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 Byrd
Originally posted by Illahee
Quick question. Why do we always assume the stones for the pyramids were quarried? I know this sounds dumb because I jump to that same assumption with no answer other than I learned they were so I built on the work of others. Now what if there were many many stones already being used in buildings and the builders reused them and started quarrying for the rest? Recycling didn't start with weed and the WV van, its always been.
Because of the writing in the workers' village talking about getting stone from those quarries, because of evidence including half-finished blocks of rock being quarried there, and because the well-used quarries are located right in the middle of the whole shebang.
Why import the stone (and they were big blocks) or go miles and miles to tear something down when they had all the rock they needed within a mile of the site?
The 7,000-year-old farming-village site includes evidence of domesticated animals and crops—providing a major breakthrough in understanding the enigmatic people of the Neolithic, or late Stone Age, period and their lives long before the appearance of the Egyptian pharaohs.
Makes sense. What I was leaning towards and didn't state properly is do we know the total volume from the site or is there considerably more material used than what was cut and moved.
Originally posted by Hanslune
Unfortunately I didn't get to go to Guatamala, that trip has been delayed but I got to got Manchester - which sucks in winter I might add.
So what is your response to the existence of large amounts of material from before 12,000 BP?
Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by Hanslune
I think its a sad thing that archaeology lacks funds. On the other hand, making the topic more interesting/exciting might generate funds.
And thats where the bestselling fringe-researchers may come in handy, even if its only dangling a carrot stick to the public.
Look at the Bosnian-Pyramid-Hype: There´s no pyramid there, but a lot of excitement and therefore funding...which led to the discovery not of a pyramid but other archaeological findings.
My advertising for fringe-topics may seem harmful to you, but I find that maybe just a little more indiana-jones-like-atmosphere may generate a bit more interest (and therefore funding).
Originally posted by Hanslune
Slandering reputations is never helpful. This is one reason you'll rarely find professionals at such boards as this.
I was contacted by a professional only a few days after this thread opened. He should his credentials and asked to have the tapes mentioned at the beginning of the thread. I passed copies of the tapes along.
So, for the sake of truth, sometimes reputations need to be shaken and cover-ups pointed out.
Originally posted by Hanslune
I seem to have missed this could you please Link to the post with tapes mentioned, I didn't see anything on the first page. What evidence do you have that a "professional" past this material to you? Do you accept that anyone skeptical will take your claim with a large grain of salt?
Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by Hanslune
Its all on record in this thread. Even the attempt at cover-up.
Originally posted by nablator
Note that there is nothing incredible in the egyptian cogs. They had this technology in Roman times.
Originally posted by Illahee
Why import the stone (and they were big blocks) or go miles and miles to tear something down when they had all the rock they needed within a mile of the site?
Makes sense. What I was leaning towards and didn't state properly is do we know the total volume from the site or is there considerably more material used than what was cut and moved.