Who built the pyramids?

Post Reply New Topic

Look, forget about the aliens.
You and I both know a limestone block cannot be shaved to that accuracy, sharp corners, properly true sides and all, using primitive hand tools.

If the Egyptians had anti-gravity rays to lift stones, and rock cutting laser beams, then why didn they use those things in their military battles with the Hitittes (thier superpower rivals), or to defend themselves against the Hyksos (the 'shepard kings') who seized lower Egypt from the Egyptians around 1500 BC?

And why didnt they use that alledged 'helicopter' in battle?

1: "A" mason(one mason)?
2: Go back to the beginning of this thread, and take a look at reply #8.

Limestone is close to concrete, and, like concrete, can be poured to perfectly fill a mold.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znQk_yBHre4[/youtube]
Go back to the beginning of this thread, and take a look at reply #8.

No, that is the argument CREATIONISTS claim the academics use. As usual, they are simple-minded and WRONG.

This commonly quoted fallacy (tornado in a junkyard producing a Boeing 747) is attributed to Hoyle. The biggest error is the presumption that everything happens in one step, ignoring any preliminary or intermediate steps to the final product.

Far from being statistically unlikely, given certain chemicals in certain combinations and billions of years to play in, it seems pretty darn likely that the chemical compounds that become living systems will form. Once that happens, evolution begins. Whichever environment they are in will act as a filter on the organisms in it. Those not wiped out by their environment survive to pass on their genes. Those genes mutate creating new information (Yes this has been observed in spite of creationist claims to the contrary. We know the mechanisms of evolution better than those of gravity) and new species branch off from existing populations.

Another common misunderstanding that is the basis of many meaningless creationist questions (which sex evolved first, etc.) is that it's not individual organisms that evolve, it is breeding populations that evolve. Sometimes the original species continues along with its descendent species, especially if the descendent species are adapted for a different environment or otherwise not in direct competition. Most species die out, but so far life continues anyway.

You may disagree with this, but I am almost certain if you do disagree you are most likely basing your opinion on misinformation (LIES) you have been told about this subject. That is what offends me the most about creationists, the way they ignore much of the strongest evidence for evolution, and deny or distort what they do not ignore, besides quoting people out of context to make it look like they mean the opposite of what they really said when you read the context the quote was "mined" from. I don't like liars, even if they are lying for Jesus. Like I said though, probably you are just misinformed, not lying, stupid or crazy.

Throw in some concrete and have a a near perfect seal and fit.

ruveyn

Why don't we just morph this thread with the "Are UFO's real?" thread? It is mostly the same users at both threads.

Great idea! Since he's using the same methodology in both threads - an "Open Minded" approach* - it only makes sense to merge the threads.

*An "Open Minded" approach means that his claims are presented as scientific, but they do not adhere to any valid scientific method; they lack supporting evidence or even plausibility; they cannot be reliably tested; they lack any real scientific status; they rely too much on apocryphal confirmation rather than any rigorous attempts at self-refutation; and they generally lack any systematic processes to rationally reach the stated conclusions.

Speaking of open-minded:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI[/youtube]

OOO!! ! Shiny!

Transcript, please?

...

Never mind ... found it!

THANKS!! !

Last edited by Fnord on 29 Jan 2013, 4:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

You can chek out the Transcript by accessing the YouTube page of the video and clicking the Transcript button below the video.

Neat feature.

Agreed.

I find the alien argument to be similar to the "God did it" perspective of some Xtians on the origins of the Universe.

The hieroglyphs showing a helicopter and other supposed craft are the same as the biblical stories. They are a written record apparently passed down through unknown generations. Which is to say they are not necessarily more than a finger pointing to the distant prehistoric Egyptian past.
They are an another indication to us of what is recognizable to us as an apparent high technology.

'Gravity rays and laser beams' are not mentioned in the clip.

Evidence for ancient hieroglyphs showing a helicopter please.

So the ancients quarried 5,500,000 tons of rock for just core of the great pyramid, then crushed it into powder, and then made bricks with it.
Sun dried quicklime is equivalent to clay, so it would have eroded to nothing long before now. So these bricks would then have had to be fired in kilns, requiring more capital works and a considerable amount of fuel.
While the 'concrete mold theory' answers the question of how the standard accuracy of the bricks was achieved, it would appear to be a far more time consuming process than quarrying the ready stone.
The third of the Giza pyramids and the red pyramid at Dahshur are built to the same precision as the two remaining Giza pyramids, yet they are built entirely of granite.
Is it to be believed that the Egyptians somehow created granite concrete as well?