1650 replies to this topic

[lliqerty]

Swede, on 28 June 2012 - 12:19 AM, said:

Ah, but they do. A number of your misconceptions (such as those related to lithic technology and draft domestication) have already been addressed. Now, let us address other matters. Please remember some of your earlier pronouncments.

The way Schmidt sees it, Gobekli Tepe's sloping, rocky ground is a stonecutter's dream. Even without metal chisels or hammers, prehistoric masons wielding flint tools could have chipped away at softer limestone outcrops, shaping them into pillars on the spot before carrying them a few hundred yards to the summit and lifting them upright. Then, Schmidt says, once the stone rings were finished, the ancient builders covered them over with dirt. Eventually, they placed another ring nearby or on top of the old one. Over centuries, these layers created the hilltop.

You can work a soft rock with a hard one. No question. But stone tools cannot be useful as metal ones. Hence, the time required to do the same amount of work is multiplied.

If you want to use a stone tool, you need to create it. With what? What type of stone?

So, lets say they used granite. Is there granite in the area? How did they shape their granite tools? With basalt?

[cormac mac airt]

cladking, on 28 June 2012 - 04:58 AM, said:

The "ramp" mentioned in the PT is anachronistic because the PT as we know it probably
didn't exiist at that time. If the PT spoke of spiral ramps and all sorts of ramps to build pyr-
amids I'd still give you the point but it doesn't.  The PT speaks of boats and flying.  It speaks
of burning the king atop the pyramid.

The "cultural context" with which you are familiar is ripped from the book of the dead and im-
posed on the great pyramid builders.  The real "cultural context" includes things like the tiny
workmen's village and insights that can be gleaned from the PT.  The real cultural context
must be consistent with the titles and jobs of the men and women buried at Giza.  You are
seeing the great pyramid builders in terms of the authors of the book of the dead and this is
illegitimate.

Which makes it irrelevant to a discussion of the Gizamids construction.   Even more-so when the earliest copy of the Pyramid Texts was addressed to Pharaoh Unas.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt, 28 June 2012 - 05:47 AM.

[jules99]

lliqerty, on 28 June 2012 - 05:09 AM, said:

I have said repeatedly that moving them is not the problem, it is cutting them on the bottom, and placing them accurately (meaning edge to edge with another one).

You are implying that something can be scaled up from 2 tons to 800 tons. There is no evidence for that. If it is so easy why are you showing this example with one four hundredth of the size in question? In particular, how will you remove the 'sleepers' or ropes from an 800 ton rock once it is in its location? Do you know if wood will support 800 tons and not be crushed?

A possible process for leveling the surface of the stones was demonstrated in the clip.
Wooden railway sleepers will support a freight train weighing approximately 500 tonne and its not unusual to see 3 or more of these linked to haul a heavy load, I suppose it would come down to weight distribution and how well the timbers were supported, I would say yes the wood could support the weight but Im OK to be proven wrong..

[samspade]

cormac mac airt, on 28 June 2012 - 03:53 AM, said:

Not hardly since it dates to about 150 years after the fact. And you've already said that cultural context only applies to when the Great Pyramids were built. But I can see your reluctance to leave your interpretations of what the PT says out of this, as otherwise you have nothing relevant to add to the discussion.

cormac

Cladking agreed with me, in regards to the symbolism there,

He may of been referring to certain cultures changes or additions that occur over time.

But clearly the primeval mound symbolism is earlier than the PT and even before the GP.
example mound symbolism in the First Dynasty. Evidence for the cosmography is quite established earlier.

Clearly the step pyramid is like steps, as well as changes to a true pyramid can be seen to be symbolic of the primeval mound as well.

[docyabut2]

http://lexiline.blog...laya-dates.html


Anothers view on the dating of Gobeki  Tepe ,as with the writer I do agree  in the evolution of a architecural design and believe they are totaly datng GT out of  its place.


The T shape temple on Menorca looks more ruggedly built giving it a more older appearence.
Gobekli Tepe is more perfectly built, similar to the evolution of the pyramid building.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/ramonduran/1638591805/

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/multimedia/photos/?articleID=30706129&c=y

Edited by docyabut2, 28 June 2012 - 10:49 AM.

[docyabut2]

I think the archeologists should keep digging around the GT to looked for more evidence of housing. It seem the locals or ,someone wanted all the traces of this culture and their worship to disapear.
One does not just buried their church.

As far as the dating,one can tell the GT was a improvement of the T stones at Menorca.

http://www.spanisharts.com/arquitectura/imagenes/prehistoria/taulas.html

[Oniomancer]

lliqerty, on 27 June 2012 - 06:04 PM, said:

I agree with everything you are saying (btw, I very much enjoyed the original Gods Must Be Crazy not only for its humor but also for its insight and the portrayal of this wonderful culture). I was implying in an earlier post that they would have had to build one circle in a season, and go on to the next one maybe a few years later.

But a single person can make a Venus figure and a cave painting, and another one next week. That is hardly comparable with cutting 16 ton blocks (and doing this with stone tools, and a 50 ton incompleted one).

What's the difference between one man carving one Venus and ten men carving the equivalent of ten Venuses?

Quote

How did they lift the weight of 200 men out of the quarry? I have asked specific questions like this before and never gotten a concrete answer. So I surmise that it has not been experimentally confirmed. Maybe you think this is a minor detail. I do not think so. Why is it so difficult to round up enough, say, college students for a shcool project? Once it has been done, then we have an idea about the effort required, in terms of manpower, organization etc. But the fact that it has NOT been done indicates to me that it is a substantial effort, maybe more than you imagine.

The quarry in question: http://www.flickr.co...man/4998652430/

Even if they were going uphill, there doesn't appear to be a lot of slope involved. Others here have already given examples of how large stones can be moved. Other demonstrations such as you propose have already been conducted.

http://www.pbs.org/w.../move/past.html

Quote

Only then can we determine if this is even possible. Then we can talk about what qualities or culture the people must have had to manage that accomplishment. Without experiment or observation of the challenge that this represents, what do you expect to learn from talking about the !Kung tribe? I am sorry to repeat myself, but science is observation.

Yes, and from the report, by _observing_ the !Kung, we can conclude that hunter-gatherer cultures would indeed have likely had available free time to work on projects like this, contrary to your prior assertions.

[cladking]

Aus Der Box Skeptisch, on 28 June 2012 - 05:08 AM, said:

Who was overseer of burning the king atop the pyramid?

Satis.

812a. To say: N. is Satis who has taken possession of both lands,
812b. the burning one who has seized her two lands.
812c. N. has ascended to heaven;

[cladking]

cormac mac airt, on 28 June 2012 - 05:46 AM, said:

Which makes it irrelevant to a discussion of the Gizamids construction.   Even more-so when the earliest copy of the Pyramid Texts was addressed to Pharaoh Unas.

By George, I think you got it.

Ramps do not fit into the cultural context.

Tombs don't fit in the cultural context either but once the PT is included then tombs are excluded by the cultural context.

[cladking]

samspade, on 28 June 2012 - 08:34 AM, said:

Clearly the step pyramid is like steps, as well as changes to a true pyramid can be seen to be symbolic of the primeval mound as well.

The other great pyramids were built as steps as well.

It appears they could lift the stones only a given height at a time.

[Sensible Logic]

cladking, on 28 June 2012 - 04:13 AM, said:

There are no ramp remnants on the GP.  You are mistaken.  I don't know why you've stated this many times.

There are ramp remnants  on later and on little pyramids.  This is irrelevant to the great pyramids.  There is
virtually no evidence of any sort for ramps on great pyramids.  We could go over it again and I think I could
get all the "evidence" in a single sentence.

But I don't see anyone addressing the fact that ramps are debunked.  This is the fact.

Quote

Recently, remnants of ramps have been found by Dr. Zahi Hawass on the south side of the pyramid that attest that some type of ramping was indeed used in the construction of this monument.

http://guardians.net...tm#bibliography

Quote

Remains of ramps have been discovered at Medium, Dahshur, Abu Ghurab and Abusir, thus supporting the claims of Siculus. Notable also are the Sinki pyramid at South Abydos and the Sekhemkhet pyramid where ramp remains, and even complete ramps have been discovered. Other ramp remains may have also been discovered at Giza, where excavators from the Cairo University excavated two parallel walls that may have formed the retaining framework of a ramp.

http://www.touregypt...yramidlifts.htm

Perhaps the ramp debunkers came to their conclusions a wee bit prematurely.

[cladking]

Sensible Logic, on 28 June 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

http://guardians.net...tm#bibliography



http://www.touregypt...yramidlifts.htm

Perhaps the ramp debunkers came to their conclusions a wee bit prematurely.

Sensible Logic, on 28 June 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

http://guardians.net...tm#bibliography



http://www.touregypt...yramidlifts.htm

Perhaps the ramp debunkers came to their conclusions a wee bit prematurely.

No.  It's not at all premature.

No ramps exist on any great pyramid and there is no evidence they ever did.

People just keep making the vaccuos claims perpetrated by sites like touregypt.  Ask yourself
why they didn't provide a picture of this. Ramps are debunked so a picture would be extremely
valuable but no pictures exist.  I can show you pictures of the routes right up the side of the py-
ramid but all touregypt can do I tell you they have found ramps.

You can take my word on it and take it to the bank.  No ramps.

[cormac mac airt]

cladking, on 28 June 2012 - 02:49 PM, said:

By George, I think you got it.

Ramps do not fit into the cultural context.

Tombs don't fit in the cultural context either but once the PT is included then tombs are excluded by the cultural context.

Looks to me like you purposely DIDN'T get it. So let me spell it out for you. The Pyramid Texts are irrelevant to a discussion of the Gizamids as they date to 150 years after the fact and are, in the oldest extant text, addressed to Unas. There are no extant texts from the time of Khufu, so you can't use the PT (which are religious texts anyway) as an instruction manual for structures that pre-existed it and to whom it was not addressed. Ramp remains however, regardless of where they are located, are know to exist from prior to Unas so your claim of ramps not existing because they've been debunked is bullscheise.

cormac

[kmt_sesh]

Haven't we had this exact same debate before? A thousand times before? Going back years? Is it worth rehashing?

[questionmark]

kmt_sesh, on 28 June 2012 - 06:47 PM, said:

Haven't we had this exact same debate before? A thousand times before? Going back years? Is it worth rehashing?

Well, looks like somebody thinks we have a short memory and going away for a few months makes us forget the past