Re: Intent of the Ancients
Jean-Paul Turcaud
technique far more developed that the one even used now.
This ramp business is in line with Archaeologists completely brainwashed by
the Evolution theory, and the assumption of the linear progression of
technology. It is not so, and the Mountains Ranges of the World are the
demonstration of the terrible events the Earth went trough. Each time and
especially at that with the Alpine Surrection whole civilisation were
destroyed... and buried below 300 m of overburden, 1000 m of Magma and 10
000 m of Oceans !
According to the True Geology the whole Alpine Orogenesis occurred approx a
bare 12 000 years ago, and was done and over in about 6 HOURS for the most
part of the Andies, Rockies, Himalayas, Alps etc Surrection ( as well as
consecutive secondary surrection for Hercynian ranges ) Of course the
stabilisation of the Earth system took may be 40 years to recover stability,
about I million miles away from the Sun ...
The ludicrous theories elaborated by the Official Archaeology especially
concerning Egypt, the Gobi, and the Maraes remaining in the Pacific's, is
the result of crude Ignorant of the Mechanics of Physics ... and moreover of
Fluid Mechanics !!! Only "Back Engineering" applied to Unconsolidated
Sedimentation ( called wrongly Pleistocene by the way ) is able to throw a
proper light on Egypt 's History ! ... with of course all Deserts of the
world being the result of massive invasion of Sea already discriminated
deposition to wit : silt, sand, & heavy sands !
The present Deserts of the world were all laid through huge 2 000 m high
waves propelled at 400 km/h in terms of Fluid Dynamics ( and not by
Glaciers, fools ! ) ... and a study according to such well established
Principles of Engineering allows one to establish this .... as a result of
course the Imbecile Glaaaciatonzzz theories fall by the side with his
gnawing toady supporters indeed
As far as I can see, the present discourse of Archaeologists is akin to
Kindergarten level, estimating clouds origin to be the result of chimney
smoke, or sci000ntific discussion on the problem of Santa Claus 's
distribution of toys at Xmas time, and resolution of the tight time schedule
resulting. . Yep ! Same crude level !
I am afraid the present Universilities teachings of Oxford, Caltech, MIT and
other places of Stupid / Biased Learning, have done irremediable injuries
to the normal intellectual endowment of Mankind at large. This is
illustrated indeed in the impossibility of Archaeologists as well as present
Gogologists to understand a single silicate rounded pebbles genesis !
Pathetic indeed !
... + of course in the case at hand, Manganese nodules as we find spread in
the lowest course of the Nile.
Yep ! Something to be done about raising the crude primitive thinking level
of the present Archaeology Tribe !
+ indeed of course the bestial overall stupid approach of the present
Physics & Geology Dudes, unable indeed to come to term with UPL concepts
( Universal Pressure Laws ) Corner Stone of the True Geology.
So Pathetic now with that Relativities Schizophrenic Madness, the equivalent
indeed in Archaeology of the Great Pyramids Ramps !
What is really Sci000nce as taught in Universilities of the World ?
DAMNED IMBECILITIES FOR PRIMITIVE AND BRAINWASHED GOGOS ! Yep ! So True !
--
Jean-Paul Turcaud
Exploration Geologist
Discoverer and Legal Owner of Telfer, Nifty & Kintyre Mines
The Great Sandy Desert of Australia
Founder of the True Geology
~~ Ignorance Is The Cosmic Sin, The One Never Forgiven ! ~~
"Philip Deitiker" <Donev...@worlnet.att.net> a écrit dans le message de
news: pE8Ce.2796$5N3...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> After these rather futile arguments with Steve and Eric it is quickly
> realized that they are trying to discern the intent of the ancients
> without rationilizing what their intent was.
>
> Let us take the issue of the ramp for example. The intent is not to
> build a ramp, but to build a pyramid. Steve keeps bringing up the
> example of the stones, 70 of them, that weighed 70 tons each. 70 x 70
> = 4900 tons the great pyramid of Giza wieghed 4.9 million tons. About
> 1000 fold heavier.
>
> If the ancients built a ramp for carrying the large stones what was
> their intent.
>
> 1. To carry a single stone, tear down the ramp and rebuild it for
> smaller stones.
> 2. To carry only large stones on one ramp and all other stones on a
> smaller ramp.
> 3. To carry all stones on a ramp that can handle big and small
> stones.
>
>
> To address this question on has to think about this issue at hand,
> the pyramid is a layered structure, and the large and small stones go
> on some layers where as some layers only have small stones.
>
> The intent of the builder would then be obvious, to have a ramp for
> some layers that was capable of carrying large stones. Several ramp
> designs were given by douglas, at least a couple were adaptable to
> adjusting ramp height, at the base of the object, where all one needs
> is small stones, one does not need a ramp. At the tip of the object,
> also only need smaller stones
>
> We can't judge the intent of the builders before they need a large
> stone carrying ramp, however once they need one we can interpret this
> a meaning they would carry large and small stones on the same ramp
> until the larger ramp was not needed anymore, such as close to the
> top, in which case they could convert the final portions of the ramp
> to a smaller ramp.
>
> This differs obviously from the intent of showing the world one could
> surroung the pyramid with a great swimming pool, or jack stones up
> from an inner chamber. It also differs from the intent of lauching a
> ship or using a crane to hoist an air conditioner or pale of concrete
> over a building.
>
> We cannot make judgement about what the ancients would do, but on
> chosing between 1 and 3, we could conclude that a person might have a
> pyramid built in 5 or 6 lifetimes if they continued to make bad
> judgements like number 1. Needless to say some posters in this group
> will never be Pharoahs, let alone failing to gain a masters degree.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Philip
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> ____Groups_____
> Mol Anthro http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DNAanthro/
> Pal Anthro http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Paleoanthro/
> Arch. Aux http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sciarchauxilliary/
> Gliadin Sci http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/GliadinScience/
>
> ____Sites_____
> Mol. Evol. Hominids http://home.att.net/~DNAPaleoAnth/
> Evol. of Xchrom. http://home.att.net/~DNAPaleoAnth/xlinked.htm
Nobody
Sam Wormley
> No ramps were used to build the GP, and well as the 2 main others... another
> technique far more developed that the one even used now.
*plonk* and yet another killfile entry!
Nobody
http://www.softcom.net/users/vtown/oldcontent.html
These should keep you busy reading and
pondering on it all for the rest of the weekend.
Don't blow your mind and enjoy.
stevewhittet
"Philip Deitiker" <Donev...@worlnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:pE8Ce.2796$5N3...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> After these rather futile arguments with Steve and Eric it is quickly
> realized that they are trying to discern the intent of the ancients
> without rationilizing what their intent was.
>
> Let us take the issue of the ramp for example. The intent is not to
> build a ramp, but to build a pyramid.
Exactly.
Steve keeps bringing up the
> example of the stones, 70 of them, that weighed 70 tons each. 70 x 70
> = 4900 tons the great pyramid of Giza wieghed 4.9 million tons. About
> 1000 fold heavier.
The Egyptians built hundreds of pyramids and thousands of buildings without
the need for ramps. True the GP does have some very large stones in it
but that in and of itself does not require a ramp any more than the
number of stones requires a ramp.
I'm beginning to wonder if you think they had a code that required ramps ?
Perhaps they would have had no choice but to build them to provide
handicapped access for people in wheelchairs?
> If the ancients built a ramp for carrying the large stones what was their
intent.
If the ancients built a ramp.
If the ancients built a ramp for ___________________what was their intent.
If the ancients built _____ was it their intent to use it for carrying the
large stones
> 1. To carry a single stone, tear down the ramp and rebuild it for smaller
stones.
To carry a single stone,___________
Tear down the ramp because you don't need it to carry a single stone.
To carry [many] smaller stones __________
.
> 2. To carry only large stones on one ramp and all other stones on a
> smaller ramp.
To [lift] large stones ______
To carry all other stones ______
To carry stones on a ramp.
> 3. To carry all stones on a ramp that can handle big and small stones.
To [raise] all stones with a method _______that can handle big and small
stones.
> To address this question on has to think about this issue at hand,
Thinking is good, and a focus on the issues at hand is better.
(can you use the same method to lift a single heavy stone as to lift many
stones of various sizes)
(Is building a ramp that is larger than the structure you want to construct
a ramp a mile long and 481 feet high, a good choice of method)
> the pyramid is a layered structure, and the large and small stones go
> on some layers where as some layers only have small stones.
By layered structure you apparently mean its constructed of coursed masonry.
No argument there. The majority of it is constructed of what I would call
ordinary sized stones, simialr to those used in other structures like
Mastabas.
> The intent of the builder would then be obvious, to have a ramp for
> some layers that was capable of carrying large stones. Several ramp
> designs were given by douglas, at least a couple were adaptable to
> adjusting ramp height, at the base of the object, where all one needs
> is small stones, one does not need a ramp. At the tip of the object,
> also only need smaller stones
That word obvious often pokes up when people have selected the
plain vanilla in a cup without reading the rest of the choices on the menu.
The largest stones are at the base of the building and about halfway up
and were probably raised by dragging them to the center of the
building and lifting them from course to course as the building rose.
None of the ramps listed by Doug were higher than 7 meters
Typically Egyptian causeways were used to elevate funeral
processions enroute from a river to a mortuary chapel.
If you actually study the slips used to haul blocks out of quarrys
they are generally below grade.
Ramps such as the ascending and descending passages in Pyramids
and Mastabas were used for people to raise or lower themselves,
not to carry stones.
If you look at the images Doug provided, to rise to a height of 7 meters
the ramps were constructed about 60 feet wide. To understand why
I suggest you go google 'angle of repose'
>
> We can't judge the intent of the builders
You can state the truth and say nothing or
if you prefer speculation to judgement then
rather than observe what they did do you can
talk about what you think they could or would do.
> before they need a large stone carrying ramp,
> however once they need one we can interpret this
> a meaning they would carry large and small stones on the same ramp
> until the larger ramp was not needed anymore, such as close to the
> top, in which case they could convert the final portions of the ramp
> to a smaller ramp.
try substituting "method" for "ramp", the general sense would
then be that they might use more than one method depending
on the situation.
> This differs obviously from the intent of showing the world one could
> surroung the pyramid with a great swimming pool, or jack stones up
> from an inner chamber. It also differs from the intent of lauching a
> ship or using a crane to hoist an air conditioner or pale of concrete
> over a building.
There is that plain vanilla in a cup again.
> We cannot make judgement about what the ancients would do, but on
> chosing between 1 and 3, we could conclude that a person might have a
> pyramid built in 5 or 6 lifetimes if they continued to make bad
> judgements like number 1. Needless to say some posters in this group
> will never be Pharoahs, let alone failing to gain a masters degree.
Personally I think most people who have actually done any construction
would chose a solution involving elevating or lifting with tools like
crowbars,
wedges, jacks, cranes and cribbing over building a ramp but then I
am probably never going to be a Pharoah.
> --
> Philip
steve
Philip Deitiker
news:56udnY-bGpU...@adelphia.com:
> If the ancients built a ramp.
> If the ancients built a ramp for ___________________what was
> their intent.
Bowling, steve, bowling their intent was to make it easier for the
Pharoahs to bowl. Its better for you to believe that than to argue
with you.
> If the ancients built _____ was it their intent to
> use it for carrying the large stones
You cannot say that, because if their intent was to carry large
stones it could carry smaller stones also, so that the intent would
be redundant with another intent, and you could not separate the two
in the thinking of the builders.
I am not going to address the rest of your post, unfortunately you
ahve lent yourself to produce Stevenesk squink.
THe bottom line is this, as a pharoah you want to have a pyramid
built approximately by the time you die, not six pharoahs later.
Obviously their intent is for the pyramids to be built efficiently,
and their directive to the master builder is that it be built
efficiently. That master builder is going to be looking for
facilities with redundant functions. A ramp that can carry large
stones can carry small stones, and so it has two redundant functions.
It could also be used as a runway for F-16s, but and for bowling, but
we have to assume these other functions would be distractive in
nature.
To break down Intents.
Pharoah. pyramid built fast, fast means that the schemes are time
effecient and labor efficient
Builder. Labor wasted on ramp building for a 2 ramps, one with a size
of X and the other with a size of X + .30X means two ramps with size
2X + 0.3 or one redundant ramp of 1.3X, what are you going to choose
as a builder, simple question, no more squink and diversion?
John Sefton
There must be a formula that relates how
many killfiles you have to how good your
worldview is doing. The more, the worse,
until you just bury your head and keep it
there.
John
Veszpertin
narrow minded people in denial of the reality
before them. They are like automatrons that
let their computer live their Usenet lifes for
them.
I've never even bothered to learn how to use
a killfile and never will. If I don't care for a
post - I ignore it and read the next one and
so on.
Tom McDonald
You must be in a whole buttload of killfiles, on current
evidence. I bet you have a problem with Sam in general; lots of
self-absorbed oddballs do.
--
Tom McDonald
http://ahwhatdoiknow.blogspot.com/
Philip Deitiker
news:1121557295.3...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
> Exactly! Killfiles are for chicken shits and
> narrow minded people in denial of the reality
> before them. They are like automatrons that
> let their computer live their Usenet lifes for
> them.
How wonderfully sick you are. Have you been drinking from the same
water as
> I've never even bothered to learn how to use
> a killfile and never will. If I don't care for a
> post - I ignore it and read the next one and
> so on.
i.e. their too difficult for you to use, and so you want to bitch to
everyone who knows how to use one.
Ah well another clueless anonymous poster from AOL.
<PPPLLLOOONNNKKK>
Philip Deitiker
news:2FiCe.4541$wN3....@fe07.lga:
No, he is just another clueless idiot who doesn't know how to use
one. There is only one killfile, it can, however, have many names.
Jean-Paul Turcaud
Do you realise that some points of importance have been developed in my
previous post, and the responses are typical i.e. pitiful and pathetic as
could be expected !
I won't go over them all but will note only the following :
The Mechanics of formation of a "Rounded Silicate Pebble " ...is brushed as
of no importance by the brainwashed Official theories ruminating
sci000ntific cattle. Indeed what they have been taught, is that such was
obtained by Glaciers, Torrents, Rivers or Surf action.
In fact this is not ! Rounded Pebbles which always tend to be spherical in
shape can be obtained only by a Tumbling process, involving Auto-Erosion of
the whole sedimentary mass. Then, as can, be observed Granulometric
Distribution from the Silt up to the Erratics
Upstream from that are the Necessary Extraction of such pebbles which in
case of Intrusive rocks of the Granite, Diorite type or Metamorphic etc
would necessary imply :
A) Extraction through Blasting, Crushing,
B) RESUMPTION, Reduction of massive rocks corresponding to millions of tons
within of course such fluid environment allowing buoyancy,
C) RESUMPTION of the process, Crushing again of the mass in motion,
Continuous Mechanical Erosion
D) RESUMPTION, Granulometric Distribution etc etc ...
E) leading finally to the end productSS : Silt, sand, cobbles, pebbles in
Eskers, Drumlins, Moraines ... up to the Erratics of 6 km in length ...
AND ALL THIS ACCORDING TO FLUID DYNAMICS IN A VERY HIGH WATER COLUMN HEAD
WITH DRIVING AROUND 400 KM / H OF THE HETERO GRANULAR MASS IN MOTION ( water
& rocks )
... and what is opposed to that in the previous Crude Unversilities
Brainwashed Sci000ntific Beasts' post :
Killfiles,
Hollow Earth idiocies with regards to what I indicated being the foundation
of the True Geology i.e. the UPL !
Trying jokes !
.. and soon of course the Charpentier, Aggasiz, Buckland, Murchison,
theories
The problem I feel is not with coming up with a new Understanding or new
global Encompassing knowledge like say the UPL, or the EE theories, but
with trying to understand the process of :
Induced limitation in the Intelligence of the slow-learning tunnel-vision
Universilities-programmed Analytical-mad, narrow-minded SCIOONTIFIC MASS
PRODUCED BEASTS indeed !
Whatever the disciplines indeed, either Geology, Archaeology, Physics,
Ethnology etc and of course Theology or Sects Supported Faith, the
Sci000ntific Animal uses his limited intelligence for only ONE
PURPOSE : That is to support, abound in, and defend what has been foraged in
his little brain, and has become automatic responses to intellectual
stimuli. The whole problem of the sci000ntific Establishment and of his
Intellectual Slaves rests in the real difficulty in programming the
slow-learners in the one hand, and allowing such acquired basic knowledge to
become just a tool towards a Synthetic Approach of our environment past,
present & future !
Aristotelian programming leading to Platonic encompassing of the whole !
Possible or not possible ? This is the question since as it is, the changes
for the better are very slow, and are always the results of two concomitant
process : Firstly the death of the older Dudes and the forcing upon the
youngest ones of inescapable evidence. It takes then Centuries where only a
few minutes are necessary !
Hence as can be observed, at present and for still a long time, the Dudes
will repeat the tale about the GP ramps, the Glaciatons, the Continental
rafting, the Orogenesis in solid phase through Plates in collision
.........and of course will go with the 4 ridiculous admitted Forces in
Physics !
I hope I have been clear, Tom ?
--
Jean-Paul Turcaud
Exploration Geologist
Discoverer and Legal Owner of Telfer, Nifty & Kintyre Mines
The Great Sandy Desert of Australia
Founder of the True Geology
~~ Ignorance Is The Cosmic Sin, The One Never Forgiven ! ~~
"Tom McDonald" <tmcdon...@nohormelcharter.net> a écrit dans le message
de news: 2FiCe.4541$wN3....@fe07.lga...
John Sefton
Oddball?
I resemble that statement!!
You, sir, are a fart smeller- I mean a
smart feller.
No, I like Sam's posts in general.
I find them informative.
For instance, the report of redshifted
quasars interacting with nearby galaxies......
hello? Anybody home? That's a paradigm-shattering
observation, man!
John
Eric Stevens
<Donev...@worlnet.att.net> wrote:
>"stevewhittet" <whi...@adelphia.net> says in
>news:56udnY-bGpU...@adelphia.com:
>
>> If the ancients built a ramp.
>
>> If the ancients built a ramp for ___________________what was
>> their intent.
>
>Bowling, steve, bowling their intent was to make it easier for the
>Pharoahs to bowl. Its better for you to believe that than to argue
>with you.
>
>> If the ancients built _____ was it their intent to
>> use it for carrying the large stones
>
>You cannot say that, because if their intent was to carry large
>stones it could carry smaller stones also, so that the intent would
>be redundant with another intent, and you could not separate the two
>in the thinking of the builders.
>
>I am not going to address the rest of your post, unfortunately you
>ahve lent yourself to produce Stevenesk squink.
Deitiker-talk for Steve Whittet having both learned more and thought
more about the pyramids than our uniformed expert in everything.
>
>THe bottom line is this, as a pharoah you want to have a pyramid
>built approximately by the time you die, not six pharoahs later.
>Obviously their intent is for the pyramids to be built efficiently,
>and their directive to the master builder is that it be built
>efficiently. That master builder is going to be looking for
>facilities with redundant functions. A ramp that can carry large
>stones can carry small stones, and so it has two redundant functions.
>It could also be used as a runway for F-16s, but and for bowling, but
>we have to assume these other functions would be distractive in
>nature.
>
>To break down Intents.
>Pharoah. pyramid built fast, fast means that the schemes are time
>effecient and labor efficient
>Builder. Labor wasted on ramp building for a 2 ramps, one with a size
>of X and the other with a size of X + .30X means two ramps with size
>2X + 0.3 or one redundant ramp of 1.3X, what are you going to choose
>as a builder, simple question, no more squink and diversion?
>
I as a builder would choose a number of ramps to take the pyramid up
to about half-height of the pyramid. Their height would not be great,
nor would be their length. Hence, neither would be their volume. Not
too much work.
Why several ramps? Just calculate the rate at which blocks would have
to be moved onto the sire and you will see that there would be
impossible traffic problems with but one ramp.
I would build one ramp more solidly than the rest and use that to
transport the small number of heavy blocks.
This might get them to, say, tier 5. As the construction of tier 6
advanced across tier 5, I would build a one-tier temporary ramp (a
small volume) to get the blocks to the top of tier 6. Later, once tier
7 was under way I would use another one-tier ramp to get the blocks up
another tier.
I would probably run out of room before I got the heavy blocks to
their final height so at that stage I would start using a system of
levers of the kind which the Egyptians are known to have used.
Once I got the height of the pyramid to the limits of an economically
viable ramp I would switch to using a system of sheer legs to hoist
the vast number of smaller blocks up one level at a time.
For my long established views on the subject, see
<eQOaOJTqDFs2IaN+HO3mBALX6=V...@4ax.com> and
<c5bYOEMwZ8zfKB...@4ax.com>
Eric Stevens
Jean-Paul Turcaud
"Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> a écrit dans le message de news:
50qjd1l7mi9ekbp2v...@4ax.com...
>
> I would probably run out of room before I got the heavy blocks to
> their final height so at that stage I would start using a system of
> levers of the kind which the Egyptians are known to have used.
>
> Once I got the height of the pyramid to the limits of an economically
> viable ramp I would switch to using a system of sheer legs to hoist
> the vast number of smaller blocks up one level at a time.
>
> For my long established views on the subject, see
> <eQOaOJTqDFs2IaN+HO3mBALX6=V...@4ax.com> and
> <c5bYOEMwZ8zfKB...@4ax.com>
>
>
>
> Eric Stevens
... and what would be the purpose of it all, Eric ?
To make a tomb according to the Official tale ?
Since you are so good, how would you cut the Syenite and Basalt 70 tons
blocks, and dressed them so impeccably square & normal to each others,
than their size varies from less a 1/10th of a mm, and they fit all together
without cement. How would you that ? With a theodolite ?
... and cut them through ? with bronze tools ?
How many people to achieve it ? and what was the planning in your view ? 100
years or 200 years !
How long for extraction of a single 25 tons of Dolomite( nearly local ) ,
Syenite ( coming 400 km up stream ) and 70 tons Basalt blocks ( coming from
Nubia )
As a builder, surely you can give us figures, which Archaeologists unable to
work with their 10 fingers, and no mining, nor Civil engineering experience
cann't figure out !
Your little Archaeology hairy committee's findings should be matched now
with the Geologists and Physicists ... I am sure you do not object to this ?
Thanks
Jean-Paul Turcaud
"Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> a écrit dans le message de news:
50qjd1l7mi9ekbp2v...@4ax.com...
>
> I would probably run out of room before I got the heavy blocks to
> their final height so at that stage I would start using a system of
> levers of the kind which the Egyptians are known to have used.
>
> Once I got the height of the pyramid to the limits of an economically
> viable ramp I would switch to using a system of sheer legs to hoist
> the vast number of smaller blocks up one level at a time.
>
> For my long established views on the subject, see
> <eQOaOJTqDFs2IaN+HO3mBALX6=V...@4ax.com> and
> <c5bYOEMwZ8zfKB...@4ax.com>
>
>
>
> Eric Stevens
... and what would be the purpose of it all, Eric ?
To make a tomb according to the Official tale ?
Since you are so good, how would you cut the Syenite and Basalt 70 tons
blocks, and dressed them so impeccably square & normal to each others,
than their size varies from less a 1/10th of a mm, and they fit all together
without cement. How would you that ? With a theologise ?
Eric Stevens
<mining_...@com.yahřř> wrote:
>
>
>"Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> a écrit dans le message de news:
>50qjd1l7mi9ekbp2v...@4ax.com...
>>
>> I would probably run out of room before I got the heavy blocks to
>> their final height so at that stage I would start using a system of
>> levers of the kind which the Egyptians are known to have used.
>>
>> Once I got the height of the pyramid to the limits of an economically
>> viable ramp I would switch to using a system of sheer legs to hoist
>> the vast number of smaller blocks up one level at a time.
>>
>> For my long established views on the subject, see
>> <eQOaOJTqDFs2IaN+HO3mBALX6=V...@4ax.com> and
>> <c5bYOEMwZ8zfKB...@4ax.com>
>>
>>
>>
>> Eric Stevens
>
>... and what would be the purpose of it all, Eric ?
>To make a tomb according to the Official tale ?
>
>Since you are so good, how would you cut the Syenite and Basalt 70 tons
>blocks, and dressed them so impeccably square & normal to each others,
>than their size varies from less a 1/10th of a mm, and they fit all together
>without cement. How would you that ? With a theodolite ?
> ... and cut them through ? with bronze tools ?
I would dress them with hammers made of diorite until they were a
fairly good fit. Then I would place them together and run a saw made
not of bronze but of COPPER down between them to dress the high spots
off the contact faces. I haven't invented this technology. There is
unarguable evidence that this is what they did.
>
>How many people to achieve it ? and what was the planning in your view ? 100
>years or 200 years !
>How long for extraction of a single 25 tons of Dolomite( nearly local ) ,
>Syenite ( coming 400 km up stream ) and 70 tons Basalt blocks ( coming from
>Nubia )
>
>As a builder, surely you can give us figures, which Archaeologists unable to
>work with their 10 fingers, and no mining, nor Civil engineering experience
>cann't figure out !
>Your little Archaeology hairy committee's findings should be matched now
>with the Geologists and Physicists ... I am sure you do not object to this ?
>
To my amazement http://www.pubs.asce.org/ceonline/0699feat.html is
still there since 1999. My thanks to Doug Weller for originally
locating it.
Eric Stevens
Autymn D. C.
70 tons -> 70-ton
each others -> each other
Rambling foreigners get ignored fast.
Maybe they were made in a lava or steam vent?
I don't suppose you watch the Travel, History, or Discovery channel
shows about this kind of thing? Did you see the ton-blocks being
lifted by kites and scaffold? Did you see two men chipping and
scraping a huge boulder into a ball with round river stones in a week?
Jean-Paul Turcaud
are you foreigner ? 100 or more ?
I am indeed a great speller but a poor typist, hence !
The issue being the value of present rambling ( indeed ) Officialdom matched
against "Back engineering"
...but no use wasting my time, explaining to you what it means in term of
updating of present knowledge of our past.
Your mind is already frames and stratified on what is right and what is
wrong ! Hey ?
By the way, is it not a fact that you are a blattering Parrot of official
theories, with not nor never up to now original thought of your own.
Please reply on the very point !
--
Jean-Paul Turcaud
Exploration Geologist
Discoverer and Legal Owner of Telfer, Nifty & Kintyre Mines
The Great Sandy Desert of Australia
Founder of the True Geology
~~ Ignorance Is The Cosmic Sin, The One Never Forgiven ! ~~
"Autymn D. C." <lysd...@sbcglobal.net> a écrit dans le message de news:
1121598715.9...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Jean-Paul Turcaud
> On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 10:35:31 +0200, "Jean-Paul Turcaud"
"snip"
> I would dress them with hammers made of diorite until they were a
> fairly good fit. Then I would place them together and run a saw made
> not of bronze but of COPPER down between them to dress the high spots
> off the contact faces. I haven't invented this technology. There is
> unarguable evidence that this is what they did.
> Eric Stevens
>
Dear Eric;
Thank you for your reply.
Copper saw then ?
Marvellous !
Have you conducted Spectrophotogrammetry analysis ( my speciality once ) for
Copper on the sample chips taken on the Dolomite, Basalt and Syenite Great
Pyramid stones !
Or has it been conducted by others ?
Remember with Spectrophotometers we are working on ppm ... what are the
values obtained then ?
As well a nuclear Scanner would certainly give some clues on any of the
tools used.
Has this been done on the GP stones ?
Please advise. .
With kind regards
jp
Philip Deitiker
news:fgeCe.3646$5N3....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
Note: Steve did not answer the question.
This whole issue is predicated on the fact that the statement was
made that if the ancients built a ramp it would be inefficient
because the weight of 1 70 ton stone was 1/100th to 1/1000th of the
mass of the pyramid, therefore they would not use a ramp to carry the
stone. I tried to lay down the logic many times but Steve did not
understand, that if they were to Use a ramp, I repeat _IF_ they were
to use a ramp there would be no reason to assume that they would
build and utilize ramps in such an inefficient manner. So let me
restate the question again to Steve. Your a builder for a short lived
pharoah, you can build separate ramps for each stone size, or you can
build a single ramp for all stone sizes. Why would you waste your
time build ramps for a single stone, one stone size, when you could
build a ramp that could handle all stone sizes? I really expect an
answer, no more kooks from far off newsgroup spammed UseNet land.
Waiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Eric Stevens
See, for example:
http://www.geocities.com/unforbidden_geology/ancient_egyptian_copper_slabbing_saws.html
http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/timelines/topics/stonework.htm
http://www.geocities.com/unforbidden_geology/ancient_egyptian_copper_coring_drills.html
>
>With kind regards
>
> jp
>
> ~~ Ignorance Is The Cosmic Sin, The One Never Forgiven ! ~~
>
>
Eric Stevens
Eric Stevens
Steve said nothing of the kind. This discussion would be easier if you
did not invent the arguments which you are opposing.
>I tried to lay down the logic many times but Steve did not
>understand, that if they were to Use a ramp, I repeat _IF_ they were
>to use a ramp there would be no reason to assume that they would
>build and utilize ramps in such an inefficient manner. So let me
>restate the question again to Steve. Your a builder for a short lived
>pharoah, you can build separate ramps for each stone size, or you can
>build a single ramp for all stone sizes. Why would you waste your
>time build ramps for a single stone, one stone size, when you could
>build a ramp that could handle all stone sizes? I really expect an
>answer, no more kooks from far off newsgroup spammed UseNet land.
Hmmm. You don't know much about Steve Whittet, do you?
>Waiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>
Eric Stevens
stevewhittet
"Jean-Paul Turcaud" <mining_...@com.yahřř> wrote in message
news:42da1878$0$15576$8fcf...@news.wanadoo.fr...
>
>
> "Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> a écrit dans le message de news:
> 50qjd1l7mi9ekbp2v...@4ax.com...
> >
> > I would probably run out of room before I got the heavy blocks to
> > their final height so at that stage I would start using a system of
> > levers of the kind which the Egyptians are known to have used.
> >
> > Once I got the height of the pyramid to the limits of an economically
> > viable ramp I would switch to using a system of sheer legs to hoist
> > the vast number of smaller blocks up one level at a time.
> >
> > For my long established views on the subject, see
> > <eQOaOJTqDFs2IaN+HO3mBALX6=V...@4ax.com> and
> > <c5bYOEMwZ8zfKB...@4ax.com>
> >
> >
> >
> > Eric Stevens
>
> ... and what would be the purpose of it all, Eric ?
> To make a tomb according to the Official tale ?
To encourage other to let you fold them into your empire
and take the lead in business, religion, politics and commerce,
if helps to have some symbols of stability in your Public Buildings.
Stryutures like pyramids that involve a substantial investment on your part
reduce uncertainty as to whether you will still be around some years in the
future
and hence reduce the risk of investment on their part.
> Since you are so good, how would you cut the Syenite and Basalt 70 tons
> blocks, and dressed them so impeccably square & normal to each others,
> than their size varies from less a 1/10th of a mm, and they fit all
together
> without cement.
I think Eric already cited "Ancient Egyptian Construction and Architecture"
which does indeed answer those questions in some detail.
The present consensus is that the Granite was shaped with pounders,
sawn with abrasive saws, drilled, chiseled and generally worked by hand.
You can google all the pictures your heart desires of the tool marks.
How would you that ? With a theologise ?
> ... and cut them through ? with bronze tools ?
http://www.hallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=58
>
> How many people to achieve it ?
Estimates of the numbers of workers have varied but one good way
to break it down is by work site,
When Pharoahs needed stone they typically dispatched a couple of thousand
workers
to the the quarries where the stones were cut
There were also shipyards that built barges to transport the stones along
the river
Construction battalions employed to build worker housing and to supply them
with food lothing and shelter
More men were involved in obtaining wood for cribbing and scaffolds,
making and sharpening tools, designing and overseeing the work
All told a reasonable assessment is about 20,000 men laboring
for 20 years per pyramid with a total of a couple of hundred
pyramids being built over a spaan of a bout a millenia.
>and what was the planning in your view ? 100
> years or 200 years !
I would say the planning was probably ongoing and continuous
throughout the age of pyramids, or at a minimum through the first
couple of dozen dynasties
> How long for extraction of a single 25 tons of Dolomite( nearly local ) ,
> Syenite ( coming 400 km up stream ) and 70 tons Basalt blocks ( coming
from
> Nubia )
Reports vary but generally a round trip took about a month
> As a builder, surely you can give us figures, which Archaeologists unable
to
> work with their 10 fingers, and no mining, nor Civil engineering
experience
> cann't figure out !
I can give you figures, but the way I would chose to do that would be
to direct you where to find the original sources. You might have to
do some reading.
> Your little Archaeology hairy committee's findings should be matched now
> with the Geologists and Physicists ... I am sure you do not object to this
?
I guess it depends who you have in mind. I tend to evaluate my academics
more positively if they lack notoriety and don't have a book to sell.
>
> Thanks
>
>
> --
> Jean-Paul Turcaud
welcome,
regards,
steve
stevewhittet
"Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote in message
news:r5gld1hil2j78k9to...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 15:05:39 GMT, Philip Deitiker
> <Donev...@worlnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> >Philip Deitiker <Donev...@worlnet.att.net> says in
> >news:fgeCe.3646$5N3....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
> >
> >> "stevewhittet" <whi...@adelphia.net> says in
> >> news:56udnY-bGpU...@adelphia.com:
> Steve said nothing of the kind. This discussion would be easier if you
> did not invent the arguments which you are opposing.
> Hmmm. You don't know much about Steve Whittet, do you?
>
> >Waiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I'm just going to repeat Eric's comments. I think of him as worth listening
to.
If he want's to he can point you to some really interesting reading.
If you want to engage us productively you need to listen to what we tell
you.
If you pay close attention you will learn a lot about the ancient
worlds technology, there is a lot more to Egypt we can show you...
If you disagree with something, research the topic and respond to what
we said rather than substitute arguments we wouldn't touch.
Make the discussion easier on yourself so we spend more time
adding on something more besides and less time arguing.
> Eric Stevens
regards,
steve
Jean-Paul Turcaud
Thank you very much for the examples supplied
in the link
http://www.geocities.com/unforbidden_geology/ancient_egyptian_copper_slabbing_saws.html
and the 4th photo is presented a Basalt block.
First of all this block is NOT a basalt block indeed, but in all case an
acidic INTRUSIVE and most probably a Syenite.
that is unforgivable error and typical of Archaeologists of doing without
Geologists to the point of stupid assumption where correct appraisal are
need.
Secondly when you examine the cut, two things are patent and again have
escaped the intellectual approach of Archaeologists :
A) The escape end of the cut is VERTICAL, which is impossible with a saw,
but typical of a wire.
B) The attack of the rock was aborted and started lower, and in this
previous cutting attempt you will note the tool on one of the face, is not
on the same plane than as on the other face of the rock
Typical of a wire not sufficiently tensed ....
C) Typical of such cutting is the complete lack of planning & supervision
indeed ... nothing of the kind ever in the GP
D) If you use Copper tools you get Copper cuttings and a lot of it by your
own site conclusion. The Question now is : WHERE ARE THE COPPER CUTTINGS IN
THE QUARRIES ?
If recovered, those fallen with the rock cutting where not worth being
recovered for many obvious reasons THEN WHERE ARE THE COPPER CARBONATES AND
OXIDES WHERE THEY SHOULD BE NOW ???? Both on the faces of the rocks cuts and
in the quarries floors ! There are none ?
The other site shows primitive tools alleged to have been used by the
Egyptians for core drilling exploration
http://www.geocities.com/unforbidden_geology/ancient_egyptian_copper_coring_drills.html
with the 4th photo allegedly showing the result as a Granite Core !
I am sorry to say that only Archaeologist who have not field experience in
either percussion, and especially Diamond Drilling could be as grossly
stupid than to infer any relation between the two !
Just look at the groves mark on the side of the Granite core, what is
clearly seen by any Miner / Driller / Geologist / Physicist IS THE THREAD OF
THE DRILLING TOOL !
... and what is the pace of that tool drilling through a very hard stone
indeed.?
About 7 on Mohs' scale and Copper tool ? less than 3 since you scratch it
anytime with a piece of calcite ?
Well, the scale of the core is indicated but it is evident that the tool had
a very high penetration rate with a continuous spiral grove all through. No
mucking about indeed : Very High Pressure on the head or on the bit, High
speed and high penetration rate indeed ! ... and all this carried out with
hardness 3 tool on a hardness 7 material !!!
WHO DO YOU THINK YOU THE ARCHAEOLOGISTS ARE TRYING TO FOOLS WITH YOUR
UNENDING TRADELESS IDIOCIES !
I challenge any Archaeologist in the world and I backed in that by any
Geologist indeed, to show us how you are able to go Core drilling in Granite
with any Copper tools as well as cutting a slab of hard rock with Copper saw
!
The main Problem with Archaeologist is their crude & tradeless ignorance,
and further more as a result their incapacity at sorting chronologically the
building methods !
INDEED THE OLDEST ONES ARE THE MOST INVOLVED AND THE BLURRED UNDERSTANDING
OF SUCH FACT LEADS TO LUDICROUS CONCLUSIONS !
With best regards
--
Jean-Paul Turcaud
Exploration Geologist
Discoverer and Legal Owner of Telfer, Nifty & Kintyre Mines
The Great Sandy Desert of Australia
Founder of the True Geology
~~ Ignorance Is The Cosmic Sin, The One Never Forgiven ! ~~
"Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> a écrit dans le message de news:
d1fld1l0r207nulhj...@4ax.com...
Eric Stevens
Its not a continuous thread. It's not even a spiral. It shows the
pattern of reversals in rotation from the bow that drove the drill.
>... and what is the pace of that tool drilling through a very hard stone
>indeed.?
>About 7 on Mohs' scale and Copper tool ? less than 3 since you scratch it
>anytime with a piece of calcite ?
>Well, the scale of the core is indicated but it is evident that the tool had
>a very high penetration rate with a continuous spiral grove all through. No
>mucking about indeed : Very High Pressure on the head or on the bit, High
>speed and high penetration rate indeed ! ... and all this carried out with
>hardness 3 tool on a hardness 7 material !!!
>
>
>WHO DO YOU THINK YOU THE ARCHAEOLOGISTS ARE TRYING TO FOOLS WITH YOUR
>UNENDING TRADELESS IDIOCIES !
>
>I challenge any Archaeologist in the world and I backed in that by any
>Geologist indeed, to show us how you are able to go Core drilling in Granite
>with any Copper tools as well as cutting a slab of hard rock with Copper saw
>!
>
>The main Problem with Archaeologist is their crude & tradeless ignorance,
>and further more as a result their incapacity at sorting chronologically the
>building methods !
>INDEED THE OLDEST ONES ARE THE MOST INVOLVED AND THE BLURRED UNDERSTANDING
>OF SUCH FACT LEADS TO LUDICROUS CONCLUSIONS !
>
>With best regards
Eric Stevens
Jean-Paul Turcaud
as to recover it ?
Explain !
Hence, your bow tool is ludicrous for exploration and exploitation, just
good at the most to make a hole into a slab ALREADY FACED AND CUT ... and
at the most a foot I would say !
With such tool there is no way you could indeed get the core out of a blind
bore ! Yep !
Well it seemed to me, from the regularity of the groves, they were to be
assimilated to a thread. In any case, this would mean a very primitive and
Copper consuming way of boring a hole, since obviously wearing the tool at a
fastest rate that it would penetrate ! Building the GP alone with such tools
would have taken a 1000 years ... and more !
The GP builders had other type of instruments and knowledge.. and the
datations goes back according to the evident unconsolidated sedimentation of
the desert around, to a period anterior to that overlay !
..and the Syenite quarries of Ashuan or Syčne are filled with that material
.... and although the arguments regarding sand blown dunes is valid, where
is the sand coming in the first place, as well rounded pebbles cannot be
blown away... and the Egyptian desert is made of Erg and Reg as well.
There is no relation indeed in the making of the 3 great Pyramids, and all
the others are just pale and more recent imitation of such.
AGAIN then, have Archaeologists have been boring a hole in a Basalt or
Porphyry Granite say with their Copper boring tools ?
Have they be cutting such material with their Copper Saws too ?
I BET NONE EVER DID SO EXCEPT IN THE PAGES OF BOOKS !
jip
"Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> a écrit dans le message de news:
72pld11d5ms6a809s...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 00:49:33 +0200, "Jean-Paul Turcaud"
> <mining_...@com.yahřř> wrote:
"snip "
Philip Deitiker
news:8YSdnag6m4v...@adelphia.com:
>> Steve said nothing of the kind.
Oh, he didn't, Mr. Squink?
>> Hmmm. You don't know much about Steve Whittet, do you?
Actually I read quite a bit of the discussions from the past, for the
most part when Doug and he went at it, IMHO, Steve lost. While still
one step above the Stevens.
>> >Waiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>> >.
>
> I'm just going to repeat Eric's comments.
Your now the Elustrious Eric Stevens Playback Recorder. Let me remind
you Eric dance with even the filthiest of partners. He's played this
game before, he ussually looses. With that said and done, tell me
what is your answer, Herodotus? Or shall I dig up the coptic sources
describing how God instructed the Jews how to build the great
pyramid. Bad theories can appear in any century and by any one, hell
this group probably sets the record from really bad theories by a
single person. There are probably as many theories on how the
pyramids were built over the ages as there were fools to waste time
thinking about how it was built. I particularly like the one where
they are landing pads for alien space craft, ASCIP. Alien space
crafte impalers.
"
This whole issue is predicated on the fact that the statement was
made that if the ancients built a ramp it would be inefficient
because the weight of 1 70 ton stone was 1/100th to 1/1000th of the
mass of the pyramid, therefore they would not use a ramp to carry the
stone. I tried to lay down the logic many times but Steve did not
understand, that if they were to Use a ramp, I repeat _IF_ they were
to use a ramp there would be no reason to assume that they would
build and utilize ramps in such an inefficient manner. So let me
restate the question again to Steve. Your a builder for a short lived
pharoah, you can build separate ramps for each stone size, or you can
build a single ramp for all stone sizes. Why would you waste your
time build ramps for a single stone, one stone size, when you could
build a ramp that could handle all stone sizes? I really expect an
answer, no more kooks from far off newsgroup spammed UseNet land.
Eric Stevens
<Donev...@worlnet.att.net> wrote:
>This whole issue is predicated on the fact that the statement was
>made that if the ancients built a ramp it would be inefficient
>because the weight of 1 70 ton stone was 1/100th to 1/1000th of the
>mass of the pyramid, therefore they would not use a ramp to carry the
>stone.
You know very well that is not the argument.
I know very well that you will use a cloud of petulance to hide your
inability to produce a quotation to support that claim.
Eric Stevens
John Sefton
'they're', or 'they are', too difficult...
as English seems to be for you.
Is English your second language?
Perhaps your first is........let me
guess- Gibberish? Peckish? Ruffian?
:-)
John
Tedd Jacobs
pot.... kettle.... ?
as if.
John Roth
"Jean-Paul Turcaud" <mining_...@com.yahřř> wrote in message
> ... and what is the pace of that tool drilling through a very hard stone
> indeed.?
> About 7 on Mohs' scale and Copper tool ? less than 3 since you scratch it
> anytime with a piece of calcite ?
All of this tirade (most of it snipped) would be quite true
_if_ the tools were pure copper. The actual composition
is pretty much unknown - precise metalurgy was not a
specialty at that time.
I suspect that the tools are described as copper for the
simple reason that they weren't alloyed with tin, etc,
when they were smelted. It's more likely that the ores
contained something that hardened them substantially.
In a somewhat similar situation, people have been
puzzling over how Damascus steel was made for
literally centuries. It turns out that the "secret" was
ore from a specific bed that contained traces of
certain other substances in quantities small enough that
earlier analyses had dismissed them as trace contaminants.
Ref: Dec 1999 SciAm (I think that's the month.)
In the absense of a decent metalurgical analysis of the
artifacts, backed up by recreation of an actual saw
or whatever with the described properties, doing a
riff on the word "copper" is, at best, premature.
John Roth
Eric Stevens
Naturally the copper used in those days would by now be regarded as
'impure'. Also, towards the end of the middle period and the new
kingdom the Egyptians started to use bronzes of various kinds. However
the hardness of the copper/bronze is not the point at issue. It is
understood that the egyptians used sand as an abrasive and it was
this, embedded in the surface of the copper, which did the cutting.
Flinders Petrie was of the opinion that the egyptians used harder
materials than sand. See http://www.touregypt.net/petrie/c19.html
Eric Stevens
Autymn D. C.
I did reply on the points. You did not. Those experiments emulated
the technology of the rightful past. I disagree with lots of those
theories, and make my objections known on eGroups and lately here on
Usenet. You are thus a clueless liar.
By the way, here is one of my signatures I just wrote up:
(6/7) The French are daftlings. They think that the ampere is a basic
unit, when it's based on a coulomb a second, where coulomb is of
charge, a fundamental property likened to mass. One is electric load,
and the other gravitic load. (Charge is only French for load. To wit,
the English delegate Sears proposed ampere as the fourth base in 1935,
but the French committee believed him.) And they think that a comma
and dot can be exchanged in a number and still be grammatically
meaningful, and that punctuation can hang free with spaces on either
side as if it were an uttering. Then again, the other Europeans
mindlessly copied them. If only they made counting and the metric
sustem base-twelve, using our units, we would be on the ball. I'll fix
that in due time...
Autymn D. C.
Philip Deitiker
realized that they are trying to discern the intent of the ancients
without rationilizing what their intent was.
Let us take the issue of the ramp for example. The intent is not to
build a ramp, but to build a pyramid. Steve keeps bringing up the
example of the stones, 70 of them, that weighed 70 tons each. 70 x 70
= 4900 tons the great pyramid of Giza wieghed 4.9 million tons. About
1000 fold heavier.
If the ancients built a ramp for carrying the large stones what was
their intent.
1. To carry a single stone, tear down the ramp and rebuild it for
smaller stones.
2. To carry only large stones on one ramp and all other stones on a
smaller ramp.
3. To carry all stones on a ramp that can handle big and small
stones.
To address this question on has to think about this issue at hand,
the pyramid is a layered structure, and the large and small stones go
on some layers where as some layers only have small stones.
The intent of the builder would then be obvious, to have a ramp for
some layers that was capable of carrying large stones. Several ramp
designs were given by douglas, at least a couple were adaptable to
adjusting ramp height, at the base of the object, where all one needs
is small stones, one does not need a ramp. At the tip of the object,
also only need smaller stones
We can't judge the intent of the builders before they need a large
stone carrying ramp, however once they need one we can interpret this
a meaning they would carry large and small stones on the same ramp
until the larger ramp was not needed anymore, such as close to the
top, in which case they could convert the final portions of the ramp
to a smaller ramp.
This differs obviously from the intent of showing the world one could
surroung the pyramid with a great swimming pool, or jack stones up
from an inner chamber. It also differs from the intent of lauching a
ship or using a crane to hoist an air conditioner or pale of concrete
over a building.
We cannot make judgement about what the ancients would do, but on
chosing between 1 and 3, we could conclude that a person might have a
pyramid built in 5 or 6 lifetimes if they continued to make bad
judgements like number 1. Needless to say some posters in this group
will never be Pharoahs, let alone failing to gain a masters degree.