jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (40 posts)

Are we the most advanced society that ever was?

  1. janesix profile image61
    janesixposted 2 years ago

    We can build atomic bombs, particle accelerators and highway systems that span continents. But is this the height of civilization?

    What about places like the Giza Pyramid complex? We can't even match that given the technology we have today.

    Egyptologists make claims that the pyramids were built using copper chisels and pullys and logs. Which is, of course, impossible.

    Obviously they had some sort of technology that we do not possess today.

    What do you think that technology might have been?

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Copper chisels and pulleys and logs.  While you claim that is impossible, you offer no tests and no proof that it is. 

      We can, of course, build the pyramids today.  That we do not is an indication that the cost is too high, whether monetary, lives or other.  If we can cut blocks of marble from a mountain that are bigger then any pyramid block, take it to a factory and polish the surfaces to within microns (something the pyramid builders couldn't even measure or see, let alone do) we can build a pyramid.

      1. janesix profile image61
        janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        It might be possible to build some of the pyramids today. Some not though. There are some blocks that are too heavy to be lifted into place.

        Where is the infrastructure for the technology that was used? Not one crane has ever been found. Not one diamond drill. Where are the remains of the manufacturing plants for the tools?

        And yes, these things have been tested. Egyptologists and engineers have failed in experimenting with techniques such as rolling stone blocks on logs, using barges for transport, etc.

        1. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          We can lift 4.5 million pounds into near earth orbit but can't lift a 150,000 lb stone block a few yards in the air?  You've got to be kidding!

          Transportation?  A recent truck that went through my area was hauling over 800,000 pounds from Oregon to Canada.  A far more fragile load than a chunk of rock, I might add.

          http://s4.hubimg.com/u/8711831_f248.jpg

          You don't need a diamond drill to cut stone; spear points were chipped by little more than monkeys long before the pyramids were built.  And the infrastructure that WAS used is right before our eyes in the ruins of Egypt from that time period.

          Give the Egyptologists ten billion $$ to build a pyramid and I guarantee they can.  Or give them 100,000 slaves, a bunch of whips and 50 years.

          1. janesix profile image61
            janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Show me ONE example of ancient Egyptian ruins of a stone hauling truck, the factory that built the truck, ANYTHING of the infrastructure needed. You said it is located in the ruins of Egypt. Where? All we see is the end product, not the "stuff" that was needed to build it.

            I think any engineer with knowledge of construction would tell you that our cranes today can lift some blocks, up to a certain point. But there are some stones that are simply too big even for our current capabilities. Look at the stone in Balbeck. What crane could lift THAT thing? The might be able to lift the blocks, but also maneuvering them into place precisely would be a huge problem.

            And yes, there are places in Egypt where a diamond, or even a laser drill would be necessary. One place would be the coffer in the Kings Chamber of the great pyramid. There are plenty of structures that have precise cuts that can't be done with sanding and copper tools.

            1. wilderness profile image97
              wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              The logs have rotted away, unfortunately, but sticks, seeds and other things might remain.  There is sand (could be used to cut with).  Water is available (cut or lubricate).  There are bones, indicating muscle power.  There are chemicals.  There are remains of fire.  There are remnants of hammers and chisels.  There are vines (rope).  Lots and lots of things, if we can but figure out how they were used.

              Who said anything about cranes?  I do not think Egyptians then could build a crane to life an 80 ton block; it requires metallurgy.  But a ramp?  Sure.  Tilted logs from one level to another?  Sure.  Possibly (I doubt it) ropes with 10,000 people lifting it vertically, level by level.

              But there is not a single stone beyond our capability today.  The Taisun crane is capable of lifting 20,000 tons, or 250 of the pyramids 80 ton blocks all at the same time.  And if a crane were used maneuvering the block is not a problem at all.  http://gcaptain.com/building-the-worlds-largest-crane/

              The wild tales that we could not build a pyramid are just that; wild tales, usually promoting the idea that ET was here but left no technology in hundreds of years.

              Precise cuts can't be done by sanding?  Of course they can; final smoothing is almost always done by sanding (or it's equivalent depending on the material) with every cut. 

              Your coffer; I will give you just one suggestion that WILL work.  The coffer is granite; a stone that reacts with many acids.  So eat the gross form away with acid (most citrus fruits are acidic) and sand the last bit with silica from the desert.  Again, the point is not that that's how it was done, but that it could be done with technology available to the Egyptians of the time.  Heck, given 50 years you could wear it down by rubbing with hard wood blocks!

              1. janesix profile image61
                janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                You, and Egyptologists, still haven't provided a shred of PROOF that they were built this way.

                Logs? Where did they get that many logs?

                1. wilderness profile image97
                  wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  They got logs from forests; that's where they usually grow.  The area was not the total desert it is now but a lush, fertile valley.  The desert was created by an shift in axial tilt of the earth around 7,000 years ago; by 4,000 BC parts of the Sahara were drying but still quite fertile.  The banks of the river systems would have been quite lush.

                  But I don't need to prove exactly how it was done to thoroughly debunk the idea that there had to be ET's to help them.  Just show one possibility that did not require alien technology.

                  Still might have been ET, mind you.  Or Thor, Odin or even the Christian god.  There just isn't any particular reason to think it happened that way as there are other possibilities and zero evidence ET (god, etc.) was ever there.

                  1. janesix profile image61
                    janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Seriously? When did I mention extra terrestrials?

                    I think there were normal humans, with normal intelligence, with a type of technology we know nothing about.

                    My guess is a technology based on vibration or sonic energy of some kind. But I won't even go into that because it is only a vague guess.

                    About the trees: even Egyptologists don't suggest the logs used came from EGYPT. There is a theory(with no proof) that they were imported from Europe.

  2. Kathryn L Hill profile image83
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    And what about the amazing intricately carved stone sculptures and temples of India? I am with janesix. They had technology of some sort that we have no knowledge of today. Furthermore, most of our knowledge of electricity etc. came with us from the days of Atlantis. Manifestations of technological advancements is cyclical, in my opinion.

    1. janesix profile image61
      janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I agree, it is cyclical. We go from highly advanced to living in huts, and then back again.

    2. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Not knowing how they did something does NOT translate into knowing they had advanced technology.  It is amazing what can be done with very simple tools, skill and most of all time  We've forgotten, in our world of seconds and milliseconds, what it means to work on a single project for decades or even multiple lifetimes.

  3. calculus-geometry profile image87
    calculus-geometryposted 2 years ago

    The only advanced technology they had was extreme patience. They were all built as the archeological and historical records suggest they were built, but over a much longer time span than you might imagine.  These days a 50-story hotel complex is completed in a couple years, back then it would be decades.

    1. janesix profile image61
      janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      The Egyptologists say a lot of things.

      Such as the ancient Egyptians couldn't even figure out pi. When it is evident that they understood that and many other things, like the measurements of the Earth.

      I have trouble believing many things they say.

      1. wilderness profile image97
        wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        They recorded the digits of pi?  Or the diameter of the earth?  Where?

        1. janesix profile image61
          janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          In the design of the Great Pyramid.

          1. wilderness profile image97
            wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            pi refers to circles; the pyramid is square.  Fail.

            The pyramid does not reference in any way the approx. 8.000 miles of the earth.  Fail.

            Anywhere else it was recorded.

            1. janesix profile image61
              janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              That's the probably purpose of the Great pyramid. A teaching tool.

              It is encoded, throughout, with everything from pi to the Earth's circumference, to the exact number of days in a year. And many, many other things. One or two might be a coincidence, but not hundreds.

              1. wilderness profile image97
                wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                You keep saying that, that it is "encoded".  Where?  How? On which block?  Photos of the numerical sequence?  Records of the number of days in a year, to at least 2 decimals? 

                Where is the proof of all this?

                1. janesix profile image61
                  janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  I gave you one link. You can research from there if you would really like to find out.

                  Here is another good one

                  http://garyosborn.moonfruit.com/#/sacre … 4572231179

            2. janesix profile image61
              janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this
              1. wilderness profile image97
                wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                You know, if you draw enough squares, triangles, rectangles and circles you can find almost anything.  In this case obvious errors in the side angles (they vary by almost 4 degrees!) have resulted in a number that almost equals pi when the perimeter is divided by the heightX2.  For one pyramid; none of the others have that solution, perhaps because they didn't make such a bad error in construction.

                But Jansix, "encoded" does not normally mean that if you take enough equations at near random you will nearly always find a famous number.  That's like the bible thing with secret codes embedded, which applies to every book of decent length, not just the bible.  It's called coincidence.  If the Egyptians knew this stuff it would be recorded somewhere - if nothing else as a teaching tool, which the pyramids were NOT.

                1. janesix profile image61
                  janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  That is just an excuse for not wanting to actually look for the facts. Which are there. In front of your face.

      2. calculus-geometry profile image87
        calculus-geometryposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Whether or not an ancient civilization had a standard approximation of pi, or cleverly hid esoteric mathematical ratios in the construction of monuments, has no bearing on whether the monuments were built with advanced technology whose traces are mysteriously absent.  Theoretical mathematical knowledge does not imply advanced technology.  I have a math degree and can barely build a birdhouse.  smile

        I contend that since there is no evidence of them having advanced implements, the most logical explanation of how the monuments were built is with the primitive tools available and over a long period of time.  You know, Occam's Razor and all.

        1. janesix profile image61
          janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          It's not just "theoretical mathematical knowledge". They knew precisely the measurements of the Earth, the speed of light, advanced astronomical data.

          Erecting a monument of millions of tons, and with a footprint of 13 acres, and aligning it MORE accurately than our modern buildings are, can not be done with logs and copper chisels.

          It implies that they certainly had advanced technology to do this. Maybe it's something we have no idea of. Maybe they didn't need giant cranes. It could be so foreign to us that we wouldn't recognize it as technology.

          1. wilderness profile image97
            wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            It implies nothing, particularly as there are pretty bad construction errors (by today's standards) in the building of the pyramids.  Your own link shows that.

        2. janesix profile image61
          janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          http://www.gizapyramid.com/mehler%20new%20article.htm

          Evidence of advanced machining in ancient Egypt

          1. wilderness profile image97
            wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            One of the big ones seems to be a round hold in stone - several of these are show as being fantastic.

            A copper pipe or rod,  with some flint dust or flakes, will drill a perfectly round hole through even granite - one of the hardest stones known.  Draw around the pipe, score it to a shallow groove with flint and a hammer.  Sprinkle the dust/flake in the groove and turn the copper pipe with a rope, like you're trying to make a fire with a bow and stick.  Replace the flint as necessary.  Eventually (days/weeks depending on the thickness) you will have a perfectly round hole. 

            Not very advanced, I'd have to say.

            1. janesix profile image61
              janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Try drilling a copper tube through diorite, and see how far that will get you.

              1. wilderness profile image97
                wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                You miss the point - the copper isn't cutting anything.  The flint is, and flint is slightly harder that diorite.  Not that it has to be harder as it must be continually replaced by the "drill operator", but it helps.  We still use this basic technique today when cutting some materials.

                1. janesix profile image61
                  janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Ok. I admit I MIGHT be wrong. That video was pretty convincing. It's hard to look at that and still say they couldn't move stone blocks with very little effort and material.

                  1. wilderness profile image97
                    wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    It is, isn't it?  I loved the way he picked it up; that's something I never would have thought of.  Tipping it, yes, and maybe onto sand. But not picking it up via a teeter totter.

                    I also saw a TV show on a "hidden" pyramid where they had dramatizations.  One showed a big copper "saw" blade being used - after a shallow grove was chipped into the limestone with flint and flint particles spread into it.  The blade was smooth, with no teeth at all.  The show commented about 5 days to cut through a 2 ton block.

  4. tfox62@yahoo.com profile image81
    tfox62@yahoo.composted 2 years ago

    The proof lies within the complex of Coral Castle, located in Florida. The complex was designed to illustrate how there had been no extra outer life forces, used to build the great pyramids. Through a highly complex scientific method, one man had constructed coral castle out of stones that weigh thousands of pounds.  Typically people would say that he might have had newly powered tools, since the construction began around the turn of the century. But the very notion of that belief is far from the truth.
    What he had done in la-max terms, is use three logs, stood fast into the ground and then used the earths magnetic pool, to the advantage of the construction.

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Pretty cool - had to check it out.  And in so doing, found this video of a single man using nothing but muscle and gravity, standing a 20 ton block ALA stonehenge.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYQBDhkBfr0

      1. janesix profile image61
        janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        That WAS a pretty cool video.

        1. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Isn't it though?  Absolutely amazing what can be accomplished by a single person if they just understand what they are doing.  Working the construction industry, I've seen leverage and such used many times, sometimes in truly novel ways, but never anything like that.

          1. janesix profile image61
            janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Yes, it is.

            Now I have new and useful information to think about. You are always a great person to argue with:)

            1. wilderness profile image97
              wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              *shock*  Argue?!?!  Debate is the PC term, thank you very much! big_smile

 
working