Atlantis Online
March 28, 2024, 04:00:21 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: THE SEARCH FOR ATLANTIS IN CUBA
A Report by Andrew Collins
http://www.andrewcollins.com/page/articles/atlantiscuba.htm
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

How to Build a Pyramid

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: How to Build a Pyramid  (Read 7954 times)
0 Members and 18 Guests are viewing this topic.
Catastrophe
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 147


« Reply #60 on: April 29, 2007, 07:29:38 am »

Quote
Prof. Dr. Joseph Davidovits of the French Geopolymer Institute discovered a hair sticking out of a boulder of the Cheops (Khufu) pyramid of Giza

I am trying to find more information on this but I find it incredible that a hair sticks out of a rock for 4500 years.


http://www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk/Ghizawhen.htm


« Last Edit: April 29, 2007, 07:31:28 am by Catastrophe » Report Spam   Logged
Catastrophe
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 147


« Reply #61 on: April 29, 2007, 07:39:13 am »

Suspicious inclusions

Since we have established that the infill was heterogeneous, there is no longer anything suspiciois about hair, bone or organic matter.

As I stated the high humidity in the GP is commonly known as being due to sweat and exhalation from visitors.

http://www.edwardwillett.com/Columns/pyramids.htm

Quote
The Egyptians built well; the Great Pyramid remains intact. But it has suffered recently from a plague the Egyptians never imagined: tourists, as many as 5,000 a day. Their breathing and perspiration raised the humidity level inside the pyramid, causing salt to leach out of the stone and encrust the walls and more than 300 cracks to appear.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2007, 07:44:33 am by Catastrophe » Report Spam   Logged
Catastrophe
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 147


« Reply #62 on: April 29, 2007, 07:47:49 am »

Qoais

That should keep you busy for a little while.

Have fun.


Cat  Smiley

P.S. I don't think you answered my question about moulds having bottoms or 'blocks' being allegedly 'poured' onto previously 'poured' surface.


Have a good day. Hope to 'chat' later.


Report Spam   Logged
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #63 on: April 29, 2007, 12:05:38 pm »

Sunday is the one day of the week I have to do slave labour so can't play on the computer much!  Regarding the bottoms on the molds, I did explain it.  There doesn't have to be a bottom - only when pouring the "stairs" for the roofs over the chambers, and cement doesn't stick to an oiled board.  I'm no engineer that's for sure, but logic tells me that the base had to be built up to a certain point, then a chamber built in the middle - then built up again, and the King's chamber built.  Like a tower and then enclosed afterward.  Built from the inside out you might say. 

You did notice in one of the items you quoted that there was "crushed granite"?

There's a controversy over the blocks themselves, but I have never seen an article yet where someone proposes HOW the thing was built.  The engineering side of it.  For instance - like I mentioned above - at what point did they build the chambers? 
Report Spam   Logged

An open-minded view of the past allows for an unprejudiced glimpse into the future.

Logic rules.

"Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong."
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #64 on: April 29, 2007, 12:22:19 pm »

Quote
Quote
124 Some (workers) were required to drag blocks of stone down to the Nile from the quarries in the Arabian range of hills; others received the blocks after they had been conveyed in boats across the river, and drew them to the range of hills called the Libyan ...


Quote
125 ... After laying the stones for the base, they raised the remaining stones to their places by means of machines formed of short wooded planks. The first machine raised them from the ground to the top of the first step. On this there was another machine, which received the stone upon its arrival, and conveyed it to the second step, whence a third machine advanced it still higher ...

Lets - for one moment - pretend this was true.  HOW did they do this?  We know they had flimsy boats that could never had held the weight.  How did they get it on the boat - without tipping the boat? 

Since we can't reproduce any of this procedure - the point remains - HOW did they do it?  Are you saying you believe in the advanced technology theory - that maybe Atlanteans with advanced skills somehow cut these blocks and made them lighter for transport?

Quote
On January 15, 1981, our research group began receiving a communication
from the social memory complex, Ra.

Quote
Questioner: Yes. You mentioned that the pyramids were an outgrowth of
this. Could you expand a little on that? Were you responsible for the
building of the pyramid, and what was the purpose of the pyramid?
Ra: I am Ra. The larger pyramids were built by our ability using the forces
of One. The stones are alive. It has not been so understood by the
mind/body/spirit distortions of your culture. The purposes of the pyramids
were two:
Firstly, to have a properly oriented place of initiation for those who wished
to become purified or initiated channels for the Law of One.
Two, we wished then to carefully guide the initiates in developing a healing
of the people whom they sought to aid, and of the planet itself. Pyramid
after pyramid charged by the crystal and Initiate were designed to balance
the incoming energy of the One Creation with the many and multiple
distortions of the planetary mind/body/spirit. In this effort we were able to
continue work that brothers within the Confederation had effected through
building of other crystal-bearing structures and thus complete a ring, if you
will, of these about the Earth’s, as this instrument would have us vibrate it,
surface.

http://www.llresearch.org/library/the_law_of_one_pdf/the_law_of_one_book_1.pdf
Report Spam   Logged

An open-minded view of the past allows for an unprejudiced glimpse into the future.

Logic rules.

"Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong."
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #65 on: April 29, 2007, 01:04:39 pm »

Quote
The base of the pyramid is 230 metres on a side, covering an area equivalent to seven New York City blocks. And speaking of blocks, the Great Pyramid is made up of more than 2.3 million, some limestone, some granite. The largest weigh more than 50 tonnes; on average, they weigh 2.3 tonnes each. That means the Great Pyramid weighs well over five million tonnes.

50,000 pounds of solid rock - and they lifted it with little planks and ropes?  NOT

Even today with our gigantic cranes, if there's too much weight being lifted, the crane will tip.  What did they have in those days that would support that weight without breaking?
« Last Edit: May 01, 2007, 02:09:39 pm by Qoais » Report Spam   Logged

An open-minded view of the past allows for an unprejudiced glimpse into the future.

Logic rules.

"Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong."
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #66 on: April 29, 2007, 04:00:33 pm »

Quote
I am trying to find more information on this but I find it incredible that a hair sticks out of a rock for 4500 years.

Cat - the hair was not likely "sticking out" for 4500 years.  The hair would be embedded in the "rock" and when chipped or broken, revealed the hair.  I'm sure you'e aware that the French don't express themselves the same way we do.   
Report Spam   Logged

An open-minded view of the past allows for an unprejudiced glimpse into the future.

Logic rules.

"Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong."
Catastrophe
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 147


« Reply #67 on: April 29, 2007, 05:41:43 pm »

Quote
Regarding the bottoms on the molds, I did explain it.

So there is no vertical delineation between "poured" blocks?
Report Spam   Logged
Catastrophe
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 147


« Reply #68 on: April 29, 2007, 05:46:29 pm »

Quote
Cat - the hair was not likely "sticking out" for 4500 years.  The hair would be embedded in the "rock" and when chipped or broken, revealed the hair.  I'm sure you'e aware that the French don't express themselves the same way we do.

So the theory is untenable because he can't express himself in English.

OK. I'll buy that.

Wink
Report Spam   Logged
Catastrophe
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 147


« Reply #69 on: April 29, 2007, 05:51:12 pm »

Quote
100,000 pounds of solid rock - and they lifted it with little planks and ropes?  NOT

Try a block at a time.

Incidentally 100,000 pounds is nearer 50 tons than 5 million tons

But hey - who cares about a few zeros?
Report Spam   Logged
Catastrophe
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 147


« Reply #70 on: April 29, 2007, 05:56:55 pm »

Quote
100,000 pounds of solid rock - and they lifted it with little planks and ropes?  NOT

Well Herodotus did get it firsthand from the Egyptians.

D's theory is just a flawed concept in my opinion.
Report Spam   Logged
Catastrophe
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 147


« Reply #71 on: April 29, 2007, 06:00:12 pm »

Quote
The hair would be embedded in the "rock" and when chipped or broken, revealed the hair.

Errrr ... pardon???
Report Spam   Logged
Catastrophe
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 147


« Reply #72 on: April 29, 2007, 06:09:27 pm »

Qoais

I respect your right to believe any (what I consider to be) garbage as you doubtless believe my science to be garbage.

I have proven my case to my satisfaction and you believe what others have written.

Time to get on with our lives. OK?

Thanks for your input.

Cat.
Report Spam   Logged
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #73 on: April 29, 2007, 08:26:36 pm »

You sure do sound like someone else we know Cat.  You must be of an older generation.  I think you don't want to accept what's obvious because you'll feel embarrassed for having supported such a rediculous theory.  I was just averaging out the weight - as in 50 tons (not tonnes) and 50 x 2000 lbs. in a ton = 100,000 pounds.  Even if it is tonnes, it's still heavier than they had the power to lift and then place so precisely.  Even if it was 10,000 pounds they had nothing to lift it with.  They couldn't have used a tri-pod as indicated in pictures, because there was nothing to secure the tripod to.  Nor did they have anything strong enough not to break for such a weighty lift.

You're right - I'll go with the logic and keep searching.  This is me - movin' on. Roll Eyes
Report Spam   Logged

An open-minded view of the past allows for an unprejudiced glimpse into the future.

Logic rules.

"Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong."
Qoais
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3423



« Reply #74 on: May 01, 2007, 02:50:43 pm »

Hi Cat
I know we're not speaking any more, but I just noticed that I missed a couple of your posts.

You're right - my math was sloppy.  1 tonne = 1000 pounds,  therefore 50 x 1000 = 50,000 pounds.
The article said some of the blocks weigh over that.  I say, they had nothing with the strength to lift a dead weight of 50,000 pounds,
that wouldn't break or topple over.  One has to brace the lifting device.  Even today, our hydraulic cranes can only lift so much weight before they would tip over.  Then, how do you maneuver that humungous block into perfect postion?  Especially as the building gets higher and higher, and there is less room for workers?

Quote
So there is no vertical delineation between "poured" blocks?

Yes, a fine crack should eventually appear between the poured blocks.

Quote
The hair would be embedded in the "rock" and when chipped or broken, revealed the hair.

Errrr ... pardon???

I put quotation marks around the word "rock" meaning "block" as in poured block.  Not rock as in natural rock.  The hair of course, could not be found in a natural rock.  Especially limestone that was created back when the earth was still forming.  Therefore, since the hair was found "sticking out of the rock" as everyone has been calling the blocks all these years, the hair had to get IN the block somehow.  If Dr. Davidovits cracked a piece of the block open, and it revealed a hair inside, how did the hair and teeth and foreighn fibres get inside the block itself?  It had to have been in the mix.  It didn't say the hair was found in loose sand.  It was in the block or "rock" (cement).

Quote
I respect your right to believe any (what I consider to be) garbage as you doubtless believe my science to be garbage.


I do not consider your science garbage.  I believe that you may not be familiar with the process of making cement, and comparing today's modern product with an ancient one is like apples and oranges.  They had a different method is all.  Your science has not explained in a logical manner for all to understand, HOW these feats were performed.  The "pouring" of cement, or like product, explains most logically, how these feats were accomplished especially when it comes to the roof over the Queen and King chambers.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2007, 05:55:54 pm by Qoais » Report Spam   Logged

An open-minded view of the past allows for an unprejudiced glimpse into the future.

Logic rules.

"Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong."
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy