Which ancient building was built with better percision than modern construction?

Originally posted by Necrobile

Originally posted by Hanslune


...therein lies the problem, that program isn't presenting science instead it presents made up stuff for entertainment sake only

edit on 12/12/11 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)

Only if you take it in that regard. Besides being for entertainments sake, I consider the "Ancient Aliens" programs to be kind of like a "gateway drug". It opens the door to new ideas that not a lot of people even think about in their normal lives. So, if they become interested, they can then begin doing their own research, and coming to their own conclusions.

I won't lie, I am a believer in the ancient astronaut theory. To me, it makes sense, especially seeing the "evidence" in our history. But even so, I will admit that the Ancient Aliens show does tend to stretch things a bit far, hehe, but the show did point out some things that I never really knew about.

edit on 12-12-2011 by Necrobile because: (no reason given)

careful, i believe TPTB are already trying to outlaw free thought, don't go telling them it's like a gateway drug. :p

Originally posted by metalshredmetal

can you link me to this "cern alignment" information that supposedly proves some "nonsense" in my post, of which you did not identify?

So are you saying that CERN cannot match a 1/2 inch accuracy in its foundation or set up of the collider which have to mix energy streams to a tolerance of .02mm ?

You also said that "we" can lift 5000 tons..with what technology? Howstuffworks.com proclaims modern cranes can only lift about 20 tons.

Your own link says 300 tons for a specific type of limited crane, here is a question for you; remember battleships and those cast turrets weighing 100+ tons - how did they move those from the foundry to the ship?

The present world record is 17,100 metric tons, so I was incorrect it has moved up from 5,000 tons.... but let me guess David Wilcocks told you to believe the number he made up and you aren't willing to check up on him?

I obviously provided all the references when I said it comes from david wilcocks book. Please dont be so close minded and eager to attack my post

Yes you did and pointed out how they were wrong. Just because DW writes something it doesn't blot out reality. Please learn not to believe what poor researched and educated fringe writers tell you, open up that box, open your mind and be skeptical, check what they are telling you. Get both sides of the story

So did you read the link dealing with the Parthenon?

reply to post by metalshredmetal

Oh please, maximum crane capacity is only 20 tons, like Hans said max lift for a mobile crane is around 5000t for a stationary boom crane in the 17,000t range and for a bridge crane the largest is an astounding
21,000 metric tons.
And
1/2"(.500') per 440' accuracy is fantastic for the day but falls well shy of modern accuracy.
Stanford university's linear accelerator (SLAC) has a positional alignment accuracy of .0005" per 1440'.

Originally posted by punkinworks10
reply to post by metalshredmetal

 

Oh please, maximum crane capacity is only 20 tons, like Hans said max lift for a mobile crane is around 5000t for a stationary boom crane in the 17,000t range and for a bridge crane the largest is an astounding
21,000 metric tons.
And
1/2"(.500') per 440' accuracy is fantastic for the day but falls well shy of modern accuracy.
Stanford university's linear accelerator (SLAC) has a positional alignment accuracy of .0005" per 1440'.

Howdy Punkinwork; long time no read. Yes the AE did a magnificent job of leveling the sites but they fall well short of modern tolerances

Originally posted by Hanslune

So are you saying that CERN cannot match a 1/2 inch accuracy in its foundation or set up of the collider which have to mix energy streams to a tolerance of .02mm ?

i'm not saying that at all, i'm only saying that the great pyramid if giza has no one corner higher than the other.
I know what the LHC is and I would say that it is designed very differently from the pyramid.
please don't put words in my mouth.

Your own link says 300 tons for a specific type of limited crane, here is a question for you; remember battleships and those cast turrets weighing 100+ tons - how did they move those from the foundry to the ship?

yes i "remember" battleships. In fact my own mother worked at the Norfolk Naval Ship Yard and I saw these ships with my own eyes...they are pieced together while the hull of the ship is already floating on water. there is a special form of canal that the ship occupies until it is completed, then the canal function deposits the finished ship into open waters.

Yes you did and pointed out how they were wrong. Just because DW writes something it doesn't blot out reality. Please learn not to believe what poor researched and educated fringe writers tell you, open up that box, open your mind and be skeptical, check what they are telling you. Get both sides of the story

Oh, do you have a New York Times Bestseller that I need to know about? What makes you think he's not credible? Every single fact presented in his book is backed up with a scientific reference, it is not his opinion.

His book is cited with over 3,000 scientific studies and articles. If you took the time to read it you would know that you can't debunk his 3,000 references.

The Source Field Investigations hit #16 on the new york times bestseller list within a week of it's publishing, and David Wilcock is regularly interviewed by the History Channel as a scholar in esoteric and alien subject. As of this moment, The Source Field Investigations has 179 reviews on Amazon.com, 163 of which are rated 5 stars.

Relative to the majority of my post, what you have pointed out is meaningless. Obviously you are just a confused person who holds a grudge against David Wilcock for some strange reason. Have you nothing to say about the concept in my post? or can you only focus attention on these menial and unimportant details? Hate all you want, the science in his book will become mainstream science.

you've successfully derailed the thread with your bickering so it would be pointless to stay here. Areviour!

Originally posted by metalshredmetal
As of this moment, The Source Field Investigations has 179 reviews on Amazon.com, 163 of which are rated 5 stars.

Crikey, you introduce David Dickhead, um I mean Will-Cock and then through a hissy-fit because your idol isn't taken seriously!

Oh that's cool.
I can write Amazon Reviews. I can give stars.
I find there are a lot of credulous people out there. Have you checked out his '3000' references?
Just because something is popular doesn't mean it's correct. I mean, look at the Bible.



Thanks for that link, Hans. This paragraph stuck with me:

With such fanatical attention to detail, how could the Parthenon’s architects have finished the job in a mere eight or nine years, ending somewhere between 438 and 437 b.c.? (The dates come from the inscribed financial accounts.) One key factor may have been naval technology. Since the Athenians were the greatest naval power in the Aegean, they likely had unrivaled mastery of ropes, pulleys and wooden cranes. Such equipment would have facilitated the hauling and lifting of the marble blocks.

Such a short building period. Man, they must have been very talented, had a good amount of labour and played some mean kottabos in the evenings!

reply to post by Hanslune


As an answer to your thread title...pretty much all of them, save for the romans and greeks, everyone else still has mostly intact ruins and ancient buildings.

Originally posted by metalshredmetal

Oh, do you have a New York Times Bestseller that I need to know about? What makes you think he's not credible? Every single fact presented in his book is backed up with a scientific reference, it is not his opinion.

No I don't, does having a best seller make one creditable?

His book is cited with over 3,000 scientific studies and articles. If you took the time to read it you would know that you can't debunk his 3,000 references.

Actually I probably could, depends on the 'study' and how he interprets them, so what are they?

The Source Field Investigations hit #16 on the new york times bestseller list within a week of it's publishing, and David Wilcock is regularly interviewed by the History Channel as a scholar in esoteric and alien subject. As of this moment, The Source Field Investigations has 179 reviews on Amazon.com, 163 of which are rated 5 stars.

'Chariot of the Gods, Hancocks books and many other pseudoscientific books are often successful; people have always perferred fantasy and fiction to non-fiction and reality

Relative to the majority of my post, what you have pointed out is meaningless. Obviously you are just a confused person who holds a grudge against David Wilcock for some strange reason. Have you nothing to say about the concept in my post? or can you only focus attention on these menial and unimportant details? Hate all you want, the science in his book will become mainstream science.

I beg to differ; he is another fringe writer who plays fast and loose with facts and writes for other fringe believers, if the 'facts' you presented are representative of his research abilities I'd say he's as scientific as a box of frogs

you've successfully derailed the thread with your bickering so it would be pointless to stay here. Areviour!

Its my thread and I can demolish pseudo nonsense as it amuses me. Chiao friend - and don't believe everything fringe writers write - they become rich based on fringe believers refusal to do their own research.

reply to post by aorAki

Such a short building period. Man, they must have been very talented, had a good amount of labour and played some mean kottabos in the evenings!

Yes the quality of the Parthenon is noteable. I've visit it several times, a most remarkable building. Interestingly enough its accuracy is better than the old pseudo-magnet of the Giza plateau - but the Parthenon is historic so a bit hard to claim for aliens and Atlanteans!

thinking about you

If you haven't seen "Revelation of The Pyramids" it's in my signature.

It discusses many places and their precision, not just the pyramids. They talk about how the statues in Ancient Egypt are more precise and it's even hard for us to that and we use programs like CAD!!

Its probably my favorite documentary lol I tell everyone to watch it

Our ancestors were and are NOT given enough credit for what they could do.

Originally posted by lonewolf10
i'd have to say, puma punku in south america. daveearley.hubpages.com...

i saw the ancient aliens episode on this city the other day and all i can say is, WOW!
they, whoever they were, were very highly advanced, much more than we ever thought.

i dont know if they really had help from aliens or not, but they definitely had some kind of advanced technology.

we dont know half of what we think we know about history.

I love Puma Punku! I would really like to visit one day. I went on Google Earth last night and went to Pumpa Punku. The pics people post on there are awesome! There are many more interesting pics via Google Earth with these sites than what they show on TV!

Puma Punku is amazing. It reminds me of a building that was knocked down. There is red color on some of the stones and I only say that via Google Earth. Amazing place indeed!

Carving the long vertical grooves, or flutes, that run down each of the Parthenon’s main columns was probably as costly as all the quarrying, hauling and assembly combined.

Read more: www.smithsonianmag.com...





all those tall columns... that task likely employed a hundred stone carvers for 10 years of service
something like 2 carvers on each column with two shifts per day...

i wonder if they worked upward or carved the flutes downward

I wonder why the carving of those "flutes" would take more time then any other sculpturing?

I think it goes even faster.

Those Greeks were not stupid and excellent mathematicians.

I fabricated a little example how you could easily and rapidly sizzle away with your "copper" tools, not perfect, just to show the principle.




Explanation.


Now the sculptor can adjust the column width with mathematical precision, work with a few man at one time.

Just change the height and the measurement,and chisel away.

Because the measurements stick overlap , you can scale it with no problem.:




Now I did just made this in half an hour, I'm sure some smart Greek fellow would be able to think of something similar, without the flaws this still have.

Originally posted by EartOccupant
I wonder why the carving of those "flutes" would take more time then any other sculpturing?

I think it goes even faster.

Those Greeks were not stupid and excellent mathematicians.

I fabricated a little example how you could easily and rapidly sizzle away with your "copper" tools, not perfect, just to show the principle.


Now the sculptor can adjust the column width with mathematical precision, work with a few man at one time.

Just change the height and the measurement,and chisel away.

Because the measurements stick overlap , you can scale it with no problem.:


Now I did just made this in half an hour, I'm sure some smart Greek fellow would be able to think of something similar, without the flaws this still have.

They were using Iron tools, I believe that many Greek columns were built up of separate disks and not solid columns, but yes they probably used a wooden frame to keep the flutes in line. Perhaps someone knows whether the Parthenon columns are built up or solid?

reply to post by Hanslune


I Agree in thinking those are stapled blocks, I think it would be easier to first staple them and make the pattern afterwards.

About the "copper" it was just a little sarcasm from my part, Mea culpa.

Did some Googling. sure looks like stapled disks, I remember also vaguely i did see it on a historical program about it.

reply to post by Hanslune


They really should leave it alone. It can't be restored. They don't know what it looked like and they do not know how they built it.