This is my problem. The accepted archaeological theory is that the pyramids were built a couple of thousand years BC by men with stone hammers and bronze chisels, but there's no way that sarcophagus was built with those kind of tools. It's quite simply impossible. Yet it must have been built before the pyramid was finished. Someone has got something wrong. Quite a lot wrong.
The problem is you've got established 'facts' about these historic sites, and most of the highly regarded archeologists, geologists, etc, tend to toe the same line because they're scared of being po-poed by the establishment. But the other mob, the ones who challenge established thinking, are all, to a man, crackpots. Space aliens indeed. Atlantis...Hancock strongly believes in the existence of Atlantis, and he believes it's in Antarctica, but he won't write that in his books because he knows he'll be ridiculed for it (and ice core dating has already proven that the area has lain under ice for at least 400,000 years...). And his buddy John Anthony West is a proper Dime bar; he reckons the various ancient temples are actually musical instruments, or else they're human organs, or maybe plants. Proper fruit loop. No wonder the establishment ain't budging, they're too scared of looking like these two.
but you scratch a multi around the track at a fair lick too. It shouldnt be possible, but we have witnesses oops, sorry bike reference :Hilarious:
Part of the problem is that we are modern folk, with modern ideas about H&S, cost effectiveness, GDP, "realistic" time frames and such, and are trying to make ancient projects somehow fit into that mould. I've seen Multis that have put me on my 999 to utter shame. They are like bumblebees, that cannot possibly do the things that we actually see them do.
Hancock is already ridiculed. What is impossible about the Sarcophagus? there are examples of similar stone working all over the world. If your job in life is carving stone and you have carved stone since you were a child and your father carved stone and his father before him and so on back through the generations you are going to be good at it. If all you and you workmates do all day is carve stone then a lot of stone is going to get carved. You can visit the village near the Pyramids that housed the workers, we have records of their names, records of what they were fed and what they were paid. We have the quarry that the blocks were carved from, there are even unfinished and part cut blocks still in the Quarry. What is missing completely is any evidence that there is any kind of missing 'technology' or magic, or aliens or lasers.. You mention 'diamond tipped tools not being able to reproduce the finish. Who says? and what other methods have been tried? I would say the best method for getting a smooth surface on granite would be grinding using a harder stone or a cutting compound of some kind, sand etc. That's how stone is polished and smoothed today. That we don't know the exact method doesn't mean we don't know how it was done. We just don't know which of several proposed methods were used. As for the old but about every Archaeologist and Historian is 'in on it' because they would lose their job, funding. status etc if the admitted they were wrong or supported some 'alternative. Well reputations are made in Science by making new discoveries and overturing old theories and ideas. What is needed to do it though is solid evidence. Any new theory must account for everything else we know and can be explained by existing theories but it must explain more and make predictions that current theories don't otherwise it's useless. This site is a good place to start. Bad Archaeology
Good point, the though of taking centuries to produce something is as alien to us as fire was to early man. Thankfully not scratched my multi on track yet
Not a matter of centuries, there are detailed invoices and lists of stores and supplies, wages etc paid to the workers. Quarry work went on all year round as did skilled stone masonry. Moving was done in the 'off' season by the laborers who didn't need to work the fields. Remains of vegetable matter in the form of straw and rush has been recovered from the structure of the Pyramids where it forms part of the Mortar that is used in some places or has been trapped between stones when they have been put in to place. It has been Carbon Dated to the time the current theories say the Pyramids were built. Different cultures around the world all built pyramids because they are the easiest structure to build, a solid pile of rocks wide at the base and thin at the top. Think about it the great Cathedrals of Europe and Britain were built using exactly the same techniques as the Egyptians used, their construction took 30 or 40 years to complete, some are nearly a thousand years old for Example Durham Started in 1098 and finished in 1140. To my mind they are far more spectacular and amazing than what is, when it comes down to it nothing more than a big pile of rocks. Cathedrals are hollow and have massive windows, they are carved, and shaped, they are supported on delicate columns and have huge arched roof spaces and towers. They were made by men chipping and polishing stone and hauled in to place by muscle power. Look at Roman Architecture, Aqueducts and Temples, City Walls etc. Romans built the Pantheon . It has a Concrete Dome that weighs 4,535 tons. It was built in 135AD and is still standing and used as a church. It is still the world's largest un-reinforced concrete dome. In Egypt are examples of earlier Pyramids. You can follow a progression through from small structures built of mud bricks, stone faced pyramids with rubble cores right up to the 'great Pyramids'. there is no mystery.
Concrete's easy though, you just make a former and pour the gloop in. Lifting a 200 ton block out of a pit is a whole different kettle of fish.
That would depend on the type of Granite. granite has a hardness of 6 to 7 on the Mohs scale. It depends on the amount of Quartz. Rub two rocks of the same hardness together they will rub each other away. Use a softer rock and one will wear in higher proportion to the other. I noticed you cut the part about a rubbing or cutting compound. Use a rubbing compound like a quartz sand between them or something harder and you can amplify the effect. It's exactly the same as we do today when grinding or polishing. 'Pounding' was also used to remove larger amounts of rock. Here is a good Primer on Egyptian stone working techniques. It's a good place to start Ancient Egyptian Stoneworking Tools and Methods: Stone vase making
Rose granite (or red aswan granite) as used in the great pyramid is more than 20% quartz, so you'd have to have a bastard hard rock to rub against it in order to wear it. And if the local sand hadn't managed to erode the rock in the previous few million years, that's unlikely to be suitable either. They must have had better tools than have been found so far.
Ancient builders using levers and pulleys to move stuff and not magic or whatever is believable. I watched a programme where they built a replica part of Stonehenge using levers, pulleys, ropes and ramps. They got 3 or 4 shouty bossy feckers and a load of unwashed hippy looking sorts to use as muscle. They moved two upright stones into place, then they lifted a lintel stone onto the uprights, all with levers, pulleys and some good ol` fashioned hippy determination. Upon completion, the hippy sorts cheered and high five`d each other and the bossy shouty feckers stood around looking smug because they had proven, prehistoric man could have built Stonehenge with just basic terrestrial engineering tools, no alien laser beam needed here.............or they just proved hippy sorts are strong as fuck and you underestimate them at your peril. Here`s the amazing thing for me. At the real Stonehenge, on the underside of the lintels and the top of the uprights there are ball and socket joints. If you are to believe what archaeologists and other such experts say then all prehistoric man had to carve these was a rock and a sharp stick, must have taken an absolute age. I had to break up a large-ish concrete ball on the base of a washing line post with an sds drill recently and I was fed up after about a minute! Kudos to those ancient masons with their rock hammer and sharp stick.
As far as I'm aware the dynastic Egyptians hadn't been introduced to metal as such, so these pulleys and levers would have to have been made of wood. Maybe the pulleys could have been carved in stone, but they still would have had to be supported in wood. The stones cut out to make the Valley temple are around 200 tons each, and were lifted out of the pit surrounding the Sphinx. I'm sorry, but I'm not having it you can lift a 200 ton lump from below ground level using wood and rope.
Floated them down stream on rafts built from the bodies of all the hippies that died on the job, only enough hi-viz for the bossy shouty feckers you see. I think on the programme, they had their stones delivered by lorry. They said, given enough time, barges could be built to float the stones from Wales to as close to Salisbury as possible, then drag them over land to the site. Or alien gravity beams............
