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 Hanslune
reply to post by JaneFonda
Howdy Jane
Actually a Cathedral is far far more difficult to make. The Ancient Egyptians couldn't have gotten close. Arches and domes were not possible for them. The Egyptian did rather crude work very, very well and they did a lot of it.
The basilica is a remarkable piece of work, and ten thousand years from now it could be considered something which it is not.
ok... but being interpreted differently and means of construction are two very different things.
Tell me... how could ancient Romans lift and move 1,000 + stones?
When modern cranes can only hoist 1,000 tons and remain stationary??
also, what do arches and domes have to do with anything?
Big whoop, arches were around looong before Cathedrals were built.
When something is built that shouldn't exist given the technology of the time period, I question the construction methods the history channel says, thats all i'm saying
how each stone is tuned to the rhythm of the human heart.
Other Person: Well yes we have lots of evidence of these ancient people who helped to build the basilica - helped by the aliens of course.
Archaeologist: Indeed
A cathedral has no (NO) comparison to the pyramids or moving 1000 ton stones miles away 5000 years ago.
Who figured out you could make butter and cheese out of milk!