I figured already that no geysers have been reported, and there is no evidence for them found. No human has observed that, and no experiment has been done to show that, none of the guys like Temple or Hancock were looking for that either. We are left only with you using only misinterpreted images.
I figure it out that that works just for pseudo science indeed.
Agreement is irrelevent.
Experimental results determine science and Egyptologists won’t do experiments, testing, or even measuring.
cladking, without all of the mystical mumbo-jumbo can you lay out exactly what your theory is here? Are you saying that natural geysers that shot water hundreds of feet into the air were on the Giza plateau and that the Egyptians caught this water somehow (hundreds of feet in the air) and used that water as some sort of counter balance (or a water wheel or something) to lift the blocks (weighing between 2-6 TONS) up? Is that a good summation of your theory here? And these natural geysers…how long did they run for, spraying water out at high pressure(?)?
Of course it is, that had nothing to do with carbonated water.
Wood decay is the most likely explanation for the increased CO2 in the chamber with the ancient boat.
Then you demonstrate with models and formulas how that can be plausible, really, you are not doing any science here.
That caption is not exactly right though.
It’s Ramses (THE Ramses, number 2) making an offering to Isis, Amon-Ra and Osiris.
He is wafting the scent of the offering towards the Gods.
I sure bet you’d be all over a picture of a ramp though or even the word “ramp” if it had ever been used.
I was asked for pictures. I located some of the best scientific depictions. I am not responsible for either Egyptological misinterpretation or the misinterpretation of the book of the dead writers. There are many more such scientific drawings.
There were no ramps and so long as nobody wants to challenge any of the facts in post #152 they are still debunked. Until these points are successfully challenged or new evidence reestablishes ramps (yeah, right) then all we can say with certainty is that ramps are debunked and it appears stones were pulled straight up the sides of the great pyramids one step at a time. It’s not like you have to admit I’m probably right about geysers just because Egyptologists have been shown to be wrong about ramps.
What is peoples’ fascination with ramps?!? What’s with the romantic concept of superstitious bumpkins dragging stones up ramps? Forget it. It’s done. Stick it with a fork. Egyptology is jumping through hoops trying to support a “theory” that never had any evidence. They’ve spent a century and a half and came up empty handed. It’s time to pull the plug.
Well… …like duh. I can’t do modern science involving pyramids from my computer console.
I know several tests and experiments that can be done vbut they won’t do anything and haven’t really in decades.
Wallis Budge dictionary gives ‘sta’ as the egyptian word for ‘ramp’.
Don’t need images when real live pictures have been taken of ramps in many other locations.
Come to think of it, yes you do need to point at the context, you are only demonstrating tactics that pseudo-scientists use, in this case, using images with no context is only made to make more difficult for someone else to check what the subjects of the picture actually are.
So how many years do you think these geysers were “stable” for?
You really are unaware that there are computer programs that can simulate physics of water, pressure and chemical reactions?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AiLyQWXjIgThis is also where Houdin is way ahead, he contacted a company that was an expert in physics modelling to see what was the most plausible way that an internal pyramid may had worked.
And so he attracted more attention.
But I do think you are not willing to follow that path because you are afraid of what the computer experts in physical simulations are likely to tell you.
[QUOTE=GIGObuster]
But I do think you are not willing to follow that path because you are afraid of what the computer experts in physical simulations are likely to tell you.
[/QUOTE]
Heck, I’d just like to see the model for the erosion channels something like this would cause (even before the Giza plateau was being used for pyramids, unless these mystical geysers had on/off buttons the Egyptians knew how to use of course), let alone how the workers worked in an environment where that amount of water was in play…enough so that they could lift many 2-6 ton blocks hundreds of feet into the air at a rate of a block every 15 minutes (at least…I’ve heard estimates that they were setting a block every 5 or even 3 based on how long they estimate it took to build the things from start to finish)…that would be something to see!
I’d also like to know why the Egyptians could use water this way for this project, but seemed unable to use similar machines for all the other stuff they were doing, but such questions are best left unasked…
Yes. Of course there was an Egyptian word for “ramp”. There’s simply no evidence it was used until AFTER the great pyramid building age. The question isn’t whether they used the word “ramp” the question is if they used a “ramp” to build the pyramid and the utter lack of attestation for the word is strong evidence it was not used.
Yet Egyptologists use the existence of a statue being pulled on level ground as proof they dragged stones up hill to build pyramids.
Seems a but of a double standard. I can’t use something relevant but they can use something irrelevant.
Correction:
This is also where Houdin is way ahead, he contacted a company that was an expert in physics modelling to see what was the most plausible way that an internal pyramid ramp may had worked.
And so he attracted more attention.
But I do think you are not willing to follow that path because you are afraid of what the computer experts in physical simulations are likely to tell you.
I have to add that Houdin got more attention because his simulation also used physics, and clearly cladking was wrong as usual, one can do modern science involving pyramids from one’s computer.
If one’s computer is a prehistoric one 
, one can then contact groups that can look at one’s ideas and to do basic simulations. As it turns out I had some training on that, but I have to get back into the grove; I however do know enough to know that computers are sophisticated enough to allow one to make basic models that do help one to figure what could be the most likely configurations of how something like what is proposed by cladking could work.
That cladking does not know or is not willing to get other experts to check something like that only demonstrates that indeed I did call it correctly, he is not doing science. Not even the computer one.
They weren’t all that stable. “Stable and enduring” was the condition they sought. The geyser field extended 30 miles from Giza to the Fayuum and within this geyser field you could say the geysers were stable for probably at least 700 years. But individual geyser came and went. Water flows changed and some wells accumulated calcium carbonate while other wells eroded away until there was no pressure and had to be capped.
It’s difficult to guess how long individual wells could last but I’d guess some eruptions could last for days. Most wells lasted long enough to complete work on the pyramid but a few sites were abandoned. I believe there were a couple wells at G1 and the first failed generating the “story” of set and osiris. This story was actually a Greek confusion of the switch over in wells after set “swallowed the eye of horus”, ie- he deconstructed the mehet weret which fell into the well. The water swallowed the source of the water.
They were seasonal and probably lasted about nine months. The off time was used to dig new wells and repair older wells. It’s tough to say how old they wewre when the drill was invented in 3500 BC but they were, no doubt, extremely ancient and the people referred to a mythological time called zep tepi which was the first eruption when shu was spat out and tefnut was sneezed out by atum creating (defining) the earth and the sky. Atum was the phenomenon of the geyser which created himself with the ben ben as his phalus on the primeval mound. The hole in the ben ben was his consort “iusaas” which emitted the wadjet (a specific serpent). These ben bens are said in the PT to have been removed to drill wells and sent to museums where none survive though there may be Greek facsimilies.
The culture wasn’t destroyed intentionally but through confusiuon. The Greeks couldn’t translate the ancient language either despite extensive and exhaustive attempts. They did the best they could which produced the hermetic writings. Many of the attempts at translations became Bible stories eventually. I Corinthians 14 and the Tower of Babel for instance.
The geysers probably began in the 5000 BC era and ended rather suddenly (perhaps when a huge sinkhole formed near the Fayuum named the "Anus of the World) around 2650 BC or whenever G2 was completed and before G3. Water stillcame up in small quantities for a century but the geysers were all dead. “D3.t” was the scientific word for “geyser” and they died this word morphed into what we now call “the duat”. Where it had been gods above and below creating water for man the duat came to mean just dead gods under the earth. The living atum became osiris who was born dead.
Everything fits because this is how they built pyramids.
You’re forgetting a couple things. This was peak growing season that these were spraying. The only thing missing in the desert to turn it into a veritable garden of eden was a water source. There weren’t huge flows as there were when man changed the way things worked. Before man invented the means to increase water flow by plugging leaks (to stop serpents which sapped the strenght and killed the unwary) the water merely oozed and spurted out of the ground. This created a biomass which absorbed the water. These were like oases on hills.
Man never leaves well enough alone so invented the CO2 geyser and used his knowledge gained from observation and logic to build the pyramids. The water was handled by man made equipment so it didn’t leave vast erosion channels.
Computer modeling is irrelevant.
The only thing that matters is how they built the pyramid and this will only be discovered wiuth evidence. Computers can not find or interpret such evidence.
Are you suggesting that these ancient scientists went 40,000 years without discovering one of the six simple machines (the inclined plane)?