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

originally posted by: EndOfDays77
I just want to add my two pence, as I have no time for debating amongst non. Believers.

These stones were undoubtably cut by means of high technology.

So in other words.....You blindly believe ridiculous, incorrect "theories", and have no interest in actually educating yourself or discussing the multitude of reasons said "theories" are incorrect.

Good to know.

a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

It was pretty beautiful. I like the bits where experience in using modern power tools or machining is somehow experience with or knowledge of ancient non machine powered technology, when it is exactly the opposite.

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: tanka418

Well, i'm an enthusiast of primitive technologies so i try to share some of my perspectives/experiences in that field.

I'm not...I've drilled holes in glass (Coke bottle) with a copper tube, a hand crank, and abrasive...1/4" hole through probably just less than 1/8" of glass took 30 minutes or more of crank turning.

However, to state that the tool marks on these ancient monuments are data (with reference to tool marks left by modern high power tools) is only relevant when you have experiments with slow, abrasive tools to show what marks they leave.

That data exists...try the producers of Ancient Aliens, or one of the ancient technology programs. They have already done what you suggest.

None of this matters though if someone is suggesting that there were high powered (ie motorised) tools made from modern standard materials in AE or indeed a much earlier culture.

There is not one bean of evidence for it. So i don't see that there is any data on these "advanced ancient tech" or those who supposedly made it.

Huh...That's what I thought we were looking for here. You know compare the holes with known exemplars of bored rock...
So...if you are not "seeing" any data; it is because you are not looking.

Whereas we know that the AE's and others could work rock with copper and abrasives, and that they and many other cultures document that they did this.

So yeah, peeps can fantasise about ancient cultures with a local De Walt store all they like, but they will be challenged.

Working with real data does not constitute a fantasy. So, you can conjecture all you like about who is experiencing a fantasy; meanwhile, I will await someone qualified to examine the data, root for the Ancient Egyptians, and decide WHEN those result sets are available.

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

It was pretty beautiful. I like the bits where experience in using modern power tools or machining is somehow experience with or knowledge of ancient non machine powered technology, when it is exactly the opposite.

Yeah...I liked the part where he broke the rock on the desired line by "scribing" the line, then using a mallet...kind of like cutting glass...

But, many hard igneous rock is very similar to glass; in that they are very hard and brittle.

a reply to: tanka418

Can you bring this data to the discussion then?

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: tanka418

Can you bring this data to the discussion then?

"I will await someone qualified to examine the data, root for the Ancient Egyptians, and decide WHEN those result sets are available. " -- ibid.

I've seen no one here who is "qualified" to evaluate that data...so there is little reason to spend hours watching old television programming that I'm not all that interested in. I can wait for someone who knows what he is talking about.

Some of that data has already been presented, mostly ignored, and entirely misunderstood.

So...no.

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: tanka418

Can you bring this data to the discussion then?

"I will await someone qualified to examine the data, root for the Ancient Egyptians, and decide WHEN those result sets are available. " -- ibid.

I've seen no one here who is "qualified" to evaluate that data...so there is little reason to spend hours watching old television programming that I'm not all that interested in. I can wait for someone who knows what he is talking about.

Some of that data has already been presented, mostly ignored, and entirely misunderstood.

So...no.

So who would be 'qualified', in your mind? I've spent several years working in the granite industry, and apparently I "don't know what I'm talking about", so who will you listen to?

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: tanka418

Can you bring this data to the discussion then?

"I will await someone qualified to examine the data, root for the Ancient Egyptians, and decide WHEN those result sets are available. " -- ibid.

I've seen no one here who is "qualified" to evaluate that data...so there is little reason to spend hours watching old television programming that I'm not all that interested in. I can wait for someone who knows what he is talking about.

Some of that data has already been presented, mostly ignored, and entirely misunderstood.

So...no.

So who would be 'qualified', in your mind? I've spent several years working in the granite industry, and apparently I "don't know what I'm talking about", so who will you listen to?

How about a geologist?
Perhaps combined with your experience.

a reply to: tanka418

Here's lots of papers by geologists. If people want to truly learn how egyptians quarried and moved the stones this is a great place to start. It is a collection of what we have learned on Egyptian quarries.
per-storemyr.net...

a reply to: tanka418

I'll take that as a wonderfully petulant, tacit admission that this "data" is horribly skewed and would be torn to shreds before your eyes. It was also the funniest reply I have seen on ATS this week so ta

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: tanka418

I'll take that as a wonderfully petulant, tacit admission that this "data" is horribly skewed and would be torn to shreds before your eyes. It was also the funniest reply I have seen on ATS this week so ta

Sure that will work IF you want to be wrong...

But, just like the data I mentioned, it appears that what I said was seriously, misunderstood...

You continue along with your fantasy, please continue to ignore real data in favor of your misunderstanding.

Something you should understand tough...I'm probably the only one here who is actually "neutral" in all this. You certainly are not. Especially when you start to reject science.

a reply to: tanka418

Then present the data for consideration rather than playing a childish game, and/or be clearer and make yourself understood.

You may have failed to notice who posted the vid of the big wooden wheel with the copper working edge too.

a reply to: skalla

Already did you chose to ignore my post. This talks about queries techniques and uses all published papers by geologists and archeologists in one place.

per-storemyr.net...

a reply to: dragonridr

Apologies, i'm planning on taking a look at the link later - i'm familiar with Per's blog from other articles on Norse sites etc.

I'm assuming that this is not the data tanka is referring to though?

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: skalla

Already did you chose to ignore my post. This talks about queries techniques and uses all published papers by geologists and archeologists in one place.

per-storemyr.net...

It seemed to me that Skalla was responding to this particular part of Tanka418's post:

originally posted by: tanka418
You see, part of the problem is that everybody is sort of right. These holes could have been done with copper drill bits and sand, as I've tired to explain, I've done that with glass. Slabs can be cut with copper, or even rope "saws", and sand. The question isn't can it be done any given way, but rather, WAS it done that given way. Some have tried, in vain, to argue that the tool marks, the forensics, tell the story, many are trying to ignore that data.

While I appreciate any legitimate info on AE stoneworking (which is what you provided,) your links, tasty as they may be, say nothing about what Tanka418 was implying - that there exists some "data" set out there concerning tool marks possibly indicating a method other than slabbing saws and coring drills - both hand-operated - that "many are trying to ignore."

I can only assume Tanka418 is referring to Christopher Dunn's assertion of rapid plunge rates for the coring drills.

Unfortunately, nothing Dunn says has anything to do with legitimate data concerning the plunge rates of AE coring drills.

Harte

a reply to: Harte

I was indeed responding to tanka... not that it matters, but if anyone cares, i bookmarked that link to Per at the time, i even gave dragonridr a sparkly star as thanks for a good link to someone i already respect and have linked here myself in the past. I didn't feel that i needed to verbally acknowledge him providing a link to someone else...??

There is some good info there as i would expect - some of the links are just abstracts or dead...and in one that i looked at i was pretty sad to see it ended at page 51 while the chapter i was really interested in was about page 80

We can of course only guess at what tanka is referring to as his data, but i've had my say on that!

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: Harte

I was indeed responding to tanka... not that it matters, but if anyone cares, i bookmarked that link to Per at the time, i even gave dragonridr a sparkly star as thanks for a good link to someone i already respect and have linked here myself in the past. I didn't feel that i needed to verbally acknowledge him providing a link to someone else...??

There is some good info there as i would expect - some of the links are just abstracts or dead...and in one that i looked at i was pretty sad to see it ended at page 51 while the chapter i was really interested in was about page 80

We can of course only guess at what tanka is referring to as his data, but i've had my say on that!

I've seen everyone arguing only small points of a big picture. The quarrying process was developed over a long period of time. And involved not just chipping or cutting. For example at the quarries we discovered that fires were set to heat the stones. Funny process to use if they had power tools what would be the point.

Here take a look at this thus discusses the use of fire in quarries.
per-storemyr.net...!/

We know how the ancients cut stone- they sprinkle sand over the area that they were sawing. It is a remarkably effective technique.

This is all hogwash.

a reply to: cachibatches

Nice to see another rational mind in here.

a reply to: dragonridr

Personally (and i wouldn't be surprised if a couple of others may feel the same way), there is a bit of history with the OP's threads/incredulity, so it's more about focussing on the OP for me, and dealing with the objections "etc" than spreading out in to wider quarrying and stone working techniques. Kinda like dealing with one element of incredulity at a time. Not that its working, but time may tell.

As a teacher of traditional/woodland crafts who is working on making a living as a crafter/artist in natural materials and repro stone-age artefacts (i'm a former archie too, but that doesn't go down well here), you really are preaching to the choir