I was watching some video on youtube about how the pyramids could have been made but then i started to think about what if they were made with a concrete type mix ?

I typed in "pyramids concrete" and found this video.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=znQk_yBHre4

I am very open minded but this seems like a more logical and far more believable explanation than Aliens built them. What do you guys think ?

I am leaning towards this theory untill there is a better one.

There is always the theory that they just used stone blocks, rope, rollers, sand ramps and muscle. I've always thought that they didn't need any thing more then those tools.

well the concrete idea falls flat because the Egyptians didn't have Concrete mixers

they did have sledges



and oddly they had murals of oxen pulling pyramid blocks on sledges like this one from the Tura Stele


but pffft Aliens probably did it, they'd be far more likely to want to use limestone for inefficient structures having been stuck on a spaceship made of advanced alloys and plastic for that journey to get here from zeta reticuli

Wow I didn't know about the murals. Why dont the people making documentaries ever show these things ?

but i heard that the blocks on the pyramid was made from this type of stone that was only located miles away, and it was impossible to get stones from there to the pyramid

This seems to be the concensus among those who think for a living.

People who work for a living generally seem to think they had something more.

You don't need a concrete mixer to make concrete LOL In alot of places in history, even bricks were made by simply making blocks from mud and having them dry in the sun. It's entirely possible that ancient societies were able to make some sort of concrete mix, if they had wanted to. The Egyptians were certainly smart enough to do so! Even the pics (hieroglyphics) could be depicting cattle pulling man made bricks or pieces of concrete. They're not depicting what those blocks are or where they came from, as far as I know. But, even with all this conjecture, I find it hard to believe that the pyramid blocks could have been any form of mixed concrete since they are supposed to be solid limestone - which is a rock that was cut into blocks.

The mural of the ox pulling a sledge that small is all fine and dandy, but in comparison that is a small block. Did the ox also carry the blocks to the top of the pyramid? I would guess that that was mural found in one of the smaller pyramids. Mans ingenuity was and has been an amazing thing, never doubt that. Man did make the pyramids and this is just a small piece of th puzzle.

Think about what you just stated!!Ancient men knew how to make cement ???? How come it didn't start a street from pyramid to pyramid??

Worked in construction all my life. My back is testimony to it and my X Ray's agree. Nope, agree herartily with Die Checker. No more than hard work needed for construction.
In any case, the people that think for a living are often employed to come up with designs for construction. Probably not a big leap for them.

Anyone see the special (think it was on Foreign Correspondant, darn I wish I could remember right now) about the large number of small holes on the Southern (once again, I think) Side of the Pyramid in the ground. They correspond to all the points on the structure and show how the angles were achieved by shadows with basic engineering skills, although not all that basic at the time of construction! It also mentioned how perfect the work was, and that they believe it was not slaves who built these mighty structures as it appears to have great pride taken in all aspects, not what one would recieve from a whipped slave. It is thought the work force was employed locally.

I have heard this theory. It was theorised as a very basic limestone-sand mix. There would have been plenty limestone powder around as this is what the structure was finished in. Not proven, but plausible. The use has been around for centuries, just the composition has altered. Wherever primitive mud bricks were used, they were bedded together with a thin layer of clay slurry. Early structures were toughened and water proofed with a mix of cow dung and lime. As long as there has been structure, there has been some form of cement.

In response to the question of whether or not ancient man had concrete, it has been proven that the ancient Romans had a form of concrete. Unfortunately, however, we don't know the recipe.

Man surely made them as well. If one was to doubt that, an excellent modern example would be Coral Castle The structure comprises numerous megalithic stones (mostly coral), each weighing several tons, the entire structure built by one man. I believe the front gate weighs in at around 9 ton, yet a child can open it with one hand.

Leverage! It's a wonderful thing!

I had heard in recent years that few slaves were used. Most of the workers were believed to be farmers during the off seasons, working for their living god, the Pharaoh. Many of these people who died in the work were buried nearby in catacombs. Slaves would not have been buried in such a way.

Yeah i actually just watched something about that on youtube. Really interesting stuff

The Coral Castle link above proves that anything can be done with time and its no different to the pyramids. I would LOVE to go to Egypt one day to see these things for my self.

Egypt was totally dependent on the seasons. At certain times of the year, there was not much work to be done. And the Nile provided a huge amount of food so a relatively large population could be sustained.

When you consider basically the entire nation was concentrating on constructing one building, you can start to see how it might have been possible. A huge achievement nevertheless.

you dont need a mixer to mix concrete
and it has been used for thousands of years

It was proven on this site before that the pyramids at giza were built in two phases, the lower part was built using natural limestone blocks and the upper part was built using a concrete type mix. This was proven using samples of each tier of the pyramid being analysed by a electron microscope which found that the upper part was a different makeup of limestone, these samples contain volcanic ash and other materials. It was then proven that limestone can be ground down into a powder and mixed with water and dried out in the sun to form bricks. And when volcanic ash was added increased the strength on the brick.

Quick question: Why does the location and exact earthly grouping memic those of the stars of Orions Belt and even the pyramids of Mars?

Read a book several years ago on this subject.
I would also ask how was it possible to align the pyramids perfect to the compass when we did not have flight. Was someone from above giving directions?

Surely, it has to be more then human slaves?

I read a book about 10 years ago about sound vibrations that can lift huge amounts of weight.

Something to think about..........

I dont know but back then people had to use their brains a hell of a lot more than we do now. They didnt have all the luxeries that we do now ( computers, GPS etc.. )

Maybe they made some kind of compass who knows. As for the stars of Orions Belt, wouldnt have a clue.

I might go to the book library and read up on some of this stuff.

the great pyramids weight is estimated at 5.9 million tons, thats a hell of a lot of concrete to be making by hand
lol

the main quarry was two miles away along the course of a river and the AE had boats

the vast majority of blocks in the GP weigh less than 2 tons. thats about the same size as the block depicted being pulled by six oxen in the mural. There are murals of the AE pulling sledges containing weight in excess of 40 tonnes by hand without the oxen

it was totally disproven that was the case. If it was true you would also have to explain why the AE after finishing pouring their concrete blocks decided to put the fossils back in entirely intact

what you are claiming is that the AE quarried solid limestone blocks and then ground them up and then reconstituted them on site and then placed them in position in the pyramid. you don't think perhaps it would have been easier to just use the original limestone block that they had quarried in the first place. the concrete theory doesn't work. it is even more labour intensive than placing the actual blocks themselves. Are you claiming that the AE decided to do it the hard way. Don't you think they had enough work to do already
lol

While there have been chemical tests on the limestone comprising the blocks of the Pyramid, and these tests show microstructures comparable with an earth-cement type misture, this in itself is not proof the blocks were 'poured' rather than quarried. The analysis of the limestone is also explainable as a natural composition.

Further to the theory about the Pyramids being 'poured cement', shall we analyse why the ancient Egyptians would do this?

The 'cement Pyramids' theory was proposed as a possible means to explain how the Egyptians managed to lever very large blocks of stone up to form the pyramid, so we can eliminate the 'pouring the blocks then moving them after the set' scenario. It is just as much labour intensive to do this as to quarry the stone.

The theory proposes the blocks were poured 'in situ' i.e., on the pyramid itself. Here's why I don't think this is a viable theory.

i) The pyramid blocks are irregular and not all 'placed within a fraction of an inch of each other' (despite internet articles to the contrary). Poured blocks would be regular in shape (if not size) and in distance apart as the mould would be either reused or made from a form.

ii) The pyramid blocks are all separate from each other. So? You might ask. Pouring cement into a form would mean the blocks are separate. I agree....except on the underside of the block. Think about it. If the mould had no base the blocks above would be cemented onto the blocks underneath. They are not. If the mould had a base, well, how was it removed? Those blocks are heavy!!!

iii) The blocks are heavy and it would have taken a significant labour effort to raise them onto the pyramid. But how heavy is cement? Heavier than the stone it forms is the answer. Cement sets by losing water and water has weight, weight which must be carried up the pyramid just as a stone would be. Yes, you could carry it up in smallish amounts, but you are constrained by the time it takes for the cement to set as well as the sheer amount of extra labour all this requires. It's possible, but any engineer worth his or her salt would consider this a very inefficient method.

Simply put, it would be easier for the pyramids to be constructed of quarried stone rather than poured with cement. Less effort and it also takes less time (you don't have to wait for each level to set before starting the next).

Allien didnt built anything, we did it in the civilization prior to the actual, the one before the flood... And I do believe they were made with something similar to concrete.

I do mix concret at home and I dont have a mixer, I do it on top of the garage floor or I a Big plastic Container.. and it works very well...

ok as an experiment go to your garage right now and mix up 5.9 million tons of it forming it into blocks (not fogetting to put the fossils back in) on average 2 tons in weight, then pile them on top of each other in a pyramid shape. then let us know if that works very well too

you need to complete this task inside of 20 years

It's curious that the heights of the individual layers of
the pyramid correspond to the sunspot cycle. This is
an eleven year cycle with an overlain 88 year cycle.
There is also a strong correlation between the sunspot
cycle and rainfall in the Nile headlands.

This is all coincidence (no doubt) but there's also a
mountain in the Nile headlands which is currently car-
bonating a lake on its south side. There is a series of
aquifer basins extending far to the south but if there
were one on the north side of this mountain it would
have been tipped to the north and emptied thousands
of years ago.

Appropos of nothing in particular here's a nice picture
of natural rock;

http://www.allposters.com/gallery.asp?aid=...KEYWORD=1240865

Just because everything fits is hardly persuasive. It's
much easier to believe that stones were levitated by
alien rays or by levers.

So... my question is,
For all the lauded genius of the AE, their knowledge of Pi (yeah, fat chance) their worship of the sun, their astronomical genius, they never actually got around to discovering the wheel???
When I look at all the claims of higher intelligence, even alien assistance, I always come back to the fact that they were so dumb that the wheel was beyond their capabilities.
One day, I would love to see a hieroglyph depicting a wheel, many stone age civilisations had the wheel, but the AE, with their supposed links to Atlantis, and to higher geometry, never had an inkling! All they manage to do is pull things along on a sled.!

Sorry, but I do not kneel down and wonder at the mighty lost knowledge of the AE. They were pre-stone age with a lot of labour available. They have nothing to teach us except how to erect mighty buildings using the most inefficient means. Batteries to light their way? Please! Other knowledge? NO! they would kneel down before the humblest of todays mankind and wonder at their knowledge.

No it isn't!! There is no way of knowing if separate layers of the pyramid were laid in such-and-such a year. There is no way that we can get that resolution in dating. Where are you getting this information? What is the significance of an 88 year cycle( OK 8 X 11 = 88) what exactly is the significance of this? NOTHING! What is the significance of an 88 year cycle? beats me. These people were primitive beyond primitive, in this respect.

although I agree with a lot of what youre saying as regards them being stunned by our level of technology, you may have heard that King Tutankhamen is now believed to have died by complications received in a fall from his hunting chariot
are you claiming that this chariot ran on skis ?
this dates to around 1400bce

the advantages of not trying to use wheels in a sand environment without roads before that is not indicative of them being dumb. Most of the AE travel was done by river boat and barge and this is the method that they transported limestone from the quarries to construction site which if you check you will find are generally all along watercourses cutting down the need to drag blocks a long way. The Mesoamerican cultures did not use wheels for practical purposes either as they found that in a jungle environment the rolling noise kept the leopards awake
probably


and they weren't dumb, they would have scored just as highly on I.Q. scores as any of us. Most people I know can't generate electricity or build aeroplanes without help either

"When I look at all the claims of higher intelligence, even alien assistance, I always come back to the fact that they were so dumb that the wheel was beyond their capabilities."


Yes, we are so very smart now and they were were stupid and primitive. Building
pyramids without modern technology is a piece of cake. Sure, we don't know how
they did it but it must have been easy since there they still stand.

As smart as we are now days it's a little surporising to some of we slower people how
things get done at all. For instance most people in the aeronautic industry apparently
don't know how a wheel works. They believe a plane couldn't take off from a conveyor
belt running against it! Very few people can name the parts of a wheel!!!!!

Yes, they were dumb. Unfortunately we're just a little dumber. The difference might
be that they knew their limitations. We seem to have no concept whatsoever of ours.

I'm hardly claiming the layers of the pyramid were added in
any particular year. I'm saying that it appears the stone of
which the pyramid is comprised appears to have been lain
down in a pattern which matches the sunspot cycle; every el-
eventh layer is thicker and every eight thick layer is thicker
still. Every layer is in it's proper place except the 35th which
might have passed by three or four staged layers. This 35th
layer is a critical layer and includes critical structure in the py-
ramid.

Coincidence? Maybe, but it is a fact that there is a large inc-
rease in rainfall in the Nile drainage basin corresponding to the
sunspot cycle today. If somehow stone were deposited on the
Giza Plateau dependent on the amount of rainfall then this stone
would mimic the pyramid in its thickness.

How can stone be deposited on the plateau one might ask. If
the aquifer that is known to exist under Egypt and Sudan were
carbonated and this water reached atmospheric pressure under
the plateau it could shoot up to remarkable heights. It could
even shoot up high enough to fill large containers which could
used as counterweights to lift stone up the side of the pyramid.

Such cold water geysers are known to exist in several places.
CO2 forms carbonic acid in solution with water and is highly cor-
rosive to limestone. It would bring vast quantities of dissolved
limestone to the surface of the ground and this stone would pre-
cipitate out as the CO2 left solution. One would imagine that
this precipitate would contain shells and mimic the composition
of cement. It would form in layers of a thickness dependent on
water flow which would be determined by the sunspot cycle. The
layers would cleave easily making harvesting them a much less-
er task. Many could even be broken and reassembled in the same
position in the pyramid.

Why didn't the Egyptian pass down their knowledge building the pyramids and other amazing stuff to their children? Instead, we have to wait the modern scientists to figure them out.

Of course if I'm right there was no need to pass it down
since as the mountains rose the aquifer tipped northward
and the flow of carbonation ended.

In the pyramid texts there are endless exhortations for
Osiris to rise. This God was always depicted in white or
appeared "bubbly". His efflux is said to be stored in fiery
red jars hidden at Giza. The texts also imply that natron
was employed to encourage Osiris to stand. This is a salt
which would cause a massive eruption if thrown in carbo-
nated water.

This event lasted for many centuries and was ending as
the pyramids were build.

I agree with psche101..leverage is a wonderfull thing. Ive been working steel for 25 years. I can move massive amounts of weight with a little pry bar. leverage,Gravity,common sense and a lot of sweat can move mountains. As far as the wheel goes.....wasn't Ramseys or whatever his name was chasing the Jews into the Red Sea on wheeled chariots about the same time they built the pyramids? Maybe they just couldn't build a wooden wheel strong enough to pack 2 tons so they used sleds.
I can't see them making a strong enough concrete without some sort of aggregate mixed in to support the weight of the pyramids. The so called concrete tests they performed showed no type of aggegate other than sand. (if I remember correctly) On the other hand the Romans built things like the Colloseum using basicly the limestone/volcanic ash concrete thing. So maybe the ancient egyptions did but I doubt it. I think they just bounced ideas off of each other untill they found the quickest easiest way of doing it, then all pulled together and gang banged it. : )

this is because he was generally depicted mummified and rotten because he was lord of the dead. He has green skin for that reason, he wasn't from Vulcan
there are also depictions of him when he was alive looking very healthy

The logs used to move the blocks could be considered a type of wheel?

Have a quick look on youtube for that doco I mentioned, the OP might be kind enough to post a link if spotted again.

It is very interesting how they used shadows and stars to attain the necessary angles, and that the holes used as markers remain to this day.

The work is so good that historians believe it was not forced labour.

Sure you can pry a two ton stone up the side of the pyramid.

How in the hell can you pry 6,000,000 stones up the side without
everyone tripping over everyone else? Every time a stone falls
dozens of men would be killed.

The pyramids were ancient by the time Moses fled Egypt.

I've seen white, bubbly, green, mummified, and scaly.

I'm not familiar with who he was as a man and would be interested in any information you have along these lines.

I suspect his brother Set was Khufu when he lived among men.

...a proto-wheel perhaps. This is a single part of a true wheel.

With hundreds of men all at once and some organisation.
Check the coral castle link a couple pages back, see what one man did.

I beleieve many would indeed have been killed during the construction. China loses about 12 men a week to industrial accidents.

Even with thousands of men each man would need to lift thousands
of two ton stones by himself. If he worked with others than he'd need
to lift tens of thousands of stones.

Ummm... as far as the wheel goes....

1. No roads or real hard surfaces on the Giza Plateau. Ever tried to ride a bike or drive a car on sand? It's pretty hard, you get stuck a lot.

2. We're talking mega tons here worth of stone... that's going to take one wide wheel to support and distribute the weight evenly, especially on a very soft surface like sand/dirt/mud... using logs to roll the stones along, makes the most sense.

3. They had the wheel, they had chariots, small wagons etc...

I used to like the theory that perhaps the blocks were a type of poured cement or concrete or even like tuffa. I don't so much anymore though. Many of the stones show signs of tool marks left over from quarrying. The stones also aren't a consistent size and shape which they would be if you used a form to pour concrete/cement. What would be the purpose of making a new form for each uneven block? If they didn't use a form, what did they use? They didn't patty-cake it into place.

A cement/concrete mixture and a poured stone sounds like a viable and smart way to achieve the results, but I don't think the evidence supports that theory at all.

This is the video I watched.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=oDLjd2CZYt8

Its got 2 parts to it. i dont believe for a split second the thing about the HUGE ramp though.

Why thank you

I have not had the chance to check the Youtube video yet, when I get a chance I'll let you know if it is the one I saw, I didn't remember seeing anything about a large ramp, I thought the segment I saw was specifically on the existing holes that correspond to the geometry of the Pyramid. I am sure it was an ABC program with a specific segment. Darn my memory!

No, not that many, you may be suprised what can be accomplished with the principals of leverage





From Here . Very interesting.

As I mentioned earlier, we have a modern day version in Coral Castle. Follow THIS LINK for a very interesting account of one man building his dream with megalithic stones - each weighing several tonnes using hard work annd leverage. I believe the front gate is 9 ton. Truely a feat worth admiration.

I have trouble with the ramp as well. I have questions about the viability of that theory... I like it, it sounds plausible, but... that's a lot of wood product to build a ramp that size... was there a ton of lumber they would have had access to? How easy is it to build a ramp strong enough (without nails, screws, staples etc...) to hold many many tons of stone AND the huge number of men on the ramps? It would have had to have been strong enough to not only support the weight, but the movement of men and stone too--it would have had to have been both strong AND flexible. That would almost be an engineering feat as great as the pyramid itself, unless there's something I don't understand.

Nah this is just a small segment and the shadows were mentioned. I would like to find the video you watched though sounds good.

One last try.

There are 6,000,000 stones in this pyramid. If hundreds of men built it then you do the math.

What would you call the circular things that egyptian chariots rolled arround on?