The Theory Of The Humongous Stones Thread

[FAX]

Whilst working this evening, I happened to have the TV tuned to the History Channel as they were re-airing a documentary on Ancient Aliens. Basically, it was the same old hash about huge, old monuments and the assumed difficulties involved in building them without the use of technology in some form or fashion ... blah, blah, ho hum, etc.

But then, all of a sudden, this one wacky dude made a statement that caught my attention. He said, "Why would the builders make their job so much more difficult by carving, transporting, and elevating these mammoth, individual stones?"

When you think about it, that's a darn good question. The weights we're talking about are formidable. For example, The Colossi of Memnon in Egypt are carved from two stones weighing an estimated 1000 tons each (some archaeologists peg them at 1200 tons each, actually).

Then there's the Stellae of Axum which weighs about 500 tons, the Ramesseum in Egypt which weighs in at an estimated 1000 tons, the 'Stone of the South' in Lebanon which is around 1200 tons, and the Unfinished Obelisk also in Egypt and also in the 1200 ton range. And these are just a few examples of enormous, megalithic stones which modern builders would have great difficulty manipulating in a construction setting.

The reason is that there are a variety of modern cranes rated to the 100- to 300-ton capacity. However, it takes a custom crane to lift anything beyond that tonnage. NASA, for example, had to build a custom crane with a lifting capacity of 430 tons to lift the shuttle. And, a New York engineering company has a specialty crane with a lift capacity of 500 tons that is used to lift other cranes to the top of high-rise construction sites. So far, I haven't identified any modern crane with the lift capacity to handle a 1000 ton rock. And, of course, that's just lifting ... not transporting, or manipulating the stone into place at the job site.

Okay, so these builders liked big rocks. I get that part. However, it's completely obvious that they could have used smaller stones that were easier to quarry, easier to transport, and far easier to use in construction to accomplish the same building objectives. So why did they choose to make their job so much more difficult by using these enormous stones?

The argument for many "ancient technology" theorists seems to be that the builders used big rocks because, for them, it just wasn't all that difficult ... in other words, they had super secret methods and means of which we modern dudes are unaware (like those used by the crazy Coral Castle guy, maybe).

I know that Planeteers understand building stuff, hauling stuff, and stacking stuff, so I thought I'd throw this thread out there to see what you guys think about the question. Is it possible that the ancients worked with megalithic stones because they had the ability to do so easily? Or, were they just making their slaves work their asses off for the sheer joy of it?

FAX

Disclaimers: Sorry if repost.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

Somewhat off subject here, but i don't think i wanna make a thread about it either.

Lets say, oh...20 years from now we develop a way to time travel. We time travel back 10,000 years into the past. While we are in the past, one of out time travelers drop a Year 2030 Nickel.

Then, in the year 2011, archeoligists discover this nickel.

Would the nickel be determined to be from the past, or the future? What would Carbon Dating show? How would this nickel fit in with any other artifacts from that area in that time period? How would that nickel change the future?

A nickel contains no carbon in which to date... the nickel changes nothing and the experiment is a failure...

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by KC Fish

A nickel contains no carbon in which to date... the nickel changes nothing and the experiment is a failure...

So then would it just be considered an artifact from 10,000 years ago with a year 2030 date and American scripture on it?

Would it show as evidence of time travel, or would we just dismiss it?

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

Somewhat off subject here, but i don't think i wanna make a thread about it either.

Lets say, oh...20 years from now we develop a way to time travel. We time travel back 10,000 years into the past. While we are in the past, one of out time travelers drop a Year 2030 Nickel.

Then, in the year 2011, archeoligists discover this nickel.

Would the nickel be determined to be from the past, or the future? What would Carbon Dating show? How would this nickel fit in with any other artifacts from that area in that time period? How would that nickel change the future?

And what would happen if the nickel was found by a peasant, invested in an aggressive bond fund for the next 9,800 years, and the wealth was used by the finder's descendant to fund the widescale marketing and sales of pocketless pants, which were then worn by the guy who dropped the nickel in the first place except now he wouldn't drop the nickel because it wasn't ever in his pocket?

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

So then would it just be considered an artifact from 10,000 years ago with a year 2030 date and American scripture on it?

Would it show as evidence of time travel, or would we just dismiss it?

It would be considered an artifact from the past. They wouldn't be able to tell any past age as far as I know.

I don't know how one would detect evidence of time travel. But carbon dating wouldn't really work to tell time travel like you're describing. An object would show the carbon decay over it's own lifetime, regardless of where it was on the timeline.

[Gonzo]

Originally Posted by Metrolike

His anus is pretty big, I hear.

Anus jokes ftl.
You're more clever than that, (I hope).

Now, toss my e-salad.
Posted via Mobile Device

[LaChapelle]

Is this another thread about Clayton

[Jenson71]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

If you believe in Dan's Brown theory, which is put forth in his latest novel "The Solomon Key", the Ancient Mysteries also include the forgotten and long lost power of the human mind and "collective consciousness".

He basically states that human beings when focusing on one event, whether it be prayer or moving 500 ton stones, can accomplish God-like "miracles" with the power of the human mind.

I just finished reading that (The Lost Symbol). He talked a lot about the Noetic Science stuff figuring this out again. There is such a thing as Noetic Science.

But . . . that's just not how atoms work like we can tell they do. I think it would be cool if it did work, but consider me a serious skeptic.

[bowener]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

Somewhat off subject here, but i don't think i wanna make a thread about it either.

Lets say, oh...20 years from now we develop a way to time travel. We time travel back 10,000 years into the past. While we are in the past, one of out time travelers drop a Year 2030 Nickel.

Then, in the year 2011, archeoligists discover this nickel.

Would the nickel be determined to be from the past, or the future? What would Carbon Dating show? How would this nickel fit in with any other artifacts from that area in that time period? How would that nickel change the future?

Well, as far as dating goes (can't be done, but lets say there is a way), the Nickel would show that it was 11,980 years old since it will have existed through that length of time. Now it is somewhat about semantics as far as being from the future or past. If we knew it was from the future I suppose it would be just that, a nickel that was created in 2030 but then left in the past. If we did not know it was from us in the future then I would assume we would say that it was from ~12,000 years ago.

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by bowener

Well, as far as dating goes (can't be done, but lets say there is a way), the Nickel would show that it was 11,980 years old since it will have existed through that length of time. Now it is somewhat about semantics as far as being from the future or past. If we knew it was from the future I suppose it would be just that, a nickel that was created in 2030 but then left in the past. If we did not know it was from us in the future then I would assume we would say that it was from ~12,000 years ago.

Even though it was dated to the year 2030 and looked like a modern coin and had refrences to modern America?

[-King-]

Originally Posted by Bill Lundberg

Yeah, this makes a lot of sense, except one thing. How did he get the pebble underneath that block?

[Goldmember]

Originally Posted by KcChiefsKing

Yeah, this makes a lot of sense, except one thing. How did he get the pebble underneath that block?

duh, he dug under it

[-King-]

Originally Posted by Goldmember

duh, he dug under it

I'm lost. He did it on concrete. He cant dig through the concrete.

[Goldmember]

Originally Posted by KcChiefsKing

I'm lost. He did it on concrete. He cant dig through the concrete.

some things just can't be explained

[Valiant]

Originally Posted by FAX

You'll change your tune when archaeologists dig up that big-ass ancient crane, Mr. Stewie.

Anyhow, have you ever seen the NOVA sponsored experiment and documentary in which a gaggle and a half of EngDs, master stonemasons, and Egyptologists attempted to quarry, transport, and elevate a 35 ton obelisk (not one of those 500 ton ones ... just a teensy one) using the materials and techniques the ancient Egyptians are believed to have used? The whole idea was to prove that it could be done.

It was very funny ... hilarious, really. A bunch of sweaty PhDs trying to screw a rock. They got nowhere. They couldn't even cut the stone, let alone move it an inch.

FAX

Funny, that old guy a couple videos up did it by himself.. Sometimes the easiest answer is the hardest..

[Valiant]

Originally Posted by KcChiefsKing

Yeah, this makes a lot of sense, except one thing. How did he get the pebble underneath that block?

I am guessing those wooden clamps.. Or hammer a wedge underneath it to insert the stone..