The Baalbek foundation stones.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

a fully fueled and loaded 747-400 weighs about 430 tons, or 870,000 pounds. A bit more than half as much as one of those stones!

I don't see this happening without some kind of tech that we just don't know about.

Now some facts: The Temple of Jupiter has blocks in the architraves (that's part of the roof structure) that weight 60 tons. And the corner cornice blocks (also part of the roof) weigh a cool 100 tons. No lightweights. The Romans lifted those with their cranes, and pulleys, capstans, and treadwheels provided the lifting power.

Ancient Roman cranes

And please DON'T fall into the trap of believing the blocks making up the trilithon ever had to be LIFTED. Ragette and Lohmann and others have depicted a multitude of ways the blocks were DRAGGED into place by rollers, without ever be picked up off the ground. (depicted here).

a reply to: Blackmarketeer

That is really neat and all but it has nothing in common with the stones in the OP.

so where is the earthen ramp that they were pulling it over? how did it get to where it is now? you don't get to skip the details here.



a reply to: Harte

so then where is the earthen ramp they were moving them over? remember how that theory depends on hard packed level ground? where is this ramp leading from the "quarry"? did they disassemble it around that one sticking out of the ground?




a reply to: Blackmarketeer

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
so where is the earthen ramp that they were pulling it over? how did it get to where it is now? you don't get to skip the details here.



a reply to: Harte

Ramp? All they needed was to smooth out the path.
If part of the foundation was laid first, they could have simply slid the stones onto it from over the site and then cleared out any fill used to keep the stones on the right level. Then finish the foundation.

Again, why did the Anunnaki leave those even larger stones in the quarry? Why didn't they place them on their "landing pad," which consisted of only three large stones?

For space-traveling advanced alien overlords, they are poor planners and constructed a landing pad that's only a few feet wide.

Also, as Blackmarketeer pointed out, there are many large stones in the temple construction itself.

Would you assert that the temple was built by the Anunnaki as well?

Harte

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
so then where is the earthen ramp they were moving them over? remember how that theory depends on hard packed level ground? where is this ramp leading from the "quarry"? did they disassemble it around that one sticking out of the ground?




a reply to: Blackmarketeer

So then where is the ladder against your house the builder used to put your roof on? Where is the scaffold around the Washington Monument?

Earthen ramps are construction aids, not permanent features. In the case of the Temple complex at Baalbek, it would have been a stone causeway constructed between the quarry due north of the site and slightly elevated. Later generations have plundered the blocks for re-use elsewhere.

I suppose you would have us believe that because an earthen ramp or paved causeway is no longer present, that the only means the blocks could get to the site is by levitation?

lol that's all that remains from after being destroyed in the deluge [snipped]


a reply to: Harte

no I'm talking about that one that's sticking out of the ground. did they remove the ramp from under it? you guys haven't got a clue and how come nobody will answer what makes these "experts" so credible? what is empirical about their theories? what are they basing their theory on?

a reply to: Blackmarketeer

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
no I'm talking about that one that's sticking out of the ground. did they remove the ramp from under it? you guys haven't got a clue and how come nobody will answer what makes these "experts" so credible? what is empirical about their theories? what are they basing their theory on?

a reply to: Blackmarketeer

Pot Kettle
As you have never backed up any of your claims you are hardly in a position to make demands

a reply to: bottleslingguy

It's comical that you are ridiculing the 'experts' (researchers like Ragette, Weigand, Lohmann, the DAI, et. al.) when it is abundantly clear you have never read any of them.

FYI they didn't need to "ramp up" to get the blocks of the Trilithon into place. The temple platform itself is what those 3 blocks were brought across, as the quarry lat due east of the site, and no ramp was needed to get the blocks onto that platform. The quarry was at a higher elevation, and bringing the blocks down a causeway meant bringing them downhill. As Ragette and Lohmann both mention, the major force needed was to bring those blocks down the slope in a controlled fashion. They certainly weren't dragging them uphill. Bear in mind, the blocks hidden behind the Trilithon were not there at the time the Trilithon were being placed. They had the whole wide width of the platform to use for maneuvering those blocks into place.

so they're credible just because you say so? they can and will say anything to keep people like you in the linear world. none of you have provided anything even close to reality I don't care who you call an expert like nobdy ever lied or made things up for fame and fortune before.


a reply to: Blackmarketeer

for anyone who is looking for alternative explanation for this historic ruin, I present to you an excellent series about this and many other unexplained and sometimes even overlooked archaeological findings by mainstream.

Here is the video to part 26, which is focused on Baalbek. There are many other parts and all together they paint a magnificent picture of our past...



In short, my thinking is similar to bottleslingguy...there are many details mentioned in video which present the case for such an opinion and why mainstream "facts" are not facts at all.

Watch this part and if you like it, than I recommend all other parts also and build your own opinion around our (true?) history, for anyone curious...in any case, always, try to look on the both side of the fence and see what makes more sense to you, mainstream or alternative opinions.

originally posted by: Harte All they needed was to smooth out the path.
If part of the foundation was laid first, they could have simply slid the stones onto it from over the site and then cleared out any fill used to keep the stones on the right level. Then finish the foundation.


Harte

this is what I call the "bump out a wall" thinking. it goes hand in hand with bamboo technology (has to do with Gilligan's island technology. google it)

the story goes: my wife and I were house hunting and while looking over a tiny cape style we were upstairs in the bathroom with the real estate person. I mentioned how small it was and she flippantly replies with "oh just bump out a wall" which made me chuckle because she obviously had no idea how difficult and extensive of a job that would be. Sure I'll just "bump out" this roof and build a dormer like vacuuming the floor or loading the dishwasher. no biggy. I'll just pat down some sand and built a causeway that can withstand several 1200 ton bulldozers being dragged over it. not to mention able to solidly hold a turnbuckle system and then just disassemble that as if it was a bunch of feathers and rub our hands over it to pat it smooth. lol these people are not experts in anything other than bull#.

you can't make stereo headphones with coconuts and you can't just simply play around with stones like this of these scales. scaffolding? sure. but there's a whole lot more work involved from start to finish and these suggestions by the "experts" don't come close to explaining one percent of the total. we don't need to keep going back and forth whether it could be done or not. it can't now and couldn't then. the laws of physics still apply but some people live in a cartoon world where you can do anything just by waving your hands and using yer i.m.a.g.i.n.a.t.i.o.n. lol

geopolymers and growing stones-very interesting. I stopped it at the 44 min mark when she started talking about the martial arts energy showing the sensei walking around like he was Jackie Chan though. I get it about Chi and Tao and all that but the guy never touched them and they were flying around like you see in Hollywood. that's silly. She raises a lot of great questions and I mean at some point you gotta say wtf was goin on back when these things were done? the point about Nero living in a #ty little mud hut was a good one.



a reply to: UniFinity

a reply to: bottleslingguy

haha yes the last part is truly hard to believe.

But in my experiences "chakras" and "prana" are not the stuff of imagination. Although they are manipulated by it...But if this stuff is possible or not with correct training in mind and body with strong one pointed concentration and almost for whole life...I can't imagine the extent of possibilities in such a person. These people who are in the videos are possibly such masters, who devoted their whole life to hard training in mind and body, like shaolin monks...maybe.

On that note, I am a believer that previous advanced global civilization (antediluvian and even way longer back in time) had a LOT better knowledge of more subtle energies and nature of our reality and maybe they could with different/"natural" technology or even maybe just correct mind and body training build megalithic structures.

Mind over matter and all that. Manipulations of the elements is one of the siddhis mentioned in ancient yoga or others esoteric text for instance.

well in any case you asked the right question....wtf was going on indeed in our forgotten or mysterious past. The point is we will probably never know for sure. It is just about the interpretations of evidence which is available to us with the combination of what is the real nature of our reality we supposedly know it to be true...we have science for that today.

And our sciences mainly abides currently in materialism and evolution without any "depth" (for instance worlds or energies "behind physical") and due to that we have appropriate mainstream history suited to our science. And that is why in my opinion, it fails in some cases, for instance when it comes to explaining megalithic structures or many other historic findings which are sometimes hard to explain by mainstream.

originally posted by: bottleslingguy

originally posted by: Harte All they needed was to smooth out the path.
If part of the foundation was laid first, they could have simply slid the stones onto it from over the site and then cleared out any fill used to keep the stones on the right level. Then finish the foundation.


Harte

this is what I call the "bump out a wall" thinking. it goes hand in hand with bamboo technology (has to do with Gilligan's island technology. google it)

the story goes: my wife and I were house hunting and while looking over a tiny cape style we were upstairs in the bathroom with the real estate person. I mentioned how small it was and she flippantly replies with "oh just bump out a wall" which made me chuckle because she obviously had no idea how difficult and extensive of a job that would be. Sure I'll just "bump out" this roof and build a dormer like vacuuming the floor or loading the dishwasher. no biggy.

[snipped]

originally posted by: bottleslingguy I'll just pat down some sand and built a causeway that can withstand several 1200 ton bulldozers being dragged over it. not to mention able to solidly hold a turnbuckle system and then just disassemble that as if it was a bunch of feathers and rub our hands over it to pat it smooth. lol these people are not experts in anything other than bull#.

Here you not only show your penchant for dishonest discourse, but you also betray your ignorance in the area of civil engineering.

In the first instance, you claim there are several 1200 ton stones hidden somewhere within the constructions at Baalbek.
In the second instance, you show everyone with a brain that you have not one inkling of a clue when it comes to the compressive strengths of various materials.

I make out a required compressive strength here of about 550 kPa. Am I wrong?

Perhaps you should make some small effort to examine the compressive strengths of earth, clay, sand, and a mixture of these.

It's about 3 times what's needed.

Harte

a reply to: karl 12

Its not just an impressive feat of engineering its beyond what we are capable of achieving using modern day technology at least weight wise i dont think we have anything capable of lifting 800 tonnes. Or at least if we can lift such weight we have only been able to do so in the past decade or two.