It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by bearwithredhat
Here's the post AGAIN...
The only known device that can shift a 10,000 ton block of stone with ease in a single lift is… A ZEPPELIN.
As a basis, I have assumed that the central roadways were not roadways, but, in effect, a shipyard for the construction of Zeppelins, built in hard wood, and filled with hydrogen. The original, late Victorian Zeppelins actually were filled with pig’s bladders filled with hydrogen.
By using the stats for the Hindenburg I scaled up on the basis of the length of the main roadway through Puma Punku (which I believe was a mile long). I substituted the weight of lumber for steel. The lift was lower, but there would have been no passenger section to weigh it down. The result was a Zeppelin with a net lift marginally in excess of 10,000 tons, just great enough to have moved Baalbeck’s biggest stones.
Had a Zeppelin been used it would explain lists of things. Since these would have been dangerous in narrow valleys it would actually would have been easier and safer to built near the tops of mountains and to have used only the biggest stones, rather than having all the loading time of small stones and for greater stability. Also, had a zeppelin got into trouble, one can quite imagine the crew jettisoning a big stone that ends up pointlessl half way up the mountainside below.
This would also explain the positioning of the pramids and megoliths. Using trade winds, these could have voyaged across the Atlantic to Central America then traveled up the eastern seaboard to cross the Atlantic on the way back coming out near north west France and Britain.
Arriving in Britain after a storm crossing, these zeppelins would need a new supply of hydrogen and repairs, hence the magnetized stone circles like Stonehenge. By putting a copper wire bound rota in the centre of Stonehenge turned by horses, Stone henge then becomes a vast alternator, capable of generating electricity that could be used to electorlyse sea, salt or march water to produce…hydrogen. It is interesting to note that in many ancient civiliszations like the Romans and Greeks, the God of the Sea was alaso the God of the horse and in Ancient Britain, the Horse was their God.
To get back to “base camp” at the Great Pyramid, the Zeppelins would need to cross the Alps at the most shallow passes. This would then explain Ley Lines as indeed, it was originally pointed out that they curiously resemble trade routes yet cross mountains as if they are not there.
Most of these Ley Lines come out at places like Delphi which again is built near the clear to of a mountain… and thence on to Egypt. This incidentally, would also explain why parts of Antarctica are mapped, but ONLY the parts which happent o have trade winds.
For the pyramids, I assumed that the Zeppelins might have been pulled by horses on the ground. Assuming two of these Zeppelins, one taking a day to load and one at the other end taking a day to unload, it gave a round trip of one week, and incredibly dropped out the figure of 21.7 years to move all the necessary stones.
Originally posted by mutatismutandis
In all seriousness, if zeppelins were floating all around the ancient skies (assuming they even had the hydrogen on hand) don't you think there would have been at least one reference to them found somewhere? Not just one zep shaped hyroglyph?
Not to mention, if they had such a tech it would have very quickly caught on with the rest of the world. Greeks and Romans would have used it exstenively in the development of their massive empires.
I mean no offense, but your depiction suggests at some point in our history we would have had to take a major step back in the evolution of our technology, which makes absolutly no logical sense...
and don't tell me it was some massive flood because noah's ark would have been floating through the air with the rest of us.edit on 26-6-2012 by mutatismutandis because: (no reason given)edit on 26-6-2012 by mutatismutandis because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by aivlas
reply to post by ajay59
What has happened to this siteedit on 26-6-2012 by aivlas because: (no reason given)edit on 26-6-2012 by aivlas because: (no reason given)