Why Can't others See?

[Minimalist]

Anto,


I suspect that you and I have found something to agree upon. I, too, dismiss the "tombs and tombs only" idea of the pyramids...certainly the Giza pyramids.


The "resurrection machine" idea is intriguing but, when applied to Giza certain obvious questions arise.

1- Why build 3 of them?

2- Why does only one have complex internal passageways?

3- Why is one about 1/3 the size of the other two?

4- How did they build them with ropes, copper chisels, and manpower?

[Beholden]

Archaeology - science - proves the original intent, as well as the historical record, and the contents of the pyramids themselves. Robert Schock and John Anthony West have both been totally and completely rebuffed, as well as Graham Hancock, if you're planning on bringing him up as well. None of them are archaeologists, and went into their respective investigations convinced ahead of time that they were right, and cherry-picked their evidence to fit.

People far more studied and dedicated than us lot have spent their lives researching and excavating to find the facts. Pseudoscience can be interesting, even fun, but it is not science, and only rarely uncovers accepted facts.

[Minimalist]

First off, there was always a dispute between West and Schoch because West wanted Schoch to go further back than he was willing to go. Schoch's date of 5000 BC is based on geology, climatic conditions and weathering. He also noted that first century mud brick mastabas do not show the same weathering that the limestone at the allegedly 4th dynasty Sphinx and the Sphinx enclosure wall show. A number of geologists have supported Schoch and one, Colin Reader, has tried to strike a compromise which only served to piss off the Egyptology Club. Schoch would have been better served by maintaining his earliest position which was, essentially: "I don't care who built it. I'm just telling you when it was built." His later suggestions about Jericho do nothing to change the geology but give Egyptologists something to shoot at but, that's his problem. Hancock has not claimed to be an archaeologist, Egyptologist or geologist but he is an educated man who can read the work of others and draw his own conclusions. I see nothing wrong with that.

There is an interesting little book out called "The First Americans" by Chris Hardaker. While it deals with the growing body of evidence that North America was settled prior to the so called "Clovis" people it also has a number of episodes which deal with the professional suicide of scholars who challenged the prevailing "Clovis First" paradigm. If you think that politics does not play a role in academia you are kidding yourself. What has changed, and this is thanks to the internet, is that it is no longer possible for a cadre of scholars to dictate what the truth is by making sure who gets grants and whose articles are published in the handful of professional journals. Someone once observed that "science advances one funeral at a time" a comment on the need to get the opinionated old war horses out of the way so new ideas can flourish. There does seem to be some of that in current Egyptology.

More than archaeology, my problem with Giza revolves around engineering. In a recent special, Bob Brier was touting the idea that the Great Pyramid was built by using a system of "internal ramps." (Zahi Hawass blasted that idea...predictably.) Brier though made a great case for dismissing the other possible methods. One big ramp would have been a project of even greater scale than the pyramid itself and there is no room to build such a ramp. Ramps sprawling around the edges would obscure the corners making it impossible for the architects to check their work. Machines to lift the stones one course at a time would take forever and there is no place to anchor them. So Brier trashed the 3 main ways and then Hawass trashed Brier's alternative. We are still left with no consensus on HOW these things were built. Yet, built they were.

The Egyptologists have a virtual equation for their tombs and tombs only view.

4th Dynasty Egyptians + primitive technology + manpower + 20 years = pyramid.

Any term in that equation can be attacked. Erich Von Daniken attacked them all! (Aliens with lasers did it very quickly!)

I would simply like to see them quarry a 70 ton granite block using dolomite hammers (as they propose) float it up the Nile on a primitive boat and then finish it to the tolerances shown in the Kings Chamber with what they claim is Old Kingdom technology and then raise it up some sort of ramp, by manpower, to a height of... let's be reasonable...70 feet. And let's see how long that takes.

They are big on assertions but not on experimentation.

[Anto Kennedy]

I don't have any quams with the prevailing theories concerning the construction of the pyramids. I'm more interested in why they were built.

1- Why build 3 of them?

There are quite a number of pyramids, and hundreds perhaps thousands more mastabas in Egypt alone. Take into account burial chamber construction throughout the world and you see a huge component of the ancients way of life, pretty much brushed aside by all but a few archaelogists.

Wants even more bizarre is that at this time, most cultures in the world didn't bury their dead, they cremated them.

As for your question, why build 3 of them? Well, this ritual is an important part of the individuals life. In the case of Egyptian nobility, having undergone the ritual is a signal of divine favour. To be honest, I think the pyramids step over the line, I feel they are a waste, like the elaborate cathedrals in certain major European cities.

2- Why does only one have complex internal passageways?

Each burial chamber has at least one passageway, made to look like the vaginal passageway. If there are more than one, then that's just the personal innovation of he particular architect. The actual construction of the burial chamber was as much a ritual as it's later use.

3- Why is one about 1/3 the size of the other two?

Same as I've said before, unique architects for each burial chamber and the wealth of the individual for whom the chamber is being built for are the main factors. Most burial chambers where built communally to be used quite a number of times though.

4- How did they build them with ropes, copper chisels, and manpower?

That's none of my concern, let the architects and engineers deal with that one. Although, don't underestimate human ingenuity and willpower (or Holy Willpower if you subscribe to such irrational views)

We put a man on the moon so pyramids shouldn't be a problem.

[FaithAffirmed]

Why can't others see? Well lets be respectful of the question. Why can't we see what the others see? If you're going to reduce beliefs down to a battle of opinions, then no one will win. What we can't combat is not religion, is not science, and not political issues. The one thing that the atheist have failed and will fail to combat is Faith. Although I lost mine I have every ounce of respect for it because its such a powerful tool.

[Minimalist]

There are quite a number of pyramids

True enough, and most of them post-date Giza and have collapsed into rubble because they were built like shit.

The 5th Dynasty "Pyramid" of Unas.

Well, this ritual is an important part of the individuals life

An assumption. I have a big problem with lazy archaeologists who instantaneously ascribe anything they do not understand to "ritual." Such a cop out answer. I suspect that in 10,000 years when future archaeologists find the remains of Mount Rushmore they will quickly identify the foundation of the Snack Bar and Gift Shop as a "mortuary" temple and decide that the sewage pipes were to catch the blood of sacrificial victims.

The actual construction of the burial chamber was as much a ritual as it's later use.

Still falling back on "ritual?" There is no comparison between the internal arrangements of the Giza Pyramids.

Khafre



Menkaure



as opposed to Khufu.

That's none of my concern

And you are certainly free to ignore tangible problems in favor of hypotheticals if you wish. But all the human willpower in the world does not explain HOW they did it. As someone once noted, moving 100 1-ton blocks is child's play when compared to moving a single, 100-ton block. I find the technical aspects far more interesting than the religious mumbo-jumbo but, that is why they make chocolate and vanilla ice cream.

[Anto Kennedy]

An assumption. I have a big problem with lazy archaeologists who instantaneously ascribe anything they do not understand to "ritual."

Excuse me? An assumption?

What, the resurrection ritual written onto the inner walls of the pyramids, written on the inside of sarcophogi? Assumption?

[Minimalist]

Excuse me but where is the "resurrection ritual" written in the Great Pyramid? It has all the decoration of a subway tunnel.

[loosescrews]

I think most believers do so because they fear an afterlife in an eternal lake of fire. How ludicrous.

[Ace Otana]

I think theists are more affraid of being wrong about the whole idea of an afterlife.