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.
Woodcarver
reply to post by Kantzveldt
There are an estimated 2.3 million blocks that make the great pyramid. What i have trouble wrapping my head around is, how long would it take to quarry 1 block on average. Or 100 blocks.
If we guess 1 hr on average to quarry, shape, move, and set each stone. (Im using 1 hr as a standard because its a nice round number. )
It would take approx 2.3m hrs. To build just the great pyramid
There are 8,760 hrs in 1 year
Divided into 2.3m = 263yrs.
So how long does it take to quary and set 1 block?
BobAthome
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
It would take approx 2.3m hrs.
1 block every 2.5 minutes
typical management.
2 minutes a block guys,,
what did the forman say?
1 min a block,, sorry but thats straight from the top.
yea.
DazDaKing
reply to post by Woodcarver
Thanks man, I just read your earlier post and can see you had a similar way of thinking about it.
The other day I saw something that genuinely made me 'snap' into releasing how real the cover-up is. I decided to randomly watch a documentary on the Sphinx, as it is a ridiculous thing. They didnt build this thing from the ground up, they cut a massssive square area out of the ground, significantly deep and built it from within that enclosure. I mean, all carbon dating tests on its outside give approx. 2500 BC era but the inner material and limestone core push it back to 4500-5000 BC! Not to mention an inventory 'Stella' found from the 4th dynasty period for the Sphinx that showed it was renovation work. Why are we ignoring the science and other evidence? We are doing the whole 'flat earth' thing again because we're/they're accustomed to an idea they don't want to let go for whatever reason (any of the 'sins' basically).
But anyway, this documentary was based around the geologists who first bought up the weather erosion problem. The Sphinx and its whole enclosure show rain erosion clearly, yet the outer area and the smaller limestone periods only show wind erosion. It seems to be generally accepted that Egypts been pretty dry since around. 10,000-5,000 BC. So the logic follows that the Sphinx should be at least ~5000 years old. They even did tests showing the saturation was twice as deep under the front of the sphinx (12 ft) compared to the rear. That means the front is older by atleast twice. Hence, the dates 2500 and 5000 BC crop up again.
You may of heard of this already, as I have a few times before seeing this, but the evidence really is obvious when you see the erosion up close and get comparisons. One of the geologists is a Harvard student who fully understood the implications of his research, so I trust his scientific method of the other tests to an extent, plus I know that various other intelligent and open minded geologists have backed this. They got blasted by the academic community, but the part that got me was seeing the 'Egyptologists' talk lol.
The director of the Giza plateau was just rambling loudly about how much nonsense these theories are and they have conclusive evidence Khufu built it in 2500 BC. But it is the way he presents himself, with that simple minded anger, and no actual detail of evidence but just the use of key words that made me release they really are perpetuating a lie on purpose. It's obvious isn't it. When you have scientific data after data, not to mention historical references (Herectodus with an Egyptian high priest) saying the great pyramid and sphinx were built by Shepard kings before the 1st dynasty - it makes you wonder doesn't it.
There's conclusive proof there's a rectangular chamber some metres under the front of the Sphinx, yet as far as I'm aware no attempt has been to reach it, the Giza authorities won't allow it. That is where the Hall of Records are meant to have been. It pisses me off because they think we're dumb. And if they have and it was 'empty', I simply could not buy it. Something's being kept secret for whatever reason. It all reminds me of the Vatican and whatever crazy history and knowledge is locked up in those archives.
edit on 6-12-2013 by DazDaKing because: (no reason given)
Hmmmmmmm
www.youtube.com...
Interesting video that shows how easy it is to move large heavy items with a little wood, some rope and a few men.
Remember, they used hemp ropes back then, much stronger than the junk we have to use now.
edit on 8-12-2013 by Hmmmmmmm because: (no reason given)
The concepts of levers and fulcrums were in use for many moons before heavy equipment took over. They surely understood these concepts in ancient Egypt, in fact, I would bet money they understood them better than we do today.
In the way we have become dependent on technology we have stopped using our analytical skills as much. We choose the easiest way instead of the smartest way.
I can't find it now but I read an article about some train cars that ended up in lake and all the heavy machinery they could find wasn't getting it done. So they hired a group/tribe (don't remember) who specialized in moving heavy items. Using only basic rapes and human powered tech they got the job done. I want to say it was in India, but I can't remember.
edit on 8-12-2013 by Hmmmmmmm because: (no reason given)