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

originally posted by: Triton1128
Its stated that it took 100,000 slaves/workers, 20 years to build the great pyramid.

Its estimated that the pyramid contains 2,300,000 blocks. Ranging from 3 - 50 tons each.

That means, working around the clock, they would need to remove the stone from the quarry's, transport, lift, and set 315 blocks a day.

So taking into consideration that it would take 150 hours to cut 1 meter into a slab. Then you're already 6 days behind on the FIRST block and its still sitting in the quarry.

* keep in mind, some individuals sole responsibility is to side track and derail topics that are on point. It doesn't take a genius to realize that some feats, in our past, were simply impossible according to what we know. Similarities of construction within these huge monolithic sites. From Easter Island, to South America, Asia, India, Old Sumeria ( present day Iraq ) all have much in common. Someone, or something was able to communicate around the globe and it wasn't Kufu on a chariot swinging around a copper Khopesh.

The numbers you have are accurate, And you are correct about it being stated but not by the Egyptians themselves. Nope. Non of the Egyptians wrote about who made the pyramids or why, not one.

The statement comes from egyptologists, Who were ASSUMEING ( remeber assuming makes and Ass-of-u-and-me, As the saying goes my friend lol) Because Thutmosis wrote a Stela and left it front of the Sphinx.

So they draw up the obvious conclusion OH Since Thutmosis made the Stela ! And mentions a Kafre ! He must of build that gynormous pyramid sitting behind him! And the Sphinx too! /facepalm Cuz kafre Ruled for 20 years! so he must of built the pyramid in 20 years! ??????????????? What?

How do Egyptologists jump to that conclusion? Did they even read the Stella?

What did the Stella Say?

The Sphinx, Egypt

The 'Inventory stella' - Found at Ghiza by Auguste Mariette in the 1850's, in the ruins of the Temple of Isis clearly states that Khufu restored the Sphinx. This stone provides some of the strongest evidence that the Sphinx was constructed before Khufu and not by him.

It says: Long live The King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Khufu, given life He found the house of Isis, Mistress of the Pyramid, by the side of the hollow of Hwran (The Sphinx) and he built his pyramid beside the temple of this goddess and he built a pyramid for the King's daughter Henutsen beside this temple.


The place of Hwran Horemakhet is on the South side of the House of Isis, Mistress of the pyramid He restored the statue, all covered in painting, of the guardian of the atmosphere, who guides the winds with his gaze.

He replaced the back part of the Nemes head-dress, which was missing with gilded stone The figure of this God, cut in stone, is solid and will last to eternity, keeping its face looking always to the East '(10).


...Which implies that the Sphinx (and a temple to Isis), were extant before Khufu... While it is believed by traditional Egyptologists that this stella was carved in the 26th dynasty (664-524 BC), the reason why the statement that Khufu restored it is ignored by modern Egyptologists is a mystery, as the other information on it is regarded by the same people as historical fact.

Which Pyramid did Khufu make? Proably one of the Stepped Pyramids in front of the Great pyramids. As those were made to be Temple and tombs.

The 'Dream Stela of Thutmosis IV, who also restored the Sphinx. In fact, the French Egyptologist and Director General of Excavations and Antiquities for the Egyptian government, Gaston Maspero, who surveyed the Sphinx in the 1920s asserted that:

'The Sphinx stela shows, in line thirteen, the cartouche of Khephren. I believe that to indicate an excavation carried out by that prince, following which, the almost certain proof that the Sphinx was already buried in sand by the time of Khafre and his predecessors'. (5)

Lots of people think the head was recarved. Because it is smaller in preportion to the rest of the body. But i think that was entirely intentional. As a smaller head has nothing to do with what the Sphinx is actually depicting.

What if the image was done intentionally? I mean, if the head was any bigger. it would of fallen off since the surrounding limestone is decaying from past water errosion + Time being buried and re-excivated several times.

There isn't really any Evidence at all that Khafre created the Great Pyramids. He did however set his tomb nearby the Sphinx and surrounding monuments. That already pre-existed and were already ancient and weathered. Constantly needing refurbishment throughout time.

So all the Egyptologists are doing is assuming.

originally posted by: Triton1128

Puma Punku is another great example : The below stones are Diorite. Toughness 2.1 Just below Fresh Basalt. This site, NOT to be confused with tiahuanaco, which was settled adjacent to Puma Punku around 1000 BC.

Puma Punku is dated to be 14,000 years old.

Image 1

Image 2

Image 3

Image 4

Image 5

Diorite Puma Punku design

So mystery solved. Apparently they had CAD and diamond tipped drill bits and saws well before the pyramids

Fun Fact : Puma Punku is located at an altitude of 12,800 feet, which means it is located above the natural tree line, this means NO trees grew in that area which means that no trees were cut down in order to use wooden rollers, the question is how did they transport the stones? The closest quarries were over 60 miles away.

One of the most important archaeological artifacts ever discovered in Tiahuanaco or Puma Punku is the famous Fuente Magna Bowl.

Fuente Magna Bowl

Which has, what looks like, Sumerian Sand-script on it. Sand script used 12,000 years ago, 12,566 km away..

Puma Punku 14kya? Maybe according to some dribbling mouth breather on YT...

And Sand-Script?

Which is Sumerian?

and 12,000 years old?

Please have a word with yourself.

The writing on the Fuente Magna Bowl compares with the writing of the Libyco-Berberused used in the Sahara 7000 years ago. This writing was used by the Proto-Dravidians (of the Indus Valley), Proto-Mande , Proto-Elamites and Proto-Sumerians.

These people formerly lived in Middle Africa, until the extensive desertification of the Sahara,which began after 3500 BC.

There are also Sumerian, FinnUgor and Iranic myths that speak of the freezing of the old homelands which occurred around 10,000BC.

Then we have Gobekli Tepe, which radiocarbon dating places the construction of these early circles in the range of 9600 to 8800 BC. Its located North of the Euphrates River, in what you would classify as North-West Mesopotamia.

So lets not pretend that this part of the world was not populated during that time period. The question is, how did this bowl with Sumerian cuneiform writing on it. Appear 12,000km away in Bolivia.

better?

originally posted by: AnuTyr


The statement comes from egyptologists, Who were ASSUMEING ( remeber assuming makes and Ass-of-u-and-me, As the saying goes my friend lol) Because Thutmosis wrote a Stela and left it front of the Sphinx.

So they draw up the obvious conclusion OH Since Thutmosis made the Stela ! And mentions a Kafre ! He must of build that gynormous pyramid sitting behind him! And the Sphinx too! /facepalm Cuz kafre Ruled for 20 years! so he must of built the pyramid in 20 years! ??????????????? What?

How do Egyptologists jump to that conclusion? Did they even read the Stella?

Did you?

if so I would think you'd know the difference between the Dream Stela and the Inventory Stela.

The Dream Stela pre-dates The Inventory Stela by at least a thousand years, and Kuhfu pre-dates the Dream Stela by 1200 years.
Giza was already out of use even by the time of the Dream Stela (Thutmose), as the Stela itself attests.

Harte

a reply to: Triton1128

If you are going to say stuff, at least say stuff that makes sense.

And it's a bit better; but if you really are asking, it's Finno-Ugric.

Sand-Script really made me laugh though, i'll give you that.

ETA: meh, what the heck, seeing as i'm being a pedant and you are using terms you are not very sure of, "Finno-Ugric Stories/Legends" doesn't work much either as it's a family of languages, like Indo-European for example. Were they Hungarian, Finnish, Estonian?

a reply to: skalla

I apologize. I'm out of work.. and "relaxing" at the moment.

I tend to lean more towards the optimistic side of controversy. Only because I hope not all of life's mysteries have been solved.

originally posted by: Triton1128
The writing on the Fuente Magna Bowl compares with the writing of the Libyco-Berberused used in the Sahara 7000 years ago. This writing was used by the Proto-Dravidians (of the Indus Valley), Proto-Mande , Proto-Elamites and Proto-Sumerians.

These people formerly lived in Middle Africa, until the extensive desertification of the Sahara,which began after 3500 BC.

According to debunked Afrocentrists only.

DNA evidence refutes this claim.

originally posted by: Triton1128There are also Sumerian, FinnUgor and Iranic myths that speak of the freezing of the old homelands which occurred around 10,000BC.

The Finno-Ugric myths are understandable, wouldn't you say?
There is a single source to this in the Levant- Zoroastrianism.

The Sumerian religion predates it and contains no such myth.

originally posted by: Triton1128Then we have Gobekli Tepe, which radiocarbon dating places the construction of these early circles in the range of 9600 to 8800 BC. Its located North of the Euphrates River, in what you would classify as North-West Mesopotamia.

Sure, if you want to call Turkey "Northwest Mesopotamia."

By those standards, Europe also constitutes part of "Northwest Mesopotamia."

originally posted by: Triton1128So lets not pretend that this part of the world was not populated during that time period. The question is, how did this bowl with Sumerian cuneiform writing on it. Appear 12,000km away in Bolivia.

Because we have no indication of exactly where and under what circumstances the bowl was found, this is a question we will never be able to answer. However, the "proto-cuneiform" supposedly on the bowl is not proto-cuneiform at all. That much we can determine.

Harte

a reply to: Triton1128

I'm highly relaxed too. I'm honestly not trying to be an ass, really. But you obviously have an interest in the subject and are sat at a computer with net access.

Trawl more widely for sources and treat both fringe and academia in the same way and with the same level of cynicism and examination, you'll broaden your knowledge way more that way.

Sure, if you want to call Turkey "Northwest Mesopotamia."

By those standards, Europe also constitutes part of "Northwest Mesopotamia."

Not all of Europe is still between the tigris and Euphrates . Silly..

a reply to: skalla

Trawl more widely for sources and treat both fringe and academia in the same way and with the same level of cynicism and examination, you'll broaden your knowledge way more that way.

Below is a pict of someone using manual means to cut through an ordinary piece of stone. You can see the quality in perfections in the line which is being cause because the tools blade underforce isn't travelling a completely straight path. The Ops pictures of cuts in the granite appear as straight lines and observe how crisp and parallel the edges are indicates that the blade was held completely steady.

Im siding with the Op on this one, but for any those with counter views if you can show some contemporary photos of people using manual methods to make the same perfect cuts I will be convinced otherwise.

a reply to: AthlonSavage

All that is needed is an abrasive - if we are talking ancient tech, string and sand can do it - obviously a lot of string is needed, and plenty of time. Both were of course plentiful.

Here is a factory scene that illustrates the process

originally posted by: Triton1128

Sure, if you want to call Turkey "Northwest Mesopotamia."

By those standards, Europe also constitutes part of "Northwest Mesopotamia."

Not all of Europe is still between the tigris and Euphrates . Silly..

None of Gobekli Tepe is between the Tigris and Euphrates.

Harte

originally posted by: AthlonSavage
Below is a pict of someone using manual means to cut through an ordinary piece of stone. You can see the quality in perfections in the line which is being cause because the tools blade underforce isn't travelling a completely straight path. The Ops pictures of cuts in the granite appear as straight lines and observe how crisp and parallel the edges are indicates that the blade was held completely steady.

Im siding with the Op on this one, but for any those with counter views if you can show some contemporary photos of people using manual methods to make the same perfect cuts I will be convinced otherwise.

The person in your pic isn't using a saw.

The AEs used saws. Like I said, they even left artwork depicting the use of such saws on stone.

Harte

a reply to: skalla

That is an interesting vid. I meant however a true manual method no electric power involved. I hear what you mean about lots of string and taking forever, but it has to be practical in context of backing the contemporary claim pyramids were built in twenty years. Show me a completely manual machine that can make the cuts using completely manual method to cut and shape the individual blocks at the speed necessary to complete work in twenty years.

Noting the above post, using saws, chisels strings or otherwise.

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: Triton1128

Sure, if you want to call Turkey "Northwest Mesopotamia."

By those standards, Europe also constitutes part of "Northwest Mesopotamia."

Not all of Europe is still between the tigris and Euphrates . Silly..

None of Gobekli Tepe is between the Tigris and Euphrates.

Harte

a reply to: AthlonSavage

I'm sure you can understand that finding one possible vid in a gazillion is a pretty impossible task.

However, you'll also surely understand that power tools just reduce the sweat levels of a task and reduce the time involved.

So the principle of using string and abrasive is clearly shown.

Now all we need is a few thousand labourers, and some water and pulses to keep them alive. They can operate the string. And a reasonably skilled string maker can make about 10 feet of the stuff from raw fibres per hour, according to what i have read. i can do about 3 feet an hour, taking into account boredom and my own lack of skill.

It's academic though as the AE's used saws, i'm just trying to demonstrate proof of concept with even simpler, more fragile materials, ie: string which is significantly more fragile than copper.

Heres picture of person using hand saw to cut limestone which isn't as hard as granite. There are imperfections in the line of the cut visible.




here is ancient picture of handsaws being used which would be about the same physical size.



Did the ancients use hand saws to make the perfect cuts, i don't see it.

a reply to: skalla


As it stands my reasoning mind is having trouble visualising what you are describing. If its as as straight forward a you believe please draw a picture of what you think the manual apparatus looked like and no of slaves operating each device. From that I will analyse it.