Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 11
Llalesay

How did the Egyptians build pyramids?

3,532 posts in this topic

I saw this video and i was a bit shocked/sceptical.

Apparently, some people suggests that the Egyptians build their famous pyramids through paranormal activity ( aliens ).

Is this the pure nuts or is there actually something about it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why so much interest in the pyramids? Though evidently well constructed, they're still just a bunch of rocks piled on top of each other. If the ancient Egyptians had instead constructed something like a midieval cathedral I'd be more impressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basic hand tools and hard work, over seen by very forward thinking clever people, no alien intervention if thats your angle?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

There are already several threads in this same section about the pyramids...

The basic answer is... yeah, this is pure baloney mate.

The Egyptians built the pyramids, and the tools they used were what you'd expect from the time period.

Um... didn't know that was blocked. Lemmee change it.

Edited by ShadowSot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basic hand tools and hard work, over seen by very forward thinking clever people, no alien intervention if thats your angle?

It is, i know that the pyramids were build by strong egyptian labour and basic worktools.

However, this whole alien theory is completely new to me and seems rather odd/strange. i have seen it being suggested a couple of times now, so i just wanted to make sure that it was already debunked.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

There are already several threads in this same section about the pyramids...

The basic answer is... yeah, this is pure baloney mate.

The Egyptians built the pyramids, and the tools they used were what you'd expect from the time period.

Um... didn't know that was blocked. Lemmee change it.

Ok thanks, that's pretty much what i wanted to hear. I was a bit sceptical at first, and the idea of aliens building the pyramids made me laugh.

Edited by Ultimatium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one really knows for sure, but the common sense approach would be that of hard work and clever humans of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little less short thrift posting, I'd recommend reading through some of the existing threads, paying attention to Kmt_Sesh' posts on Egypt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw this video and i was a bit shocked/sceptical.

Apparently, some people suggests that the Egyptians build their famous pyramids through paranormal activity ( aliens ).

Is this the pure nuts or is there actually something about it?

I'm not impressed by the video but I'm beginning to believe that aliens make

more sense and are better evidenced than ramps. Neither of these theories is

well supported but there's little doubt that ramps are a virtual impossibility.

Even if they were possible it would be impossible to hide evidence for them.

This leaves a void into which many people have tried to project all sorts of

wonderful, strange, and exotic ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Straight up ignore Cladking, plenty of evidence has been presented for ramps (Including... ramps.) but he refuses to accept it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... plenty of evidence has been presented for ramps (Including... ramps.) but he refuses to accept it.

There is no evidence of any sort whatsoever that a ramp was used to

lift a single stone on any of the great pyramids.

I can show evidence all day long that such ramps were not used yet no

one has ever shown any evidence that they were. Their attempts are dis-

ingenuous and involve pictures from hundreds or even thousands of years

after the great pyramids were built and flimsy ramps on the ground in

betyween pyramids which could not have been used to lift stone. They

simply choose to ignore the evidence against ramps and repeat their

mantra that "it mustta been ramps".

I would suggest people try tune out any time that someone tells you it

must have been built by anything at all because axe grindings will fol-

low. Egyptologists have invented a million ways to say "it mustta been

ramps" but my favorite is "we don't know exactly what ramp system was

used".

The reason for this is that ramps weren't used. Egyptologists don't care,

and They have no plans to go look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jean-Pierre Houdin is making a pretty good case but there is no real proof. The case for the seemingly oversizeed Grand Gallery makes sense with his theory though, and he points to several markings and constructional feats that might support his theory for the transport of the granite block to the kings chamber.

Here are some of all the theories presented over the years (alien intervention excluded) >> http://www.cheops-pyramide.ch/khufu-pyramid/ramp-models.html

Regardless any of these theories, they hardly match up to the time-plan - one stone set in place every other minute in a constant pace for some 20 years. Not much room for errors, accidents or hiccups. A gigantic error-free assembly line with enormous stones and hectic tempo??... seems improbable.

As long it remains a mystery it will keep the interest alive. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless any of these theories, they hardly match up to the time-plan - one stone set in place every other minute in a constant pace for some 20 years. Not much room for errors, accidents or hiccups. A gigantic error-free assembly line with enormous stones and hectic tempo??... seems improbable.

The person who calculated that didn't put into his calculations a couple of things )and more I've probably forgotten.), chiefly there are pockets of backfill and empty space in the pyramids... and we don't know for sure how much there is. Khufu's pyramid is a also built on top of a limestone rise, meaning less blocks were needed.

The blocks also got smaller as you go up, requiring less effort. The stoes were loosely stacked, the real detail went into the exterior of the pyramid.

To, we know they had several gangs moving stones, and much of the work force of Egypt available during the months the Nile flooded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The person who calculated that didn't put into his calculations a couple of things )and more I've probably forgotten.), chiefly there are pockets of backfill and empty space in the pyramids... and we don't know for sure how much there is. Khufu's pyramid is a also built on top of a limestone rise, meaning less blocks were needed.

The blocks also got smaller as you go up, requiring less effort. The stoes were loosely stacked, the real detail went into the exterior of the pyramid.

To, we know they had several gangs moving stones, and much of the work force of Egypt available during the months the Nile flooded.

The pyramid is not hollow no matter how many times ramp theorists say

it is. It has an average external density of about 2.65 compared to the

density of limestone which is 2.70 which makes it more than 98% solid.

Backfill is no easier to lift than stones and is actually harder so is

entirely irrelevent. There is no evidence whatsoever of any sort of hill

under G1 larger than about 25' at its center. The course thickness of G1

does not greatly change at altitude and this is irrelevent as well since

even if they had used smaller stones then they'd have just needed to haul

more of them.

There is nothing about Orthodox theory which is logical. The facts are

bent and manipulated to make ramps look plausible despite the lack of ev-

idence for them. There were no ramp builders buried anywhere in Egypt and

no evidence that there were ramps or ramp builders.

The amount of manpower available was irrelevent since a limited number of

men can fit on any sort of ramp system at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The pyramid is not hollow no matter how many times ramp theorists say

it is. It has an average external density of about 2.65 compared to the

density of limestone which is 2.70 which makes it more than 98% solid.

Backfill is no easier to lift than stones and is actually harder so is

entirely irrelevent. There is no evidence whatsoever of any sort of hill

under G1 larger than about 25' at its center. The course thickness of G1

does not greatly change at altitude and this is irrelevent as well since

even if they had used smaller stones then they'd have just needed to haul

more of them.

There is nothing about Orthodox theory which is logical. The facts are

bent and manipulated to make ramps look plausible despite the lack of ev-

idence for them. There were no ramp builders buried anywhere in Egypt and

no evidence that there were ramps or ramp builders.

The amount of manpower available was irrelevent since a limited number of

men can fit on any sort of ramp system at all.

Ok, how would you build a prymid?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, how would you build a prymid?

I've invented or discovered several possible methods which are consistent

with logic and the actual evidence. The question isn't how I'd do but but

how the ancients actually did do it.

The first thing that's a safe bet is they got rid of all the pencil whippers

because they needed something that worked rather than someone who could de-

vise inefficient and impossible ideas. This means forget ideology and relig-

ion as a means to build this. Burying a God does not provide the builders

with divine strenght. The method has to be extremely and hugely efficient

so anything that involves hauling the body weight of a man to 120' 25,000,000

times is out from the get go. No ramps. Anyone who suggested ramps would have

been laughed off the pyramid.

Ideally a method involves a motive force and thetre are several possibilities

here and evidence they used them but we'll not consider thios now; merely the

evidence for the route the stones took. There are vertical lines right up the

sides of all the great pyramids. These undoubtedly required a long time to form

since the pyramid grew slowly and these span many layers of them. This suggests

that by some means stones moved direcly up the side. This is consistent with

what the builders said that they used ladders to build them. How the stones

moved up is not as obvious. It's safe to assume they were not pushed since they

are massive. It's safe to assume they either moved up quickly, close together,

or many at a time sionce the huge stone size suggests the lifting method was

very robust and the size of the pyramid dictates a high delivery rate.

There are numerous ways that tones can move up the side with or without a mo-

tive force. The most obvious and one Orthodoxy should like is a team of men on

the pyramid top pulling on ropes to get them up the side. But they're married

to ramps and can't even consider an alternative. They always regress to "it

mustta been ramps".

They also could have built a stone trough out of tura limestone which went straight

up the side. This trough would be designed to pry stones higher with hundreds of

men working each trough with large pry bars. This would essentially be a man pow-

ered stone conveyor. They could have strung out ropes to harness natural processes

like sails in the boat pits which could provide huge lift. The Nile flowed right

by and could provide large amounts of lift over great distance.

They could have used teams of men and animals pulling from the opposite side.

There are a million things they might have done consistent with logic and the evi-

dence but ramps are not included in this. Ramps would obscure the lines needed

to build the pyramid true. They would have left a mark on the pyramid, in the

cenmetery and in history. There is no mark.

What there is is evidence of water. There was water here and it may have been used

for little more than filling the boat pits for massive sails or leveling the pyramid

base but there is ater here that could have beebn used in cliff face counterweights

to move stone. This is consistent with the fact that there is a canal from a water

collecting device surrounding the pyramid to the cliff face which bears evidence of

water erosion. So they not onlyhad water but actually used it. Find out the source

of this water and I'm certain you'll know how they built the pyramid. Nehebkau was

the water cycle who manifested as rain according to the Pyramid Texts. But Nehebkau

could not have caused water to arise to Giza. We know there are caves under here and

we know the powers that be are ignoring them. Any process that took water to the top

of the plateau almost certainly involves these caves and Giza meant "Mouth of Caves"

to the ancients.

There are clues to how the pyramids were built under Giza and the authorities are

burying their heads in the sand. The answers are everywhere but it will require some-

one to look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've invented or discovered several possible methods which are consistent

with logic and the actual evidence. The question isn't how I'd do but but

how the ancients actually did do it.

The first thing that's a safe bet is they got rid of all the pencil whippers

because they needed something that worked rather than someone who could de-

vise inefficient and impossible ideas. This means forget ideology and relig-

ion as a means to build this. Burying a God does not provide the builders

with divine strenght. The method has to be extremely and hugely efficient

so anything that involves hauling the body weight of a man to 120' 25,000,000

times is out from the get go. No ramps. Anyone who suggested ramps would have

been laughed off the pyramid.

Ideally a method involves a motive force and thetre are several possibilities

here and evidence they used them but we'll not consider thios now; merely the

evidence for the route the stones took. There are vertical lines right up the

sides of all the great pyramids. These undoubtedly required a long time to form

since the pyramid grew slowly and these span many layers of them. This suggests

that by some means stones moved direcly up the side. This is consistent with

what the builders said that they used ladders to build them. How the stones

moved up is not as obvious. It's safe to assume they were not pushed since they

are massive. It's safe to assume they either moved up quickly, close together,

or many at a time sionce the huge stone size suggests the lifting method was

very robust and the size of the pyramid dictates a high delivery rate.

There are numerous ways that tones can move up the side with or without a mo-

tive force. The most obvious and one Orthodoxy should like is a team of men on

the pyramid top pulling on ropes to get them up the side. But they're married

to ramps and can't even consider an alternative. They always regress to "it

mustta been ramps".

They also could have built a stone trough out of tura limestone which went straight

up the side. This trough would be designed to pry stones higher with hundreds of

men working each trough with large pry bars. This would essentially be a man pow-

ered stone conveyor. They could have strung out ropes to harness natural processes

like sails in the boat pits which could provide huge lift. The Nile flowed right

by and could provide large amounts of lift over great distance.

They could have used teams of men and animals pulling from the opposite side.

There are a million things they might have done consistent with logic and the evi-

dence but ramps are not included in this. Ramps would obscure the lines needed

to build the pyramid true. They would have left a mark on the pyramid, in the

cenmetery and in history. There is no mark.

What there is is evidence of water. There was water here and it may have been used

for little more than filling the boat pits for massive sails or leveling the pyramid

base but there is ater here that could have beebn used in cliff face counterweights

to move stone. This is consistent with the fact that there is a canal from a water

collecting device surrounding the pyramid to the cliff face which bears evidence of

water erosion. So they not onlyhad water but actually used it. Find out the source

of this water and I'm certain you'll know how they built the pyramid. Nehebkau was

the water cycle who manifested as rain according to the Pyramid Texts. But Nehebkau

could not have caused water to arise to Giza. We know there are caves under here and

we know the powers that be are ignoring them. Any process that took water to the top

of the plateau almost certainly involves these caves and Giza meant "Mouth of Caves"

to the ancients.

There are clues to how the pyramids were built under Giza and the authorities are

burying their heads in the sand. The answers are everywhere but it will require some-

one to look.

I think you got confused, how would you build a prymid? what materials, tools etc?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've invented or discovered several possible methods which are consistent

with logic and the actual evidence. The question isn't how I'd do but but

how the ancients actually did do it.

The first thing that's a safe bet is they got rid of all the pencil whippers

because they needed something that worked rather than someone who could de-

vise inefficient and impossible ideas. This means forget ideology and relig-

ion as a means to build this. Burying a God does not provide the builders

with divine strenght. The method has to be extremely and hugely efficient

so anything that involves hauling the body weight of a man to 120' 25,000,000

times is out from the get go. No ramps. Anyone who suggested ramps would have

been laughed off the pyramid.

Ideally a method involves a motive force and thetre are several possibilities

here and evidence they used them but we'll not consider thios now; merely the

evidence for the route the stones took. There are vertical lines right up the

sides of all the great pyramids. These undoubtedly required a long time to form

since the pyramid grew slowly and these span many layers of them. This suggests

that by some means stones moved direcly up the side. This is consistent with

what the builders said that they used ladders to build them. How the stones

moved up is not as obvious. It's safe to assume they were not pushed since they

are massive. It's safe to assume they either moved up quickly, close together,

or many at a time sionce the huge stone size suggests the lifting method was

very robust and the size of the pyramid dictates a high delivery rate.

There are numerous ways that tones can move up the side with or without a mo-

tive force. The most obvious and one Orthodoxy should like is a team of men on

the pyramid top pulling on ropes to get them up the side. But they're married

to ramps and can't even consider an alternative. They always regress to "it

mustta been ramps".

They also could have built a stone trough out of tura limestone which went straight

up the side. This trough would be designed to pry stones higher with hundreds of

men working each trough with large pry bars. This would essentially be a man pow-

ered stone conveyor. They could have strung out ropes to harness natural processes

like sails in the boat pits which could provide huge lift. The Nile flowed right

by and could provide large amounts of lift over great distance.

They could have used teams of men and animals pulling from the opposite side.

There are a million things they might have done consistent with logic and the evi-

dence but ramps are not included in this. Ramps would obscure the lines needed

to build the pyramid true. They would have left a mark on the pyramid, in the

cenmetery and in history. There is no mark.

What there is is evidence of water. There was water here and it may have been used

for little more than filling the boat pits for massive sails or leveling the pyramid

base but there is ater here that could have beebn used in cliff face counterweights

to move stone. This is consistent with the fact that there is a canal from a water

collecting device surrounding the pyramid to the cliff face which bears evidence of

water erosion. So they not onlyhad water but actually used it. Find out the source

of this water and I'm certain you'll know how they built the pyramid. Nehebkau was

the water cycle who manifested as rain according to the Pyramid Texts. But Nehebkau

could not have caused water to arise to Giza. We know there are caves under here and

we know the powers that be are ignoring them. Any process that took water to the top

of the plateau almost certainly involves these caves and Giza meant "Mouth of Caves"

to the ancients.

There are clues to how the pyramids were built under Giza and the authorities are

burying their heads in the sand. The answers are everywhere but it will require some-

one to look.

Quote "What there is is evidence of water. There was water here and it may have been used

for little more than filling the boat pits for massive sails or leveling the pyramid

base but there is ater here that could have beebn used in cliff face counterweights

to move stone. This is consistent with the fact that there is a canal from a water

collecting device surrounding the pyramid to the cliff face which bears evidence of

water erosion. So they not onlyhad water but actually used it. Find out the source

of this water and I'm certain you'll know how they built the pyramid. Nehebkau was

the water cycle who manifested as rain according to the Pyramid Texts. But Nehebkau

could not have caused water to arise to Giza. We know there are caves under here and

we know the powers that be are ignoring them. Any process that took water to the top

of the plateau almost certainly involves these caves and Giza meant "Mouth of Caves"

to the ancients."

Ah ha now this I think is good reasoning. The old Sphinx may have suffered a bit from the water pouring off the Plateau. It may also be the reason a sump was devised to drain water from the interior of the construction.

The idea is sound when it comes to an easily used counterweight and using the old fashioned A frame lever and bucket to get the water from the Nile is not nearly as laborious as dragging all the stone by sledge and ropes. I need to think at bit more on this and maybe come up with a plan.

Edited by Flashbangwollap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you got confused, how would you build a prymid? what materials, tools etc?

Today I would buy a pump to pump water up to a counterweight. As the pyramid

got taller I'd buy moree pumps. This is by far the most efficient way to build

a pyramid today and a similar system was most probably the most efficient way to

build it then. It's no muss and no fuss. You just have to pay the elecric bill.

The ancients said the Gods built the pyramids so my guess is they didn't even

have to pay the bill for lifting. Seker was "chief of lifts" is my guess and the

builders said Osiris was cool effervescent water who became Seker in the counter-

weight.

Counterweights are the most efficient means of lifting on a pyramid and seem to

be well evidenced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks, remember Cladking loves to hijack threads for himself. If he wants to, let him start a new thread, where the same things as have been can be rehashed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks, remember Cladking loves to hijack threads for himself. If he wants to, let him start a new thread, where the same things as have been can be rehashed.

The title of the thread isn't "How do Egyptologists imagine

pyramids were built?".

I'm talking about facts and evidence. Until everyone starts

talking facts we might never have an answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, aside from teasing Cladking...

Here's a few of the threads here on UM that have to do with constructing the Pyramids at Giza:

Pyramids Around the World

Why are there no Hieroglyphs Inside the Great Pyramid?

Mysteries of the Pyramids

It's a fair bit to read through, but after you're done, or even before you're done, you can post questions and someone will answer you.

:) Have fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a look at the video The Searcher providede in the ancient aliens thread. It show ONE man moving and lifting heavy blocks by himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, aside from teasing Cladking...

Here's a few of the threads here on UM that have to do with constructing the Pyramids at Giza:

Pyramids Around the World

Why are there no Hieroglyphs Inside the Great Pyramid?

Mysteries of the Pyramids

It's a fair bit to read through, but after you're done, or even before you're done, you can post questions and someone will answer you.

:) Have fun.

Thanks Shadow. It would be rather wearying to go through all this for yet another time. Well done.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 11

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.