Reasons for the pyramids of Egypt/South America/Mars-solved?

Loungerist,

You're obviously an intelligent person, and have given this enough thought for me to investigate this further, and I will do so when time permits a bit more (at work, and rushed at the moment).

However, a few things to consider:

• You don't have to lift a stone to get a skid under it. All you have to do is dig under it and THEN place the skid, or have the ground properly shaped when it falls from the quarry. Either way, effectively, at any given point in time, the majority of the stone's weight rests on skids or ground, while the dirt is dug out from underneath it in a "tunnel" shape. Slide the skid through the "tunnel". Do another tunnel. Slide another skid through. Continue until you have as many skids as it takes. Then burrow out the rest of the ground around the skids, smooth out the ground in front of them, perhaps even having the foresight to burrow grooves for the skids in stone, and use a constant stream of water as a displacement between the skids and the grooves.
  
  
• The skids needn't be dragged by people with ropes. They can be -cranked- along. Think of a giant fishing rod with the line and weight laying out on the ground. As you reel it in, it draws the weight along the ground. The same concept applies, except your reel is a giant 10 or 20 foot wheel with several levers, each being pushed in a clockwise or counter-clockwise direction by several people, and the fishing line is a series of very stout ropes that have been harnessed to the skids.
  

At no point was the stone lifted, and no one's muscle-power was unamplified.

Originally posted by thelibra

The skids needn't be dragged by people with ropes. They can be -cranked- along. Think of a giant fishing rod with the line and weight laying out on the ground. As you reel it in, it draws the weight along the ground. The same concept applies, except your reel is a giant 10 or 20 foot wheel with several levers, each being pushed in a clockwise or counter-clockwise direction by several people, and the fishing line is a series of very stout ropes that have been harnessed to the skids.


At no point was the stone lifted, and no one's muscle-power was unamplified.

I think this is what Loungerist was saying. That this can't happen, since Egypt, in the Age of the Pyramids (supposed age), didn't have the wheel. But I could be wrong...

Fallen One

Byrd.
I'm interested in seeing what you've come up with against those scientists. If they right (I have no view one way or the other), then it sort of proves that thousands of years ago, maybe to the end of the Ice Age, that we've had an understanding (or at least, a knowledge) of pyramidal structures, with special ways to build them.

PS I don't think it was Aliens. I just think we were more capable then than we are now. Or at least were a few hundred years ago, I'm still not sure if could accomplish what they did so long ago to their specifications...with modern equipment.

[edit on 20/10/2005 by FallenOne]

Libra,

Without going into the individual reasons for why that wouldn't work other than what Fallen One just pointed out,I will just re-iterate that it is possible to build the pyramids and it is possible to move those stones. Evidenced by the fact that the pyramids are there. What is not possible is building it with the primitive technology and methods we are told was used. I.e. wooden stakes,simple copper tools,hammerstones,no wheels,no pulleys,etc. There are at least 4 notable impossibilities in the Simple Tools theory/myth.



1.Stones in excess of 40 tons lifted,dragged along the ground with human strength,then lifted again(at angles,no less) into current position. The proposed methods only work for the lighter stones and are utterly useless against the numerous stones heavy enough to drive themselves and any one/apparatus trying to move them into the ground.

2.Stones cut to optical precision beyond the technology of all but the most recent of times. The positioning and cutting of the stones was so meticulous and precise that the stones were placed side by side with the largest gap between them being less than half a milimeter. The tip of a modern machine-crafted knife's blade cannot fit in-between this gap. To say nothing of the deformed-by-comparison blades and edges of ancient times.


3.Chambers 350 feet in length and at a precise angle throughout tunnelled through solid rock. It's dimensions are uniform to form a straight line and are more perfect than whatever room you're sitting in now. And this tunnel was somehow created with no carbon signs of torches or flame used to provide light for the work despite that the shaft would be dark past 50 feet.


4.Marks and bore holes showing drilling speeds many times faster than what could be achieved by the human hand and/or with bits made of the materials were are told they were limited to.

There are other suspect points such as the replenishing of material for tools needed to work over 2 million stones vs. the amount of material actually available. But for now those 4 are more than enough to move the orthodox ideas of pyramid construction to the realm of fantasy. Most of this is drawn from physical text but I'll try to find something online and post it for you.



[edit on 20-10-2005 by Loungerist]

Here's a few.

www.si.edu... - This page gives the orthodox theory proposed for the construction of the pyramids.

www.world-mysteries.com... - This article basically shoots the rollers/skid theory in the head and watches it die. Elsewhere on the page is further detail about what the orthodox method entails in terms of what the Egyptians were and weren't supposed to have.

www.sacredsites.com... - This page illustrates many of the technological aspects of the pyramid one has to pretty much ignore in order fit it into the orthodox theory.






[edit on 21-10-2005 by Loungerist]

Where did everyone go? Did we scare them off? haha.

just a quick question; when the pyramids were first built they had shined limestone all the way down which would reflect the light quite well so have anyone thought what would happen if light was shined down from space (to a target that could answer maybe) or vise versa

If these alien dudes were so advanced wouldnt they give us something a little more portable? Radio, Webcam, stargate etc.

[edit on 22/10/05 by Atomix]

One of the fundamental problems with this line of inquiry is that we don't really have a handle on terrestrial, human intelligence let alone something as hypothetical as some extraterrestrial consciousness. If we can't agree upon what members of our own species are capable of and motivated by then how can we possibly argue about the logic of an alien intellect? There are plenty of enigmas and feats of wonder surrounding the Great Pyramid and other ancient monumental sites. Making the leap to extraterrestrials is for me a leap too far. We may just as well invoke angels or genies as an explanation.

Nobody here said aliens did it. Why is it that when someone says "We don't know how they did it", someone automatially assume we think aliens did it...nonsense. But I won't rule out the possibility of INFLUENCE.

We said that the Ancients, some how had a technology more in tune with the Universe than we do now. I myself, tend to go believe in the Christopher Dunn/John Cadman Theory. Being that it was a power house, that harnessed the energy of water and the seismic waves of the earth. It's also possible that that's how the Jews conquered Jericho, with sound. Tibetan monks still use music to lift enormous blocks and set them on cliffs. There are legends of the Mexicans that little people would whistle (akin to snow white I suppose), and that stone would fly in the air.

But, it's all just speculation.

On the other hand, tuning into a frequency of an object doesn't seem far fetch. I saw a Mythbusters, where singer was actually able to sing a note in harmony with a glass, and shatter it...without amplification. So, I can see how maybe those theoris might make sense. But, we still don't know how it was done.

Originally posted by FallenOne
Nobody here said aliens did it. Why is it that when someone says "We don't know how they did it", someone automatially assume we think aliens did it...nonsense. But I won't rule out the possibility of INFLUENCE.

We said that the Ancients, some how had a technology more in tune with the Universe than we do now. I myself, tend to go believe in the Christopher Dunn/John Cadman Theory. Being that it was a power house, that harnessed the energy of water and the seismic waves of the earth. It's also possible that that's how the Jews conquered Jericho, with sound. Tibetan monks still use music to lift enormous blocks and set them on cliffs. There are legends of the Mexicans that little people would whistle (akin to snow white I suppose), and that stone would fly in the air.

But, it's all just speculation.

On the other hand, tuning into a frequency of an object doesn't seem far fetch. I saw a Mythbusters, where singer was actually able to sing a note in harmony with a glass, and shatter it...without amplification. So, I can see how maybe those theoris might make sense. But, we still don't know how it was done.

Read the first post of this thread again if you don't think anyone here has brought up aliens. The concept of pyramids on Mars automatically invokes aliens unless someone is prepared to argue an antediluvian space program.

When you have people arguing what would have been the logical thing for an extraterrestrial race to leave as a marker, or whatever, the whole thing becomes rather ridiculous, as this is certainly based upon a model of cognition and reasoning based not just on the human race of earth but on 21st century Western cultural attitudes and conceptions.

I guess we can't rule out the possibility of influence because of the nigh-infinite size of the universe, but that same vastness makes the possibility of contact and mutual communication that much more unlikely. You do the math.

Originally posted by FallenOne
Nobody here said aliens did it. Why is it that when someone says "We don't know how they did it", someone automatially assume we think aliens did it...nonsense. But I won't rule out the possibility of INFLUENCE.

Me either. Though I can't help but chuckle though at the irony. The same people that think extraterrestrial influence is implausable are the same people that think the ancient Egyptians having superhuman strength,microscopic vision,and magic skids makes perfect sense.

Originally posted by Cicada

Read the first post of this thread again if you don't think anyone here has brought up aliens. The concept of pyramids on Mars automatically invokes aliens unless someone is prepared to argue an antediluvian space program.

I could, and I will. If you check those links I had from last page...it seems very plausible that the ancients HAD the technology. Infact, Sometimes I wonder if Mars was the first planet we lived on, and we ruined it, came here (hence no need for missing link), and had to start over. But being that the weather easn't very promising, our race just kinda died out and is just now remembering where we were at once before.

Originally posted by Loungerist
[
Me either. Though I can't help but chuckle though at the irony. The same people that think extraterrestrial influence is implausable are the same people that think the ancient Egyptians having superhuman strength,microscopic vision,and magic skids makes perfect sense.

Haha, exactly. People are so hypocritical. But I love when they throw words down your throat and expect them to come back up. To me, all of the anceint can be seen in the flooded cities brought to an end at the end of the last ce age. They are far larger and more precise than what's on land today. That's also where we get our flood myths!

If you read more carefully you may have picked up on the fact that what I was reacting most strongly to were the posts arguing against alien intervention based upon the logic of what those aliens should have left as a sign for future generations. Some people, especially around this topic, are so anxious to put everyone else in boxes, I suppose to easier invalidate their points. As someone who is in between the two major camps I get it from both ends if I dare say boo about the holes in anyone's logic. For me the concept of extraterrestrial life let alone intelligence is huge, and one that is poorly defined by popular conventions which are designed primarily to entertain. Boiling things down to aliens doesn't really clarify things anyway. Where did the aliens come from? Who gave them their vast technology? Unfortunately we can only deal with what we can all mutually observe. There is enough enigma and grandeur surrounding ancient human history and architecture without invoking E.T. You can call people hypocrites all you want if that's your thing but it doesn't make your argument any more tenable.

Originally posted by Cicada
If you read more carefully you may have picked up on the fact that what I was reacting most strongly to were the posts arguing against alien intervention based upon the logic of what those aliens should have left as a sign for future generations. Some people, especially around this topic, are so anxious to put everyone else in boxes, I suppose to easier invalidate their points. As someone who is in between the two major camps I get it from both ends if I dare say boo about the holes in anyone's logic. For me the concept of extraterrestrial life let alone intelligence is huge, and one that is poorly defined by popular conventions which are designed primarily to entertain. Boiling things down to aliens doesn't really clarify things anyway. Where did the aliens come from? Who gave them their vast technology? Unfortunately we can only deal with what we can all mutually observe. There is enough enigma and grandeur surrounding ancient human history and architecture without invoking E.T. You can call people hypocrites all you want if that's your thing but it doesn't make your argument any more tenable.

I agree with you on that point. That's why I say humans have been in big cities and civilisations much longer than previously thought. If we have what we have now in only 5000 years after discovering Iron...just imagine what we might have had after 200,000 years...worlds are built and worlds go under. Perhaps the monuments we see now are remnants of ancient knowledge past down in secret schools. We know secret schools existed before our written history, I don't see why it couldn't happen.

We don't need aliens to help us. Although, it would be nice to know there are people of higher intelligence than the people here...if it indeed exists.

The only thing that gets me about the pyramids is the seeming lack of images recorded of how they were built. Whether it was by humans or aliens, which i guess we will never know, I would still like to think that they would have recorded SOMETHING about their construction. I could be wrong, but in all the images I have seen from ancient Egypt, and all their art and jewllery, I have never come across images that depict the construction of the pyramids. For me that is the strangest of all things, because whether by human or alien, you would think someone would have left a description. Unless the pyramids were always there.

It wouldn't surprise me if we'd already found records of how the Great Pyramid was built but misinterpretted or ignored them as some type of myth.

Originally posted by Loungerist
It wouldn't surprise me if we'd already found records of how the Great Pyramid was built but misinterpretted or ignored them as some type of myth.

That's what I was saying. There's lots of myths all over the world that say that sound was able to lift and crush heavy objects. Also, that pyramids themselves had odd properties with sound/electromagetic waves...which is why I wanted to know if these guys have any merit:

The book and an about on the auther, Dr. John DeSalvo:
www.authorhouse.com...

Dr. K of the russian/ukrainian things:
www.inerton.kiev.ua...
www.gizapyramid.com...
www.gizapyramid.com...

Joe Parr:
www.gizapyramid.com...
www.handpen.com... (scroll down to "Hyper-Space Physics of Joe Parr")

www.keelynet.com... (I'm not sure what this is but it seems to be the same thing Parr did)

Also...what does everybody think of Christopher Dunn?

I truly believe that there is a lost art, and that we were much more in tune with the Universe long ago.

Dunn is a machinist and others in his field have shared his proposal of advanced machinery used in the craftsmanship. And I would imagine machining is a fairly cut and dry science so if they're reading that then that's probably what it is. I can't speak on his power plant theory though since I've not read how he came up with it. But at a glance it sounds like the tendency of experts to see the things only in the perspective of their own field instead of cross-referencing. If done that way then each single field would probably lead you to a different theory.

Originally posted by Loungerist
Dunn is a machinist and others in his field have shared his proposal of advanced machinery used in the craftsmanship. And I would imagine machining is a fairly cut and dry science so if they're reading that then that's probably what it is. I can't speak on his power plant theory though since I've not read how he came up with it. But at a glance it sounds like the tendency of experts to see the things only in the perspective of their own field instead of cross-referencing. If done that way then each single field would probably lead you to a different theory.

That's very true. That each proffesion sees things in their own light...

Perhaps as we enlighten as a race (human), we can share all theories together. The Religion, Mechanics, Purpose, Ideals, Daily Life, and such of the ancient Egyptians....or the even the Khemetians. We still can't carbon date rock, so nobody really knows how old the Pyramids are, it's all just speculation. Perhaps it was the structures that inspired the Egyptian culture?

I have Dunn's book, it's quite convincing in it's own right. He was even able to predict the metal nodes at the end of the shafts and that there where shafts going down past the 'doors'. But his thoery used chemicals...which would not be so safe. That's where John Cadman comes in. He took Dunn's theory and modified it, so that we can see how the Pyramids could produce the same power the same way, but using water instead (at least when it was first built. Cadman thinks the explosion might have been caused by using chemicals [as Dunn thoerized] instedad of water, since the nile moveed away from the source after thousands of years), if indeed that is what these structures were made to do.

John Cadman's add to Dunn's is quite interesting. Perhaps we should open a thread on Dunn and Cadman?

we should remember that the people who built the pyramids were experienced stone masons and had tools and technology that had been evolved from the earliest stone ages. They would be as familiar working with their materials as any modern engineer or artist would be working with their own. We don't generally use stone much as a medium and therefore we don't think about how it could be used. we use other mediums and materials, therefore we think in the way that they are used.
We are used to using trucks, cranes, machine based technologies, and that is generally how we think. We are capable of puzzling out how they planned, cut and moved these stones, but it will always be with our modern bias towards our own technology. We and they were equally intelligent, we just have different ways of solving a problem based on what we are used to. We build skyscrapers because they are efficient for us. Stone was what was efficient for these builders, nothing superhuman or alien about it , just different.