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 Pictnation
But enough of that. Back to the pyramids. What we know about the pyramids is taken from people who dig a hole in the ground and try to find something worth money.
The offical timescales do not match. Between the Sphinx and the Pyramids. Some sources reckon that the Sphinx could predate the Great Pyramid by at least 10,000 years. If this is so who built them and why?
2. There are buildings on the Islands of Scotland, which predate the Pyramids and yet show the same accuracy of building. e.g inline with the revolutions of the sun/moon.
3. For the manpower involved to build the pyramids the generally thought of way, we should be able to dig up mass graves with the workers showing spinal deformity, missing limbs and signs of great stress upon thier skeletal structure.
Yes, we can dig up SOME graves, showing these deformities but it only works out about 5% of the calculated numbers thought to be employed. so how come the rest are ok?
4. Still on the workers, it is known that they were not slaves, but were actually paid to work, so what about the rest of the jobs? Did they bring in imigrant workers from some other place to farm, bake etc?
5. Today, with modern technology, we could maybe just replicate the precise building of the pyramids using computer programs such as solidworks and 3d building packages. How on earth did the builders manage it using papyrus and ink and quill? Come on folks think about it, this is the serious flaw in the orginal building method.
6. Remember that the pyramids where also covered in a smooth surface, which could be made from marble, granite or some rock thats similar.
Giving that, the building feat is even more remarkable and these where said to interlock giving the impression of being jointless.
Look at the rough stepped pyramids we have now, and think on how they attached smooth sheets weighing tons to these sides.
Prominent members of the archaeological community have since debunked the Ministry's claim. While not disputing the possible existence of underwater structures in the Gulf of Khambat, they argue that the evidence found so far is far too flimsy to support the grand claims that are being made. Their contention is that the government should hand over the excavation work to qualified marine archaeologists. It is a well established that civilisation began around 3500 B.C. in the Sumer valley (now in southern Iraq), and around 2500 B.C. in the Indian subcontinent with the Indus Valley civilisation. In archaeological methodology, the records generated from fieldwork have primacy in establishing the value of an excavation and the conclusions that are drawn. "It is highly unorthodox to go public so soon after a discovery and without first presenting the findings to one's peers," Jaya Menon, a lecturer in the Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, MS University, Baroda, told Frontline. "I don't see how claims were made without the involvement of marine archaeologists."
1000 years ago we thought the yearth was flat, 5000 ago we thought the sun rotates toward the earth and 5 n\minutes ago you thought that Sumer was the oldest civilisation in the world...imagine what we will know tomorrow
what we will know tomorrow will be built on facts and empirical evidence and not on peoples imaginations
Originally posted by Telos
9,500-Year-Old City Found
Underwater Off India
In other words since egyptology exclude it self from being part of the exact sciences (i.e. math, physics, chemistry etc)
... this means that the conclusions reached thru the years are subject of change.
1000 years ago we thought the yearth was flat, 5000 ago we thought the sun rotates toward the earth and 5 n\minutes ago you thought that Sumer was the oldest civilisation in the world...imagine what we will know tomorrow
Originally posted by Astyanax
Still watching this thread. I continue to be impressed by the encyclopaedic knowledge of Byrd and Marduk. Their very different styles of presentation (I see Marduk's has earned him a little red flag) add variety, colour and vigour to the thread.
Pity they have no worthier opponents. Is there someone among the opposition who can actually post sources of verification for their claims? From the point of view of a spectator at a tennis match, it's rather obvious who's getting the better of this match. But then, knowledge and commonsense whack fancy and the need to believe every time. Or so it has proved in my experience.
Thanks again, Byrd and Marduk, for teaching me a great deal about a fascinating subject.
I am wondering if anybody here has any thoughts as to the construction of the pyramids by the aid of sound and water??? I know that the histoical timeline of human civilizations only goes back so far according to most people, but I beg to differ with that thought. Without going into too much detail.....I am of the thought process that humans have been around much longer than previously thought and that maybe some sort of cataclysmic (sp?) event happened to wipe out most people in the past, making it start over again. With that in mind, I tend to believe that the ancient Egyptians may have been MUCH more advanced than we thought...and may have had techniques using water and sound to aid in the construction of the pyramids.
P.S. Just so you do not think I am uninformed,
I do have a degree in Anthropology with specifics
in Egyptology...just trying to think outside the box.
Originally posted by Mondogiwa
Hmmm, Deus! that's one that i have never heard, but hey.....until it is looked into, who knows for sure. It seems from a cursory look at it that it would be among the difficult of ways to accomplish the feat but do you have any other ideas or details about this thought???
Nor does it take into account, placement errors, math errors, weather, and any thing else that may chip into that time.
The Harappan is older still
Hey Marduk, Byrd, this isn't a peer-reviewed journal, it's a conspiracy/paranormal board.
Can you explain what it is about this particular discussion that has caused such a focusing of your skeptical ire?
Originally posted by Astyanax
Still watching this thread. I continue to be impressed by the encyclopaedic knowledge of Byrd and Marduk. Their very different styles of presentation (I see Marduk's has earned him a little red flag) add variety, colour and vigour to the thread.
Pity they have no worthier opponents. Is there someone among the opposition who can actually post sources of verification for their claims?
Originally posted by nextguyinline
The last line there, see it? "just trying to think outside the box". He never said the textbook theories were wrong, just he may believe otherwise, and asked for some imput. Immediately he was attacked, because he didn't subscribe fully to the textbook theories.