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.

 

Any "other" ideas on the pyramids??

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Good day,

A bit back it was I who started a thread on the idea that maybe sound and water may have played a part in the construction of the pyramids. That thread got intertwined with a seemingly hostile typr of environment that seemed to stray off of my intended topic line. So, in an effort to start anew and keep on track, i will attempt to choose my words very carefully as to not draw attention in other areas.

Does anybody have any interesting theories about the construction of the pyramids that does not fall in line with the common belief that they were made using bare hands, ramps, etc...?

If you do, please post your ideas and where your influence for your ide has come from.
That way, we can all understand and be able to do the research needed to contribute in a positive manner to your post.

Thanks way ahead of time by the way! I appreciate the civility that we all adhere to at ATS also! Peace, Mondo




posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 02:59 PM
link   
www.abovetopsecret.com...
40 pages of ideas here Mondo
with added shouting



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 03:02 PM
link   
Marduk,

Thanks, still trying to learn how to add a link as you did! I will refer to your link for the time being and read up on others' ideas. Thanks again mate! Peace, Mondo



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 04:39 PM
link   
there's probably many reasons against my idea, but its just an idea not a proposal of how the Pyramids were built.

the construction used the muscle power of elephants rather than the dozens of men each elephant would replace for the grunt power.

also, timber planks were saturated with water then smeared with some type of growing medium which grew a slimy mold or bacteria on the skid-board planks...
cradles were used to slide & transport the stones towards the lift stations
& then other trained elephant-man teams would again slide the stones to their placement locations w/o the use of moldy planks this time as the watery slime would act as the lubricant, on that particular tier of stones

here's the secret, the Pharohs' astrologers & engineers & the quarry men & the masons, & record keepers & scribes....did not report the use of African elephants, so the future generations would marvel at the accomplishments. & so on - & so forth

just another perspective to consider



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 04:54 PM
link   


the construction used the muscle power of elephants rather than the dozens of men each elephant would replace for the grunt power.

this is the swindon stone


it is part of the avebury stone circle in wiltshire engalnd
It weighs more than any stone in the great pyramid of Giza
it was bought froma greater distance than any stone at Giza
and no
they didn't use elephants because they found that dragons are far stronger and actually able to fly blocks this big in their talons for hundreds of miles





posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mondogiwa

Does anybody have any interesting theories about the construction of the pyramids that does not fall in line with the common belief that they were made using bare hands, ramps, etc...?


I watched a documentary on what i believe was the history channel about a year or 2 ago.

They demonstrated how giant kites could lift upright an obylisk that weighed more than 1,000 pounds. All they used were ropes, kites, and man power to guide the obylisk. The wind did most the lifting.

One of my "off the wall" and slightly off topic thoughts ...

A curious oddity i would also like to share is the fact that the pronunciation for pyramid is peer (look) amid (to the), and the entire structure itself seems to be pointing up. So, perhaps the peer amid pointing upwards suggests we should look to the stars???

Looks soar. Lucks soar. luxor.

just some thoughts.

thanks,
john



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 12:56 AM
link   
Since you introduced yourself as having a degree in Anthroplogy (as I do) with a specialization in Egyptology, I recommend that you go back to your textbooks and look at the material.

I honestly don't know how all this escaped you, but you seem to have missed out on the whole discussion (in every textbook I've seen) of the various forms and the associated temples and the roads and projects and so forth.

I don't know why your professors didn't introduce you to the tools of the culture (that's just really shockingly inept), but why don't you go back to the texts and look at what they say on the tools and so forth.

You seem to have missed this background completely. I'd like to suggest that you first (as all good researchers do) establish what the scientific community has to say (you seem to have a good grasp of what others say) and then start from there.

How can you find any truths if you ignore all the written material and the artifacts??



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 01:10 AM
link   
Since my degree is not in Antropology, and I have no idea if the Egyptians were able to harness electricty or not; I posit this idea as just that, an idea.

Perhaps the egyptians were able to use electricity to either, polarize the the charge of the stones, causing a decrease in the effect of gravity. Electrogravitational Field Theory
—or I remember reading some theorys (but cant find anything to there effect right now) about making the atoms in the stones align in such a way(i think i remember the alignment being perfect columns and rows) that it also caused an anti-gravity effect.



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
Since you introduced yourself as having a degree in Anthroplogy (as I do) with a specialization in Egyptology, I recommend that you go back to your textbooks and look at the material.


Hi Byrd.

I have two quick questions you may be able to answer for me.

Not to disrupt the thread too much, I was wondering:

What is the Arabic (current) word for pyramid?

What is the Ancient Egyptian word(s) for pyramid?

Thanks in advance for any reply,
john



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 04:20 AM
link   
Funnily enough, I found a very nice idea in a Donald Duck magazine about the construction of the pyramids, lol. Instead of using manpower to pull the stones up ramps, they would simply slide them up the sides using counterweights on the other side of the pyramid (of course they would still have to position it when its up there). When the stone is at the level required, they simply empty whatever counterweight container used (for example filled with sand) and repeat the process.

Somehow this made perfect sense as it would allow stones to be brought up from all sides (thus minimizing moving work at that level).

But it may have been a too extravagant version for the Egyptians.



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 04:32 AM
link   
yes but what goes up must come down
and vice versa
to have say a 2 ton block counterweighted by 2 tonnes of sand someone first has to carry that two tonnes up to the top
so in essence you're doubling the work you need to do




But it may have been a too extravagant version for the Egyptians.

I can think of a better word than Extravagant


[edit on 18-1-2007 by Marduk]



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
Since you introduced yourself as having a degree in Anthroplogy
How can you find any truths if you ignore all the written material and the artifacts??


Not totally sure whom you are referring to Byrd???

If it is I, then yes I do have a degree in Anthropology and no, I have not ignored all the written materials and the artifacts at all. Contrary to what you and maybe even perhaps Marduk think, I actually respect the history and the study of other cultures quite a bit, hence as you know the basis of Anthro/Socio studies. It is just that I think there may be more to the puzzle than meets the eye and has been understood or even discovered yet.
I intend no disrespect to the Egyptians at all of the past and their ability to do a great many things, whatever they're methods of getting things done is. However, this is a forum and website disigned to delve into other ideas and possibilities of a great many things.
I would like to point out that I have not, not even once, jumped onto you or Marduk's (and Marduk, I am only linking the two of you due to your very strong historical examples.) claims to the way they may or may have not done these feats. I respect, may not agree, but do respect your opinions and beliefs. I can say without pause that I do in fact have total confidence in your obviously detailed recollection of your studies, you are an educated individual as is Marduk, for sure. We just have some different approaches is all, I am trying to approach from a different angle is all, although traditional Anthropology does dictate doing it from a scientific and deductive apporach to start. I take that into account but it does not convince me yet, nor do all the (supposed in my opinion) facts and documents.
I will continue to dig (sorry for the pun) into the pyramid puzzle until it seems to be a convincing arguement one way or the other to me, so far that has not been done to my own curiosity and satisfaction.
It has for you as you continue to try to disprove my "thoughts and ideas", it seems simple and worthless of any other study as to how they were made, but that's not it for me and maybe others on this forum......that's why I search out other people's thoughts and ideas. Your stance on the subject is noted and totally understood and again, I hear you and respect your thoughts........With utmost respect AND peace, Mondo



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 11:17 AM
link   
Here is a link for an interview I did with Patrick Heron on this topic.

Click Here



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 11:42 AM
link   
Here's a little diagram that may help explain how the counter-weight theory may have occured.



A hole could have been dug, the sand extracted from said hole, could be used for the countering, and endup being placed back into the hole, effectively covering up.

I guess it depends on whether the Egyptians felt digging a hole was more or less work than building scaffolding and such. With the use of 3 poles and a block and tackle
, hoisting the sand out of the hole, would not be difficult.

[edit on 18-1-2007 by nextguyinline]



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 12:55 PM
link   
mondo ignore the thought police and keep this thread going

question the answers, if not the globe would still be "flat"

some people insist that scientific answers or "facts" are absolute like 2 + 2 = 4


i believe the pyramids were used somehow as energy center's and this is something that deserves a HECK of a lot more thought

and yes i beleive sound waves were used to direct, alter, and magnify this energy.




[edit on 18-1-2007 by cpdaman]



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 12:59 PM
link   


A hole could have been dug, the sand extracted from said hole, could be used for the countering, and endup being placed back into the hole, effectively covering up.

ok so what youre suggesting is that instead of using the already proven method
they
dug a hole up to 450 feet deep in sand and bedrock
then they filled a bucket with 2 tonnes of sand and rigged up a pulley system going all the way to the top of the pyramid
and this in some way made things easier

errrr
ok



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 01:51 PM
link   
That the 'pyramids' (as in the Great Pyramid
) was built by the 'Egyptians'... Please!


The ONLY thing the 'Egyptians' did to the Great Pyramid... was remove it's finish player. (Read plundered/scavenged it for some remodel work post earthquake repairs.
).

'History' regarding ALL of the ancient pyramids is unfortunately 'reconstructed' via 'science'... has little to do with reality (Read: 'This is a fantasy'.
).

'Anthropology' is even worse.


Second... The Great Pyramid generates a huge field that wreaks havoc with avonics gear. Some of my old school friends have related to me that the area was a no fly zone.



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 02:03 PM
link   
thanks for that
I'm voting you for the most ridiculous post so far

the egyptian texts are full of references to pyramids being built
by egyptians
and as for it being a no fly zone
perhaps you should check out this picture
mwebster.com...

so as history and athropology in your view are a joke what medium do you suggest people use for studying the past ?
tea leaves or imagination ?



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 02:40 PM
link   
Could be true that Egyptian has nothing to do with pyramids, they were just cleaners, they were sinners, they chased away prophet Moses.
The pyramid builders must be descendant of Adam, the 1st man of Allah.

And that helicopter on Pyramid was CGI.

Hey big boy.
Do you know how many pyramids in Arab?

And why pyramid? Not cylinder, cube, spiral?

And why it is square-based pyramid? not triangular-based pyramid? or circular based ( you know like those upside down bra shape ) pyramid?

And why there are anomaly on Mars surface?

And lastly, why not spherical shape or double balls shape? ( like the one you have, if you got any )






[edit on 18-1-2007 by CinLung]



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 02:50 PM
link   


they chased away prophet Moses

ah yeah I know Moses
hes that semitic guy whos a founding father of Judaism


the helicopter wsas not CGI
you can actually book helicopter tours of the Giza plateau
www.viator.com...




Do you know how many pyramids in Arab?

you might want to repharse that question in proper english as it doesnt make any sense in that format



And why pyramid? Not cylinder, cube, spiral?

yes I can see it now
"come to egypt and visit the mysterious spirals of the Pharoahs"




And why it is square-based pyramid? not triangular-based pyramid? or circular based ( you know like those upside down bra ) pyramid?

how old are you Cinlung




And why there are anomaly on Mars surface?

I knew someone would make this laughable claim at some point
got a credible link that suggest that there is anything man made on mars I'd love to see it







 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join