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.

 

How to move 7,000 Ton Blocks Of Granite

page: 1
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 01:16 AM
link   
- Why are pyramids always found in landlocked areas and stone circles found near the sea?
- Why did the builders use 1,300 ton stones IN PREFERENCE TO small ones? How did it make I easier to move and install them?
- Why are there always chips broken off the corners of stone obelisks, usually high up where nothing will hit them?
- Why are there always long straight, wide avenues leading to pyramids in the Mayan, Egyptian etc. cities?
- What is the benefit of having pyramids a basically conical shape?
- Why are there traces of salt and possible hydrogen production in the pyramids?
- Why would gliders be built that would be a pain to launch?
- Why are stone circles like Stonehenge always have an associated smaller circle and why is there always a stone duct laid in the ground connecting them?
- Why was Stonehenge abandoned almost immediately after nearby small circle was moved by priests and installed within the main major circle? Did this intended enhancement cause it to become useless?
- Why are stones in stone circles often magnetic?
- Is it not coincidental that the “Manna” is both the name of what sustained the Jews in the desert AND the power that moved the Moai Statues of Easter Island into place?
- Why have landing strips and lines on the desert when spacecraft would land vertically, not horizontally?

I have just realised how to move blocks of stone of up to 7,000 tons across the world and up near vertical mountain sides with no wheels, no roads, no rivers, no aeroplanes, no earth moving equipment, no anti-grav machines and no magic nor spiritual forces... and it solves all the above questions.

To do so, would need access to:-

- Half a mile of straight, very wide road with stepped buildings on either side (which Copan has)

- A limitless supply of timber

- Bronze or stone axes

- Limestone

- A workforce of about a thousand

- A tall stone obelisk or two.

Given this, within a couple of decades, it would be possible to construct the pyramids, put the Moai statues into place, survey Antarctica yet leave no direct trace of how this was done, with the exception of also having to build places such as Stonehenge to facilitate this.

I have already done the mathematics on this and it precisely fits with the evidence.

I would be delighted for an opportunity to demonstrate how Ancient Aliens could have done this using an unskilled, backward workforce.

The Theory… Manna that fed the Jews in the Wilderness and moved the Moai statues into place is not food nor a magical force…

Manna are Zeppelins

Wood-framed and filled with Hydrogen, a Zeppelin of 0.6 miles (the length of the street down the centre of Copan) would have a lift capacity of approximately 7,000 tons.

To construct, wooden beams would have been bolted together to run laterally from one step level of a temple across to the other side to allow a semi-circular frame to be built. Once a sequence of semi-cicles had been made, half of these could have been inverted and bolted onto the top of the other to produce a sequence of frames twice the height of the temples.

Once a chain of these is made, fabric is stretched over it and filled with hydrogen. There is clear evidence of hydrogen production in the Great Pyramid of Egypt and has an exit point, high up, in the “roof” of the pyramid – prefect for pumping hydrogen into a Zeppelin above. To hold it ion place, any normal tree would be uprooted, so a stone tether would have been needed, namely an obelisk.

Stability concerns would have made it mandatory for the stones moved as cargo to be as large as possible to prevent movement onboard.

With a top speed when even driven by petrol engines of about 50 miles per hour, an ancient Zeppelin would have been exceptionally slow, making it highly advantageous for accurate placing of stones, and, likewise, fears of hitting trees etc, would have made it preferable to build high up on hillsides than flying low in valleys, hence the stones laid are near the top of vertical drops.

Since the construction would have been primative, leakage would have been a long term problem. After crossing the Atlantic, ancient Zeppelins would have had urgent need of hydrogen, but no easily accessible resources would have been available. To these end, stone circles like Stonehenge would be necessary. By having horses running around on the tops of the lintels of Stonehenge, a central rota spun with copper wiring could be turned, making Stonehenge the world’s largest alternator to electrolyse salt water from the nearby coast. The large circle is cabled to a smaller circle (known to exist near the river) allowing water to be electrically pumped by using the electricity generated. As the small circle is smaller than the large one, the power would have been more concentrated, allowing it to be used also as an electrically powered milling machine to allow the ancient to carry out repair work on their Zeppelins. It is interesting to note that stone circles only occur where horses do and in Ancient Britain, the horse was a supreme God.

With access to these Zeppelins, Ancients could travel the world, needing only to put up obelisks at places where they needed or wanted to stop so that their Zeppelin could be anchored. As a result of roping up the Zeppelin, where the ropes cut in during stormy times would have caused the chipping at the corners high up on the obelisks.

And where no obelisk preexisted, a glider could have been launched to allow those onboard have ground crew to fix an obelisk into the ground at an intended new landing place.

With a Zeppelin, those on board would never have had to fear attackers on the ground, hence Moses could have been resupplied in the desert by ferrying food from elsewhere.

And why have Ancient Astronaut theorists thought of this before? Because many of the images thought to be cigar-shaped UFO’s on ancient texts and carvings are actually the “Manna” or Zeppelins.




posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 01:44 AM
link   
I don't know about all the other things you listed, BUT i was thinking that maybe if an Obelisk, being tall and such, might be a good place to attract lightning, and lightning and the heat that comes with it, might have chipped and cracked the obelisks at the very top...



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 01:51 AM
link   
This is my kind of thread!

I really like this theory and do not think I have heard any like it before. I was reading another thread the other day about using a process where the blocks were molded in place, like cement. I will have to try and find the thread again. This one really plays with my imagination though!

S & F!



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 01:58 AM
link   
Here are some possible answers to some of your questions


Why are pyramids always found in landlocked areas and stone circles found near the sea?


I'm not sure what you mean by 'landlocked' nor are all stone circles found near the sea Meso-American pyramids are away from the sea except for Tulum and the El Castillo.


- Why did the builders use 1,300 ton stones IN PREFERENCE TO small ones? How did it make I easier to move and install them?


Two possible reasons, lacking concrete it was easier and more structurally sound to use large pieces of stone and it may have been easier in some cases to move a large rock than to cut it into smaller pieces and carve them so they interlocked. Stones of that weight were rarely moved probably due to the difficulty


- Why are there always chips broken off the corners of stone obelisks, usually high up where nothing will hit them?


Modern bullets will - depends on what you are referring to also


- Why are there always long straight, wide avenues leading to pyramids in the Mayan, Egyptian etc. cities?


For the religious parades and ceremonies that the pyramids were the center of



- What is the benefit of having pyramids a basically conical shape?


Easier to build as you need less material, some religious reasons for the the pyramid representing rays of the sun etc, Meso American and Zuggurats/pyramids were so shaped so people could see the ceremony and temple at the top


- Why are there traces of salt and possible hydrogen production in the pyramids?


Becasue they are often made of limestone which has salt in it and it leaches out - Hydrogen production???


- Why would gliders be built that would be a pain to launch?
- Why are stone circles like Stonehenge always have an associated smaller circle and why is there always a stone duct laid in the ground connecting them?
- Why was Stonehenge abandoned almost immediately after nearby small circle was moved by priests and installed within the main major circle? Did this intended enhancement cause it to become useless?
- Why are stones in stone circles often magnetic?


Unable to provide a short answer to these


- Is it not coincidental that the “Manna” is both the name of what sustained the Jews in the desert AND the power that moved the Moai Statues of Easter Island into place?


No, the people of Rapa Nui made no such claim and the Hebrews ate Manna


- Why have landing strips and lines on the desert when spacecraft would land vertically, not horizontally?


Because they weren't landing strips - unless stone strew fields that run up hills make good landing fields


That's a start I'll look in tomorrow to see where we are at, oh it might be helpful to look at the technical history of what was required to built early airships - rather well out of the abilities of the AE or anybody else of the time based on the technology we have found in the archaeological record
edit on 23/1/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by ballisticmousse
 


It is speculated that balloon flight was something already used in acient times. This is how scientists believe the Nasca line were drawn.



But a hot-air ablloon does not generate enough lift. Hydrogen balloons might have that capacity but then they would have also known how to make hydrogen. It would explain the Baghdad Battery...

Peace



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 02:09 AM
link   
Its late I will read your thread tomorrow it looks interesting.

They got a bunch of men and ropes, pulled the 1ton+ blocks up 146 meters. BWHAHAHA
I remember learning about this when I was in school, I asked the teacher if Egyptians had supper powers. She just looked at me with a blank stare and told me to focus.

I have not researched it much but I have heard some theories. The one I liked the most is vibrational energy. Vibrating a block in a way that would cause it to float so that it could be moved easily.

I have heard some theories about melting the stones down into a mold witch is why so many massive statues are exactly alike.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 02:16 AM
link   
Amazing !!! this is the secret of Cabbalah -cabbalus- cal-horse !!! 7000 years old !! Great post!



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 02:25 AM
link   
The closest attempt I've seen of what the ancients did comes from a movie called "Fitzcarraldo". They physically haul a 320 ton boat up a 40º inclined muddy hill using only ropes, pulleys, and man power. No movie magic.

I like the OP's idea though. That'd be an impressive thing to see floating in the air.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:15 AM
link   
reply to post by ballisticmousse
 


That is a very interesting theory. Moving large stones this way would be like a Macy's parade balloon with several handlers to guide it. I wonder how they would have controlled up and down motion. Coming down would be no problem. Just release some of the hydrogen. Going up would a different story. They would have to refill the balloon with hydrogen to create more buoyancy.

Maybe they had a method of compressing hydrogen into tanks. If so, how would they communicate with the operators on which direction they needed to go? A large megaphone, maybe?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to make fun of your theory. I think it's very plausible. I'm just trying to work out the logistics of operating such a craft at that point in time.

edit: Out of curiosity, I was searching Google for evidence of hot air balloons in Ancient Egypt. One of the listings brought me to this ATS thread


edit on 23-1-2012 by N3k9Ni because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 04:07 AM
link   
I heard that the popular notion is that the heavy blocks were moved using sound waves. This is supported by a find of some large crystals under one of the pyramids which archaeologists believe were for that purpose. I got this info second hand and I haven't verified it yet, but that's what I heard.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by lostbook
I heard that the popular notion is that the heavy blocks were moved using sound waves. This is supported by a find of some large crystals under one of the pyramids which archaeologists believe were for that purpose. I got this info second hand and I haven't verified it yet, but that's what I heard.


Sorry, no large crystals under the pyramids, and no archaeologists believe the blocks were moved by sound. There are a pictures from tombs and other sources and references to Egyptians moving huge statues and large stones by using oxen and human power and boat transport. They have some of the bills of lading for the cargo -- which you can see for yourself and confirm if you learn to read hieroglyphs.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 


Thanks for that Byrd. One would think that documentation from the builders of those pyramids trumps any theory we can come up with. I heard that Egyptians were great with paperwork and accounting.

Peace



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 10:20 AM
link   
It would explaine a lot of questions...

Very nice thread...



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 10:28 AM
link   
What evidence do you have for Hydrogen production at the Great Pyramid?

I've never heard of this before. Link would be appreciated.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   
A 'timber-framed' half-mile long zeppelin? The mind boggles at the absurdity. Things you're obviously not considering in your massive, weighty, timber-framed zeppelin:

1. The use of timber framing - Ever see a timber-framed barn? Or an medieval timber-framed home? You think something like that would ever float by wrapping it in gauze fabric and pumping it full of hydrogen?

2. Fasteners for wood joints (nails, bolts, or rope lashings)? King Tut's workers were the first to ever use metal nails in AE and he lived long after the pyramid phase.

3. Rope - ancient rope making revolved around animal or plant fibers and hand wove - it lacked appreciable tensile strength and weighed a great deal. The longest ancient rope was used by Xerxes in Persia, a 1-mile long rope that was 2 feet in diameter. Such a rope alone would weigh tons.

4. Hydrogen production - an advanced science - your hypothesis would have us believe ancient builders possessed this science but not advanced metallurgy, chemistry, or mechanical devices? They leapfrogged over all that and went straight to hydrogen production?

The AE have left plenty of stone carvings and painted walls of workers - hundreds if not thousands - tugging on thick wooly hand-made ropes or using massive timber levers to push and pull their megalithic stone blocks around, you would think that if they had used a half-mile long blimp, the sheer spectacle of such would have garnered at least one bas-relief made to memorialize the event.

But just to play along, let's say they did somehow build this giant zeppelin - how many could they realistically operate at a time? One, maybe two? It would take all day to coordinate the use of such a lifting device, as opposed to dozens, if not hundreds of stone-hauling teams each loading a stone block on a sled, attaching it to an oxen team, and dragging it to a prescribed location. Even if you ignore the archeological record and the science involved, it would still be more efficient and timely to drag the stones into place.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 11:02 AM
link   
I can only guess that this is a way that large stones were moved regardless of what time/age we were in. This guy has managed to do it by himself....as in SOLO.




posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 11:34 AM
link   
Note on wooden framed Zeppelins by Schütte-Lanz

Wooden framed Zeppelins

A number of other wooden framed airships were built by other countries - none were too successful.

The problem with the idea of using airships, balloons, kites and other airborne lifting platforms is the wind. The wind was the great nemesis of airships and balloons. You could, by theory, make such a lifting device but the wind would make it impractical - as noted by (AFAIK) anyone every using this method of heavy construction.
edit on 23/1/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 11:46 AM
link   
It seems strange to me that people would rather invent fanciful explanations as to how the ancients moved large stone blocks rather than explore the reality.
And as for sound being used...perhaps that gives another clue. We know that when large groups work in unison in these endeavors it is an advantage to chant or sing.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by DaRAGE
 


you must remember that these obelisks were buried by the sand , with only a small portion of the tops sticking out
the nomadic tribes used to camp in these areas so it is understandable that some damage would occur .
if you visit luxor or karnak temples you will see the marks near and around the tops of the walls where the campers sharpened their knives .



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


Yes, and as mentioned in your link, the wood used in these early zeppelins were laminated wood products or plywood, structurally superior to timber, which would allow for smaller-sized spars and the like (each ply with it's alternating grain and glued together), and those were still found to inherently weak for general use.

Another consideration is where would you attach a 7,000 ton point load on such a frame? The frame would have to be built like a space frame or tensegrity frame to handle such a load without pulling itself apart under such a load. Not that ancient builders ever dealt with anything near 7,000 tons - the heaviest AFAIK are the 800 ton trillithons in Baalbek. This whole argument is moot since there's nothing in the archeological record that comes close to supporting this idea.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join