Because I doubt your knowledge of all things related to lifting objects. I doubt hemp ropes would work, I doubt your setup would work, and I doubt ropes made from the materials at hand would work, I doubt you are capable of demonstrating any of those things.
But again, you have no intention of demonstrating anything. You make things up out of whole cloth and wave away any evidence that disproves you. This will be no different.
It doesn’t contradict my theory. It’s not even very important to it.
Utterance 518.
1193a. Further, to say: O ’Iw, ferryman of the Marsh of Offerings,
1193b. bring for N. this (boat); N. goes, N. should come,
1194a. the son of the Morning Boat whom she bore before the earth, his happy birth,
1194b. whereby the Two Lands live, on the right side of Osiris.
1195a. N. is the annual messenger of Osiris.
1195b. Behold, he is come with a message from thy father Geb:
1195c. “If the year’s yield is welcome, how welcome is the year’s yield; the year’s yield is good, how good is the year’s yield!”
1196a. N. has descended with the Two Enneads in ḳbḥ.w;
1196b. N. is the measuring line of the Two Enneads,
1196c. by which the Marsh of Offerings is established.
1197a. N. found the gods standing,
1197b. wrapped in their garments,
1197c. their white sandals on their feet.
1197d. Then they threw their white sandals on the ground,
1197e. they cast off their garments.
1198a. “Our heart was not joyful until thou didst descend,” say they;
1198b. “may that which was said of you be that which you now are.”
11199a. Stand up, Osiris,
1199b. commend N. to those who are on “Śḫm is joyous” north of the Marsh of Offerings,
1199c. like as thou didst commend Horus to Isis the day that thou didst impregnate her,
1200a. that they may give food to N. in the fields,
1200b. and that he may drink at the sources
1200c. in the Marsh of Offerings.
It was instrumental in explaining one line from the Palermo Stone and it gavew me the answer to why they named their years after a measuremnent that isn’t the height of the nile flood. Otherwise it is relatively unimportant and my understanding of the last few lines and the determinative is incomplete.
1193a. Further, to say: O ’Iw, ferryman of the Marsh of Offerings,
This is the cliff face counterweight operator.
1193b. bring for N. this (boat); N. goes, N. should come,
They need the boat at the top.
1194a. the son of the Morning Boat whom she bore before the earth, his happy birth,
Probably isis who bears “horus the younger” who is N (the dead king).
1194b. whereby the Two Lands live, on the right side of Osiris.
This would be the west of the counterweight which ran N/ S. I don’t understand this reference but it might be the physical location of the means to measure total water expended.
1195a. N. is the annual messenger of Osiris.
The dead king is the wdn’t offering or the ballast of the geyser, as well.
1195b. Behold, he is come with a message from thy father Geb:
The earth, geb, sends seker/ wdn’t/ ballast/ dead king (it depends on perspective) with a message.
1195c. “If the year’s yield is welcome, how welcome is the year’s yield; the year’s yield is good, how good is the year’s yield!”
The seasonal flow is tallied and the year is named after this number. High numbers assured large exports.
1196a. N. has descended with the Two Enneads in ḳbḥ.w;
Probably should be “from” rather than “in”. “Kbḥ.w” is 81’ 3" where heaven and the top of the first step are. The enneads are pantheons of heaven and earth.
1196b. N. is the measuring line of the Two Enneads,
Between them is the calculation that establishes the year’s yield. -the water.
1196c. by which the Marsh of Offerings is established.
It is this water that establishes the marsh where important crops are grown.
1197a. N. found the gods standing,
These lines are all in the vulgar implying a different sort of perspective. The meaning here is somewhat enigmatic here but the nature is not.
1197b. wrapped in their garments,
1197c. their white sandals on their feet.
1197d. Then they threw their white sandals on the ground,
1197e. they cast off their garments.
1198a. “Our heart was not joyful until thou didst descend,” say they;
1198b. “may that which was said of you be that which you now are.”
11199a. Stand up, Osiris,
1199b. commend N. to those who are on “Śḫm is joyous” north of the Marsh of Offerings,
As you can see we’re still north of the cliff face counterweights.
1199c. like as thou didst commend Horus to Isis the day that thou didst impregnate her,
“Shm” is probably an historicalk figure of great power whoi lent his name to the word for tthe power sceptres (shm-sceptres).
1200a. that they may give food to N. in the fields,
1200b. and that he may drink at the sources
1200c. in the Marsh of Offerings.
Again, I just don’t understand this part of the utterance. In have much more knowledge about it than I typed out but you must understand the forematting and the context to understand the meaning. One word can keep you from getting an entire utterance because of this. Like computer code a word can modify even words that came before since they can contribute to the formatting or perspective.
There’s certainly no reason to believe this utterance deviates from the hundreds I do understand. They all are part of a whole and they are all just rituals read to the crowds at the kings’ ascension ceremonies.
Your belief is complete and utter bullsh…scratch that…unsupported by evidence. There may once, for a relatively brief time, have been a '“universal language”, spoken by all humans - if all humans descend from a single small band of Homo sapiens somewhere on the African plains. But very soon thereafter, as H. sapiens sapiens spread out into Africa and then Eurasia, alternate languages arose. Alternatively, language may have arisen after humans had dispersed; or even before we were humans, as apparently Neanderthals had the same language-control gene FOXP2 that H. sapiens sapiens does, which suggests our common ancestor H. antecessor had it.
In any case, we’re talking about times roughly 150 to 200,000 years before the pyramid-builders. By the time they came around, thousands of languages had developed. Hell, we even know of some other language contemporaneous and coterminous with Old Egyptian - Sumerian, for one.
As the saying goes, you have the right to your own opinions. You do not have the right to your own facts.
Wouldn’t you agree that in the real world that if every part of an idea is possible that it can actually be done. Obviously some parts here (like catching water at 81’ 3" in an eye) are more difficult and some parts (like the existence of a geyser) might be less probable but what’s to keep simple laws of physics from operating?
I don’t ask people to stick a ramp on the side of a pyramid and drag a stone up so why am I challenged when I say water flows downhill?
I think the main point here is that the evidence says in no uncertain terms that the stones were pulled straight up the side of a five step pyramid one step at a time. Once this obvious fact is accepted and that the vision of superstitious people dragging stones is dumped on the pile of stupid ideas it will be easy enough to accept the possibility that counterweights were used.
I’m obviously going to need to establish this step by step just like the pyramids were built.
I’m not asking for a right to my own facts but a right to interpret the facts in a new way. The Sumerians had a tower of babel sytory as well you know;
I really don’t mean to “lecture”. I’m fully aware that some people here know more science than I do and I’m in no position to lecture anyway.
I am merely trying to get people to see that all things are perspective and there exist an infinitude of perspectives. We percieve things much differently than animals and much differently than ancient man. It’s very hard to see the reality about how the pyramids were built because no blueprints or plans survive. There is exceedingly little evidence from our perspective.
There still isn’t any conclusive proof from myt perspective but the depth of the evidence ioncreases slightly and the breadth increases tremendously. Everything fits together. All those little facts that people can’t see or ignore all fit into the same pattern. This pattern makes predictions and just as the pyramid builds itself the theory does as well.
All that’s needed to solve this is some simple science and simple measurements but nothing is being done. The status quo is so deeply engrained that even simple testing lies outside its scope. The status quo is on autopilot and we’re obviously not heading in the right direction since ramps are debunked (see post #152).
I’ll just scratch my head at the rest of this post.
Water doesn’t want to go uphill. Even geysers have to fight gravity to get uphill and to go higher than the ground. You can’t just put an 80’ pipe on a geyser and expect it to squirt out the top. This isn’t how they work and it’s not how physics works. If you put an 80’ pipe on top it will increase the back pressure on the water so much it will probably never erupt at all. It’s when water degasses due to sufficiently low pressure that it erupts at all.
You say there’s no evidence but you are looking at it from a perspective that accounts for all the evidence in other ways. Not even all the evidence is accounteds for at all. The min (hole on the east side) and trial passages are really cases in point. Across the board you are simply dismissing solid concrete evidence because you believe it represents something else.
The point is that sumerian and egyptian are totally different languages, during the time period, that you claim, only had one.
A Sumerian tale from some 700(+) Years later does nothing to change that fact.
Besides, the tale is more interresting in actual historical context. That it was harkening back to a time when, indeed sumerian was the lingua franca of that region, and that it may be the basis of the story of the Tower of Babel.
I believe that I need to stress lingua franca, as there were other languages, such as the semitic akkadian. Plus that region, being the southern part of modern Iraq.
Fair enough. The problem is the configuration **cladking **is suggesting means the ropes would need to be subjected to a force of much greater magnitude, and would be subject to bending and friction from pulleys (which didn’t exist) or sliding points. I know you understand the differences and are just pointing out the starting point, but **cladking **is going to ignore those issues, refuse to supply any calculations, and he’s unwilling or unable to produce a physical model.
Why don’t you explain, in detail and without a bunch of mystical horseshit exactly how the water got from the non-existent geyser to the top of the 80+’ step and into the boat? Simple really. They didn’t use pipes, according to you, and they didn’t have the water simply spray out and 80+’ into the air, so how DID the water get up there, exactly? See, this is the issue…all information from your ridiculous theory has to come from you. And you aren’t very good at explaining anything in detail enough to grasp what the hell you are talking about. Personally, I think you are doing it on purpose, since when you DO give details you almost immediately get hammered with all of the issues involved, so if you stay vague you can do silly shit like in this post.
You’ve presented exactly no evidence so far. None, nada, ziltch, zippo. Nuffin’. So, there is no perspective for me to look at nothing except to point out that there has been nothing presented.
I haven’t dismissed any ‘concrete’ evidence because you haven’t presented any. You gave me some coordinates that I looked up…they were on the NORTH side of the pyramid (under it really). Peter Morris, who seems the most sympathetic to you did some digging around and found an irregularity on the east side…but frankly I can’t find anything about whatever it is and YOU HAVE PRESENTED NOTHING TO BACK UP YOUR CLAIM. Just some horseshit about Benben stones and assertions about geysers. If there is still evidence of this geyser, feel free to present it…until then, there is nothing concrete or even nerf for me to dismiss.
Well, color me disappointed! I was anticipating a treatise on how “white sandals” was the sand, and that “joyful” meant “extant” or something. Instead, you claim you can explain this utterance, then totally fail to explain the relevant portion: the part which contradicts your theory.
So, to reaffirm: I dispute that your reading of the PT is internally consistent, when it has these sort of gaps in it. Conversely, the gods=gods, heaven=afterlife reading doesn’t have these gaps. Draw your own conclusions.
Oh, and if the utterances were meant to be read aloud to the assembled public, why were they written on the inside of the pyramids, and on the sarcophagi within? Would they have teams to relay the words from the interior to the outside, like a giant game of telephone?
At a certain point, when no one else can see the facts you’re relying on, you should start to wonder if it’s you that’s wrong, you that’s blind to reality. Your need to invoke variations on “you can’t understand” over and over again in response to questions you can’t answer merely underlines this.
Well, which is it? Many lives have been lost building cathedrals, and no doubt were lost building the pyramids too. That says nothing about the reasons for building them anyway.
I’m not talking about injuries and fatalities I’m talking about manhours. An ancient Egyptian had perhaps 35,000 manhours in his career so I’m merely converting manhours to manlives by dividing by 35,000. This is justified because many of these men spent their entire or very large parts of their productive lives dragging stones up ramps. According to new research by Dr Mark Lehner these men even lived on the ramps and apparently dragged their personal possessions with them through their lives. These guys had nothing Henry David Thoreau.
Imagine a large part of the population being stone draggers and 20% of GDP going into building a tombstone for a dead immortal king!!!
