New images shows something unimaginable HUGE is buried beneath ancient Baalbek

a reply to: Harte

Plus, the Romans used oxen as draft animals which could pull wheeled wagons with a weight of 1.5 tons. They did not have to rely on manpower alone.

originally posted by: Byrd
a reply to: Harte

Plus, the Romans used oxen as draft animals which could pull wheeled wagons with a weight of 1.5 tons. They did not have to rely on manpower alone.

Pulling is one thing, but how did they lift 1,000 tonns upwards many feet?

-MM

a reply to: Harte

Thanks, Harte, but just how did they lift a 1,000 ton block upwards to place the blocks?

-MM

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
a reply to: Harte

Thanks, Harte, but just how did they lift a 1,000 ton block upwards to place the blocks?

-MM

Two things I see I need to repeat:

1) NO stone in that temple weighs 1,000 tons.

2) Not a single stone of the trilithon had to be lifted upward during the construction by any stretch of the imagination.

Harte

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
a reply to: Harte

Thanks, Harte, but just how did they lift a 1,000 ton block upwards to place the blocks?

-MM

Haven't read the entire thread but I'd guess they could do it with a pulley system attaching the rope and pulley to the top of whatever they have built and having the oxen with a harness attached to the rope.

I am assuming they could have had a pulley as well though.

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
a reply to: Harte

Thanks, Harte, but just how did they lift a 1,000 ton block upwards to place the blocks?

-MM

Two things I see I need to repeat:

1) NO stone in that temple weighs 1,000 tons.

2) Not a single stone of the trilithon had to be lifted upward during the construction by any stretch of the imagination.

Harte

But how about these approx. 557 ton blocks twenty feet above ground level then? How did they lift these up to place them on the wall?
Source: www.ancient-origins.net...


-MM

Universal language math is....
Pulley Mechanical advantage Formula

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
a reply to: Harte

Thanks, Harte, but just how did they lift a 1,000 ton block upwards to place the blocks?

-MM

Two things I see I need to repeat:

1) NO stone in that temple weighs 1,000 tons.

2) Not a single stone of the trilithon had to be lifted upward during the construction by any stretch of the imagination.

Harte

But how about these approx. 557 ton blocks twenty feet above ground level then? How did they lift these up to place them on the wall?
Source: www.ancient-origins.net...

-MM

I don't care to explain it to you for a third time.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
a reply to: Harte

Thanks, Harte, but just how did they lift a 1,000 ton block upwards to place the blocks?

-MM

Two things I see I need to repeat:

1) NO stone in that temple weighs 1,000 tons.

2) Not a single stone of the trilithon had to be lifted upward during the construction by any stretch of the imagination.

Harte

But how about these approx. 557 ton blocks twenty feet above ground level then? How did they lift these up to place them on the wall?
Source: www.ancient-origins.net...

-MM

I don't care to explain it to you for a third time.

Harte

I'm sorry, but I've only seen you explained how to *pull* large blocks and not how to *lift* them.

-MM

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
a reply to: Harte

Thanks, Harte, but just how did they lift a 1,000 ton block upwards to place the blocks?

-MM

Two things I see I need to repeat:

1) NO stone in that temple weighs 1,000 tons.

2) Not a single stone of the trilithon had to be lifted upward during the construction by any stretch of the imagination.

Harte

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation

I'm sorry, but I've only seen you explained how to *pull* large blocks and not how to *lift* them.

-MM

Same way people lift heavy objects everywhere: place a ramp that leads to where you want to go and pull.

But the Romans did invent the lifting crane before this time period and there's depictions of them using it to lift materials at construction sites.

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
a reply to: Harte

Thanks, Harte, but just how did they lift a 1,000 ton block upwards to place the blocks?

-MM

Two things I see I need to repeat:

1) NO stone in that temple weighs 1,000 tons.

2) Not a single stone of the trilithon had to be lifted upward during the construction by any stretch of the imagination.

Harte

Have look at the picture below of these 557 ton blocks at Baalbek, they have been lifted up about 20 feet into their place. These are the blocks I've been asking you to explain how were lifted, do you have any idea of how those blocks were lifted upwards? If they were not lifted, then how did they place them in this wall?

Source: www.ancient-origins.net...

-MM

A good read on the subject

Harte

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
a reply to: Harte

Thanks, Harte, but just how did they lift a 1,000 ton block upwards to place the blocks?

-MM

Two things I see I need to repeat:

1) NO stone in that temple weighs 1,000 tons.

2) Not a single stone of the trilithon had to be lifted upward during the construction by any stretch of the imagination.

Harte

Have look at the picture below of these 557 ton blocks at Baalbek, they have been lifted up about 20 feet into their place. These are the blocks I've been asking you to explain how were lifted, do you have any idea of how those blocks were lifted upwards? If they were not lifted, then how did they place them in this wall?

Source: www.ancient-origins.net...

-MM

What part of "they weren't lifted" is confusing you?

Harte

Only have to lift one end if you had to..Then pull or push.Humans had thousands of years to figure stuff out before the pyramids.How quickly did humans need to figure out how to build Highrises?

There are numerous "Lewis" lifting appliance holes in the Roman blocks to show that they were at least lifting most of the blocks at the site, although according to Lohman several blocks have had there faces abraded to remove the unsightly holes after being placed into their final position. So the Romans did lift some of these multi-ton beasts. I put it to the doubters, many of the Roman blocks encompassing the peristyle weigh in the 450 ton range, and the technology to move and lift those would have also moved and lifted the 800-ton blocks of the Trilithon, only the scale would have changed. Instead of 4 capstans you may have had 8, or even a dozen. Ragget depicted a hypothetical lifting apparatus for the monoliths that relied on known Roman technology and even calculated how many Lewis lifting appliance holes would have been needed, based on the shear strength of their iron and that of the blocks. Of course this doesn't mean the 800-ton blocks were ever lifted, as they are foundation blocks, and grades and slopes would have been altered to accommodate their movement. Remember, the Romans in their time flattened entire hilltops for the sake of their grand designs.

Pr 8:22 ¶ The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.
23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.
24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.

If this is verse can be taken as correct and in chronology

1) the earth is a lot older that 6,000 plus year.

2) Originally there was no water on earth it was in fountains.

3) Lucifer tried to exalt a throne which I believe was originally on this earth and was built by commission from God Almighty to exalt his son.

This could be a remnant of that original throne city that was why God flooded the earth as we see in Genesis 1:2

a reply to: Blackfinger

too cool...thanks much.

why don't people just READ before posting.
long quote from Doerneburg:

...From Roman times, and the trilithon was built in Roman times, we have full documentations about the methods they used. For example, the transport of a 900 t block at the time of Thedosius (compareable to the Bal Bekaa blocks) was accomplished with 12 winches manned with 24 men each - or only 264 men!!! The romans developed a system of continous winch movement, called in German a "Göpelwinde". With this system, winches are placed on poles dugged into the ground besides the transport way. In the example listed above 2 parallel rows with 6 winches on each side, between them the weight was moved. Each winch had a distance of about 5 m to the next. All 6 winches on each side had a different repe angle to the weight to pull. The lower, the smaller the transport force afflicted to the block. When the angle ot the two winches most behind got unpracticable, the winches were removed from the pole and moved to the frontmost position and the ropes got new connected. And so on. The blocks were transported on sleds. The transport of the Byzanz-Obelisk eg. took about 2 weeks for 3 kilometers from waterfront to 300 m height. The Trilithon-blocks were transported only 600 meters to a lower position!! When the work was finished, the poles were pulled out and the holes filled. Next point: How were the blocks in Bal Bekaa lifted? Answer: They werent lifted. The quarry was slightly higher than the platform of the forum, so the Romans only had to fill a small trench with rubble to bull the blocks horizontally to their places. Next point: Why do I write Bal Bekaa instead of Baalbek? Because this is the original name of the settlement after roman times: Bal Bekaa means "Valley of the Bekaa" and has nothing to do with the old god Baal (you notice the similarity between "Valley of Bekaa" and the famous "Bekaa-plateau" in Lebanon??? Yeah, right, they both mean the same location.) . "Bal Bekaa" was the official name up to the 19th century, and the French use this writing (or the shortened form Bal Bek) until today. In fact, the whole settlement is of Roman origin, first mentioned in about 20 AD as "Colonia Iulia Felix Helipolitania", named not after the Greek sun god Helios (as Sitchin proposes), but after a local Roman hero, Iuppiter Heliopolitanus. The city lay in the center of several trade routes and therefore flourished after it had to be abandoned because of the onrush of the Arabs. Next: Why is it no ancient spaceship landing platform? Because of its construction. Its a typical Roman honeycomb-brick-construction. Underneath the forum is a labyrinth of brick walls and chambers, filled to support the weight with shards and other compact trash. All of roman origin. Only beneath the temples on top of the forum are fundaments to the bedrock to support their weight. And in typical roman fashoin, to conceal the flimsy inner construction an outer wall of monoliths between 50 and 800 tons each was placed around the construction so that it lookes massive. But this is only an outer appearance, the whole construction is so unstable, that any decent space ferry would simply break through the ceiling and land in a heap of roman shards. All these things are known since the publishing of the Wiegand- Baalbek-report between 1921-1925. Z. Sitchin (from where you as I believe you got the "facts") is or was in posession of these reports (because he uses pictures from these books, without mentioning their origins). He publishes the pictures, but doesn't mention the other facts published in the three volumes - so I think I can say, he is a fraud...

www.ramtops.co.uk...

From Doug's Archaeology Site. He's a member here, but I ain't seen him lately.

That's a great site - been using it for years.

Frank gets a little testy in that copy of an old usenet thread.

Harte