My proposed explanation for the great pyramids.

[sucahyo]

Another explanation, geopolymer, made the stone block using giant mold from clay polymer.

Chris Dunn wrongly believes he has disproved the geopolymer stone theory. Chris Dunn writes,

"I read about the poured rock theory in 1986. I thought at that time that there might have been something to it. That is until I actually began looking at the evidence. The poured stone theory does not explain all the artifacts in Egypt. To know this, all you have to do is look at the evidence with an understanding of how materials are poured, shaped and cut. If we look at the artifacts I describe in my book, and allow that they were made by pouring cement, or any other mixture that sets and hardens, there is one inescapable consideration that has to be made. The mold or form that is used needs to have the same shape as the final object. With respect to the contoured granite blocks on the Giza Plateau, these molds would need to be machined to a high precision. Considering, also, that the blocks are extremely heavy, weighing more than 6 tons in some cases, the form would need to be robust and able to withstand the pressures against their surfaces. A weak form, such as one made out of wood, would buckle under the weight and the precision would be lost. So what were the forms made of-and how were they created with such precise surfaces? Certainly not with primitive tools."

Margaret Morris replies to Chris Dunn: Again, we see Dunn's arguments arise from his misconception that the pyramid blocks had to be poured. It is true that Dr. Joseph Davidovits initially believed that pyramid blocks were cast into molds. The reason is that evidence shows that the blocks of Egypt's first pyramid, built for Pharaoh Zoser of the 3rd Dynasty, were cast into mud-brick molds. Consider the statement below by Dr. Dieter Arnold, of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Arnold's book, "Building in Egypt" (1991), is the most up-to-date Egyptological standard. Arnold writes:

'The blocks were small, and the stones were square and brick-shaped."

Dr. Davidovits continued to consider that the pyramid blocks were made in wooden molds after geologists found the impression of wood grain on the Lauer sample from the interior of the Great Pyramid. For instance, geologist Robert G. McKinney commented about the artificial nature of pyramid stone after I provided him with the Lauer sample (from the Ascending Passageway of the Great Pyramid and donated by Egyptologist J.P. Lauer) to examine:

"This is a very strange rock indeed, and does not exhibit properties which one normally sees together in a sedimentary rock...The rock underneath the coating exhibits a texture that is definitely wood grain."

After further study of the pyramid blocks, Dr. Davidovits changed his mind about the use of molds and began to consider that the blocks were built up like adobe, Egypt's oldest building material. This is possible because of the high early strength of geopolymerized rock. More details appear in my book, "The Egyptian Pyramid Mystery Is Solved!"
...
Chris Dunn adds, "Morris claims that the stone "can be shaped to perfection with primitive tools while still in the soft stage of setting." However, she doesn't describe the means necessary to guide the tool and produce a three-dimensional contour with a precision of .005 inch."

Margaret replies to Chris Dunn: If Dunn is alluding to the tight fit of the casing blocks, which fit as close as 1/800th of an inch or in perfect contact (see Petrie, "Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh," 1883), then Chris Dunn ignores the precision jointing that can be achieved when geopolymerized stone is packed against another geopolymerized stone that has set. With geopolymerization, there is very little shrinkage, so that the precision jointing is achieved. In fact, geopolymerization is the only logical explanation for the remarkable way casing blocks conform to each other (and to irregular blocks behind them), on all touching surfaces.

Chris Dunn tries to argue that his studies of measurements prove the existence of high technology. But logic and a great wealth of archaeological evidence tell us that advanced machine tools did not exist. To understand this, take a look at what Chris Dunn is asking us to believe. Chris Dunn proposes that all traces of machine tools disappeared from the Earth in a great cataclysm. This, Chris Dunn claims, is why there are no physical traces of machines, and no writings or drawings.

Hard stone artifacts like diorite vases appeared in Neolithic times (c. 7000 B.C.) and museums exhibit diorite items dating to the 26th Dynasty, i.e., the manufacture of hard stone items of the type Chris Dunn takes issue with range over several thousand years. Many items are inscribed, so there is no question about the periods they date to. For Chris Dunn's advanced machining theory to hold, machine tools would have to have been in use for several thousand years.

How can anyone believe that all physical traces of thousands of years worth of machines, and all traces of writings and drawings of these machines, disappeared without a trace? Using pliable stone eliminated the worst problems of shaping rock precisely. There is a great wealth of ancient documents that would have described or depicted Chris Dunn's machines if they existed. How can we believe that these machines were used in conjunction with the primitive tools we know existed? No great cataclysm spanned the long ages when hard stone artifacts of the type Chris Dunn takes issue with were made.

[sucahyo]

From Christoper Dunn's Giza power plant:
Advanced Machining in Ancient Egypt

I have contacted four precision granite manufacturers in the US and haven’t been able to find one who can do this kind of work. With Eric Leither of Tru-Stone Corp, I discussed in a letter the technical feasibility of creating several Egyptian artifacts, including the giant granite boxes found in the bedrock tunnels the temple of Serapeum at Saqqarra. He responded as follows:

"Dear Christopher,

First I would like to thank you for providing me with all the fascinating information. Most people never get the opportunity to take part in something like this. You mentioned to me that the box was derived from one solid block of granite. A piece of granite of that size is estimated to weigh 200,000 pounds if it was Sierra White granite which weighs approximately 175 lb. per cubic foot. If a piece of that size was available, the cost would be enormous. Just the raw piece of rock would cost somewhere in the area of $115,000.00. This price does not include cutting the block to size or any freight charges. The next obvious problem would be the transportation. There would be many special permits issued by the D.O.T. and would cost thousands of dollars. From the information that I gathered from your fax, the Egyptians moved this piece of granite nearly 500 miles. That is an incredible achievement for a society that existed hundreds of years ago."

Eric went on to say that his company did not have the equipment or capabilities to produce the boxes in this manner. He said that his company would create the boxes in 5 pieces, ship them to the customer and bolt them together on site.

[digitz]

HairBear: i've read the lost book of enki few days ago because of this thread, definitly a must !

Here are 2 interesting videos related to pyramids, energy and other stuff discussed here:

YouTube - The Holy Grail Vortex - Haarp and Egyptian Levitation Part 6 of 9

YouTube - The Physics of Crystals

[HairBear]

The Sumarians which were reputed to be the forefathers of the egyptians. At least the oldest known society to write in cunniform (however you spell it). It is interesting to me that they actually have the story of the bible with different names. And the translations include some very very interesting things. One of which they talk about the "gods" as knowing the flood was coming. They in fact were arguing about telling the humans about the event. But they decided to run without helping us except for one. They talk about two beings in this argument and I believe they were factions. One being benign and the other more emotional in nature.
I'll see if I can find the link again. It is an incredible story about the Father of Ra himself. The creator of Human kind. This I believe is in error. It could be he was the modifier of the current man (caveman) to be more capable of learning and actually this father was just that. He mixed his own genetics with women in the natural form (sex). This father loved the human race and wanted us to grow so he donated his own genetics to our ancestors.
Let me see if I can find the link.

"The Lost book Of Enki" by Zechariah Sitchin is exactly what you are looking for. Enki is RA's(ray not raw) Father. RA is also a prince. Enlil is Enki's half brother and the creator of Eden, his home. He explains so much more in this book. This is one of the best books I have read to date! I found a copy @ my local Barnes&Noble...

[Jbignes5]

Wow

I couldn't have said it better Rickoff. The problem that most people face is this. If the Egyptians didn't craft them then how exactly did they get made with such precision and with such mathematics to include all our our current knowledge of today. Like distances to the moon and tool crafting. Obviously most people don't care to learn any more then to scoff at the others that have learned a lot about these wonders.
If we are to believe that they were indeed crafted by someone else we must also believe that the Sumerian texts are in fact correct. They talk about a list of kings of the Sumerian civilization and to tell you the truth that list of kings is very very long. They estimate that in order to have such a list that they were in existence for over 400,000 years. Although I don't believe all of those years were on this planet. Leaving the fact that some of the texts refer to another planet in our solar system like I had suggested earlier. That asteroid field is in fact what is left of that planet as I mentioned before. Only now have I research the Sumerian texts and indeed they talk about this planet. Planet X I believe it was called by our current theorists. Some assume that this planet was very cold and they needed the resources to make it lush and capable of supporting life. I believe this theory and suggest that when their own supply of gold ran out they came to our planet for resources. Some also postulate that they got tired of mining it and decided to use the current for of man as a workforce but they didn't have the capability to learn as well as us today. This caused them to augment our ancestors with their own dna to boost our capability to learn. Unfortunately that also gave us the ability to say no and rebel once we attained a certain level of intelligence. I believe they intended to destroy us and thats where the flood came from. As far as mars in concerned I believe that was a hopping point to our planet and could have been a faction base that was trying to help both sides.
The evidence is there we just have to sit down and put it all together.

[rickoff]

Hi Rick;

With respect to the problem of carving and moving large blocks of stone in ancient Egypt I thought you would find these interesting, even though it is about the Romans moving them to Rome.

If they could make and erect obelisks like this, I think 60 ton stones would not be all that difficult by comparison.

Full article here;

Saudi Aramco World : A Forest of Obelisks

Al

That's an interesting article, Al, and I'm sure it is probably a fairly accurate account of the methods used by the Romans to move and erect the massive obelisks. As far as the article's conclusions about how and when these massive stones were originally quarried and erected in Egypt, that's pure speculation, though. As the article points out, "It is not known just when the Egyptians began to erect obelisks.." and that "Surprisingly little is known about how Egyptian engineers erected obelisks." The article then presents some theories as to how the obelisks were removed from the quarry, and how they may have been erected, but that's all they are - theories. Then too, moving and erecting the 330 ton Vatican obelisk, though a daunting task at the time, was a small feat compared to the moving of 80 ton blocks to the upper courses of the Great Pyramid. As the article concedes, "Fontana, of course, had immense advantages over the ancient Egyptians; he had iron tools, winches and pulleys. Still, it took him six months to move the Vatican Obelisk from beside the church to the center of the piazza. And this did not include the time spent constructing the scaffolding and clearing the site, operations which took another six months of feverish work. The project also involved the demolition of houses to clear the site, the ordering of immense quantities of hemp rope and required the construction of 40 huge winches." All that time and effort just to move one large stone a distance of 841 feet. Evidently, even with their advanced construction skills, the Romans were far inferior in ability and knowledge when compared to the engineering skills of those who originally created and erected the obelisks in Egypt, for nearly every one of these that was brought to Rome had at some point in time toppled over, with many having been broken as a result.

What amazes me most about the Great Pyramid is the granite components, and the level of engineering and craftsmanship skills that would have been required to produce them. Let's for a moment fast forward to the early 1900's, when the granite industry began to flourish in New Hampshire. The Swenson Company became the industry leader, eventually providing the granite for the Library of Congress, the Brooklyn Bridge, and the Pentagon. Even though they had the most advanced quarrying tools, equipment, and methods available at that time (anywhere from 4,500 to 12,500 + years after the Great Pyramid was constructed) David Swenson, a grandson of the company's founder, noted that, "Nothing is ever easy in granite." According to David, back when drilling was done by hand, days were long and discouraging because of poor breaks in the rock or spoiled patterns. To lose a pattern after many days of drilling was more than just a setback - it was costly." Now contrast this degree of difficulty to what the suggested methods were at the time the granite was quarried and prepared for the Great Pyramid. Do you suppose that the early Egyptians had drills, or that they simply quarried the granite blocks by pounding on the granite with 10 pound dolomite hammers, a method suggested by the "Forest of Obelisks" article? The red granite used in the Great Pyramid is one of the hardest and densest type of stone in the world. The mohs hardness rating of red granite is a 7, and is harder than steel, while dolomite is rated from 3.5 to 4 on the mohs scale of hardness. So dolomite is definitely out. I have read that many Egyptologists believe that the granite was worked with copper chisels, but that would seem ridiculous seeing as copper does not even approach the hardness of steel. The only naturally occuring material suitable for working red granite would have been Corundum (which the sapphire and ruby come from), with a mohs rating of 9, or diamonds, rated at 10. Today we have carbide tipped masonry drills which rival diamonds in hardness. The carbide can be manufactured to the exact shape and angle required for a drill tip or saw teeth, and brazed or laser welded in place. But can it be imagined that the Egyptians had developed the methods to prepare such drills or saws with sapphire, ruby, or diamond cutting edges? That's what would have been required to manufacture the granite components of the Great Pyramid. Take, for example, the large coffer of the Grand Chamber (which is erroneously referred to as a sarcophagus). There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that the coffer was ever used for the purpose of entombment. In fact, according to burial custom of the Egyptians, the use of the stone coffer for burial would have required the engraving of the deceased's name, titles, deeds, and history on the inside and out. No such engraving exists. Incidentally, and quite interestingly, the cubic capacity of the coffer is the same as Ark of Covenant made by Moses. The coffer is made of one solid piece of red granite. To cut this to size "would have required bronze saws 8 to 9 feet long set with teeth of sapphires," according to an analysis by Piazzi-Smyth, who also stated that microscopic analysis showed that the hollowing out of the interior of the coffer would had to have been done by repeatedly drilling into the granite with a fixed-point drill, using hard jewel bits and a drilling force of two tons. I think we can safely assume that the Egyptians did not develop such technology. If a people emerging from the Neolithic, or "New Stone Age," to the Bronze Age did in fact possess such technology, then I believe it could only have been gifted to them by far superior and highly advanced beings. Piazzi-Smyth contended that the Great Pyramid was designed by God Himself, a school of thought that still very much pervades throughout the world even to this day, and to which there is a great deal of supporting evidence revealed by characteristics of the pyramid that appear to coincide with Biblical events and prophesies. Could all of that be purely coincidental? I don't think so, any more than I would accept as coincidental the astounding number of geometric, geophysical, astronomical, and mathematical relationships pertaining to to the pyramid's structure and measurements. Indeed, the pyramid would appear to be nothing less than a standard that all other measures are derived from. Nothing about the Great Pyramid is coincidental or accidental.

Rick

[Jbignes5]

I started reading about...

The Sumarians which were reputed to be the forefathers of the egyptians. At least the oldest known society to write in cunniform (however you spell it). It is interesting to me that they actually have the story of the bible with different names. And the translations include some very very interesting things. One of which they talk about the "gods" as knowing the flood was coming. They in fact were arguing about telling the humans about the event. But they decided to run without helping us except for one. They talk about two beings in this argument and I believe they were factions. One being benign and the other more emotional in nature.
I'll see if I can find the link again. It is an incredible story about the Father of Ra himself. The creator of Human kind. This I believe is in error. It could be he was the modifier of the current man (caveman) to be more capable of learning and actually this father was just that. He mixed his own genetics with women in the natural form (sex). This father loved the human race and wanted us to grow so he donated his own genetics to our ancestors.
Let me see if I can find the link.

[sucahyo]

Because Egypt had a non-monetary economy...They did not play a part in the building of the pyramids...The pyramid blocks were hewn from quarries using stone and copper tools...The Egyptians did not use the wheel during the Pyramid Age...A lubricant may have been poured upon the road to reduce friction.

How do they know this? Too questionable statement. As if we can built a pyramid with technology lower then ours right now, when we can't even replicate what they are doing with our current technology. Note rick comment on laser precision, he just mention the measurement only, still don't mention the technology used to cut the stone. You can't laser cut very thick stone.

They wrote down their symbols for exactly what they wanted to express;

Are you saying that it is a "photo" of that time? I really can't imagine a king want to put a photo of his living room lamp at their wall.

Then you are really believing that the picture that I post is a picture of wireless lamp?

If you believe Champolion translation then it is too bad. I am a religius man, I even base my science understanding from my religion. So I respect every people that confirm it like keely and viktor schauberger. For ancient egypt history I certainly don't believe champolion translation because everyone use his translation can not find record of Moses, a foster brother of egypt king that then become his enemy. That event is too big to be not mentioned. More so with a super weird incident of split up sea. I highly doubt champolion follower can find the record of this event.

I found the conclusion below to be very weird.
Aspects of Life in Ancient Egypt

The gods are gone, so are the pharaohs, the language and the writing.

This is a convenient assumption to avoid any people still speaking the language to deny any wrong translation.

The list of king according to champolion do not include king in any holy book, and thus have to be seen as incorrect if you believe in your holy book. See champolion based translation here:
Ancient Egypt, by Sjef Willockx - An outline of the chronology of pharaonic Egypt
Ancient Egypt, by Sjef Willockx - Gods in the DZA

Alsaadawi give proof that is also supported by independent study, single wrong character can change the whole meaning, ptah should have been read as ftah (father). It also compare with credible work of Budge.
Proof that [Q3], the square hole, relates to (F) sound and not (P)
:

*4- Sound comparisons and etymology of Egyptian colloquial and Coptic words:
Few examples:
(Fasakh), equivalent to [Q3:O34:Aa1*D54], = elapse, pass, Budge EHD P. 232, 248 .. There is no Egyptian word that phones as (pasakh)!
(Fat), equivalent to [Q3-G40-X1], [Q3:X1-D54], = elapse, pass, Budge EHD P. 230, 253 .. There is no Egyptian word that phones as (pat)!!
(Fashesh), equivalent to [Q3:N37A:N37A]-D54, = crash, shatter, Budge EHD P. 251 .. There is no Egyptian word that phones as (pashesh)!

[Q3] has the value of (F) and it was turned to (P) during the Ptolemaic epoch when (phi) read roughly as (pi), yielding (Ftah) to (Ptah)!

Different translation result:
Rosetta-Stone-Alsaadawi - حجر رشيد أسامة السعداوي

this famous frequent AE word reads 'ftaH-mri', which exclusively means:

* then follow the peaceful creed of Abraham *

Egyptologists offered this word the meaning of 'beloved of PtaH' !!

But I think we fail to take into account what brute force coupled with simple ingenuity can accomplish as we have become to accustomed to using such machines as huge cranes to do our construction work.

The example you post do no explain how. And thus don't decide that it is simple.

then sawing down the joint which left both sides the same (matching)

What kind of saw has laser precision cutting?

I also find it odd that their drill bit broke. That type of stone is no problem for modern masonry type bits; and they only brought one bit?

After saying that do you still believe a saw can be use to cut the stone?

Further, there is no way to build a bulb of that size then or now, no matter how you power it, as he also explains.

Have you ever hear a story of queen bilkis raised his gaun when stepping on king solomon pool? I believe that story and thus I believe at that time there is technology high enough to build super transparent strong glass good enough to fool the queen eye. But I still don't buy the light bulb theory.

As light, remember that Tesla had at one time experiencing light that penetrate everything including copper shield and made his lab luminous but can not be captured on photos.

We'd be insulting the ancient Egyptians to suggest they didn't have the inventions of the winch and pulleys yet, when they possibly did apparently have barges and metal tools to even roughly produce square rocks. Like a 4000AD society questionning whether our cars needed to be bump-started each time, deduced from the fact that for some reason we used the same clumsy basic type of engine for over a century.

I believe technology at that time is advance not only on machine but also on non machine.

We know from the priests of the far east that they were able to lift heavy boulders up high mountains with the help of groups of various sounds. The knowledge of the various vibrations in the audio range demonstrates to a scientist of physics that a vibrating and condensed sound field can nullify the power of gravitation. Swedish engineer Olaf Alexanderson wrote about this phenomenon in the publication, Implosion No. 13. The following report is based on observations which were made only 20 years ago in Tibet. I have this report from civil engineer and flight manager, Henry Kjelson, a friend of mine. He later on included this report in his book The Lost Techniques.

That is not the only possible explanation, it is also possible that the musical instrument use is not to reduce gravity but to intruct the invisible carrier. I remember receiving email some years ago containing a video of lifting the top of a building with invisible carrier
YouTube - Pemindahan Kubah Masjid Di Desa Kailolo Indonesia

[Jbignes5]

Even though...

Even though some of the opinions talk about conventional ways to build them I highly doubt that when they are said to be made in the 10k bc era that they really didn't have that kind of technology. When man doesn't understand what is presented to him they tend to go for the best explanation with their current understandings of the events.
The problem I see there is that there is nothing to support their conclusions but then again we don't have support either but it seems to me that if you look at the whole period and how unique these pyramids are they just don't fit.
Remember I said to not focus on that exact time period. You need to pull back and look at everything we do know before and after.
We do know more about the period of time that we suspect made it necessary to make those structures. Even their stories of gods fit if one looked at it another way and the god part was taken out of the equation. If someone came and helped us and them out to stabilize the planet this would be the way we do things now or could do it if we needed to. Of course if they would come back now wouldn't they be godized again. Even though they were not.
All through our history man who knew things that the general public didn't know were held as saviors and put on a pedestal to admire as the saver of our current world. Man tends to believe that only gods would save them purely. The problem is they are not gods but purely benign beings who only care about our and then their well being.
Just some food for thought.
A lot in those links tend to guess at how they would attain that knowledge or have been given it by someone who only cared enough for us to help. Although there are a lot of things that were left to lead us to believe that there was another faction, weather they were from earth or not that did in fact have a higher understanding of the world or universe that we didn't have the understanding to give proper credit to. So as usual we put them on that godly pedestal because there magic saved us.

[ANTIQUER]

Hi Rick;

With respect to the problem of carving and moving large blocks of stone in ancient Egypt I thought you would find these interesting, even though it is about the Romans moving them to Rome.

If they could make and erect obelisks like this, I think 60 ton stones would not be all that difficult by comparison.

Full article here;

Saudi Aramco World : A Forest of Obelisks

Al

[ANTIQUER]

Hi Cloxxki;

I too had thought of winches and pulleys but there is no evidence they had knowledge of them.

Here is an excellent site showing the tools used and methods employed in building the pyramids. One of the best I have seen. The bibliography shows there is a lot of info. on this topic, but it is in books and not available on the web. I wish it were.

Aspects of Life in Ancient Egypt

Talk about labor intensive!

Al

[ANTIQUER]

Hi Jbignes5;

Thanks for the links. I have seen the World Mysteries one before, lots of good info. there.
As far as unique designs or elements in the Great pyramid, why not? As their building technology evolved you would expect to see new features emerge, especially as getting larger requires new and unique design and engineering changes. An example is building on solid bed rock and preparing it to support the immense weight.

The Red Moon Rising links are really good, I'll have to go back and read all the pages when I have more time. But what I did read confirmed much of what I had posted, like the evolution of the mythology of Osiris, and that was what took place just in the Old Kingdom. By the time they got to the last dynasty you could hardly keep track of all the gods and symbols that had been added. The summation on the last page about God and Jesus (7) is really interesting.

I stand corrected, they apparently did drill some holes and found sand. Maybe there is something else there, maybe not. I just find it odd that in 24 years there has been no more news about it, even though the Japanese team and the Gantenbrink team were there later working in the same area and said nothing about it.
I also find it odd that their drill bit broke. That type of stone is no problem for modern masonry type bits; and they only brought one bit?

The Search for Hidden Chambers on the Giza Plateau, Part IV: More Recent Investigations

Of course with the fanatical and tyrannical Z. Hawass in charge anything is possible, but as eager as he is about showing off new finds and claiming the glory I don't think he could keep quiet this long. That would also boost the tourist trade significantly and I know they want the revenue.
I hope more exploration will find something worthwhile that would shed light on the unanswered questions.

I look forward to more links from you.

Al

[rickoff]

....during daytime, the light from the pyramids could be seen as far away as Israel.

Yes, I have read that in several different sources, and that the dazzling reflection also would have been quite visible from the moon. Even at night, the Great Pyramid is said to have reflected moonlight so well that the light was a superb navigational aid for the Nile and the Mediterranean Sea.

Rick

[HairBear]

Free Masons

I see this discussion pointing to the Freemasons when any building process is in question. Even online, many lodges have easily accessible archives with a wealth of information. If any of you care to look in the future, you will find great books of old that you would not expect to find. These are true treasures of archived knowledge!

[ANTIQUER]

Hi Rick;

Sorry I mis-read your post, thought you were talking about the 4 edges that join up with other facing stones as per my reply.

There is a theory in a link I will post shortly that they are concave to make them look straight. It counteracts an optical illusion that would make them appear to bow outwards if they were actually straight.The longer the line or column you have, the deeper the concave measurement needed to offset the optical illusion.
Roman and Greek columns in particular have this same feature; it's easy to see they are slightly concave if you hold a string line from top to bottom, but they appear straight to the eye.

Al