It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: JamesTB
The date is unimportant in proving that the tech i suggested was used, as hammerstones are stone age tech so they could be 100,000 years old and my point still stands. I've personally experienced the effect of stricking one rock on another - i'm an occasional Flintknapper and use granit hammerstones to strike cores of flint. You be surprise how quickly the granite (and quartzite etc) wears as a result of this.
You really should take a look at Stone age granite work, you'd learn something if only you'd examine the evidence. Did stone age man make granite axes with an angle grinder or a vibrating drill? please do some research on that before you answer the question.
s4.postimg.org...
originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: JamesTB
Seriously, limestone is not that difficult to shape and polish. Human history is a history of stone working - it's no shock that we are good at it.
Please consider the points that i have made though - i am a traditional crafter and i've worked with many other trad crafters too including stone masons.
I'd tell you about my back ground in Archaeology too but i know that's worse than working for the gubbermunt so i'll not bother.
originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: JamesTB
With a lot of time and effort, what a lot of the "power tool" and "highly advanced lifting gear" proponents seem to ignore is that the great pyramid would have been made in about 5 years with a fraction of the manpower.
So, 2551 - 2472 BC the Pharaoh comes along and sees the Pyramid and says, OMM, (that is OMG but the Pharaoh is a god so it is Oh My Me ) What a great tomb for me. Make that into a tomb!
So they rake out all of the old mortar and replace it with fresh mortar that they mix themselves. Luckily for us they use wood ash as one of the ingredients to make the mortar.
originally posted by: Painterz
Yes, Carbon dating has an error range. But the +/- is usually in tens or hundreds of years, not tens of thousands.
Carbon Dating has been around along time now, and it's a pretty solid science.
I'm a professionally qualified archaeologist, and the stuff in the video is, in my opinion, complete bunkum.
originally posted by: JamesTB
originally posted by: Harte
originally posted by: JamesTB
There are millions upon millions of massive stone blocks on the Giza Plateau all shaped and placed with precision
What a crock.
"Shaped and placed with precision," eh?
When did you last have your eyes checked?
Harte
Yeah look at this shoddy work so fine water couldn't pass through it -
s30.postimg.org...
originally posted by: Harte
originally posted by: JamesTB
There are millions upon millions of massive stone blocks on the Giza Plateau all shaped and placed with precision
What a crock.
"Shaped and placed with precision," eh?
When did you last have your eyes checked?
Harte
originally posted by: pheonix358
a reply to: JamesTB
If you would not mind, look up 'Cathedrals' on wiki and just have a look at the scope of some of the huge ones in Europe. Look at some of the castles as well. They were all done with hand tools and the work, especially the statues, are quite amazing. Most of them were built over just a few decades with reasonably small work forces.
Slaves in the ancient world were not just untrained minions. Most had some sort of trade and it does not take that long to train people in stonework.
With a huge work force anything is possible.
P
originally posted by: Harte
originally posted by: JamesTB
originally posted by: Harte
originally posted by: JamesTB
There are millions upon millions of massive stone blocks on the Giza Plateau all shaped and placed with precision
What a crock.
"Shaped and placed with precision," eh?
When did you last have your eyes checked?
Harte
Yeah look at this shoddy work so fine water couldn't pass through it -
s30.postimg.org...
One pair of stones does not equal "millions and millions of massive stone blocks ... all shaped and placed with precision.
The interior surfaces in the various chambers and passageways are quite well done.
But let's not pretend that "all" the stones are shaped and fitted "precisely." I mean, it's pretty damn obvious they aren't.
Harte
originally posted by: signalfire
originally posted by: Harte
originally posted by: JamesTB
There are millions upon millions of massive stone blocks on the Giza Plateau all shaped and placed with precision
What a crock.
"Shaped and placed with precision," eh?
When did you last have your eyes checked?
Harte
Oh, I dunno, for thousands of years old, and missing the cover stones, I think it looks pretty good, far better than anything you could build would look after that many years. And you're not looking at the interior stones in the grand gallery and the King's Chamber here, which are obviously a jaw dropping work of precision;
originally posted by: JamesTB
There are millions upon millions of massive stone blocks on the Giza Plateau all shaped and placed with precision
originally posted by: signalfirethen there's the astronomical and mathematical correlations in the placement of the pyramids. Why would anyone bother, for a tomb?
originally posted by: Harte
originally posted by: JamesTB
originally posted by: Harte
originally posted by: JamesTB
There are millions upon millions of massive stone blocks on the Giza Plateau all shaped and placed with precision
What a crock.
"Shaped and placed with precision," eh?
When did you last have your eyes checked?
Harte
Yeah look at this shoddy work so fine water couldn't pass through it -
s30.postimg.org...
One pair of stones does not equal "millions and millions of massive stone blocks ... all shaped and placed with precision.
The interior surfaces in the various chambers and passageways are quite well done.
But let's not pretend that "all" the stones are shaped and fitted "precisely." I mean, it's pretty damn obvious they aren't.
Harte
originally posted by: undo
i've been listening to forester's videos on youtube. most of it is quite interesting.
this video convinced me that mainstream archaeology is too specialized in their own little niches, to see the overall picture. i think universities should give courses in comparative ancient archaeology.
originally posted by: JamesTB
You have no interest in this subject all you do is try to shut down any thread which has a different opinion to yours. You haven't even watched these videos by your own admittance you stopped watching after 5 minutes ignoring the 2 hours of footage. Why do you bother?
Those structures were not built with stone pounders and chisels they are not tombs its obvious that they have a different use. Thankfully people like Brien do have an open inquisitive minds and are making sacrifices to get to the bottom of this mystery.
originally posted by: JamesTB
originally posted by: pheonix358
a reply to: JamesTB
OK, I will bite. Let us turn it around a bit.
What powered tool do you know that could do that.
P
Ha! Good question. I don't know of anything which could do that what I am saying is I highly doubt that it was done manually. How about you, how do you think it was done?