Ancient Astronauts...opinion (aliens, pyramid, Egypt)

[gsoboi78]

Originally Posted by sanspeur

Correct.

How do you know there are no structures on Mars?

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by gsoboi78

How do you know there are no structures on Mars?

What I find incredibly odd is NASA's repeated balking.

NASA has had numerous legitimate opportunities to investigate this matter and resolve it one way or another. I care not about the end result, only that the end result is achieved using scientific methods with an open mind and that all facts are taken into consideration, so that we may arrive at an objective truth. It could be there is nothing there in that it is the product of natural erosion or other geologic activity, or that it is not natural -- the production of someone's labor.

For example, Mars Global Surveyor operated for more than 7 1/2 years, four time longer than planned. The satellite, which was given four additional missions due to its operating longer than planned, could have been parked in geosynchronous orbit over Sidonia and the area studied in great detail for 24 hours, 5 days, a week, 30 days, 3 months, 6 months, a year or longer and a definitive conclusion could have been reached, but NASA chose not to do that.

In fact, everything NASA has done has makes it appear that NASA is in a bad dream that it desperately wants to get out of and forget.

Originally Posted by sanspeur

I know some of the inner stones in the pyramids were up to 80 tons, but those are the largest I have heard of...I know there are statues and obelisks that reached those weights, but they just had to be transported, then raised upright.

That isn't true at all. No one has been able to any of that ever.

Originally Posted by InsaneInDaMembrane

The massive stones at the Baalbek platform havealways amazed me and so does Gilgal Rephaim ("Circle of the Giants").

There is no modern machinery in existence that is capable of moving the Trilithons at Baalbek, or at the ones at Jerusalem.

Not only does no modern machinery exist, films, documentaries and books have interviewed engineers at major universities worldwide and in the private sector and those who own companies that perform large construction projects, like Hoover Dam, Aswan Dam etc and many other experts and all have repeatedly said for the past 40 years that it isn't even possible to build a crane or other equipment that could move them.

If modern machinery can't move them, and if people can't even design a crane or machine to move them, then it is not possible that people moved them without machines. To suggest that they were rolled on logs is absurd. Those Trilithons would crush a California Redwood into a 1/4" thick piece of plywood in about 3 seconds.

Originally Posted by raison_d'etre

Solomon's Temple - stones up to 100 tons
Obelisk of Axum - 160 tons
Temple of Sais - 500 - 1000 tons
Le Grand Menhir Brise - 300 - 350 tons
Karnak - 300 tons
Sacsayhuaman - up to 400 tons

There are others.

Note that at some of those sites they would have been moving the stones up large inclines.

Originally Posted by sanspeur

Agreed. I have no idea how some of those megaliths were lifted, but they found a way.

No, they did not find a way. Apparently there's some part of "physics" that you don't understand. If a machine cannot generate the energy necessary to lift something, then neither can people.

Originally Posted by raison_d'etre

They found a way without leaving evidence... I thought all things had evidence? I guess without evidence, they don't really exist or they just magically appeared.

Yeah, that's right. Not a single shred of evidence. Who needs evidence anyway? And who cares, since most of them ignore the evidence anyway.

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

Originally Posted by raison_d'etre

Still you have to admit that even today we don't have equipment that could build such monuments. To life a 200-2000 ton slab of stone as high as some have, is an amazing task, one we can't do in some cases. For a modern crane to lift such weight would need an even bigger counter weight. And to move such heavy stones up to 200+ miles across uneven terrain, again is a difficult task even today.

Originally Posted by sanspeur

You are badly misinformed...The blocks forming the pyramids weighed 2 1/2 tons on average. There is no doubt that these can be moved and lifted using hand tools, muscle power and a little ingenuity.

No, it is you who are badly misinformed.

When the Temple was relocated to make way for the lake to be formed by the Aswan Dam, modern mechanical machines were used to quarry and move 2,200 stone blocks weighing 2 tons to 30 tons several miles away to a new site.

It took 5 years.

Five freaking years just to quarry and move 2,200 limestone blocks, and you're saying the "Egyptians" quarried and moved 2.5 Million limestone blocks in 20 years.

2.5 Million divided by 2,200 equals 1,136 and multiplied by 5 means it would take you...

5,681 years to build the Great Pyramid.

Aren't you the brilliant one.

Let's talk about evidence.

People like you who have mental blocks that keep you from seeing the objective truth often make silly statements like, "They had millions of slaves."

Really? Millions of slaves, huh?

That is an incredibly silly statement.

I spent a lot of time in the S-3 at Battalion and Brigade level. The commander tells us what he wants and we make it happen. We do that, by planning the entire operation from start to finish and that includes, um, logistics.

Yeah, logistics. In the modern US Army with computers and vehicles it takes 1 person to support 3 troops in the field.

Before that, using the stubby pencil method, desktop computers and vehicles, it took 1 person to support 2.5 troops in the field.

During the Vietnam Era using the stubby pencil method, main-frame computers and vehicles, it took 1 person to support 2 troops in the field.

In WW II using the stubby pencil method and vehicles, it took 1 person to support 1.5 people in the field.

In WW I with stubby pencil, pack animals and vehicles, it was 1:1.

In the Civil War, it took 2 people using the stubby pencil method and pack animals and wagons to support 1 troop in the field.

Cornwallis had a ratio of 3:1. His baggage train was bigger than his army here in the Colonies.

When we go back to the Roman Legions, it took 5 people to support one legionnaire in the field.

And what do I mean by support? Food, water, medicine, administration, finance, supplies, sanitation, etc.

So to add insult to injury, if you have 1 Million laborers, then you're going to need 5 Million people to provide support to the 1 Million laborers.

So that would be 6 Million people on the Gizeh Plateau, urinating, defecating, throwing their chicken bones, pig bones, banana peels, coconut husks, orange rinds, fig seeds and broken pottery and every thing else all over the place.

So where is it?

Show me. I'm from freaking Missouri so you all are going to have show me where this stuff is. You've had more than 100 years to show me. Where is it? Show me the urine. Show me the feces. Show me the animal carcasses and the seeds and rinds and everything else used for food that became garbage. Show me the cooking utensils and vessels used to cook food for the 1 Million laborers (well in reality 6 Million were chowing down), show me the broken pottery, the clothes, show me where 6 Million people lived on the Gizeh Plateau and its environs, show me the gigantic charcoal pits used to cook food for 6 Million people for 20 freaking years while the supposedly built the Great Pyramid. Do you people have any idea how much charcoal would have accumulated cooking every day for 20 years?

You can't show me because it never happened.

Go look at the census conducted by Julius Caesar or August Caesar.

Y'all think Jerusalem was a teeming metropolis? Wrong answer. It was podunk backwater town of 4 square miles and 1,200 people. Yeah, that's right. That's the big Capital City of your Hebrew Empire. After the northern kingdom was destroyed, Jerusalem rapidly expanded because of the influx of refugees, but even so, it was only 12 square miles and had 12,000-14,000 people. That's the big capital of the Kingdom of Judah.

How many people lived in Cairo? 3 Million at the time of the First Plague. Before that, about 1 Million in 900 CE. How many in 2,600 BCE? An estimated 32,000 people lived there.

So yeah, 6 Million people just boogied on into Cairo and set up shop to build the Pyramid.

Total fail.

There were no cities greater than 100,000 people in 2,500 BCE because there was no possible to support populations larger than that and provide them with food, water, sanitation, and other services.

Originally Posted by AREQUIPA

That's an undisprovable theory, but it does smack of coming up with an excuse for the lack of evidence for this ancient astronaut's stuff. Just as it is used to excuse the lack of sound evidence in Theism, alternative science and cults. Which this is. In fact the official reaction to Daniken was disinterest rather than suppression.

As to the blocks, there is an Egyptian wall painting or sculpture (I admit I only saw a drawn copy in an Egyptology book) of a line of workers dragging along a huge statue on rollers urged on by an overseer. That together with team marks on blocks and the ropes for hauling them having been found should put the weight on the pyramids being made by bronze age men without alien technology.

I have no doubt that the "Egyptians" (their ethic origin varied from time to time) may have erected a few monuments in later years, but not the Pyramids for the reasons I just told you.

Egyptologists claim the Great Pyramid was built in 20 years. That means that each and every single one of the 2.5 Million blocks would have to be selected, cut, removed from the quarry, transported to the Gizeh Plateau, dressed and placed in only...

2 1/2 minutes.

You can't even cut a 2 ton limestone block now in 2 1/2 minutes with all of your fancy equipment, yet ancient "Egyptians" using the tools of the day supposedly cut a 2 ton limestone block in less than 2 1/2 minutes.

Do you see how absurd that is?

Quarry to Pyramid in 2 1/2 minutes. You'd have to be doing more than just drugs and alcohol to have a fantasy like that.

Once again, for the hard of hearing, it took 5 years just to cut, dress, move and place a mere 2,200 blocks using modern equipment and machinery. Building the Great Pyramid today would take more than 5,000 years.

You people need to get with reality.

Originally Posted by InsaneInDaMembrane

Mircea, where can I see an the actual carving, painting, relief of that picture? Which civilization provided it and how were those interpretations of it determined? Just curious.

Sir Clemens Markham. He wrote an English translation of Relacion. If I remember correctly at least two of his works have a copy of it: Incas of Peru and the Narratives of the Rites and the Laws of the Yncas. Those were written in the 1880s, except at least one of his works were published after he died.

Lothrop also has copies of it in his works, which were published in the late 1950s and early 1960s. I'm not sure which university Lothrop was at, but he usually published in collaboration with other scholars.

Someone else also did a translation of Relacion (originally written by Bishop Diego de Landa). If you recall, he was the bishop that carried a wooden staff which was an exact copy of the wooden staff carried by Quetzalcoatl/Ninghishiddza.

The original drawing was made by either Fransisco Avilar or Don Juan de Pachacuti-Yumqui Salcamayhua whose father I believe traveled with Bishop de Landa and his mother was an Inca Princess. That was about 20 years after the Spanish arrived -- so figure maybe 1560 or so.

Remember that at that time, no one has any knowledge that the Sumerians, Akkadians, Amorites (Babylonians), Assyrians or Chaldeans (Neo-Babylonians) exist.

The Babylonians, Assyrians and Chaldeans are known from references in the Old Testament, but not the Sumerians and Akkadians (in reality the Land of Shin'ar is Sumer -- but we don't figure that out until 40 years ago) and no one has found their cities or cultures yet and it would be another 3 to 4 centuries before they were discovered.

[InsaneInDaMembrane]

Originally Posted by Mircea

What I find incredibly odd is NASA's repeated balking.

NASA has had numerous legitimate opportunities to investigate this matter and resolve it one way or another. I care not about the end result, only that the end result is achieved using scientific methods with an open mind and that all facts are taken into consideration, so that we may arrive at an objective truth. It could be there is nothing there in that it is the product of natural erosion or other geologic activity, or that it is not natural -- the production of someone's labor.

For example, Mars Global Surveyor operated for more than 7 1/2 years, four time longer than planned. The satellite, which was given four additional missions due to its operating longer than planned, could have been parked in geosynchronous orbit over Sidonia and the area studied in great detail for 24 hours, 5 days, a week, 30 days, 3 months, 6 months, a year or longer and a definitive conclusion could have been reached, but NASA chose not to do that.

In fact, everything NASA has done has makes it appear that NASA is in a bad dream that it desperately wants to get out of and forget.



That isn't true at all. No one has been able to any of that ever.



There is no modern machinery in existence that is capable of moving the Trilithons at Baalbek, or at the ones at Jerusalem.

Not only does no modern machinery exist, films, documentaries and books have interviewed engineers at major universities worldwide and in the private sector and those who own companies that perform large construction projects, like Hoover Dam, Aswan Dam etc and many other experts and all have repeatedly said for the past 40 years that it isn't even possible to build a crane or other equipment that could move them.

If modern machinery can't move them, and if people can't even design a crane or machine to move them, then it is not possible that people moved them without machines. To suggest that they were rolled on logs is absurd. Those Trilithons would crush a California Redwood into a 1/4" thick piece of plywood in about 3 seconds.



Note that at some of those sites they would have been moving the stones up large inclines.



No, they did not find a way. Apparently there's some part of "physics" that you don't understand. If a machine cannot generate the energy necessary to lift something, then neither can people.



Yeah, that's right. Not a single shred of evidence. Who needs evidence anyway? And who cares, since most of them ignore the evidence anyway.

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.





No, it is you who are badly misinformed.

When the Temple was relocated to make way for the lake to be formed by the Aswan Dam, modern mechanical machines were used to quarry and move 2,200 stone blocks weighing 2 tons to 30 tons several miles away to a new site.

It took 5 years.

Five freaking years just to quarry and move 2,200 limestone blocks, and you're saying the "Egyptians" quarried and moved 2.5 Million limestone blocks in 20 years.

2.5 Million divided by 2,200 equals 1,136 and multiplied by 5 means it would take you...

5,681 years to build the Great Pyramid.

Aren't you the brilliant one.

Let's talk about evidence.

People like you who have mental blocks that keep you from seeing the objective truth often make silly statements like, "They had millions of slaves."

Really? Millions of slaves, huh?

That is an incredibly silly statement.

I spent a lot of time in the S-3 at Battalion and Brigade level. The commander tells us what he wants and we make it happen. We do that, by planning the entire operation from start to finish and that includes, um, logistics.

Yeah, logistics. In the modern US Army with computers and vehicles it takes 1 person to support 3 troops in the field.

Before that, using the stubby pencil method, desktop computers and vehicles, it took 1 person to support 2.5 troops in the field.

During the Vietnam Era using the stubby pencil method, main-frame computers and vehicles, it took 1 person to support 2 troops in the field.

In WW II using the stubby pencil method and vehicles, it took 1 person to support 1.5 people in the field.

In WW I with stubby pencil, pack animals and vehicles, it was 1:1.

In the Civil War, it took 2 people using the stubby pencil method and pack animals and wagons to support 1 troop in the field.

Cornwallis had a ratio of 3:1. His baggage train was bigger than his army here in the Colonies.

When we go back to the Roman Legions, it took 5 people to support one legionnaire in the field.

And what do I mean by support? Food, water, medicine, administration, finance, supplies, sanitation, etc.

So to add insult to injury, if you have 1 Million laborers, then you're going to need 5 Million people to provide support to the 1 Million laborers.

So that would be 6 Million people on the Gizeh Plateau, urinating, defecating, throwing their chicken bones, pig bones, banana peels, coconut husks, orange rinds, fig seeds and broken pottery and every thing else all over the place.

So where is it?

Show me. I'm from freaking Missouri so you all are going to have show me where this stuff is. You've had more than 100 years to show me. Where is it? Show me the urine. Show me the feces. Show me the animal carcasses and the seeds and rinds and everything else used for food that became garbage. Show me the cooking utensils and vessels used to cook food for the 1 Million laborers (well in reality 6 Million were chowing down), show me the broken pottery, the clothes, show me where 6 Million people lived on the Gizeh Plateau and its environs, show me the gigantic charcoal pits used to cook food for 6 Million people for 20 freaking years while the supposedly built the Great Pyramid. Do you people have any idea how much charcoal would have accumulated cooking every day for 20 years?

You can't show me because it never happened.

Go look at the census conducted by Julius Caesar or August Caesar.

Y'all think Jerusalem was a teeming metropolis? Wrong answer. It was podunk backwater town of 4 square miles and 1,200 people. Yeah, that's right. That's the big Capital City of your Hebrew Empire. After the northern kingdom was destroyed, Jerusalem rapidly expanded because of the influx of refugees, but even so, it was only 12 square miles and had 12,000-14,000 people. That's the big capital of the Kingdom of Judah.

How many people lived in Cairo? 3 Million at the time of the First Plague. Before that, about 1 Million in 900 CE. How many in 2,600 BCE? An estimated 32,000 people lived there.

So yeah, 6 Million people just boogied on into Cairo and set up shop to build the Pyramid.

Total fail.

There were no cities greater than 100,000 people in 2,500 BCE because there was no possible to support populations larger than that and provide them with food, water, sanitation, and other services.



I have no doubt that the "Egyptians" (their ethic origin varied from time to time) may have erected a few monuments in later years, but not the Pyramids for the reasons I just told you.

Egyptologists claim the Great Pyramid was built in 20 years. That means that each and every single one of the 2.5 Million blocks would have to be selected, cut, removed from the quarry, transported to the Gizeh Plateau, dressed and placed in only...

2 1/2 minutes.

You can't even cut a 2 ton limestone block now in 2 1/2 minutes with all of your fancy equipment, yet ancient "Egyptians" using the tools of the day supposedly cut a 2 ton limestone block in less than 2 1/2 minutes.

Do you see how absurd that is?

Quarry to Pyramid in 2 1/2 minutes. You'd have to be doing more than just drugs and alcohol to have a fantasy like that.

Once again, for the hard of hearing, it took 5 years just to cut, dress, move and place a mere 2,200 blocks using modern equipment and machinery. Building the Great Pyramid today would take more than 5,000 years.

You people need to get with reality.



Sir Clemens Markham. He wrote an English translation of Relacion. If I remember correctly at least two of his works have a copy of it: Incas of Peru and the Narratives of the Rites and the Laws of the Yncas. Those were written in the 1880s, except at least one of his works were published after he died.

Lothrop also has copies of it in his works, which were published in the late 1950s and early 1960s. I'm not sure which university Lothrop was at, but he usually published in collaboration with other scholars.

Someone else also did a translation of Relacion (originally written by Bishop Diego de Landa). If you recall, he was the bishop that carried a wooden staff which was an exact copy of the wooden staff carried by Quetzalcoatl/Ninghishiddza.

The original drawing was made by either Fransisco Avilar or Don Juan de Pachacuti-Yumqui Salcamayhua whose father I believe traveled with Bishop de Landa and his mother was an Inca Princess. That was about 20 years after the Spanish arrived -- so figure maybe 1560 or so.

Remember that at that time, no one has any knowledge that the Sumerians, Akkadians, Amorites (Babylonians), Assyrians or Chaldeans (Neo-Babylonians) exist.

The Babylonians, Assyrians and Chaldeans are known from references in the Old Testament, but not the Sumerians and Akkadians (in reality the Land of Shin'ar is Sumer -- but we don't figure that out until 40 years ago) and no one has found their cities or cultures yet and it would be another 3 to 4 centuries before they were discovered.

Thanks for the info Mircea, but I'm just personally requesting a little toning down on the apparent snide remarks. This is a GREAT discussion (even with the disagreements) and it would be sad to see mod editing, deletions and/or a locking of the thread.

[Fullback32]

Originally Posted by Mircea

For example, Mars Global Surveyor operated for more than 7 1/2 years, four time longer than planned. The satellite, which was given four additional missions due to its operating longer than planned, could have been parked in geosynchronous orbit over Sidonia and the area studied in great detail for 24 hours, 5 days, a week, 30 days, 3 months, 6 months, a year or longer and a definitive conclusion could have been reached, but NASA chose not to do that.

Negative on that ghostrider. You can't just move a satellite into any old orbit you want. The Mars Global Surveyor was placed into a Highly Elliptical Orbit (HEO or Molniya) over Mars. In order to move it into ANY other orbit would take an enormous amount of fuel which satellites do not carry. The only exception to this are probes such as Voyager whose 700 ton weight was mainly fuel. Probes that only study a single body and satellites such as communications, weather, imaging, etc do not carry fuel loads like Voyager did.

A Geosynchronous Earth Orbit (GEO) is 26,199 mi from earth. I do not know what distance from Mars is required for a geosynchronous orbit or geostationary orbit, but the fuel required to get into the correct trajectory just to get it to a geosynchronous location is not carried on the satellite. This doesn't even take into account the fuel needed to park it in its orbit (orbit insertion burn). They carry enough fuel for an orbit insertion burn by the main motor and a small amount of hydrazine (generally) for the jets that is used in small bursts for station keeping or super-synching at the end of its life (if necessary). The reason for this is simple...weight. Less weight mean less escape velocity required to leave earth's gravity.

NASA couldn't have moved it if they had wanted to. This isn't Star Wars.

One other thing, from a geo orbit you would not get the type of detail you referred to. It's too far away. As an example, when watching the weather report and you see a satellite image of the western hemisphere, those are from GEO birds. The detailed images are from low-flyers. The kind of orbit required for detail is a Low Orbit or a Polar Orbit (either sun-synchronous or HEO).

[sanspeur]

Originally Posted by Mircea

That isn't true at all. No one has been able to any of that ever.

Oh, but they absolutely did, and some of these feats are being replicated today.

There is no modern machinery in existence that is capable of moving the Trilithons at Baalbek, or at the ones at Jerusalem.

Wrong...see below.

If modern machinery can't move them, and if people can't even design a crane or machine to move them, then it is not possible that people moved them without machines. To suggest that they were rolled on logs is absurd. Those Trilithons would crush a California Redwood into a 1/4" thick piece of plywood in about 3 seconds.

Wrong...The Shubert Theater in Minneapolis (over 2,900 tons) was moved in one piece in 1999. In 2000 the Hotel Montgomery San Jose ( over 4,800 tons) was moved. The heaviest move was the Fu Gang building in China (15,140 tons). Look it up in the Guinness book of world records.
HowStuffWorks "Five Heaviest Buildings Ever Moved"

Taisun, the biggest, strongest crane in the world sets a crane heavy lift world record by lifting the 17,100 metric ton topsides of the Saipem-owned "Frigstad D90" semi-submersible "Scarabeo 9".

The Rapanui moved their Moai the largest of which was 160 tons using logs as rollers. The actually deforested Easter Island with their foolish Moai escapades.

Note that at some of those sites they would have been moving the stones up large inclines.

So what?

No, they did not find a way. Apparently there's some part of "physics" that you don't understand. If a machine cannot generate the energy necessary to lift something, then neither can people.

You've never heard of leverage?...See above for heaviest items moved by machines.

Yeah, that's right. Not a single shred of evidence. Who needs evidence anyway? And who cares, since most of them ignore the evidence anyway.

There is lots of evidence that you are conveniently ignoring.

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

This is the only thing you've posted that I agree with.

No, it is you who are badly misinformed.

Are you sure about that?

When the Temple was relocated to make way for the lake to be formed by the Aswan Dam, modern mechanical machines were used to quarry and move 2,200 stone blocks weighing 2 tons to 30 tons several miles away to a new site.

It took 5 years.

Five freaking years just to quarry and move 2,200 limestone blocks, and you're saying the "Egyptians" quarried and moved 2.5 Million limestone blocks in 20 years.

2.5 Million divided by 2,200 equals 1,136 and multiplied by 5 means it would take you...

5,681 years to build the Great Pyramid.

A complete straw man, not even woth addressing.

Aren't you the brilliant one.

Sarcastic insult that has totally backfired on you.

Let's talk about evidence.

See above

People like you who have mental blocks that keep you from seeing the objective truth often make silly statements like, "They had millions of slaves."

The pyramids were not built with slaves, but by paid and well treated workers... An estimated 20,000 to 30,000 workers built the Pyramids at Giza over 80 years. Much of the work probably happened while the River Nile was flooded.

Huge limestone blocks could be floated from quarries right to the base of the Pyramids. The stones would likely then be polished by hand and pushed up ramps to their intended positions. National Geographic: Egypt Pyramids--Facts, Photos, Diagrams

Really? Millions of slaves, huh?

That is an incredibly silly statement.

Yes it is, so why did you make such a silly statement?

I spent a lot of time in the S-3 at Battalion and Brigade level. The commander tells us what he wants and we make it happen. We do that, by planning the entire operation from start to finish and that includes, um, logistics.

Yeah, logistics. In the modern US Army with computers and vehicles it takes 1 person to support 3 troops in the field.

Before that, using the stubby pencil method, desktop computers and vehicles, it took 1 person to support 2.5 troops in the field.

During the Vietnam Era using the stubby pencil method, main-frame computers and vehicles, it took 1 person to support 2 troops in the field.

In WW II using the stubby pencil method and vehicles, it took 1 person to support 1.5 people in the field.

In WW I with stubby pencil, pack animals and vehicles, it was 1:1.

In the Civil War, it took 2 people using the stubby pencil method and pack animals and wagons to support 1 troop in the field.

Cornwallis had a ratio of 3:1. His baggage train was bigger than his army here in the Colonies.

When we go back to the Roman Legions, it took 5 people to support one legionnaire in the field.

And what do I mean by support? Food, water, medicine, administration, finance, supplies, sanitation, etc.

So to add insult to injury, if you have 1 Million laborers, then you're going to need 5 Million people to provide support to the 1 Million laborers.

So that would be 6 Million people on the Gizeh Plateau, urinating, defecating, throwing their chicken bones, pig bones, banana peels, coconut husks, orange rinds, fig seeds and broken pottery and every thing else all over the place.

Another rather incredible straw man argument

So where is it?

Show me. I'm from freaking Missouri so you all are going to have show me where this stuff is. You've had more than 100 years to show me. Where is it? Show me the urine. Show me the feces. Show me the animal carcasses and the seeds and rinds and everything else used for food that became garbage. Show me the cooking utensils and vessels used to cook food for the 1 Million laborers (well in reality 6 Million were chowing down), show me the broken pottery, the clothes, show me where 6 Million people lived on the Gizeh Plateau and its environs, show me the gigantic charcoal pits used to cook food for 6 Million people for 20 freaking years while the supposedly built the Great Pyramid. Do you people have any idea how much charcoal would have accumulated cooking every day for 20 years?

There were no millions of slaves....The builders' villages boasted bakers, butchers, brewers, granaries, houses, cemeteries, and probably even some sorts of health-care facilities—there is evidence of laborers surviving crushed or amputated limbs. Bakeries excavated near the Great Pyramids could have produced thousands of loaves of bread every week.

You can't show me because it never happened.

I just showed you because it did happen

Go look at the census conducted by Julius Caesar or August Caesar.

Y'all think Jerusalem was a teeming metropolis? Wrong answer. It was podunk backwater town of 4 square miles and 1,200 people. Yeah, that's right. That's the big Capital City of your Hebrew Empire. After the northern kingdom was destroyed, Jerusalem rapidly expanded because of the influx of refugees, but even so, it was only 12 square miles and had 12,000-14,000 people. That's the big capital of the Kingdom of Judah.

How many people lived in Cairo? 3 Million at the time of the First Plague. Before that, about 1 Million in 900 CE. How many in 2,600 BCE? An estimated 32,000 people lived there.

So yeah, 6 Million people just boogied on into Cairo and set up shop to build the Pyramid.

Your downfall is thinking that millions of slaves built the pyramids

Egyptologists claim the Great Pyramid was built in 20 years. That means that each and every single one of the 2.5 Million blocks would have to be selected, cut, removed from the quarry, transported to the Gizeh Plateau, dressed and placed in only...

2 1/2 minutes.

You can't even cut a 2 ton limestone block now in 2 1/2 minutes with all of your fancy equipment, yet ancient "Egyptians" using the tools of the day supposedly cut a 2 ton limestone block in less than 2 1/2 minutes.

Do you see how absurd that is?

Quarry to Pyramid in 2 1/2 minutes. You'd have to be doing more than just drugs and alcohol to have a fantasy like that.

Only if they were cutting them one at a time...With 20,000 to 30,000 workers, that is not very likely is it...Your "logic" fails badly here and in the rest of your post...So far the only thing you have been good at in this posts are your nasty insults.

Once again, for the hard of hearing, it took 5 years just to cut, dress, move and place a mere 2,200 blocks using modern equipment and machinery. Building the Great Pyramid today would take more than 5,000 years.

Yup more than 20,000 workers cutting and moving one stone at a time....Right, I gotcha.

You people need to get with reality.

Well some people certainly need to...You really should do your research before you post... Irrelevant blather snipped.

[Trackwatch]

Originally Posted by sanspeur

Yup more than 20,000 workers cutting and moving one stone at a time....Right, I gotcha.

I think that is what is sticking a lot of people, many stones could be in various levels of assembly at any one time.

The workers were NOT slaves as many think, they were not treated poorly.

[TRANSPONDER]

Just two things.

The Mars face I thought was done and dusted. Those who inisist that the photos produced in response to the insistence that a closer look be taken and which showed it to a natural feature must be fakes are not going to be convinced whatever NASA does - and it has better things to do with a cut budget that pander to cultist demands to investigate all manner of ...well..cultists...theories.

While the pyramids are remarkable work and the various huge rocks around the world take a bit of explaining, the incidental evidence of tooling marks, accommodation for workers and marks designating which team was to work in the block suggests that men, not aliens with rock - cutting lazers were able to do this.

It's sometimes forgotten that up to Ptolemaic times huge statues and columns of iron -hard diorite were being cut and polished to a mirror - finish.

We also need to recall that the dates of the pyramids, Stonehenge, the Baalbek temple, Easter Island and Sacsayhuaman range from 2,500 BC to the 14th c. AD. Aliensdunnit cultists apparently tend to airly lump all this stuff together as 'ancient' without realizing that it requires continual alien input to every 'unexplained' structure, because if one of those is accepted as not done by aliens, then the whole rationale collapses.

"Cieza de León (1976:153-154), who visited Sacsayhuaman two times in the late 1540’s, mentions the quarrying of the stones, their transposition to the site, and the digging of foundation trenches. All this was conducted by rotational labor under the close supervision of Imperial architects" (Wiki)

Remember also the huge labour that went into Iron age hill forts which doesn't apparently stack up given the sheer number of them per a relatively small population. Yet the presence of signs of human construction (discarded antler picks, for example) suggests that, just because it seems incredible to us, it might have been a normal day at the office for the ancients.

[raison_d'etre]

Originally Posted by Trackwatch

I think that is what is sticking a lot of people, many stones could be in various levels of assembly at any one time.

The workers were NOT slaves as many think, they were not treated poorly.

Do you have proof? Physical proof of this? Slavery was big back then especially in egypt.

[Asheville Native]

Originally Posted by Trackwatch

The workers were NOT slaves as many think, they were not treated poorly.

I'm sorry that reality conflicts with your fantasies, but statements like that tend to make one look highly uneducated.

[whoppers]

According to the Torah, the Israelites preferred the luxuries of Egyptian Slavery to wandering around the desert and it's sparse accomodations.
So much so that Yahweh had to take them out into the desert until that generation died out, and there would be nobody left to reminesce about "the good ol' days". The generation that made it into the promised land had only known the harsh life of the desert, so they had no memories of how nice Egypt might have been for their parents. Now back to actual history....

What's funny is that if you do a simple google search for "who built the pyramids", the third link from the top boldy states ALIENS BUILT THE PYRAMIDS (Aliens built the pyramids). I find that highly amusing and highly depressing at the same time. Now let's try to link the two paragraphs...

Most people assume the pyramids were built by slaves, because that has been a popular idea over the years. Christianity has contributed much to this idea, especially using the account of the Exodus as some sort of 'proof', and so has popular culture. The truth is - it had never been established 100% positive that slaves built them, especially considering that not all the pyramids were built at one time...

Mark Lehner (an Egyptologist) gives his thoughts on the matter here: Who Built the Pyramids? | Harvard Magazine Jul-Aug 2003. You can then determine for yourself whether the term 'slave' is accurate or not. Personally, I have not heard the slave-theory for a long time and had assumed it had died out. I always have to remember the power of obstinacy...

At least it's a much more plausible theory than the alien-theory...