Thing is, some blocks were really somehow cut. And that they had such weights. And then they had to be somehow transported. Sometimes even very far away. Evidence for those events exist. What does not exist is evidence of tooling and consistent methods used. All there is available are sets of more or less extreme theories. And those in video are quite extreme too. They are simple, and workable, but require some extremes to work on given scale. Be it size+weight or time. What video mentions is "Atlantis" and it being sunk. Some historic record say that Egyptian technologies paled in sight of those on "Atlantis". While they downplayed this practically mythical land and made it into mere gas stop on way to America, it could be actually more plausible explanation. Those dudes on "Atlantis" could have been far beyond everyone at time. And depiction in video about sharp decline of technology across the Africa/Europe as this "Atlantis" sunk would actually point towards this place to be source of technologies used. And that Egyptians and others would not know all that was needed for the task or were not able to preserve know-how on their own. And if we were to believe about being technologically advanced and theories about sinking because they did something what critically failed... Then in a way, they could have been technologically far ahead even us. (In some ways.) But I think that at this point it is really not as important to have clear information about who and how, but to understand that we actually do not know. When we do not have actual records, it is best we can do. It is same as dead sea scrolls. Those have been translated over time. But nobody in public knows if all and if correctly. And it is like they do not even exist. Being ignored and not talked about. Would someone want to make some interesting movie, they can just go and read this and make something based on it.
Yeah, just last Thursday, I carried 8 tons block on my own. It was just 0.001mm, but I swear, I did it. Or maybe it was micro earthquake while I was leaning on it.
the blocks were drawn on sleighs, water was used to wetten the sand before the sleigh reducing friction. though not all of the pyramids are even solid limestone.
Keep in mind that the blocks varied in sizes. It would take a hell of a long time to cut all of them with such precision to make them fit so precisely that you cant even fit a razor blade in the gaps between them.
Geopolymers. They didn't move or haul anything, they crafted it on the spot using molds. edit: Can we do Antarctica next?
@Fox2232 Another thing mentioned in the vid, that the blocks, if cast on site did not have to dry out completely. They simply moved to the next blocks and so forth. By the time they dry, building on top of them would have commenced. Also the composition of the blocks was not exactly the same as the limestone from the quarries. Air bubbles were found in some of the pyramid block samples (consistent with the cast/mold theory). Also when the blocks were sufficiently dry (not completely dry), they would pull the wooden forms off, thus giving the sides of the blocks the rough texture. Splinters or wood particles were mentioned to be found embedded on some of the blocks sides. Heres a shorter vid that explains the differences in chemical composition of the pyramid blocks vs the limestone in the quarries.
All these theories are insulting to the Egyptians of old. I'm not talking about the Greeks or the Ottoman Empire that have changed the landscape genetically. I talking about the original Egyptians that actually had the know how to build that stuff. Some where it got lost in time. Probably the knowledge burned in the fire of Alexandria back in Caesar's day. Face it guys they were genius's. Alien's?... give me a break.
Everyone is looking at the pyramids from the wrong perspective. They were not built in the past. When looking at the pyramids we are looking at a civilization that has yet to be. We are looking at our future...what will be.
@alanm Main concrete problem is weight and time. We can play a lot of games around it. But I doubt anyone can persuade me that their concrete was better than what incomparable knowledge of chemistry enables people to make today. And while today, they tell you that 70% of curing is done within 48 hours, they also tell you to not put heavy weight on it for 4 weeks. And each layer of pyramid is pretty heavy. Now to the actual casting. How did they ensure that whatever material (likely wood) did not move to sides as they fill this barrier? Because this theory is not based on creation of XX tons bricks on site and then moving them to sides. It says that each block been cast into place where it would end up being. Sure, 1st one can be made with use of 4 barriers. What about one next to it? You use 3 barriers and one side is touching existing block. Then you have situations where only 2 barriers can be used. So, how do you exactly hold 2 barriers in place and prevent them from moving as you pour XX tons of concrete into this form? You know, all that downward force will push to sides. It is not by ropes. You can think about places where rope provides maximum force and where it provides almost no force depending on shape of entire floor. Then you have problem with time. If you could pour entire floor at same time, you are going to wait a month at best before you pour floor above it. But that's not the case here. One block at time. And it has to be hard enough to support itself as you remove barriers around it, otherwise your next block is not going to be touching it perfectly. And that enables you to play iterative game. Take 5mm graph paper with squares. And mark some zone. And count in how many iterations you can fill entire area with simple rule. You can't fill 2 adjacent squares at same time, because they are sharing edge/corner. (Barriers are too thick and therefore even corners can be ruined.) Remember that part of concrete theory about water availability? That's another constraint which forces you to work fast. While generally acknowledged theory like one @Astyanax spoken of has logistics limitation requiring manpower to reduce time. Concrete theory needs certain minimum time per block curing. And prevents you from placing 2 blocks next to each other in few days. That's physical/chemical limitation you can't work around. Otherwise that XX tons block collapses under own weight as you remove barriers which were holding concrete in shape. Imagine 2.3 million blocks poured (each directly into its final place) and time needed with this rule.
@Fox2232 Surprised you narrowed your focus on trivial, easily overcome challenges in the concrete theory compared to the much bigger challenges that the traditional theories presume (chisling, transporting, hoisting the blocks). The concrete theory is the most practical and logical way that anyone has been come up with to date. Because the precision required to cut massive blocks and place them perfectly level across each layer is too impractical to achieve and would not be stable due to imperfections that would hinder exact levelling. And this would be compounded when applied to 2 million blocks. Too much time and effort would be needed to cut that many blocks of varying sizes with the perfect precision required. But poured concrete is self-levelling with gravity and makes a perfect basis for the most stable structure possible. So what if they have to wait a few weeks for each layer to cure before building on top of it. There are around 200-210 layers of blocks in the Great Pyramid. Pretty sure that could be done in the 20 year estimate of how long it took to build it. Finally, you would think ppl test out their theories before propagating them. And indeed they have. Lime based concrete mixes of the same composition as the pyramid blocks were manufactured successfully for this theory and demonstrate it could be done on a mass scale.
It is not only question of layers. It is question of building it block by block as you can't cast two blocks next to each other in any way at same time. I'll give you simple task. Imagine floor and wall. Now, place in front of this wall, in any way, three barriers which will enable you to pour 1m^3 of liquid. That's 2.4 tons in case of concrete. How do you intend to hold barriers in place, so concrete will not push them in any way? - - - - As for the traditional theories. Their limit is man power. If you throw million people at it, it will get proportionally faster. Concrete theory scales little on productivity side even if you give it billion people.
I did. Can you answer my question now? It is question of what's not really on video. (Intentionally?) Why they show something, yet not show it in chronological order? There is no reason to obscure anything they are sure of.
Out of all alternate theories, this is the only one that makes some sense to me. Nothing else comes close. If ppl want to argue aliens or 2 million precision chiseled blocks of varying sizes, transported and hoisted into place, so be it.
Most old big civilisation could do that, they were not stupid... Asiatic (in actual china) were preventing sismic eartquake with special structure, in bronze era people were doing trade at over 3000 km range without GPS... etc... Archimede was knowing so much about our solar system that we get at the same point he get just before the race to the moon...And he has lot less ressource at his time. btw there is really interesting documentary, now that we can scan the inside and see the left inside on how they build, on national geographic and on the site of the new museum of cairo: Egyptian use workers, not slave, and were just very smart in the way to build and in the way to make mesurement... no alien tech (at least on the contruction lol).
Good case made against the geopolymer (and concrete) theory. Clear evidence that the large granite blocks or slabs were precision cut (rather than melted down).
