Archaeologica.org

Minimalist wrote:

BUt what was time to an ancient Egyptian?

In one sense, nothing...in another sense, everything. Life was short and if they were really were building a pharaonic tomb they could never be sure when the Boss Hooter would drop dead.

Yes ... but we have examples of what they did when "boss hooter" dropped dead before the pyramid was finished.

I'll be back later ... I do have a life and my hubby has just made popcorn (not that nasty microwave crap .. the real stuff) and is putting a movie in....

Katherine Reece wrote:

Minimalist wrote: He stopped just short of calling Vyse a forger.

Oh please ... that argument was shown to be wrong years ago.

By the same people who hold to the 1 block every 4 minutes dogma?

Katherine Reece wrote:

Beagle wrote:I may be wrong here, and should go back and read it. I thought the issue began with the 20 year formula, which is seemingly impossible. Prior to that we were discussing how 40 ton stones could be moved. Which is a far cry from the 2.5 ton outer casing stones.

Please read the information I posted earlier from Lehner. And the AE moved stones at 40 tons much in the same way ....

Seriously...and please don't get insulted ... but y'all need to do some research most of the things you're pondering have been answered.

Btw Beagle .. I'm in Alabama ... did you know there's an AE exhibit in Nashville? Hawass was there a week and a half ago .. unfortunately I found out the day of the lecture he was giving which was too late to get tickets and get up there.

No insult taken Kat. I should explain where I'm coming from and I might save you from the effort of getting so many articles to me. You might have underestimated our former research juuuuuust a little.

BTW - I'm a retired professional - what most folks would call well educated. I have the time now to indulge myself in a lifetime interest. I've been to the Nashville Museums (they have much more than just Egyptology). I saw Ramses II in the Smithsonian back in '74. I toured the Edgar Cayce Institute for Research and Enlightnment in Virginia Beach. I decided for myself that they were crazy. As you know Hawass does business with them. He has a big job to do and I respect him for that but I am not a fan of his. I've seen many more things. I've also read "current, accepted theory" since I could read. Mainstream archaeology has forgotten that their theories are not "answers".

Let's go back to the early '90s. A new "discovery" was applauded and published in every mainstream journal. A new theory had no chance. In fact many good scientists have had their careers ruined because they did not agree with the status quo. Remember Virginia Steen-McIntyre - she had physical evidence that was abducted and hidden. Never seen again. And her career was ruined. She holds a Doctorate in geology.

But about that time - comes the internet, and the information age begins. That, Katherine, is a paradigm shift. Over the next decade I predict that the current models of history that we have always applied to these discussions will change a great deal. No one, scientist or otherwise, can be kept quiet now. Even crazy people like Os.

So let me say that I've kept up "pretty well" with things. Please don't feel insulted if I don't spend hours looking up articles in your website. That reminds me of the million trips to the library that I used to make. Now, for any question I have, there is google. Something with such a silly name
has changed the world so much. Plus by entering specific key words I get exactly what I want, rather than wading through a scientific article that "may" answer my question. And it comes with pictures too. (being silly there)

So, my sincere thanks Kat. I do have one question though. When all of you folks are over here, who's runnin' the store over there?

http://doernenburg.alien.de/alternativ/ ... yr03_e.php

The claim that Vyse forged the cartouche can be traced back to Sitchin.... this site shows what is wrong with these claims.

It should be noted that once Graham Hancock and John Anthony West also believed that Khufu's name had been forged. But after they'd seen the evidence and been in the chamber even they admited that there was no way that Vyse could have forged the name.

Beagle ...

If you don't want to read what I have to offer that is of course your choice. But please don't act like there are no explanations when there are.

And yes.. I'm familar with Virginia Steen-McIntyre .. I could say things about that as well ... ... but I don't think you'll listen.

Oh... and as far as who is minding the store? I type 100+ words a minute and I have an excellent system in place to keep up with things and a wonderful team. Thank you for your concern though! oh... is this your way of telling me you want me to leave?

A new theory had no chance.

LOL!! And yet friends of mine (amateurs! ~gasp~) have given lectures to academics challenging the status quo and have been well received. Forgive ME if I don't buy this old line....

Katherine Reece wrote:Beagle ...

If you don't want to read what I have to offer that is of course your choice. But please don't act like there are no explanations when there are.

And yes.. I'm familar with Virginia Steen-McIntyre .. I could say things about that as well ... ... but I don't think you'll listen.

Oh... and as far as who is minding the store? I type 100+ words a minute and I have an excellent system in place to keep up with things and a wonderful team. Thank you for your concern though!

Kat, I'll listen to anything you have to say. But you have rarely "said" anything. You have asked me to read your articles from your website. Check back for yourself - I am not exaggerating.

It seems that you're trying your best to "educate" me. I don't mean to be difficult but I'd rather enjoy the discussions that we have here. The Bosnia thread is the only contentious place here (well - there's Minimalist and Arch).

Enjoy our forum and understand that I am really not being unfriendly.

(well - there's Minimalist and Arch).

Down with the bible-thumpers!!!!!

Beagle wrote: Kat, I'll listen to anything you have to say. But you have rarely "said" anything. You have asked me to read your articles from your website. Check back for yourself - I am not exaggerating.

Actually from my website I've only linked to one thing ... as for linking to information why should I type out something that is already prepared with graphics and all references when all I have to do is provide a URL?

Forgive me but I don't understand the problem with that ...

Katherine Reece wrote:Beagle ...

If you don't want to read what I have to offer that is of course your choice. But please don't act like there are no explanations when there are.

And yes.. I'm familar with Virginia Steen-McIntyre .. I could say things about that as well ... ... but I don't think you'll listen.

Oh... and as far as who is minding the store? I type 100+ words a minute and I have an excellent system in place to keep up with things and a wonderful team. Thank you for your concern though! oh... is this your way of telling me you want me to leave?

A new theory had no chance.

LOL!! And yet friends of mine (amateurs! ~gasp~) have given lectures to academics challenging the status quo and have been well received. Forgive ME if I don't buy this old line....

WHOOPS!.....Katherine when I hit the quote button and began my last reply, you edited your post. That's not the first time that's happened here. Anyway, to respond to your question, of course I don't want you to leave. Not you or anybody. Even if I had the power to do that I wouldn't.

I will admit to you though - when you, Doug, Paul, and Irna all logged in at the same time (when you first came over), I was taken a bit aback. It was a genuine and concerted effort to make a point that you enjoy in your website. There is nothing wrong with that at all - but my immediate reaction was a little defensive. It seemed that you all were making an effort to re-educate the Bosnian thread. GOOD LUCK.

Anyway that was an initial reaction. I'm cool now. I'm glad you're here and I enjoy all of your posts. If any of you are "thin-skinned" you'll be in trouble in that other thread

Oh about the "amateurs"? That's what I'm talking about. Fantastic. But I was referring to the early '90s and the history for many decades prior.

Hi you all, here's a question for you...

What phase on pyramid construction do you think was the bottleneck that would slow all the process?

1) Block quarrying

2) Moving the blocks from the quarry to the pyramid base

3) Moving the blocks up the pyramid

4) Placing the blocks at the correct place (alignment etc.)

And one more question...

Have the blocks been analysed in order to determine in which order where they placed? I suppose that blocks that where quarried from the same place at the quarry must have similar characteristics, maybe drill marks or something like that...

And BTW:

Quote:
The ramp gets higher as the stones are piled higher until your at maximum height and the pyramid is over half finished. Then you start to bring them up and lower them down to complete the other half.



It seems that you would lose a lot of time rigging the ropes to lower the stone. Also, and I'm not an engineer, wouldn't you need a heavier stone going down to overcome the force of gravity acting on the stone moving up?

Yeah you need a heavier stone to move it all the way up, but a lighter stone helps.

But anyway I think Frank Harrist's idea is flawed. In the end it would require more effort than to just move up the blocks to their place, you're in fact moving up blocks just to move them down again ...hmmmm I'm sorry I don't have much time now so I can't put my mind on it and give a full answer!!!

It's easier to pull a stone up a ramp than to lift it straight up. It wouldn't be effortless, but it would be easier than just dragging it with no counterweight. They'd still have to drag it part of the way sometimes, but it would make things go quicker and easier. I still think my idea's right, at least part of the time. I'm sure they didn't do every stone exactly the same way. They could have several crews working at the same time as it was a big pyramid with plenty of work space.

Oh and BTW, just call me Frank.

I welcome the links that Katherine has posted. Unlike
Beagle, I don't mind having people trying to educate me.
In fact that's one of my aims in being on this bulletin board.
(That's the only way I can keep up with some of you!)

I've never been to Egypt, Bosnia, Peru, or a lot of other places we talk about here.
I stumble along, trying to figure it all out, trying to separate the gold from the dross. Sometimes I spot logical fallacies or things that just don't make sense, and maybe that is
what I bring to the board, if not hard information.

One thing I dislike about this kind of communication is that if I make several points in a post, only the last one is responded to. Makes me think people aren't reading very carefully. But it may mean that I "scored a point" and people don't want to admit it, and that is mildly insulting.

Best wishes to all! I love the forum.

Frank Harrist wrote:Oh and BTW, just call me Frank.

Hahahaha ok Frank, I just re-read your post and I think I didn't quite get it this time.

I have worked construction and you'd be surprised how quickly one can become very proficient at a repetitive task. I have no scanner so i can't illutrate my method. But you start on one side building up and back as you go up the first few stone will have to be manually wrestled into place then you can build the ramp and lower the stones down the back side and use their weight to pull stones up the ramp. The ramp gets higher as the stones are piled higher until your at maximum height and the pyramid is over half finished. Then you start to bring them up and lower them down to complete the other half. The proto pulley mounted on a kind of jib to place the blocks. Read the link about pullies and ramps that Kat posted earlier. I read that and an idea that had been in my head for years suddenly just crystalized and it was like a light coming on. It's so simple I don't know why somebody else hasn't come up with it before. It took the math formulas and shit to make it clear.

I understand that you're trying to use stones as counterweights in order to make it easier to move other stones up a ramp, and at the same time, use the counterweight stones as construction material in the lower parts of half a pyramid. You move one stone up, tie it to a rope through a pulley, then move it down to its place which is on the other half of the pyramid while at the same time you're pulling another stone block up the ramp. Repeat until the pyramid is finished.

Is that right?

BTW why is a ramp needed? couldn't they just move the blocks up the pyramid one step at a time? are the stones too heavy for this?

Have you heard of this theory? http://www-personal.umich.edu/~imladjov/Mladjov.pdf

stan wrote:I welcome the links that Katherine has posted. Unlike
Beagle, I don't mind having people trying to educate me.
In fact that's one of my aims in being on this bulletin board.
(That's the only way I can keep up with some of you!)

I've never been to Egypt, Bosnia, Peru, or a lot of other places we talk about here.
I stumble along, trying to figure it all out, trying to separate the gold from the dross. Sometimes I spot logical fallacies or things that just don't make sense, and maybe that is
what I bring to the board, if not hard information.

One thing I dislike about this kind of communication is that if I make several points in a post, only the last one is responded to. Makes me think people aren't reading very carefully. But it may mean that I "scored a point" and people don't want to admit it, and that is mildly insulting.

Best wishes to all! I love the forum.

I agree with you, Stan. I learn a lot here and sometimes I put in my two cents worth. I have read a lot and watched a lot of discovery and stuff like that, but I'm no expert at all. I could educate some of you on the Caddo culture, but on most other things I'm just learning from you guys and gals. I do regard myself as fairly intelligent so occasionally I come up with a theory or an idea which I believe has merit. I post them here and let ya'll pick the shit out of 'em. "Review by peers" so to speak. People spot the flaws.
Then there's Bob and Arch and their interminable argument. Sometimes good for a laugh and sometimes just the same old boring shit. Sometimes arch raises my ire and......oops off topic!