Nungali

Now ... factor in how great their skills may have been and maybe we could reduce those numbers . How many guys does it take to turn, move or raise a giant block (with 'primitive techknowledgey ' ) ? One ! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCvx5gSnfW4

There is some evidence on blocks that the rope and sand method was used. One guy demonstrated it as a technique to get blocks to fit exactly; the rope and 'grit' is put between two already cut and stacked blocks and used to match surfaces as it is ground down. I sat for ages transfixed in New Zealand watching a Maori do the most intricate of stone carving with cotton thread and stone powder , the thread kept wearing out, but he would just move on to a new length and keep going. he had a few in his bag and would work on them all the time ( not having TV or the internet probably helped his time management )

Nice tools ...... check this guy;

You arent going to bring up Atlantis again ? ! Remember where we left off ? You were going to return with more pertinent info .... still waiting ! It is not a reasonable view at all IMO and indicates a certain lack of reason trumped by an emotive 'want to believe' . I assume that is a factor in your astrological makeup Okay .... I agree with you that that the Egyptians had advance technology ... they developed it ! If not, please explain where it came from ..... reasonably ... not by some fictional fantasy.

Dont even need diamond tip . I have a bag (left over from experiments) of topaz sand .... its about 1 and 1/2 times heaveier than beach sand and 'cuts' excellently . Of course they didnt use the copper blunt teeth of a saw to cut hard stone Use your noggin man ! Try thinking smarts like ... 'Think like an Egyptian" ! One of the most famous stones left behind is the Unfinished Obelisk, more than twice the size of any known obelisk ever raised. Quarrymen apparently abandoned the obelisk when fractures appeared in its sides. However, the stone, still attached to bedrock, gives important clues to how the ancients quarried granite. Archeologist Mark Lehner, a key member of nova expedition, crouches in a granite trench that abuts one side of the Unfinished Obelisk. Lehner holds a piece of dolerite similar to the kind that he and others believe Egyptian quarrymen used to pound out the trench around the edges of the obelisk. They then lifted the pulverized granite dust out of the trenches with baskets. Evidence also exists that workers pounded underneath the obelisk until the monument rested on a thin spine. Lehner says that huge levers were probably used to snap the obelisk from its spine, freeing it so it could be carved more finely and transported. Archeologists know that the ancient Egyptians had the skills to forge bronze and copper tools. Stonemason Roger Hopkins takes up a copper chisel, which works well when carving sandstone and limestone rock, to see if it might carve granite. "We're losing a lot of metal and very little stone is falling off," observes Hopkins, which is hardly the desired result. Hopkins' simple experiment makes this much clear: The Egyptians needed better tools than soft bronze and copper chisels to carve granite. As a young man, Denys Stocks was obsessed with the Egyptians. For the past 20 years, this ancient-tools specialist has been recreating tools the Egyptians might have used. He believes Egyptians were able to cut and carve granite by adding a dash of one of Egypt's most common materials: sand. "We're going to put sand inside the groove and we're going to put the saw on top of the sand," Stocks says. "Then we're going to let the sand do the cutting." read this and look at the pictures ; http://egyptraveluxe.blogspot.com.au/2011/12/add-caption-today-quarrymen-cut-and.html

. Not totally 100% sure of every technique they used but the evidence from a wide range of sources is pretty clear. You just need to study the science of it and not the fantasy of the uneducated about it ( like VonDanniken and Handcock ... they have been well exposed . quite some time back . Their proponents make as much sense as religious fanatics ... thats why people get so emotive about it and them. Thats what Egyptologists and others do , thats what I am doing here. You have to get an holistic picture. These building techniques are common all over the world ; giant slabs in Lebanon, massive architecture in Egypt, pyramids and massive stone blocks in Sth America, the Moai in Easter Island ( and there is a great case of evidence of 'stone pounding carving technique' ) Orkney Islands .... all progressed with similar stone techniques , being massive, and later in their history, they developed metal tools, blocks became less massive and the work not as good. Now, I know some will claim this as evidence of some alien or super or anti-diluviuan race going around instructing people ... but the time scales are way out ! So we either have to postulate that these are levels of human accomplishment and develop alongside human societies and discoveries at different stages at different times in different parts of the world or aliens went around and taught first the Egyptians and then others and thousands of years later the Mayans and Aztecs (while Europeans built cathedrals ) .... and then hundreds of years later came to Australia and started showing the Aboriginals how to carve stone channels through bedrock to link one watercourse with another to start the continents first aquaculture project. And not only that ... came and taught each group in stages hundreds of years apart ..... maybe they will be back soon to teach the aboriginals how to make those stone channels deeper and then undercut and remove a block and start making their own pyramids ? There is certain learning and development required to be able to properly analise the evidence aside from projecting ones desires into it. I highly recommend John Romer's Book 'Ancient Egypt - from the first farmers to the Great Pyramid' - its preface has a long section on interpreting empirical evidence without cultural or religious bias - an essential read for any serious student of the subject ! Just in case people dont realise - I am no way a materialist ... i used to love reading and believing in Von Daniken, Sitchin and all the rest ... they used to be my hero's ... until I started studying things with a more open mind. My thirst for knowledge was behind that, I wanted to learn all I could as well as what they wrote. But I know, subjects like this, when enflamed with near religious fervor will throw that out the window ... and it can become just as useless as a religious conversation is for some .

Oh right .... lets add "at high speed" Anyone else got some things I never claimed at at all to add to the mix to try and disprove things ? There is quite good evidence that round rocks (pounders ) were used to remove varve out massive blocks and people have demonstrated the process. A wooden stick is also 'efficient' and was used to cut and split many rocks. Try and figure it out yourself and see if you are a match for these ancient minds ... yes, they did use wooden sticks as part of the stone cutting process, try and work out how (as it seems you dont know ) . Or, you could just sit back in your modern superiority and smirk at all this. These are important stages in the development of the unique skill sets of 'mankind' and its development.

Do you really want to be buried in a landslide of very well accepted academic data about this ? Or are you going to still maintain it could have been aliens without offering any proof yourself ? If you walk past me holding a glass of wine and go into another room and I hear a smash and go in and you are standing there, and the glass is broken on the floor, I will assume you probably dropped it or something similar .... even though I never saw it happen .... as opposed to imagining a UFO went by the window and shot it out of your hand with a laser beam . But thats me ....

It is generally known that way before that and after it they used stone tools .... at one stage they had stone tools and copper mostly , but also had the use of iron. This 'copper only period' was soon superseded by bronze. You have gone from a claim of 'only had copper saws' too 'were limited to using copper, and later bronze and wood'. You aren't trying to move the goal posts are you Michael ?

But ... but ..... what if I am using a different calendar ? And scholars say jesus was born 3 AD .... and he died Friday afternoon and was resurrected by Sunday morning. ... however ... I did notice 3 easter Bunnies on my front lawn at dawn .

So Junko .... what did you get ? List presents below : (no new puppies or anything ? ) here is my present ( something more substantial this time ) : ...... hmmmm .... he seems a little un emotional ... there ya go ! Go Spokey ! Ooooh ! Urrrmmmm ...... oooops ! ..... "Highly illogical Captain ! " (too much 'birthday wine ' ? )

Well , you do have a Stewart's 'unmention button' dont you ? Oh wait .... Michael has one too ! But that would be abuse of power (It would more appropriate if he bribed you to do it . )

Most definitely my dear fellow ! And may I mention, it is pretty bad taste to bring attention to it again ... and repeat it .

Then there is the old Vedic 'Soma' ( not that I recommend it ..... unless you want to go on a Indra warlords ramage against the 'enemy' ! )

Great ! Spread it round !

and if the answer is yes ... hold that thought too . It isnt psychedelics that are known to be the addictive drugs, its the narcotics depressives and stimulants ... a different class altogether . besides, I am not claiming that it is essential. I havent used psychedelics in years and years ... and have no hunger for them. There are also a heap of practices I used to do that I dont anymore ... they 'bedded in' and I live in the experience I gained from them . If you stop your 'cultivation' do you think all the benefits you got from that practice (if it has been long term and balanced , so far ) will just evaporate ? or are you 'addicted to practice' and missing results ? Ummmm .... right dosage and good quality acid puts you in that state to do the practice for what is to come. Same as the related meditations and ceremonies ; 'practices' .... practicing for the 'real' event . I hope you realise what you wrote about, on that bardo, is illusory too ? This too shall die . It is the 2nd death ... astral death ... although, it can take some time for some , as you say 'lingering' . Maybe, again, dont be so quick with the LOLs and he he he You seemed to miss the point that here, good practice is being recommended .... not just advising people to dope out any which way ! and I am not advising anyone to do it either ... its just something that happened to me , and I was directed to do it the right way . A bit like the 'other thing that happened to me , when Kargu kama lamas 'got to me' an early age and threw me in (unbeknown by me at the time ) into VERY radical practices . irresponsible of them ..... or benevolent compassion ? For a while I thought the first , now I realise the second, and have unending gratitude . ...... but I dont need to go there everyday and become a monk .... I prefer to be my own type of monk ... its quite eclectic ... but gells ..... last Lama I talked to could 'dig it'. Well, it may not be , for you. If you feel that, dont do it .

Hope we dont mind a little diversion into archery ...... Karl is right here . The good thing is, when we research properly we can get things back ! Instead of playing with light sabers ... some of us can do this ! Go Lars !

here is the thing about 'copper only tools' (aside from the quote I made from Petrie , where he says bronze. ) Ummm ..... when was the Copper Age ? It goes ; Stone Age, Bronze Age, iron Age. Of course this a general division , iron was known and used in the Stone and Bronze Age ... even the Eskimo and Inuit had iron and made knives and tools out of it . Let's leave that one for some to guess how they got and used iron A lot of the time, stone and bronze tools were used together. It seems iron became more popular during the beginning of the Iron Age due to a few factors ( they already knew how to mine and extract it but inefficiently ) changed things, one being the 'collapse' of many Bronze Age societies around the same time and the disruption of tin supplies (needed to make bronze) . Iron was known in ancient Egypt, and used, but it was rare and valuable . Another interesting point is , if you use a tungsten steel chisel to work dirote, it is so hard it will eventually blunt the chisel. Have you ever tried to resharpen tungsten steel ? It isnt easy and it is time consuming. Soft steel is easier to sharpen, but blunts quicker. regardless of all this .... I still do not claim to know their actual full techniques .... and I still stand in awe ; Solid diorite;

Yes, I dont know how true this is but I heard the modern NASA techs cant comprehend how on earth people got to the Moon and back with that 'ancient '60s ' technology ! One thing the Pyramids do indicate is the amazing ability of human ingenuity and early social organisation . Many cant seem to realise that even 'primitive' man had this ability, in some areas, greater than we have today . Another great 'mystery' is the great and wide spread Sth American Empires ... based on foot travel .... it can seem incomprehensible to today's mind set ( so we postulate levitation or some sort of 'alien assistance' ... which, when one thinks about it , seems far stretched and little evidenced compared to the obvious answer a little research throws up .

And when he 'spoke' did he say happy birthday ? here is your present from Nungali ; (be careful opening it ..... and dont you peek Sternbach ! Its for Junko ... not you ( besides , you will busy running to the shops to get the present you 'didnt' forget ) http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view7/4086120/marilyn-monroe-kiss-o.gif

Oooo yeah Release Sarah Tonin ! ..... she is innocent ! I know it !

No, I would not put it that way, or so 'suggestively' , I was trying to offer some info from someone who was not writing about what they never experienced. You can say it as much as you want . Constant assertion doesnt make points of convincing in my discussions. Good karma ? You better explain what you mean by that .... and 'mind cultivation' ... and how such mind cultivation 'enables' one to 'experience various stages of consciousness ' ..... various stages of consciousness can be achieved many ways and need not be restricted to your 'mind cultivation' ... whatever that is That is a postulation that cant really be demonstrated . Besides any good or bad associated with 'karma' is a socio-cultural localised mores and taboos system. ... unless you are going to play some religious card here . I see , you are going to behave like that are you ? Or is it a case of lack of reading comprehension ? I said lack of vitamins can change consciousness ... not vitamins equate to psychedelic drugs . You are trying to twist things ..... nice ! Good for you ... great story .... Mr LOL LOL . Also I dont get your grammar /syntax , eg. " So as many of you here. " tacked onto the end of that . What does that mean ? .... as many of you here have ? and the stuff you wrote before it . I am not American nor experienced 'American teen ' . I see . you made that up ... and now you are going to run with it ... hmmmm ? Oh. smart move there ... that 'got me' Dude ! The vitamin comment was in relation to your comment about Rhodia rosa ... Are you saying Rhodia rosa is like psychedelic drugs !!! Surely you not advocating drug usage !!!!!! (annoying isnt it ? ) Ho hum ... another rave against me starting from a wrong postulation and a misquote of what I said . Is this a past time for some people ?

So you want me to do the work do you ? Ai yi yi ! Ya lazy bum ! The following extracts are taken from Chapter VIII entitled "Mechanical Methods" in Petrie's classic reference work "The Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh". They concern some of his findings at 'Gizeh' during the winters of 1880 and 1881. "The methods employed by the Egyptians in cutting the hard stones which they so frequently worked, have long remained undetermined. Various suggestions have been made, some very impractical; but no actual proofs of the tools employed, or the manner of using them, have been obtained..." BUT ... re 'saws' drills , etc : "The typical method of working hard stones - such as granite, diorite, basalt, etc.- was by means of bronze tools; these were set with cutting points, far harder than the quartz which was operated on. The material of these cutting points is yet undetermined; but only five substances are possible - beryl, topaz, chrysoberyl, corindum or sapphire, and diamond. The character of the work would certainly seem to point to diamond as being the cutting jewel; and only the considerations of its rarity in general,...interfer with this conclusion." " Many nations,..., are in the habit of cutting hard materials by mean of a soft substance (as copper, wood, horn etc.), with a hard powder applied to it; the powder sticks in the basis employed, and this being scraped over the stone to be cut, so wears it away. Many persons have therefore very readily assumed(as I myself did at first) that this method must necessarily have been used by the Egyptians; and that it would suffice to produce all the examples now collected. Such, however, is far from being the case; though no doubt in alabastar, and other soft stones, this method was employed." "That the Egyptians were acquainted with a cutting jewel far harder than quartz, and that they used this jewel as a sharp pointed graver, is put beyond doubt by the diorite bowls with inscriptions of the fourth dynasty, of which I found fragments at Gizeh; as well as the scratches on polished granite of Ptolemaic age at San. The hieroglyphs are incised, with a very fre-cutting point; they are not scraped or ground out, but are ploughed through the diorite, with rough edges to the line. As the lines are only 1/150 inch wide (the figures being about .2 long), it is evidence that the cutting point must have been much harder than quartz; and tough enough not to splinter when so fine an edge was being employed, probably only 1/200 inch wide. Parallel lines are graved only 1/30 inch apart from centre to centre." "We therefore need have no hesitation in allowing that the graving out of lines in hard stones by jewel points, was a well known art. And when we find on the surfaces of the saw-cuts in diorite, grooves as deep as 1/100 inch, it appears far more likely that such were produced by fixed jewel points in the saw, than by any fortuitous rubbing about of a loose powder. And when, further, it is seen that these deep grooves are almost always regular and uniform in depth, and equidistant, their production by the successive cuts of the jewel teeth of a saw appears to be beyond question..." "That the blades of the saw were of bronze, we know from the green staining on the sides of the saw cuts, and on grains of sand left in a saw cut. The forms of the tools were straight saws, circular saws, tubular drills, and lathes. The straight saws varied from .03 to .2 inch thick, according to the work; the largest were 8 feet or more in length..." "...No. 6, a slice of diorite bearing equidistant and regular grooves of circular arcs, parallel to one another; these grooves have been nearly polished out by cross grinding, but are still visible. The only feasible explanation of this piece is that it was produced by a circular saw." "These tubular drills vary in thickness from 1/4 inch to 5 inches in diameter, and from 1/30 to 1/5 inch thick. The smallest hole yet found in granite is 2 inch diameter." "At El Bersheh... there is a still larger example, where a platform of limestone rock has been dressed down, by cutting it away with tube drills about 18 inches diameter; the circular grooves occasionally intersecting, prove that it was done merely to remove the rock." "...the lathe appears to have been as familiar an instrument in the fourth dynasty, as it is in the modern workshops. The diorite bowls and vases of the Old Kingdom are frequently met with, and show great technical skill. One piece found at Gizeh, No 14, shows that the method employed was true turning, and not any process of grinding, since the bowl has been knocked off of its centring, recentred imperfectly, and the old turning not quite turned out; thus there are two surfaces belonging to different centrings, and meeting in a cusp. Such an appearance could not be produced by any grinding or rubbing process which pressed on the surface. Another detail is shown by fragment No 15; here the curves of the bowl are spherical, and must have therefore been cut by a tool sweeping an arc from a fixed centre while the bowl rotated. This centre or hinging of the tool was in the axis of the lathe for the general surface of the bowl, right up to the edge of it; but as a lip was wanted, the centring of the tool was shifted, but with exactly the same radius of its arc, and a fresh cut made to leave a lip to the bowl. That this was certainly not a chance result of hand-work is shown, not only by the exact circularity of the curves, and their equality, but also by the cusp left where they meet. This has not been at all rounded off, as would certainly be the case in hand-work, and it is clear proof of the rigidly mechanical method of striking the curves." Thats from Petrie http://www.theglobaleducationproject.org/egypt/articles/petrie.php and took about 6 secs to find ... as well as a whole page of various pictures and for quarrying , and even finishing .... from 1:00 ... the most common ancient method .... the 'stone pounder' and finally for polishing eg, for a statue .... a hand full of slurry (harder rock dust and liquid ) continually rubbed on the surface

No it is what you are doing below . They way people made stone blocks , from cutting them in a quarry from base rock or cliffs and shaping them and smoothing them is actually very well known and does not use copper saws at all . I think you better look up how they did it . What is this fixation on them only using copper saws, where did that come from ? I see. Where is my reasoning faulty ? Again, you claimed they only had and used copper saws to cut hard stone . This is wrong . How can you start with a wrong premise and end up with a right conclusion based on that premise, and then have to postulate some possible alien or unknown intervention because you have limited the tools and processes by a wrong assumption in the first place ... and then ... think I need to be more clear and logical ? ? ? I can be more clear ... I suppose and explain how they did it .... but its better if you find out yourself (so you know Nungers isnt making stuff up again ) . Excuse me ....... its called evidence , and I am surprised if you think it should be ignored ! There are marks left in the quarries, there are unfinished blocks in the quarries, there are some blocks dressed and abandoned in transit, with marks. Even the final surfacing leaves tell tale marks of how it was done, there are ancient images showing how it was done, modern day sculptures can use the same tools and get the same results as was done . I observe the evidence at hand and do use my rational mind , I read peer reviewed papers and follow the latest discoveries when I can . To ignore all this is overtly rational ? ? ? Show me the other evidence of how it was done differently if you believe so . Unless .......

No I am not . Its about social structure and motivation. For example The Chimu (pre Aztec ) valued spikey pink shells more than gold . People died to collect them. Even death was considered different back then . The reason I gave the big hole as an example is , in modern day, it was still done by hand . You seem to be thinking I am trying to prove something else ... like if we could dig that we could build a pyramid ? No. What about he rest of 'my issues' ... are they equally LOLable ? * What makes you think they only had copper saws ? * Why say we cant we make blocks like that anymore ? We do it all the time . * Why were not the tools adequate considering the results they achieved ? * Are you claiming all the statues bowls and objects made of the hardest stone was done with unknown techniques ? * Which parts of the pyramid were so hard they needed help ?