Plato's Atlantis My Theory

[Qoais]

Well, I'm not saying there weren't giants.  As a matter of fact, back in this thread somewhere, I talked about that and wondered about the size of the structures in ancient Egypt and considered they might have been built for giants instead of "normal" sized folks.

Also speaking of which, I wondered if the giants didn't build the pyramids as well.  Everyone knows I don't agree with the methods that Egyptologists  purport were used to build the pyramids, and those stones WERE awfully big.  I thought maybe it would have been a bit easier for giants to build them, like we'd play with building blocks, than the way they supposedly were built with ramps and slaves and stone and copper tools, etc.  Maybe to the giants, those blocks were just toys and just as they were almost finished and were about to put the pyramidion on top, they got called to lunch and then the next thing you know, the ship had come to take them home and off they went and we're left with an enigma for the next thousands of years.!!

Ok - maybe not.  But what if they did know a bit about levitation as has been mentioned in some older writings?  Here's a link to a web site that you can puruse if you wish, or you can go to the last few pages and ruin the whole ending for yourself, like reading the last chapter of a book, first.  Actually the guy hasn't finished posting the theory, which is really annoying but he is trying to keep what he's learned a secret until he's proven it, but I can see he also wants to publish it while he goes along so the work will be dated and he'll get the credit if it does work out.

http://rebelscience.blogspot.com/2009/10/lattice-propulsion-part-ii.html

[Qoais]

I was thinking again about some of the ancient maps and people wondering how they were made.  Edgar Cayce said the Atlantians had flying baskets, that were powered by the giant crystal - these baskets I suspect, would have flown in designated "lanes" much like our buses have a bus lane.  The Urantia Book tells of the giant birds called Fandors, that were trained as rides at the time of Adam and Eve.  Way back in the beginning of this thread somewhere, I think I mentioned that I thought maybe the mapping was done with the use of these birds, and also possibly with the use of the flying baskets.  They may even have had the hot air balloon. 

[Qoais]

I have recently been chatting about the pyramids in another forum and had reason to check out Prof. Davidovits once again.  I was most pleased to find that after quitting work on the pyramid samples in the '80's, he rekindled his interest and has written another book.   He also explains why geologists think that the poured blocks are natural.



This is a video of Prof. Davidovits explaining about the poured product for the pyramids. He has a new book out which I didn't realize or I'd have had it right away, explaining why the pharaohs used man made blocks.



This is a clip of the staff of Prof. Davidovits actually making the reconstructed blocks. You will notice that they even used the same design for the brace that holds the wood in place as is depicted in the hieroglyphs for the building of "bricks" but it seems to me, that the size of the bricks, would not need to have a brace to hold the shape upwards, since bricks are made laying on the ground.



http://videos.howstu...egypt-video.htm

I'm sorry some of you can't play the videos because this one shows how bricks are made in Egypt "to this day" as kmt_sesh says, the method has not changed. They make a large pit in the ground, the worker stands up to his knees in muck and stirs with his hands. He has a bit of water that he adds to get the right consistency, and then when he deems it right, he has a small wooden frame that he sits on the ground, fills it with the muck and removes the frame. The camera pulls back, and you can see a large area of ground covered with the drying bricks. They are the size of a normal brick, therefore, I say, that the pictures in the glyphs of the large blocks, with a brace holding up the side, is actually the workers making blocks, not bricks.  I will admit that it does show the workers picking up the blocks in a shoulder harness with several bricks in the hold-alls on each side, BUT, it may be depicting both brick and block manufacture.

[mdsungate]

   This site is so large I can't recall where I posted stuff on rock softening, LOL.  But there are legends in South America about how the Inca knew how to soften rocks into a plyable form that could be molded and then they would reharden into the original rock density.  There's a story about a dig where a clay urn contained a liquid that softened a rock when it fell and smashed opened.  The liquid evaporated and the rock rehardened, leaving no evidence, but the story.  Berlitz mentions it, and several other tales concerning this apparently lost knowledge.
 
Mike

[Qoais]

That story would be from the personal memoirs of a Royal Engineer, Percy Fawcett.

 After Fawcett became familiar with the story of Francisco Raposo his attention began to shift from pure engineering toward exploration and discovery. Things he heard on his survey expeditions, and stories and lore he learned from people he met between expeditions began to seduce him. In one place He records a conversation with a man concerning an unusual forest bird that nests in perfect round holes in rock cliffs.
   "'They make the holes themselves.' The words were spoken by a man who had spent a quarter of a century in the forests. 'I've seen how they do it, many a time. I've watched, I have, and seen the birds come to the cliff with leaves of some sort in their beaks, and cling to the rock like woodpeckers to a tree while they rubbed the leaves in a circular motion over the surface. Then they would fly off, and come back with more leaves, and carry on with the rubbing process. After three or four repetitions they dropped the leaves and started pecking at the place with their sharp beaks, and—here's the marvellous part—they would soon open out a round hole in the stone...'
   "'Do you mean to say that the bird's beak can penetrate solid rock?'
   '...No, I don't think the bird can get through solid rock. I believe, as everyone who has watched them believes, that those birds know of a leaf with juice that can soften up rock till it's like wet clay.'
   "The man continued with a personal story about his nephew. He had walked through the thick bush to a nearby camp to retrieve his horse, which had gone lame and had been left there temporarily. He noticed, when he arrived, that his new Mexican spurs had been eaten away almost completely. The owner of the camp asked him if he had walked through a certain plant about a foot high, with dark reddish leaves. The young man said he had walked through a wide area that was completely covered with such plants. 'That's it!...That's what's eaten your spurs away! That's the stuff the Incas used for shaping stones. The juice will soften rock up till it's like paste. You must show me where you found the plants.' But when they retraced the young man's steps they were unable to locate them."
http://www.spidercanyon.com/backiss/bibooks4.html

[mdsungate]

 :)Fawcett is definitely the main source of the legend, but not the only one.   I've seen that site before, but thanks, because now I can bookmark it, LOL.

QUOTE FROM QOAIS:

"'Do you mean to say that the bird's beak can penetrate solid rock?'
   '...No, I don't think the bird can get through solid rock. I believe, as everyone who has watched them believes, that those birds know of a leaf with juice that can soften up rock till it's like wet clay.'

You know I’ve often thought that this bird has the genetic clue to the ancient technology mystery.  Surely the secret of how to soften rocks, (assuming the legend is true, of course), was probably ascertained by the Inca by observing theses very same birds.  If I had the resources I’d finance an expedition to find one of these birds and capture it.  Then with today’s technology, the bird could be fitted with a GPS tracking device.  Once the bird was set free, it could lead us to those mysterious plants.  It’s not really so unbelievable.  Almost all of today’s modern wonder drugs are just chemical copies of plants that have been discovered to have certain healing proprieties.   So why not a plant that could soften solid rock, temporarily?

Mike

[Qoais]

I find it intriguing that this plant can melt rock and silver spurs, but not the bird's beak. 

[mdsungate]

   Yes it's certainly not like any compounds I know of.  Acids will eat away metals like silver, but will also eat at organic substances, and have no effect on a rock.  But I don't think anything is too strange to be true.  It could be some kind of silicon solvent, as rocks are made up mostly of silicon.  Acids have no effect on glass, (which is silicon).  So this liquid reacts with silicon, and also with metals but not on organic substances.  I'm sure it's possible.  It's just not something we know anything about.  We have nothing like that in our science yet. 

Mike

[Qoais]

Quite a while back, after studying Prof. Davidovits' theory of a poured product being used to make the blocks to build the pyramids, I was trying to figure out if the AE's had the technology for creating the amount of heat it would take to "melt" granite and reshape it into blocks for the King's Chamber.  I found that although they knew to blow on a fire to make it hotter, and that perhaps they could even create mega temperatures for firing clay and ceramics, it was doubtful they had the know how to create the temperatures needed to melt granite.  Also, I found that one must be most careful when heating certain types of rock as it will crystallize and shatter very easily. 

If I'd have been paying a little more attention at the time, I would have realized from Prof. Davidovits' work that it was not heat from an external source that was required, but the heat created by a chemical reaction as well as the chemical reaction itself. 

It delights me no end to find that Prof. Davidovits continued his work, and has now found that not only did the AE's know how to re-aggregate limestone, they had the knowledge to man make other types of stone as well.  I for one, am so glad that someone with Davidovits caliber, had the guts to stick to his notion that logic should prevail when it comes to building with huge blocks, and he pursued and researched whatever it took to prove his theory.   

In his new book, Davidovits explains how it came to pass that the Ancient Egyptians had this knowledge, and how it was part of their religion, passed down to initiates from one generation to the other, lost for a time, and re-invented a thousand or more years later, in time to build the colossal statues we see in front of the temples in Egypt.  For a glimpse into his book, here is the first chapter:

http://www.geopolymer.org/fichiers_pdf/pyramid_chapt1.pdf

[Qoais]

AND - remember all those beautiful vases and bowls that were found that were made out of rock, and the silly explanation given by orthodox Egyptology as to how they were made by chipping away tiny flecks for years and years and somehow drilling out the insides with a piece of rock attached to a straw or something and they turned it and turned it back and forth between their palms and hollowed out the hardest stone in the world this way, to make a vase?



Prof. Davidovits explains how it was done and this is so much more logical.

In 1999 at the Grand Palais in Paris, there was an exhibition on
the ancient Egyptian empire "L’art égyptien au temps des pyramides". Exhibited there were objects
from the Ancient Empire (3000 to 2400 BC), such as hard stone statues (granite and gneiss).
And among other remarkable objects, I noticed a vase, or as it was called in catalogue number 99
"coupe" resembling an ashtray (figure 2). The shape of the vase was curiously evocative of
ceramic, whereas in fact, it was made in one of the hardest rocks that exist, anorthositic gneiss. It
was described thus in the catalogue:
"... the walls are astonishingly thin, and the folding of the edges is so natural that anybody not knowing that it
is made of stone would believe it to be of some flexible material ..."

With its beautifully shaped curves and its wafer thin walls, how could such a vase have been
fashioned? How could such a hard and crystalline material have been worked without being
broken by the sculptor’s chisel? To this, the experts have no answer, and are content to suggest
that the craftsmen would have worked extremely slowly and minutely, chipping away at this very
hard material millimetre by millimetre for a whole lifetime. No, clearly, the craftsmen used a
technique similar to that of a potter, using instead of clay a stone paste developed through
chemical knowledge and worked in a similar way.

Maybe, but you must admit that to suggest that a people of nearly 5000 years ago had knowledge of the very
latest science and technology of today appears unlikely.
Perhaps, but we can approach things differently. Is it finally so surprising that a civilisation, that
so venerated stone, the symbol of eternity (and we shall see that the act of agglomeration is
indissociable from religious practice), should turn some of its energy to the observation, study and
experimentation of minerals? Their knowledge did not appear from nowhere. It is the product of
history, i.e. a long transmission from initiate to initiate, with discoveries, failures and technicians,
one of whom, Imhotep, probably the wisest of all, is known to us. This is real science. And this
science, like others, has been lost. The history of progress is not a linear history, whether
scientific or not. And is it not paradoxical that our modern Western society, which has invested
so much in the study of the animal and vegetable kingdoms (from which have come oil
chemistry), has done so little with minerals? In other words, your perplexity stems perhaps more
from our own ignorance than to the incontestable genius of the ancient Egyptians.

http://www.geopolymer.org/fichiers_pdf/pyramid_chapt1.pdf

[mdsungate]

   Wow, ... well I guess I won't have to go to South American and strap homing devices on those birds then, LOL.  That's really impressive.  I think for my own opinion, that he has more or less proven how the pyramids were built.  It makes so much sence.
 
Mike

[Qoais]

I totally agree, although of course orthodoxy is kicking butt trying to deny it all.  Prof. Davidovits and Prof. Barsoum and a few others are saying that yes, there was a ramp part way up, to about where the gallery starts I think, then the long gallery was used as part of the machinery to pull the huge granite blocks up for the Kings' Chamber, although how they moved those into position afteerwards, is another conundrum. Also we have a problme with placing the corner stones, unless of course we adjust our thinking on which parts of the pyramid were built first.  I say the centre had to be built first so the rest could be built around it. 

[Qoais]

If you haven't seen all of this video, give it a go.  It's all about Mr. Houdin's theory of internal ramps, but it also explains why other things don't fit with the orthodox theory.  Like why there couldn't be just ONE ramp, although i'm told that MODERN orthodoxy no longer thinks there was just one ramp either.  They think there were two!!  Same problem however, and it would be too steep.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKvTmuIDS8c&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IS4IQhyEw1Q&feature=related

[Qoais]

Parts 3-5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncg9sBdwJpQ&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzkbAoq66XU&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-mDLP_oKP4&feature=related

[mdsungate]

   LOL, okay, I guess it could be the stupid firewall filter here at work, but there's no web link in the last two posts, LOL.  Is it there on your display?
 
Mike