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 -
kborissov

Girdle stones in the Great Pyramid

98 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

NicoletteS
On 5/16/2018 at 5:14 AM, jmccr8 said:

I have read through several times now and have reasonable doubt that the hypothesis that you are putting forward is unacceptable. First off you are claiming tech beyond the capabilities of any known cultures of the time. Secondly gas is highly combustible and the sanity of sliding stone that distance and generating friction heat and potential spark is questionable even once.

jmccr8

The first point is highly flawed as we obviously do not have complete records of the cultures at the time let alone even know what tech was used to build the pyramids or what they were used for. Incomplete data does not equal capability limitations.

The second point however is crucial. Now why the hell would anyone use scraping a conductive stone that can produce sparks down a corridor to block an incredibly flammable gas? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
jmccr8
50 minutes ago, NicoletteS said:

The first point is highly flawed as we obviously do not have complete records of the cultures at the time let alone even know what tech was used to build the pyramids or what they were used for. Incomplete data does not equal capability limitations.

The second point however is crucial. Now why the hell would anyone use scraping a conductive stone that can produce sparks down a corridor to block an incredibly flammable gas? 

Hi Nicolette

No we do not have complete documentation, we do have enough data collected through artifacts for a period far exceeding and preceding the construction of the pyramids that does show the tech level of many cultures. There is no evidence that the pyramids were anything more than what is currently known.

jmccr8

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kmt_sesh
On May 23, 2018 at 6:57 PM, jmccr8 said:

...There is no evidence that the pyramids were anything more than what is currently known.

jmccr8

One wonders why anyone still bothers to fight the evidence.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


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

One wonders why anyone still bothers to fight the evidence.

To sell books...

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kmt_sesh
3 minutes ago, Piney said:

To sell books...

Bingo.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte

The girdle stones are just that - girdles.

The GP was putting on a little weight and didn't want to be seen in public like that, so she went with the girdles under her petticoat.

Harte

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kmt_sesh
54 minutes ago, Harte said:

The girdle stones are just that - girdles.

The GP was putting on a little weight and didn't want to be seen in public like that, so she went with the girdles under her petticoat.

Harte

Yet she never lifyed her petticoats to mince across the Atlantic.

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wistman
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, kmt_sesh said:

Yet she never lifyed her petticoats to mince across the Atlantic.

She daren't, for the geysers would be released upon the royal necropolis.  And we know what moisture does to mummies, papyri, and pretty things in tombs, don't we.  Woe.

Edited by The Wistman
  • Like 2
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte
7 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

Yet she never lifyed her petticoats to mince across the Atlantic.

By her time, that was passe.

I mean, it's been done, ya know?

SO yesterday.

Harte

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte
6 hours ago, The Wistman said:

She daren't, for the geysers would be released upon the royal necropolis.  And we know what moisture does to mummies, papyri, and pretty things in tombs, don't we.  Woe.

That would lift the petticoat, baring her unmentionables.

Harte

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wistman
5 hours ago, Harte said:

That would lift the petticoat, baring her unmentionables.

Harte

...embarrassing the old girl, causing her head beacon to turn from green to rosy red.  :o

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GoldenWolf
16 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

One wonders why anyone still bothers to fight the evidence.

One wonders why this guy doesn't show people the inside of the Great Sphinx.

2014-635338644108104286-810.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Windowpane
8 hours ago, Harte said:

That would lift the petticoat, baring her unmentionables.

 

But the petticoats might have been like the skirt of a Hovercraft.  If they could have been filled with air from - well, whatever source - she could have hovered her way across the deserts and oceans.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet
3 hours ago, MysticWolf said:

One wonders why this guy doesn't show people the inside of the Great Sphinx.

2014-635338644108104286-810.jpg

Because you can't get in there.  It's solid.

I stood outside with him, and he pointed out all the tunnels and the attempted tunnels (and anyone who's studied the Sphinx knows about them}.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet
1 hour ago, Windowpane said:

But the petticoats might have been like the skirt of a Hovercraft.  If they could have been filled with air from - well, whatever source - she could have hovered her way across the deserts and oceans.

Let's not speculate on the source of the air.  I already went there, thanks, so the rest of you don't have to do it.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kmt_sesh
12 hours ago, MysticWolf said:

One wonders why this guy doesn't show people the inside of the Great Sphinx.

2014-635338644108104286-810.jpg

What, you're interested in seeing what the inside of solid rock looks like?

And why would Hawass do it? He's no longer in charge at Giza.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lord Harry
Posted (edited)
On 5/21/2018 at 7:51 PM, kborissov said:

No one recovered a mummy from the pyramids either...

Not true. Human remains were discovered in the Red Pyramid of Sneferu in 1948. Remains which the lead archaeologist Dr. Abdel Salaam Hussein, as well as modern Egyptologists Drs. Rainer Stadelmann, Bob Brier, and Aidan Dodson believe comprise the royal mummy of King Sneferu.

These remains will soon by made subject to C14 analysis. And by the way, the fringe only reveals their ignorance on the subject when they presume the Third and Fourth Dynasty pyramids were anything but royal tombs. To make such an assumption defies logic, because it ignores not only the presence of stone sarcophagus in many of these pyramids, but also more than five centuries of royal mortuary architectural precedent. The Great Pyramid represents merely the pinnacle of evolution Egyptian royal mortuary architecture, and did not arise in a vacuum as the fringe erroneously presumes.

Edited by Lord Harry
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte

But that doesn't debunk the slightly-pudgy-needing-a-girdle hypothesis.

Harte

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet
On 5/26/2018 at 10:35 AM, MysticWolf said:

One wonders why this guy doesn't show people the inside of the Great Sphinx.

2014-635338644108104286-810.jpg

Also, for what it's worth, I listened to a lecture by him at the Sphynx some 2 years ago.  He showed us where all the tunnels were and where all the modifications/repairs were done.  

And, as others have said, he's not in charge of anything these days.  Yet somehow he gets blamed for everything.  Still.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jarocal
On 7/21/2018 at 9:41 AM, Lord Harry said:

And by the way, the fringe only reveals their ignorance on the subject when they presume the Third and Fourth Dynasty pyramids were anything but royal tombs. To make such an assumption defies logic, because it ignores not only the presence of stone sarcophagus in many of these pyramids, but also more than five centuries of royal mortuary architectural precedent. The Great Pyramid represents merely the pinnacle of evolution Egyptian royal mortuary architecture, and did not arise in a vacuum as the fringe erroneously presumes.

To be fair, many phringe theories do not ignore the other pyramids. They merely contend that the Giza complex predates the smaller ones which were obviously built as tombs and that they were created in imitation of the ones at Giza. Carbon14 dating is claimed to be skewed by later repairs made to the structures.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bennu
Posted (edited)

This explanations seems possible.

"Mendelssohn (5) argued that the Girdle-stones are evidence of buttress walls from an internal step-pyramid structure. He said the following;

'Since earlier and later stone pyramids relied on a basic core of buttress walls it is more than likely that the same design was used in the great Giza pyramids. Borshardt has drawn attention to the existence of 'girdle-stones' in that part of the ascending passage of the Khufu pyramid which was cut through already existing masonry at the first alteration of the interior design. These are large vertical slabs through which the new corridor passes at intervals, and he has taken them as part of internal buttress walls', but then he says 'This view has been disputed by Clarke and Engelbach, who have pointed out that it would be wholly fortuitous for the passage always to have encountered whole stones. They also maintain, rightly, that the walls of this passage are made of fitted stones...'

In order to reconcile this information, he concludes that;

'...probably both sides are correct. The passage was evidently lined with new masonry and the girdle-stones, while not being part of the original buttress walls, were placed to mark their positions. This seems more likely since the girdle-stones are spaced at intervals of 10 cubits (about 5m.), which is the distance between buttress walls in the medium pyramid. This indication of internal buttress walls shows that no novel features seem to have been introduced in the core structure of the Giza pyramids'. "

http://www.ancient-wisdom.com/Ghizaarchitecture.htm#2.23

It was a novel idea you had though. About the hydrogen, I doubt there would have been any practical purpose for it. It's extremely dangerous to work with. Its own friction when escaping from a tube or hole of some kind will ignite it. I've seen it happen. I generated some for an experiment and used a poly tube, like 1/8", and just the pressure from water in a 2 liter pop bottle pushing it out was enough to ignite it, turning the tube into a small blow torch until I pinched it off to extinguish it. Let's just say, if the Egyptians were messing around with hydrogen you would see some seriously blown out structures. Would have been accompanied by immense carnage I assume. Doubt they'd try it again after the first few of those.

Edited by Bennu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lord Harry

@kborissov I believe I refuted a stated assumption of yours. Who's running and hiding now?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jon101
Posted (edited)
On 21/07/2018 at 2:41 PM, Lord Harry said:

Not true. Human remains were discovered in the Red Pyramid of Sneferu in 1948. Remains which the lead archaeologist Dr. Abdel Salaam Hussein, as well as modern Egyptologists Drs. Rainer Stadelmann, Bob Brier, and Aidan Dodson believe comprise the royal mummy of King Sneferu.

These remains will soon by made subject to C14 analysis. And by the way, the fringe only reveals their ignorance on the subject when they presume the Third and Fourth Dynasty pyramids were anything but royal tombs. To make such an assumption defies logic, because it ignores not only the presence of stone sarcophagus in many of these pyramids, but also more than five centuries of royal mortuary architectural precedent. The Great Pyramid represents merely the pinnacle of evolution Egyptian royal mortuary architecture, and did not arise in a vacuum as the fringe erroneously presumes.

My dear lord Harry, 

Does this allusion mean the search for the missing mummy, (believed to be in  the ain al qasir collection, if I recall correctly), has borne fruit?. 

Are you able to provide more details?. 

 

Edited by Jon101
Incomprehensibility.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.