• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Great Pyramid of Giza


That's an assumption. It's not well known "history" it's what they teach in text books, along with the "fact" that the pyramids were tombs. This is the common answers, but there are many problems with these ideas.
The pyramids I mentioned have been dated and the forms shown a demonstrated progression of sophistication of construction and size. If that doesn't mean anything to you then that is just your opinion. Whether they were tombs is irrelevant to my point which is about how they were built without supernatural intervention.


That's not the same thing at all, and the Gothic cathedrals of Europe ar enot one of the wonders of the world.
What does being one of the wonders of the world have to do with anything? It is irrelevant to how it was built.


No, what you showed, including the Nova link about cutting with sand, is a method to do something similar. But they don't get the same results.

And the Egyptologists still say they used copper tools.

You said it was impossible to cut granite with copper tools. My example showed you could use a copper blade with sand to cut granite. That is the result. It can't be any clearer. You are wrong.


Where are the very large structures that were made by modern man then? I mean with really big stones like that. The Egyptians did some amazing things, but they didn't continue making large structures like the pyramids. If that was their level of technology, why not build a whole city like that?
You want big? I'll give you big.
Oil Rig Photos - Comparision of Troll Platform & Eiffel Tower
Wikimedia Error
This thing was towed out to sea and installed in one piece!

But we can't even do it if we wanted to.

That oil rig proves otherwise. But you keep missing the point which is typically there is no good reason to build anything that big in one piece.


The point was that is the best tolerance they can offer, and the Egyptians didn't have diamond blades.

Like I said those are rough cuts. No different from rough cuts at lumber yards. Finished pieces need to be worked down by planing to exact dimensions. Are you sure you are a woodworker?

We don't built things with that much perfection. No absolutely flat surfaces or perfect angles. The real question is why did they need that?
Sure we do. What makes you think we don't?

The Egyptians like many ancient people who worked with stone used precise fitting for structural stability because they didn't use mortar and it would last longer. We don't try to build anything to last more than a 100 years or so. That is an intentional assumption of life cycle that is the nature of modern construction.

Yeah, once again, with power tools. I can show you the counter tops in this apartment and you sure can fit paper in the seams. I'm a woodworker, so I know about that stuff.

Precise fitting can be done with metal files or stone grinding on limestone or granite.

I can show you wood and stone fittings that are nearly invisible. Maybe you just don't know good builders. The Japanese are renown for wood joinery that is used on whole buildings with fit so perfect that no nails or glue are needed. Shaping of stone while much more difficult is perfectedly doable.

As a woodworker you should know that perfect joints of irregular edges are often the result of using hand chisels, scrapers or sandpaper and not power tools.

It's always on a smaller scale... and that's the problem.

I'm sorry, but until someone builds that exact structure with these primitive tools, I wont believe it. They haven't done it yet, and even doing it on a small scale, they fail.

Ever heard of "proof of concept"? If you can prove it on one scale you have proven that it can be done. It's a very basic part of scientific process. That is why we do wind tunnel tests on smaller scale models of jets. It doesn't alway give us the exact performance characteristics but it is a reliable way to determine feasibility.

And that is really the point. You are saying it's impossible and I'm saying it is possible.

I use to believe everything you believe in now about the pyramids. But I've seen the compelling demonstrations from scientists and architects that such things can be done. Whether or not we figure out every minute detail of all the methodologies that the Egyptians used to pull off this amazing achievement is not as important as determining feasibility. With more research and discoveries we may yet find out. Maybe someone will spend the ridiculous amounts of money to do a full size demonstration of hiring a couple thousand people, cut a huge stone from the quarry, haul it a hundred miles away by wooden barg, and drag that sucker up a 200 foot ramp and put it in place. I think that would be insane.

And for even larger cut stones, go to Baalbek. These are estimated at 2,000 tons:

BaalbekQuarryMegalith.jpg
Ever more reason to give ancients their due credit for being clever and hard working.

Don't get me wrong I am in wonder of the things they accomplished. But it is unfair to them to think they needed help from Aliens or anti-gravity to build these amazing structures.
 
The pyramids I mentioned have been dated...

The mortar on the outside of the pyramid has been dated. It's obvious that some of there dates are wrong, since that area hasn't had heavy rain fall at the time of these dates, yet there is evidence of water erosion.

The mortar is presumed to be from more recent repairs.

What does being one of the wonders of the world have to do with anything? It is irrelevant to how it was built.

Because they were seen as something wondrous. If they just seemed like a gothic cathedral, they wouldn't be one of the wonders of the world. it would just be another big monument.

The gothic cathedrals don't use those big ass stones, and we don't even know why they used them for the pyramid. Why not use smaller stones like in more modern times?

You said it was impossible to cut granite with copper tools. My example showed you could use a copper blade with sand to cut granite. That is the result. It can't be any clearer. You are wrong.

What I said is true. I said nothing about sand, and there is no evidence that such tools were used with sand. Were are those tools?

That's one theory on how they might have done it, but we don't know how it was done, because we weren't there. It's just conjecture.

I also doubt they could get such precision that way. Hand powered saws like to wander, and it's hard to cut a straight line in wood, never mind granite.

You want big? I'll give you big.
Oil Rig Photos - Comparision of Troll Platform & Eiffel Tower
Wikimedia Error
This thing was towed out to sea and installed in one piece!

And it wasn't cut from a single piece of limestone, was it? I think the Bolder Damn is bigger, right?

Do you remember the theory scientists had that the stones of the Great Pyramid weren't cut at all? At the time it was "proven" that they were a form of cement and were poured in place. The scientist even came up with the formula. Case closed they said.

Where is that theory now? 50 years from now they will have new theories, and none of them have been proven beyond a doubt yet.

We will never know exactly how it was done, unless we figure out how to look back in time. All these theories do is present possibilities of how it might have been done. And you can't prove a single one of them.

That oil rig proves otherwise. But you keep missing the point which is typically there is no good reason to build anything that big in one piece.

It wasn't cut from stone, and dragged by whatever means over sand and on rafts. It was done with large modern machines, that the Egyptians didn't have. Or am I missing something? Did we find the Great Earthmover of Cheops? King Tut's Back Hoe maybe? ;)

Like I said those are rough cuts. No different from rough cuts at lumber yards. Finished pieces need to be worked down by planing to exact dimensions. Are you sure you are a woodworker?

Yep, and I build musical instruments, which have a pretty high level of precision, otherwise they don't work, and might as well be a chair. I also design the electronics and hand wind the pickups.

And what tools did they polish the granite with? They say they rubbed flat stones to make flat surfaces, I guess with sand in between. So how did the get the perfect curved surfaces? Also sand will leave a rough, scratched surface on granite.

If you do a little reading, you can see the stones they started to cut, and didn't finish, and they had round holes drilled in them. The cuts are pretty damn smooth. Not rough like Stonehenge.

And that big stone at Baalbek, that's also a rough cut, and look how perfectly straight the sides are. And square. It's a perfect rectangle. So it wasn't cut rough hewn at all, and then dressed to get the cuts smooth. But they did dress it after that stage.

How did they do it? Lets be honest and say we don't know. And for all those scientist that have the "answer", give them some overalls and some tools and have them do it. I mean really do it. Cut that 2,000 ton stone with hand tools and have it that smooth. Then drag the damn thing out of the hole and put it in place with the rest of the temple.

Anytime you design a working object, you have to make prototypes and test it. Often after using it for a while you discover that there is a flaw in the design that did not reveal itself at first. So what worked on paper and in theory often falls flat on its face in real life.

So sorry, but you are wrong. You are taking the word from Nova, and people who really don't know what they are saying, besides trying to prove their view on the subject. Any Egyptologist that still says the pyramids were tombs is an example. And they all do. These are educated people spewing nonsense, because that is the status quo. They don't want to rock the boat.

When that geologist said the Sphinx was way older than the Egyptologist said it was, they automatically dismissed his findings, even though they new little about geology.

Sure we do. What makes you think we don't?

What makes you think we do? Get a machinist square, and then go around your house, and check to see if the walls are 90° to each other. They wont be. Now go to a modern granite or stone building, and check that. Nope. Now get a precision straightedge and check the flatness of stone walls and see if any light is peeking under the straightedge. I'm sure it will be.

Why? Because it's close enough.

When I was a teenager we had a guy come and do some plumbing in our bathroom. He asked me who put the bathroom wall up behind the tub. I thought that was an odd question, and as a matter of fact my dad did. I told him so and he said "oh, I figured as much because it's square, and no professional framer ever bothers to do that!" Why? because there is no reason for that level of precision in a wall of a house.

The Egyptians like many ancient people who worked with stone used precise fitting for structural stability because they didn't use mortar and it would last longer. We don't try to build anything to last more than a 100 years or so. That is an intentional assumption of life cycle that is the nature of modern construction.

We have a lot of structures much older than 100 years in big cities around the world. There are 200+ year old houses right up the street from me.

We don't make stuff that lasts because it costs too much. We also don't use 2,000 ton cut stones. So why and how did they do that 4000 years ago?

We don't do it now because it's more difficult than its worth. So people without power tools and machines felt it was easier than we do now?

Precise fitting can be done with metal files or stone grinding on limestone or granite.

Anything can be done. That's not the question. They still haven't explained how they drilled perfectly round holes in the granite. I saw some dopey explanation showing a bunch of oxen with a ropes around the "drill" going back and forth very slowly!

Dunn, who is a mechanical engineer, toolmaker and machinist, doesn't think it was done that way from looking at the marks left in the stone.

I can show you wood and stone fittings that are nearly invisible. Maybe you just don't know good builders. The Japanese are renown for wood joinery that is used on whole buildings with fit so perfect that no nails or glue are needed. Shaping of stone while much more difficult is perfectedly doable.

Wood cut with sharp steel tools is not the same as granite cut with copper and even with sand. None of these modern stone workers use these copper tools.

People can do amazing things. I'm not saying that humans didn't make the pyramids, just that they were not as described.


Ever heard of "proof of concept"? If you can prove it on one scale you have proven that it can be done. It's a very basic part of scientific process. That is why we do wind tunnel tests on smaller scale models of jets. It doesn't alway give us the exact performance characteristics but it is a reliable way to determine feasibility.

There's a flaw in that reasoning. In a wind tunnel, wind is wind. A scale model will behave the same as a full size model. Weight is irrelevant. But small stones weigh less than big stones. That increases the effort needed to move the big stones, in likely an exponential manner. You are working with larger stones and greater distances.

A scaled down system using a wooden tripod and a 100 pound stone as a test, wont be the same as a larger setup with a 2 ton stone. The wood wont get stronger as you scale it up, and the longer the legs on the tripod are the more flexible. The rope used wont get any stronger either.

Look at big modern cranes. They are rated for a certain load, along with the chains and stuff. What size crane is needed to lift a 70 tone stone? How about a 2,000 tone stone?

There are 2.3 million stones in the Great Pyramid. They are 2-30 tons each with some weighing as much as 70 tons. They had to get those stones 480 feet in the air at the top.

And that is really the point. You are saying it's impossible and I'm saying it is possible.

No, its not impossible. We know that because the things were built. We just don't know how they were built, and I haven't seen an explanation yet that doesn't have holes in it.

I use to believe everything you believe in now about the pyramids. But I've seen the compelling demonstrations from scientists and architects that such things can be done.

Well two things here, whether you want to believe me or not, and I don't care, but both myself and my older brother were told not to believe this stuff about the pyramids when we were young. Who told us? We don't know. But it happened to both of us, and he is 12 years older than me, so I wasn't even born when he was told, and I new nothing of it.

But I grew up and was taught the usual stuff about thousands of slaves and stuff. But it didn't make sense. As I got older I realized that they don't even know what the thing was made for. It was not a tomb. That's obvious. But then what was it for? It's too complicated to be a tomb. That needs to be addressed. Forget how it was made. Why was it made in that manner? What are all the shafts and chambers for? There are many questions unanswered, and we probably will never know the answers.

And I'm sorry, but for all the scientists and architects that have a theory, others disagree. They don't agree on the age of the structures, even those strong evidence points to them being much older, which means that the dynasty that is presumed to have built them, didn't.

The Egyptians have no written record of building them, only of discovering them and repairing them. So who built them?

I'm prone to believe that there might have been technological advances in our past that we have forgotten. Maybe we were wiped out by some catastrophic event. Then we started over again, and we don't know anything about these structures.

Don't get me wrong I am in wonder of the things they accomplished. But it is unfair to them to think they needed help from Aliens or anti-gravity to build these amazing structures.

I never said aliens or anti-gravity, but I do not believe that the people we say that built them had anything to do with their construction, and that's based on pretty strong evidence IMO. Dunn never says aliens or anti gravity either, but he does show evidence for high tech tools, maybe even ultrasonic tools.

If you haven't, read the book. He's very technical in it about machining methodology and such. He shows something and explains how we would do that today, and shows why the many theories are technically flawed. He came up with these ideas after going there and examining the structure.
 
The mortar on the outside of the pyramid has been dated. It's obvious that some of there dates are wrong, since that area hasn't had heavy rain fall at the time of these dates, yet there is evidence of water erosion.

The mortar is presumed to be from more recent repairs.

We know when the pyramids were built because there are records of who they were built for by the written records. There are even work crew who were named "Kufu's Friends". How do we know? Because many of the worker, Egyptian workers, were buried near the site. Their bones show stress from heavy labor. There is tons of archaeological evidence.

If you are referring to the Sphinx then there is definitely controversy to the exact date that it was built.


Because they were seen as something wondrous. If they just seemed like a gothic cathedral, they wouldn't be one of the wonders of the world. it would just be another big monument.

The gothic cathedrals don't use those big ass stones, and we don't even know why they used them for the pyramid. Why not use smaller stones like in more modern times?

You have a habit of missing my point. I was not drawing a equivalency in terms of ease of construction as was showing the progressive development of building techniques.

What I said is true. I said nothing about sand, and there is no evidence that such tools were used with sand. Were are those tools?

That's one theory on how they might have done it, but we don't know how it was done, because we weren't there. It's just conjecture.

Exactly you don't know what exact tools were used. Yet said proclaim it "impossible" to cut granite with copper tools. The only conjecture that is happening is yours. I'm not say that my example are the only method that was used just that it could have been used and there is nothing extraordinary about it.

I also doubt they could get such precision that way. Hand powered saws like to wander, and it's hard to cut a straight line in wood, never mind granite.

No one expects saw cuts to be finished cuts. I don't understand why you can't seem to make that distinction. Saw cuts are not finish cuts in wood. Neither are they in stone.

I had a former professor who used pounding stones to finish large blocks of stone and proved that a very smooth finish could be achieved. I saw him on a documentary on Mayan pyramids.

And it wasn't cut from a single piece of limestone, was it? I think the Bolder Damn is bigger, right?
You asked for something giagantic to be moved in one piece. I gave you an example of a giant oil rig 472 metres high and weighs 656,000 tons built complete and towed out to see in one piece. It's one piece regardless of what material was used. Too bad this doesn't satisfy you. It is a far more impressive feat to me than the pyramids.

Do you remember the theory scientists had that the stones of the Great Pyramid weren't cut at all? At the time it was "proven" that they were a form of cement and were poured in place. The scientist even came up with the formula. Case closed they said.

Where is that theory now? 50 years from now they will have new theories, and none of them have been proven beyond a doubt yet.

We will never know exactly how it was done, unless we figure out how to look back in time. All these theories do is present possibilities of how it might have been done. And you can't prove a single one of them.

And you are not offering a single explanation of how things were done. Just flailing your arms saying they can't be done.

And what tools did they polish the granite with? They say they rubbed flat stones to make flat surfaces, I guess with sand in between. So how did the get the perfect curved surfaces? Also sand will leave a rough, scratched surface on granite.

Who said they used course sand for polishing? They've demonstrated that course sand could be used to cut the stones only. Why couldn't they have used a fine powder in conjuction with a flat stone. There are also different grades of sand just as you would find different grades of sand paper at the hardware store.

I will post a bunch of videos that talk about the methods including the fact that the copper used by the Egyptians was much harder than ordinary copper because of impurities.

If you do a little reading, you can see the stones they started to cut, and didn't finish, and they had round holes drilled in them. The cuts are pretty damn smooth. Not rough like Stonehenge.

I thought I posted videos that demonstrated hole cutting with copper pipes and ropes.

And that big stone at Baalbek, that's also a rough cut, and look how perfectly straight the sides are. And square. It's a perfect rectangle. So it wasn't cut rough hewn at all, and then dressed to get the cuts smooth. But they did dress it after that stage.
OK so it looks flat, straight, and square. So what? You yourself said it needed to be dressed later.

How did they do it? Lets be honest and say we don't know. And for all those scientist that have the "answer", give them some overalls and some tools and have them do it. I mean really do it. Cut that 2,000 ton stone with hand tools and have it that smooth. Then drag the damn thing out of the hole and put it in place with the rest of the temple.
I will be honest. I don't have the definitive answer. I am only proposing potential answers which you seemly like to reject outright without proposing alternative solutions. I guess I have to repeat myself. All I'm saying is that it was possible not impossible for the Egyptians to do it all by themselves without some mysterious advanced technology.

So sorry, but you are wrong. You are taking the word from Nova, and people who really don't know what they are saying, besides trying to prove their view on the subject. Any Egyptologist that still says the pyramids were tombs is an example. And they all do. These are educated people spewing nonsense, because that is the status quo. They don't want to rock the boat.

I am wrong about what exactly? I am not debating you whether they were tombs or what purpose they were built for. That is a side discussion that you are having with yourself.

When that geologist said the Sphinx was way older than the Egyptologist said it was, they automatically dismissed his findings, even though they new little about geology.

Again I am not talking about anything other than construction techniques. The Sphinx is a mystery.

What makes you think we do? Get a machinist square, and then go around your house, and check to see if the walls are 90° to each other. They wont be. Now go to a modern granite or stone building, and check that. Nope. Now get a precision straightedge and check the flatness of stone walls and see if any light is peeking under the straightedge. I'm sure it will be.

Why? Because it's close enough.

When I was a teenager we had a guy come and do some plumbing in our bathroom. He asked me who put the bathroom wall up behind the tub. I thought that was an odd question, and as a matter of fact my dad did. I told him so and he said "oh, I figured as much because it's square, and no professional framer ever bothers to do that!" Why? because there is no reason for that level of precision in a wall of a house.

Well congratulations you discovered that contractors don't build things precisely. What a revelation! Does this prove that they couldn't. No. But if I had unlimited budget I could have my wall studs machined and fitted with laser cut metal panels and installed machine ground Silestone and get incredible precision. Yes, we can do it. There is just no practical reason.

Why would the Egyptian find precise fitting important? If anyone has ever laid tile, never mind giant blocks of stone, knows you better get your lines and fits proper or your mistakes will only be compounded the more you stack pieces on top of one another. We lay tile with grout lines so there is room for correction. The Egyptians had to be precise because they didn't use mortar joints. If you are only 1/16" off per block and you multiply this mistake by several hundred blocks you are going to have some serious structural problems besides the fact that everything will be misaligned. Addendum: Interior stones were rough fitted and gaps filled with ground stone and gypsum mortar. The precision that every is so crazy about only exists in outer stone and visible important areas.


We have a lot of structures much older than 100 years in big cities around the world. There are 200+ year old houses right up the street from me.

We don't make stuff that lasts because it costs too much. We also don't use 2,000 ton cut stones. So why and how did they do that 4000 years ago?

We don't do it now because it's more difficult than its worth. So people without power tools and machines felt it was easier than we do now?
This is simple. In many of the cases where you'll find extra large stones it is used for structural purposes. If you are going to span any space horizontally and you have support a million tons of stone above you then you don't have much of a choice but to use a very large stone. You can't use heavy timber because it will rot over time. And the Egyptians hadn't really figured out the structural benefits of the arch like the Romans.

Anything can be done. That's not the question. They still haven't explained how they drilled perfectly round holes in the granite. I saw some dopey explanation showing a bunch of oxen with a ropes around the "drill" going back and forth very slowly!

There is a video of scientist drilling a hole. I thought I posted that video already showing it.

Dunn, who is a mechanical engineer, toolmaker and machinist, doesn't think it was done that way from looking at the marks left in the stone.
And he could be as wrong as the scientist and archaeologists you keep railing about. Has he tried to prove his theory like trying to cut granite with a copper blade and sand? That would prove to me that he is a scientist and not some guy trying to sell sensationalist books.

If the Egyptians used smooth blades and sand to cut then there could be a very simple explanation of why there are not any found. Any metal including copper would be an expensive and valuable material during ancient times. After a smooth blade has been worn down beyond the point of usefulness I would think that it would be melted down and remade into other tools. After all a smooth copper blade isn't useful for anything other than cutting stone. Hell, they tore down all the surfacing marble of the Great Pyramid. Why wouldn't they reuse the metal?
 
This was the site of the first ever StarBlocks... err StarBucks... :D

With all those late nights, coffee was huge back then, no wonder there are no trees, they were used up to heat up the coffee pots and to make lounge chairs and coffee stirs....


Ok... I'm going with the 'Adoption theory' , because it just makes better sense.
 
We know when the pyramids were built because there are records of who they were built for by the written records. There are even work crew who were named "Kufu's Friends". How do we know? Because many of the worker, Egyptian workers, were buried near the site. Their bones show stress from heavy labor. There is tons of archaeological evidence.

I already showed that there are no written records by Khufu that he built the pyramid, but he did write that he discovered things about it and the Sphinx, and had the Sphinx repaired.

And the graffiti says "Friends of Menkaure" and the "Drunkards of Menkaure". Lets get those "tons of evidence" right...

See here:
BBC - History - The Private Lives of the Pyramid-builders

It was more than likely faked by Colonel Howard-Vyse:

The authenticity of the workmen's graffiti in the Great Pyramid is questionable. Alsford and many other authors claim that the graffiti could have been faked. It was known at the time that Colonel Vyse had expended many years and a great deal of money on expeditions to Egypt, but had failed to unearth anything of major significance until his 'amazing' discovery in the Great Pyramid. The Graffiti could have easily been fabricated by copying inscriptions which had already been discovered on other structures and in the quarries nearby. Interestingly, the graffiti was only found in the chambers broken into by the Colonel. The so called Davidson chamber, lying below the other chambers and discovered by an earlier explorer, had no such graffiti. Indeed the rest of the pyramid is strangely devoid of markings of any kind. In the absence of any attempt to radiocarbon date the ‘red ochre’ paint which was used to daub the graffiti onto the massive granite blocks in the relieving chambers, debate as to the authenticity of the graffiti will continue.

So the graffiti was only in the chamber found by Howard-Vyse, and not in any others. The Egyptians were building the causeway at the time, which is much newer than the pyramids. So the graffiti was copied from that.

Onto carbon dating the Pyramid:

The 1983-84 ‘Pyramids Carbon-dating Project’, directed by Mark Lehner and Robert Wenke, delivered results that do not support the building of these structures during the 4th dynasty. For example, thirteen samples of mortar taken from the Great Pyramid gave construction dates in the range 3101-2853 B.C., and an average date of around 3000 B.C. Similarly, samples of mortar removed from the Second Pyramid produced a comparable date. It is interesting to note that all of these samples were taken from stone courses on the outside of the pyramids. As such, using these samples to date the structure is questionable. The mortar samples could have had a much later origin than the massive stone blocks from which they were taken, as part of a restoration project; much better to have taken the samples from deeper into the stone work.

Such was the confusion caused by the carbon-dating project that a second study was carried out in 1995. The results of this study were published in 2001. In the case of the Great Pyramid there was still considerable scatter in the data over a range of about 400 years.

And:

Egyptologists date the 4th dynasty kings Khufu and Khafre to the period 2500-2400 BC. However, the 1983-84 ‘Pyramids Carbon-dating Project’, commissioned and funded by the Edgar Cayce Foundation, and directed by the Egyptologists Mark Lehner and Robert Wenke, discovered some highly anomalous results.

For example, thirteen samples of mortar from the Great Pyramid produced dates in the range 3101-2853 BC, and an average date of 2977 BC. Similarly, seven samples of mortar from the Second Pyramid produced an average date of 2988 BC. Equally intriguing, a sample of wood from ‘Khufu’s Boat’, buried alongside the Great Pyramid, produced a remarkable date of 3400 BC.

Workers graves:

In his book ‘The Phoenix Solution’ (1998 ), Alan Alsford claimed that much of the evidence for the 4th dynasty origin of the Giza Pyramids and Sphinx actually pointed to an adoption scenario, rather than construction of the monuments during that time period. Thus, according to this theory, the Egyptian pharaohs Khufu and Khafre adopted the Great Pyramid, the Second Pyramid and the Sphinx, rather than built them. In addition to renovating these structures, they and their successors built the causeways which ran between the mortuary and valley temples, and the smaller pyramids and masteba. According to Alsford, this massive building program would explain the presence of the early dynastic workers’ villages which have recently been excavated at Giza.

So there is no firm data supporting Khufu being the builder.
 
All five parts are worth watching. A possible explanation for many odd features in the Pyramid. Including the Grand Gallery, the Notch, discoloration stripes on the exterior, and repair marks on original stones near the Kings Chamber.


It is an interesting theory that has a lot of circumstantial evidence to support it. This will be my last post on this subject.

I don't have all the answers and I enjoy a mystery. This is one of the great mysteries of the world so enjoy it.
 
Hey, you can believe what you want.

Hm...I don't like word 'believe', I try to understand. As simple as that.
Do you seriously believe that if the Egyptians had figured out anti-Gravity they would have only built the Gisa Pyramid and just never built anything bigger and grander?

For what purpose? This like to say - why we haven't built bases on Moon all over the place if we already know how and actually flew there? :)

Or they would have used their knowledge of Gravity which would have been thousands of years ahead of everyone on the planet to conquer the world? They would have flying machines and gone out to space if they had been able to lift 70 ton blocks with anti-gravity.

Well, you conquer other places if you need more resources, unless you're completely nuts, which I don't think was the case with the civilization which built the Pyramids. It is really not necessary to start a war in Iraq unless you need OIL ;) So Egyptian civilization could have enough resources to do not search weapon of mass destruction in other deserts.

But no, the Egyptians got conquered by the Romans, Greeks and just about everyone else including the Europeans later.

Check out The Great Sphynx back - water erosion, last time when where were enough water to do that was right after the last Ice Age, it's matter of geologists not egyptologists! Check out Robert M.Schoch work (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M._Schoch) I consider a theory which tells that both Sphynx and The Great Pyramids were built around 10...12,000 B.C. So Egyptian civilization became weak the way later then the time where the Pyramids were built.

They never built anything to rival the Great Pyramids. They never built flying machines.
Assuming the Pyramids age lots of the stuff they built could be simply lost or still underground.
They never wrote about defying Gravity.

This is our civilization strong believe that only using writing you can preserve, exchange and pass a knowledge, but it could be not as universe as we believe. This my assumption.
Their empire was not as big as the Romans, the Mongols, or the Greeks. Gee Egyptians didn't make very good use of the most advanced technology that modern humans have yet to discover. They only use it to lay a huge pile of rocks.

Aha, if only you believe that those piles were used as thumbs...There are no mummies inside them, there is single note inside the greatest one which speaks to an assumption that it was built for Khufu. Well I can fly to Egypt, give some bakshish to the guard, take a spray and leave my signature inside one of them and so in a few thousand years people will say 'Gee, here is the guy's name who built this Pyramid for himself!' For now Chris Dunn theory about The Great Pyramids as power plans seems for me the most plausible.
 
I have read so much about Egypt and the connections with Aliens or ET.You have a far number of researchers and so called ufologists claiming that aliens helped the Egyptians build the Pyramids.This people appear on many paranormal shows talking about this issue.

I was just thinking about this today. How if there was any truth to this claims. That sightings in that Area of the world are not very frequent. I Have never heard of a ufo flap in Egypt. People spent more time out outdoors in that area of the world than most due to the sunny weather. Just for argument sake... Just say, this researchers who have researched the Egypt and alien connection are right. Why, don't this Aliens in ufos appear more frequent over this area. Since according to this researchers. This aliens helped cultures in the distant past.I find it a bit strange myself.

If you look at ufo flaps through history and were ufos appear most often. The United states, uk and British Isles, and many countries in South America stand out above the rest. We have had many tiny flaps in other countries and many small sightings which have been well documented like the Belgium triangle sightings. It Just my opinion. There just seems to be a greater interest by the ufo occupants in the regions above. I just wonder why?
 
Well, it was my joke at the beginning of this thread, as I person who loves Apple products and read about this alleged connection between aliens and Pyramids I thought it could be a nice joke to tell:)

Seriously, as long as we still speculate about UFO phenomena and can't give an answer on such questions as, if it has a single origin or multiple, have we been dealing with the same phenomena for the last couple thousands or not, I don't think we can reject completely or accept a possibility that aliens were involved in Pyramids building or not.

But my gut feeling tells me that in the case of The Great Pyramids of Giza and other equal in complexity pyramids built in Egypt, South America, Turkey (Gobekli Tepe), Asia, Eastern Island (statues) we see examples of the previous civilization technology.

The problem is even if we will try to find tools, which could be used to building such gigantic scale and complexity structures, we de facto expect to find stuff we are familiar with. But if, let's say, ancient egyptians or should I say, people of Khemit, knew how to deal with gravity in a way we can't now it doesn't make much sense to hope to find some tools that we would use for such purpose - to move and install several tones blocks.

There are three things which I would really love to happen but I'm afraid I won't be lucky enough to see it in my life time:

  1. Let the team of professional builders, engineers to study the pyramids without taking into acccount what mainstream egyptologists tell us and give their estimate about, what would it take for current technical level cizilization to build such pyramids.
    [*]Let the team of specialists who work with granite as a construction material now to analyze the Sarcophaguses, stone jars and statues in Cairo Museum<br>
    <object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3M-nnzP2mog&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x2b405b&color2=0x6b8ab6"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3M-nnzP2mog&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x2b405b&color2=0x6b8ab6" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>​
    <br>
    [*]Scan the Great Sphinx of Giza underneath to figure out what is extactly has been or not hidden there.
 
Well, it was my joke at the beginning of this thread, as I person who loves Apple products and read about this alleged connection between aliens and Pyramids I thought it could be a nice joke to tell:)

Seriously, as long as we still speculate about UFO phenomena and can't give an answer on such questions as, if it has a single origin or multiple, have we been dealing with the same phenomena for the last couple thousands or not, I don't think we can reject completely or accept a possibility that aliens were involved in Pyramids building or not.

But my gut feeling tells me that in the case of The Great Pyramids of Giza and other equal in complexity pyramids built in Egypt, South America, Turkey (Gobekli Tepe), Asia, Eastern Island (statues) we see examples of the previous civilization technology.

The problem is even if we will try to find tools, which could be used to building such gigantic scale and complexity structures, we de facto expect to find stuff we are familiar with. But if, let's say, ancient egyptians or should I say, people of Khemit, knew how to deal with gravity in a way we can't now it doesn't make much sense to hope to find some tools that we would use for such purpose - to move and install several tones blocks.

There are three things which I would really love to happen but I'm afraid I won't be lucky enough to see it in my life time:

  1. Let the team of professional builders, engineers to study the pyramids without taking into acccount what mainstream egyptologists tell us and give their estimate about, what would it take for current technical level cizilization to build such pyramids.
    [*]Let the team of specialists who work with granite as a construction material now to analyze the Sarcophaguses, stone jars and statues in Cairo Museum<br>
    <object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3M-nnzP2mog&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x2b405b&color2=0x6b8ab6"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3M-nnzP2mog&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x2b405b&color2=0x6b8ab6" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>​
    <br>
    [*]Scan the Great Sphinx of Giza underneath to figure out what is extactly has been or not hidden there.

I agree with you, your argument is valid. We can't really dismiss it entirely. I do just find. It strange that a phenomen that in all purposes seems to be the same. Well the phenomen, that seems to fly around in flying discs and other type of craft. Does not appear as often. I could be wrong. Well i am looking at it from my view as a human. I can not be sure. It just an opinion.

The ufo occupants may have appeared more in that area of the world. It just the phenomen was not observed or seen or even reported. It is possible.

It be interesting. As a study, to see why ufo sightings are less frequent in that part of the world. With the amount of history that is claimed which involves Ufos. Sightings are very rare.
 
I would like to chime in and say that this is an interesting debate. The amount of information in this thread is quite substantial and it will take me quite a while to review and digest it all.

Either way, all contributors to this debate have made some good arguments as to the possibility and plausibility of of construction methods.
 
I've read the Giza power plant book. I just came across the 'Giza Death Star' hypothesis pushed by Robert Farrell who has been suggested as a guest on The Paracast: Giza Death Star

One thing is for certain: Building the great pyramid was expensive, really, really expensive. Any theory as to what it really is has to take this into account. A massive amount of money went into building it--way more than the Coloseum, for example, which is puny in comparison.

the cathedrals in Europe were expensive as well, so I suppose religion could be a sufficient explanation.
 
I remember reading somewhere that they were build for there journey to the stars or heavens.When the elite of Egypt died. They were placed into the pyramids.There was a suggestion that the pyramids were markers to some point in the sky.Of course, with this you have different theories to the purpose of the pyramids.
 
Well, just a goldern minute there young feller!

Amongst the standard gladiator fights and Christians to the lions schtick, the Coliseum was built to be flooded for naval battle, and then drained. That required an entire series of valves, drains, catchment basins/cisterns and flooding/drainage controls.

There were also complex underground structures that housed the slaves/gladiators/victims/wild animals for both long-term (however long it took to appear on stage and die, that is) and short-term occupancy.

Stage sets, backdrops, all those things were housed in the Coliseum and had to be accessible for quick set up and take down ere the masses became restive in between 'acts' so to speak.

Not only that, but the series of arches built along the outside had to be engineered to provide support for the tiered seating, as well as the ceilings/floor of the levels.

And some suggest the Coliseum even at one time had a canvas or other type of cloth roof, possibly rigged by master sailors, that was capable of being removed and or set up according to the position of the sun.

So, I think while the Pyramids of Giza do have the entire 2 000 tonnes of granite blocks to figure out how they were moved and such, the Coliseum was a work to be marvelled at, and surely cost a bunch of caesars, too!

Although the Coliseum may be puny in comparison sizewise, I suggest its purpose and complexity are way more grand than the Pyramids.

;)
 
I've read the Giza power plant book. I just came across the 'Giza Death Star' hypothesis pushed by Robert Farrell who has been suggested as a guest on The Paracast: Giza Death Star

One thing is for certain: Building the great pyramid was expensive, really, really expensive. Any theory as to what it really is has to take this into account. A massive amount of money went into building it--way more than the Coloseum, for example, which is puny in comparison.

the cathedrals in Europe were expensive as well, so I suppose religion could be a sufficient explanation.

Agree, it did cost A LOT in terms of resources they spent. But religion....if only we assume that religion did already exist at the time when the pyramids were build. Unfortunately it's impossible to date stone, but the water erosion on the Sphinx back and the bed rock around speaks for it's much more ancient age then egyptologists tell us.

The reason why I think that more practical purpose can be attribute to the pyramids, namely - the power plant idea, is that plus to the arguments presented by Chris Dunn in his book, we know that there are 3 basics things which support our civilization - food, water and energy. Among these 3 I think energy is the most probable as the big enough application to spend LOTs of your resources to build such an enormous structure as The Great Pyramids of Giza and other similar by their size and complexity pyramids in other parts of the world. But this is my assumption, we don't know lots of things about the time when they were built and especially such important as what energy source did they had at hand at that time to build.
 
Been there, seen that. The Colosseum is a dinky little stadium well within the skill set of the Romans who, after all, had running water, working odometers, concrete, and lots of cool stuff. We know where they got the bucks, too, from Jerusalem where they plundered the Second Temple, though some of it may have come from Vespasian's tax on urine. Titus invaded the Inner Sanctum, said, "I don't see no steenking god!" and carted off the loot. There's no real questions on how they built the thing. It took a mere eight years.

In terms of national treasure needed to build the Great Pyramid, I think we are at a whole different scale. That's what prompts me to wonder about its construction.

Not saying I don;t think the Colosseum isn't a work of art. It's pretty nice for an execution chamber. Vespasian and Titus are among my favorite dictators. Too bad Domitian was such a butt head.
 
I laugh, yea though mine own honest opinion has been soundly trounced by a most genteel exhibition of education and eruditon,the humour has not escaped mine own most humble of sensibilities...

Schuyler, you rock! ;)
 
Back
Top