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.

 

Spynx's paw

page: 8
0
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 08:46 AM
link   
reply to post by dredd120
 


Yes. You refer to mfkzt. The subject of Laurence Gardner's book: Lost Secrets of the Sacred Ark.




posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Uncle Joe
 


Well, technically, the Summerian people actually tell stories of how the creators of the world made the first humans with the body of man and the head of a lion, or a bull, or a bird.

If you then look at the egyptian culture, the gods the egyptians worshipped were often depicted as having animal heads and human bodies.

Could this then mean that these things actually lived here, and the egyptians assumed they were our gods because they were different when actually, they were creations too?



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 05:06 PM
link   
A few comments




Recent scientific investigation has also supported the idea that the stones used to construct the main body of the Pyramids show lower density then the blocks that support its weight (research this yourself). Meaning that the base stones were solid rock and the upper layers were man made. This would also easily explain how they are aligned so tightly together with little space between one block and the next.


"lower density" I think your are referring to the fact that the limestone the Egyptians used came from quarries where the quality varies in bands - as most limestone does. I've been to the top of Menkaure's and if the Egyptians were making concrete upper parts they were using separate molds - they are all different and show no signs of casting - they do show signs of being hammered out.



posted on Jul, 15 2008 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


""lower density" I think your are referring to the fact that the limestone the Egyptians used came from quarries where the quality varies in bands - as most limestone does. I've been to the top of Menkaure's and if the Egyptians were making concrete upper parts they were using separate molds - they are all different and show no signs of casting - they do show signs of being hammered out."

Read this: www.timesonline.co.uk...



posted on Jul, 15 2008 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Yep about two years ago the amusingly named Barsoum* made that claim, as of yet unsupported.

The main problem people have with this is that they fail to understand the nature of limestone. He has a nice theory but not the facts to back him up. Davidouts tried this path too a few decades ago. It runs into the same major problem - the core stones are clearly individually cut and not from molds.

What would the impact be of the Egyptians using concrete to make the pyramids? As they had a form of concrete already and used it for fill, not much. It would be interesting thou but it also raises the question, if they invented concrete for structural use - why did they then abandon it?

The latest thing I could find on this theory is this.

Concrete




Ancient drawings and hieroglyphics are cryptic on the subject of pyramid construction. Theories as to how the Egyptians might have built the huge monuments to dead pharaohs depend heavily on conjecture based on remnants of rubble ramps, as well as evidence that nearby limestone quarries contained roughly as much stone as is present in the pyramids.

And good old Zahi offers up some uncompromising words

Zahi Hawass, head of Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities, minced no words in assailing the concrete idea. "It's highly stupid," he said via a spokesman. "The pyramids are made from solid blocks of quarried limestone. To suggest otherwise is idiotic and insulting."



* A common Egyptian name but it always makes me think of John Carter

[edit on 15/7/08 by Hanslune]



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 07:20 PM
link   
I have created my own thread concerning the matter due to the length of my post and the lack of recent activity hereabouts. If you should read this, and would like to continue this discussion, I would politely ask for your attention at my thread, labeled The Mystery of the Sphinx. This is not an act of spamming, so please don't interpret it as such; I've read through these posts and simply wish to rekindle the debate.



new topics

top topics
 
0
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join