What parade of evidence?
i haven’t seen anything yet. There’s two questions you pose that I would consider valid.
“Shouldn’t the workers village be bigger?” and “How come there is no mention, among the various attested jobs, of a job related to a ramp?”
These are drowned in an actual true parade of wild gut-guesses, bald claims, weird stuff and declarations of how you have somehow proven something.
No. There is one science, and it has an established definition that is recognized around the world. You are just going to have to find another name for whatever it is you are talking about, I guess. Here are some suggestions:
Woo.
Pseudoscience.
Guessing.
Superstition.
“Mustta been geysers” is not consistent with science and evidence.
Not that I dont believe thats possible, but where did you get that from? I was under the impression it was a mix.
In almost every satellite picture I’ve seen with enough resolution to tell the pyramid is three dimensional I can see the min. This thing is huge. It should have about the volume of 120% of the water to match the 20 tons of stone it “launched”. It should hold about 24 tons of water or about 750 cubic feet of water as predicted by my theory. This is another in an incredibly long list of unavailable data. To my knowledge this hole has never even been excavated.
They know there’s no stinkin’ ramp in the bottom of it so why go look?
Of course it’s relevant. The only reason that it isn’t known why the pyramids were built is that they seem to believe Petrie took enough measurement for all time. When I predict the fire pan held ~1.109 gallons they hid it away in a backroomn lest someone try to determine it photographically. I can’t prove there were geysers yet with available evidence even though I might be closing in on it and I’m not out of leads yet. But the fact remains ramps are debunked and you can’t make a port out of a roadless village or a ramp out of wet sand any more than you can make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear or a sow’s ear out of a silk purse.
I have no problem with any Egyptologist but the evidence that exists still stands no matter how anyone interprets it.
This is a great start. Why don’t you consider the massive water collection shaped device under the pyramid relevant? It is attached to a water worn canal. There are “Overseers of Canals” and “Operators of a Boat”, as well as “Overseer of the Boats of Neith”. Osiris fell in a canal when he died.
Why don’t you accept the evidence that the pyramids were stepped or do you think this stepping was irrelevant to the means used to construct them?
I think there is a ramp at the bottom but Geyserologists refuse to do sonar imaging. What are they afraid of?
Are you proposing then that by “guessing” or "woo’ the anbcients invented the calender and aligned the pyramid more perfectly N/ S than virtually anyt building standing on the planet today?
Swing and a miss.
They had to have science and there’s no evidence of anby sort for “metaphysics” like modern science.
To me as a generalist this is the most telling of all facts.
I don’t believe it mustta been geysers. I estimate the probability that they had geysers at about 65% and the probability they used ramps at < 2%.
Egyptologists know it mustta been ramps.
This is a big difference.
When I say “geysers” I merely mean they are the simplest explanation for the totality of the evidence.
I doubt it would hold water and that it was originally stone lined. It might hold it briefly.
Again, cite from any researcher that support your point of view?
It is clear that so far you are even at odds with the pseudo scientists that you cited so far.
Upon further research I think you’re correct. The higher resolution images may still come from planes but the majority appears to be satellite imagery.
Bats use sonar and they dont fly under water.
There are six assertions in the four sentences you quoted.
Care to be specific?
And besides a geyser not lasting long and being intermittent we have to add also what for the time was not a very reliable way to contain water at that level and with the pressures that would had been an issue.
Once again the value of looking at what was possible by using computer models is seen, once you figure how it would had been possible with the technology of the day then you can go forward by having a working model that helps convince others that you are on the right track.
So far you are not.
Again, cite for any researcher that agrees with you that there were no ramps and that geysers were used?
None of this is indicative of geysers. The “evidence” you have brought for geysers is just flat out ehrm, can’t think of a nice word…
If you would just keep it at “I don’t think a big ramp was used”, you would be in good company, as loads of people have speculated how the things were built.
Really, drop the geyser. You have become too invested in this fantasy.
There’s still plenty left to speculate about. Like your min. Were the causeways canals? Did they use cranes or other machines, as Herodotos indicates?
Now, what do you mean with the term stepped?
This usually refers to earlier forms of pyramids, that did not have the smooth sides of the great pyramids. So you are not using the usual sense.
So there is no physical evidence of geysers and the “cultural” evidence is all your unique and frankly bizarre interpretations of language and pictures. I mean “Hey see this round object being held in this picture? That’s a pyramid and the hands represent a geyser”. “See where it mentions the Eye of Horus? Well that’s clearly the water catching aperture for their geyser catching resevoir”. Is there any way to convince you, clangking, that this is all your own fantasy?
Czarcasm had it right. You didn’t. And your beliefs as expressed in all of your quotes show that you have NO idea of what science is/was or will be.
When you say you “rediscovered” some ancient science which is “observation>logic”, you are in woo territory. Your theories are without basis or proofs.