Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

The Old World is a reference to those parts of Earth known to Europeans before the voyages of Christopher Columbus; it includes Europe, Asia and Africa.

Moderators: Minimalist, MichelleH

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby circumspice » Fri Feb 09, 2018 12:06 am

Here's a link to an interesting article that discusses the various theories regarding the construction of Egyptian pyramids in general & the pyramids on the Giza Plateau specifically. It doesn't endorse any of the theories. Instead, it notes the theory & then lists the pros & cons.


https://www.ancient.eu/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza/
"Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer, and, without sneering, teach the rest to sneer." ~ Alexander Pope
User avatar
circumspice
 
Posts: 724
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:10 pm

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Simon21 » Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:35 am

Skiessa wrote:
Tiompan wrote:[quote="Skiessa"

quarry and transport 2,3 million 2 ton stone blocks and construct the pyramid of topic in given time.... all i've heard from the construction experts everyone has considered it impossible.


Probably one or both are wrong .


how can the first one be wrong? the amount of stones used along with their average weight is acknowledged even by the mainstream archaeology.

and of course while my personal experience from the construction experts views on the pyramid construction isn't an argument in itself, it weights heavy that no construction expert ever has come forth with even remotely clear view of how such feat could be done even with the modern technology, and indeed the internet is half full of the construction experts claiming that they do not have idea how it could be done. the view of the modern experts who build everything from skyscrapers to largest dams and bridges value million times more than archaeologists who aren't experts in any practical or theoretical field of complex science.[/quote]

Well the internet is full of a lot of rubbish as we all know. Maybe your "experts" need to be more "expert". There is no mystery to building the pyramids, they have found camps where the workers lived, found tools, found painting showing the Egyptians moving large monuments. Obviously detailed chapter and verse remain mysteries but this is a very ancient building.
Simon21
 
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2014 4:40 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Skiessa » Fri Feb 09, 2018 7:45 am

circumspice wrote:Here's a link to an interesting article that discusses the various theories regarding the construction of Egyptian pyramids in general & the pyramids on the Giza Plateau specifically. It doesn't endorse any of the theories. Instead, it notes the theory & then lists the pros & cons.


https://www.ancient.eu/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza/


the link gives a formidable suggestion for neither of the astonishing rate of construction required, or the astounding accuracy and the mathematics implemented along with the perfectly-cut granite blocks in the building.

while i'm open for any kind of theory for the construction, the theory must explain the hardest problems presented in the construction of the pyramids satisfyingly, rather than completely ignoring them.
Last edited by Skiessa on Fri Feb 09, 2018 11:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
Skiessa
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:22 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Skiessa » Fri Feb 09, 2018 7:48 am

Simon21 wrote:
Skiessa wrote:
Tiompan wrote:[quote="Skiessa"

quarry and transport 2,3 million 2 ton stone blocks and construct the pyramid of topic in given time.... all i've heard from the construction experts everyone has considered it impossible.


Probably one or both are wrong .


how can the first one be wrong? the amount of stones used along with their average weight is acknowledged even by the mainstream archaeology.

and of course while my personal experience from the construction experts views on the pyramid construction isn't an argument in itself, it weights heavy that no construction expert ever has come forth with even remotely clear view of how such feat could be done even with the modern technology, and indeed the internet is half full of the construction experts claiming that they do not have idea how it could be done. the view of the modern experts who build everything from skyscrapers to largest dams and bridges value million times more than archaeologists who aren't experts in any practical or theoretical field of complex science.


Well the internet is full of a lot of rubbish as we all know. Maybe your "experts" need to be more "expert". There is no mystery to building the pyramids, they have found camps where the workers lived, found tools, found painting showing the Egyptians moving large monuments. Obviously detailed chapter and verse remain mysteries but this is a very ancient building.[/quote]

internet is full of bullshit, but it also consists large amount of professional and scientific data, and it's the best channel for anyone for becoming acknowledged world-wide for one's expertise and intellect. therefore the absolute absence of any kind of formidable theory for the construction of the great pyramid is an argument for the so called pseudo-scientific view of the pyramids not being built by ancient egyptians.
Skiessa
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:22 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Tiompan » Fri Feb 09, 2018 11:37 am

And still you have failed to provide the time factor .
Tiompan
 
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Skiessa » Fri Feb 09, 2018 5:43 pm

Tiompan wrote:And still you have failed to provide the time factor .


wut? the time factor from 20 to 60 years has been provided by the mainstream archaeology, and i've already compared the amount of stones to that. if you'd just read the discussion instead of randomly jumping on and off you'd see that every single point you try to make have been answered.
Skiessa
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:22 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby circumspice » Fri Feb 09, 2018 7:47 pm

I'm bowing out of this "discussion". skiessa's whole point of contention is that the ancient Egyptians could not & did not build any of the edifices that were built of stone. He concedes that the mud brick structures were built by the ancient Egyptians... "mud cake"... I watched the YouTube video that he linked & that is the entire point of this thread, to gain concensus. I want no part of that idiocy.
"Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer, and, without sneering, teach the rest to sneer." ~ Alexander Pope
User avatar
circumspice
 
Posts: 724
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:10 pm

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Tiompan » Sat Feb 10, 2018 2:05 am

"quarry and transport 2,3 million 2 ton stone blocks and construct the pyramid of topic in given time"
You omitted the time factor . Just as you ignored working practices .

The points that have been answered are wrong .
"does the archaeologists take the environmental factors into account when dating the ancient sites, and how much of evidence they estimate to be lost to these factors?
Taphonomy and taphonomic logic are tools that you were obviously unaware of .

The rate of axial precession is not 72 yrs but 71.6 making a nonsense of your "magic "72 andmegalithic structures that " encode" the number

" nothing of what i know from the ancient human history can explain the astounding accuracy towards the true north, ."
You were provided with the evidence that the accuracy was easily achievable with the very simple technology available at the time .
Tiompan
 
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Skiessa » Sat Feb 10, 2018 6:49 am

circumspice wrote:I'm bowing out of this "discussion". skiessa's whole point of contention is that the ancient Egyptians could not & did not build any of the edifices that were built of stone. He concedes that the mud brick structures were built by the ancient Egyptians... "mud cake"... I watched the YouTube video that he linked & that is the entire point of this thread, to gain concensus. I want no part of that idiocy.


gets tons of arguments in 1,5 hour video - runs away.

as i said, take none of the arguments for granted. if you're in doubt, investigate. debunk if you can. see if it's already debunked. but what you do? call it idiocy and ride away with it. sadly the whole mainstream archaeological view of the history of the civilization is built that way.
Last edited by Skiessa on Sat Feb 10, 2018 6:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
Skiessa
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:22 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Skiessa » Sat Feb 10, 2018 6:50 am

Tiompan wrote:"quarry and transport 2,3 million 2 ton stone blocks and construct the pyramid of topic in given time"
You omitted the time factor . Just as you ignored working practices .

The points that have been answered are wrong .
"does the archaeologists take the environmental factors into account when dating the ancient sites, and how much of evidence they estimate to be lost to these factors?
Taphonomy and taphonomic logic are tools that you were obviously unaware of .

The rate of axial precession is not 72 yrs but 71.6 making a nonsense of your "magic "72 andmegalithic structures that " encode" the number

" nothing of what i know from the ancient human history can explain the astounding accuracy towards the true north, ."
You were provided with the evidence that the accuracy was easily achievable with the very simple technology available at the time .


disqualifying the whole argument for the error of not knowing that the rate of precession is currently little less than 72 years is either trolling or plain retardation. the very same link that showed the current rate to be 71,6 years showed that the modern belief is that the precession changes over time, and historically have been measured to be the exact 72 years, which you ignored completely because I didn't provide you my own link which would tell you again the exact same data that was already present in your own argument. -not to mention that even the 71,6 years is so close to 72 years that it could have very well been measured to be the average rate of precession that varies over time.

Read this carefully: the link you provided CLAIMED that the accuracy of 0,05th of a degree could be achieved with ease - it no way proved it.

"unaware or waffling to avoid mentioning sources" the biggest argument i've been using is the out of mind 4 minute per stone minimum which is derived directly from the mainstream archaeological view of what purpose the pyramids were built for and in what time. I don't think i need to provide you a link for this number, since it can be calculated with a pocket calculator with the numbers provided by MA.

What links do you need then, a link to prove you that cutting limestone is painstakingly slow with bronze and copper tools, and that the accuracy with such primitive equipment is horrible? A link to prove you that transporting 2 ton stones without wheel in sand is slow too? A link which proves that building a geometrically perfect pyramid with non-identical stones challenges the human eye and bubble level capability, and again, is freakingly slow? a link which proves that cutting granite in large quantities is practically impossible with such primitive tools at the first place, not to mention the ultra-accurate shaping of the 70 ton granite blocks, and lifting them to tens of meter altitude and placing them so accurately that no piece of paper can fit in between them? the problem with proving the impossibility of this is that no-one has ever tried to replicate the pyramid, all that have been done is some attempts to cut and shape the limestone and granite with the known primitive tools with horrible results. the rate of 1 stone in 4 minutes speaks for itself - the whole assumption of the mainstream archaeology is one big plothole that has been taken for granted because of their desire to believe in the fairytale they've written. the ancient egyptians building the great pyramid has been set as default without being able to answer any of the overwhelming problems that comes along with the assumption - it's not our job to prove this impossible - it's the mainstream archaeology's obligation to prove that it was possible first.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeS5lrmyD74 5 centimeters in few days using sand and water as catalysts - i wonder why didn't they show the finished stone.

I rest my case here, obviously there is no point of trying to make sense of this to you, regardless of if you are just stupid or trolling. thank you for this enlightening debate.
Skiessa
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:22 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Tiompan » Sat Feb 10, 2018 7:03 am

What argument ? I was talking about the points that you got wrong or had illusions about .
You clearly didn't have a clue about dating monuments , the use of RC dating , taphonomy , taphonomic logic ,the rate of axial precession ,how to find true north with simple tech at the time of the AE to a similar accuracy etc.
But you do seem to have a belief in a lot of alt ideas that you were unwilling to provide a link to .


I asked for a source of the "magic" 72 figures , more than a couple of times , none was forthcoming .That is the only source or link I asked about .

Read this carefully , the very first response to your ignorance about the accuracy ."We don't know for sure how they did it but it wasn't that difficult using the tech of the time ."
It's not that difficult , but we couldn't possibly know how it was achieved ,only that it is achievable using the simple tech of the time .
Pointing out errors and mistakes is not trolling .
Tiompan
 
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby circumspice » Sat Feb 10, 2018 4:18 pm

This video speaks for itself.

https://youtu.be/E5pZ7uR6v8c
"Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer, and, without sneering, teach the rest to sneer." ~ Alexander Pope
User avatar
circumspice
 
Posts: 724
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:10 pm

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Diviacus » Sun Feb 11, 2018 2:29 am

If one wants to estimate the time needed to construct a building, in our case the great pyramid, all attempts to prove or disprove the possibility it was build in a given time is not possible within a dozen of lines text. The volumes of materials must be quantified, and then translated into their labor equivalence. This is just what every quantity surveyor does for every building to be constructed in our modern time. Applied to ancient buildings, the method has been developed and promoted by E. M. Abrams for 30 years (called "Architectural energetics"), and till now, more than 100 studies have been made on ancient buildings.

This is the method used (even if the author doesn't refer to the name "Architectural energetics") by C.G. Smith in his book "How the great pyramid was built" (2004). Even if some author's assumptions are debatable, the study is interesting and proposes rough figures for each task of the project.
The author shows that the great pyramid may have been built (obviously using ancient Egyptian's technics) within 12 years by less than 40,000 workers.

As anyone studied this book and has any opinion about it?
Diviacus
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 4:21 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Skiessa » Sun Feb 11, 2018 5:14 am

Diviacus wrote:If one wants to estimate the time needed to construct a building, in our case the great pyramid, all attempts to prove or disprove the possibility it was build in a given time is not possible within a dozen of lines text. The volumes of materials must be quantified, and then translated into their labor equivalence. This is just what every quantity surveyor does for every building to be constructed in our modern time. Applied to ancient buildings, the method has been developed and promoted by E. M. Abrams for 30 years (called "Architectural energetics"), and till now, more than 100 studies have been made on ancient buildings.

This is the method used (even if the author doesn't refer to the name "Architectural energetics") by C.G. Smith in his book "How the great pyramid was built" (2004). Even if some author's assumptions are debatable, the study is interesting and proposes rough figures for each task of the project.
The author shows that the great pyramid may have been built (obviously using ancient Egyptian's technics) within 12 years by less than 40,000 workers.

As anyone studied this book and has any opinion about it?


I would be interested to hear his arguments for the major problems of construction of the pyramids presented in here.

No single theory that i've stumbled across to has even tried to answer any of the actual known problems of the construction of the pyramid, but rather present a theory how a large building in general built from 2 ton stone blocks could be built in 20 years. ignore the geometry, ignore the lack of advanced measurement, ignore the granite blocks, ignore the construction rate, ignore the astronomy - present a rough idea of ramps, wet sand and logs and how they could help moving heavy stones from place A to B, not even presenting a calculation of what kind of transportation rate could be achieved with this method with the suggested workforce.

I hope Mr. Abrams does better with his theory.
Last edited by Skiessa on Sun Feb 11, 2018 5:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
Skiessa
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:22 am

Re: Contemporary Great Pyramid Document

Postby Skiessa » Sun Feb 11, 2018 5:28 am

circumspice wrote:This video speaks for itself.

https://youtu.be/E5pZ7uR6v8c


A brilliant guy no doubt, but how does this video exlain the laser-accurate shape and placement of the granite blocks, and their transportation of 900 miles from Aswan?
Skiessa
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:22 am

PreviousNext

Return to Old World

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: circumspice and 3 guests