Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Paul Hai

Giza Pyramid construction

1,175 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Hanslune
53 minutes ago, jaylemurph said:

The most relevant fact here is that it is /far/ more realistic than proposing magical carbon dioxide geysers with no geophysical evidence. 
 

—Jaylemurph 

Now, now do you want to trigger a rabidly obsessive response from an eccentric who has single highhandedly-overturned EVERY aspect of Egyptology and Science BUT declines to publish his research and data? Certainly you don't actually want that do you?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
1 hour ago, cormac mac airt said:

Which is a load of bullscheisse since Anatomically Modern Humans have been cranio-morphologically the same for the last circa 35,000 - 100,000 years. Our brains and that of the pyramid builders ARE THE SAME. 
 

cormac

Hey don't get all sciency and rational....you're just reading about the world chaining  intellectual gifts of Cladking.

Did you know that the ancient Egyptians manufactured canned goods?

Did you know also that Cladking knows how to 'open' the secret passage at the heat anomaly on the GP to gain entrance to the Madfet dead cat or whatever - but he declines to change the world due to his great humility?

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jaylemurph
1 hour ago, Hanslune said:

Now, now do you want to trigger a rabidly obsessive response from an eccentric who has single highhandedly-overturned EVERY aspect of Egyptology and Science BUT declines to publish his research and data? Certainly you don't actually want that do you?

Probably worth a few giggles. Maybe even a guffaw. 
 

—Jaylemurph 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jaylemurph
1 hour ago, Hanslune said:

Hey don't get all sciency and rational....you're just reading about the world chaining  intellectual gifts of Cladking.

Did you know that the ancient Egyptians manufactured canned goods?

Did you know also that Cladking knows how to 'open' the secret passage at the heat anomaly on the GP to gain entrance to the Madfet dead cat or whatever - but he declines to change the world due to his great humility?

 

Meh. I like my Doctor Who villains with just a touch of camp. Humility makes for poor drama.

—Jaylemurph 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tom1200
4 hours ago, jaylemurph said:

The most relevant fact here is that it is /far/ more realistic than proposing magical carbon dioxide geysers with no geophysical evidence. 
 

—Jaylemurph 

hay jay its ' me tom again . do you rembur from la'st time?   you did not rite bak so i ass'oom you did not see mi post .  ? i axd the peepil at the cherch  allthe qwestuns  an they tol me to leeve.  they wer very rood

i don understand . if carbon doxid gaysirs ar magic why don we see them in hare potar filums? cos thats all magic an s'tuf .  i fink maybee they'ar noh reel? 

uver fing tat is pu'zli'n me - why is clad kng say peramids arnt ' reel?  they ar reel ! i 'v seen them on tely by monty palin an he wood unt  ly to us . he is famus an has  reppytashun an alredy rich so why wood he ly - ax yorself that?  

an that wun wot cals imself piny      wot a stoopid name ! carn not fink up sumfin betrerer eh pinny?  so funy! /?  i fink tiny or finy or winy or hiny is funyer . but i am jus jossing yu cos yoo r cooul

but wy pepul mak fun of denisovans?  wot them ever do to you eh hart? mi father in lor is caled denis evans an he isnt;'n stoopid or nuffin so wi you make fun ov im? ist's rood an very bad so you need to apolo polo ap need too apoljis say sory rite NOW 

uver fing wot is rong wiv ram'ps ? wy you say them not ther in ainchin times?  ram's i s  the man sheep so they need rams to mak mor sheep cos thats wot sheep do .  you need a sheep an a ram to mak mor sheep so don say ther is no rams then thtat's stupid

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats
12 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

hay jay its ' me tom again . do you rembur from la'st time?   you did not rite bak so i ass'oom you did not see mi post .  ? i axd the peepil at the cherch  allthe qwestuns  an they tol me to leeve.  they wer very rood

i don understand . if carbon doxid gaysirs ar magic why don we see them in hare potar filums? cos thats all magic an s'tuf .  i fink maybee they'ar noh reel? 

uver fing tat is pu'zli'n me - why is clad kng say peramids arnt ' reel?  they ar reel ! i 'v seen them on tely by monty palin an he wood unt  ly to us . he is famus an has  reppytashun an alredy rich so why wood he ly - ax yorself that?  

an that wun wot cals imself piny      wot a stoopid name ! carn not fink up sumfin betrerer eh pinny?  so funy! /?  i fink tiny or finy or winy or hiny is funyer . but i am jus jossing yu cos yoo r cooul

but wy pepul mak fun of denisovans?  wot them ever do to you eh hart? mi father in lor is caled denis evans an he isnt;'n stoopid or nuffin so wi you make fun ov im? ist's rood an very bad so you need to apolo polo ap need too apoljis say sory rite NOW 

uver fing wot is rong wiv ram'ps ? wy you say them not ther in ainchin times?  ram's i s  the man sheep so they need rams to mak mor sheep cos thats wot sheep do .  you need a sheep an a ram to mak mor sheep so don say ther is no rams then thtat's stupid

38C9F861-FB57-4459-9C8F-02345622D9AC.jpeg.4269ffbbeef975e9e2c2efc2c7417dff.jpeg

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
On 11/3/2019 at 1:40 PM, Vaz said:

With a tiny bit of research you could find out.  Most serious Pyramid researchers have :whistle:

I suppose you mean pyramidiots. The serious pyramid researchers such as Mark Lehner know your claims are idiotic at best.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
onlookerofmayhem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking
10 hours ago, Harte said:

Founder of Denny's restaurant chain and the originator of the concept of "second breakfast" among the Hobbits.

He was a sly one.

 

So you can't even tell me what a ramp could look like.  

Just as you have no evidence that it was a tomb, that its builders were just like us, and that they saw the world just like we do.   You have no evidence for a massive hill under it.  No evidence it was built in 2500 BC (or whenever every Egyptologist knows this week). You have no evidence the kings were buried with great riches and the people communicated in a language that could express anything other than superstition..  

Peers are given carte blanche because they base their beliefs on the beliefs of the past but those who don't accept belief must prove their contentions using the evidence Egyptology never bothered to gather.   This goes way beyond pyramid construction because they don't gather any evidence and instead  try to piece together the past by "troweling for pot shards".   Petrie is spinning in his grave.   

If Petrie had modern instrumentation and forensics he would have solved all of this in about ten minutes.  Newton could have done it in a week with a computer.   

People are devolving ever faster.   We rely more and more on machines and tools and think in terms of them.  It will get much worse as computers learn to think and humans forget how.  

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
On 11/4/2019 at 1:21 PM, Vaz said:

Put it this way Tom I'm far more likely to listen to a precision engineer like Dunn who has studied the GP, has the measurements and has carried out all necessary analysis than your goodself.  He has thebackground and you don't.  No disrespect intended.

Has anyone on this thread really studied the pyramid?  If so how come no one appears to regard it any differently to a say a Roman Road?  

Is everyone here seriously lacking the necessary knowledge I wonder?

People here talk about:

  • The pyramid wandering through tectonic plate movement yet the calcs indicate this to be miniscule
  • Drunken builders
  • Hardly any granite used.
  • 'Stacking rocks'
  • No precision in the build. Try looking at the descending passageway for a starter.
  • Copper tools
  • Built as a tomb

In short the ravings of people who are desperate to stick to a party line at any cost to protect the status quo, totally oblivious to truth and reality.

Not an impressive situation.

Cheers

Wow. Reading and comprehension are a skill you need to vastly improve. 

People here talk about:

  • The pyramid wandering through tectonic plate movement yet the calcs indicate this to be miniscule[sic] This shows your claims of being on 30N are dead wrong. How did you miss that?
  • Drunken builders This is in reference to the translated hieroglyphs. How did you miss that?
  • Hardly any granite used. You got something correct. I knew you could get it.
  • 'Stacking rocks' You got something right again. A pyramid is a stack of rocks. 
  • No precision in the build. Try looking at the descending passageway for a starter. You seem to be failing to understand again. It is not no precision. It is not the high precision you claim. How did you miss that?
  • Copper tools Another win here. They had copper and bronze. 
  • Built as a tomb Again, how did you fail to miss that? 

You are even more lost in this thread than you are in your loony desperate ravings about UFOs. 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking
13 hours ago, Harte said:

50% of any pyramid structure lies in the bottom 1/3 of the height, where materials could be hauled up and placed quite quickly by straight and wide ramps on all sides.

It wouldn't be surprising to find that the top 10 or 20% took as long or longer to erect than the rest of the pyramid. A different hauling ramp would be required for that height, probably two spiral ramps.

 

Why straight ramps at the bottom?  If you need no evidence and can just imagine them then why not imagine curved ramps like the one at Hatnub?  Logically if they used curved ramps there the curve might be integral to the function.   Posts along the sides could facilitate moving stone merely by their presence or the way in which they block teams of men from pulling them.   

Every time someone proposes a ramp it proves to be unbuildable, inoperable, unevidenced, or contraindicated and usually more than one of these.  Indeed, most of these proposals are inane since they are one way to the top.   All of them require large armies of men to operate and no evidence or logic exists to suggest they did or even could have had so much manpower.  These simple facts will just be brushed off like a little sand and then more "they mustta used ramps" follows.  Modern beliefs require that the builders used savage, brutal, and ignorant methods to build pyramids and nothing is worse than ramps.  Instead of evidence we get beliefs.  

ALL the facts AND logic run counter to our beliefs.  There are no ramps that point up the side of a great pyramid.   There is no cultural context that supports ramps for building great pyramids.   There are no job titles consistent with having used ramps to build great pyramids.  There are no depictions of gods or bumpkins dragging stones  up ramps.  The word "ramp" is unattested from the great pyramid building age.   

 

People need to wake up and see all this because everything is being reinterpreted and retranslated and in twenty years 5000 year old writing will suddenly have words like "ramp" interspersed throughout.  Soon enough everything will support our beliefs because we are a species more adept at circular reasoning than intelligence or progress.   

Edited by cladking
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
2 hours ago, cladking said:

deleted

same old BS and  nonsense

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
1 hour ago, cladking said:

  deleted a boring rant we've heard a thousand times before.

Yawn

 

Cladking if you want to talk about something how about addressing the FACT that your ideas about the PT have been tested and found to be wrong. Why are you pretending you don't know this? lol

Edited by Hanslune
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
1 hour ago, cladking said:

ALL the facts AND logic run counter to our beliefs.  There are no ramps that point up the side of a great pyramid.   There is no cultural context that supports ramps for building great pyramids.   There are no job titles consistent with having used ramps to build great pyramids.  There are no depictions of gods or bumpkins dragging stones  up ramps.  The word "ramp" is unattested from the great pyramid building age.   

https://www.livescience.com/63978-great-pyramid-ramp-discovered.html

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/does-this-ramps-explain-how-pyramids-were-built-1389712

https://www.history.com/news/ancient-egypt-pyramid-ramp-discovery

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oniomancer
2 hours ago, cladking said:

Petrie is spinning in his grave.   

If Petrie had modern instrumentation and forensics he would have solved all of this in about ten minutes.  Newton could have done it in a week with a computer.   

People are devolving ever faster.   We rely more and more on machines and tools and think in terms of them.  It will get much worse as computers learn to think and humans forget how.  

Petrie was a supporter of archeoastronomy and believed that Stonehenge was built in the early middle ages.

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
4 minutes ago, Oniomancer said:

Petrie was a supporter of archeoastronomy and believed that Stonehenge was built in the early middle ages.

He got lots of stuff wrong but still did a fair job in starting up what would become Egyptology. He would be spinning in his grave to have an Internet 'eccentric' giving him powers he didn't process.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
6 minutes ago, Piney said:

Cladking is well aware that ramps existed. He has stated that before - he is now just trolling people with his statements that they didn't exist

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanos5150
14 hours ago, Harte said:

50% of any pyramid structure lies in the bottom 1/3 of the height, where materials could be hauled up and placed quite quickly by straight and wide ramps on all sides.

It wouldn't be surprising to find that the top 10 or 20% took as long or longer to erect than the rest of the pyramid. A different hauling ramp would be required for that height, probably two spiral ramps.

Harte

I actually would be surprised if the last 10% took as long or longer than the other 90% for several reasons, let alone 10 compared to 17.  From the RC up in particular the blocks notably begin to decrease in size, and unlike the larger blocks mostly found at the RC and below, these could be carried by men not to mention more likely pulled up several courses at a time. The relative ease in which these smaller blocks could be handled, it stands to reason would be more than enough to compensate for the increase of distance traveled and different delivery system which in reality the latter may have been much more efficient.  

Also, as said before (not sure what happened but this quote is supposed to end at "...and not necessarily G1":

Quote

If it took 10yrs to complete the last 10% how long did it take to do the other 90% which would have comprised all of the largest stones (except casing stones) and granite work...? Hmm. 

Also, how many years after the fact did it take to build the mortuary temple, mastabas, mastaba temples, queen's pyramids, boat pits ect? The queen's pyramids were also cased in Tura limestone as were some of the mastabas of which all are part of "Akhet-Khufu" which in reality refers to the necropolis as a whole and not necessarily just G1.

The latter speaks to the fact this is not just finishing the pyramid, but numerous other projects would have been just beginning after work had made it to RC if not well after when G1 near completion.  

And It goes without saying the additional work of the RC and below, not present above it, are the building of the chamber system itself.  Not to mention the leveling of the site and shaping the hill, building transport and docking, housing and supply lines for the workers, ect, ect. A little more to consider than just Lego blocks and ramps. 

Edited by Thanos5150
problem with quote
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
5 minutes ago, Thanos5150 said:

 these could be carried by men not to mention more likely pulled up several courses at a time.

Howdy Thanos

A minor quibble. This is an image of the top surviving G1 tier - I don't think those stone could be carried by men. Did you mean to say pulled by men?

dPkQEqs.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oniomancer

Was looking up alternate scans of the book discussed above to check a hunch. Couldn't find one, though I did find a later edition where the footnote in question appears even more damning. However....

In reading over parts of the book, the general tone is one of raconteur's humor and suggests that Puckler-Maskau was having one over at Vyse's expense. It would be interesting to know how it reads to a native speaker in the original. 19th century humor, especially  that of aristocrats, tends to be very dry and doesn't always carry over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
16 minutes ago, Oniomancer said:

Was looking up alternate scans of the book discussed above to check a hunch. Couldn't find one, though I did find a later edition where the footnote in question appears even more damning. However....

In reading over parts of the book, the general tone is one of raconteur's humor and suggests that Puckler-Maskau was having one over at Vyse's expense. It would be interesting to know how it reads to a native speaker in the original. 19th century humor, especially  that of aristocrats, tends to be very dry and doesn't always carry over.

Yep I read a great deal of 19th century material, not just books but their newspapers and magazines.

Here is a comedy book from a few decades after Vyse's time but utilizing stories from his time and before. Some of the humor shines through but some also doesn't seem funny at all:

https://play.google.com/store/books/details/Mark_Lemon_The_jest_book_the_choicest_anecdotes_an?id=qdcBAAAAQAAJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
Just now, cladking said:

You didn't address a single word I said.  You merely said what YOU BELIEVE and why YOU BELIEVE it.  

I posted some form of evidence. You on the other hand haven't. :yes:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
1 minute ago, Piney said:

I posted some form of evidence. You on the other hand haven't. :yes:

Did you guys really have to get the nutcases started again? :w00t:

cormac

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
Just now, cormac mac airt said:

Did you guys really have to get the nutcases started again? :w00t:

:yes:

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.