It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Gorman91
The tablet, assuming I am looking at the right one, was written 2000 years after the Great Pyramids were built.
Originally posted by afsalazar
Is it possible that it was built before the flood?
We find the bones of the people who lived and were buried in these tombs. All that can be radiocarbon dated, for example. But primarily we date the pyramids by their position in the development of Egyptian architecture and material culture over the broad sweep of 3,000 years. So we're not dealing with any one foothold of factual knowledge at Giza itself. We're dealing with basically the entirety of Egyptology and Egyptian archaeology.
Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by MagnumOpus
Defense? It was a giant pile of rocks. It was one of the first things abandoned when the old kingdom fell.
Originally posted by Gorman91
Now as for the age of the pyramids. It's a burial site.
You know.
Bodies.
You can carbon date them.
Except no. A fortress is more than just a pile of rocks. It is a system of tectonic alignments designed to defend in 3 dimensions. The pyramids are a 2d designed triangle that if any siege weapon was used, would collapse very easily, as it can only defend against gravity.
Which body was found in the great pyramid and how can you prove that it was the builder or from the same time?
The guy being interviewed completely evades the question and instead says that there were tombs AROUND the great pyramid. Not IN it. So because people made tombs on the outside of the pyramid at one point, it automatically means the pyramids were built at the same time as the graves? That's speculation if I ever heard it. The reasoning they use, is that because they found some pottery dated from xx time period, it means the pyramid must have been built then. Tons of cultures lived in that area over the years. Of course we're going to find evidence of them. It is NOT, however solid objective evidence that indicates even an estimated date of construction.
Say what? Collapse easily? They are almost pure stone. Those structures will outlast anything else man made on this planet right now.
Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by MagnumOpus
Except no. A fortress is more than just a pile of rocks. It is a system of tectonic alignments designed to defend in 3 dimensions. The pyramids are a 2d designed triangle that if any siege weapon was used, would collapse very easily, as it can only defend against gravity.
A triangle is not a good shape for bricks if it's used for defense. It will collapse once one corner is taken out. Complex shapes are used for forts. Because their geometries are locally secure,
Earthquakes, the sands of time, and all four corners of the pyramids still work fine. Even the inner chambers still work fine.
If ones purpose was to defend the Pharo and Queen and give them a safe place to ride out a siege, the pyramid is a perfect spot.
Plus, if there were alchemists around they'd all know that the Egytians knew the poison gas secret and how to use it against invading armies. Pyramid shapes means they know the poison methods of fluorite, as well as the ultimate defense against it.