I just wanted you to clarify, when you call the whole on site experiment an “abortion” it does lead many to think that indeed it is you the one that is obfuscating.
So, no, not an abortion if we can see that adding a bit of water on the inclines and ramps does work wonders. What the newest research in sand showed is that the trick also does work over sand.
[/QUOTE]
The child in the video is hopelessly confused.
You’re missing the entire point of the Dutch study.
It is not my opinion that the construction of the little pyramid was an abortion. My opinion is that it was very interesting and instructive and hinted that ramps almost could have been used to build G1. It is consensus opiniuon that the thing was an abortion and created an eyesore.
I believe the Dutch study is an abortion and suspect it was done to try to save recent Egyptological nonsense that the builders village was actually a port with no roads. By definition ports have roads so this is impossible. To save the new conjecture they invented dragging stones on wet sand that doesn’t collapse under the weight of a sled. The study besides being highly flawed (probably)(due to scaling issues) is irrelevant to whether the builders village was really a port and to pyramid building. Did you notice that even wiki has taken up the idea that the pyramid builders slept on ramps? Egyptology appears to be trying to respond to the debunkment and digging themselves ever deeper into the sand. Men can’t live on ramps and if they could they’d be dragging all their possessions up the pyramids as well.
I’m not really sure of exactly what’s going on but frankly I couldn’t be happier they might be doing some important science right now. Egyptologists simply made a lot of “common sense” assumptions, but in this case, the common sense itself was faulty. Garbage in, garbage out is a truism in all things. (well, unless you’re farming)
And this adds yet another fallacies to your tool set of debating tactics.
Red herring, when one watches the program it is clear that it was not designed to be a permanent structure, it was made to test the ideas. That you concentrate on the item that “it was an eyesore” you only make a fallacious point.
Another red herring that does not counter the main conclusion of the study.
The main point of the study that you seem to miss is that “Ancient Egyptians transported pyramid stones over wet sand”.
And you demonstrate that truism in your constant say so’s.
It is clear that you only can counter what was observed in a real life experiment with the very dumb idea that it “was an eyesore”.
Well, ya know, you could just read the links I cited…
But you claimed that Sumerian and Egyptian were so similar that a Sumerian would merely have to learn some new pronunciations to speak with an Egyptian. This is laughably wrong.
Sumerian is an agglutinative language - it formed words by adding syllables in a long chain. Egyptian (like Hebrew and Arabic) formed words by using a two-letter or three-letter (usually) root that expressed a basic meaning, then using different vowels to indicate grammatical changes, the way English does with swim and swam or drive and drove.
Now, no doubt Sumerians and Egyptians could learn each other’s languages, just as an English-speaker can learn Navajo, another agglutinative language. But the idea that all that would be required to do so would simply be a matter of learning some new pronunciations is, like all of your claims about language, thoroughly ridiculous.
It would have been a pyramid on par with the other Giza pyramids, and the evidence that it was a pyramid is pretty substantial (the only other thing I’ve seen is it might have been a very large sun temple). Regardless, my QUESTION to you was how did they build it without the use of magic geysers? What of the evidence of large scale ramp use in it’s construction? Why could they build this pyramid/sun temple without your magic geyser and using ramps but not the other pyramids? And, how did they move the geyser about on the Giza plateau to build the other non-Khufu pyramids?
Thanks, GIGObuster! Saved me a lot of thumb-typing. Note that this was cladking moving the goalposts, after I challenged his claim that Sumerians could speak Egyptian after learning a few new pronunciations.
Speaking of “there is no evidence”…
That’s not how it works. The burden of proof is on you, not me. You made a claim that this language functioned in a radically different fashion than any other human language; it’s your responsibility to back it up.
Aside from all the linguists and archaeologists who study these languages, you mean?
Not hand flagging, either. But it does sound like an activity associated with vigorous hand motions, yes.
No one has been able to show you, but as evidenced by this thread even the most basic elements of linguistics are beyond your ken, and you haven’t actually looked into the relevant subjects beyond reading English translations of a narrow set of Egyptian writings and having gut feelings about those.
How do you reckon these bumbling Egyptologists who don’t realize that what these writings actually are have managed to render them into English in a manner that you can interpret? I guess you just assume that if you studied the development of Egyptian language, which can be followed through a multitude of preserved writings through the centuries, people just suddenly decided to use words in a way that wasn’t gobledeegook to you, and run of the mill religious texts to the rest of us.
You are tripped up by your ignorance, again.
Philologists have worked out the changes in language to the point that they can determine the length of time in which changes occur. Not to the minute or the year, but certainly to within centuries. The languages that we know, today, have ancestry far older than the Great Pyramid. Even if we cannot speak the language of the pyramid builders, as you certainly cannot except in your imagination, and even if we cannot know exactly the vocabulary and grammar of the builders of the pyramid, we can ascertain that the rest of the IndoEuropean language families are far older than that period and the languages of the Far East, Southern Africa, Oceania, the Americas, and other unrelated linguistic families broke away millennia before that. Your claim that they were speaking some ideal, perfect language, later corrupted in some Babel event is rubbish, contradicted by evidence about real languages.
Ultimately the question here will remain how was the pyramid built. Suddenly there are lots of pictures on the net that shows the water collection device. I’ve been searching for these for years but people didn’t snap pictures of it and all I had were grainy long distance shots, most of which were quite old.
Here’s one that clearly shows its nature and that it lies under the pyramid so was built before it;
I have little doubt this was caused by drawing peoples’ attention to it.
The width of this pavement varies even over short distances so the idea that it’s “holy” or is just for looks doesn’t work. It is (was) as smooth and as falat as glass and if my theory is correct then it bent with the contour of the earth because rthey used water to build it. This is apparently what they are measuring right now!
I could very well be wrong however I don’t believe any of the ancient languages are understood. I believe that if a corpus of text is understood then the simplest terms in it can be defined by the translator whether the text is incantation or ritual or anything else. The fact they can’t define these terms is prima fascie evidence they don’t understand their own translations. Linguists are tracking these languages using vocabulary and I don’t believe the vocabulary changed. If the vocabulary didn’t change then a change in the way meaning was expressed would be invisible.
It is Egyptologists who believe there were only 10 to 15,000 words in the ancient language. As I understand the PT this estimate seems to be fairly close. I’d guess there are only about 5,000 different words in the PT and it seems highly plausible that this would represent between half and a third of the lexicon.
I obviously don’t know how many words were in the whatever animal language preceded the first complex language. I am merely guessing that most animnal languages don’t need more than a few hundred words. Today there are well in excess of 100,000 words which doesn’t include highly esoteric words. These facts are consistent with my theory.
The slanted blocks are the surviving cladding stones. Underneath them are the water collection device that was built before the pyramid because they couldn’t build pyramids without it (at least not G1). It’s easier to tell the paving stones are underneath it in the second picture.
This one’s even easier;
Not only are the casing stones watertight but so too are those of the water collection device under it.
I actually started solving the Sumerian language several years ago but quickly gave up in frustration. I solved a couple of their “natural phenomena” but there is no corpus in Sumerian like the PT. It requires extensive writing to use the technique I used. It can probably be solved but it’s far more difficult because subject varies, authors vary, and translators vary. It’s easy to factor out translation biases when you have several versions of the same work to study.
I suspect that if I’m proven right about the meaning of the PT there are going to be some significant revisions even in the basic understanding of the glyphs. These were the words of the gods and they are far more logical and coherent than they appear in our mangled translations and dictionaries. Understanding fundamental things like the meaning of the glyph for “duat” (star in circle) will yield insights to meaning can only be guessed at this time. I believe it will be found that writing had elements that made it a sort of “moving picture show”. In other words there will be a lot of revision in all sorts of things they think they know. I’ve solved quite a few of these glyphs but I doubt I can learn to “see it” for many many years.
The amount of genius and scholarship that went into translating the ancient language was simply staggering. All the heavy lifting was done long before I ever came around. Frankly I doubt I could have even contributed due to the nature of the work.
They left the easy part for me. Finding patterns and understanding processes is what I do and trained myself to do.
Only in your dreams. I don’t see anything that looks like a water collection device…and, btw, I’ve actually BEEN there and walked around that exact place (I remember having the surviving casing stones pointed out on a tour). And those pictures aren’t new revelations…I’ve seen that same picture of the surviving limestone casing stones dozens if not hundreds of times.
The first image comes from one that has another explanation for the construction of the pyramids, with no water or geysers involved.
The second one comes from, as if you can not help it, from another woo woo proponent of ancient aliens, although the focus is with the second “other” possibility he mentions too, that the pyramids were build by a lost technological civilization.
That straw is really rotten, they are not measuring any water collection and with alien technology no water was needed. Indeed no mention of the geyser is also coming from the second cite also. And they also do request that any image used should not be removed from the context they use.
So why isn’t it possible that Egyptology went down the wroing path and that’s why they can’t tell a simple nbht-sceptre from an mks-sceptre and don’t even know how the ankh arose? Maybe if they were on the right path they would know how the pyramid was built rather than opine how it must have been built.
Thanks. Worse things have happened to people. Imagine going 4,000 years down the wrong path because you lost the playbook!
I’m just one little guy so I don’t matter. But if I’m right we can all get back to the highway.
Not to mention that the king here is also using images used in the context of an article from “answers in genesis”. That is like going to the bottom of the barrel for reliable information.
Because they have investigated this issue for hundreds of years until you came. Add to that the fact that we found that you are grossly wrong and grossly ignorant of many of the items being looked at and no one here is taking you seriously.
Well, I just looked at the picture. I actually have a similar one with my wife and I standing on top of those casing stones with goofy looks on our faces. Regardless of where the picture was linked, it’s just a picture of the remaining casing stones and the broken paving stones around it…there is no water capturing machine either in those pictures or there. Gods, literally millions of people have been at that exact spot, it’s not like it’s on the dark side of the moon or something! You’d think if there was evidence of a mystical water capturing machine that one of them would have noticed by now. :smack:
Regardless of where the picture was linked, it’s just a picture of the remaining casing stones and the broken paving stones around it…there is no water capturing machine either in those pictures or there. Gods, literally millions of people have been at that exact spot, it’s not like it’s on the dark side of the moon or something! You’d think if there was evidence of a mystical water capturing machine that one of them would have noticed by now. :smack: