Why ancients or ETs would use stone to construct buildings and not metal.

This is not a very strong point, and it would require alot of reaching. Just wanted to say that upfront.

While reading a few books on standard Egyptology and then serpent in the sky by john west.

One problem I always thought, if ancients had some advanced technology that we dont have today, to move large weights in 3 dimensions (horizontal and vertical and everywere inbetween) then why use stone at all? Surely if they had anti gravity then they could make steel. And make stuff easyer and quicker.

I have a few explanations for this.

1. Aliens did come, and whatever ET tech could be used to move big blocks was readily available. Or was easyer to make or execute than mining and smelting or other metal production processes.
2. The advanced people/civilization needed all the metal available to leave earth and what was needed to leave but left behind(pyramids etc) was made out of stone. This would align with the theory that the pyramids are an energy harnessing structure.
3. A combination of the both

Now obviously there are human explanations, and some that at this point I am more inclined to believe. But this is ATS so lets ignore those

its made from earth...so that it lasts


also...they didnt have synthesised metal....
& aliens or ancients..didnt leave with metal...in egypt most of the gold was retained by the king

its bs mate...pyramids were built by locals

we know who built em..where they lived...and where the quarries were

peace

I have pondered this from a few angles as well. It does seem as though the ancient builders had a true affinity for stone works and megaliths.

1. Maybe stone was/is more permanent.
   
2. Maybe stone had special properties that steel did/does not.
   
3. Maybe their stone forming/moving methods were actually much easier than producing and working with steel.
   
4. Maybe they liked using natural materials.
   
5. Maybe the "aliens" wanted it to look like they weren't involved.
   
   

reply to post by ubeenhad


Dear ubeenhad,

If ancient aliens had come and made these ancient rock sites, why didn't they use technologies that we have today? Why don't we find ancient aluminum? Stone was readily available and did not have to be manufactured. If ancient aliens had been here with advanced technology, they still would have had to fabricate new materials and even if they took all the materials that they fabricated with them, they still would have had to leave some evidence behind of the manufacturing process, factories, tools, something. Our ancestors were not stupid, they were pretty much like us; but, had to develop systems for manufacturing things. If you were born 1,000 years ago and knew how to make a computer, you wouldn't be able to because you would not have plastic, transistors, the special metals and all the other things needed, you would not have the infrastructure in place to make all the parts.

I'm going to avoid going into who made the pyramids ( man vs aliens), but just add another possible reason for using stone rather than metals. The stone has lasted far longer than just about any other material they might have used. Metal structures would have rusted away a very long time ago. Using stones of the size and weight that were used, it was surely no easy task, but it offered a long lasting structure. That's just one more idea to throw in there, anyway.

Well, in the time it took me to type that, I see the same idea was posted at least twice.

reply to post by ubeenhad

OP, if I wanted to leave a message that would last for the ages, literally tens of thousands of years, I would make it out of stone, as this will be around long after steel, iron, copper etc.. is all weathered away.

Also just because they came doesn't mean they allowed humans to use their tech beyond their uses, and teaching metalergy to an inferior race is against intergalactic information/ technology exchange treaties. As this would constitue uplift, and thereby make any misdeeds caused by an early evolution race that aquired knowledge with the lessons involved in getting, like hard work and effort of generations that builds discipline, would be their responsibility, and there for they would be responsible. Like parents for the actions of their children when they play with guns or heavy machinery.

So they had no choice but to leave us nothing even close, or teach us their secrets, as we were litterally "kids" in societal terms, and only after discovering the power of the atom, and the consequences of its use did we grow up to adloescence as a race.

After a couple of more steps we will be ready to be conscenting adults.

Or we are just like the tribes on the islands of the pacific, and built what we saw the visitors having in hopes we could invoke their return.

Or, ancient people were far more advanced and date back far further than modern archaeology gives them credit for, and there were no "Ancient Aliens", but rather somewhat advanced human civilizations whose technology and history we know little about at present.

Originally posted by DeadSeraph
Or, ancient people were far more advanced and date back far further than modern archaeology gives them credit for, and there were no "Ancient Aliens", but rather somewhat advanced human civilizations whose technology and history we know little about at present.

edit on 15-10-2012 by DeadSeraph because: (no reason given)

This is what I have been leaning towards as well.

Because metal rusts, It's hard to heat metal in the winter hard to cool metal in the summer. metal is expensive and limited in quantity.

I could write a book on why this is. Would you like me to?

No?

So I shall just jot some brief notes in following posts.

it is my belief that we have failed to answer all the basic questions to Egyptology and for the Mayans etc because we have been looking through the wrong end of the telescope.

Instead of asking "Hwo did they manage to haul big stones up hills?", we should be asking "Why did they PREFER to build temples at the tips of hills?"

Instead of asking "How did they manage to move big stones?", we should be asking "Why did they PREFER to build with big stones?"

Instead of asking "Why are they agnetically aligned?" we should be asking "Why did they magnetically align them?"

Instead of asking "Why did they use stone instead of metal?" we should be asking "Why did they PROHIBIT the use of metal?"

When you start asking these questions, one begins to get answers.

I also find it amazing how people utterly dismiss what the legends say about how Stonehenge, the Moai stones and the Pyramids were built instead of considering that we simply have not understood what the legends about how they were built which could be, technically, correct.

If taken as techniocally correct then this would answer many questions.

Likewise, a HUGE question is this... how is it that if there is life out there, why have we not heard about it? There is a terrible truth about this I believe.

Likewise, I believe that standard Ufology is utterly wrong as it is based on one GROSS assumption that really, really has no grounds to support it...that the ALiens are here to help us. Just consider this for a moment, when in your life has anyone, ojutside your family, fallen over backwards to help you? Hardly ever? So why would aliens be any different?

Consider... what is the great value to aliens of this planet? What do we have that no-one else has? What s there parallel to our planet in our day to day lives? The results are frightening and would explain much.

So, what is special about us? ANswer, NOTHING.

Hard to swallow isn't it?

Our planet is in the extreme boonies. The Globular Clusters where stars are close should logically be the industrial might of the Galaxy... and where are we? On the edge of the spiral arm, the very fringe.

We are the hillbillies of the Galaxy.

So, if you have a country, a nation, and you have a big area of empty wilderness, like marshes or mountain nowhere, as a national Government what do you place there, far from civilization? Answer...military research establishments, nuclear power plants, all the big things that if they go wrong, really mess up a country and kill lots of citizens... you place them far form population centres.

SO, why might the aliens have come to our planet and maybe created mankind as a worker? Answer...to establish germ warfare research establishments and bred us to do tasks that would put them at risk from the germs that they were developing. If this was the case, if we were a research lab, the "Gods" ...

1. The "Gods" would need to perform regular vivisection, explaining the Mayan etc ceremonies of killing humans and cutting up the sacrifices for the Gods.
2. The "Gods" would want our population kept low as they hardly want humans running around the Galaxy like a race of "Typhoid Mary"'s
3. For the same reason, they would want us to keep our technology low to keep us out of space.
4. Once we began launching into space, they would show an immediate interest, hence Roswell in 1947.

So, why no metal?

Simple...Metal is easily detectible by radar etc, whilst stone is not. SO if the Earth was the site of military bio-labs, the aliens would have wanted to keep away from metal to avoid detection to avoid being bombed to bits by their cosmic enemies.

Originally posted by georgemoseleylander
it is my belief that we have failed to answer all the basic questions to Egyptology and for the Mayans etc because we have been looking through the wrong end of the telescope.

Instead of asking "Hwo did they manage to haul big stones up hills?", we should be asking "Why did they PREFER to build temples at the tips of hills?"

Instead of asking "How did they manage to move big stones?", we should be asking "Why did they PREFER to build with big stones?"

Instead of asking "Why are they agnetically aligned?" we should be asking "Why did they magnetically align them?"

Instead of asking "Why did they use stone instead of metal?" we should be asking "Why did they PROHIBIT the use of metal?"

When you start asking these questions, one begins to get answers.

Couldn't agree with you more.

First of all, people built these structures. Second, it was easy.
Consider those two points and then start to research.
People today and in the ancient past always do things according to intent. When building large buildings, we choose metal because its strong and its what we know. It's easier than trying to build skyscrapers out of stone, or platinum. There are other considerations such as cost. In the ancient world it was really no different. They probably built with stone because that is what they knew, maybe because it was easy for them, much easier than forging metal. Perhaps it served some function to use stone, ie. with magnetics or some other earth science. It probably made perfect sense to build with stone and they would laugh at us toiling away with metal today. I agree that we should ask why it was their desire to use stone, or why it was the easiest method to use stone.

I have always thought that to cut and move such large and hard rock would have been extremely difficult, unless there was an easy way to do it. Humans have always been lazy and will do things the easy way when given the chance. If building with large stone was as difficult as some of the proposed science has tried to convey, i.e with slaves and hauling with ropes, I don't think many of these structures would ever have been built.

Once we identify the desire of a culture and discover what motivates them, where their interests lie, issues such as why they built with stone will become very clear. But we're obviously not there yet in understand in these cultures. Studying pictograms, engravings, pottery designs and other artifacts can shed light on larger archaeological questions such as the one posed here.

The pyramids in Egypt would not be half as interesting if the were not covered in hieroglyphs. Same goes for the Mayan Temples. I believe there is an old post here about a researcher who studied the geometric drawings found in the caves of France, drawings which were ignored for the most part in favor of the larger animal pics. But after studying them and classifying them into a coherant system, these drawings may reveal more about the people than the larger animal images could ever do on their own.

I think the only things that erode solid rock are constant wind and water over the course of thousands or even millions of years (hence canyons). To transport the heavy rock, I think they pulled it along on small balls that were on a track. I could imagine that animals were also used to pull. The largest ever recorded stone to be moved purely by human power was the ‘Thunder Stone’ in Russia, being moved from St Petersburg to the Gulf Of Finland in 1768. It weighed about 1250T and was moved on the ball and track system, the track being about 100m long. They moved it at a rate of around 150m per day. So just transportation would have taken them years in some cases.

Then for lifting, I have actually engaged in the same practice they used (and I’d confidently say that many of you have too). Using a lever and a fulcrum (a pivot point). Essentially what you do is with levers you jimmy up an end then place a log or whatever under it. Jimmy up the other end and do the same. And so on and before you know it you’ve lifted a very heavy object with man power. Would have taken a long time, lots of people would have hurt themselves and many, many would have died but it was possible. Everyday situations for this involved lifting/setting down something very heavy on to a forklift or pallet jack. Or to put a dolly under a heavy couch to move it elsewhere in a room.

Didn’t Archimedes once say; "Give me a lever long enough, a fulcrum strong enough and I'll move the world”?

The position of the structures in line with all sorts of things like the sun and the buildings accuracy is a completely different question, and the question I ask myself. Perhaps they had help for this?

I would say they knew stone would last longer.

ancient aliens, or smart humans who built # good - they knew what would last the longest and they wanted their creation to be viewed for generations to come.

our # we build now...we dont care if it lasts 50 years lol we'll be building new stuff at all times with no real purpose.

Logically--which we assume that the ETs would be in their manner and systems of travel--we should not be too quick in eliminating natural materials as building materials. A key point in manufactured materials is the necessary processes that are required to make anything! That includes all metal, plastic and glass and materials in between. ETs may come in self-sustained ships, but that didn't mean they could do any amount of great material processing.

If the local materials (stone) are good enough to tens if not hundreds of thousands of years, why go to the trouble of manufacturing metal materials and structures that would not be anymore durable?

It will always be easier to make something from something than to start from nothing.

Some of you don't seem to have any idea of what is involved in metal-producing procedures: finding the ore, mining it, moving it, refining it, forming the raw product into the proper shapes, not to mention designing the machinery to do all of those functions on top ofd designing and fabricating the finished product.

So, logically, we must assume that ETs will use natural asteroids for their huge "mother" ships and that accepted concept works when even when applied to the visited place where the local inhabitants will be given instructions and examples (monuments) of what they can aspire to doing on their own.

Finally, an asteriod would make a nifty, ready-made deep space habitat for wandering ETs. It's bulk would provide protection from cosmic and other rays, and when near a visited sun, a protective and temporary shield is produced that effectively insulates the body from the more intense raditation at that range. How more natural can you get? We exist on this planet by just such a natural condition: the atmosphere. There is a plausible reason for looking at those glowing objects in the sky and wondering if, indeed, we should call some of the biggest and brightest a more suitable term such as "cometships."

reply to post by ubeenhad


Ok, buying into your argument (for the sake of the thread) that is was aliens and not man...............

On the way here, they passed lots of planets. All made of stone or gas (ish), none made of metal. So they get here and think "what to build with?". And then one bright spark says "rock, that seems to last. Billions of planets of it.......".

However, as thePharoah has pointed out, we know who built them, where they lived and where the quarries are that the stones came from..........

Originally posted by ubeenhad
This is not a very strong point, and it would require alot of reaching. Just wanted to say that upfront.

While reading a few books on standard Egyptology and then serpent in the sky by john west.

One problem I always thought, if ancients had some advanced technology that we dont have today, to move large weights in 3 dimensions (horizontal and vertical and everywere inbetween) then why use stone at all? Surely if they had anti gravity then they could make steel. And make stuff easyer and quicker.

I have a few explanations for this.

1. Aliens did come, and whatever ET tech could be used to move big blocks was readily available. Or was easyer to make or execute than mining and smelting or other metal production processes.
2. The advanced people/civilization needed all the metal available to leave earth and what was needed to leave but left behind(pyramids etc) was made out of stone. This would align with the theory that the pyramids are an energy harnessing structure.
3. A combination of the both

Now obviously there are human explanations, and some that at this point I am more inclined to believe. But this is ATS so lets ignore those

edit on 15-10-2012 by ubeenhad because: (no reason given)

The answer is found in the will. God's will is to give and receive. Evil takes and cares little for the consequences of the future. Can you name one technology that God created (Trees, bio-mechanical life...) that does not give back to nature? Stones and wood give back and do not take. As building materials, they are perfect for future existence and stones last for generations.

Enter mankind. Carbon has 6 protons, 6 neutrons and 6 electrons. It is our fruit of knowledge and the mark of mankind. We use it to build the world and it does not give back. Instead, it destroys. Isaiah said, if you know the end from the beginning, you know the entire story by perspective.

Here is the beginning.

Genesis3

2 The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”

That fruit is technology and Carbon.

Here is the End:

Revelation 13

18 This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man.[e-or of mankind] That number is 666.

Related Post

Related Thread - UNESCO and the new Carbon Standard

It seems we should have kept using stones and wood.