Look Mama, no diamond saw

[ShadowSot]

I'm trying to find the program, but there was a show where they demonstrated carving a stone spehere using a plumbbob and a sizable chunk of rock. The real mystery with the stone spheres is what they were intended for.

Maybe Costa Rica was the site for the manufacturing of the stone balls used in all of those temples as traps?

[Big Bad Voodoo]

I'm trying to find the program, but there was a show where they demonstrated carving a stone spehere using a plumbbob and a sizable chunk of rock. The real mystery with the stone spheres is what they were intended for.

Maybe Costa Rica was the site for the manufacturing of the stone balls used in all of those temples as traps?

Hi Shadowsot,

Interesting theory. I have many hypothesis. Maybe Giant balls were just what name tell us-GiantS balls. Why not? I remembered story when Europeans came into South America there were stories about Giants. They even took one with them to Europe.

Or planetary models. Star maps.

[ShadowSot]

The only use I can remember, since early American societies isn't really my interest, (though finding this metates from Costa Ric is sparking my interest:)

There may have been a ceremonial use to the balls, one I recall was similar to headstones or memorials today for people who have passed.

Another idea was similar to the later uses of the Moai, that you had competitions between villages to build and place them.

Since the culture responsible for them died off after the Spanish appeared and didn't leave any writing behind,we'll probably never know.

[Abramelin]

Maybe it is not really your interest, because ancient American societies aren't that old.

I love really OLD too.

OK, then read about Caral, Peru: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caral

It's older than the Giza Pyramids.

+++

EDIT:

Radiocarbon readings at this city gives a start around 2627 B.C. at times of the Great Giza Pyramids; only surpassed by a small sunken plaza temple at Sechin barely 150 km north of Caral, it gives a surprisingly date parallel to late Egyptian pre dynastic Naqada I period (4400-3500).

http://www.rediscovering-america.com/Caral%20Peru%20a%204600%20years%20old%20American%20Pyramids%20Palaces%20Conglomerate.html

.

Edited May 26, 2012 by Abramelin

[ShadowSot]

Maybe it is not really your interest, because ancient American societies aren't that old.

I made that exact suggestion to a person who's passion is Pre-Columbian America and I had to retreat quickly, partially due to Caral but also the Olmec and similar civilizations.

Shame to, she was a nice looking lady.

I do love the truly ancient civilizations, where society as we know it is just getting started.

The main reason I have so much information on Egypt is mainly due to the number of times it pops up on fringe forums. S'where I started.

[Time Spy]

I know I said that I would not post in this thread any more just want to add some good videos. I didnt want to start new thread with same questions as in this one.

[media=]

OUTSTANDING first video 'L', talk about setting the academic world straight. That is exactly the way I see it as well, minus the timeline debate of course. I personally think time has changed in drastic relations to orbital alignment of the sun and daily rotation of the Earth on the axis. Nevertheless these guys are absolutely right about the lost technology factors in history and cultural change. I for one am not brainwashed by those wanting to renew the yearly funding budget from the many grants made available to those who will just 'research to find' that which they're told to discover.

I will take the time soon to watch the next two videos. Once again, FANTASTIC, and thanks for sharing.

[Big Bad Voodoo]

OUTSTANDING first video 'L', talk about setting the academic world straight. That is exactly the way I see it as well, minus the timeline debate of course. I personally think time has changed in drastic relations to orbital alignment of the sun and daily rotation of the Earth on the axis. Nevertheless these guys are absolutely right about the lost technology factors in history and cultural change. I for one am not brainwashed by those wanting to renew the yearly funding budget from the many grants made available to those who will just 'research to find' that which they're told to discover.

I will take the time soon to watch the next two videos. Once again, FANTASTIC, and thanks for sharing.

Thanks. Dont forget 4 video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=s835dO0rfGE

[BMan375032]

Just to put my 2 cents in, I work in a power plant and lift many tons of machinery. I just can not fathom how they could of lifted such heavy blocks of stone up to 80 tons and were transported from Aswan, more than 500 miles away. I even have some friends who are Crane operators and they say the problem wouldn't be with lifting it, but having a crane large enough to pick up a block and move it 375ft to the center(of the Great Pyramid) without beginning to tip or become off balanced. It can be done but the crane would be massive and counterweights of the like that we have not used yet. Also the pyramids are built to a (5/1000) of an inch accuracy. This is the kind of tolerance we have for setting motors that weigh about the same as a 8 ton stone block. Sometimes it takes us days to get it within (5/1000) of an inch. This is a Hugh mystery to me and I would love to see an Pro Mason carve the Puma Punku stones and have them interlock like they were with the tools used then. I have no idea how it was done but I think some of you give our ancient people to much credit.

[ShadowSot]

The stones in the pyramid are not 80 tonnes, most of them are around 2 tonnes. They were also stacked fairly haphazardly, with many empty spaces and backfill left in the pyramid interior. There's not such accuracy to the pyramids building, save for the alignment to true north and the leveling at the foundation.

And you're thinking wrong here, they didn't lift but dragged the stones into position. It's easier to drag than lift. Speaking as someone who's had to drag machines and material, I know this from experience.

Also, the quarry the granite was mined from was on the Nile, and the pyramids at the time were much closer to the Nile as well. The stones would have been loaded to a barge and then floated to the construction site. The limestone was taken from a quarry on site.

Edited May 27, 2012 by ShadowSot

[Abramelin]

Just to put my 2 cents in, I work in a power plant and lift many tons of machinery. I just can not fathom how they could of lifted such heavy blocks of stone up to 80 tons and were transported from Aswan, more than 500 miles away. I even have some friends who are Crane operators and they say the problem wouldn't be with lifting it, but having a crane large enough to pick up a block and move it 375ft to the center(of the Great Pyramid) without beginning to tip or become off balanced. It can be done but the crane would be massive and counterweights of the like that we have not used yet. Also the pyramids are built to a (5/1000) of an inch accuracy. This is the kind of tolerance we have for setting motors that weigh about the same as a 8 ton stone block. Sometimes it takes us days to get it within (5/1000) of an inch. This is a Hugh mystery to me and I would love to see an Pro Mason carve the Puma Punku stones and have them interlock like they were with the tools used then. I have no idea how it was done but I think some of you give our ancient people to much credit.

The Romans carried off Egyptian obelisks weighing a 100 tons or more to Rome.

Tallest obelisk in Rome, and the largest standing ancient Egyptian obelisk in the world, weighing over 230 tons. Originally from the temple of Amun in Karnak.map Brought to Alexandria with another obelisk by Constantius II, and brought on its own from there to Rome in 357 to decorate the spina of the Circus Maximus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_obelisks_in_Rome

.

Edited May 27, 2012 by Abramelin

[Gunn]

Just to put my 2 cents in, I work in a power plant and lift many tons of machinery. I just can not fathom how they could of lifted such heavy blocks of stone up to 80 tons and were transported from Aswan, more than 500 miles away. I even have some friends who are Crane operators and they say the problem wouldn't be with lifting it, but having a crane large enough to pick up a block and move it 375ft to the center(of the Great Pyramid) without beginning to tip or become off balanced. It can be done but the crane would be massive and counterweights of the like that we have not used yet. Also the pyramids are built to a (5/1000) of an inch accuracy. This is the kind of tolerance we have for setting motors that weigh about the same as a 8 ton stone block. Sometimes it takes us days to get it within (5/1000) of an inch. This is a Hugh mystery to me and I would love to see an Pro Mason carve the Puma Punku stones and have them interlock like they were with the tools used then. I have no idea how it was done but I think some of you give our ancient people to much credit.

Why not? That sounds like the typical setiment of the AA proponents. The ancient cultures were certainly intelligent enough to know how to improvise and achieve what ever it was they wanted to do. That's why we as a human species, are as far as we are today and it didn't take alien intervention throughout history to get to this point. Although I've heard the AA proponents are trying to claim that as well, seems they're now claiming alien help with famous people like Leonardo Da Vinci and others who were ahead of their time in history.

That's just sad, really sad. Anything for the ratings I guess.

[BMan375032]

The stones in the pyramid are not 80 tonnes, most of them are around 2 tonnes. They were also stacked fairly haphazardly, with many empty spaces and backfill left in the pyramid interior. There's not such accuracy to the pyramids building, save for the alignment to true north and the leveling at the foundation.

And you're thinking wrong here, they didn't lift but dragged the stones into position. It's easier to drag than lift. Speaking as someone who's had to drag machines and material, I know this from experience.

Also, the quarry the granite was mined from was on the Nile, and the pyramids at the time were much closer to the Nile as well. The stones would have been loaded to a barge and then floated to the construction site. The limestone was taken from a quarry on site.

The stones above the Kings Chamber are estimated to be 50 to 80 tons. As for the accuraccy of the pyrimid, right angles to the (2/100th) are maintained inside most of the pyramid. And when your dealing with accuraccy you cant drag, I know this from experience.

The Romans carried off Egyptian obelisks weighing a 100 tons or more to Rome.

Tallest obelisk in Rome, and the largest standing ancient Egyptian obelisk in the world, weighing over 230 tons. Originally from the temple of Amun in Karnak.map Brought to Alexandria with another obelisk by Constantius II, and brought on its own from there to Rome in 357 to decorate the spina of the Circus Maximus.

http://en.wikipedia....belisks_in_Rome

.

Yes, I know but im talking about a balanced condition of conventional crane is achieved by equalizing forward and rearward moments. In simple terms, let us assume that the weight of the boom and basic machine equalize each other, and that the center of gravity is above the crane's tipping point. The weight of the load multiplied by its distance forward from the tipping point must be equalized by the weight of the counterweight multiplied by its distance rearward from the tipping point. For example, a one ton load at a twenty foot radius gives a forward load moment of twenty. This load moment would then be equalized or counterbalanced by an 4 ton counterweight at a distance of five feet, having rearward load moment of twenty. (figure 1)

- Figure 1 -

Why not? That sounds like the typical setiment of the AA proponents. The ancient cultures were certainly intelligent enough to know how to improvise and achieve what ever it was they wanted to do. That's why we as a human species, are as far as we are today and it didn't take alien intervention throughout history to get to this point. Although I've heard the AA proponents are trying to claim that as well, seems they're now claiming alien help with famous people like Leonardo Da Vinci and others who were ahead of their time in history.

That's just sad, really sad. Anything for the ratings I guess.

I would like to hear why you seem to think this is such a simple feat to be done. I will even admit that they might have been able to do it with hemp, pulleys and copper. But I would think after moving or dragging or whatever you want to say they did, those tools would be close to useless after the first stone. So where are all these tools at they used. Please lets not hear the "they had plenty of time to achieve this" theory. I agree they had lots of time but not enough to be using the biggest stones and achieving right angle to almost perfection.

Edited June 4, 2012 by BMan375032

[questionmark]

The stones above the Kings Chamber are estimated to be 50 to 80 tons. As for the accuraccy of the pyrimid, right angles to the (2/100th) are maintained inside most of the pyramid. And when your dealing with accuraccy you cant drag, I know this from experience.

Yes, I know but im talking about a balanced condition of conventional crane is achieved by equalizing forward and rearward moments. In simple terms, let us assume that the weight of the boom and basic machine equalize each other, and that the center of gravity is above the crane's tipping point. The weight of the load multiplied by its distance forward from the tipping point must be equalized by the weight of the counterweight multiplied by its distance rearward from the tipping point. For example, a one ton load at a twenty foot radius gives a forward load moment of twenty. This load moment would then be equalized or counterbalanced by an 4 ton counterweight at a distance of five feet, having rearward load moment of twenty. (figure 1)

- Figure 1 -

I would like to hear why you seem to think this is such a simple feat to be done. I will even admit that they might have been able to do it with hemp, pulleys and copper. But I would think after moving or dragging or whatever you want to say they did, those tools would be close to useless after the first stone. So where are all these tools at they used. Please lets not hear the "they had plenty of time to achieve this" theory. I agree they had lots of time but not enough to be using the biggest stones and achieving right angle to almost perfection.

I guess you have never seen the pyramids yourself or you would certainly not come with the precision crap: There was some window dressing with smaller blocks but all the large ones are set pretty sloppily and if not held in place by plenty plaster the whole shebang would come down in the first strong shemal.

[Gunn]

I would like to hear why you seem to think this is such a simple feat to be done. I will even admit that they might have been able to do it with hemp, pulleys and copper. But I would think after moving or dragging or whatever you want to say they did, those tools would be close to useless after the first stone. So where are all these tools at they used. Please lets not hear the "they had plenty of time to achieve this" theory. I agree they had lots of time but not enough to be using the biggest stones and achieving right angle to almost perfection.

Never said it would have of been simple for them, BMan. As matter of fact, I'm pretty sure they suffered a few injuries in the process if no one was accidentally killed; which probably did happen as well. But thing is, there is this mentality that our ancient ancestors were just primitive and ignorant, so they must have had help from an alien source. That they couldn't think for themselves, when it came to solving a puzzle or finding a way to do what some think is the impossible. No, nothing is impossible...where this is a will, there is a way and humans will eventually find that way. The way you might look at it, is in this way... they obviously had a few unorthodox techniques that we haven't discovered yet. A unique way of doing what they did in that time in history, in which they igeniously came up with, but the technique has been lost over a few thousand years to us today. And we have yet to figure it out, but certainly not Ancient Aliens is the answer. The greeks didn't have Ancient Alien help did they? The Romans didn't either, yet we know both accomplished their incredible feats all by themselves. What makes the Ancient Egyptians any different when it comes to ingenuity and clever ideas?

[Time Spy]

I guess you have never seen the pyramids yourself or you would certainly not come with the precision crap: There was some window dressing with smaller blocks but all the large ones are set pretty sloppily and if not held in place by plenty plaster the whole shebang would come down in the first strong shemal.

You know questionmark that is just NOT right. Precision is the ONLY thing that enabled the Kings chambers to withstand such a load. I know from past posts that your a credible source, but this is just astonishing. How could you say such a thing. There was NOTHING, and I repeat NOTHING sloppy about any of the 'shebang' throughout construction, which is quite obvious. If only the casing stones remained upon the entire surface, science and EVERY discreditor would simply have to behold in astonishment a work of art that sit withstanding the elements in an engineering amazement of wonder.

Just a note mortar is week and crumbles upoh impact stone stands the test of time, any mason will testify to this truth.

[BMan375032]

You know questionmark that is just NOT right. Precision is the ONLY thing that enabled the Kings chambers to withstand such a load. I know from past posts that your a credible source, but this is just astonishing. How could you say such a thing. There was NOTHING, and I repeat NOTHING sloppy about any of the 'shebang' throughout construction, which is quite obvious. If only the casing stones remained upon the entire surface, science and EVERY discreditor would simply have to behold in astonishment a work of art that sit withstanding the elements in an engineering amazement of wonder.

Just a note mortar is week and crumbles upoh impact stone stands the test of time, any mason will testify to this truth.

Thank you Time Spy! And no I have never been there. Just to clear things up, I don't think aliens did it. I don't know who did it! But It wasn't our ancient civilizations coming up with ways to move the biggest stones they could find around. Could be a lost part of human history techno for all I know. Just saying I don't see it with the tools that show up in the digs around these monoliths.

[Time Spy]

Thank you Time Spy! And no I have never been there. Just to clear things up, I don't think aliens did it. I don't know who did it! But It wasn't our ancient civilizations coming up with ways to move the biggest stones they could find around. Could be a lost part of human history techno for all I know. Just saying I don't see it with the tools that show up in the digs around these monoliths.

Exactly and well said. The tools that were used are no longer in existsence. They wound up weapons like everything else at the time to kill. The ancient civilization who created them were born of this soil. Those who influenced in ways of know how may not have been, just saying. It was most definitiely a lost part of human history, using a technology that was long lost as well.

[questionmark]

You know questionmark that is just NOT right. Precision is the ONLY thing that enabled the Kings chambers to withstand such a load. I know from past posts that your a credible source, but this is just astonishing. How could you say such a thing. There was NOTHING, and I repeat NOTHING sloppy about any of the 'shebang' throughout construction, which is quite obvious. If only the casing stones remained upon the entire surface, science and EVERY discreditor would simply have to behold in astonishment a work of art that sit withstanding the elements in an engineering amazement of wonder.

Just a note mortar is week and crumbles upoh impact stone stands the test of time, any mason will testify to this truth.

Then tell me what you see in between those blocks, if you are such an expert:

[Time Spy]

Then tell me what you see in between those blocks, if you are such an expert:

I see cracks (VERY thin) where the mortar has crumbled, notwistanding the fact that it doesn't mattter since the stone is the everprecident mass and resolution of greatness in engineering capacity. Maybe I misunderstand your point, as I also see a human figure to exponentiate the ever prominent dominance of the MILLIONS of boulders that sit there regardless of the mortar and its existence while in long lost deteriation.

Expert is a term, maybe not relavent to myself, as I am but an experienced observer throughout time in a relevance that is not pertaining to an understood recognition, so what? My only point was that the presice construction of this structure is STILL unequaled in the greatness of engineering and the feat of placement of stone upon stone, year after year, regardless of the device design still conceiled within, still remains ever evident probably evermore not understood to modern day science.

[Gunn]

Thank you Time Spy! And no I have never been there. Just to clear things up, I don't think aliens did it. I don't know who did it! But It wasn't our ancient civilizations coming up with ways to move the biggest stones they could find around. Could be a lost part of human history techno for all I know. Just saying I don't see it with the tools that show up in the digs around these monoliths.

I can understand that point of view, but at the same time, the tools in question must of had something to do with at least shaping and crafting those blocks of stones we see today. Swede and Questionmark made a valuable point in this thread, about the material make-up of copper tools back then, and I quote:

jmccr8 - Just some thoughts based upon personal experience/experimentation and professional research:

Cuprous metallurgy can take many forms and can result in somewhat of a range of hardnesses in regards to the final product/application. For example, cuprous materials, even if falling into the "softer" ranges, have the capacity to hold embedded silicates (for example, sand) quite well. Thus, "wear" can, in certain applications, be primarily associated with the degradation of the silicates, which are easily supplemented.

Even raw annealed and hammered copper can achieve a Mohs hardness in the range of that of wrought iron, which was the most commonly available and utilized ferric metal form up until quite recent history.

The early arsenic bronzes, while essentially unintentional in their generation, would be capable of even greater levels of hardness.

Multiple tools, multiple methodologies, multiple applications.

and....

Swede already answered most of the question. I just want to add that with the discovery of metalworking metallurgy soon followed. We know from the early smelting areas in Turkey, Serbia and Spain that copper-smiths were actively testing the mixing of other metals and minerals with copper and checking the property of the resulting metal.

So the answer to the question: "With copper tools?" is always another question: " What kind of copper are you talking about?" Chemically pure copper makes a poor tool, if we mix it with a little silver the tool gets harder and if we mix it with some tin it gets much harder. If additionally we are capable of reducing the oxides (i.e. with arsenic or phosphates) its hardness nears that of iron (where we have to add that evidence of this we have found in South America, not Asia, Africa or Europe). If then we pressure form (forge) the tool from an ingot instead of casting it we come to hardness levels not achieved again until the widespread use of forged iron.

So its not that because they were capable of only smelting "copper" that they had poorer tools than lets say two thousand years later, maybe a little less durable and in need of retooling more frequently but not a poorer tool. In fact, for most stone work copper alloys were used until the Renaissance because the available cast iron was too brittle besides being way to expensive.

So, as far as those tools that were found are concerned, in relation to shaping and cutting those blocks...that makes perfect sense to me; well also because of my experiments with different metals in my spare time over the years. But as far as exactly how they put those heavy blocks in the places (especially on top of one another) we see today, is of course going to be up to debate for probably sometime. But it doesn't mean we should totally dismiss any ideals or suggestions the Academia has made so far. After all, nothing material or archaeological has surfaced to counter those arguments. Yet, it doesn't mean they're totally correct about every single suggestion, but I can see the Academia comes a lot closer than anyone else. Especially more so than what the AA proponents try to pass off about their ideals of alien intervention and alien technology as being the right ideal. No, the ancients did it on their own, somehow, someway, we just don't have all the final pieces of the puzzle yet.

[questionmark]

I see cracks (VERY thin) where the mortar has crumbled, notwistanding the fact that it doesn't mattter since the stone is the everprecident mass and resolution of greatness in engineering capacity. Maybe I misunderstand your point, as I also see a human figure to exponentiate the ever prominent dominance of the MILLIONS of boulders that sit there regardless of the mortar and its existence while in long lost deteriation.

Expert is a term, maybe not relavent to myself, as I am but an experienced observer throughout time in a relevance that is not pertaining to an understood recognition, so what? My only point was that the presice construction of this structure is STILL unequaled in the greatness of engineering and the feat of placement of stone upon stone, year after year, regardless of the device design still conceiled within, still remains ever evident probably evermore not understood to modern day science.

Have your glasses checked. And a verbose "I am not saying anything" does not change the fact that you are evidently at a total loss what you are talking about. It could also be that we are talking about two different things, I am talking about a bronze age funerary monument located in Giza, a suburb of Cairo, Egypt. A place where I have been at least once a year for the last 15 or so to document the archeological progress for an image agency. While you are evidently talking about something invented by the Grandmaster of Bool Krappy himself and parroted by people who the nearest they got to Giza is about 5 feet from their desk, and that only because the Sitchin or von Daniken book fell on the floor.

But keep it up, you might discover that you can delude yourself into anything.

[lightly]

That's a great picture of the blocks (thanks again Q) . One aspect of accuracy that is apparent is LEVEL. I think that's the main secret to the Great Pyramid's longevity? ( i saw a documentary where LEVEL was demonstrated ) Plumb sort of takes care of itself in a pyramid shaped pile? Although, some of the finished interior work shows accuracy in both Level and Plumb? ... And some of the 'relieving' work to bare the immense weight above the chambers ,evenly, would no doubt have to be accurately leveled and plumbed?

I think the block behind the man's head is fascinating . It and a few others have sort of S shaped joins. I suspect those to be either natural fissures? ..or perhaps more likely, caused during Quarrying? .. then the S fit was utilized during construction.

The newly finished pyramid with it's casing stones must have been spectacularly beautiful.

[questionmark]

That's a great picture of the blocks (thanks again Q) . One aspect of accuracy that is apparent is LEVEL. I think that's the main secret to the Great Pyramid's longevity? ( i saw a documentary where LEVEL was demonstrated ) Plumb sort of takes care of itself in a pyramid shaped pile? Although, some of the finished interior work shows accuracy in both Level and Plumb? ... And some of the 'relieving' work to bare the immense weight above the chambers ,evenly, would no doubt have to be accurately leveled and plumbed?

I think the block behind the man's head is fascinating . It and a few others have sort of S shaped joins. I suspect those to be either natural fissures? ..or perhaps more likely, caused during Quarrying? .. then the S fit was utilized during construction.

The newly finished pyramid with it's casing stones must have been spectacularly beautiful.

by the size of the block most likely during quarrying, it looks like it broke and then simply was set side by side with the next one to make it fit. You always have to remember that these things were set up as fast as the work could be performed as nobody knew when the boss would kick the bucket. And at closer inspection there is evidence of that everywhere, cavities filled with rubble, on top of the great pyramid there is a cavity with 4 blocks missing that could not have been removed after the building was complete but looks like some kind of "shortcut" during construction.

As far as how it might have looked, the last reliable description of a mostly unspoiled pyramid in Giza we have is that of Strabo in the first century AD. After that all descriptions we have is of stripped down versions that have been used to source stones for the building of Cairo.

[keithisco]

I see cracks (VERY thin) where the mortar has crumbled, notwistanding the fact that it doesn't mattter since the stone is the everprecident mass and resolution of greatness in engineering capacity. Maybe I misunderstand your point, as I also see a human figure to exponentiate the ever prominent dominance of the MILLIONS of boulders that sit there regardless of the mortar and its existence while in long lost deteriation.

Expert is a term, maybe not relavent to myself, as I am but an experienced observer throughout time in a relevance that is not pertaining to an understood recognition, so what? My only point was that the presice construction of this structure is STILL unequaled in the greatness of engineering and the feat of placement of stone upon stone, year after year, regardless of the device design still conceiled within, still remains ever evident probably evermore not understood to modern day science.

Hmmm...OK. I believe you but I just dont understand any of your sentences (are you using a Thesaurus by an chance? - you do know that the further you get down the list of synonyms the further from the root meaning you get?).

Oft quoted, but entirely wrong, the assumption that no "modern" engineering feats measure up to the Great Pyramid. I disagree, for the Pharaohs to have built anything to equal to the hundreds of taller structures in the modern world would have been quite beyond their capabilities.

In fact the Great Pyramid is pretty useless as a building - it contains nothing, open spaces inside so small (as a determinant of the design) to present any useful purpose - except to satiate the ego of perhaps one man.

So, to use a "modern" term, it fails the "Form, Fit and Function" criteria, that all of the modern structures DO fulfil.

[keithisco]

Just a question to everyone - do we actually know that the entire pyramid had stone casing as well, or was it just the cap?

Thanks