Egyptian Stone Vases-The Smoking Gun In The Advanced Technology Debate?

Originally posted by undo
info is accelerating. soon we either all be vindicated or they will wipe us and start over and in 6000 years from now, some other culture will trying to explain away our culture

There will be zillions of artifact to show we had a high tech civilization from kilometer long tunnels bored thru granite, ceramics, radioactives, mounds of plastic, brick, glass and other non perishables - not to mention all the gold and cut gems which will last until the crust is subducted

Originally posted by undo

ice age?
sometimes i wonder what these guys are thinking. did he not dot an "i" or something

In Egypt? Don't think so!

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
It's really as simple as that, you want to now shift focus to Dunn and ignore the real evidence. You and Hanslune are trying to be subtle but it's totally obvious you can't address the physical evidence.

The "evidence" has been addressed a hundred times here.

Of course, you have to actually read it...

Harte

Why do you keep telling me the feed rate evidence, tapered core and multiple axii bowl cuts have been addressed? none of that has been addressed let alone answered.

reply to post by Hanslune


hand work and high speed machining leave two distinctly different marks just as your guy who replicated the 12"X12" tablet says and he nor anyone else can make hand work look like high speed tooling.

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by Hanslune

 

hand work and high speed machining leave two distinctly different marks just as your guy who replicated the 12"X12" tablet says and he nor anyone else can make hand work look like high speed tooling.

Again you failed to answer my previous questions

What is the basis of Dunn's claim and who verified it and how?

Oh by the way he later reneged on the 'faster' when it was pointed out that was impossible and he changed it to 'greater'......did you read the link?

reply to post by Hanslune


Hey man, you should really lighten up a bit, and stop being so conservative.
You are the only guy in the thread who is absolute certain that everything is EXACTLY as we have been told.
How can you be so sure? Do you have any proof?

Deny ignorance much?

He provides decent evidence but they are still just theories.

His problem is he believes these theories to be absolute truths.

They are just Theories.

He seems to think other theories proposed that are not from the all mighty Hall Of Maat, are just a waste of time to even consider.

That all other theories must be wrong.

Only his is correct.

Yes, that is ignorance.

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
It's really as simple as that, you want to now shift focus to Dunn and ignore the real evidence. You and Hanslune are trying to be subtle but it's totally obvious you can't address the physical evidence.

The "evidence" has been addressed a hundred times here.

Of course, you have to actually read it...

Harte

Why do you keep telling me the feed rate evidence, tapered core and multiple axii bowl cuts have been addressed? none of that has been addressed let alone answered.

There exists no "feed rate evidence," as that is just a claim made by a person with an agenda.

Tapered cores result from the method used. Think about it. They're abrading stone with sand by turning a copper tube to force sand against the stone. Sand inside the tube also abrades the core, just like the sand outside the tube abrades the stone. The core gets tapered from this constant abrasion.

It's simple as hell, but you have to pause for a moment and think about it.

If you use a tube saw, you can choose whatever axis you want. Why do you think that this is exceptional?

Harte

Originally posted by mcx1942
He provides decent evidence but they are still just theories.

His problem is he believes these theories to be absolute truths.

They are just Theories.

He seems to think other theories proposed that are not from the all mighty Hall Of Maat, are just a waste of time to even consider.

That all other theories must be wrong.

Only his is correct.

Yes, that is ignorance.

You are even ignorant of ignorance.

Ignorance is when you choose to ignore the facts that are actually known because they don't fit your sparkly, feel good world view.

Harte

Originally posted by reef75
reply to post by Hanslune

 

Hey man, you should really lighten up a bit, and stop being so conservative.

reply to post by Harte



Wrong. I accept all theories as theories, not facts. I never once have said any of these theories are factual.

They are all theories.

Originally posted by mcx1942
reply to post by Harte

 

Wrong. I accept all theories as theories, not facts. I never once have said any of these theories are factual.

They are all theories.

But you will not accept the artwork, done by the Ancient Egyptians themselves, that shows they didn't use machines to make their stone bowls?

You refuse to acknowledge, multiple times, that the pharoahs would certainly have used this "machinery" in other areas in addition to stoneworking, such as making weapons, jewelry, homes, etc?

Ignorant.

Harte

Originally posted by mcx1942
He provides decent evidence but they are still just theories.

We talked about this before mcx1942 there are theories and then there are evidenced theories - there is a difference

His problem is he believes these theories to be absolute truths.

I'm sorry mcx1942 but you stated that before and I told you it was wrong, your repeating it is a deliberate lie. I would suggest you drop it

He seems to think other theories proposed that are not from the all mighty Hall Of Maat, are just a waste of time to even consider.

No from Egyptologist, geologist, archaeologists and other specialists, HoM is just a forum as was explained to you before

That all other theories must be wrong.

That is what the evidence shows - at present

Only his is correct.

Nope the evidence is what my opinions are based on, again you deliberately are misrepresenting my position

Yes, that is ignorance, yes mcx1942 is being ignorant of my position, please try to get it right in the future or I may have to unleast my powers of mockery and sarcasm - and dreaded things they are

More seriously you are developing a pattern of deliberately misrepresenting my position, this is your first warning

reply to post by Harte


I never said I 'refuse' to accept the evidence.

All though well put together evidence, it is still theoretical.

Just like all the other theories put forth for the history of Ancient Egypt.

I have logged all the information that Hans has provided under theoretical because that is what it is.

Originally posted by mcx1942
reply to post by Harte

 

I never said I 'refuse' to accept the evidence.

All though well put together evidence, it is still theoretical.

Just like all the other theories put forth for the history of Ancient Egypt.

I have logged all the information that Hans has provided under theoretical because that is what it is.

You don't seem to know what theory is and what fact is

There is a theory that the AE using advanced machinery or civilization 'x' made those vessels --- yep theory

There are stone vessels with the name and motif of the Pharaoh Peti engraved on them --- not a theory, FACT

There is a study that shows the characteristics of stone vessels changes over time, with some styles ceasing to be made and new ones being introduced.....not a theory, FACTS

I could go on but hey, I think you get the idea

reply to post by Hanslune


Ancient mariners used to use the heavens to efficiently guide their sailing trips even though their model had the Earth as the center of the universe, too.

Necessity is the mother of invention... with no explanation to accurately explain how these items were made they can easily fit their preconceived notions to the evidence no matter how contrived it is.

Did anyone else notice how lopsided that 30,000 year old vase was, pretty funny, not bad funny but you know, that's hard work..

Anyhow what would happen if you got the stone real hot, could you just scoop out big chunks. The reason I mention this is, that someone must of noticed, melted hot rocks lava.
Look at guys that work with glass, so what do you need fire, something that burns and air to make it burn hotter.

I know they used fire and water to make the stone break, explode.

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
reply to post by Hanslune

 

hand work and high speed machining leave two distinctly different marks just as your guy who replicated the 12"X12" tablet says and he nor anyone else can make hand work look like high speed tooling.

Again you failed to answer my previous questions

What is the basis of Dunn's claim and who verified it and how?

Oh by the way he later reneged on the 'faster' when it was pointed out that was impossible and he changed it to 'greater'......did you read the link?

in answer to your first question it was Dunn verifying Petrie's analysis. and secondly splitting hairs is another tactic you guys use to change the focus away from the gist of the subject. Both Petrie and Dunn agree that there are many points of evidence that the makers of these things used high speed tools and even Petrie at one point had no explanation how something was done. You want to drag this away from the meat and potatoes because it's as simple as this- the physical marks left by the manner of fabrication could not have been made from hand working the pieces. Are you saying they actually intentionally created the high speed marks by hand to make it look as though they used high speed equipment? that's foolish

Originally posted by TheKeyMaster


Necessity is the mother of invention... with no explanation to accurately explain how these items were made they can easily fit their preconceived notions to the evidence no matter how contrived it is.

one thing is certain concerning the evidence found on all sorts of stone work in Egypt, the makers used high speed tools and not only were the tools more sophisticated than just bamboo technology tvtropes.org... such as bow saws and sticks, but they must've had an incredibly sophisticated state of the art in order to reach such a high level of symmetry and consistency in quality. Not an easy task at such a large scale.

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by bottleslingguy
It's really as simple as that, you want to now shift focus to Dunn and ignore the real evidence. You and Hanslune are trying to be subtle but it's totally obvious you can't address the physical evidence.

The "evidence" has been addressed a hundred times here.

Of course, you have to actually read it...

Harte

Why do you keep telling me the feed rate evidence, tapered core and multiple axii bowl cuts have been addressed? none of that has been addressed let alone answered.

There exists no "feed rate evidence," as that is just a claim made by a person with an agenda.

Tapered cores result from the method used. Think about it. They're abrading stone with sand by turning a copper tube to force sand against the stone. Sand inside the tube also abrades the core, just like the sand outside the tube abrades the stone. The core gets tapered from this constant abrasion.

It's simple as hell, but you have to pause for a moment and think about it.

If you use a tube saw, you can choose whatever axis you want. Why do you think that this is exceptional?

Harte

from the Dunn link:

"It was not only evident in the holes that Petrie was studying, but on the cores cast aside by the masons who had done the trepanning. Regarding tool marks that left a spiral groove on a core taken out of a hole drilled into a piece of granite, he wrote, "the spiral of the cut sinks .100 inch in the circumference of 6 inches, or 1 in 60, a rate of ploughing out of the quartz and feldspar which is astonishing." After reading this, I had to agree with Petrie. This was an incredible feedrate (distance traveled per revolution of the drill) for drilling into any material, let alone granite. I was completely confounded as to how a drill could achieve this feedrate. Petrie was so astounded by these artifacts that he attempted to explain them at three different points in one chapter. To an engineer in the 1880’s, what Petrie was looking at was an anomaly. The characteristics of the holes, the cores that came out of them, and the tool marks indicated an impossibility. Three distinct characteristics of the hole and core, as illustrated, make the artifacts extremely remarkable. They are:

A taper on both the hole and the core.
A symmetrical helical groove following these tapers showing that the drill advanced into the granite at a feed rate of .100 inch per revolution of the drill.
The confounding fact that the spiral groove cut deeper through the quartz than through the softer feldspar.

In conventional machining the reverse would be the case. In 1983, Mr. Donald Rahn of Rahn Granite Surface Plate Co., Dayton, Ohio, told me that in drilling granite, diamond drills, rotating at 900 revolutions per minute, penetrate at the rate of 1 inch in 5 minutes. In 1996, Eric Leither of Trustone Corp, told me that these parameters haven't changed since then. The feedrate of modern drills, therefore, calculates to be .0002 inch per revolution, indicating that the ancient Egyptians were able to cut their granite with a feed rate that was 500 times greater or deeper per revolution of the drill than modern drills."