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 -
WVK

Concrete pyramids?

295 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Hanslune
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, stereologist said:

You suggest without evidence that "This lip indicates that the block was cast in place"

Isn't the basis for your statement that you suggest "that would have been very hard, and somewhat pointless, to carve"

What if there had been a use for that lip? Hard to tell from the photo since it does not give us the opportunity to look at the context.

What we do not see on any block is the evidence of a mold surface. The face are remarkably smooth for a mold surface. I see no evidence of wood grain. I see no evidence of any seams in the mold surface. I see no saw marks or marks where the wood was split. There are no marks where a board was warped or bulged outward from the pressure of the supposed concrete poured into the mold. Where are the pieces of charcoal or wood ash that would have gotten into the concrete? Where are the wood chips or anything else modern such as pieces of cloth? What about the boats? They were held together with ropes. How was the mold assembled? Tied with ropes? Did they have nails for molds, but not nails for boats? 

I see zero evidence for molds. Care to explain that?

Quote

A ground level block in front of the Great Pyramid of Khufu includes a irregular lip at the bottom that would have been very hard, and somewhat pointless, to carve. This lip indicates that the block was cast in place -  the material in the lip having slid out under the temporary wooden mold before hardening. Barsoum analyzed a piece of material from the bottom lip and says he did not find smoking gun evidence. “The only logical conclusion is that after 5000 years, the binding phase has basically been washed away. Solution? Get samples from the core of that block. Easier said than done.”

...no kidding no smoking gun huh....

Since there is no reference to where this is at it is impossible to reach a conclusion. Why? We don't know if that piece is one of the few modified by modern technology*, whether it is actually at the Great Pyramid or if is is part of original hill, etc., etc.,

*Portions of the great pyramid and other sites have been modified in modern times to allow access by tourist and to allow lights, air conditioning, and dehumidifiers to work and some limestone and granite rocks have been cut or added to with real concrete. So bad info.

Edited by Hanslune
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

...no kidding no smoking gun huh....

Not that any hammer head will listen to common sense....

  • Haha 2

Share this post


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

Not that any hammer head will listen to common sense....

Oh I added some material to the reply since you quoted it.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MWoo7
Posted (edited)

 

HUGE THANKS ! to you all, who knew frigggging cement could be so interesting eh??~!hahahahahahaaa! but n seriously, this right here was what I was after and thanks ! again.

On 4/4/2019 at 1:44 PM, Jarocal said:

Couple things,

-To be comparable to modern Portland concrete not only does the lime need to be fired but cement clay also.

 

.,.,.,  so, the crap one might find  LIKE SOME OF US DID! we thought we had a gold mine, long story a while back,

anyway so natural nature lime deposits found are worthless or OR! also a bit of clay from any of the old pioneer water wells just will not work, okay, got it.   That was a toughy.  Much better now-- got to the bottom of it. THANKS ! ALL OF YOU !

Edited by MWoo7

Share this post


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

Did he create the 90 degree angle seen here? 

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/522005d3e4b005122eb8eb5e/t/550c8ffce4b06e8da2e96844/1426886660723/?format=1500w

Perhaps this block was poured in with the casting stone in place seeping into the crevices . That would have made the cladding  stable/well supported strong

Maybe it's just me, but it seems that what the pic shows is a line of mortar, part of which has crumbled away (the "scoops" mentioned earlier.)

How embarrassing for a geopolymer expert not to identify mortar..

Look along the line of the stone bottom - especially to the right. It seems clear that the "lip" is a separate thing from the stone. It doesn't even look like the stone above it- not really even the same color.

Harte

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WVK
3 hours ago, stereologist said:

Did they go to old grove forests and saw down trees 8 and 10 feet across to make big molds that left behind no evidence of seams between boards?

Like the ones here:

https://pumapunkutheories.webs.com/arrowrock.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Swede
23 minutes ago, WVK said:

Ok. Moving along then I'd apreciate  your thoughts on this:

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.870.591&rep=rep1&type=pdf

 

You have presented this non-peer reviewed article on more than one occasion. Without going into detail, there are a number of problems with the article:

  • The authors do not state the physical dimensions of their samples.
  • The authors also do not specify the specific provenience of their samples or the manner(s) of sample acquisition. There may be legalities involved here.
  • As can be noted in Figure 1, the curves for the BP sample and the Tura sample are very close, especially for sedimentary lithic materials.
  • The introduction of diatomaceous earth into the article is a self-serving red herring.
  • At no point is the fossiliferous content of the sedimentary materials addressed.
  • And, in the author's own words:

Since both the Giza plateau and Tura quarries cover a large area,subsequent work on samples from these quarries may produce NMR spectra more similar to that of the present BP spectra, but in the absence of contrary evidence, the present conclusions are sound (Mackenzie et al 2011).

In this concluding comment, the authors are acknowledging the variabilities of sedimentary materials and the inherent weakness of their conclusions, as evidenced by Figure 1.

.

 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
4 minutes ago, WVK said:

Like the ones here:

 

The link to a moldmaker who's not a geologist or archealogist who doesn't realize the "seams" were engraved lines following a plumb bob line to find level. 

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
46 minutes ago, Harte said:

How embarrassing for a geopolymer expert not to identify mortar..

Nor basalt or limestone. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Swede
9 minutes ago, WVK said:

As noted in your "reference", the line is described as a "tooling line" and is engraved, not a proud mold line. The line likely served as a "straight edge" guide for the carving and has nothing to to with molding.

.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Swede
8 hours ago, stereologist said:

The one block that shows a lip is a block that appears to have been trimmed down to allow the casing stone to fit properly.

The Drexel info is rather odd. It makes many claims that are based on looking without actually inspecting. There are also statements such as no copper tools were found yet I don't believe that is the case.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308889702_Old_Kingdom_Copper_Tools_and_Model_Tools

Most of what is stated in that article is simple an argument from incredulity rather than evidence of casting.

 

WVK should also note that the previously presented Diaries of Merer note the transport of Cu to Giza. One could rather safely presume that the Cu was not transported for dietary purposes (!).

It should further be noted that hand-hammer Cu can reach a Brinell hardness approximating that of wrought iron, the dominate ferric material until the development of the Bessemer process in the mid-19th century.

.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
38 minutes ago, Swede said:

As noted in your "reference", the line is described as a "tooling line" and is engraved, not a proud mold line. The line likely served as a "straight edge" guide for the carving and has nothing to to with molding.

.

I explained that. 

43 minutes ago, Piney said:

The link to a moldmaker who's not a geologist or archealogist who doesn't realize the "seams" were engraved lines following a plumb bob line to find level. 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

I explained that. 

 

Yes, we were replying at approximately the same time.

.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
4 minutes ago, Swede said:

Yes, we were replying at approximately the same time.

Again??? 

Great minds. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet
On 4/4/2019 at 4:20 PM, Oniomancer said:

Hmmm...how many "bread ovens" did they find in the workman's village? :whistle::devil:

Not thousands of them.

Quote

I may have mentioned some time ago, it occurred to me You could get around the molding form problem by doing every other block then using the sides to self-form. After the first row was complete, you could then use that as a third side. :yes: 'Course the material would probably settle into the cracks...

Then there wouldn't be the separation between blocks that we see.    It would look like they were one huge continuous slab.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WVK
57 minutes ago, Swede said:

As noted in your "reference", the line is described as a "tooling line" and is engraved, not a proud mold line. The line likely served as a "straight edge" guide for the carving and has nothing to to with molding.

.

The mold line on the molding experiment (at the bottom of the page) appears recessed not proud

https://pumapunkutheories.webs.com/arrowrock.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oniomancer
2 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Then there wouldn't be the separation between blocks that we see.    It would look like they were one huge continuous slab.

They have to allow the initial blocks to set, don't they? ;)

Share this post


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

The link to a moldmaker who's not a geologist or archealogist who doesn't realize the "seams" were engraved lines following a plumb bob line to find level. 

Not to mention the dudes would have gone for a very long walk to get balsa wood - although they could have used something else.....

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

WVK should also note that the previously presented Diaries of Merer note the transport of Cu to Giza. One could rather safely presume that the Cu was not transported for dietary purposes (!).

It should further be noted that hand-hammer Cu can reach a Brinell hardness approximating that of wrought iron, the dominate ferric material until the development of the Bessemer process in the mid-19th century.

.

I think he discounts that as it doesn't fit the idea he is supporting - I have noted that he keep repeating the same lines of argument.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Not to mention the dudes would have gone for a very long walk to get balsa wood - although they could have used something else.....

PETG thermoplastic. :)

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
14 minutes ago, WVK said:

The mold line on the molding experiment (at the bottom of the page) appears recessed not proud

https://pumapunkutheories.webs.com/arrowrock.htm

So can you show an existence of said mold lines on all the stones or at least a majority - can you show a peer review study that supports this? Do figure one such line that cannot be examined close up is 'proof'? Can you show us the wood working tools that were used to make molds? Can you show us where the concrete was mixed?  There should be extensive spillage and 'mistakes' - so where are they?

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
1 minute ago, Piney said:

PETG thermoplastic. :)

Yeah of course and they could have had it delivered by Aztex

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
1 hour ago, Swede said:

WVK should also note that the previously presented Diaries of Merer note the transport of Cu to Giza. One could rather safely presume that the Cu was not transported for dietary purposes (!).

Proof of batteries for electro-discharge machining no doubt.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Swede
34 minutes ago, Piney said:

Again??? 

Great minds. :lol:

Chuckle! Quite so. There does appear to be a pattern!

.

  • Thanks 1

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.