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 6
dreamland

Secret Caves under the Pyramids

969 posts in this topic

There's such a thing as too simple. If dragging a stone with ten men is extremely

hard then they can use thirty men to make it easy. But these men clog up your ramp

on the way up and coming back down. This means you'll need bigger ramps and more

ramp builders to build them. If you make their work easy with extra men then you have

even busier ramps and need even more ramp material.

I believe you run out of room long before you build enough ramps to do the job.

More importantly I know there's no evidence for ramps and that the word "ramp" isn't

even attested before the 5th dynasty. It's an unworkable theory unless you can believe

they could build ramps, use them, and leave no trace of evidence in the job titles, the

culture, or on the ground.

It could be true that ramps aren't impossible but it's also true that life on other planets

might be out there and they mighrt have visited earth. It's possible they built five step

pyramids because they had only 81' 3" ropes and had to pull the stones up the side. This

is what the evidence actually says; the stones were pulled up the side. Once people admit

this simple and obvious fact then I can say I don't believe that even using this efficient

means would allow enough manpower to be brought to bear.

Of course the ironic part is that since they know they must have used ramps no one will

even lookin the cave under the pyramid that might somehow contain clues to how they were

built. dr Hawass himself announced in 1996 that there are clues to how they were built in

the Osiris Shaft so why might there be no clues in this new cave?

Can I just say, Jeesh!!

I said the idea why the pyramid was form like that is so simple. When you are there building it in actual can also be made simple manpower are already there. Pulling up little bit then stop put something to stop sliding down itmight be built within not less than 10 years, when on top is easy now because the people is on the way down you can visualize it. The rope no need to think about it of course they can make as long as they want that is common sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just wondering what egyptian obelisk is doing in rome...why was it made in egypt and transported all the way to rome?

I found this very interesting picture :

http://www.lindahall...n_obelisk.shtml maybe this explaines how egyptians build pyramids....

Most Egyptian obelisks were transported to Rome during the period of the Roman empire. While few Roman emperors cared a whit about Egypt's culture and heritage, they were impressed by its architectural achievements. So in one sense they took the obelisks to beautify their city, but in a broader and more overt sense it was a demonstration of their power. Roman emperors could point to their purloined Egyptian obelisks and say: "Egypt was once a mighty empire, and now look: their architecture decorates my city."

The early Roman Catholic Church followed in much the same vein. They could co-opt the symbols of once-great pagan empires for their own decorative purposes, as a visual reminder of the power of the Church. Note that the great Vatican obelisk was fitted with a Christian cross on its tip before Fontana's teams erected it at the Vatican in the sixteenth century—a kind of in-your-face jab at the once-great empire of ancient pagan Egypt.

One of the periodicals to which I subscribe recently ran a detailed article on how Fontana figured out how to transport and re-erect the Vatican obelisk. I think it was Archaeology magazine but it might have been KMT. Can't recall at the moment. In any case it was a very interesting article. While some of the basic engineering principles employed by Fontana certainly would've been known in ancient Egypt, the technology of the time he lived (again, sixteenth century) was exponentially more advanced than that known in ancient Egypt. That being the case, the Egyptians figured out how to build massive pyramids and erect enormous obelisks using much simpler building and engineering techniques, which makes their achievements all the more impressive.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe in aliens but I don't believe aliens help the people build the pyramids. For what? Is there any good reason, people say aliens are intellectual beings but what benefits the pyramids will do to them? The drawings on the stones are made by native artist that means long time ago they can see those things, what they can see they are recording it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There must be a perfectly logical reason that no one claims to know how they were built.

There must be a logical reason no one can show evidence of ramps.

There must be a logical reason that ramps can be debunked.

There must be a logical reason they built five steps.

1) There is... it is called the scientific method with hypothosises and theorys. Almost no theory is 100% sure. If it was 100% sure, it would be a Law. Like the Law of Gravity. SInce the evidence does not support 100% certainty, GOOD scientists will tell you that they cannot be 100% sure how they built the pyramids. But they can give a educated guess based on evidence that is probably like 90% likely to be correct.

2) There is evidence of ramps. At several sites.

3) I don't think so. Ramps have the most evidence and the most basic level of technology and fit the timelines. What is Debunked is the "Debunkment of Ramps" that has no convincing evidence behind it.

4) Perhaps. Every engineer, architect and mason probably would plan these things differently on some level.

This concept that they must have used ramps is so intimately interwoven with Egyptological beliefs that it can't be extracted. This is not reasonable. Every argument against "fringe" ideas always comes back to "cultural context" which is extremely this and strictly interpretation. And it comes back to ramps being the only possible means to support this so-called "context". They could only have used ramps so they must have used ramps.

"Can't be extracted"... and rightly so. It is the best method that fits all the evidence and criteria. Therefore it is Completely and Totally... Logically... Reasonable.

Arguements against Fringe Ideas comes back to it, because Ramps fits the evidence better then any fringe idea so far. Ideas need to be compared to the existing paradym do they not?

Your arguement is something like.... A man traveled from New York to Los Angels in 3 hours. So it can be deduced that he took an airplane, since it is the most likely used technology that can do this in modern times. But then you suggest using a Matter Transporter, or a Pneumatic Super Lev Train System were used because it is idiotic to only believe that the mainstream idea is the correct one. Yet there is no evidence of matter transportation technology, or the existance of a pneumatic train system. Yet that does not prevent your speculation. Since the data supports Planes, the answer is Planes. Just as the answer is Ramps because the data says Ramps.

There's such a thing as too simple. If dragging a stone with ten men is extremely hard then they can use thirty men to make it easy. But these men clog up your ramp on the way up and coming back down. This means you'll need bigger ramps and more ramp builders to build them. If you make their work easy with extra men then you have even busier ramps and need even more ramp material.

I believe you run out of room long before you build enough ramps to do the job.

We've been over this Ad Nauseam. 75% of the mass of the pyramid is in the lower third, so several wide generous ramps would have been possible. Your claim of it being too hard to manuever would apply only to the upper courses of stone, where all the blocks were MUCH smaller and required much fewer laborers. Plus the upper courses would have used a spiral ramp, which would have been MUCH easier to make wider then a giant straight on ramp. Ten times easier perhaps.

Edited by DieChecker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) There is... it is called the scientific method with hypothosises and theorys. Almost no theory is 100% sure. If it was 100% sure, it would be a Law. Like the Law of Gravity. SInce the evidence does not support 100% certainty, GOOD scientists will tell you that they cannot be 100% sure how they built the pyramids. But they can give a educated guess based on evidence that is probably like 90% likely to be correct.

2) There is evidence of ramps. At several sites.

3) I don't think so. Ramps have the most evidence and the most basic level of technology and fit the timelines. What is Debunked is the "Debunkment of Ramps" that has no convincing evidence behind it.

4) Perhaps. Every engineer, architect and mason probably would plan these things differently on some level.

"Can't be extracted"... and rightly so. It is the best method that fits all the evidence and criteria. Therefore it is Completely and Totally... Logically... Reasonable.

Arguements against Fringe Ideas comes back to it, because Ramps fits the evidence better then any fringe idea so far. Ideas need to be compared to the existing paradym do they not?

Your arguement is something like.... A man traveled from New York to Los Angels in 3 hours. So it can be deduced that he took an airplane, since it is the most likely used technology that can do this in modern times. But then you suggest using a Matter Transporter, or a Pneumatic Super Lev Train System were used because it is idiotic to only believe that the mainstream idea is the correct one. Yet there is no evidence of matter transportation technology, or the existance of a pneumatic train system. Yet that does not prevent your speculation. Since the data supports Planes, the answer is Planes. Just as the answer is Ramps because the data says Ramps.

We've been over this Ad Nauseam. 75% of the mass of the pyramid is in the lower third, so several wide generous ramps would have been possible. Your claim of it being too hard to manuever would apply only to the upper courses of stone, where all the blocks were MUCH smaller and required much fewer laborers. Plus the upper courses would have used a spiral ramp, which would have been MUCH easier to make wider then a giant straight on ramp. Ten times easier perhaps.

Every part of the ramp debunkment has survived the exceedingly little scrutiny that it

has been paid. I've had to modify parts of it to fit the arguments against it. It stands.

Theconcept that ideas have to be compared to the paradigm is essentially what's wrong

with the human race. We are quick to adopt ideas that seem to fit and entail no change

and fearful of new ideas that rewrite the paradigm or entail swee[ping changes. At their

basis there is no science in a paradigm. A paradigmis a model to understand some com-

plicated event or process but all such processes exist only outside of the paradigm. Para-

digms serve the sole function of defining who belongs to the good ol' boys club and who

does not. While they might aid in the thinking of the masses to understand something a

true scientist does not invest in the paradigm. Founding Egyptology on a paradigm, one of

whose planks is entirely irrational, was a massive error worthy of a religion but not science.

You are thinking of the facts as to how they were built as being established (a plane took

three hours...), but nothing could possibly be further from the truth. Even that the stones

of which the pyramids are composed came from Giza is not firmly established. we are as-

suming a big hole in the plateau with quarry marks is the source of the stone but this isn't

actually established because Egyptology is not doing any science. Nothing is established

except the pyramids exist and Egyptology have founded a belief system on the concept

that they must have used ramps. There is no 90% sure, there is only 99% assumption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile the existence of caves is simply ignored because the powers that be can't

see how caves would be related to tombs, ramps, bumpkins, or static culture. They can't

understand how caves could be related to a place named "The Mouth of Caves" or that

they might be related to the Pyramid Texts which is the only thing we actually have similar

to "cultural context".

1551a. To say: This thy cavern there is the broad-hall of Osiris N..

1557b. he who hastens with his soul goes to his cave;

What are the Egyptologists so frightened of? If they're so afraid of snakes and bats then they

should hire somebody to come in and do the work. Of course they aren't doing any of the science

at Giza so it's deeper than just a few snakes and serpents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every part of the ramp debunkment has survived the exceedingly little scrutiny that ithas been paid. I've had to modify parts of it to fit the arguments against it. It stands.

I'd lke to hear that from someone other then the one who supposedly did the Debunkment. Even the Flat Earth people will tell you there are correct, but that means Nothing unless others agree with them.

You are thinking of the facts as to how they were built as being established (a plane took three hours...), but nothing could possibly be further from the truth. Even that the stones of which the pyramids are composed came from Giza is not firmly established. we are assuming a big hole in the plateau with quarry marks is the source of the stone but this isn't actually established because Egyptology is not doing any science. Nothing is established except the pyramids exist and Egyptology have founded a belief system on the concept that they must have used ramps. There is no 90% sure, there is only 99% assumption.

The facts are established. Stone chemistry can and HAS been tested. They know where all the materials of the GP came from. They found the tools used to crave out the blocks. They found blocks that were cut but never transported. They have found all the facts that are needed to make a highly likely assumption of what happened.

If you have two pieces of bread, some sliced meat, some sliced cheese and some tomatos all staked up it does not take a genuis to assume that it is a sandwich. When 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 4, there is no reason to assume that the real answer must be 3 or 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd lke to hear that from someone other then the one who supposedly did the Debunkment. Even the Flat Earth people will tell you there are correct, but that means Nothing unless others agree with them.

For the main part it is simply ignored because people believe in ramps. Very few

comments have been made at all and, unsurprisingly, some of the commenters do

not agree with my assessment. This is simply the result of a paucity of hard evidence

of any sort making certainty for or against impossible. But each part of the debunk-

ment still stands.

I personally believe the fact that the word "ramp" isn't even attested before the 5th

dynasty to be most telling of all. When the word finally is used it's as a means to get

from point A to point B on foot. It's a walkway rather than a tool to lift stones.

People naturally jump to conclusions. Our brains simply try to put everything in terms

we understand. We can't even see things we don't expect and do see things that con-

firm our judgement. The problem is people have jumped to the wrong conclusions. We

need to do the science (gather the data) that will lead people to a paradigm that can

make accurate predictions.

The only thing they really have to fear is that the science will confirm an idea that has

failed for 150 years. Tombs are dead, long live the tombs.

Do the science and then you can lord it over all those silly alts. In the meantime Egypt-

ology is looking worse and worse. They look scared.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why you'd describe the filling of holes built for an unknown purpose with

concrete to be "minimally invasive". When we finally have to jackhammer all this cement

out of the holes a great deal of evidence will be permanently lost. And then there's re-

moving the western boat placed there 4700 years ago which can hardly be called min-

imally invasive. I suppose swatting the beetle was hardly worthy of note just as is digging

up grave after grave and removing the occupants. Then there's the sheer lunacy of de-

ciding there must be another chamber with a dead king in it because a book of fiction

written 1000 years after the pyramid was built can be interpreted to mean this. On this

basis they send robots up the shafts and drill holes.

Meanwhile none of the important work is being done because Egyptologists already believe

it's a tomb built with ramps so anything that can't support this doesn't get measured and

doesn't get studied. It's a shame the damage going on but it's a bigger shame the import-

ant work not being done.

Re: Bolded #1 - Kindly reread the referenced quote:

Properly conducted archaeological research routinely entails extensive evaluative processes prior to any invasive (and potentially damaging) procedures. Quite a number of non/minimally- invasive geological evaluations of the Giza Plateau have already been conducted (Emphasis added) (Swede #137).

You would appear to be conflating two separate comments in addition to again demonstrating a lack of familiarity with archaeological methodology.

As to your reference regarding concrete filled voids, to what would you be referring? Collins' Tomb of the Birds? If so, it should be noted that the entrance to the "Tomb" is protected by a steel-grate gate set in concrete.

Tomb%20of%20the%20birds%20gate%20close%20low.jpg

Photo credit: Larry Hunter, 2010.

As to the funerary boat excavation, you are aware that this was a process that involved quite a number of years of analysis and evaluation prior to the actual excavation? Including having suitable preservational facilities already in place?

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Bolded #1 - Kindly reread the referenced quote:

Properly conducted archaeological research routinely entails extensive evaluative processes prior to any invasive (and potentially damaging) procedures. Quite a number of non/minimally- invasive geological evaluations of the Giza Plateau have already been conducted (Emphasis added) (Swede #137).

You would appear to be conflating two separate comments in addition to again demonstrating a lack of familiarity with archaeological methodology.

As to your reference regarding concrete filled voids, to what would you be referring? Collins' Tomb of the Birds? If so, it should be noted that the entrance to the "Tomb" is protected by a steel-grate gate set in concrete.

As to the funerary boat excavation, you are aware that this was a process that involved quite a number of years of analysis and evaluation prior to the actual excavation? Including having suitable preservational facilities already in place?

Truth to tell, I believe that most of what Egyptology destroys to study and examine the

evidence is fully justified in the last 125 years or so. I believe it might be better if they

were slower to destroy the irretrievable and faster to remove overburden but this is mostly

an opinion from relative ignorance. However I don't believe it's necessary to destroy each

grave and to remove artefacts to a single location where they are in danger of being de-

stroyed. I know it's best to excavate and examine things while having a good understanding

of what you're actually looking at. There aren't a lot of places where they are just simply

wrong because these guys are pretty sharp. But their values and priorities couldn't be more

wrong. Logically you seek easy data and wholly nondestructive data first and they are not

doing this. Logically you investigate anomalies first and they are not doing this.

What they are doing is essentially looking at this from their perspectiove and trying to prove

it. This isd not the way science is done. Science is the invention of experiment to test a point

or the observation that some datum can prove a point and then obtaining such data. Science

isn't rushing out on the plateau with trowels looking for ramps and bumpkins but it is gathering

data. Simply stated, if there's something you don't know about the plateau you measure it. If

there's an anomaly on the plateau you study it. Hawass actually said that he knows everything

there is to know about the plateau. In ten thousand years we still won't know one millionth of 1%

of what there is to know about the plateau but by then they'll get a good chuckle out of Hawass'

statement. They'll know a billion times what we know and they'll know when to laugh.

I don't want them to destroy evidence. The bottom of the cave could be lower than the level that

existed in the 4th dynasty or lower than some of the evidence. I have no doubt that there will be

evidence of man all through the layers of guano and the guano itself could have some limited

value as information about past conditions. Ideally, in such situations you simply leave some areas

unexcavated so future scientists with new more advanced tools and instruments can gather the

data that is impossible today. To see the cave as the ancients saw and used it you have to get

to the bottom of the bat droppings. To even know where it leads you'll need a shovel and pick.

They are destroying evidence almost daily. Anything they don't percieve as relevant they are liable

to change to suit current needs or the needs of the countless tourists. So long as they believe only

ramps could have been used they will continue to ignore evidence that doesn't fit and destroy what's

inconvenient. As scientists they should be striving to gather information to prove their conjectures.

They are so busy drilling holes and troweling wind blown sand that they might never get to gathering

the data which can prove or disprove ramps. This is no way to run a science. Dr Hawass was great

for promoting tourism and trying to protect the sites on limited budgets but he severely damaged the

science of Egyptology through exclusion and dogma.

Egypt deserves better. People deserve better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to your reference regarding concrete filled voids, to what would you be referring? Collins' Tomb of the Birds? If so, it should be noted that the entrance to the "Tomb" is protected by a steel-grate gate set in concrete.

There was what I believe was an hydraulic elevator a few hundred feet south of the east side

of G1 which I have been told has been filled with concrete. This could actually be more a means

to preserve it than destroy it but it certainly becomes unstudiable in its current condition. Any

means to remove the concrete might entail destruction of subtle yet critical evidence. Some

chemical change is also likely though probably of little or no import.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the main part it is simply ignored because people believe in ramps. .... But each part of the debunkment still stands.

So.... just you then?? OK. I can live with that, as long as all the readers of this thread understand this is your own private Debunkment and not a generally accepted idea.

I personally believe the fact that the word "ramp" isn't even attested before the 5th dynasty to be most telling of all. When the word finally is used it's as a means to get from point A to point B on foot. It's a walkway rather than a tool to lift stones.

Or even a Road? Roads were used to move construction materials. A ramp is just a elevated road.

And... I believe your own quotes, about caves and Osiris... are from the 5th dynasty also, right?

People naturally jump to conclusions. Our brains simply try to put everything in terms we understand. We can't even see things we don't expect and do see things that confirm our judgement. The problem is people have jumped to the wrong conclusions. We need to do the science (gather the data) that will lead people to a paradigm that can make accurate predictions.

So what data needs to be gathered? How are YOU not jumping to a wrong conclusion?

AFAIK, no one has come up with a better conclusion, that better matches the evidence... AND convinces people it is correct. After all Aliens fits the evidence as well as ramps, or could be made to fit, and no one takes that seriously. Well, almost no one....

As to your reference regarding concrete filled voids, to what would you be referring? Collins' Tomb of the Birds? If so, it should be noted that the entrance to the "Tomb" is protected by a steel-grate gate set in concrete.

I'd like to know what he was talking about too. Even if one hole is being filled in, that is not a systematic destruction of tombs and wells.

Edited by DieChecker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what data needs to be gathered? How are YOU not jumping to a wrong conclusion?

AFAIK, no one has come up with a better conclusion, that better matches the evidence... AND convinces people it is correct. After all Aliens fits the evidence as well as ramps, or could be made to fit, and no one takes that seriously. Well, almost no one....

I am one of relatively few who don't much jump to conclusions. I jump ahead to the answer by

means of intuition and this answer may well be entirely wrong but I don't jump to conclusions be-

cause I've never reached a conclusion. I strive to be perfectly ignorant and should I live long

enough I might yet achieve it. But this is beside the point just as much as what other people

believe is beside the point. It is wholly irrelevant if everyone believes disease is caused by bac-

teria or the moon is made of green cheese because nature doesn't care and holds no vote. If

you jump off a twenty story building because you think you can fly you will splat on the sidewalk

below unless you are a bird or a cartoon character. ...So it goes. If surgeons are all in agree-

ment that washing their hands and instruments before operations is a waste of time then all their

patients will die despite the aggregate learned opinion. All human activity is an appeal to mother

nature and she dispenses the cases as she deems fit. There are no explanations and no appeals.

The fact that ramps have been drilled into peoples heads for 150 years is wholly irrelevant to the

truth and the debunkment stands whether one person agrees or no one at all. This is because

we have only reason and facts to try to predict how mother nature will rule. Sometimes there isn't

much to work with. I believe we have ample evidence to virtually exclude ramps from consideration

of how the great pyramids were built. I believe that if they actually did real science that proof ramps

weren't used could easily be found.

They are afraid of the pyramid because it simply doesn't fit the preconceptions. It is a 6 1/2 million

ton anomaly reminding them everyday that the paradigm is composed of contradictions and count-

less inconsistencies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me put it this way; The caves are an anomaly at a place called the "Mouth of Caves".

That previous sentence should set off alarm bells in any reasonable person's mind. Why

is it being ignored? What are they so afraid of that they can't do even the most basic sci-

ence? Across the board they are hiding themselves from the facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mentioned the Coral Castle. There's a very simple way to move large pieces of stone. Without levitation. With wood beams and rocks.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As scientists they should be striving to gather information to prove their conjectures.

They are so busy drilling holes and troweling wind blown sand that they might never get to gathering

the data which can prove or disprove ramps.

And herein lies the crux of your misunderstanding as it relates to the ongoing archaeological/geological/biological/environmental, etc., research related to the Giza Plateau (or other sites). The concept behind the various fields of research is much more comprehensive and is based upon furthering our insights into past cultures in toto. That ramps were a part of the technological lexicon of the period under consideration is documented.

Archaeological research is perpetually limited in its funding and there are numerous research proposals/designs to be accommodated and coordinated. In the processes of these various studies, notable ranges of data are accumulated and interpolated.

It is rather unlikely that the qualified researchers involved in the ongoing studies are particularly concerned with your own personal fantasies. However, should credible data related to the topic be encountered, you may be rather confident that it will be documented and reported.

.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And herein lies the crux of your misunderstanding as it relates to the ongoing archaeological/geological/biological/environmental, etc., research related to the Giza Plateau (or other sites). The concept behind the various fields of research is much more comprehensive and is based upon furthering our insights into past cultures in toto. That ramps were a part of the technological lexicon of the period under consideration is documented.

Archaeological research is perpetually limited in its funding and there are numerous research proposals/designs to be accommodated and coordinated. In the processes of these various studies, notable ranges of data are accumulated and interpolated.

It is rather unlikely that the qualified researchers involved in the ongoing studies are particularly concerned with your own personal fantasies. However, should credible data related to the topic be encountered, you may be rather confident that it will be documented and reported.

Nonsense. One can build an inclined surface without ever thinking the word "ramp".

Animals build ramps but the word is probably not in their language. I would suggest

that while you can build a ramp without thinking of the concept that it's impossible to

build a structure usiung an inclined surface you made yourself while draggiong stones

up it without the use of the word. This word is simply unattested before the 5th dyna-

sty!! They understoiod concepts as complicated as balance and weighing/ reckoning

but never used the word "ramp". I would find it astounding they could drag 6 1/2 mil-

lion tons up a ramp they built themselves but somehow neglect to use the word. No

god of ramps or ramp builder, stone draggers, nothing of the sort survives. The silly

little structures Egyptologists find about the pyramids and dignify with the term "ramp"

have cross members that would prevent the use of rollers which is just as well since

there's no evidence for rollers and wood was so precious they wouldn't waste tons of

it each day to roll stones.

You just can't reconci;le the nonsensical proposition trhat they mustta used ramps

with the physical evidence that these are five step pyramids. These things are simply

and incompatible. The most demeaning thing ever said about the ancients is that "they

mustta used ramps". This is tantamount to saying these people were so stupid and

backward that they could not invent any other method to lift stones. But it's even more

demeaning to us because it suggests that we are so superstitious that we have to be-

lieve our ancestors were bumpkins. It says that we are so superstitious that we can't

concieve of any other type of world and we are afraid to actually go runthe tests that

would answer the questions.

If you're saying archaeological research is about digging as big a hole in the sand as

possible and then sticking our heads in it then I agree whole heartedly.

As I told you years ago all the research would support my theories and deny ramps. You

might have overlooked the fact that we are in a thread discussing a cave that Hawass

insisted couldn't exist only a couple years ago. In 2010 Lehner dug up a cistern down-

hill from the G2 water catchment device that could only be filled by steady flow from a-

bove or by walking miles to the river to get water. In 2011 he found evidence that the

Nile did not flow in this area. Actually if you look more closely you'll find virtually all the

news for 150 years denies ramps and points in another direction. But people can't see

what they don't expect so they report dry facts instead of its implications.

It will continue just this way until people open their eyes. It will not be established how

the pyramids were built ubntil all the basic science is done. I often say that the ancients

are spinning in their graves but I'd wager Petrie is spinning much faster. Science has

lost out to politics and religion. It has lost out to superstition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...This word is simply unattested before the 5th dynasty!! They understoiod concepts

as complicated as balance and weighing/ reckoning but never used the word "ramp".

...

Goodness, you simply need to stop making up stuff that "sounds right" to you. You've already admitted your limitations in research, so why would you misrepresent the body of evidence for something about which you know so little? It becomes astounding. Please cite a source of respectable repute that will corroborate the above portion I've quoted. I don't want a long soliloquy or meandering philosophical discourse based on your personal opinions—I want only corroboration that will support your statement.

Obviously ramps were well known to the Egyptians, for construction purposes and long before the Great Pyramid was built. A Dynasty 1 tomb in Saqqara, designated Tomb 3507, still has the remains of a construction ramp on the north side.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Judging by your post, you lack the intelligence to understand as to what exactly defines a GOD that in the mythology of the people is clearly defined as having an extraterrestrial origin.

Its not surprising though, given your general lack of knowledge regarding such matters and in turn your callous reaction to the topic.

Judging by all most all of your posts, you fail to understand the inception and uses of religion in a culture. You post baseless assertions and claim them as indisputable fact, then call everyone who disagrees with you ignorant.

What, prey tell, are your academic credentials? What and where have you studied and for how long?

Edited by Imaginarynumber1
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am afraid to say...but we may never know how egyptians build pyramids...everyone here and in the world may have different answers.but for any answer...there is no solid proof....even if i say that they were build by aliens,egyptians used ramps levitation..or any other explanation..i dont have prove... whoever build pyramids had know a lot about planets and math.... to this day i believe that builders left a message how they did it...that is somewhere underground,,,maybe in the hall of records...i dont know...they left us a puzzle to figure out..and we now have to figure out this puzzle...they did amazing job,,whoever build pyramids...there must be some message that has been left by the builders.

Edited by dreamland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am afraid to say...but we may never know how egyptians build pyramids...everyone here and in the world may have different answers.but for any answer...there is no solid proof....even if i say that they were build by aliens,egyptians used ramps levitation..or any other explanation..i dont have prove... whoever build pyramids had know a lot about planets and math.... to this day i believe that builders left a message how they did it...that is somewhere underground,,,maybe in the hall of records...i dont know...they left us a puzzle to figure out..and we now have to figure out this puzzle...they did amazing job,,whoever build pyramids...there must be some message that has been left by the builders.

There is solid proof. Manual labor, ramps, ropes, etc. I don't know why people continue to ignore this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is solid proof. Manual labor, ramps, ropes, etc. I don't know why people continue to ignore this.

Solid proof will be only when we find an answer left by the builders explaining how they did it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Solid proof will be only when we find an answer left by the builders explaining how they did it.

Proof for you, perhaps. Everybody else accepts the obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We may have an idea,but we never gonna know the real truth.

Edited by dreamland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Solid proof will be only when we find an answer left by the builders explaining how they did it.

The builders left no such thing - after all, the phrase "post project review" is unattested prior to the Fifth Dynasty. ;)

Edited by Mangoze
1 person likes this

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 6

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.