The ‘BASALT FLOOR’ Giza Plateau Smoking Gun Evidence of LOST ANCIENT TECHNOLOGY

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: tanka418

Yeps, copper hand saws/wire or discs; using abrasive, powered by by hand/pole-lathe type arrangements, maybe water power. All excellent suggestions and in line with their other tech - i've been advocating the same thing for far too many pages

Sure, but my premise that they were able to cut quickly changes all of that. And here is another perfect example of this premise and why it's sound:


Look just above the main cut. See the one that just got started? That was a mistake. You don't spend hours and hours carving a mistake only to realize you're too high. The only reasonable explanation is, a saw with high RPMs was put against the rock, then oops. "Move down guys"

Just throwing this out there....
How about a ceramic blade with quartz sand mixed in before it is fired?

a reply to: FlySolo

You still have not answered my question..

What would you say are the possible materials such a saw would be made of, and what are the possible means by which it would be powered?

originally posted by: ISawItFirst

I don't necessarily agree that these must be circular saw cuts, but they do have the look of a circular saw plunge cuts.

The next big question would be what were the saws made from to actually cut the stone? We have copper and maybe bronze/iron as metal at best.

Also they did not have the invention of the wheel yet so once again, kind of hard to have one unique wheel type machine.

Here are two pictures of a copper tool using sand to cut stone. I wonder if the tool was curved more how that would effect the cut of a sliding rotating motion, but in any case copper tool using sand does cut very well.

a reply to: skalla
You're asking me to speculate so you can tell me I'm speculating. Lol. Fortunately for me, it's not my responsibility to speculate on what ifs. All I need to do is to say is what it's not and why. And I've done that.

originally posted by: FlySolo
a reply to: Xtrozero

You're being obtuse. If I made a cut in the rock like that with my finger, you would say "it's not straight". Besides, look at the entry mark on the right and not on the left. You can even see the depth as it progresses and just stops. lol. Maybe they used dental floss to scratch that out back then.

I'm not seeing what you see I guess.

a reply to: FlySolo

It does not take hours and hours though, considering rank amateurs in the experiment linked removed material at 12 cubic centimetres an hour, that top cut may have taken a matter of minutes.

And surely these are possibly test cuts too, so why the assumption that the top cut is a mistake?

Surely the middle cut serves no practical purpose than a possible test either, as does the very shallow one at the bottom.

Do you at least acknowledge the data in the experiment, contrary to your suggesting that copper and abrasives do not cut stone?

There is too much evidence in this thread for you to maintain that position now, surely - it's ok for us to learn new stuff.

a reply to: FlySolo

I'm not, i've been very clear in asking for suggestions/possibilites based on their tech. I've laid my ideas of copper and specific abrasives with hand or pole lathe power out there.

Why are you so reticent to do the same. You must have some suggestions.

originally posted by: FlySolo
The only reasonable explanation is, a saw with high RPMs was put against the rock, then oops. "Move down guys"

I think that is the problem here. You are modern and so time is measured differently than in the past. In not too recent past a 100 mile trip under 3 days was looked at as good speed... I do that as my daily drive to work.

It seems that you think the ancients would see a 3+ hour cut that was incorrect as a long time, and they most likely saw that in a much different way of just 3 hours might be minutes to us.

You also suggest the other two were mistakes and I would need say all three were mistakes since none were completed, well unless all three were actually something along the lines of training a person how to cut stone then they would not be mistakes.

When we break this all down it seems we are debating time in how long it took. Whether by machine or hand the only big difference is how long it takes to do. You think for some reason that quick to them would be a power saw taking minutes and quick in their view was something most likely measured in days.

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: FlySolo

So we have contemporary illustrations, the tools, and experiments show they work.

What have you got in the way of evidence?

Yep. It reminds me of last year when scientists "discovered" the Egyptian secret to moving huge pyramid stones. As workers pulled sleighs w/the objects on them, they used water to wet the sand directly in front. The reason I say "discovered" is because the info was in a hieroglyphic but earlier scientists had apparently ignored it or thought it wasn't feasible!

Here's a link I found that includes the hieroglyphic I was talking about.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Exactly. Even though we may try and not attribute our social norms on ancient culture, we can't seem to help it. It is not as if when the rooster crowed you could toss a rock at it to snooze that extra five minutes (more rocks, more snoozes). Get up to take a shower... wait... scratch that. Instead get a breakfast of rice and dried fish. The get the 'ol chariot ready to go. Head up the Nile 101 hoping there is not too much congestion on the pyramid byway. And if you were lucky, you would have a pharaoh phast pass to get around the camel caravans. Finally arrive at your job of sitting on a cube counting stuff all day.

So, back to reality. This is how people would make a living. Cutting stones. Thousands of people. All day. Every day. No 9 to 5. No getting home before you show comes on. Just cutting rocks. All. Day. Long. You might even make it to foreman one day. And if you and your co-workers were good enough, you might be able to cut 5 to 10 basalt stones a day. and if there were 10 groups working this project, that would be 50 to 100 stones a day. and in 10 days, 500 to 1000 stones.

Now this is all conjecture, but the Egyptian people were paid, fed and given housing to work on the many monuments in Egypt. Thousands of people over many centuries. Why there are even rumors of the stonecutters still around today...

a reply to: enlightenedservant

well it seems that that is a pic of carpentry..i have read folk saying how there are illustration of stone cutting. Perhaps they were mistaken or perhaps they came to light after the statement to the contrary was made at the Oocities link.

Someone may turn up later with more info, but i'm mystified why one can't at least suggest possible materials based on the tech available.

If yone can suggest a circular saw, one has to reason what it would be able to be made of and powered by other wise the idea is frankly unworkable and empty speculation.

Funny thing is, a copper wheel with abrasives powered by a water wheel, pole lathe, gears linked to a donkey on a circular track etc is essentially a powered circular saw and highly achievable with AE tech.

Oh well, not glamorous enough i guess.

a reply to: skalla

Here's something I'm reading

"That the blades of the saw were of bronze, we know from the green staining on the sides of the saw cuts, and on grains of sand left in a saw cut.
The forms of the tools were straight saws, circular saws, tubular drills, and lathes.
The straight saws varied from .03 to .2 inch thick, according to the work; the largest were 8 feet or more in length..." "...No. 6, a slice of diorite bearing equidistant and regular grooves of circular arcs, parallel to one another; these grooves have been nearly polished out by cross grinding, but are still visible. The only feasible explanation of this piece is that it was produced by a circular saw."

www.theglobaleducationproject.org...

And here's another site in Turkey which seems to indicate circular saws

hiddenincatours.com...

originally posted by: Painterz
I'm a trained professional archaeologist, with hands-on experience in experimental archaeology.

Simple technologies readily available to the ancient Egyptians can explain all of this I'm afraid. The experiments have been done, they've been demonstrated to work.

It's really just a question of scale. Experimental archaeologists are teams of a half dozen or so people, the Egyptians could throw tens of thousands at their problems.

Well a needle and thimble is not really a primitive sowing machine.

a reply to: skalla

Do you know how fast a copper circular blade would be dulled by oak wood? Are you serious with this copper stuff? Copper is just not going to hold up.

Interesting. Exodus actually mentioned that the Hebrews lived in Egypt for 430 years. I think the problem here is that the Archbishop counted the 430 years from the time Abraham entered Canaan, instead of from the time Jacob entered Egypt. If we use the latter, then we need to add 215 years, which would make the date of the Flood 2563 B.C

a reply to: Xtrozero

The real problem with the idea of hand saws be they copper of iron is that the cuts don't suggest a relatively sloppy tool was used.

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: enlightenedservant

well it seems that that is a pic of carpentry..i have read folk saying how there are illustration of stone cutting. Perhaps they were mistaken or perhaps they came to light after the statement to the contrary was made at the Oocities link.

Someone may turn up later with more info, but i'm mystified why one can't at least suggest possible materials based on the tech available.

If yone can suggest a circular saw, one has to reason what it would be able to be made of and powered by other wise the idea is frankly unworkable and empty speculation.

Funny thing is, a copper wheel with abrasives powered by a water wheel, pole lathe, gears linked to a donkey on a circular track etc is essentially a powered circular saw and highly achievable with AE tech.

Oh well, not glamorous enough i guess.

Hey, some ancient people may have had that! LOL Some ancient civilizations had things like "windcatchers" as ancient air conditioners, and whatever those building-sized ice pits are called that they'd use as huge coolers (filled with collected snow). And windmills that were the wind equivalent of what you mentioned in your post, which were used for various "automated" tasks in their day. And the Haya people in Africa had steel furnaces centuries before Europe developed them.

I think the biggest problem is that many people today have a preconceived notion that ancient people were stupid or more primitive than we are today, even though modern humans/Homo Sapiens have been around at least 100,000 years. Some of our technology is more advanced, but much of it is identical to what was used in the past. People forget just how "primitive" our technology was just 150 years ago (medical "technology", I'm looking at you)

a reply to: np6888

Yeah, about the Exodus... that never happened.

a reply to: JamesTB

It's reality and fact that hundreds of world heritage sites around the world are still vanishing at an alarming rate due to theft by locals. The Great Wall Of China, for instance, is still being dismantled by locals using the stones for house building and farm walls.

There is absolutely nothing about this story which suggests these cut marks were made prior to last year, let alone thousands of years ago.