A spherical shaped building involves different and very complex engineering principls. Load ratios and stress points are very different and difficult to establish accurately. The ancient egyptians had not developed the dome or arch and a spherical shaped building has no advantage over a tetrahedron. A tetrahedron has sloping sides like a dam and modern sea defence walls. The sloping works to reduce the pressure of water against the sides.
Even with cutting edge computer aided design WE still get it wrong when building arches and spherical shaped buildings. - read this:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3739715.stm
But what would have been the point anyway when a tetrahedron is far more resistant both to flood and seismic events?

really? then read this from: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/news/99/11/flood.html

Scientists have retrieved sonar images of an ancient coastline 550 feet below the surface of the Black Sea that are strong evidence that a sudden violent flood destroyed a fresh water oasis and inspired the story of Noah's Ark, a theory advanced by two oceanographers at Columbia.



Explorer Robert Ballard, who found the remains of the Titanic, led a research team this summer that discovered the ancient beach dated 7,500 years ago. That date supports the ideas of Walter Pitman and Bill Ryan, senior scientists at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, who believe that a flood 7,500 years ago forced the diaspora of an advanced civilization. Their research has generated new discussions about the role climate change has played in human history.

The story behind their discovery is recounted in "Noah's Flood: The New Scientific Discoveries About the Event That Changed History," which was published in 1999. The book sparked new archeological interest in the Black Sea, and inspired Ballard to look for further evidence to support their theories.

Ryan and Pitman believe that the sealed Bosporus strait, which acted as a dam between the Mediterranean and Black seas, collapsed when climatic warming at the close of the last glacial period and caused icecaps to melt, raising global sea level. With more than 200 times the force of Niagara falls, the flood caused water levels in the Black Sea, which was no more than a large lake, to rise six inches per day and swallowed 60,000 square miles in less than a year. As the Mediterranean salt water replaced fresh water, it caused a wave of human migration from what had been an oasis of fresh water within very arid lands--an exodus traumatic enough to be recorded in human memory as the epic of Gilgamesh and the biblical story of Noah's Ark, the scientists said.

"Our research is causing a re-look at the role climate plays in human history," said Ryan. "Before our work, archaeologists were focused more on studying ancient peoples' behavior based on the tools found in digs, not the bigger picture of climate change. Right now we have a working hypothesis that answers all the evidence, and we have set the stage for a good dialogue."

The scientists base much of their findings on a 1993 expedition to the Black Sea with the Russian Academy of Sciences. Though sediment cores had previously been taken from the middle of the Black Sea, the 1993 trip was the first post-Iron Curtain cruise, and the first time shoreline research was open to the West.

Using cutting-edge sonar equipment to map the ancient shoreline, Ryan and Pitman found that the shores had been at least 140 meters lower than the present shoreline. They also found a single, uniform layer of mud that strongly indicated a flood. When the sediment core samples were brought to the surface, Candace Major, a student intern for the cruise who is now a graduate student at Lamont, discovered sun-bleached freshwater mollusks, fossilized plant roots and cracks in the buried mud indicating that it had once been dried out and windswept.

"We came back with the goods," said Pitman.

While the scientists waited for the mollusk shell carbon-14 dates from an accelerated mass spectrometer--a machine with the highest accuracy available--they knew that those dates would be the ultimate test. If the sea had grown slowly for more than a thousand years, so would the population of the mollusks. But if a flood had occurred, all the mollusks would be approximately the same age.

In February 1994, the results came in. There was only a 40 year difference between the mollusks in the deepest layers and the ones in the shallowest. The date was 5,600 B.C.-- within the era of modern human history.

"Statistically, the dates were the same. It was pretty persuasive," said Pitman.

So with the scientific story in place, Ryan and Pitman began looking at other aspects of the story. They consulted with archeologists, anthropologists, linguists and seed geneticists. From this research, their hypothesis took shape: the Black Sea was an oasis where people from surrounding areas migrated during a cold, arid period beginning in 6,200 B.C. and exchanged languages, ideas and farming. When the Bosporus dam broke and the valley was deluged, the scientists believe, the peoples migrated to higher lands, taking the farming and cultural adaptations with them. The memory of the flood continued in an oral tradition for three thousand years until written languages emerged, and the tale remains in the epic of Gilgamesh and the biblical story of Noah.

"Whether or not it is true that the myths are based in the flood we discovered, the book is shaping an agenda in archeological circles," said Ryan.

Previous to Ryan and Pitman's research, the Black Sea was not a place many archeologists believed held much human history. Now, archeologists are wondering if climate change might have been the piece missing from the early human history of the region.

"This is just what we wanted to happen," said Ryan. "We wanted our research to drive the mission to have people explore the region and to look at global climate change as an important factor."

Published: Nov 19, 1999
Last modified: Sep 18, 2002



and you said "they share a flood legend....details tend to differ greatly...."
well lets take a look at the differences:

epic of Gilgamesh story that tells of a hero who escaped a worldwide flood with many parallels to the Genesis story.
The Koran, in Sura 7, tells of Allah sending "Noah unto his people... I fear for you for the retribution of an awful day...We saved him and those with him in the ship, and we drowned those who denied our token."
The Popul Vuh, the holy book of the Quiche Maya, tells of a great flood through which the Mayan ancestors came to the western hemisphere.
The ancient Egyptians had a legend that the gods had purified the earth by a great flood. Only a few shepherds escaped. In another legend, Surid, a pre-dynastic king was warned of a flood in a dream. He built the two greatest of the Pyramids, recording the secret sciences, the positions of the stars, and all that was known of arithmetic and geometry on their walls. Curiously, the outer casings of the pyramids were removed long ago, and the queen's chamber of Khufu's pyramid shows a curious high water mark inside.
In Greek tradition, Deucalion and his wife Pyrrha were warned that the gods would bring a great flood. They built a great boat and escaped with their family. The boat rested on Mt. Parnassus. He sent out a dove twice. They flung stones over their heads which became new men and women.
Old Persian traditions speak of a hero named Yima who carefully screened a thousand couples in good health and of good habits to share his three story deep "vara" or bunker lined with clay and equipped with underground streets while fires, floods, and earthquakes ravaged the earth.
The great flood in Welsh epics, was known as The Third Catastrophe of Briton. The survivors were Dyfwan and Dyfwach.
The Icelandic Edda speaks of heaven splitting in two, and the sun and the stars disappearing as the earth sinks into the sea and massive fires rage.
In Chinese tradition, Fa-He, the founder of Chinese civilization, escaped a great flood when man rebelled against heaven. His wife and three sons and three daughters escaped with him.
The Druids of England had a legend of a righteous patriarch whose descendants repopulated the earth after it was destroyed in a great flood.
Polynesians have flood legends from which there were eight survivors.
Mexicans record that one man and his family were saved in a ship when the earth was destroyed by a flood.
In Peruvian legend, many years before the Incas, one man and one woman escaped in a box that floated in the flood waters. In another legend six people survived on a float.
The Mechoachans believed that a single family escaped a flood with sufficient animals to replenish the new world.
In Cuba there persists a legend about an old man who escaped a flood in a great ship.
In Tahiti, The supreme God became very angry and dragged the earth through the sea, but their island broke off and was saved.
In Persian legend, Ahiran the evil one corrupted the world and it was destroyed by raindrops the size of a bulls head.
In the Scandinavian Edda, the oceans of the earth are the blood of the great giant Ymir who was slain by the early gods. All were drowned except a man and woman who escaped in a bark.
In the legends of the Brazilians there are accounts of a worldwide flood.
American Indians have various legends in which 1, 3, or 8 people were saved from a flood in a boat on a high mountain.
The Book of the Hopi by Frank Waters and White Bear, tells of great cities and civilizations that ended because "when the people had what they wanted, they wanted more still and wars began." finally cities were destroyed by a weapon called patuwvotas (possibly some kind of bomb) in wars that culminated when the lands and the sea changed places destroying everything.
A similar story occurs in the Hindu Mahabarata, with a chilling and vivid account of ancient war between the gods. A dreadful bomb called the Thunderbolt of Death or the Iron Thunderbolt exploded with the brightness of ten thousand suns killing thousands of the enemy with billowing death clouds, spreading upward and opening like giant parasols, sucking upward into its center soldiers, chariots, horses, and elephants. It left burned, unrecognizable corpses in its wake. Survivors were horribly burned and disfigured. Their hair and nails fell out and their skin decayed away. Food was contaminated and the people needed to wash themselves in a flowing stream. Later, it tells of Manu, who alone built a ship and escaped a great flood, landing on Mt. Hivamet in northern India.
And in another legend, an evil demon stole the sacred books from Brahma and corrupted the whole land except seven Nishis and Satyavrata, who were visited by the god Vishnu and who warned them to escape a coming flood in a miraculous vessel.
A legend from Greenland says the earth once tilted over. All were drowned except a man and a woman who repeopled the earth.
Among the Tamanacs & Maypures and the Indians of Rio Erevato in South America are legends of the "age of water" when a man and a woman saved themselves on a mountain called Tamanacu on the banks of the Asiveru River. They cast fruits from a palm tree that became the men and women who repeopled the earth.

let me know if you want more....

There is evidence suggesting that the Black Sea flooded following a collapse of the Bosphorus Dam c7600 years ago. However, you should know that there is also evidence suggesting that the Black Sea was already linked to the Med at that time and that no such catastrophic flood took place.....(see Aksu etal 2002). Also, it has been suggested that the Altai Flood may have previous swept through the Bl;ack Sea and into the Med.

In short, there's still much research to be done before any definite conclusions can be drawn.

And in any case no one is disputing that post ice sea levels rose substantially in the Med. Just not to the level you're suggesting (although I believe there is some - again disputed - evidence that levels may have risen sufficently to flood much of the current Nile Delta).

Oh and don't forget that the Med is one of the most seismically active regions on Earth. There are many ruins now beneath the sea - and coastal settlement now hundreds of feet above the sea - simply as a result of tectonic movements. For this reason alone sea level changes are not easy to quantify in the region.

From TalkOrigins ...

FLOOD GEOLOGY

5. The Flood Itself

Where did the Flood water come from, and where did it go? Several people have proposed answers to these questions, but none which consider all the implications of their models. A few of the commonly cited models are addressed below.

Vapor canopy. This model, proposed by Whitcomb & Morris and others, proposes that much of the Flood water was suspended overhead until the 40 days of rain which caused the Flood. The following objections are covered in more detail by Brown.

How was the water suspended, and what caused it to fall all at once when it did?

If a canopy holding the equivalent to more than 40 feet of water were part of the atmosphere, it would raise the atmospheric pressure accordingly, raising oxygen and nitrogen levels to toxic levels.

If the canopy began as vapor, any water from it would be superheated. This scenario essentially starts with most of the Flood waters boiled off. Noah and company would be poached. If the water began as ice in orbit, the gravitational potential energy would likewise raise the temperature past boiling.

A canopy of any significant thickness would have blocked a great deal of light, lowering the temperature of the earth greatly before the Flood.

Any water above the ozone layer would not be shielded from ultraviolet light, and the light would break apart the water molecules.

Hydroplate. Walt Brown's model proposes that the Flood waters came from a layer of water about ten miles underground, which was released by a catastrophic rupture of the earth's crust, shot above the atmosphere, and fell as rain.

How was the water contained? Rock, at least the rock which makes up the earth's crust, doesn't float. The water would have been forced to the surface long before Noah's time, or Adam's time for that matter.

Even a mile deep, the earth is boiling hot, and thus the reservoir of water would be superheated. Further heat would be added by the energy of the water falling from above the atmosphere. As with the vapor canopy model, Noah would have been poached.

Where is the evidence? The escaping waters would have eroded the sides of the fissures, producing poorly sorted basaltic erosional deposits. These would be concentrated mainly near the fissures, but some would be shot thousands of miles along with the water. (Noah would have had to worry about falling rocks along with the rain.) Such deposits would be quite noticeable but have never been seen.

Comet. Kent Hovind proposed that the Flood water came from a comet which broke up and fell on the earth. Again, this has the problem of the heat from the gravitational potential energy. The water would be steam by the time it reached the surface of the earth.

Runaway subduction. John Baumgardner created the runaway subduction model, which proposes that the pre-Flood lithosphere (ocean floor), being denser than the underlying mantle, began sinking. The heat released in the process decreased the viscosity of the mantle, so the process accelerated catastrophically. All the original lithosphere became subducted; the rising magma which replaced it raised the ocean floor, causing sea levels to rise and boiling off enough of the ocean to cause 150 days of rain. When it cooled, the ocean floor lowered again, and the Flood waters receded. Sedimentary mountains such as the Sierras and Andes rose after the Flood by isostatic rebound. [Baumgardner, 1990a; Austin et al., 1994]

The main difficulty of this theory is that it admittedly doesn't work without miracles. [Baumgardner, 1990a, 1990b] The thermal diffusivity of the earth, for example, would have to increase 10,000 fold to get the subduction rates proposed [Matsumura, 1997], and miracles are also necessary to cool the new ocean floor and to raise sedimentary mountains in months rather than in the millions of years it would ordinarily take.

Baumgardner estimates a release of 1028 joules from the subduction process. This is more than enough to boil off all the oceans. In addition, Baumgardner postulates that the mantle was much hotter before the Flood (giving it greater viscosity); that heat would have to go somewhere, too.

Cenozoic sediments are post-Flood according to this model. Yet fossils from Cenozoic sediments alone show a 65-million-year record of evolution, including a great deal of the diversification of mammals and angiosperms. [Carroll, 1997, chpts. 5, 6, & 13]
Subduction on the scale Baumgardner proposes would have produced very much more vulcanism around plate boundaries than we see. [Matsumura, 1997]

New ocean basins. Most flood models (including those above, possibly excepting Hovind's) deal with the water after the flood by proposing that it became our present oceans. The earth's terrain, according to this model, was much, much flatter during the Flood, and through cataclysms, the mountains were pushed up and the ocean basins lowered. (Brown proposes that the cataclysms were caused by the crust sliding around on a cushion of water; Whitcomb & Morris don't give a cause.)

How could such a change be effected? To change the density and/or temperature of at least a quarter of the earth's crust fast enough to raise and lower the ocean floor in a matter of months would require mechanisms beyond any proposed in any of the flood models.

Why are most sediments on high ground? Most sediments are carried until the water slows down or stops. If the water stopped in the oceans, we should expect more sediments there. Baumgardner's own modeling shows that, during the Flood, currents would be faster over continents than over ocean basins [Baumgardner, 1994], so sediments should, on the whole, be removed from continents and deposited in ocean basins. Yet sediments on the ocean basin average 0.6 km thick, while on continents (including continental shelves), they average 2.6 km thick. [Poldervaart, 1955]

Where's the evidence? The water draining from the continents would have produced tremendous torrents. There is evidence of similar flooding in the Scablands of Washington state (from the draining of a lake after the breaking of an ice dam) and on the far western floor of the Mediterranean Sea (from the ocean breaking through the Straits of Gibralter). Why is such evidence not found worldwide?

How did the ark survive the process? Such a wholesale restructuring of the earth's topography, compressed into just a few months, would have produced tsunamis large enough to circle the earth. The aftershocks alone would have been devastating for years afterwards.

10. Historical Aspects

Why is there no mention of the Flood in the records of Egyptian or Mesopotamian civilizations which existed at the time? Biblical dates (I Kings 6:1, Gal 3:17, various generation lengths given in Genesis) place the Flood 1300 years before Solomon began the first temple. We can construct reliable chronologies for near Eastern history, particularly for Egypt, from many kinds of records from the literate cultures in the near East. These records are independent of, but supported by, dating methods such as dendrochronology and carbon-14. The building of the first temple can be dated to 950 B.C. +/- some small delta, placing the Flood around 2250 B.C. Unfortunately, the Egyptians (among others) have written records dating well back before 2250 B.C. (the Great Pyramid, for example dates to the 26th century B.C., 300 years before the Biblical date for the Flood). No sign in Egyptian inscriptions of this global flood around 2250 B.C.

*Rest here
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

*Flood Geology
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-flood.html

Sean

That is interesting Sean.

Although I don't know much of natural disasters and such, I do know that one thing remains constant- the Earth revovles around the sun and the moon around the Earth. The thing is if the Earth remains alive in all of these acts of Nature and suppose the human race ended - the Earth would just rebuild itself- Perhaps this was one of the best creations that God made. The Earth does not have what we say Free will- only natural responses to what is happening around us.

The Earth's ozone layer thins- causing an eventual Global warming- What then happens - we as a species adapts to the surroundings and so does the Earth.

Perhaps the world evolved after the animals died from the flood. Those microorganisms that were able to live off no sunlight?

Just a thought.

It is the most structurally secure, as a perfect sphere mabey.

But for sea worthy vessels, the purpose being to stay afloat, the box design is best!

It has been proved that an ark with a box design can flip completley upside down, and then right itself up again on its own, based on the box design!

Did you notice that half of those came from the same region (Near East, Mediterranean, even Europe)? These things tend to travel around a bit, as you can see from the Hebrew Flood Myth's blatant borrowing of detail from the Epic of Gilgamesh.

You also, again, failed to answer my criticism, which is why, since there seem to be flood legends worldwide, there must have been a worldwide flood? Floods are ubiquitous, and happen worldwide, [particularly, as I noted earlier, in the areas where most of the ancient civilizations appeared (next to large rivers that flooded frequently), or where the people live near the sea. That's not mentioning the fact that water, as a source of life to an agricultural people, picked up great religious significance, and was therefore seen as a source of death and rebirth.

As for your Black Sea point, I wasn't saying that the Black Sea flood didn't happen; I was saying that I was skeptical of it being the source of flood myths, although it is certainly possible.

I have never claimed that there was a worldwide flood. I posed a simple question: did the ancient egyptians build their pyramids to survive flood . The cataclysmic events that took place in the period 8,000 to 800bce in the mediterranean region which included the eruption of Santorini and numerous other volcanos in that region plus countless earthquakes took place within the time the ancient egyptians lived.

However, the worldwide flood legend is particularly interesting to me because the only way it could have happened would have been thru earth crust displacement brought on by shrinkage or collapse of the earths mantle. An even that may take place regularly.

it is actually believed that prior to the collapse of the dam seperating the black sea from the mediterranean the black sea was in fact a fresh water lake.

err...you forgot about centre of gravity

Your topic title is quite poorly chosen then. The Flood?



What does it take to prove to you that the pyramids were just built that way because it was easiest? Poster after poster in both threads has argued completely reasonably and convincingly that the pyramids can not have been built to survive a flood, because there is simply no real evidence to prove it.

"what does it take to prove to you that the pyramids were built that way because it was easiest"
easiest? lol deary, no. Please read this before you reach any more earth shattering conclusions sweety:

Pyramid Construction Theory
Article by Daniel Gerardo
The pyramids, a monument of human strength and intelligence, have caused awe and curiosity among men at all times. Cheops's Pyramid - also called the Great Pyramid -, which was raised on the Gizeh plateau during the ancient Egyptian Empire, is the masterpiece of builders. The construction techniques applied for carrying out this work and the explanation of the reasons for its unique inner layout are both vast and debatable matters.

In this article I shall refer to two issues which have attracted the attention of archaeologists from Borchardt's time to our days:

a) the method used for lifting the blocks of stone;
the purpose of the Grand Gallery.

Traditionally, the two questions have been analysed separately without ever gathering enough evidence in either case. I shall briefly outline the existing scientific views on each one of them and will then formulate a different approach whose uniqueness lies in the fact that the two are assumed to be related.

The Purpose of the Grand Gallery
Flinders Petrie was the first archaeologist to express the opinion that the Grand Gallery had been used for storing the three granite blocks blocking the upward corridor - where they had been placed after the Pharao´s funeral (see Fig. 1).

Borchardt shares this idea, yet he points out that it can explain neither the slots carved in the lower part of the third row of stones on the side-walls of the gallery, nor the blocks mounted on each one of the twenty-eight holes carved in the wall benches at regular intervals (see Fig. 2). He also believes that the blocks of stone on the floor of the gallery might have hindered the funeral procession, and postulates that they were placed on a wooden platform mounted on the side-wall slots which was supported by logs embedded in the bench holes. He completes his hypothesis with the theory of the successive stages of the construction, based on the assumption that during the building process three changes were made in the layout plan. This might cast a new light on the existence of three chambers in the pyramid. According to Lauer, the second layout plan provided that the intermediate chamber would act as a chapelle ardente while the gallery would be built as a dead-end hall for storing the large granite blockswhich would obstruct the whole upward corridor. In the end, this idea might have been discarded by the builders. The upper- and antechambers were furnished with a built-in blocking system which provided sufficient safety for the upper storey, so the builders may have deemed it unnecessary to obstruct the whole upward corridor and thus limited the number of blocks to three. The remaining granite stones were used for building the upper chamber. They mounted a scaffolding akin to the one formulated by Borchardt - and consistent with the various details found in the gallery - in order to raise the blocks of stone to the upper chamber.

Techniques for Lifting the Stone Blocks
The average weight of the blocks of stone in Cheops's Pyramid amounts to 2,500 kilogrammes - except for the huge slabs on the 68-metre-high roof of the granite chamber and its outlet rooms, near the centre of the building. There was but one way in which ancient Egypcians could lift those enormous slabs: the use of the straight ramp made of bricks and earth. Considering that vestiges of ramps were found during archaeological explorations, the straight ramp theory formulated by Borchardt and completed by Lauer was unanimously accepted at that time. However, the use of a straight sloping path proves extremely laborious when it comes to reaching heights like those in this pyramid, as the volume of the material on the ramp could only be compared with that of the pyramid itself.

The use of a spiral ramp might have helped overcome this difficulty. Even though no archaeological evidence has confirmed it, the spiral ramp theory has been widely accepted among scientific circles.

J.F. Lauer, an archaeologist who has greatly helped elucidate this issue, suggested a variant to his straight ramp model. He postulates that ramps of increasing steepness were placed one on top of the other, taking into account both the gradual average-height decrease in the courses as they approached the peak, and the fact that the huge stone slabs are not found above the height of 68 metres in this pyramid. Furthermore, superimposed ramps make it possible to limit their length from the foot of the pyramid to 300 metres. The great advantage of this system is that the ramps in the lower levels of the pyramid are extremely wide, providing vast building surfaces. Their width decreases slightly as each new row of stones is placed. The outer path, on the other hand, lengthens towards the south and towards the north, where a system of large counterbalance baskets filled with sand, descending along the face of the building, may have helped lift the heavier blocks of stone.

A Different Proposal
It is clear that one of the objectives of pyramid builders was to increase the height of their constructions. In the case of Cheops's Pyramid they achieved the maximum height of 147 metres - surpassing by far that of the proceeding South Pyramid (103 metres) and North Pyramid (92 metres) of the Dahshur Group. This remarkable increase in height entailed growing difficulties. Builders had to solve a number of structural problems which were apparent both in Meidum and in the South Pyramid, and they also had to confront ever-increasing difficulty when raising the blocks of stone to much higher positions.

Most probably, as construction evolved the block-lifting techniques also varied. Thus, the difficulties that the old construction methods entailed could finally be overcome. Coinciding with the unprecedented height of Cheops's Pyramid there is also an unprecedented feature in its inner layout: the Grand Gallery.

Let us consider that both phenomena are connected, that is to say, that the remarkable increment in height has been achieved by applying a block-lifting method which calls for the existence of an inner ramp with the characteristics of the Grand Gallery.

In order to clarify my thesis, I shall adopt the hypothesis that the gallery was used as an inner ramp whereon a counterweight would slide (see Fig. 3). To illustrate the practical application of the method I am postulating, let us imagine that the pyramid has been built up to the height of 100 metres; its upper surface is a square platform where the next row of blocks is about to be placed. Inside the building, the sloping gallery is divided by a wooden platform mounted on the existing slots along the third tapering of the side-walls. Under this platform a counterweight container filled with small stones is sliding along the wooden rails fixed to the benches. The holes at regular intervals make it possible to fit the logs to the benches by means of wooden pegs, while the blocks embedded in the walls, acting as bumpers, halt the counterbalances at intermediate positions.

A vertical conduit connects the south wall of the gallery with the upper surface of the building. The effect resulting from the counterweights sliding movement is transferred by means of ropes and lubricated props thus helping lift the blocks of stone outside. By the time a block has been lifted, the counterweight reaches the end of its run, next to the north wall of the gallery, where it is unloaded. A group of men standing on the platform in the gallery raise the unloaded counterweight back to its initial position in the upper part of the gallery by means of ropes. Once the counterbalance has been loaded again, another block of stone can be lifted. As we can see, the apparently inexplicable details and features in the gallery can now be explained in the light of the roles they have been assigned. The greatest virtue of this new way of visualising this Question is that it is susceptible of proof. As a matter of fact, in order to describe the method I am postulating I assumed that there existed a vertical conduit connecting the south wall of the gallery with the building platform, and that this conduit made it possible to transfer the kinetic energy generated during the sliding movement of the counter-balance to the building platform outside. Let us now imagine that the construction of the pyramid - including the surfacing - has been completed.

The next task to be performed is the obstruction of the vertical conduit. If we assume that this conduit did exist and that it was obstructed by means of small blocks, evidence of this should necessarily be found in the upper lock of the building. Fig. 4 shows a drawing of the upper lock made by E.W.Laner a professional draftsman, in his work "Exhaustive Description of Egypt" (British Museum, add. MS. 34,083, f.24) -first published in C.W. Ceram´s book "In Search of the Past". Three small blocks of stone placed one next to the other can be seen on the east face of the building, near the centre of the platform (see arrow).

I shall point out two facts that can prove the existence of the aforementioned obstruction. In the first place, the size of these three blocks differs from that of the rest of the stones in the platform. Secondly, the stones which still remain from the previous course are placed along the edge of those small blocks and do not form the lock, as one would suppose they should. This detail, which will be analysed in due course, makes it possible to prove in one way or another the alternative theories I have formulated.

The Chephren Pyramid was built right after Cheops's Pyramid and is slightly lower in height; it is logical to deduce that its inner layout should be similar to the one we have just analysed, as suggested by different archaeologists. In short, the use of an inner counterweight during the construction may have helped lift the blocks of stone to unprecedented heights, thus supplementing the existing building methods. Furtbermore, it makes it possible to explain both the use and the unique characteristics,of the Grand Gallery.

Copyright by Daniel Gerardo
All Rights Reserved
danielgerardo@hotmail.com

"they chose the easiest way to build them" lollololol.....we still cant figure out exactly how they built them even today!!!!!

And for which there is no proof. Incidently, the collapse of a large segment of the Earth's crust towards the center of the Earth would release a ton of gravitational potential energy; almost certainly enough to boil a large chunk of the oceans off, or at least generate some superhot steam.

You are a very annoying person, fantazum. As you can see by the above quote, I never said the pyramids were easy to build. What I said, or rather inferred, was that they were easiest to build when compared to other possibilites for the shape of a monument, more specifically, easiest to build for the ancient Egyptians, with their limited technology. Could they have built a dome as easily? No. Cube? No. Even my proposed tetrahedron could potentially be more difficult to build than a pyramid. I defy you to tell me of a way the Egyptians could have achieved something the size of the pyramids using any other structure shape.

As I've said before, the pyramid is a very simplistic design. If you pile up enough rocks, you'll end up with something roughly similar to a pyramid. The Egyptians just put some planning into where they dropped the rocks, that's all.

yes you are correct a mantle collapse would creat vast amounts of energy released in the form of volcanic action. A growing number of scientists suspect that this event may have happened regularly since the creation of the earth .
The earth was originally (it is believed) composed of gas that gradually became compressed into solid matter. It is suspected that this process of compression is still occurring, not as an ongoing process but as a cataclysmic event.
The theory claims that this compression takes the form of a sudden collapse of the mantle resulting in cataclysmic volcanic action from tectonic friction and explosive release of magma from deep within the mantle. Crust displacement causes continental drift and crust folding and temporary instability of the gravitational field causing either an increase in the gravitational effect or a reduction.
If this event really does take place then we may be able to provide an answer as to why there have been 5 mass extinctions since the Cambrian period , what caused the evolution of such gigantic creatures as the Jurassic Saurapods, why they suddenly disappeared and finally....why there is such a disproportionate amount of water on the earth's surface.

"I defy you to tell me of a way the Egyptians could have achieved something the size of the pyramids using any other structure shape."

hmm thats an easy one to answer. Why didnt they just build a small pyramid and put it on top of a mountain. Easy peasy.

theres an Incan or Mayan pyramid much larger than the great pyramid, many thought it was quite literaly a mountain with a little pyramid on top due to the amount of soil and vegation that was around it, then they realised the mountain was actually the pyramid. How they built that may help add a little to the construction to the pyramid at Giza, maybe, maybe not. If u know what im talking ok, if no ill look for tis exact place etc.

I jumped to no conclusion and you cannot show me part of any post I've written to support that. What I object to is your deriding people because of their participation in other threads. You and I may not find other topics of interest but neither of us have the right to criticize others for their interests. I think I speak for all when I ask you to tone down your objections and address people with respect.

yes I know of the pyramid of which you speak. it is truly gigantic. did you know that some archeologists now believe that the pyramid complex at Teotihuacan was actually constructed within a water flooded enclosed series of walls and dams?
we do know of course that the Aztecs never built it. That the complex predates the Aztecs by many centuries.

That's not the same thing. Don't be stupid.

Interesting. I've never even heard of the theory! Do you have any references?

if the mantle basicaly slips underneath an area of lava beneath the surface, that lava gets pushed up with an extreme amount of force, very nasty.

here is an excellent introduction to the the theory of catastrophism and vulcanism:

http://www.pibburns.com/catastro/tercatas.htm

and here is a good site for the Deccan Traps. Here you will see real evidence of the extent of volcanic action the earth experienced regularly in the distant past:

http://atropos.as.arizona.edu/aiz/teaching...4/lecture6.html

Which scientists, and where's the proof that this mantle collapse causes bursts of increased volcanic activity? A link would be helpful.



The 'compression-formation' theory is actually used to explain the formation of gas giants, not terrestrial planets like Earth, which coalesced out of a cloud of matter from clunks of matter that eventually became large enough to draw other clumps of matter, and increase in size. But the Earth has essentially remained around the same size for nearly 4 billion years, so what is your mechanism for sudden compression of the mantle?



What causes the mantle to 'suddenly collapse'? That mass doesn't just disappear, and claiming that it comes out en masse from the volcanoes is disingenous, since the amount of magma that would need to come out volcanically in order to noticeably decrease the mantle in size (especially when it is continuously being fed basaltic crust material at the subduction trenches) would be one of those events that essentially wipes life on Earth.

By the way, what does 'tectonic friction' have to do with it? There is great volcanic activity at the edges between continental plates, but that is simply because the crust is thinnest at that point in the subduction areas, and ocean crust is being formed from basaltic, volcanic materials at the opposite end (I can't remember what they are called; induction trenches?).

As for the actual driver of Continental drift, although the actual mechanism is not completely understood, it seems to be either gravity (i.e., the plates flow 'downhill' from the mid-ocean ridges), or friction (convection currents in the mantle). I would suggest that you look at the Wikipedia article on it.



Although, overall, the Mesozoic period was warmer than it is now, there was a significant amount of climactic change in that period, with continental drift as one of the major factors.
The sauropods were not exactly the most versatile herbivores either. The end-of-dinosaurs extinction is easy enough to explain, since they found the impact crater in the Yucatan peninsula of Mexico.

As for the disproportionate amount of water on the Earth's surface, most of that stems from very early in that planet's history, as a combination of vapors being emitted by the heavy volcanic activity characterizing the period, and the impact of frozen bodies of water from space. It is generally maintained, at least on a small level, by volcanic activity.

this what you said in your previous post:
"And for which there is no proof. Incidently, the collapse of a large segment of the Earth's crust towards the center of the Earth would release a ton of gravitational potential energy; almost certainly enough to boil a large chunk of the oceans off, or at least generate some superhot steam."

Now in what form would that sudden release of energy express itself?

plate tectonics and volcanism: http://jrscience.wcp.muohio.edu/FieldCours...ndvolcanis.html

Yes. There are dozens of flood basalt provinces around the world. The Siberian Traps have been linked with the PT extinction c250MY and many scientosts believe that the Deccan Traps may ahve been a contributory factor in the extinction of the Dinosaurs c65MY. However other flood basalt eruptions have occurred without any extinctions taking place, leading to the general belief that a combination of factors are needed (likewise a meteorite impact on it's own does not lead to mass extinctions)

That's an interesting point. The Egyptians WERE maticulous record-keepers, recording everything from births and deaths to how much crop was grown in any given year. Yet not one record exists of the building of the Great Pyramid. The Egyptians did not build it, I believe. It was already there when they arrived.

Also, how would any civilization have know the ENTIRE WORLD was flooded?

Hi, I am new and already am enjoying the discussion, you all raise very good points.

you actually raise an interesting question there, why is there a legend of a worldwide flood?
A flood the extent of which would cover the entire surface of the earth is very unlikely but of course when we think of the world we think of it in its entirety. The people who lived in the near east or south and north america or china or africa 2 millennia ago would not have thought of the world in such a context as they didnt know the extent or size of the earth. They witnessed a flood that covered the land to the horizon and assumed that it was a flood that covered the world. Well it did, it covered that part of the world they knew and understood.
So could people in all parts of the earth have experienced a cataclysmic flood worthy of recording within their history?
The question we need answering now is when these people experienced this flood.
The ancient egyptians did keep meticulous records but unfortunately most of those records both written on papyrus and stone , have been stolen by europeans since the early 19th century and either destroyed or removed from the public eye into private collections.
It is known that thousands of papyrus scrolls were destroyed after being shipped to europe and of course the vast collection of papyrus scrolls at the alexandria library were destroyed by fire.

also the point that the used to be one super massive continent Pangea, only one peice of land, when that breaks apart[though yes this is a fantasticly long time ago] they just ahppen to have remembered that, chaos and fire from the skies and floods and so on, they dont just mention flood water u know. Obviously they recorded some kind of global catastroph

so many questions so little time.....

1/. there are contrasting theories re the formation of the earth but the truth is, we dont really know. the nebula gas/dust theory is about the best we can do at the moment. It is certainly unlikely that the earth was formed from large rocks spinning thru space.

2/ the earth could not possibly have remained the same size for 4.5 billion years.it wouild have gone thru a long period of stabilisation and settling which would have caused changes in its density shape and mass.Plus the fact that no scientist can prove the real age of the earth.

3/ silicon within the mantle is consumed by the core. water within the mantle is ejected by volcanic action.This process would definitely cause a weakness within the mantle.

4/ the weakness within the mantle created by the movement of silicon to the core and water to the surface could cause structural changes .

5/ there have been at least 5 extinction events during the earth's evolution.
these events take place with oddly regular intervals between them. So it is more likely that these events have been seismic rather than cosmic.

6/ mass in the form of vaporised solid material could be ejected thru volcanic action and expended into space. A seismic event of such cataclysmic size would cause mass extinctions.

7/ when two continental plates collide and rub aganist each other immense heat is created thru friction and a magma pocket is created. Volcanic action created thru tectonic plate action has nothing to do with the thickness of the crust at that particular spot.

8/the dinosaurs were earth's most successful species and they evolved over a period of 150 million years. The larger sauropods attained almost unimaginable sizes and one must question their ability to support their own weight under present gravitational conditions.

9/ the reason for the extinction of the dinosaurs has not been found. There are numerous theories.

10/ as you said, massive volcanic action releases water. Water that has arisen from deep within the mantle. the loss of that water from within the mantle to the surface could create structural stress within the mantle and compression on the surface.

"The larger sauropods attained almost unimaginable sizes and one must question their ability to support their own weight under present gravitational conditions."

the distance of the moon maybe prevelant to the effect of gravity upon the earth and its ability to sustain such enormous creatures.

"It is certainly unlikely that the earth was formed from large rocks spinning thru space."

your theory?, as Egyptians had an interesting habbit of banging on about how we came from the orion nebula, how they coincidently knew that this is one of the most active stellar nurserys in our region of space is very peculiar.

Uh, that's what he was describing. I don't understand the point of your link, unless you thought he was saying the Pyramids are a tetrahedron, which he wasn't.

Man, get off your high horse and stop trying to make others look stupid, because it just came back to bite you in the ass right there.

Haha, classc

I'm with you on this one angrycrustacean!!

Fan, the Pyramids are NOT tetrahedrons. Tetrahedron, triangle base, pyramid, square base. The Egyptian PYRAMIDS, obviously have a square base.

You're kidding me right? Are you suggesting that it would be easier to haul the huge blocks that make up a pyramid to the top of a mountain than, to create a larger structure on lower land? Are you really saying that? Or, are you suggesting, they build the pyramid on lower land, and then CARRY the FINISHED pyramid to the top of the mountain? Oh, and were would the mountains be in Egypt on which to build this pyramid of yours?

It is the primarily accepted theory, and has been observed in action around other stars. The earliest possible planetary nebula was noted around Vega.

And why, may I ask, is it unlikely that the Earth formed from the collision of rocks in space? It's quite simple. As the rocks smashed together, either shattering each other or combining, eventually you would get a few micro-planets with enough gravity that when they collided with other micro-planets, they didn't shatter, but ended up combining. Repeat for millions of year, and you get a bunch of planetary bodies.



And why is that? As far as can be proven, the Earth has not noticeably changed in size since the collision of the Mars-sized body over 4 billion years ago that essentially ejected both the new Earth's crust and a good part of its mantle into space, resulting in the Moon.

And contrary to your claim, we CAN prove the real age of the Earth, from dating the amount of rubidium-87 and strontium-87 in ratio to the strontium-86 in a rock sample.



And you point it? The silicon supposedly consumed by the core is still inside the planet. It may not be displacing volume in the mantle, but it is still displacing volume. Water is being ejected, but hasn't been ejected in enough amounts to significantly decrease the mantle since 4 billion years ago.



'Could' cause structural changes? Do you have any proof?



Not unless you have proof that there were volcanic eruptions at the time period to cause a mass extinction. We do have that for the creation of the Deccan Traps. We also have evidence, from the impact crater in the Yucatan, of the asteroidal impact 65 million years ago.



You ignored my earlier point. Of course, a large event, such as the creation of a new volcanic plain like the Deccan traps, could cause a mass extinction. However, they would not nearly be enough to cause a noticeable decrease in the mantle size.





I commented on this in an earlier thread, in the Paleontology forum, and provided a link. Check it out again.



The asteroidal impact theory is almost universally accepted. We have found the impact crater, and radioactive material from that crater dates to roughly 65 million years ago - the period of extinction. The size of the impact crater gives an indication of the size of the asteroid, and it was enough to cause a mass extinction.

Actually there wouldn't have been fire raining for the skies or anything fun like that. The seperation of Pangea occurred over millions of years. I can see increased flooding happening during that time, however, probably creating lakes and rivers which we still see today.

Also there's the fact that the closest thing to humans when Pangea was seperating was a few species of rat-like critters; I doubt that ancestral memory is THAT effective.

I think that there really was a huge flood that flooded all of our World. For in some books, I heard Noah, reached Brazil, and assuming he sailed when the flood started from the Middle-East well that's one big flood. Non?

And in Islamic Holy Book, it is written that Noah tok with him a male and female of each species of animals by order of God:thus I have two point out to two things:

First this means that all the world was actually flooded. Thus Noah mission to save at least the male and female of each species of animals.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home made theories:
Second, well it's a theory of my own, how in world was he to put all of these animals on one boat, not to say that maybe God did a miracle maybe and shrunk all the animals, I would like to say that maybe Noah and his people were really advanced technologicaly speaking, I mean maybe he took the DNA of each animal, or maybe he made a new kind of storage system (Like Pokemon balls HAHA ) Or maybe he actually made a huge ship. Thus I think the people of Noah were actually no one else other than the Atlanteans.

When he came to them and urged them to stop their nuclear wars, they didn't want to listen and this was their downfall, and so he escaped, with his followers. So the reason of the flood was probably of a nuclear war between the Atlatians, followed by rain that God made come down to cleanse the world from radioactivity.

So?

IMO Noah was probably just a farmer that figured the river was going to flood, grabbed breeding pairs of his livestock and headed for the hills. The story then got to the next village and would have been pretty much as it happened.

A little further down the line the story would lose a few details, kind of like, "Heard a bloke called Noah kept most of his animals when that flood happened","how`d he do that then","Dunno built a boat or something".

Then the more it was told the more it was altered to make it a bit more jazzy.

I'd compare it to the game of telephone. The local flood becomes a worldwide flood, and so on.