Pyramid = Electric Generator

page: 20
68
<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 2 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by DavidWillts
 

you can not cut and shape granite blocks to the degree of accuracy found with round stones. say you can all you want but you haven't a clue what you're talking about. it works in your head but not in reality


yawn

Please look at the work of Jean Pierre Protzen and you might want to look at the unfinished obelisk




posted on May, 3 2012 @ 06:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by Hanslune
 

you have no supporting evidence. fail


Sure I do, but you're in denial

fail, lol

the only denial around here is me denying you guys of being able to just wave your hand in the air to say you know how the GP was built. Your evidence is not even close to what we see has been done. so what you can scratch granite- it takes a lazy mind to jump from that to what we see in the desert.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 06:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by DavidWillts
 

you can not cut and shape granite blocks to the degree of accuracy found with round stones. say you can all you want but you haven't a clue what you're talking about. it works in your head but not in reality


yawn

Please look at the work of Jean Pierre Protzen and you might want to look at the unfinished obelisk


where does he demonstrate how to cut the stones as we see them cut with the tools they had?



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

the only denial around here is me denying you guys of being able to just wave your hand in the air to say you know how the GP was built. Your evidence is not even close to what we see has been done. so what you can scratch granite- it takes a lazy mind to jump from that to what we see in the desert.


You mean that you deny all evidence that doesn't meet your pre-determined bias! lol

Your funny
edit on 3/5/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

where does he demonstrate how to cut the stones as we see them cut with the tools they had?


In books and papers on the Incan masons. You are also forgetting that the Incan didn't immediately collapse they continue to build after the Spanish arrived - in the same style they had before

Perhaps you could tell us what type of evidence you would accept - instead of immediately denying it?
edit on 3/5/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


Darn, I knew I misplaced that hammerstone in my past life. I was trying to chip off that limestone to make something for the old lady to grind the tortillas on.

There could be many reasons that hammerstone was there. Just because it's there doesn't mean it was used to build it or was put there anytime in history that was even close to the time the structure was created. I've left tools out in the woods near my digs, in ten years someone will say someone was digging there in the nineteenth century because of a 19th century shovel found near the site. Yes, my shovels are old. some are over a hundred years old. I put new handles on some shovels I got from scrapping. I like antique tools and use them all the time.....

Man seems to be obsessed with adding personal touches to things to modernize them. Man used to recycle stones a lot throughout history. Why dig up and grind new stones when there is a pile of them in front of you that appear to have no owner around anymore. I'm sure that if you looked at some old buildings made a couple hundred years ago you will find stones from ancient structures.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by rickymouse
reply to post by Hanslune
 


Darn, I knew I misplaced that hammerstone in my past life. I was trying to chip off that limestone to make something for the old lady to grind the tortillas on.

There could be many reasons that hammerstone was there. Just because it's there doesn't mean it was used to build it or was put there anytime in history that was even close to the time the structure was created. I've left tools out in the woods near my digs, in ten years someone will say someone was digging there in the nineteenth century because of a 19th century shovel found near the site. Yes, my shovels are old. some are over a hundred years old. I put new handles on some shovels I got from scrapping. I like antique tools and use them all the time.....



Trying to hand wave it away? lol

Hammerstones have been found in place in Inca, Rapa Nui and Egyptian quarries - when they hammer out a stone instead of cutting or spliting it leaves a 'man-sized' trench next to it too - just what you see in these three photos, the first two are of the quarries on the Giza plateau, the third is an unfinished obelisk in the Aswan quarries






edit on 3/5/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

where does he demonstrate how to cut the stones as we see them cut with the tools they had?


In books and papers on the Incan masons. You are also forgetting that the Incan didn't immediately collapse they continue to build after the Spanish arrived - in the same style they had before

Perhaps you could tell us what type of evidence you would accept - instead of immediately denying it?
edit on 3/5/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)


how about maybe talking about the GP instead of the Incas?



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


nothing regarding what he talks about has anything to do with demonstrating how you cut ten foot by ten foot by ten foot blocks with primitive tools and come up with what we see at the GP. you're making things up that don't fit in with reality simple as that.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by Hanslune
 


nothing regarding what he talks about has anything to do with demonstrating how you cut ten foot by ten foot by ten foot blocks with primitive tools and come up with what we see at the GP. you're making things up that don't fit in with reality simple as that.



Actually I am you having nothing but denial, so since you present nothing but denial I'll deny your denial! LOL


Oh my, you failed to answer this question, please try, ask an adult to help you if need be--here it is again




Perhaps you could tell us what type of evidence you would accept - instead of immediately denying it?


So what type of evidence will you accept? I suspect it is NONE, if so at least be honest and admit you're in complete denial

Now I'll be gone until Monday - you read up on the subject, admit you're in denial - or just keep denying reality
edit on 3/5/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy


how about maybe talking about the GP instead of the Incas?


How about you demonstating even the lowest standard of knowledge about what you are in denial about? lol

AE and Incan stone work was similar, they too faced the same problem, no iron and tough rocks - same solution, bash them out with harder rocks, as did the Rapa Nui. *

*In some cases they used wedges to split the harder stones too
edit on 3/5/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 

And what is your explanation as to how they would get that unfinished obelisk out of the hole in the third picture and how they would shear the bottom loose? Aren't going to do that with hammerstones. We probably do not presently have big enough equipment to pick that up without breaking it. Maybe stone hammers are a lot better than jackhammers.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 

that's funny


how about doing it to scale with whatever tools you guys think they did this with.


have a nice weekend



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by rickymouse
 


I've brought up the "how did they release it from the bottom and why would they do it this way?" question and they just make jokes and change the subject. this is one of the most tangible of the proofs, this obelisk. I love the ancient alien tool marks at the apex and how the down pressure of the tool probably opened the crack otherwise why would they continue to pound away with stones on it with the crack so evident? Why would they start working on it to begin with? Also they believe the workers could do this with round stones within a reasonable amount of time as in like someone's lifetime. Why wouldn't they carve it out of a cliff face? Why do it the most difficult way?



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by rickymouse
 


I've brought up the "how did they release it from the bottom and why would they do it this way?" question and they just make jokes and change the subject. this is one of the most tangible of the proofs, this obelisk. I love the ancient alien tool marks at the apex and how the down pressure of the tool probably opened the crack otherwise why would they continue to pound away with stones on it with the crack so evident? Why would they start working on it to begin with? Also they believe the workers could do this with round stones within a reasonable amount of time as in like someone's lifetime. Why wouldn't they carve it out of a cliff face? Why do it the most difficult way?


They used fire, followed by water, once they had pounded in a crease along which the obelisk could break (due to temperature differential) for them.

In fact, this is theorized to be the very reason the cracked obelisk cracked. It appears, both visibly and chemically, that the surface of the cracked obelisk has been put under some high heat.

Can you see how this explains why the cracked obelisk gives you the impression that they kept on working on it after it was cracked?

They wouldn't try to free it until they had taken as much granite off of it as they could.

Note, this method likely wasn't used for any granite meant to act as structural support. This sort of temperature swing can create tiny cracks between the crystals in the granite, rendering it unsuitable due to a weakened structural strength. More likely, wedges were applied to any structural granite - such as some of what's in the Great Pyramid.

Does that make sense to you?

Breaking a stone monolith out of a cliff face is not only dangerous, it's far more difficult to do (suspend workers in air while they pound diorite stones against a granite cliff.) Not only that, but there's also the problem of ensuring the stone doesn't fall and break.

Much easier to do all of the above on the ground.

To take the stone out, they filled under it with sand (probably the sand and rubble making up one end of the hole) to create a ramp they could drag it up.

BTW, ramping up out of a quarry isn't even disputed by the fringe. After all, both existing ramps and the remains of ramps have been found in practically every ancient quarry ever seen by archaeology.

Harte



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 

The research I read said to split stone would necessitate steel tools. I don't listen to interpretations of facts unless I see someone has tried reproducing the stuff on the same scale. I've learned long ago that people who have lots of school knowledge rarely know how to do things. Any good tools left around would have been scarfed up by the local people a thousand or two years ago. You will probably find them at a junk yard in the USA from when someone cleaned out gramdpa's garage after he died.



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 08:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


Yeah, right. look at the size of the people compared to that stone. Even with our technology today it's highly unlikely that a one piece stone like that could be moved. A hundred men couldn't lift one corner of that stone with fulcrums.. Diorite is tough enough to make a wedge out of but it cracks when hit with something hard. It would make a good splitting mall or axe for wood. There is diorite around here and magnetite and Jasper, and chert and flint. Etc...... I have been investigating which ones would make good tools. I bang rocks together. They would need a lot of those stones and there would be lots of evidence of broken tool stones around somewhere. A hammerstone wouldn't last an hour beating on rock. There should be many many thousand broken hammerstones somewhere close.



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 06:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by rickymouse

I've learned long ago that people who have lots of school knowledge rarely know how to do things.


I totally agree and have experienced it firsthand. I deal with architects and engineers all the time and everything works great on paper.



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 06:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 

a ramp out of a three foot wide trench? where's the room to work? why make the surrounding trench so small? If they were going to fill it with sand why is there a big opening on the side? HOW WERE THEY GOING TO LIFT THE STONE TO BUILD A RAMP UNDER IT? if they could lift it to build a ramp under it why would they need a ramp?

you guys are living in a fantasy world and you think you know everything and you've shown you will believe anything without proof. probably never lifted a finger in your life except to hold a pencil.
edit on 4-5-2012 by bottleslingguy because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 07:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by rickymouse
reply to post by Harte
 


Yeah, right. look at the size of the people compared to that stone. Even with our technology today it's highly unlikely that a one piece stone like that could be moved. A hundred men couldn't lift one corner of that stone with fulcrums.. Diorite is tough enough to make a wedge out of but it cracks when hit with something hard. It would make a good splitting mall or axe for wood. There is diorite around here and magnetite and Jasper, and chert and flint. Etc...... I have been investigating which ones would make good tools. I bang rocks together. They would need a lot of those stones and there would be lots of evidence of broken tool stones around somewhere. A hammerstone wouldn't last an hour beating on rock. There should be many many thousand broken hammerstones somewhere close.

So, you deny, then, the existence of the diorite hammerstones (and hammerstone marks on the obelisk) that were found alongside the cracked obelisk?

That's a sure way to maintain an ignorant view - completely ignore any evidence that's been found which would contradict your sparkley vision of Man's ancient past.

Harte





new topics
top topics
 
68
<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in

join