The Baalbek foundation stones.

originally posted by: andy06shake
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.

This tired old argument? We have cranes that can lift 20,000 metric tons!

It's been conclusively proven the blocks making up the Trilithon are Roman (whether you accept it or not), and the Romans had at their disposal pulleys, winches, capstans, and treadwheel cranes. In fact the treadwheel crane had existed since the middle of the second century B.C. (and would remain in use until the 19th c.!) The Romans routinely shipped obelisks, some weighing 500 tons, from Egypt to their city and raised them. (several examples are here)

But this is all moot, since the Romans DID NOT HAVE TO LIFT the blocks, but only had to drag/slide them in to place.

originally posted by: andy06shake
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.

What research have you done that leads you to believe such nonsense? Have you even done any? There are places you can walk into a store and rent cranes capable of lifting well over 800 tons. There's a place 20 minutes from me I could rent one that can lift 1,200 tons.

Or at least if we can lift such weight we have only been able to do so in the past decade or two.

With modern cranes, perhaps. We've been able to lift such weights with (relatively) simple mechanical systems for centuries, if not longer. It's a moot point, though, as no stones weighing anywhere near that were ever lifted at Baalbek.

this one of my fave crane pics, certainly more than 1200 tons involved

notice the big red and white metallic structure and steel cables none of which existed back then. did you notice that? so what's your point just to prove to somebody we can lift a lot of weight today? try doing it with ropes and logs from start to finish. no pre-cut stones from some quarry nearby loaded on a flatbed with a crane and set in place with laser accuracy. try getting the amount of symmetry and precision with sticks and strings and if the thing is off one degree the whole thing is wrong. one mistake anywhere in the process and it's over. we don't find that with these ancient structures. you people think, "oh I'll just kick it in place with my foot". you guys are in la la land.


a reply to: punkinworks10

a reply to: bottleslingguy

Those above replies were to the comment:

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.

A tired, dragged through-the-mud and false argument made originally by the Ancient Aliens crowd claim that is easily disproven by the fact that we have ample tools today to easily move such weights.

"we have anything capable of lifting 800 tonnes."

Yes, we can move 800 tons. We can move 1,300 tons. We can move 20,000 tons.

It's a ridiculous claim that has no bearing on the ability of Romans to move those 800 ton blocks in to place.

Moreover, it sets up another false argument, that the Romans were not capable of moving such weights in 70-100 AD, therefore it must have been an earlier (somehow more advanced) civilization - cue the "Nefilim," "Giants," or "Ancient Aliens" theories.

a reply to: bottleslingguy
My post was in response to the statement "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". the idea that seems to pervade this discussion, and was in response to a particular poster, not you.
So, your reply has no bearing on my reply.
Ancient engineers achieved remarkable results, given the level of mathematics and physics they had to work with.
Most of their techniques revolved around generations of work experience and trial and error, and my biggest argument against the basic of idea of threads like this is that they belittle the considerable skills and knowledge of the ancient craftsmen.
To imply that these things could only have been built with external intervention is a slap in the face to these long past craftsmen.
And as skilled and brilliant all those great ancient engineers were, we, as modern industrial age humans, take on daily projects that would leave any ancients dumbfounded.
Almost nobody knows that nearly 50 years ago new york started a tunnel ,Tunnel # 3, to carry water from upstate to NYC.

New York City Water Tunnel No. 3 is a part of the New York City water supply system and is the largest capital construction project in New York City history.[1] It is being built by the New York City Department of Environmental Protection to provide New York City with a third connection to its upstate water supply. The tunnel will be more than 60 miles (97 km) long, travels 500 feet (150 m) below street level in sections, and will cost over $6 billion. Construction began in 1970 and is expected to be completed in 2020.[2]

Its an impressive feat of engineering, being excavated out of bed rock, 500' feet down and will end up where it needs to be within a couple of feet, if not inches.

that's fine I saw that and that was called putting your foot in your mouth and I try to avoid it as much as possible and that's why all ya gotta do is keep it simple. If we are talking about what we see being done with modern technology, then fine. If we are talking about this stuff being done with ropes and windless aka "bamboo technology", then no there is no way the older more primitive stones were done without sophisticated methods beyond simple pencil drawings of one tiny percentage of the scale of the whole job. there are plenty of forensics that, without a shadow of doubt, show high speed cutting marks. no way to get around that so people like you love to cling to tiny irrelevant details based on a slip of the keyboard or just one small half-baked moment of non-thought on their part. it doesn't mean the whole subject as been proven false by you and your nit-picking details. don't fret, you are not alone around these parts cowboy


a reply to: Blackmarketeer

a reply to: bottleslingguy

I would love to see all these "facts" you keep pushing from a credible source.

Sadly, the only place you'll see them is on other conspiracy websites or from people who don't understand basic construction.

Links or you're talking bs.

good for you. I wasn't supporting your point of view. I was pointing out how people like the person who replied to you capitalize on the issue when people say stupid things but that doesn't mean the whole subject has been falsified. a reply to: punkinworks10

you would never consider something "credible" unless you considered it credible. what's this about "basic construction" you say? are you saying a stick drawing of people moving a stone with ropes and windless is how this was done? really what about all the stuff before that drawing and all the stuff after? why is that one stone sticking out of the ground? you're trying to tell me they just took all the time to dismantle the huge earthen ramp around it and left it there? really? that's your story? don't you see how much is missing? I would submit you are the one who hasn't a clue of what it takes to complete a job like what we see all around the globe. all with a common source but again bud the truthhhhh is out there. it's up to you to find it or deny it, either way don't look to other people to answer your questions. maybe you're not meant to see it.


a reply to: TerryDon79

a reply to: bottleslingguy

there are plenty of forensics that, without a shadow of doubt, show high speed cutting marks.

These is NO EVIDENCE of "high-speed cutting marks" anywhere to be found at Baalbek, by all means link to a photo if you believe there is.

I spent a great deal of time reading every source available including plenty of docs from the German outfit that has been engaged in archaeology at this site for the past 100 years - it hasn't always been clear where the line between "Roman" and "pre-Roman" was drawn when perusing this material until Dr. Lohmann's recent work made it abundantly clear that the "Trilithon" are Roman and encapsulate an earlier Herod-built foundation. The masonry of that Herod-built foundation is a perfect match for the masonry of Herod's rebuilding of the Temple Mount.

That, in a nutshell, means the three 800-ton blocks are not older than Herod, not older than the time of the Romans, do not predate humanity, were not subject to some great flood, were not built by Nefilim, Djinn, Angels, or Giants.

Personally, I'm more impressed by the feat of Romans moving a 500-ton obelisk from Egypt to Rome than I am by their feat of dragging these 3 blocks a few hundred yards downhill.

a reply to: bottleslingguy

I guess you've never seen a bridge that ca hold several tonnes made out of stocks and string. You've also never watched any video of anyone making a rudimental crane with sticks and string.

Counter lever cranes were invented and used a long LONG time ago.

What's to dismantle? It's ground, dirt, mud. You don't "dismantle" it. It's erodes and goes away all by itself.

So your "proof" is what? An economist?

Dude listen! I work with computers, but I can tell you there's aliens in the pond at the end of my street! I've got all the relevant eduction too....I taught myself!

originally posted by: [post=20602049]Blackmarketeer

These is NO EVIDENCE of "high-speed cutting marks" anywhere to be found at Baalbek, by all means link to a photo if you believe there is.

hiddenincatours.com...

your post is a joke right?


a reply to: TerryDon79

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
your post is a joke right?


a reply to: TerryDon79

Nope.

If you had actually done any research (instead of reading what an economist had said lol) you might realise how far wrong you really are.

Live in your fantasy world for all I care, but please don't ever reproduce.

a reply to: bottleslingguy

So as proof you link to "Hidden Inca Tours," a fringe site dedicated to the Inca. Apparently Baalbek relocated in the dead of night to the other side of the globe?

The foundation blocks at Baalbek were split from the face of the quarry, and those that had abraded faces (meaning the ones that had been dressed) used hammer stones and polishing stones. The Herodian blocks of Baalbek, as pointed out by the DAI/Lohmann are nearly identical to the ones Herod placed at the Temple Mount.