There’s an enormous difference between spending 50,000 man lives to build a tombstone for a dead king who lives forever and spending 1500 man lives to build a laundry, cannning plant, quarry, meat packing and monument to ingenuity. It’s not just the purpose that makes ramps stupid but the lives it chews up and spits out for nothing at all. Dead kings don’t live forever no matter how big their tombstones and there’s no reason 50,000 men need to live for nothing but to toil in the blistering heat.
Ramps to lift 6 1/2 million tons to 140’ are an inane concept and it never happened except in the minds of modern people. The pyramid builders would simply shake their heads in wonder that anyone could believe they did it with ramps.
If the dead king really lived forever if you built him a large enough tombstone then that might not be ridiculous either. But he didn’t and no one thought he did.
People believe in God and believe they need to make a house of worship. There’s nothing wrong with this. If they were to spend inordinate amounts of wealth as the Egyptians would have needed to or they wasted 10’s of thousands of lives to build it then this would be a problem. It would be ridiculous to waste many lives to do back breaking work to build anything for a religious or other belief.
Actually I believe there was a universal language spoken by all men that was the foundation of their science that allowed the invention of agriculture and cities after lifting humanity from the caves. Had they actually been superstitious the race would have become extinct.
We survived the collapse of the ancient language because ancient technology could be passed down asa a craft.
I’m merely paraphrasing their beliefs. In my opinion it is very close to their beliefs. Ask them.
There’s no conspiracy. This is just what they believe. They believe the ancients were stumbled footed bumpkins wherther they use these use these woirds ort not. It’s never been my contention that they’d ever use any word with negative connotations to describe these people. They simply wouldn’t nor would they say something negative about them. But they each and everyone believe the pyramids were tombs built by religious people who believed in magic whose religion and language remained essentially unchanged for millinea and these pyramids were dragged up ramps (or moved by other primitive means). This is a fact. It’s no conspiracy that they take these things as being axiomatic; it is their considered opinion. These opinions first arose many decades ago and persist to this day for many of the reasons I’ve already stated in this thread.
They didn’t use ramps so it didn’t take 50,000 lives. The gods built the pyramids so it required only about 8,000 lives. They got something out of the pyramids to offset this cost.
But there’s still the simple fact that something named “min” existed and that the year of the arrival of min is recorded. There’s the fact that the culture suggests such a device existed and this is in the exact location that it was needed for the job and that it holds the proper volume of water for the task.
There’s no proof this was an hydraulic leveling device or even that such existed. But the PT seems tosay there was one and I’ll wager if it’s correct that this is it.
Obviously you’re correct but any metaphoric meaning would tend to distort the literal meaning and reduce the internal consistency. But this isn’t seen. Every word has a single meaning that is repeated with every usage which is why I say there was no metaphore and probably no symbolism. They simply said what they meant and meant it literally.
They used the words consistently with how CO2 behaves in nature.
There really aren’t many strange interpretations of any sort. The only one besides mine has a little overlap. I suppose it’s consistency is fairly good but it does not jive with the physical evidence and does not make accurate predictions.
I mean that it makes the PT internally consistent. It becomes logical and sensible rather than being a book of incantation that includes instructions to the reader and the phrease “listen up men”.
Originally Posted by cladking View Post
Yes, this has become painfully clear to me. All I can do is reiterate that my solution doesn’t require word meanings to change like Egyptological interpretation.
I’m not sure – metaphors can be part of “word meanings”, and your interpretations can be wrong on the word meanings (especially since we’re looking at translations of ancient texts).
I can quote this entire utterance and explain it but it will please or convince nobody. Let’s just say you took these lines out of context destroying the original meaning. The language in which they are written simply can’t be translated into modern languages. Meaning was in context.
Perhaps this is more complex than I’m making it sound and I don’t know many of the rules of grammar. Most of this is written in the vulgar which is quite unusual. I’m one man working alone and I haven’t had time to do the huge amount of work that will be required to completely understand all this.
I don’t even really know how similar this was to everyday speech. These were rituals and some of what I’m seeing might apply more to the “poetry” of ritual than they do to everyday speech. I can see only the broad outlines and get some insight into how they thought. There is every reason to believe that this language was a more formal version and more scientific version of what the average man used day to day. There is simply too little to go by other than the PT and my understanding of it is not total.
Fine. You would like to believe that. It is not true, course, and there is evidence that your beliefs are wrong, but you are comfortable in your odd erroneous beliefs and you wander around the internet spouting them.
For example, agriculture arose in multiple locations around the world, centuries apart. There is no reason to believe that some universal language allowed anyone to use a non-existent science speaking a non-existent language to develop agriculture in the way that you imagine. Cities arose even later than agriculture, long after your imaginary universal language would have broken into its many dialects and daughter languages.
And, of course, the societies that did develop agriculture all left evidence behind that they were deeply involved with what you dismiss as superstition, and yet humanity thrived, regardless. Your beliefs are counter-factual and silly.
Ask whom? That is exactly the problem with your libels. You persistently claim that some nebulous “they” have made one claim or another, yet you cannot provide a single citation for any of those claims. It is not incumbent on me to go ask some imaginary “Egyptologist” (whose name you are refusing to divulge) what he or she believes. You made the claim; you need to document the evidence for your claim.
[QUOTE=cladking]
The pyramid is on a hill. There was water at the base of the pyramid.
Therefore there was water on a hill.
[/QUOTE]
You yourself said that no evidence remains. So, you have failed, utterly, to demonstrate this. So, again, I don’t believe you. If anyone else in this thread had asserted the completely plausible idea that there COULD be a spring or other water source on the Giza plateau I’d probably accept that without comment, but from YOU…nope. You have repeatedly asserted stuff without backing up a single thing.
I happen to live in a desert, so you unless you are talking about the Atacama (we ARE talking about Egypt, right?) you are full of shit. The Egyptian desert has plenty of oasis and water (there is that Nile thingy if nothing else). Oh, and you still haven’t demonstrated water, a hill or anything else. Zero cites showing zero…and you handwaved in any case, since you admitted that none of the evidence remains in any case. It’s all out of your ass speculation based on your interpretation of ancient Egyptian texts.
I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. The ‘boat’ was 80+’ in the air from what you said before. To get 80+’ in the air is going to require the pressure I discussed earlier, whether they used a pipe or they used 80+’ of solid rock (both items which are conveniently long gone and there is zero evidence for, of course). You are just talking (or typing I suppose) to hear yourself babble at this point…it’s all meaningless drivel with no connection to reality, no evidence at all, and all based on your own internal fantasies.
Are you serious? You’ve been quoting one or two lines at a time for weeks now, to support your theories. Now, when a lengthy passage (one of many, I should add, and it’s about a quarter of the utterance) contradicts your theory, it’s suddenly impossible to get meanings from individual passages? That’s the weakest of sauce, cladking. If you can’t explain how passages like this square with your theory, it’s ok to say so. You admitted that you didn’t know why the Egyptians mummified bodies if they cremated them, and the world didn’t end.
Above, you’re basically stating that debating this with you is impossible: it can’t be done in English, and only you can read what the Egyptians really meant (which, mind-blowingly, you do by reading it in English). You’re framing the discussion as being you lecturing us on evidence only you can see and understand. Why even debate this stuff in public fora, then?
I know you prefer not to put work in, but it sounds like your theory needs a lot more work put in.
I don’t question that ropes existed. I seriously question that ropes could be built from the materials at hand that would lift rocks of that size via the mechanism you propose. Until you build something physical to demonstrate this and show the calculations that show the physical strength of those ropes, you have nothing.
Right now, you have nothing.
But it won’t matter, you didn’t reason yourself into this position and you’re not susceptible to reason.
