<img src="/cgi-bin/counter/24">
Fido-UFO / Date: 22 Sep 95 10:05:06
To: Michael Danehy.
From: namon@ibm.net
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Date: 23 Sep 1995 10:04:50 GMT Distribution: world Message-ID: <440m42$1pbu@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
JM_ If all the world's
skeptics were tied to the biggest Baalbek stone -
JM_ that would keep
them stuck there forever, since they coudn't budge it.
:-)
What did we just see on TV? This latest in fictional
series a la
"How the Egyptians did it" - had fifteen-thousand
pyramidiots' working
for two months - and what did they construct?
A little, ill-fit rock pile - smaller than the
piece missing from the top of
the Great Pyramid!
Let me utter a couple more words on this..What
We See Is Not What
We're Being Told To See. This blatant propaganda
flick came complete
with a lot of grandiose, but well tattered phrases,
and a big musical
"TRA-DAH" at every opportunity. Despite the hoopla,
this film serves
the opposite effect on a perspicacious observer.
- It shows, how it definitely
could not be done! There were so many things
wrong with the show,
I don't know, where to start telling you.
* Quit while you're ahead.
I noted that the experiment was abandoned just
when it had reached
the point of rapidly diminishing return on efforts.
If the pyramid were
half the size, only two thousand people would
have to work on it for the
same period of time, however, you could easily
spit over it like over a
big dump of chicken droppings. To place blocks
even higher, the base
would have to be widened, and there would have
to be increases in the
already very long ramp, which always requires
more material than the
steeper structure, to which it leads.
I did a few calculations. The pyramid built by
these debunkers was less
than 30 feet tall - the height of the missing
piece from the top of the Great
Pyramid - as the film said that the DP (debunker
pyramid) was smaller
than that missing piece.
Thirty feet - is just five inches over nine meters.
So let's say that the
debunker pyramid was nine meters tall... * When
the pyramid's height
doubles, while retaining shape, its area quadruples,
but the volume
increases eight-fold. The same factor of eight
applies to the ramp.
I hope that it's clear, how, in order to double
the pyramid's height
to 18 meters, the construction would take At
Least 16 months.
Getting to 36 meters would take 128 months, i.e.,
nearly 11 years.
To 72 meters - 85 years and four months. To 144
meters - 2,5 meters
short of the GP - 683 years. However, increase
the workforce to the density
of a beehive - and 150,000 workers could be done
in a mere 68.3 years
of no hollidays.
So, 500,000 workers ( Hello, Woodstock , we were
"rocking" at the GP
for twenty years.. ) could do it in the target
interval of 20 years, placing
115,000 building blocks a year - 26 blocks
each hour of a 12 hour working
day - one block every 2 minutes and 12 seconds!
ROTFLMFO. ! ?
*
Next, they'd still have to expand the base
of the pyramid downwards by
eight feet. That's just two
more courses. But those first two courses of the
pyramid contain about 100,000 blocks!.
So the pyramidoits would need another year, or
else they could compensate
by adding about 33,000
workers for the 20 years. Of course, our history
tells us that only a few million people
were alive in the primitive world back
than. Human lifespan was much shorter... It seems
that our historians
speak in quacky contradictions.
*
All the big slabs were quarried across the Nile,
at Mokottam - about twenty
miles away, and at Turah, and Maura quarries
at Memphis ..
That's a lot of big sailboats, we're talking
about here, an armada of perhaps
two thousand ships. Speaking
of ships, a huge fleet of sea-going sailing ships,
such as could conquer half the known world,
if manned with warriors, had
to ferry the necessary timber ( cedar trunks)
from Lebanon.
About a hundred of the 50-70 ton granite slabs
had to be ferried from Aswan -
five-hundred miles
up the then untamed river. We remember the forty-three
50-70 ton granite blocks, in five layers above
the King's chamber, and as large,
but I guess, not quite as heavy limestone blocks
just above them, which are thus
about seventy meters above Giza. _ Care to move
just one of those up there? _
The hard granite - was used extensively.
Granite surfaces were polished to
a high sheen. Yet, only
diamond, or corrundum drills under pressure of about
two tons per square inch will bore into
granite.
Still, there are even predynastic diorite vases
with narrowing neck, whose
flaring bowl is hollowed out
to paper thinness. Care to duplicate this with
Lo-Tech? A good example of such quality diorite
work is the finely inscribed
Rosetta-stone...
In other words, as we approach the quality standards
of the ancient builders,
our task is getting ever
harder, ever more time consuming.
* We saw that this debunker pyramid was simply
shoddy. Nothing fit.
No edges aligned with the
neighbouring ones... The end experiment with
the sand holding up two transoms was a disaster.
As the sand ran out, the two slammed together
- mis-aligned. You could
see the embarassment on the
faces of all the present... Improvements in
quality would have been extremely dear timewise.
If the Great (savor that word) Pyramid were built
by the true pyramidiots -
whomever that term concerns
-it would probably collapse half-way up.
However, the throng of half the million men
at the start, would never last
that long, attritioning into an army of cripples.
"We don't need a protracted
war - we have the Pyramid!" <Grim>
Indeed, at the film's rate of physical effort,
a man's back couldn't last longer
than, oh, a couple of
years. That's a lot of broom- sweepers for Egypt. And
with half a million, or more people working,
in near proximity of each other,
if anybody caught a flue - everybody else got
it, too.
You see, nobody cares to consider the rate of
attrition of manpower, and
also of tools, ships, etc.
The ramp theory presents so many difficulties
that - sorry - but:
'Crash goes the straight ramp 'theory'.
It involves TOO MUCH work. <Grin)
So some have proposed that a narrow (ten foot
wide) ramp could spiral
around the pyramid:
It seems logical to me that such a winding ramp
would be much less stable,
and bound to be accident-
prone. If a casing stone toppled from the top,
imagine the swath of destruction it would
leave in its 180 meter long wake...
Or, imagine turning a corner with one of the
50-70 ton blocks...
[ Oops, there it goes atumbling
again. - No offence, but, how do you make
a mummy out of
meatjuice? ] (Grim)
Any breakdowns would halt all the transport work,
which would always
progress at the pace of
the slowest crew. But even in several lanes of the
wider straight ramp, there would exist
a perpetual snarling of traffic. *
Yet, anything aside from the ramp technology
is considered sheer Pyramidiocy
by our archaeologists - who say that the Egyptians
had no knowledge of any
building machines. I think that the Egyptologists
had painted themselves
into a corner, and
they're loath to get out of there. So you see that the
debunkers were hoist by their own petarde,
once again, Michael.
Falsehood selfdestructs.
BTW, I'd like to ask you, how did the Great Pyramid's
planners know that
Cheops will rule (live)
as long as they had provided for the GP's construction?
What if he had died five years into
the construction? And if the pyramids
were built as tombs according to you - then why
was there no dead body
found inside of one? Let me tell you one thing.
It was customary in Egypt
to decorate tombs. Therefore the starkly abstract,
formally refined Great
Pyramid, with no decorations
whatsoever found anywhere on the inside,
certainly makes no pretences at having
once been a tomb. * In view of this
abstract purity, it becomes extremely unlikely
that any such ungainly daubings,
as the alleged quarry marks found by col. Wyse
above the King's chamber,
glaringly visible to all those nearby for a considerable
period of time during
the construction
- for weeks, if not months - would not be swiftly, and promptly
removed.
* ( IMHO, a hundred dollar note lost on a busy sidewalk could lay there longer.)
The crude marks, some upside
down - would
qualify as flagrant insult
to the dead Pharaoh,
as they would marr the otherwise
unbespoiled
structure directly above his
face!
Under such circumstances,
these marks are unthinkable as the real thing
(unless the Pyramid wasn't
meant to be a tomb
!!!) - in contrast to some quarry marks, found on the
lower courses of the
same pyramid, sufficiently far from the alleged burial
chamber not to constitute disrespect.
Because the marks above the King's
chamber were the decisive factor in
dating the GP, the question of that
pyramid's age is still ajar. * Sorry for the
detour.
Back to the ramp,
does not the fact that it would have to be removed after-
wards, add greatly to the
total time needed for the Pyramid's completion?
( since the ramp had to contain more material
than the pyramid itself.)
Sooner or later, we have
to express additional obstacles in terms of more
time - rather than
more workers. We
can't just keep on seeding workers
into a limited area - they
are not angels, of whom millions could fit
onto
the pyramidion's point.
<BTW, do I have you reeling? Or, are you
stuck on
the ropes?> <Grin>
IOW, manpower alone can't raise the pyramid anywhere
near the said
time limit. I know that
you're not ready to acquiesce to notions of Hi-Tech.
Hence, your only option is to agree
to the notion that the GP was never meant
to be a tomb, and thus could have been
under construction for as long as
fifty to two-hundred years.
The fruition of the pyramid's plans could only
be likely, if the pyramid's
function were to benefit
the good of the Egyptian state ( church ), rather than
any ephemeral individual, by providing
measure standards, etc..
As far, as I'm concerned, I have good reasons
to believe that Hi-Tech was used.
JM> I have long proposed
that possibility here, in answer to my critics
JM> on Nasca. But, you're
all my witnesses that these guys treated it
JM> like a powerful Taboo.
Anyhow, they were all cowed by the subject...
JM> That was back when...
So this is just to remind all the skeptics
JM> that no King-Chong
has yet thrown it into the sea. (G)
JM> Move any of these giga-behemoths
using Low-Tech, and you will have
JM> forever disspelled
a thousand FTB dreeams.
JM> BUT IF YOU DON'T -
then we shall feel compassion for your scholarly
JM> helplessness!!!
MD> MD> If not Low-Tech
then ancient levitation technology. Why ASSume
MD> aliens?
Well, in this one instance, it seems that the
platform is best suited to supporting
something as heavy,
as those two toitls' you mentioned. Aside from those, what
could weigh a zillion pounds and
sit on the Baalbek Terrace. ??? OK, I'll tell you:
A spaceship, of course.
( A big mothership, would settle down, and insectoid
robots and adroit alienoids
would crawl out
by the million to ravage the green Sahara ) - (Grin)
MD> Please, no more of this
"You can't prove me wrong so I am right!" business.
MD> We get enough of it
from Jean.
Actually, you can't even start proving me wrong,
so don't talk so much in
empty bubbles, or
worse.Don't tell me I'm not right. I'm absolutely right, as
concerns the presence of scientific geometry
within the ancient Science-Art.
That's good enough by me... If, you disagree
- target the logical substance
of the gifs. Else,
admit that these gifs are very to the point on some very
fundamental concepts
of scientific geometry..
(new comment )
Compare the ancient mathematics
discovered by me to those of Cydonia..
Impossible, right? Can't
compare a Rolls Royce to a
cart. Why is it so?
Because the Seal of Atlantis
presents a system, whereas
Cydonian inter-
pretations don't! But they
do present a riddle. As soon, as someone gives
me a 3-D database, which
I could model, I'll check it out for the same seal.
There are signs of it
there, and the whole thing
gets way more interesting
with the superimposition
of the site-plan of (
Avesbury? ) against Cydonia.
I have just seen it on
TV and I liked what I saw. It reminds me of
my own
method (superimposition)..
But, I am just amazed that
the world listens to these, yet it won't hearken
to my news of ancient
Sci-Art. Its authors do not
deserve such snubbing,
even if I do..
Back to scientific geometry, such solid basis
justifies the whole later super-
structure of speculation, and
hypotheses, which disgust you so much.
We have to search for a solution. Again,
where is your curiosity?
OTOH, I am shattering some of your illusions.
Consider it a friendly service.
I just made cheese out
of the GP-ramp 'theory'. Of course, I also recall that
the debunking of the ramp 'theory' has
been reliably done before, by various
engineers. I only made quick calculations, but
these won't be out much.
My ramp estimates are deliberately slanted in
favor of the opposition..
JM> We'll just have to try
keep a straight face. <G>
JM> So much for just one
of many unaswerable riddles, of which there
JM> are so many around.
Every single one of those reeks of technology
JM> from the ancient astronauts
- most likely the source of today's sightings.
MD> The only thing that "reeks" here is your arguments.
You said so, but sadly, you haven't proven it
to me. What you've proven is
that you like to make fun of
naive believers, but you don't like yourself taken
lightly. Don't you like a good mystery?
JM> So, where does the spunky
arrogance come from in these skeptocrats?
JM> They have no scholarly
backbone to stand and analyze...
MD> MD> Of course. They are stupid because they disagree with you.
Did I say that? I said truthfully that they have
no scholarly backbone
to stand and analyze... Besides,
they don't disagree with me! They just
weekly demur... <Grin> To disagree with me
is to point out mistakes in
my geometrical analysis of ancient images. The
rest of it is just a chat.
A nice chat. You ignored my gifs. Why? Is it
because they show something
you don't like?
MD> *sigh*
Now, you're being sighentifickle. *Sigh, sigh.*
*** To wit, or to twit. That is a dilemma..
This Page Hosted
By
Get your own Free Home Page