I've only recently learned there is a lot on YouTube about ancient Egyptian cement with bubbles in the granite or "geopolymer" (liquid stone). Clearly there is a wide range from shitty fake-noise to plausible positing. Graham Hancock is a massive piece of shit, intentionally mixing crap theory with rational ideas, and Joe Rogan should know better than to platform him without more pushback.
And before you say, but there are quarries where they dig up stone - why can't they do both? Diversified cement AND quarry industrialization would make most sense to me. More tools to play with.
Secrets of the Giza Pyramids 🏗️ - Robert Schoch (1:00) - Or, they're frauds pretending it's more complex than it is and ignoring the abundance of ideas out there. Like their "expert" jobs depend on it.
I'v had one thought I've had about the common argument against external ramp theory that the ramp would cost more to build than the pyramid.
To me this seems like an argument that would be used by someone who has never built something. Precursors can take more work than the end product. They usually do. It takes more work to build a C compiler in Assembly than it does to write a hello world program in C. But looking at it in another perspective, the precursor can't cost more than building the end result because the precursor is a part of that cost. That's part of what makes it impressive. And the people who built the pyramids were career builders. They would have had enough experience to get over the aversion. "Oh no, to build this thing I'm going to have to do something else first, and it's going to be hard!?" That's not how builders think and what allows them to make things the rest of the population can't. The 1% of Egyptians who built it would have been exactly the people who think past those aversions. They aren't modern office workers.
It's like taking 20 minutes to build a jig so that you can precisely drill a hole or cut something - and with that jig cut/drill 20 pieces in 2 minutes.
Exactly. If without that jig you couldn't do it accurately and you need to do it accurately, building the jig is the only way, even if you only use it on one piece.
The pyramids are a vanity project. They are going to be willing to put in 5x or even 100x the cost to do something better that someone else can't do without that higher initial effort. That just makes the flex stronger.
I was expecting this to be difficult to believe, but I think she offers excellent arguments, has done her resaerch, provides a good way to question the available claims, and has exceptional graphics to support the arguments. She's not necessarily offered anything groundbreaking, but has packaged it extremely well, with the essential technical information. It's an excellent example of an educational video on the pyramids. It starts out with a wild claim, however, that previous assumptions were probably wrong, but that obviously does not apply to all previous assumptions.
There's plenty of hard evidence that proves the pyramids structures were created using technologically advanced hardware, such as circular cutting saws.
These tangential theories of how they were assembled are essentially distractions away from the obvious reality that the pyramids were fabricated during a previous era of global technological human advancement.
Pre-ice age.
Each of the three major pyramids were created in separate eras, and this becomes apparent when comparing the weathering due to erosion of the three pyramids.
Below is a link to evidence of advanced cutting tech.
Here is a view from the ground.
Notice that the basalt pavers are irregular in thickness, and sometimes rounded on the bottom side. They were placed on top of blocks of tura limestone which had previously been fitted to the underlying bedrock. Apparently the basalt blocks were cut to level 'in situ' (after they had been put in place on the ground).
Emerson had access to tool steel, which wasn't available to the Egyptians in 2500 BCE.
I'm pointing out the obvious fact that we have indisputable evidence of the use of circular cutting tech which is a technologically sophisticated manufacturing technique; and this indisputable evidence is ignored.
While they continue to debate absurd techniques like manually constructing giant ramps with the same impossibly large pyramid blocks.
The video shows visuals of the proposed ramps, and the examples have 12 people using rope to pull blocks that weight tens of tons up their proposed ramp with ropes.
Why do you think they ignore the evidence of the use of circular saws?
While they continue to debate absurd techniques like manually constructing giant ramps with the same impossibly large pyramid blocks.
They control the narrative and dumb it down to absurdity. Intentionally.
Similarly, over 15 years ago I watched a lot of Climate Change documentaries and the idiots couldn't figure out the problem that was solved in another documentary that solved their problem in the first. And it doesn't stop with the environment. All of collective humanity's problems are political/controligarchy.
In addition to the circular saws (and drills), they're always puzzled by square corners and symmetry. There are so many simple ways to limit your chisel. And Jefferson's polygraph isn't that complicated either - and these can be set to scale up, down, distort, etc.
Log in
In the thumbnail, the ramp going up around all four sides doesn't make sense if you could economize with just one side.
Very interesting if true:
What Scientists Found Inside Pyramid Stones (1:00)
The Surprisingly Plausible Theory that the Pyramids were Poured from Ancient Concrete (10:28) ~ Today I Found Out
I've only recently learned there is a lot on YouTube about ancient Egyptian cement with bubbles in the granite or "geopolymer" (liquid stone). Clearly there is a wide range from shitty fake-noise to plausible positing. Graham Hancock is a massive piece of shit, intentionally mixing crap theory with rational ideas, and Joe Rogan should know better than to platform him without more pushback.
And before you say, but there are quarries where they dig up stone - why can't they do both? Diversified cement AND quarry industrialization would make most sense to me. More tools to play with.
Egypt Seeker - Eclectisphere #dance #edm #music #art (5:30) - Love this psychedelic A.I. generated art.
The New Pyramid Theory Everyone is Talking About... (21:54) - Meh reviews the OP video, adding opinion and a bit of new stuff at the end. This video is what prompted this comment.
Secrets of the Giza Pyramids 🏗️ - Robert Schoch (1:00) - Or, they're frauds pretending it's more complex than it is and ignoring the abundance of ideas out there. Like their "expert" jobs depend on it.
I'v had one thought I've had about the common argument against external ramp theory that the ramp would cost more to build than the pyramid.
To me this seems like an argument that would be used by someone who has never built something. Precursors can take more work than the end product. They usually do. It takes more work to build a C compiler in Assembly than it does to write a hello world program in C. But looking at it in another perspective, the precursor can't cost more than building the end result because the precursor is a part of that cost. That's part of what makes it impressive. And the people who built the pyramids were career builders. They would have had enough experience to get over the aversion. "Oh no, to build this thing I'm going to have to do something else first, and it's going to be hard!?" That's not how builders think and what allows them to make things the rest of the population can't. The 1% of Egyptians who built it would have been exactly the people who think past those aversions. They aren't modern office workers.
It's like taking 20 minutes to build a jig so that you can precisely drill a hole or cut something - and with that jig cut/drill 20 pieces in 2 minutes.
Exactly. If without that jig you couldn't do it accurately and you need to do it accurately, building the jig is the only way, even if you only use it on one piece.
The pyramids are a vanity project. They are going to be willing to put in 5x or even 100x the cost to do something better that someone else can't do without that higher initial effort. That just makes the flex stronger.
I used to think the Pyramids were grain silos. Now I understand that they are machines.
For...?
Catching cosmic rays from the Belt of Orion, which Egyptians called Osiris.
I was expecting this to be difficult to believe, but I think she offers excellent arguments, has done her resaerch, provides a good way to question the available claims, and has exceptional graphics to support the arguments. She's not necessarily offered anything groundbreaking, but has packaged it extremely well, with the essential technical information. It's an excellent example of an educational video on the pyramids. It starts out with a wild claim, however, that previous assumptions were probably wrong, but that obviously does not apply to all previous assumptions.
What Scientists Found Inside Pyramid Stones (1:00)
Dynastic Egypt did not build the pyramids.
There's plenty of hard evidence that proves the pyramids structures were created using technologically advanced hardware, such as circular cutting saws.
These tangential theories of how they were assembled are essentially distractions away from the obvious reality that the pyramids were fabricated during a previous era of global technological human advancement.
Pre-ice age.
Each of the three major pyramids were created in separate eras, and this becomes apparent when comparing the weathering due to erosion of the three pyramids.
Below is a link to evidence of advanced cutting tech.
http://www.theglobaleducationproject.org/egypt/articles/hrdfact2.php
http://www.theglobaleducationproject.org/egypt/pics/giza/1st/1xebsaw1.jpg
http://www.theglobaleducationproject.org/egypt/pics/giza/1st/bswctcl.jpg
Emerson Electric made circular cutting saws that were hand cranked 100 years ago. The Egyptians might have built their own.
Emerson had access to tool steel, which wasn't available to the Egyptians in 2500 BCE.
I'm pointing out the obvious fact that we have indisputable evidence of the use of circular cutting tech which is a technologically sophisticated manufacturing technique; and this indisputable evidence is ignored.
While they continue to debate absurd techniques like manually constructing giant ramps with the same impossibly large pyramid blocks.
The video shows visuals of the proposed ramps, and the examples have 12 people using rope to pull blocks that weight tens of tons up their proposed ramp with ropes.
Why do you think they ignore the evidence of the use of circular saws?
They control the narrative and dumb it down to absurdity. Intentionally.
Similarly, over 15 years ago I watched a lot of Climate Change documentaries and the idiots couldn't figure out the problem that was solved in another documentary that solved their problem in the first. And it doesn't stop with the environment. All of collective humanity's problems are political/controligarchy.
In addition to the circular saws (and drills), they're always puzzled by square corners and symmetry. There are so many simple ways to limit your chisel. And Jefferson's polygraph isn't that complicated either - and these can be set to scale up, down, distort, etc.
How Romans Split Massive Stones Without Explosives? (1:07)
Seems about right and it fits physics.