The Great Pyramid: A Conundrum Made of Stone (Built by ET's?)

I gave you a few links on the previous page that you might find interesting. I'd still be interested in your thoughts on them, pro or con. Here they are again.

viewzone2.com...
www.humanresonance.org...

Originally posted by Klassified
I gave you a few links on the previous page that you might find interesting. I'd still be interested in your thoughts on them, pro or con. Here they are again.

viewzone2.com...
www.humanresonance.org...

Very interesting, liquid stone, so no need for ramps pullies etc just a big hosepipe and a pump?!?

Research of J. Davidovits into ancient geopolymers has demonstrated through chemical X-ray analysis that the casing stones of the Giza pyramids are synthetic, being of lower density than any quarried stone due to trapped air bubbles and consisting of 85-90% calcite with other exotic mineral constituents like opal CT, hydroxy-apatite and silico-aluminates. CAT-scan work on the core stones have recorded hairs deeply embedded in the matrix of the stone, another clue that the pyramid blocks were cast using liquid stone, though RC14 dating of hair samples contained in the stone have not been reported.

It would be great to get the RC14 hair sample dates though, could change everything datewise!

reply to post by spacedonk

Yeah, I would like to see the carbon-14 dating on that myself. I still lean toward the pyramids being much older than the Egyptians. Which is not to say they weren't brilliant people, but everything about the pyramids to me, screams older. And I believe their purpose (whatever that may be) is very practical.
But then, I'm not a believer in the linear progression of man. So it's easier for me to see it the way I do.

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by spacedonk

 

Yeah, I would like to see the carbon-14 dating on that myself. I still lean toward the pyramids being much older than the Egyptians. Which is not to say they weren't brilliant people, but everything about the pyramids to me, screams older. And I believe their purpose (whatever that may be) is very practical.

I agree my instinct has always been that they are extremely old and were inherited by the Egyptians.

Originally posted by Klassified
But then, I'm not a believer in the linear progression of man. So it's easier for me to see it the way I do.

Can you expand?

reply to post by 11118


But due to Occam's Razor you would agree then that this is the best possibility to date... right?

2nd line.

Originally posted by 11118

All opinions are welcome.

Opinions are generally weak and not welcome in my book. You do not have a right to believe something or think something unless you have some sort of backing for that belief.

So opinions are welcome, as long as evidence and reasoning are present

reply to post by spacedonk

I believe man has gone through a series of peaks and ebbs. He advances technologically to a peak, then ebbs for any variety of reasons. Catastrophe could be an example. Then he goes through the same process again. Who knows how many times we've been right where we're at, right now, or much further. There's more to it, but thats it in a nutshell.

reply to post by NoJoker13


There is some very small evidence that trade existed between the Americas and Egypt to a small degree. We have no idea how this would work, but if it did, it was probably a band of native Americans whom found a current and used to to trade with what they thought was something not as far away.

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by spacedonk

 

I believe man has gone through a series of peaks and ebbs. He advances technologically to a peak, then ebbs for any variety of reasons. Catastrophe could be an example. Then he goes through the same process again. Who knows how many times we've been right where we're at, right now, or much further. There's more to it, but thats it in a nutshell.

Couldn't have put it better. I am in total agreement.

reply to post by Gorman91


What about other civilizations along the Mediterranean? Wouldn't it be possible for these civilizations to also produce acidic fruits and veggies?

reply to post by NoJoker13


Eh, not really. other than Grapes and wine, you really have mostly wheat and other products. the most common products of Egypt were vegetables. If you wanted something acidic enough to power something, you'd have to get a lot of them and it would be written down about, because capitals of trade always were.

reply to post by Gorman91


Thanks for the answer, I gotta do a bit more fishing on this but at the moment it seems acid from produce is highly unlikely.

reply to post by NoJoker13


We call them "key limes" here in Florida. cough

www.foodreference.com...

reply to post by Bordon81


no need for trading acidic fruits, etc. just store it in a container/jar with a moist and let the fungi/bacteria do the job. its called fermentation

reply to post by Bordon81


Ya would you show me where they produces "key limes" in acient egypt? Because I doubt you can.

2nd line.

reply to post by NoJoker13


They are called Mediterranean limes in the middle east, question is were Mediterranean limes available 4600 BC?
This might explain the Mexico Pyramids since Mediterranean limes were also found in Mexico very early in their recorded history.

As for the Pyramid VS Coliseum debate The Pyramids were the International Space station of their day. Few visitors could have had access to the inner chambers but the technology recorded in the pyramid would trickle down for thousands of years. Unlike the space station human strength was a valued asset for the gang members that helped build the pyramid. In that project resources were too valuable to waste so there was no underclass.

The Roman Coliseum was built more for social entertainment rather than pure intellectual purposes. Although not as huge an undertaking, similar social and employment gains were made building and operating the Roman Coliseum. Were the Christians really eaten by lions and ceremonially executed as an underclass in the Coliseum?

maybe the purpose why they build the pyramid is for reincarnation, bringing the dead to life. but too bad it didnt work. what has resulted is it slows down the process to decomposition - preservation/mummification.

Study of Ancient DNA



there is a possibility that they are already using acids at that time. acids that naturally occur in nature.

for you to understand ancient you have to be ancient - just my thought

2nd line

reply to post by sweety0003


The Pharaohs were a royal blood line so I guess there was more to it than politics

There is an ancient genetic engineering conspiracy, but I don't seem to have access at the moment.

www.lifeinthefastlane.ca...

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by 11118

 

But due to Occam's Razor you would agree then that this is the best possibility to date... right?

2nd line.

No, that would be subjective entirely - especially considering the that the internal-ramp theory can't be easily assumed as the simplest out of the other theories. When it comes to these theories Occam's Razor is hard to label with any single-pointedness.