Why are the pyramids built with the sized stones that they are?

They were not stupid, but they were also living in a time where if you had a problem, you developed novel ways to over come it. You didn't throw your hands in the air and go "Naww, that's stupid. I can't do that. I'm going to the pub." - they had nasty people with whips and stuff saying "Yes you are. Go on, it's not that hard." and thinkers with the ability to think laterally would devise ways to achieve the impossible.

reply to post by winofiend


You're giving a simple answer for a time where tools that have been discovered near the pyramids were found to be primitive. I don't care how many times you can whip a hundred human beings to lift a 2.5 ton block of stone, there is no way in hell, considering the primitive tools used back then, they could lift these stones 2,3,8,12 or 14 stories.

The majority of inventions are designed and improved upon from earlier technology. Over the years, civilizations build on that known technology to improve on their current technology. I see no evidence of historical technology or documentation that refers to moving that amount of tonnage at extremely high elevations.

Saying the Egyptians weren't stupid doesn't give any credibility that they actually constructed the pyramids. We have a lot of bright minds today, but it would be silly to think that we can develop technology that is going to be thousands of years ahead of technology of future generations. To think that future generations won't understand how our current technology functioned is ludicrous.

Until there is more substantial proof, I believe science hasn't proved that the Egyptian's possessed some extraordinary technology that assisted them to construct these massive pyramids.

No, there is also no evidence of "aliens" constructing these pyramids, but the theory is more tangible than what science and archaeologists have presented so far.

i was under the impression the stones where "cast" onsite with molds ,
thats why the joints are so tight ,

easier to carry water and
plaster then 2 ton elements ,

zerbot565
i was under the impression the stones where "cast" onsite with molds ,
thats why the joints are so tight ,

easier to carry water and
plaster then 2 ton elements ,

Think if they were molding block they would still be building them - the stones are different sizes so you would need different size molds & the time for the mold to set-up and then get the block up to the site.

Ever build a stone or block wall?

The guy laying the blocks says give me a block by such & such dimensions and then some guy goes to cut the block by those dimensions.

My question is how did they quarry the stone so fast as the block layers needed them to keep the whole thing level & square.

Crazy - think they had help.

reply to post by supermarket2012

For one, the construction of the pyramid has baffled man for thousands of years.

What's so baffling about it?

Essentially, the pyramids were built by piling one stone on top of another. It was a little more complicated than that because of the size of the pile, but not much.

our explanation makes literally no sense, because stones HALF THE SIZE of the current ones could have been used, and it likely still would have stood the test of time.

1. You have absolutely no idea whether that sentence is true or not.
   
   
2. The pharaohs were men in a hurry. They knew that if they didn't get their pyramid finished by the time they died, the chances of its ever being finished were pretty slim. Use big stones, finish your pyramid sooner.

The bigger the stones the less likely that others would steel or disassemble the structures to build their own.

Machu Picchu has been desecrated by the indigenous population for centuries using those same building materials for other means.

According to Geico, it was a mistake
Everybody knows that

I have been to the pyramids (not some second-hand re-telling, mind you). They're right over there in Egypt. Go take a look at them for yourself. Until you've BEEN there, you're just looking at pictures. To put some small measure of perspective on this, I want you to consider your knowledge of the cosmos. You know science has peered (somewhat) into the depths of the universe, but the known capabilities of mankind have extended our physical technologies barely beyond the influence of our Sun. The human mind has a great deal of trouble getting around "big."

TPTB have concocted all manner of believable tales to convince you that modern day humans managed such achievement, but we all know deep down they could be wrong. There are old records attributed to this construction. Those records were produced during a time when people worshipped their own human god-king. Therefore, those records are suspect (what would a man NOT do to curry favor?). Please recall that one of the most widely accepted notions of these structures was their use as tombs ... when we now know the Egyptians buried their royalty in the Valley of the Kings.

It is my personal belief that the pyramids are prehistoric. Their is no evidence to dispute this claim. Any 'evidence' you will find has been 'planted' at the scene. The pyramids (worldwide) are enigmas. They are, and will continue to be, wildly interesting things to behold and a very worthwhile pilgrimage if your time and finances permit.

-Cheers

reply to post by Snarl


Ill go with ya on the Prehistoric idea. Did you see the Movie 10,000 B.C. ? Think that was the name. They used Mammoths to pull the stones up ramps built around and up the sides of the Pyramid while building it. That's why the Stones were so Big. Because they Could move them! Kool stuff there. Lol! Later, Syx.

GEmersonBiggins
I respectfully disagree. I don't build scyscrapers for a living, but I know enough to understand the feat. First of all, scientists and engineers HAVE tried building pyramids, on a much smaller scale I might add. They failed.

I love when people say ignorant stuff like this. Let me guess you think nuclear powered cranes can't do it either right?

Here are people who did exactly what you claimed is impossible. And they found out it was easier than they thought.

NOVA: In your extensive work and research at Giza have you ever once questioned whether humans built the Pyramids?
Mark Lehner: No. But have I ever questioned whether they had divine or super-intelligent inspiration? I first went to Egypt in 1972 and ended up living there 13 years. I was imbued with ideas of Atlantis and Edgar Cayce and so on. So I went over, starting from that point of view, but everything I saw told me, day by day, year by year, that they were very human and the marks of humanity are everywhere on them.

www.pbs.org...

I don't care how many times you can whip a hundred human beings to lift a 2.5 ton block of stone, there is no way in hell, considering the primitive tools used back then, they could lift these stones 2,3,8,12 or 14 stories.

UNTRUE. This ONE MACHINE and only ONE MACHINE that could lift these and they COULD have buuilt it.

For 40 years or so, I have wondered how they built the pyramids until one day it hit me like a brick. Just like everyone else, I was asking the wrong questions.

I kept asking...

How did they build with such big stones across the world?
How did they build on mountain tops?
How did abandoned stones get left half way up mountains with no skids or marks left on the way up?
How did they build in both South America and Egypt?
How do Lay lines point perfectly across sea and oceans and straight over mountains?

...When the actual key questions, unlocking the problem are...

WHY did they build with such big stones across the world?
WHY did they build on mountain tops?
WHY did stones get abandoned half way up the mountain sides with no marks left on the way up?
WHY did they build in both South America and Egypt?
WHY do lay lines point straight across sea, oceans and mountains?

IN EVERY CASE, AS IN THE REST OF LIFE' THE ANSWER IS ALWAYS THE SAME...

...BEcause it was easier.

And, for it to have been easier, there is only one machine for which it would be easier.

...SO I did the calculations, based on simple extrapolations and found that it would have taken just under 22 years to build the pyramids, the maximum tonage is equivalent to the maximum monolithic stone ever used.

I am convinced thayt this is how and why they built the pyramids.

THe numbers dropped out perfectly.

reply to post by abacus10


None of that makes any sense, mostly because you don't name what machine you talk about.

reply to post by abacus10

There is a feature in nearly every temple complex where big stones have been used which is ALWAYS IGNORED by EVERYONE... from conspiracy theorists to official historians to ancient alien theorists. The one remarkable feature is ALWAYS ignored as minor yet it is the key to why and how the pyramids, the ancient temples of South America etc were built. THE ROAD.

For one South American ancient complex, access is only by a narrow, dangerous path around a hillside. It takes a day or two of hard walking to get there, yet, down the middle of the complex is a vast, wide, one mile long road. This makes no sense.

Why build a one mile long road down the centre where it is not needed yet no road was built to allow people to get there in the first place?

Here is another couple of interesting points...

Go anywhere in the world and Horses are always found near Henges and pigs are always found near Pyramids and temple complexes.

Why? Because they are at the root of how the pyramids were built.

reply to post by abacus10


So I take it you just want to troll and not tell us about this amazing machine. Gotcha. About what I expected.

The evidence overwhelmingly fits perfectly the one machine that could have lifted it, a machine reinvented by the German Count Ferdinand in 1874, long before the advent of manmade fibres and which was capable of lifting ltierally HUNDREDS of tons of solid marble and steel in a single, effortless yank in seconds.

abacus10
The evidence overwhelmingly fits perfectly the one machine that could have lifted it, a machine reinvented by the German Count Ferdinand in 1874, long before the advent of manmade fibres and which was capable of lifting ltierally HUNDREDS of tons of solid marble and steel in a single, effortless yank in seconds.

I think it would be easier to pump water up megalith structural heights to be employed as a counterweight. But that is just me.
Blimp lifts are chaotic and involve an extraordinary amount of work content per item lifted.