• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Science cannot solve the final mystery

cladking

Well-Known Member
"When I say that we all see what we believe this is EVIDENCE."

No, it is a mere ASSERTION.

I know this will come as a shock,. but simply because some dude calling itself 'cladking' in the interwebs declares something, it is not by mere decree, a fact.

This has been shown to be true many many times by Look and See Science.

There also is extensive anecdotal evidence and some experimental evidence.

I'm surprised you aren't aware of this.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
There's a great deal of illogic in the interpretation of the data and in our estimation of the ancients. These non-sequiturs are inconsistent with nature and the physical evidence.



I'm not sure which question you consider inadequately addressed. There is a huge amount of data that supports my theory and I often say it ALL does but, of course, this isn't strictly true because what the king had for breakfast is normally irrelevant to how the pyramid was built. But my theory is certainly able to include far more of the physical evidence than orthodoxy which can't even fond the word ramp anywhere.



Historical accounts say that the stones moved to the pyramid 300' at a time after a priest attached a piece of paper to them. This is inconsistent with ramps. Indeed, there are no historical accounts until more recent times that involve ramps. Herodotus' description almost precisely matches the usage of counterweights. (they were shaped like the dorsal carapace of a grasshopper and composed of "short pieces of wood".) They were built in "battlements" (steps) and the lifting devices could be moved between them. The evidence they were built in steps is pervasive in the physical evidence and historical accounts. The builders referred to “battlements” in the Pyramid Texts and historical accounts say they were built in “mounds”. Herodotus says machines were moved from one step to another.



The culture has no word for "ramps" as applied to lifting objects. There is no such record for the use of this term. While they, no doubt, physically used ramps to lift objects the lack of the word is glaring omission. There is no "god of ramps" and not a single drawing of a ramp from the great pyramid building age. The word "ramp" simply isn't even attested until centuries after the great pyramids were all built.



Far more importantly is there is no overseer of ramp builders, ramp architects, or ramp dismantlers buried anywhere in Egypt. There are no overseers of basket makers, no overseers of harness makers or salve makers. There is not even a single stone dragger or his overseer in evidence. The pyramid town had equal numbers of men and women and was a tiny fraction of the size that would be required to drag stones and build ramps. The town is hardly large enough to supply such a large army with water and supplies far less do all the work themselves. It is little larger than a couple soccer fields. Indeed the builders' town was a mere 600' by 900'. By today's standards this would accommodate only about 1000 people in an office building. People need far more space where they live. Only about 40% of the population was men so there wouldn't even be nearly enough labor to supply food and water to the thousands necessary to build ramps and drag stones up them. You say ancient people didn't mind being cramped up. Modern sanitation and processes are more efficient than they were in 2750 BC but let's say they were willing to be jammed in cheek to jewel. This only increases occupancy to about 3500 men which is still grossly insufficient. With so many people in close contact disease would spread like wildfire. Since there were storage and production facilities in the town as well it's highly improbable that there were numbers even approaching these levels.



Logic says that on a gargantuan project that a highly efficient means must be used. Ramps not only are hugely inefficient due to the high friction and high cost of building and dismantling ramps but also because the weight of the team dragging stones to the pyramid top is simply wasted as they walk back down on already constricted and overused ramps. Getting the manpower necessary to build this requires massive ramps because 55 HP being done by men at extraordinarily low efficiency requires vast numbers of men. They couldn't even see the pyramid to build it under the amount of ramping that would be needed to project so much power. Logic says it would be far easier to just drag stones up the side from the top. Friction is reduced to almost nothing since the route of the stones can be greased. The men don't have to lift their own weight and can pull much more effectively from a level surface. The concept that they must have used ramps is absurd when there are numerous better evidenced and easier means.



Maintaining this level of efficient power with muscles alone would require massive ramps and a means for the workers to get back down. Then there is the impossibility of cladding the structure with any possibly evidenced ramping system. Anything that required cladding stones as they went would leave nothing for ramps to adhere to and any other means would require the ramps to be rebuilt to apply the cladding.

Then comes the physical evidence which just puts a nail into the heart of the ramp ideas. Perhaps most glaringly is the utter lack of any evidence whatsoever for ramps on the pyramid. This wouldn’t be such a glaring void if not for the existence of numerous vertical lines visible in the pyramids. These lines tend to appear in pairs with one on opposite sides. This is consistent with counterweight operations where one line marks the counterweight and the opposite the route of the stones. It is most highly inconsistent with any ramping ideas. Simply stated ramps wouldn’t leave such lines no matter how they were configured except for ones that can be ruled out by logic such as integral ramps. The grooves on the Great Pyramid are also these routes of the stones that the builders called the “ladders of the Gods”.













Simply stated you can see the routes of the stones right up the middles and in two places above the boat museum. You can also see that these pyramids are five step (battlement) pyramids on some pictures but especially in the gravimetric scan half way down the page here;



H. D. Bui



I have a truly beautiful depiction of these five steps drawn on the scan but can't get permission to use it. But this is still conclusive proof that it's a five step pyramid which is more than adequate to debunk ramps. They would not have used steps unless it was necessary and the only reason steps might be necessary is that they could lift the stones only 81' 3" at a time.



Each of the great pyramids were five step pyramids. There is simply no reason to build these as step pyramids unless the height of each step defined the height they were able to lift stones. In order to lift stones to the top they must have needed to be relayed the greatest distance they could lift. Of course this could be as simple as the length of the ropes by which they lifted them up the side. No matter the actual reason it simply isn’t consistent with ramps. It is highly consistent with counterweights and using water for ballast since the geyser sprayed 80’ and this is the height of the steps. It might be consistent with locks that lifted 81' 3" at a time or any water or ballast lifting system limited by natural laws or infrastructure/ materiel concerns. It is not consistent with ramps.



Ramps can’t explain the various infrastructure all around and within the pyramid. They are inconsistent with the history, culture, logic, physical evidence, and the evidence left by the actual on-site builders. Ramps are not consistent with the fact that the great pyramids get progressively larger. Each of the great pyramid grows substantially with G1 having required 45 times as much lifting as Djoser’s Pyramid (the first great pyramid). There is no property of ramps that can be tweaked and improved upon until their efficiency increases 45 fold. To state it another way; it is apparent that whatever means used could be improved upon and this is not consistent with ramps.



Perhaps the greatest inconsistency is the cultural evidence right on site. In the pyramid builders cemetery is the “Overseer of the Boats of Neith”. This would be the loader on the south side in all probability but it could have nothing to do with ramps. There are canal overseers, overseers of metal shops, director of draftsmen, inspector of craftsmen, controller of a boat crew, controller of the side of the pyramid, inspector of metal workers and a host of other jobs that reflect a sophisticated and intelligent culture. Most tellingly is that there is a “Weigher/ Reckoner”. This job would be critical on a device that was said to be sensitive enough to tell the difference in weight of a “heavy heart” from a feather. They found a standard weight in the queens “air siphon” and a hook.



In point of fact there simply isn’t anything consistent with ramps. While the evidence isn’t deep it is very broad that stones were lifted from above making the vertical lines on the great pyramids and are simply sufficient to say ramps are debunked.

While ramps are debunked what we do have is evidence that water was used everywhere. The great pyramid are built right on top of water collection devices and surrounded by a cofferdam. There's one pretty obvious lock lying along the route which the western cliff face counterweight appears to have dragged stones. There is water erosion in canals leading away from the pyramid base.

We need to do the science to determine the exact means by which the water was used to build.



Of course you can reinterpret every single point in this and claim that ramps were used but people not beholden to orthodoxy seem to consider this case virtually air tight. There simply is no evidence that ramps were used to lift stones on the great pyramids which is concurrent wirth the era in which they were built. They did not use ramps and the belief that ramps are the only thing they could have used is not evidence and it is insulting to the builders and to those who use logic.

Present archaeological evidence and heirogiliphics indicate the stones were moved by boat with buried canals found up to the pyramids, and pictures of the boats. At present the most likely way the stones were raised up the pyramids is stone ramps in the side of the pyramids themselves.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Modern science was largely an outgrowth of religious writing and thought.

No, though early scientific advances are reflected in the the religious writting.

Science and religion have never been polar opposites and never will be.

Needs more explanation, and in general religious people are behind in the advances of science.

Religious people must use reason to function and scientific people are just as superstitious as anyone else.

More than a bit idealistic in your expectations. Not clear, by far the majority of scientists are not superstitious.
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
What is the final mystery?
-will mankind eventually die off?
-how long will earth be habitable?
-will the universe eventually collapse?
-if so, when?
-will humans eventually evolve into another species?
-if so, what will it look like?
-depending on what you consider final, there could be millions of final mystery's.
we get to ask God.....how?

how do you say?......I AM!
with no means to do so
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
and so.....you don't know where you are going

good luck

and do the same for me
we have no guarantees

The reality is we all do not know, and that is why 'nowhere is now here.'

Luck get's only a false sense of security with vain coincidences, and get's only where we want to go
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
There are many dozens of threads where I've clearly shown the pyramid is NOT A TOMB. Here is one where I show what the pyramid actually is in the builders' own words;

The King as Pyramid - Graham Hancock Official Website

The builders said over and over and over that the pyramid is not a tomb and the king's tomb was in the sky. Egyptologists simply dismiss all this as nonsense, metaphor, and symbolism. The builders never once said or implied that any king was entombed in any great pyramid. This is all in the minds of modern people. Even Herodotus said repeatedly that the pyramid was not a tomb and Khufu was buried elsewhere.

There is no evidence to support the beliefs that moribund and changeless stinky footed bumpkins dragged tombs up ramps.

Nobody seems to have a problem with the mystery of why we see what we expect to see.

I have very little or no confidence in Graham Hancock.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
context.....context.....

science cannot solve the mystery.....

how do you say?......I AM!
with nothing to show for it

THINK

Creator....creation

In many different religions, languages and cultures. Everyone who recites I AM, in every culture and religion believes they have what is necessary to show for it.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
There are many dozens of threads where I've clearly shown the pyramid is NOT A TOMB. Here is one where I show what the pyramid actually is in the builders' own words;

The King as Pyramid - Graham Hancock Official Website

The builders said over and over and over that the pyramid is not a tomb and the king's tomb was in the sky. Egyptologists simply dismiss all this as nonsense, metaphor, and symbolism. The builders never once said or implied that any king was entombed in any great pyramid. This is all in the minds of modern people. Even Herodotus said repeatedly that the pyramid was not a tomb and Khufu was buried elsewhere.

There is no evidence to support the beliefs that moribund and changeless stinky footed bumpkins dragged tombs up ramps.

Nobody seems to have a problem with the mystery of why we see what we expect to see.
I have very little or no confidence in Graham Hancock.

So you are Hancock’s fan, cladking.

Hancock has no background in history or in archaeology; his background was in journalism. And he certainly cannot read ancient Egyptian texts.

He is a conspiracy theorist in pseudoscience and pseudo-archaeology.
 

cladking

Well-Known Member
Hancock is irrelevant to this argument.

I linked to a thread that shows literally hundreds of times that the builders literally said the pyramid is the dead king and not a tomb.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Hancock is irrelevant to this argument.

I linked to a thread that shows literally hundreds of times that the builders literally said the pyramid is the dead king and not a tomb.

Than why even bring up Hancock. Whether the pyramid was built for a tomb is not an issue as to how it was built, Nonetheless the pyramids were used as tombs.
 
Top