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

#286    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 23,803 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 20 November 2011 - 11:39 PM

View Postcladking, on 20 November 2011 - 07:19 PM, said:

Not  at all.  Orthodoxy proposes that the largest ramp ever built by man
was somehow laid up against this pyramid and many millions of men dragged
stones up it and then walked back down.  They are proposing this despite
the fact that there are no ramp builders known to have existed and not a
single man who dragged stone.  Many of the jobs are known but not one in-
dicative of ramps or a muscle based system. Instead they leave the absense
of ramps as proof they mustta used ramps.
Clad, this has been shown to be Opinion on your part. Studies of bones of the workers do indicate dragging of heavy objects. The studies of the cemetaries and mastabas do not eliminate a title for ramp building. Not every laborers burial had a name and title assigned with it.

Quote

The evidence that they did not use ramps is complete.  Ramps could not have
left the vertical lines visible in the great pyramids.  Ramps fly in the
face of common sense which dictates that the largest lifting project in hu-
man history should have used an efficient means of lifting the stone.
Again Opinion. I've yet to see anyone agree that the evidence says ramps were NOT used. Your fixation on the vertical lines does not proove anything. Those lines might have been for any purpose. Is there only one line going up the middle, right? Might that not actually be proof of a ramp? That the pressure of the solid ramp pushed in on the blocks and created a shallow valley, which can be seen as a line down the middle? It is at least as logical as your own idea.

Quote

Incredibly there isn't one single known usage of the word "ramp" from the
great pyramid building age that applies as a means to lift objects! Still
Egyptologists insist on ramps.  They implying that these people were simply
too stupid to devise any other means of lifting than the most inefficient.
But there is mention of roads, and a ramp is just an elevated road. There was also officals in charge of roads, and you've admitted that you believe there was a God of Roads for the Egyptians.

Quote

The stones moved straight up the side and this is the only supported argu-
ment until someone gets out there and disproves it.  This is a fact.  It
doesn't matter that the support falls short of being conclusive because ramps
are supported by nothing but air.  This isn't even an arguable point but I'd
be happy to lay out the extensive evidence that stones moved up the side or
the more extensive evidence that ramps never existed as a means to lift stone.
This battle has already been lost by orthodoxy whether they choose to admit
the fact or not.  If they try to prove me wrong they'll end up only proving
I'm right.
I admit that what you propose with counterwieghts would work. But it is even less evidenced then ramps. As far as I know, you're the only one who supports your idea. I've yet to see even one person (Beyond the, "I'z totally AGreE with Youz", crowd.), here on UM that says you've blasted Orthodoxy wide open.

You've thrown out a few good physical bits, like pieces of rope and eyelets of stone. But to keep depending on the Pyramid Texts for your Heavy Lifting is making you look simply stubborn and Defensive of your pet theory, rather then open minded.

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#287    Swede

Swede

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,811 posts
  • Joined:30 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 20 November 2011 - 11:50 PM

View PostAus Der Box Skeptisch, on 20 November 2011 - 08:09 PM, said:

Battle of the geniuses happening right before our eyes. LOL that was a bit sarcastic I apologize.

Lime stone is mostly stone I read up there somewhere.... LOL OK... I'm even going to risk making my next few statements from memory because I feel pretty confident in the basic nature of the material we are speaking about.
OK you have a sea.
You have things living on the sea floor. Coral and such which will undoubtedly filter salt water...
Break apart limestone and you will find shell and other fossils .... I find them all the time at 6000 feet above sea level in thehigh desert of Arizona!!! Tons of salt too... so much that my shoes get a white layer on them from walking around. How silly of an idea to find so much salt in an ancient sea bed... have any of you seen limestone or is it just a concept in your mind? Its no big deal if its just a concept as there are a lot of things conceptual in my mind I just happen to have hands on experience with limestone and old sea beds because of where I live... I wanted to share that experience with you all.
Good day

Aus - Your observations are quite correct. In addition, the presence of haline salts in the Mokattam formation is well documented as per the below:

http://www.scribd.co...04abdel-hafez-t

Additional related references:

http://www.palarch.n...gy_1_1_2006.pdf

http://books.google....content&f=false

http://repository.up...ions limestone"

.


#288    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,498 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 21 November 2011 - 12:26 AM

View PostDieChecker, on 20 November 2011 - 11:39 PM, said:

Clad, this has been shown to be Opinion on your part. Studies of bones of the workers do indicate dragging of heavy objects. The studies of the cemetaries and mastabas do not eliminate a title for ramp building. Not every laborers burial had a name and title assigned with it.

There is no job indicative of heavy labor.  Prove me wrong.

Why do people who believe orthodoxy assume everything is already settled?  

Quote

Again Opinion. I've yet to see anyone agree that the evidence says ramps were NOT used. Your fixation on the vertical lines does not proove anything. Those lines might have been for any purpose. Is there only one line going up the middle, right? Might that not actually be proof of a ramp? That the pressure of the solid ramp pushed in on the blocks and created a shallow valley, which can be seen as a line down the middle? It is at least as logical as your own idea.

"No" on all counts.  

Quote

But there is mention of roads, and a ramp is just an elevated road. There was also officals in charge of roads, and you've admitted that you believe there was a God of Roads for the Egyptians.

There was a God of the desert in later times.  He assisted lifting
stones in the great pyramid building age though.  It was he who lifted
up his arm in the east and stood on a pedestal.  

Quote

I admit that what you propose with counterwieghts would work. But it is even less evidenced then ramps. As far as I know, you're the only one who supports your idea. I've yet to see even one person (Beyond the, "I'z totally AGreE with Youz", crowd.), here on UM that says you've blasted Orthodoxy wide open.

I do not claim to have destroyed orthodoxy.  I claim that I've destroyed
ramps and they won't admit it because they know deep down that ramps under-
pin orthodoxy.  It may be a fine point but the fact they can't even bend
on ramps is very telling about exactly what orthodoxy is.  The fact that
they can't say "well, maybe they really didn't use ramps" essentially proves
Egyptology is founded on assumptions and can't stand piecemeal.  

Quote

You've thrown out a few good physical bits, like pieces of rope and eyelets of stone. But to keep depending on the Pyramid Texts for your Heavy Lifting is making you look simply stubborn and Defensive of your pet theory, rather then open minded.

I don't consider all the physical evidence to be important to how or why
the pyramids were built. But there is no physical evidence which contradicts
any part of my theory on how they were built.  You're probably thinking about
the "sarcophagus" right now but whether or not the pyramid was a tomb doesn't
directly impact my theory of how it was built.  I believe the builders meant
what they said and they said it wasn't a tomb so it is related but not dependent.  
I believe the physical evidence alone is sufficient to show I'm right.  The fact
that much of this physical evidence was discovered by reading the words of the
builders simply lends more weight to the evidence and their words.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#289    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,498 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 21 November 2011 - 12:29 AM

View Postquestionmark, on 20 November 2011 - 10:25 PM, said:

Not enough to convert into an actual economic factor, see here, so there might have been 2.5 inches instead of 2, the water still was sourced from the Nile.

And the Pyramid texts reflect all kinds of things, but certainly not the reality... if it would be reality you would not be interested...


A water catchment device still channels water whether it falls
from the sky, condenses on the side, or flies up out of the ground.  

We've seen no proof or supporting evidence that the Nile was the
only source of drinking water.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#290    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,498 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 21 November 2011 - 12:39 AM

View Postquestionmark, on 20 November 2011 - 10:25 PM, said:

Not enough to convert into an actual economic factor, see here, so there might have been 2.5 inches instead of 2, the water still was sourced from the Nile.

And the Pyramid texts reflect all kinds of things, but certainly not the reality... if it would be reality you would not be interested...


I almost missed your link.

It contains everything you need to know about higher rainfall amounts
in ancient Egypt in the distant past;

...many of these desert fauna was hunted for sport by royalty and nobles...

If there were oryx and gazelles then there was grass.  If there was grass then there was at least a few inches of rain every year.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#291    Swede

Swede

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,811 posts
  • Joined:30 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 21 November 2011 - 01:16 AM

View Postcladking, on 21 November 2011 - 12:26 AM, said:

There is no job indicative of heavy labor.  Prove me wrong.

Why do people who believe orthodoxy assume everything is already settled?  



"No" on all counts.  



There was a God of the desert in later times.  He assisted lifting
stones in the great pyramid building age though.  It was he who lifted
up his arm in the east and stood on a pedestal.  



I do not claim to have destroyed orthodoxy.  I claim that I've destroyed
ramps and they won't admit it because they know deep down that ramps under-
pin orthodoxy.  It may be a fine point but the fact they can't even bend
on ramps is very telling about exactly what orthodoxy is.  The fact that
they can't say "well, maybe they really didn't use ramps" essentially proves
Egyptology is founded on assumptions and can't stand piecemeal.  



I don't consider all the physical evidence to be important to how or why
the pyramids were built. But there is no physical evidence which contradicts
any part of my theory on how they were built.  You're probably thinking about
the "sarcophagus" right now but whether or not the pyramid was a tomb doesn't
directly impact my theory of how it was built.  I believe the builders meant
what they said and they said it wasn't a tomb so it is related but not dependent.  
I believe the physical evidence alone is sufficient to show I'm right.  The fact
that much of this physical evidence was discovered by reading the words of the
builders simply lends more weight to the evidence and their words.

Re: Bolded above - Only that little factor known as osteological evidence. You have likely seen this lay-oriented reference numerous times. Further references can be provided.

"Based on the pottery, names, and titles found in  association with the tombs, the cemetery was begun as early as the reign  of Khufu in Dynasty 4 and continued through the end of Dynasty 5, from  ca. 2551 to 2323 B.C. The cemetery probably extends across the  escarpment above the low desert plain where we have found production and  storage facilities. It seems to be an Old Kingdom version of the New  Kingdom (ca.1500-1163 B.C.) cemetery at Deir el-Medineh, where workers  who excavated and decorated the royal tombs in the Valley of the Kings  were buried. We believe that so far we have found only 20 percent of the  tombs buried under the sand along this slope.

None of the workers was mummified, a prerogative of royalty and  nobility, but many tombs in this cemetery contained skeletal remains  that tell us much about the lives of these people. Study of the remains  by Azza Sarry el-Din and Fawziya Hussein of Egypt's National Research  Center reveals that males and females were equally represented, mostly  buried in fetal positions, with face to the east and head to the north.  Many of the men died between age 30 and 35. Below the age of 30 a higher  mortality was found in females than in males, a statistic undoubtedly  reflecting the hazards of childbirth. Degenerative arthritis occurred in  the vertebral column, particularly in the lumbar region, and in the  knees. It was frequent and more severe than in the skeletons from the  mastaba cemetery. Skeletons of both men and women, particularly those  from the lower burials, show such signs of heavy labor.Simple and  multiple limb fractures were found in skeletons from both the lower and  upper burials. The most frequent were fractures of the ulna and radius,  the bones of the upper arm, and of the fibula, the more delicate of the  two lower leg bones. Most of the fractures had healed completely, with  good realignment of the bone, indicating that the fractures had been set  with a splint. We found two cases, both male, that suggested amputation  - of a left leg and a right arm respectively. The healed ends of the  bones indicate that the amputations were successful. Few other cases of  amputation have been recorded in Egyptian archaeology".
(Emphasis added).

http://www.drhawass....yramid-builders

.


#292    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,498 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 21 November 2011 - 01:16 AM

View Postcormac mac airt, on 20 November 2011 - 11:10 PM, said:

In the case of the Pyramid Texts because they, as written in the tomb of Unis, are addressed specifically to Unis. Not to Khufu, Khafre, Menkaure or any other 4th Dynasty king. But to Unis ONLY.

If this were true then the exact same so called grammatical errors could
not appear from one pyramid to the next.  They do appear repeatedly so it
can't be true.

Quote

Nope, I'm holding them to 200 years of archaeological, linguistic and religious evidence whereas all you've shown in 5 years is "because I said so".  :rolleyes:

Great!

So where is the evidence for ramps.  

Quote

You've not shown evidence that they were ever "rain catchment devices". Hell, you've not even shown that there was a significant amount of rain at that time. And I've asked you to support that claim several times now. Thusfar, you've failed.

I've only found the two references.  Then there's the one Kmt_Sesh found and now
Questionmark found one.  This is well enough supported even in the absence of Pat-
rick Giles corroboration in my mind.  

Quote

And as I've already shown you, there is evidence that the Nile was much closer to the Plateau during the 4th dynasty, yet nothing to suggest that the Nile waters were EVER on the plateau itself.

The Nile was never on the plateau but  Osiris was.  

Quote

Did YOU notice that Kmt_sesh NEVER said that that means precipitation significantly greater than 2 inches per year. Hmm, I'd have to wonder why he wouldn't say that, unless it wasn't true.

I don't know how much rain there was.  I seriously doubt anyone really knows how
much rain there was.  But I know the experts say there was more and my guts know
oryx and wildlife can't live on two inches a years even in more temperate climates.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#293    Oniomancer

Oniomancer

    Soulless Minion Of Orthodoxy

  • Member
  • 3,605 posts
  • Joined:20 Jul 2008
  • Gender:Male

  • Question everything

Posted 21 November 2011 - 01:21 AM

View Postcladking, on 21 November 2011 - 12:39 AM, said:

I almost missed your link.

It contains everything you need to know about higher rainfall amounts
in ancient Egypt in the distant past;

...many of these desert fauna was hunted for sport by royalty and nobles...

If there were oryx and gazelles then there was grass.  If there was grass then there was at least a few inches of rain every year.
...Except those animals also live today in places like the Namib desert. There are in fact still oryx and gazelle living in Egypt.

"Apparently the Lemurians drank Schlitz." - Intrepid "Real People" reporter on finding a mysterious artifact in the depths of Mount Shasta.

#294    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,498 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 21 November 2011 - 01:28 AM

View PostSwede, on 21 November 2011 - 01:16 AM, said:

Degenerative arthritis occurred in  the vertebral column, particularly in the lumbar region, and in the  knees. It was frequent and more severe than in the skeletons from the  mastaba cemetery. Skeletons of both men and women, particularly those  from the lower burials, show such signs of heavy labor.


People used to work harder.  Even when I was young people worked harder.  In ancient
times all over the world people worked harder.  Even the bones of many of the nobles
and dignitaries show signs of heavy labor.  I've known doctors who engage in heavy
labor AND work out at the gym.  If they had only several hundred men to assist the
Gods in building the pyramid they would have had to engage in heavy labor.  Heavy
labor does not prove that anyone ever dragged a stone up a ramp.  If you could find
me 30,000 men with evidence of heavy labor then you'd have something but this is a mere
handful and affects the women as well.  Are you suggesting the women dragged stones
up ramps too.  

This does not show that stones were dragged about.  Find an overseer of stone draggers
or archetech of ramps... ..anything at all but there is nothing.  All there is is the
endless supposition and the attempt to pound a square peg in a round hole.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#295    Swede

Swede

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,811 posts
  • Joined:30 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 21 November 2011 - 01:28 AM

View Postcladking, on 21 November 2011 - 01:16 AM, said:

If this were true then the exact same so called grammatical errors could
not appear from one pyramid to the next.  They do appear repeatedly so it
can't be true.



Great!

So where is the evidence for ramps.  



I've only found the two references.  Then there's the one Kmt_Sesh found and now
Questionmark found one.  This is well enough supported even in the absence of Pat-
rick Giles corroboration in my mind.  



The Nile was never on the plateau but  Osiris was.  



I don't know how much rain there was.  I seriously doubt anyone really knows how
much rain there was.  But I know the experts say there was more and my guts know
oryx and wildlife can't live on two inches a years even in more temperate climates
.

Re: Bolded - Right... For starters:

http://jeb.biologist...3/2301.full.pdf

http://www.enhg.org/b/b11/11_24.htm

http://www.outtoafri...bestemming_id=1

.

Edited by Swede, 21 November 2011 - 01:29 AM.


#296    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,498 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 21 November 2011 - 01:30 AM

View PostOniomancer, on 21 November 2011 - 01:21 AM, said:

...Except those animals also live today in places like the Namib desert. There are in fact still oryx and gazelle living in Egypt.

Really?!?  Where?

I'm sure you're wrong about oryx since they are extinct in the wild but I've never
heard of any fauna but reptiles and insects surviving in the deserts.

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#297    Swede

Swede

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,811 posts
  • Joined:30 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 21 November 2011 - 01:43 AM

View Postcladking, on 21 November 2011 - 01:28 AM, said:

People used to work harder.  Even when I was young people worked harder.  In ancient
times all over the world people worked harder.  Even the bones of many of the nobles
and dignitaries show signs of heavy labor.  I've known doctors who engage in heavy
labor AND work out at the gym.  If they had only several hundred men to assist the
Gods in building the pyramid they would have had to engage in heavy labor.  Heavy
labor does not prove that anyone ever dragged a stone up a ramp.  If you could find
me 30,000 men with evidence of heavy labor then you'd have something but this is a mere
handful and affects the women as well.  Are you suggesting the women dragged stones
up ramps too.  

This does not show that stones were dragged about.  Find an overseer of stone draggers
or archetech of ramps... ..anything at all but there is nothing.  All there is is the
endless supposition and the attempt to pound a square peg in a round hole.

Your initial statement was:

"There is no job indicative of heavy labor.  Prove me wrong". (ck #288). You have now been proven to be incorrect. Again.

.


#298    Oniomancer

Oniomancer

    Soulless Minion Of Orthodoxy

  • Member
  • 3,605 posts
  • Joined:20 Jul 2008
  • Gender:Male

  • Question everything

Posted 21 November 2011 - 02:03 AM

View Postcladking, on 21 November 2011 - 01:30 AM, said:

Really?!?  Where?

I'm sure you're wrong about oryx since they are extinct in the wild but I've never
heard of any fauna but reptiles and insects surviving in the deserts.
For the gazelle:

http://en.wikipedia..../Dorcas_Gazelle

http://www.almasryal.../en/node/507237

http://www.sciencedi...006320787900279

You're right about oryx being extinct there now but they're reported as living in the Sinai as recently as the 19th century.

And you really need to bone up on your desert fauna.

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Namib_Desert

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahara

http://www.fjexpedit.../florafauna.htm

Edited by Oniomancer, 21 November 2011 - 02:46 AM.

"Apparently the Lemurians drank Schlitz." - Intrepid "Real People" reporter on finding a mysterious artifact in the depths of Mount Shasta.

#299    Oniomancer

Oniomancer

    Soulless Minion Of Orthodoxy

  • Member
  • 3,605 posts
  • Joined:20 Jul 2008
  • Gender:Male

  • Question everything

Posted 21 November 2011 - 02:09 AM

BTW, cherish those words just before "about oryx". You're probably not going to see them directed at you around here again for a long, long time.

"Apparently the Lemurians drank Schlitz." - Intrepid "Real People" reporter on finding a mysterious artifact in the depths of Mount Shasta.

#300    Aus Der Box Skeptisch

Aus Der Box Skeptisch

    Unknown title error

  • Member
  • 3,233 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:arizona (originally the wisconsin/minnesota area eh!)

Posted 21 November 2011 - 02:20 AM

Deleted post.

Edited by Aus Der Box Skeptisch, 21 November 2011 - 02:25 AM.

"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."




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users