# Something is Wrong with this Picture! Great Pyramid Shocker

Stretch
#1
by Will Hart

Everyone including Egyptologists, historians, alternative researchers and tourists agree on one thing: the Great Pyramid is awesome. The experts claim that it was constructed about 4500 years ago by the early Egyptians using primitive tools and methods to serve as a tomb for the reigning Pharaoh Khufu.

Egyptian scholar's claim that it was built in 23 years with stone hammers, cooper chisels, wooden sledges, ramps and manpower. But is this possible? Let's look at the facts and statistics first. The Great Pyramid is estimated to be composed of 2.3 million blocks of stone having a combined mass of 6 million tons. The stone blocks weigh from 1 to 70 tons and the average is about 2.5 tons.

Logic, common sense and basic math tell us that there is a serious problem with the formula and timeline presented by Egyptologists. We will assume that the builders were intent on finishing the massive project before Khufu died so they worked every day of the year for 20 years. That gives us a total of 7300 days to build the pyramid. Now we take the 2.3 million blocks that had to be quarried, transported, dressed and placed into position and divide that by 7300 and we come up 315 blocks.

So to build the pyramid in 20 years the builders had to place 315 blocks per day on average. We can further break that down into hours and minutes. Using a ten-hour workday they had to place between 31 and 32 per hour or about 2 blocks per minute. To further refine and conform the formula to the real world the experts tell us the builders only worked seasonally, about 120 days per year. So we can throw out the above average delivery rate because we have a massive "peak" delivery rate to configure.

To finish the pyramid on time working seasonally they would have had to radically increase the delivery rate to about 900 blocks per day or about one every 45 seconds. Is this possible? The truth is, none of it is possible and a careful analysis of the actual construction process using the primitive tools and methods clearly demonstrates that these scholars need to go back to the drawing board and quick.

For starters the closest quarry is about 1,000' from the site. It takes an average walker about 3 to 4 minutes to cover that distance. Now let's include the ramps. The pyramid is about 700' on each side. That means the lowest ramp would have to be at least 1000' long since it is on an incline. So if we walk from the quarry to the site and up the first ramp we have used up 7 to 8 minutes. Probably more since it is uphill.

Clearly a crew pulling a sledge bearing a 2.5-ton load is going to take longer, much longer. Conservatively we could triple the walking time and say 24 minutes. But we have to back up and add the quarrying process. How long does it take to quarry the average block of limestone? The quarry crew has to cut a trench around the blocks, then undercut the block and finally lift it out and onto a waiting sledge. Could this possibly take less than 20 minutes?

Actually, we have to account for two lifts, one from the quarry to the sledge and then off the sledge at the delivery point. It is as plain as day that the quarry-lift-transport-delivery-lift-and-place process, which is unavoidable given the tools and methods, would have taken at least 45-50 minutes per block. Anything less is physically impossible and that assertion can be easily proven.

We have added the practical physical steps and constraints into a real world formula as opposed to the abstract one that Egyptian scholars have made to fit their scenario. In addition to the average size blocks we have 30-70 ton granite megaliths and 140,000 outer casing stones weighing from 10 to 15 tons to factor in. Studies performed by Denys Stocks, the leading expert on ancient Egyptian stone working, have shown that using primitive hammer-stones required massive amounts of time to quarry large granite blocks. The Aswan quarry was 500 miles from Giza.

The casing stones also pose a significant challenge. They were cut from the Tura and Masara quarries east of Cairo across the river. These quarries produce high-grade limestone that polishes into marble as it ages. The rough-hewn blocks were probably 40 tons apiece. Engineers have marveled over how precisely these casing stones were cut and finished at right angles on all sides except the outer surface, which was honed to a 51-degree plane. There are no tool marks on the remaining casing blocks and the accuracy with which they were set into position is stunning.

How long did it take to haul these blocks from the quarry? Then they had to be finished and carefully set into place, some more than 400 feet up the pyramid. It is laughable to think this was supposed to have been done by men pulling wooden sledges or stone- masons pounding the blocks perfectly smooth with hammer-stones and then sanding them. 300 blocks per day for 20 years…more like 20 blocks per day for 300 years!

By what series of miracles did the ancient builders quarry, transport and position the huge granite slabs above the King's Chamber that are more than 150 vertical feet above the base? Egyptologists should get close to a group of computer programmers, systems analysts, mathematicians and construction engineers because their formula is not viable -- and does not matter if it includes levers, poles and spiral ramps -- it is embarrassingly flawed and illogical

and today with all our modern tek-no-logic, we still can't reproduce it.......

www.hiddenmysteries.org/author/hart/shocker.html (external - login to view)

Stretch
#2
by Will Hart

Everyone including Egyptologists, historians, alternative researchers and tourists agree on one thing: the Great Pyramid is awesome. The experts claim that it was constructed about 4500 years ago by the early Egyptians using primitive tools and methods to serve as a tomb for the reigning Pharaoh Khufu.

Egyptian scholar's claim that it was built in 23 years with stone hammers, cooper chisels, wooden sledges, ramps and manpower. But is this possible? Let's look at the facts and statistics first. The Great Pyramid is estimated to be composed of 2.3 million blocks of stone having a combined mass of 6 million tons. The stone blocks weigh from 1 to 70 tons and the average is about 2.5 tons.

Logic, common sense and basic math tell us that there is a serious problem with the formula and timeline presented by Egyptologists. We will assume that the builders were intent on finishing the massive project before Khufu died so they worked every day of the year for 20 years. That gives us a total of 7300 days to build the pyramid. Now we take the 2.3 million blocks that had to be quarried, transported, dressed and placed into position and divide that by 7300 and we come up 315 blocks.

So to build the pyramid in 20 years the builders had to place 315 blocks per day on average. We can further break that down into hours and minutes. Using a ten-hour workday they had to place between 31 and 32 per hour or about 2 blocks per minute. To further refine and conform the formula to the real world the experts tell us the builders only worked seasonally, about 120 days per year. So we can throw out the above average delivery rate because we have a massive "peak" delivery rate to configure.

To finish the pyramid on time working seasonally they would have had to radically increase the delivery rate to about 900 blocks per day or about one every 45 seconds. Is this possible? The truth is, none of it is possible and a careful analysis of the actual construction process using the primitive tools and methods clearly demonstrates that these scholars need to go back to the drawing board and quick.

For starters the closest quarry is about 1,000' from the site. It takes an average walker about 3 to 4 minutes to cover that distance. Now let's include the ramps. The pyramid is about 700' on each side. That means the lowest ramp would have to be at least 1000' long since it is on an incline. So if we walk from the quarry to the site and up the first ramp we have used up 7 to 8 minutes. Probably more since it is uphill.

Clearly a crew pulling a sledge bearing a 2.5-ton load is going to take longer, much longer. Conservatively we could triple the walking time and say 24 minutes. But we have to back up and add the quarrying process. How long does it take to quarry the average block of limestone? The quarry crew has to cut a trench around the blocks, then undercut the block and finally lift it out and onto a waiting sledge. Could this possibly take less than 20 minutes?

Actually, we have to account for two lifts, one from the quarry to the sledge and then off the sledge at the delivery point. It is as plain as day that the quarry-lift-transport-delivery-lift-and-place process, which is unavoidable given the tools and methods, would have taken at least 45-50 minutes per block. Anything less is physically impossible and that assertion can be easily proven.

We have added the practical physical steps and constraints into a real world formula as opposed to the abstract one that Egyptian scholars have made to fit their scenario. In addition to the average size blocks we have 30-70 ton granite megaliths and 140,000 outer casing stones weighing from 10 to 15 tons to factor in. Studies performed by Denys Stocks, the leading expert on ancient Egyptian stone working, have shown that using primitive hammer-stones required massive amounts of time to quarry large granite blocks. The Aswan quarry was 500 miles from Giza.

The casing stones also pose a significant challenge. They were cut from the Tura and Masara quarries east of Cairo across the river. These quarries produce high-grade limestone that polishes into marble as it ages. The rough-hewn blocks were probably 40 tons apiece. Engineers have marveled over how precisely these casing stones were cut and finished at right angles on all sides except the outer surface, which was honed to a 51-degree plane. There are no tool marks on the remaining casing blocks and the accuracy with which they were set into position is stunning.

How long did it take to haul these blocks from the quarry? Then they had to be finished and carefully set into place, some more than 400 feet up the pyramid. It is laughable to think this was supposed to have been done by men pulling wooden sledges or stone- masons pounding the blocks perfectly smooth with hammer-stones and then sanding them. 300 blocks per day for 20 years…more like 20 blocks per day for 300 years!

By what series of miracles did the ancient builders quarry, transport and position the huge granite slabs above the King's Chamber that are more than 150 vertical feet above the base? Egyptologists should get close to a group of computer programmers, systems analysts, mathematicians and construction engineers because their formula is not viable -- and does not matter if it includes levers, poles and spiral ramps -- it is embarrassingly flawed and illogical

and today with all our modern tek-no-logic, we still can't reproduce it.......

www.hiddenmysteries.org/author/hart/shocker.html (external - login to view)

Stretch
#3
by Will Hart

Everyone including Egyptologists, historians, alternative researchers and tourists agree on one thing: the Great Pyramid is awesome. The experts claim that it was constructed about 4500 years ago by the early Egyptians using primitive tools and methods to serve as a tomb for the reigning Pharaoh Khufu.

Egyptian scholar's claim that it was built in 23 years with stone hammers, cooper chisels, wooden sledges, ramps and manpower. But is this possible? Let's look at the facts and statistics first. The Great Pyramid is estimated to be composed of 2.3 million blocks of stone having a combined mass of 6 million tons. The stone blocks weigh from 1 to 70 tons and the average is about 2.5 tons.

Logic, common sense and basic math tell us that there is a serious problem with the formula and timeline presented by Egyptologists. We will assume that the builders were intent on finishing the massive project before Khufu died so they worked every day of the year for 20 years. That gives us a total of 7300 days to build the pyramid. Now we take the 2.3 million blocks that had to be quarried, transported, dressed and placed into position and divide that by 7300 and we come up 315 blocks.

So to build the pyramid in 20 years the builders had to place 315 blocks per day on average. We can further break that down into hours and minutes. Using a ten-hour workday they had to place between 31 and 32 per hour or about 2 blocks per minute. To further refine and conform the formula to the real world the experts tell us the builders only worked seasonally, about 120 days per year. So we can throw out the above average delivery rate because we have a massive "peak" delivery rate to configure.

To finish the pyramid on time working seasonally they would have had to radically increase the delivery rate to about 900 blocks per day or about one every 45 seconds. Is this possible? The truth is, none of it is possible and a careful analysis of the actual construction process using the primitive tools and methods clearly demonstrates that these scholars need to go back to the drawing board and quick.

For starters the closest quarry is about 1,000' from the site. It takes an average walker about 3 to 4 minutes to cover that distance. Now let's include the ramps. The pyramid is about 700' on each side. That means the lowest ramp would have to be at least 1000' long since it is on an incline. So if we walk from the quarry to the site and up the first ramp we have used up 7 to 8 minutes. Probably more since it is uphill.

Clearly a crew pulling a sledge bearing a 2.5-ton load is going to take longer, much longer. Conservatively we could triple the walking time and say 24 minutes. But we have to back up and add the quarrying process. How long does it take to quarry the average block of limestone? The quarry crew has to cut a trench around the blocks, then undercut the block and finally lift it out and onto a waiting sledge. Could this possibly take less than 20 minutes?

Actually, we have to account for two lifts, one from the quarry to the sledge and then off the sledge at the delivery point. It is as plain as day that the quarry-lift-transport-delivery-lift-and-place process, which is unavoidable given the tools and methods, would have taken at least 45-50 minutes per block. Anything less is physically impossible and that assertion can be easily proven.

We have added the practical physical steps and constraints into a real world formula as opposed to the abstract one that Egyptian scholars have made to fit their scenario. In addition to the average size blocks we have 30-70 ton granite megaliths and 140,000 outer casing stones weighing from 10 to 15 tons to factor in. Studies performed by Denys Stocks, the leading expert on ancient Egyptian stone working, have shown that using primitive hammer-stones required massive amounts of time to quarry large granite blocks. The Aswan quarry was 500 miles from Giza.

The casing stones also pose a significant challenge. They were cut from the Tura and Masara quarries east of Cairo across the river. These quarries produce high-grade limestone that polishes into marble as it ages. The rough-hewn blocks were probably 40 tons apiece. Engineers have marveled over how precisely these casing stones were cut and finished at right angles on all sides except the outer surface, which was honed to a 51-degree plane. There are no tool marks on the remaining casing blocks and the accuracy with which they were set into position is stunning.

How long did it take to haul these blocks from the quarry? Then they had to be finished and carefully set into place, some more than 400 feet up the pyramid. It is laughable to think this was supposed to have been done by men pulling wooden sledges or stone- masons pounding the blocks perfectly smooth with hammer-stones and then sanding them. 300 blocks per day for 20 years…more like 20 blocks per day for 300 years!

By what series of miracles did the ancient builders quarry, transport and position the huge granite slabs above the King's Chamber that are more than 150 vertical feet above the base? Egyptologists should get close to a group of computer programmers, systems analysts, mathematicians and construction engineers because their formula is not viable -- and does not matter if it includes levers, poles and spiral ramps -- it is embarrassingly flawed and illogical

and today with all our modern tek-no-logic, we still can't reproduce it.......

www.hiddenmysteries.org/author/hart/shocker.html (external - login to view)

#4
That's one of the reasons why people are so intrigued by Egyptology- they were much more advanced than you would expect!! The pyramids at Giza really are amazing and I don't think anyone can truly say how they were built- it's a mystery.

#5
That's one of the reasons why people are so intrigued by Egyptology- they were much more advanced than you would expect!! The pyramids at Giza really are amazing and I don't think anyone can truly say how they were built- it's a mystery.

#6
That's one of the reasons why people are so intrigued by Egyptology- they were much more advanced than you would expect!! The pyramids at Giza really are amazing and I don't think anyone can truly say how they were built- it's a mystery.

zenfisher
#7
There is something missing in this equation. How many workers? Not to diminish the accomplishment...but thirty people trying to do this and three hundred thousand ...would cause a great difference in how long it would take to complete the pyramid.For example a hundred thousand quarrying (?) a hundred thousand moving and a hundred thousand placing the stones. I can conceive it being assembled rather quickly. Say ten ,fifteen years.

We give Henry Ford credit for the production line...I think we should be looking a little further back in our history. It is a remarkable feat of engineering and planning.

zenfisher
#8
There is something missing in this equation. How many workers? Not to diminish the accomplishment...but thirty people trying to do this and three hundred thousand ...would cause a great difference in how long it would take to complete the pyramid.For example a hundred thousand quarrying (?) a hundred thousand moving and a hundred thousand placing the stones. I can conceive it being assembled rather quickly. Say ten ,fifteen years.

We give Henry Ford credit for the production line...I think we should be looking a little further back in our history. It is a remarkable feat of engineering and planning.

zenfisher
#9
There is something missing in this equation. How many workers? Not to diminish the accomplishment...but thirty people trying to do this and three hundred thousand ...would cause a great difference in how long it would take to complete the pyramid.For example a hundred thousand quarrying (?) a hundred thousand moving and a hundred thousand placing the stones. I can conceive it being assembled rather quickly. Say ten ,fifteen years.

We give Henry Ford credit for the production line...I think we should be looking a little further back in our history. It is a remarkable feat of engineering and planning.

Dexter Sinister
#10
So what's your point, Stretch, that we don't know exactly how the pyramids were built? So what?

A little research would have shown you that Will Hart is another of those fringe folks like Graham Hancock who has no particular expertise in what they're going on about. For somebody who claims to be an investigative journalist, he writes very poorly, and gets a lot of facts wrong out of sheer sloppiness. He refers consistently to a rock called dolorite in some of his writings, for instance, when in fact it's diorite. There is an igneous rock type spelled dolerite, but that's not what he's talking about. Google for "Will Hart Egypt" and check out some of what turns up, then try "Great Pyramid construction" and follow up some of those. In particular, you'll probably find this site:

www.touregypt.net/featurestories/pyramidcore.htm (external - login to view)

which among other things contains these remarks:

"Nevertheless, there are simply many assumptions, particularly about the Great Pyramids of Giza, that are not true.

For example, one may find in many books that Khufu's Pyramid, greatest of all in Egypt, contains an estimated 2.3 million blocks of stone weighing on average about 2.5 tons. In the past, both professional and amateur theorists assume that the pyramids are composed of generic blocks of this weight. Next, they set about solving the problem of how the builders could have possibly raised and set so many huge blocks. But upon closer examination, few of these Casing and backing stones near the top of Khafre's Pyramid, showing that casing hid considerable irregularity in the core, packing and backing masonry traditional assumptions are really valid. In fact, recent analysis has suggested that Khufu's Pyramid has far fewer large blocks than originally supposed, and those who maintain that the blocks are more or less uniformly 2.5 tons are simply wrong. "

In other words, just because something shows up on a website doesn't mean it has any credibility. You have to check multiple sources before making such a decision, and about two hours of poking around before posting this suggest to me that Will Hart is just another crank who has a very limited understanding of what he's writing about.

Dexter Sinister
#11
So what's your point, Stretch, that we don't know exactly how the pyramids were built? So what?

A little research would have shown you that Will Hart is another of those fringe folks like Graham Hancock who has no particular expertise in what they're going on about. For somebody who claims to be an investigative journalist, he writes very poorly, and gets a lot of facts wrong out of sheer sloppiness. He refers consistently to a rock called dolorite in some of his writings, for instance, when in fact it's diorite. There is an igneous rock type spelled dolerite, but that's not what he's talking about. Google for "Will Hart Egypt" and check out some of what turns up, then try "Great Pyramid construction" and follow up some of those. In particular, you'll probably find this site:

www.touregypt.net/featurestories/pyramidcore.htm (external - login to view)

which among other things contains these remarks:

"Nevertheless, there are simply many assumptions, particularly about the Great Pyramids of Giza, that are not true.

For example, one may find in many books that Khufu's Pyramid, greatest of all in Egypt, contains an estimated 2.3 million blocks of stone weighing on average about 2.5 tons. In the past, both professional and amateur theorists assume that the pyramids are composed of generic blocks of this weight. Next, they set about solving the problem of how the builders could have possibly raised and set so many huge blocks. But upon closer examination, few of these Casing and backing stones near the top of Khafre's Pyramid, showing that casing hid considerable irregularity in the core, packing and backing masonry traditional assumptions are really valid. In fact, recent analysis has suggested that Khufu's Pyramid has far fewer large blocks than originally supposed, and those who maintain that the blocks are more or less uniformly 2.5 tons are simply wrong. "

In other words, just because something shows up on a website doesn't mean it has any credibility. You have to check multiple sources before making such a decision, and about two hours of poking around before posting this suggest to me that Will Hart is just another crank who has a very limited understanding of what he's writing about.

Dexter Sinister
#12
So what's your point, Stretch, that we don't know exactly how the pyramids were built? So what?

A little research would have shown you that Will Hart is another of those fringe folks like Graham Hancock who has no particular expertise in what they're going on about. For somebody who claims to be an investigative journalist, he writes very poorly, and gets a lot of facts wrong out of sheer sloppiness. He refers consistently to a rock called dolorite in some of his writings, for instance, when in fact it's diorite. There is an igneous rock type spelled dolerite, but that's not what he's talking about. Google for "Will Hart Egypt" and check out some of what turns up, then try "Great Pyramid construction" and follow up some of those. In particular, you'll probably find this site:

www.touregypt.net/featurestories/pyramidcore.htm (external - login to view)

which among other things contains these remarks:

"Nevertheless, there are simply many assumptions, particularly about the Great Pyramids of Giza, that are not true.

For example, one may find in many books that Khufu's Pyramid, greatest of all in Egypt, contains an estimated 2.3 million blocks of stone weighing on average about 2.5 tons. In the past, both professional and amateur theorists assume that the pyramids are composed of generic blocks of this weight. Next, they set about solving the problem of how the builders could have possibly raised and set so many huge blocks. But upon closer examination, few of these Casing and backing stones near the top of Khafre's Pyramid, showing that casing hid considerable irregularity in the core, packing and backing masonry traditional assumptions are really valid. In fact, recent analysis has suggested that Khufu's Pyramid has far fewer large blocks than originally supposed, and those who maintain that the blocks are more or less uniformly 2.5 tons are simply wrong. "

In other words, just because something shows up on a website doesn't mean it has any credibility. You have to check multiple sources before making such a decision, and about two hours of poking around before posting this suggest to me that Will Hart is just another crank who has a very limited understanding of what he's writing about.

Karlin
#13
Its a mystery alright...

An even bigger mystery, the most awsome and enduring mystery of our time and even more than the great pyramids, is the advent of Crop Circles.

The numbers of them, the complexity, and soon enough, the message they are delivering to us must surely rank them with the Pyramids.

Have you seen the video called "Star Dreams"? I got a copy from the local library - go see if you can find it and then report back to here when you are a convert, because you will be...

Even if they are man-made, somebody knows something amazing to both do them, and what they are saying.

" target="_blank">http://www.stardreams-cropcircles.co...<br /> <br />

The formations are accompanied by a light, a small orb of light seen flying around the sites.
The formations are getting more complex, now they are Polyhedrons, which can be "folded" to create specific shapes. Some of these shapes are representative of the most advanced "protein unfolding" work being done by mathematicians. They all relate to musical relations expressed mathematically, and advanced geometry, and so on.

quote: "Among many predictions The Watchers gave were of signs in the fields that would shortly be manifesting around Europe's biggest man-made 'pyramid' Silbury Hill (hill of the Shining Beings). These signs would help humanity gain awareness of its greater responsibility in the Universe; these signs would also be carrying codes of energy for imprinting the Earth, and cleansing the ancient sites which lay upon an invisible electromagnetic (EM) grid around the world. Twenty years later, this prophesy has certainly taken form in the crop circles, whose EM fingerprints are now known to charge the energy grid of ancient nearby sites, and interact with the biophysical rhythms of people who enter them.

But one further prophesy concerned the gradual deciphering of the glyphs, through which new technology could be built to help humanity. This was to be achieved by 2007. And it appears that some progress is now being made as we draw nearer this date."

Pyramids? Yes, they tooconnect a grid on the earths surface that relates to geomagnetic forces , EMF and so on. An ancient mystery connects with a modern one... I believe we will soon know the details, and its going to be a good thing.

"That's one of the reasons why people are so intrigued by Egyptology- they were much more advanced than you would expect!! The pyramids at Giza really are amazing and I don't think anyone can truly say how they were built- it's a mystery."

- So are WEmore advanced than even WE know!! Honour your amazingness, and it will be known.

Karlin
" target="_blank">http://www.lovely.clara.net/technolo... Karlin<br />

Karlin
#14
Its a mystery alright...

An even bigger mystery, the most awsome and enduring mystery of our time and even more than the great pyramids, is the advent of Crop Circles.

The numbers of them, the complexity, and soon enough, the message they are delivering to us must surely rank them with the Pyramids.

Have you seen the video called "Star Dreams"? I got a copy from the local library - go see if you can find it and then report back to here when you are a convert, because you will be...

Even if they are man-made, somebody knows something amazing to both do them, and what they are saying.

" target="_blank">http://www.stardreams-cropcircles.co...<br /> <br />

The formations are accompanied by a light, a small orb of light seen flying around the sites.
The formations are getting more complex, now they are Polyhedrons, which can be "folded" to create specific shapes. Some of these shapes are representative of the most advanced "protein unfolding" work being done by mathematicians. They all relate to musical relations expressed mathematically, and advanced geometry, and so on.

quote: "Among many predictions The Watchers gave were of signs in the fields that would shortly be manifesting around Europe's biggest man-made 'pyramid' Silbury Hill (hill of the Shining Beings). These signs would help humanity gain awareness of its greater responsibility in the Universe; these signs would also be carrying codes of energy for imprinting the Earth, and cleansing the ancient sites which lay upon an invisible electromagnetic (EM) grid around the world. Twenty years later, this prophesy has certainly taken form in the crop circles, whose EM fingerprints are now known to charge the energy grid of ancient nearby sites, and interact with the biophysical rhythms of people who enter them.

But one further prophesy concerned the gradual deciphering of the glyphs, through which new technology could be built to help humanity. This was to be achieved by 2007. And it appears that some progress is now being made as we draw nearer this date."

[url]http://www.lovely.clara.net/technology.html

Pyramids? Yes, they too connect a grid on the earths surface that relates to geomagnetic forces , EMF and so on. An ancient mystery connects with a modern one... I believe we will soon know the details, and its going to be a good thing.

"That's one of the reasons why people are so intrigued by Egyptology- they were much more advanced than you would expect!! The pyramids at Giza really are amazing and I don't think anyone can truly say how they were built- it's a mystery."

- So are WE more advanced than even WE know!! Honour your amazingness, and it will be known.

Karlin

no1important
#15
Well I believe the pyramids were constructed with help from "visitors".

Reverend Blair
#16
I think they were built by...are you ready for this...the Egyptians.

Dexter Sinister
#17
One of these days I may learn not to get drawn into exchanges like this. But not tonight.

There's no good reason to think anyone but the Egyptians built the pyramids. There's no good evidence anybody or anything sentient has ever come to this planet from afar.

As for crop circles, Karlin, you should really start a separate thread if you want to discuss that in detail; the OP clearly wanted this one to be about pyramids. But I'll add this here anyway, in case you don't: I agree that crop circles are created by intelligent beings trying to send us a message, but the evidence overwhelmingly points to the conclusion that the intelligent beings in question are humans and the message is that some people are easily fooled.

I visited those web sites you suggested, and found some lovely pictures and a lot of unsubstantiated claims, many of which should be easily referenced to contemporary news accounts, but weren't. It should, for example, be fairly easy to verify that every car battery in a certain town went dead at the same time after a crop circle was made nearby, that would've made the news somewhere. But it wasn't, and the town wasn't even identified, making it pretty difficult to search for. What you've given us is a closed circle of true believers referencing each other, and as evidence that simply doesn't cut it. There are names for what's going on in the worlds of crop circles and pyramidology. Among them are confirmation bias, communal reinforcement, selective thinking, wishful thinking, ad hoc hypothesizing, and self-deception.

Besides, does it really make sense that a band of aliens, who presumably are at least as intelligent as we think we are, would choose such an enigmatic way to communicate with us?

Stretch
#18
yet , with todays modern tek-no-logic we cannot reproduce them.....interestingly enough.

peapod
#19
Besides, does it really make sense that a band of aliens, who presumably are at least as intelligent as we think we are, would choose such an enigmatic way to communicate with us?

Exactly

Reverend Blair
#20
And how come aliens built an architectural mess like the bent pyramid? What about the archaeological finds that show a progression of buildings leading to the pyramids?

It was the Egyptians. First they invented beer, then they built huge and unlikely monuments. It's a pattern that repeats itself over and over again throughout history all over the planet.

Now if you were to tell me that god-like aliens came down and show various groups of people how to make beer, that I could believe.

Mooseskin Johnny
#21
The major problem in Egyptology is the time-line. Early Egyptologists were heavily influenced by the Christian Bible and they believed that the world was created about 4000 BC. Thus, the pyramids and surrounding structures could be no older than 6,000 years. This bias has stubbornly persisted into modern Egyptology, which is unable to explain water erosion near the Sphinx. Any geologist will tell you that it has been some 10,000 years since there was enough running water in the area to cause that much erosion. Egyptologists can't explain the contradiction and choose to ignore it.

no1important
#22
and what about the pyramids in Mexico and south America? Same with Stone hedge.

How could they all of been built without "help"? It seems too advanced to even be built in this time, let alone 4000, 6000 + years ago.

I know some people will never want to believe it but "we are not alone". And that truth scares a lot of people so they subconsciously deny the reality of the situation.

I personally believe the ancient "Gods" of Egypt and elsewhere were "visitors". Laugh at me if you want but that is my opinion and I am sticking to it.

Reverend Blair
#23
It's all the same pattern, No1. The invent beer, then they build huge monuments. I not making this up. Various scientists have said that happens because of the nutritional value of beer, but that doesn't explain "The Garage Factor."

The Garage Factor is simply the fact that if you need a garage built or your stuff moved or a roof put on your house, you can entice your friends to do it by offering them beer. They might not do it for a million dollars, but for a few beer? No problem!

The buildings aren't really all that advanced, either. Pyramids are one of the simplest strutures to build and the only structure that can be made that large with "primitive" technology.

We know some of the technology used to build these things too. Measuring wheels explain the pi factor (if you're using something round to measure distance with pi will show up repeated in the finished product); there are hieroglyphs of ramps and blocks being moved on wooden rollers. We don't know everything they did, but we have replicated these things in experiments.

And we could build the pyramids today. We've had that technology for a very long time. The usual argument is that our buildings aren't as precise, but that's really a cultural thing. We build to within tolerances but the Egyptians wanted to be exact. We put up skyscrapers so men in suits have a place to spend their days, but the pyramid builders were sending a god on to the afterlife.

Dexter Sinister
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by Mooseskin Johnny

The major problem in Egyptology... etc...

That's a little uncharitable, Moose. The real problem is that we don't have the data necessary to answer some questions definitively, and among those questions is the age of the Sphinx. The archeological evidence seems to make the Sphinx roughly contemporary with the Great Pyramid, and there's some geological evidence that suggests it's much older, but there's no archeological evidence of a culture existing in the neighbourhood that could have built it then. The data aren't consistent. The smart--and scientific--thing to do is not take a position, but science is a human activity and thus prey to all the foibles of human nature. Eventually it'll correct itself, if the history of science is any guide.

As for the other matter raised by others here, about "visitors" helping in the construction of sites like the Egyptian pyramids and Stonehenge and other things, that's purely an ad hoc hypothesis with no good evidence to support it. It explains nothing and leads to no new insights, it just removes the need for any other explanation. It's no different in principle from postulating that God did it. Not a useful way of figuring things out; it's not an explanation at all, it's a way of avoiding an explanation.

hmsmark
#25
Wow, the only think I know about the Egyptian Pyramids is that the aliens from Stargate built them to land their ships on... well, OK, I don't know anything about the Pyramids.

I wouldn't worry. I'm sure the US will figure Egypt is hiding WMDs or Osama Bin-Ladin in there and blow them up soon. Oh... If only that were a joke.

While I'm on the subject of blowing up Egyptian stuff, does anyone know if Napoleon's army really blew off the Sphinx nose? I read something like that in a caption of a picture once, but it sounds a bit off. How the heck would they hit the nose and not seem to damage anything else with a bunch of cannon. Its not like they would set up artillery, aim it at the Sphinx and fire one shot. Officers don't usually like to see their men mess around with cannons, well, I hope not anyways.

Dexter Sinister
#26
Quote:

While I'm on the subject of blowing up Egyptian stuff, does anyone know if Napoleon's army really blew off the Sphinx nose?

No, it was the Mamelukes, according to this, and a whole lot of other sources:

www.napoleonseries.org/faq/sphinx.cfm (external - login to view)

Mooseskin Johnny
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by Dexter Sinister

Quote: Originally Posted by Mooseskin Johnny

The major problem in Egyptology... etc...

. . . The data aren't consistent. The smart--and scientific--thing to do is not take a position, but science is a human activity and thus prey to all the foibles of human nature. Eventually it'll correct itself, if the history of science is any guide. . . .

You're right, on both counts. The data is inconsistant, and I'm not charitable about it. I expect scientists to be more objective, and honest.

One more disappointment: the modern tendency to under estimate ancient peoples.

Reverend Blair
#28
Quote:

One more disappointment: the modern tendency to under estimate ancient peoples.

That's a troubling thing. We have not evolved at all since the times of ancient Egypt, only our technology has changed. The ancient Egyptians were no more primitive than we are.

Hard-Luck Henry
#29
Absolutely. The ability to pass on information, through language, means there's been an accumulation of knowledge, that's all. Ancient Sumerians, considered the founders of our civilisation, were far from ignorant savages; these people had complex laws, not to mention an incredibly sophisticated humanist philosophy.

One of my favourite quotes is from the Babylonian epic poem Gilgamesh: "Gilgamesh, what you seek you will never find. For when the Gods created Man they let death be his lot, eternal life they withheld. Let your every day be full of joy, love the child that holds your hand, for these alone are the cares of humanity"

That was written 4500+ years ago. Incredible.
( Apologies for the digression; I'll let you get back to Egypt, now).

Mooseskin Johnny
#30
No apologies needed, Henry. You reinforced my point. And, I like your quote from Gilgamesh.