he's the one that demonstrated that it can be done.

Harte

a reply to: Harte

Wait wait wait, you think 100% of hieroglyphics have been translated?!

It’s pretty blatantly obvious that it’s not the case.

The Rosetta Stone May give credit to the translations from that particular source.

But beyond that, come on lol. It’s just guessing what weird drawings mean.

Even reading the English translations is very obvious that it’s all just guess work.

Especially when the weird drawings are interpreted as poetic, religious jargon...

I remember reading that a beetle hieroglyphic stood for religious grace or blessings or whatever, lol.

originally posted by: Harte
www.sci-lib.net...

In Chapter 5, Stocks demonstrates his own making of a limestone vessel with the mouth half the diameter of the vase.
This book is the source mentioned in Byrd's link, where the author stated:

Denys A. Stocks who experimented with ancient Egyptian techniques,[9] produced a limestone vessel almost 11 cm tall, with a diameter of 10 cm and a neck opening of 5 cm. It took him 22½ hours to achieve his task:
1 rough shaping - 6½ hrs
2,3 core drilling - 5 hrs
6-8 boring - 10 hrs
undercutting the vase shoulder - 1 hr.
He reckons that an accomplished craftsman could have done it in half the time, and that the production of a similar hardstone vessel would have taken three to four times longer [1]. This estimate doesn't take into account mishaps. Breakages, according to the great quantity of vase fragments found were seemingly not a rarity.

This is from an old archy - he's not a stonemason and never practiced, yet made a pretty decent vessel on the first try. He did, however, have experience with sawing cores out of stone using copper and sand - including sawing granite - because he's the one that demonstrated that it can be done.

Harte

I’ve seen videos recording people in Egypt, trying to cut large stones with copper saws... It really doesn’t work, lol. It works so minimally, and destroys the copper saws so fast, that it’s just not practical.

Nor does Egypt have mountainous landfills of broken copper saws lol.

Re: the Dogon tribe: I never got clear myself if that was real or hoaxed, as a lot of sources say, but it's worth researching.

I found a good vid about it but currently my internet is lame, so video doesn't work well.

If real then their knowledge of star systems would be incredible. Of course, the ancient Egyptians showed off their knowledge of star systems too, in their pyramids.

So if the Egyptians did reach out to the Dogon's area then it makes sense that they're both focused on knowledge of star systems.