Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

A Well Supported Theory about Pyramids


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
798 replies to this topic

#1    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,042 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 04 November 2011 - 12:58 AM

At last someone has come up with a good idea about great pyramids.  

http://www.youtube.c.../patrickgiles22



This is superbly evidenced and can even explain what the units of measurements
on the Palermo Stone mean.  The Palermo Stone is hugely important because it con-
tains most of the very very little we know about the great pyramid builders.  Up
till now we didn't know what these numbers were but maybe it was the total amount
of water that was caught in the Lake of the Year.  The Pyramid Texts said this
number was calculated so perhaps they had to add up all the events and subtract
out what was used for other purposes.  The equations could get pretty complicated
with a pyramid sitting in the middle of the lake.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#2    Englishgent

Englishgent

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,909 posts
  • Joined:24 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bangkok Thailand

  • all dinosaurs are thin at one end, much, much thicker in the middle, then thin again at the far end -- Monty Python

Posted 04 November 2011 - 02:05 AM

Interesting thoery but seems an awful lot of trouble to go to just to collect water, which was generally in plentiful supply in that area due to the annual flooding of the NIle.  Also, if this was the reason for the pyramids being built, why the complex interior? In my humble opinion it just doesnt hold water (scuse the pun) :)


#3    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,042 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 04 November 2011 - 03:00 AM

View PostEnglishgent, on 04 November 2011 - 02:05 AM, said:

Interesting thoery but seems an awful lot of trouble to go to just to collect water, which was generally in plentiful supply in that area due to the annual flooding of the NIle.  Also, if this was the reason for the pyramids being built, why the complex interior? In my humble opinion it just doesnt hold water (scuse the pun) :)

Sure, I agree, but the fact is this theory doesn't depend on assumptions
like orthodoxy and most others do.  The first thing they built was always
the water catchment device and then they built the pyramids.  There is even
water erosion described by Petrie in the canals leading away from the water
catchment.  So this theory is demonstrably true on some levels.  

Obviousaly it's illogical to build a huge pyramid in the middle of your
"rain bucket" but this doesn't change the fact that they actually caught
water.  It doesn't change the fact that this water was so important that
they named their years after the amount that was caught.  

Don't forget the water in the Nile was warm, muddy, and loaded with para-
sites and crocodiles.  The builders spoke of cool effervescent water that
was violent and caused abundance and rainbows.  They also even had a God
of rain which harnessed the kas of the Gods who was named Nehebkau.  His
multitudinous coils were the clouds.  There would never be rainbows in the
river yet they described rainbows in detail.  Rain is infrequent in this
desert and probably wasn't much more common in the pyramid building age but
it does come nearly every year.  They probably got about 5" per year in
the pyramid building age.  

There's also a cistern in Khentkawes Town which is directly downhill from
the water catchment device surrounding G2.  This cistern can not be filled
by a downpour which very strongly suggests that water was retained at the
pyramid and slowly released.  This particular water catchment device even
gets mentioned in the Pyramid Texts (how's that for proof).  

I'd say his theory is pure genius even if he is overlooking a few obvious
facts.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#4    Aus Der Box Skeptisch

Aus Der Box Skeptisch

    Unknown title error

  • Member
  • 3,113 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:arizona (originally the wisconsin/minnesota area eh!)

  • Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned.

Posted 04 November 2011 - 03:58 AM

Where's the ramp?

"Though I stand in opposition to you, I am not opposed to you. Night and Day stand in opposition to each other, but they are not opposed to each other -they are merely two halves of the same coin."

#5    Englishgent

Englishgent

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,909 posts
  • Joined:24 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bangkok Thailand

  • all dinosaurs are thin at one end, much, much thicker in the middle, then thin again at the far end -- Monty Python

Posted 04 November 2011 - 04:45 AM

You say   ''I'd say his theory is pure genius even if he is overlooking a few obvious
facts.
His theory might well be pure genius, but anyone giving a theory cannot possibly overlook obvious facts as surely this would leave his theory open to question?


#6    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,042 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 04 November 2011 - 05:16 AM

View PostEnglishgent, on 04 November 2011 - 04:45 AM, said:

You say   ''I'd say his theory is pure genius even if he is overlooking a few obvious
facts.
His theory might well be pure genius, but anyone giving a theory cannot possibly overlook obvious facts as surely this would leave his theory open to question?


As I see it we're all just a bunch of blind men trying to identify an elephant.  We
all have different knowledge sets and unique perspectives.  As a rule Egyptologists have
the greatest amount of information and have done the permutations of the positions of the
hairs on the tail.  But somehow they've managed to get every single thing wrong.  They started
with a few absurd assumptions and then never went back and looked at them in light of new
evidence.  Ratgher than identifying an elephant they think it's a herd of mice pulling a
pumpkin shaped carriage.  

But where Egyptologists started with something that never existed this guy is starting
with something that is factual.  This is real.  It's concrete.  It's not an assumption.  This
makes a sound foundation upon which to build.  Ramps could and must have literally been
built atop these water catchment devices if they actually existed.   Of course ramps might
interfere with water flow so again ramps might be ruled out.  

We need to chuck out the mice and carriage and get back to the data.  Start construction on
water catchment devices and go from there.

Perhaps this is the point of the guy who came up with this.  Perhaps this is a philosopi-
cal statement more than a proposed usage for the pyramid.  Everybody knows that building
a 6 1/2 million ton obstruction in a catchment would be a lot of work.  Perhaps he's even
implying that the catchment might be related to the means to build the big obstruction.  

But whatever the actual case this is a sound foundation for the new Egyptology.  This is
a foundation for an egyptology striving toward answers rather than starting with answers
that lead nowhere at all.  The old Egyptology is stuck in a twilight zone where the sun
never sets nor rises.  All the Giza pyramids lie between them and the light.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#7    The Puzzler

The Puzzler

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,711 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Australia

  • I have no special talent. I am only passionately curious. ~ Einstein

Posted 04 November 2011 - 05:50 AM

It's not such a bad idea I think. Not much to say but it could also mean the pyramid was used for for than one purpose. Not only was it for shooting your soul out to Orion but it could also collect water. How about this too, because of the thought of little rain - I hear the natural covering was limestone, which usually has water dripping from it, maybe it caught the water that dripped, seeped out of the limestone.

"The agony and the irony, they're killing me"
Flagpole Sitta - Harvey Danger

#8    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 9,503 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 04 November 2011 - 12:20 PM

View PostThe Puzzler, on 04 November 2011 - 05:50 AM, said:

I hear the natural covering was limestone, which usually has water dripping from it, maybe it caught the water that dripped, seeped out of the limestone.
What the...??

That is even more absurd than the "water collection" idea.

Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#9    The Puzzler

The Puzzler

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,711 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Australia

  • I have no special talent. I am only passionately curious. ~ Einstein

Posted 04 November 2011 - 12:57 PM

View PostHarte, on 04 November 2011 - 12:20 PM, said:

What the...??

That is even more absurd than the "water collection" idea.

Harte
lol fair enough.

"The agony and the irony, they're killing me"
Flagpole Sitta - Harvey Danger

#10    rusting

rusting

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • Joined:30 Aug 2011

Posted 04 November 2011 - 02:26 PM

View Postcladking, on 04 November 2011 - 03:00 AM, said:

Obviousaly it's illogical to build a huge pyramid in the middle of your
"rain bucket"

It is illogical to build huge pyramids in the middle of anywhere just to collect water. It took thousands of workers a number of years and huge cost to build those pyramids and a civilization that was mathematically advanced enough to build such huge marvels would have been aware that it was a lot simpler and cheaper to build two cisterns and connect them rather than one pyramid and one cistern.

p.s: Wasn't Egyptian calender more centered around the Nile rather than the amount of water that the pyramids caught?


#11    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,042 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 04 November 2011 - 02:42 PM

View PostHarte, on 04 November 2011 - 12:20 PM, said:

What the...??

That is even more absurd than the "water collection" idea.


Surely you aren't suggesting Petrie was absurd.  You'd be excommunicated you know.  

"From this remarkable forking, it [p. 50] is evident that the trench cannot have been made with any ideas of sighting along it, or of its marking out a direction or azimuth; and, starting as it does, from the basalt pavement (or from any building which stood there), and running with a steady fall to the nearest point of the cliff edge, it seems exactly as if intended for a drain; the more so as there is plainly a good deal of water-weanng at a point where it falls sharply, at its enlargement."

He went to a lot of effort to hide the most important fact  about G1 in a 92 word
sentence but you still aren't allowed to doubt its veracity.  There was water at all
the great pyramids that was collected.  Even Djoser's Pyramid is surrounded by a moat.
They used water to level the site and there is extensive evidence for water on site.

It's thirsty work building ramps.  This even applies to ramps sitting in catchment
basins.  My guess is they couldn't have both so they went without ramps.  Ramps are
an absurd idea for building pyramids anyway.  

Of course if you merely meant that the pyramid's function was intended solely to catch
rain water coming from clouds then I'd be forced to agree it really is absurd.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#12    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 9,503 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 04 November 2011 - 03:06 PM

View Postcladking, on 04 November 2011 - 02:42 PM, said:

Of course if you merely meant that the pyramid's function was intended solely to catch
rain water coming from clouds then I'd be forced to agree it really is absurd.
I can't view your vid at work.

Any large construction project has to take drainage into account.

I don't see anywhere in Petrie's writings on this where he implies water was to be collected by the pyramid.

Obviously, in the case of rain, water would be collected in the interior (and on the pavement surrounding) the unfinished G.P.   This rainwater would need to be drained to continue operations.

This is what Petrie said the trenches were for.

Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#13    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,042 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 04 November 2011 - 03:09 PM

View Postrusting, on 04 November 2011 - 02:26 PM, said:

It is illogical to build huge pyramids in the middle of anywhere just to collect water.

Yes and no.  I tend to agree and definitely agree it's very safe to rule
out building a 6 1/2 million ton pyramid that would be of no benefit in
collecting rain water.  There is a remote chance that the pyramid was in-
tended largely as a plug on water seeping up out of the ground in order
to gain control over this water but, this too is doubtful.  

It would make sense if pyramids could collect water but they can't.  

Quote

It took thousands of workers a number of years and huge cost to build those pyramids...

It's not known how the pyramids were built.  Depending on the methods em-
ployed it might have required anywhere between 3% and 120% of GDP.  The
builders clearly said that the Gods built them so I tend to favor the lower
estimates.  (the Gods didn't supply their Own rope)

This is a critical consideration.  It's never even been shown that the ex-
tremely labor intensive means to build coulsd actually work.  There may be no
way to build the entire pyramid using ramps since the ramps would have to be
removed and then rebuilt to apply the cladding.  The ramps would already require
more effort than the pyramid and applying cladding would double this work.  

The evidence seems to suggest that working on the pyramid was a highly prized job
that was awarded by lottery to the cities where men came from who made major ad-
vancements in the past.  This implies there were very few jobs on the pyramid
which is supported by the fact that there are almost no graves anywhere in Egypt
of pyramid builders.  Gods neither drip corpse secretions nor occupy graves when
they die so there's is no reason to expect big pyramid building towns or big
graveyards full of builders.  All the evidence fits a specific pattern which
suggests the builders weren't mad and meant what they said.  

Quote

...and a civilization that was mathematically advanced enough to build such huge marvels would have been aware that it was a lot simpler and cheaper to build two cisterns and connect them rather than one pyramid and one cistern.

There's really no question that the argument as presented is wrong.  The reason
for building great pyramids was not as rain catchment.  

Quote

p.s: Wasn't Egyptian calender more centered around the Nile rather than the amount of water that the pyramids caught?

It's a virtual certainty that the Egyptian calender was centered around the stars
and astronomical observation.  Their math was probably largely observation of the
interaction of numbers and philosophical truisms.  The Nile tended to flood on schedule
each year since the monsoons were fairly regular.  

High Nile was important tothe Egyptians and its effects were the most important thing
each year to the overall economy.  However, every indicatiuon is the inundation came
to Giza and it was the inundation that was recorded on the Palermo Stone.  The amount
listed in the records  was far to little to be the height of the Nile.  But the height
of the inundation was of extreme importance because this water was used for numerous
critical purposes and was the manifestation of the entire earthly ennead.  This cool
effervescent inundation was the Gods on earth.  It was at the very root of this pyra-
mid building culture.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#14    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,042 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 04 November 2011 - 03:12 PM

View PostHarte, on 04 November 2011 - 03:06 PM, said:

I can't view your vid at work.

Any large construction project has to take drainage into account.

I don't see anywhere in Petrie's writings on this where he implies water was to be collected by the pyramid.

Obviously, in the case of rain, water would be collected in the interior (and on the pavement surrounding) the unfinished G.P.   This rainwater would need to be drained to continue operations.

This is what Petrie said the trenches were for.


Petrie believed in a large straight on ramp which would leave the water catchment
device wide open and draining water in a rain.  Today this belief has been utterly
rejected by almost everyone.  The water catchment device wouldn't work and would be
unnecessary with other systems.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#15    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,042 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 04 November 2011 - 03:28 PM

View Postcladking, on 04 November 2011 - 03:09 PM, said:

There may be no
way to build the entire pyramid using ramps since the ramps would have to be
removed and then rebuilt to apply the cladding.  The ramps would already require
more effort than the pyramid and applying cladding would double this work.  

I misspoke a little bit here.  This is actually more of an argument which
disproves all the fly by night, integral, or attached to the side ramping
systems that people invent.  I don't know why it never occured to me before
but all these systems are ruled out by the need to apply cladding on the way
down which is an impossibility.  

This simply rules out virtually every single ramping idea but especially im-
portant is it rules out most of the contra-evidenced spiral ramps. Only Leh-
ner's theory survives since the ramps rest on the ground.  Internal ramps sur-
vive as well.  Petrie's ramp survives.  None of these ideas are consistent
with the vertical lines however and all the other arguments and evidence against
them still stand.

This argument wasn't appropriate here but was on my mind.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users