Friends:
After reading the book titled"Fingerprints of the Gods", it caused me to seriously wonder if we have been visited by extra terrestrial being in the past.
The level of technology required build some of sites which are discussed in the book, supposedly did not exist.It is obvious that a high level of understanding concerning the stars and their movements was present.To build Machu Pichu even even with todays technology is all but impossible.How did they make the nazca pictographs and lines without being airborne?
The best question is how did all those ancient maps showing Antartica shore line without the ice, before it was even discovered come about. I believe that we were either visited or there have been civilizations here before us which surpass or equal our level of sophistication.Anybody with any more insights please let me know them.

machiaventa :rolleyes:

Why do the types that think "interaction with our past occured", always think "they were aliens"?

What if humanity gets to the point of being able to manipulate time, and they decide to interfer with themselves and anything that seems alien is "Made to look-so".

You might question why would someone make something look alien, but there are two reasons:
1: Generally Hoaxers will always be with us, and hoaxers will know if they could manipulate time to this degree, they could make large amounts of money manipulating religions to their benefits.

2: "The Grandfather Paradox", a parody where a person interfers with a time point prior to their existance. Alot of people might theorise that they can mess around with the timeline because "the universe they exist in is obviously a different one than the one they mess with", what they tend to neglect is they are still "killing themselves, and others" in a different universe. Perhaps they should get locked up for it (or to some just the lunacy of thinking they can do that).

However if a cleverly orchestrated method of delivering information from the future to the past was created, then obviously the medium chosen would be that of lies. Lieing about who they are, or what they are so as not to cause potential repurcussions with changes to their own time window.

For instance generating a craft could be possible, but you wouldn't label it in English either NASA timeprobe or a particular country, as do you know what that would cause to the global state of affairs?

Instead you would generate some bogus Lexicons, and make the craft and internal gear look as aesthetically "alien" as possible.

I'm not saying of course that any of what I mentioned is possible, but it's just something that you have to look at as an alterative.

Stryderunknown,

I don't think he was assuming anything.

Friend:
There will always be hoaxers, wether they be from our time or another. My question is could other civilizations have existed? The site know as Mach Pichu was not built by the Incas, although they did use it. Modern dating methods put it's contruction time at around 15,000 B.C.E. I am sure there are many who would debate this, however this no way the Incas built this site, and currently there is no way we could do it now.
Ancient myths and stories tell of the stones being moved by the sound of trumpets aimed at the particular stone to moved.Tiahuanaco has the same legends about it's contruction also.It also dates to about 15,000 B.C.E. To me this presents information which leads to the conclusion that there must have been some type of civilization capable of doing this. They could been alien, but I doubt it. they were probably advanced as us in some areas and much more in other areas. Being that something caused their demise, or they went back to where they lived.Leaving the local talent to carry on. Obviously if this were the case, man has a way of perverting scientific knowledge into some sort of religious dogma.When this happens civilization tends to go two steps backward then one foward in direction that has been contaminated by beliefs in superstions, multiple Gods, and a reversion to pre-existing beliefs from long befor the civilization reached it's pinnacle.

Machiaventa

Friends:
After reading the book titled"Fingerprints of the Gods", it caused me to seriously wonder if we have been visited by extra terrestrial being in the past.

There's a reason Hancock appears here on crank.net (http://www.crank.net/archaeology.html)

The level of technology required build some of sites which are discussed in the book, supposedly did not exist.

Our ancestors where very innovative, where they not. Hancock does a disservice to the level of ingenuity of the human species, IMO. Almost as bas as Von Daniken.

It is obvious that a high level of understanding concerning the stars and their movements was present.

That they did. If I had tens of years of non-light polluted skies to watch and a few hundred generations of previous observations to go on, I would like to think I could do as well.

To build Machu Pichu even even with todays technology is all but impossible.How did they make the nazca pictographs and lines without being airborne?

Draw them and scale them up perhaps.

The best question is how did all those ancient maps showing Antartica shore line without the ice, before it was even discovered come about.

That I can't answer but I believe it has been debunked.

I believe that we were either visited or there have been civilizations here before us which surpass or equal our level of sophistication.Anybody with any more insights please let me know them.

machiaventa :rolleyes:

Funny that these highly advanced or alien races use local materials with clear evidence of masonry on them. If I was an alien wishing to build an airport at Machu Pichu I'd use neutronium or unobtanium. There would be clear evidence of alien artefacts and not just pictograms open to interpretation.

Machi said:Ancient myths and stories tell of the stones being moved by the sound of trumpets aimed at the particular stone to moved.

Ancient myths may be speaking metaphorically. How were these myths recorded?

15,000 BC for machu Pichu? I hadnt heard that one before. the vidence for alien visits in the past is debateable in many ways. Which sites is Hancock talking about?

And this is the reason why I have written to Borders Books and Music to inform them that they have the books of Graham Hancock in the wrong section. I find them under Anthropology/Archaeology in nearly ever Borders I visit.

Hancock's fiction belongs in the New Age section. He is the epitome of pseudoscience.

Case in point is the mention by the above poster about Antarctica.

Hancock says:

"The best recent evidence suggests that Queen Maud Land and the neighbouring regions shown on the map, passed through a long ice-free period which may not have come completely to an end until about six thousand years ago."

Hancock's "best recent evidence" is the Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0932813429/002-1240061-9087228?v=glance) by C.H. Hapgood and published in 1966.

Hapsgood has long since been refuted (McIntosh, 2000) and one need only refer to actual recent explorations of the region to see that the ice is tens or hundreds of thousands of years old. In fact, recent core samples of Queen Maud Land shows the ice to be 750,000 years bp (Poker, 2003).

This is a typical tactic of Hancock and pseudoscientists in general. Offer a plausible reference to which the average reader must track down to verify. He doesn't explain his citations fully, takes them out of context, or simply uses previously disproven citations of hypotheses because they fit his own contention.

The average reader that has an interest in subjects of Archaeology goes to one of the more trusted bookstores and asks, "where's the Archaeology section?" Upon arriving there, books of various authors are found, but few in a store like Borders will be anything that they don't feel are marketable. Fingerprints of the Gods and extraordinary tales like it are always going to be marketable because people want to read the fantastic!

As far as Michu Picchu goes, current evidence suggests that the complex was built by the Inca emperor Pachacuti in the mid-15th century. It is not from 15,000 BCE! In spite of what Hancock would have you believe.

McIntosh, Gregory (2000). The Piri Reis Map of 1513 (http://www.ugapress.uga.edu/books/shelf/0820321575.html). The University of Georgia Press, ISBN 0-8203-2157-5 (cl.).

Poker, M. (September 2003) Oldest ever ice core is a ticket to prehistory (http://www.coldregions.org/A_A_G015.htm)(link is to abstract only). New Scientist, 179(2411), p.20- 21

Those big dates of scientists do impress some don’t they?
Stick to the evidence that isn’t easily explained away, and the real story unfolds.
But if ETI have visited us, and or are visiting us, I ask WHY!?
Even that answer is available and is thousands of years old.
Some just wont accept ETI till they see crater chains on earth, and ships over our cities.

Those big dates of scientists do impress some don?t they?

Only those that lack the intelligence or education to understand their significance or how they are arrived at.

Stick to the evidence that isn?t easily explained away, and the real story unfolds.

From what I've seen of your pseudoscience/conspiracy dribble, I don't think you will recognize "evidence" if it dropped out of the sky and fell in your lap.

this is really intresting, what about the prymids , i have herd that thye also were built by alians they are only about 1/60th of a degree off faceing prefectly east west north south.adn the rocks used came from extreamly far away and are like 15 tuns each i think im not sure

dagr8n8, the pyramids of Egypt, along with much of Egyptology, is very fascinating. But don't go just by what you hear. Research it. Ask questions. Don't just settle for fantastic explanation because it is fantastic.

Here's a good question to ask:
Is that alignment to the magnetic directions? Perfectly East today was not the same as "perfectly East" during the fourth dynasty (around 2500 years ago).

Also, keep in mind that, although technology has given modern civilizations many advantages, the people that existed several thousand years ago were every bit as intelligent as those that exist today. They had the ability, motivation, and time to build many wonderous things and deserve credit for their accomplishments. Hell, the human race deserves the credit for the accomplishments we've made! Don't be so quick to assign them to aliens that have no artifactual or epigraphical evidence to support their existence.

There is a preponderance of evidence that suggests that the pyramids were manmade between 2500 - 3000 BCE.

I suggest:
Ehrich, Robert (1992) Chronologies in Old World Archaeology. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0226194477/theancientegypts/002-9294648-8380036) University Press of Chicago

Petrie, W.M. Flinders (2000) The Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh (http://www.touregypt.net/petrie/) Kegan Paul.

Wilkinson, Toby A.H. (1999) Early Dynastic Egypt (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0415186331/theancientegypts/104-1720752-7764706) Routledge

If you check no other link above, be sure to check the middle one. Its a real gem.

SkinWalker, I am sure you are aware the alignment of the pyramids is to
true north, not magnetic north. The Egyptians were accomplished astronomers.
Her is an article published in Nature that estimated the age of the Great Pyramid
at about 4500 years. The age of the pyramids is still contested, according to
which branch of science you follow.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1024779.stm

dagr8n8, the pyramids of Egypt, along with much of Egyptology, is very fascinating. But don't go just by what you hear. Research it. Ask questions. Don't just settle for fantastic explanation because it is fantastic.

I would also ask you to follow your own advice.

Just because one theory is accepted as fact, doesn't make it so. IMO, The origins of the Pyramids(ect.) are still very debatable.

Has anyone else been puzzled by the fact that there seems to be pyramid structures in so many of our Ancient cultures?

I.

Has anyone else been puzzled by the fact that there seems to be pyramid structures in so many of our Ancient cultures?

It's not that puzzling, I think what we have to accept is that humans were far more mobile far earlier than we'd previously thought, and that many of the discoverers we think 'found' the Americas, etc, were treading over old ground. After all, it's now established that Vikings found their way to the Americas, well before Columbus. So maybe there were even earlier adventurers?

As mummies have supposedly been found to show traces of nicotine and cocaine (although I understand this is fairly controversial) and these substances come from South American fauna, where they also have Ziggurats, and make mummies of sorts, one wonders if Egypt imported drugs, cultire, and architecture? That would just imply a trade route, but such widespread travelling would also explain the alignments of structures in Cambodia, as the architect was obviously keen astronomer.

People must also remember that the "pyramid" design is one of the strongest and most stable architectural forms known. This is not some futuristic knowledge found to be out of place in the past. When ancient civilizations sought to build large and grander structures, they went with established scientific knowledge and what worked best...

Paleo SETI research gets most scientists fired from their jobs when discovered by their employers. Their reputations are lost along with the paycheck. When one seriously studies ancient documents, paintings, and so on there is a great mound of evidence that is not easily explained away. If just half of these so called de-bunkers did their job on the evidence and not on the person we would be far more advanced in our understanding of the facts.

If just half of these so called de-bunkers did their job on the evidence and not on the person we would be far more advanced in our understanding of the facts.

Would it surprise you that we probably have examined the evidence and the evidence against.

That is why we laugh at you.

Von Daniken, Sitchen, Bauval, Hoagland, Velikovsky, Lazar et al are simply scamming the public. Deal with it

Friends:
After reading the book titled"Fingerprints of the Gods", it caused me to seriously wonder if we have been visited by extra terrestrial being in the past.
The level of technology required build some of sites which are discussed in the book, supposedly did not exist.It is obvious that a high level of understanding concerning the stars and their movements was present.To build Machu Pichu even even with todays technology is all but impossible.How did they make the nazca pictographs and lines without being airborne?
The best question is how did all those ancient maps showing Antartica shore line without the ice, before it was even discovered come about. I believe that we were either visited or there have been civilizations here before us which surpass or equal our level of sophistication.Anybody with any more insights please let me know them.

machiaventa :rolleyes:
----------
M*W: machiaventa, I agree with you (but don't tell ConsequentAtheist because he doesn't understand any of this)! I ask these questions: How else could we have evolved beyond apes? It would seem that we should still be in apelike form instead of the intelligent beings that we are. Where did the Neanderthals go? Why did they die out? We didn't descend from them, but we branched off before them, and we should still be apes, but we're not. Did they interbreed with a higher being? I think so. When did we realize we were naked? I don't believe that was from modesty or anything. I believe we became intelligent enough to make clothes to keep us warm from the cold. Where did intelligent life come from? I tend to believe they weren't already here but genetically compatible with the apes. Although I'm not religious, I believe there could be some legendary truths in Genesis (i.e. "sons of gods, daughters of men," etc.). I believe the order of the Torah is incorrect. I believe the story of the great deluge took place before the story of Adam and Eve. But all those Bible stories were plagarized from the earlier Sumerian stories of the great deluge.

The Nazca Lines: Why were they carved so big into the rock that they could only be seen from miles up? I don't think apes did this. There had to be some intelligent life that carved these images into the rock plain.

Something interesting was announced today. The view to Mars was lost. (Yeah, right!). Remember a few years back when the Hubble was sent up? Then all of a sudden it was "broken." I don't believe it was broken. I believe they saw something they couldn't explain and shut it off. In reality, it may not be anything significant, but it might LOOK significant.

The pyramids: You know, I don't believe the story that the pyramids were created by the hard labor of slaves. I believe they were made by an intelligent race with the use of precise technology and possibly anti-gravity. The other thing I think is that perhaps at the time they were made Titans ruled the Earth. That wouldn't make it so hard to build the pyramids if a race of Titans built them. As far as their alignment, there's something to that. I just haven't gotten into it, but I think it has something to do with the skies, kind of like an observatory.

Humanity: Where did our intelligence come from? Did it just evolve along with the apes, or did an intelligent race interbreed with the apes. I believe the latter. Whomever or whatever gave us our intelligence, I believe it was from the specific breeding. Otherwise, why are there still great apes today? Perhaps we are looking at our distant future, but it appears to be our ancient past. There was a crossover (or maybe there will be a crossover) of time and space. You know, you can only go so far in the future that you crossover to the past (or the other way around). The universe is cyclic. Life is cyclic. It doesn't go on forever, it just comes back around.

It's not that puzzling, I think what we have to accept is that humans were far more mobile far earlier than we'd previously thought, and that many of the discoverers we think 'found' the Americas, etc, were treading over old ground. After all, it's now established that Vikings found their way to the Americas, well before Columbus. So maybe there were even earlier adventurers?

Well, It used to be taught as fact that Columbus was the 1st to reach the America's.

Who's to say we won't find additional theories that are passed on as fact today, only to be proven false in the future?

Too much of our History is built upon theories. All it takes is one of these theories to be proven wrong to bring down the entire house.

Watch em fall now,,,,

ADDED
We were also taught that electrons flowed from + to – at one time in schools.
We were also taught that the sound barrier would never be broken.
,,,, and the list is endless.

SkinWalker, I am sure you are aware the alignment of the pyramids is to true north, not magnetic north.

Sure... but I was demonstrating that there are questions that he should ask that invoke his critical thinking skills. I always cringe when I hear people say (or write), "I heard that...."

The age of the pyramids is still contested, according to
which branch of science you follow.

This is true, but the quibble that archaeologists have among themselves is usually on the order of a few hundred (sometimes within a hundred) years. Certainly not within the magnitude of difference that Graham Hancock and his cohorts suggest (10,000+ years).

The origins of the Pyramids(ect.) are still very debatable.

Has anyone else been puzzled by the fact that there seems to be pyramid structures in so many of our Ancient cultures?

To those who've studied one or both cultures, it isn't so mystifying. But to the lay-person, it can become "puzzling," particularly when someone like Graham Hancock makes wild inferences, many of them patently false.

I'm not blowing you off, I just don't have time for a more detailed explanation, but I'll get back to this topic in a day or so with an explanation that may shed some light on the similarities between ancient Egyptian and Mesoamerican pyramids (I'm at work and need to reference some of my notes at home).

When one seriously studies ancient documents, paintings, and so on there is a great mound of evidence that is not easily explained away. If just half of these so called de-bunkers did their job on the evidence and not on the person we would be far more advanced in our understanding of the facts.

And that, folks, is a proper demonstration of pseudoarcheologic rhetoric. In fact, that retort is almost cut & paste of a Graham Hancock website.

List the "evidence" and lets discuss it. I won't pretend to be able to explain everything, but lack of an explanation is certainly not evidence of "paleo SETI" (itself, a pseudoscientific term).

How else could we have evolved beyond apes?

Conversely, how could natural selection and evolution not exceed the intelligence of lesser primates?

It would seem that we should still be in apelike form instead of the intelligent beings that we are.

It seems painfully obvious that we are in ape-like form. The genetic distance between Homo sapiens and Pan troglodytes is about 1.6%.

Where did the Neanderthals go? Why did they die out?

Many species have reached evolutionary "dead ends" for many reasons: Australopithecus robustus, A. boisei, etc. But it may be that the didn't die out but evolved. There is evidence to support both sides of that argument, though most anthropologists tend to agree that Neanderthal man is evolved from Homo erectus and the population discontinued rather than evolve into archaic H. sapiens.

We didn't descend from them, but we branched off before them, and we should still be apes, but we're not.

Why "should we still be apes?"

Did they interbreed with a higher being?

Wouldn't you expect some out of place, alien protein within our DNA? Instead, we have protiens that are remarkably consistent with the rest of the animals on the planet, particularly with primates. I'm amazed at the reaches people will go when answers aren't readily available. There have been countless discoveries of early hominids at various stages of evolution that clearly shows a transition from primate to modern human. There's no evidence of a sudden introduction of "new DNA" but rather gradual evolution.

Although I'm not religious, I believe there could be some legendary truths in Genesis (i.e. "sons of gods, daughters of men," etc.). I believe the order of the Torah is incorrect.

Sounds like you have a "religious belief" to me. It may not be an established or practiced religion, but your beliefs (on this point of the "emergence of man") seem to meet the same desire for explanation that many of the world's religions do.

The Nazca Lines: Why were they carved so big into the rock that they could only be seen from miles up? I don't think apes did this. There had to be some intelligent life that carved these images into the rock plain.

First, the lines were't carved into rock. The topsoil and rocks were removed to expose the lighter soil underneath. Producing these lines was easily within the abilities of the Nazca peoples. But you are right.. there was an intelligent life that created them. Second, the Nazca were primitive, but every bit as intelligent as you and I. Many theories abound among anthropologists and archaeologists about the purpose of these lines: running tracks for atheletes, ceremonial pilgrimage sites (there is evidence that the lines were traveled, perhaps by walking), homage to the dead, a calendar system, etc.

The pyramids: You know, I don't believe the story that the pyramids were created by the hard labor of slaves.

There is evidence to support your belief... in fact, many current anthropologists, archaeologists and researchers of Egyptology believe that the workers were not slaves at all, but paid.

I believe they were made by an intelligent race with the use of precise technology and possibly anti-gravity.

I believe the same thing. Only I think you and I disagree on the antigravity methods. I tend to think that people-power and clever mechanics was the method of anti-gravity. Heroditus recorded the building of pyramids in his writings: "The work went on in three-monthly shifts, 100,000 men in a shift. It took ten years of this oppressive slave labour to build the track along which the blocks were hauled..." Though current evidence supports that at least some of the pyramids were constructed by paid workers.

A short quote from W.M. Flinders Petrie: "The Great Pyramid contained about 2,300,000 stones, averaging 50 x 50 x 28 inches, or 2½ tons each. If 8 men brought 10 stones, 100,000 would bring 125,000 stones each season or the total number in less than 20 years."

The other thing I think is that perhaps at the time they were made Titans ruled the Earth. That wouldn't make it so hard to build the pyramids if a race of Titans built them.

Except that during the period that the Pyramids were built, there is no artifactual or epigraphical evidence to even suggest such a thing.

As far as their alignment, there's something to that. I just haven't gotten into it, but I think it has something to do with the skies, kind of like an bservatory.

Exactly. Imagine people as intelligent as contemporary humans. Now imagine that there is no mass media entertainment (television, movies, internet). Now imagine that there is very little light pollution. Its easy to imagine then that the night sky was a wonderous thing indeed and that many people were very intimate with its patterns. Kate Spence (2000) effectively modeled how the pyramids were aligned and even accounted for some minor deviations that researchers previously had difficulty explaining.

Humanity: Where did our intelligence come from? Did it just evolve along with the apes, or did an intelligent race interbreed with the apes. I believe the latter. ... Otherwise, why are there still great apes today?

Evolution is a branching and splitting process that involves populations. A good example is the orangutan. There are two primary species, the Sumatran and the Borneo. Already the two can be identified based on physical characteristics, but they can interbreed and create fertile young so they are technically part of the same species. In perhaps a few thousand (though more likely a few million years), assuming the two populations remain separate, there will be enough genetic distance due to genetic drift, mutation and selection, that the two will not be able to interbreed. Perhaps one population will no longer be able to survive due to a change in environment, but the other will flourish.

This is similar to human evolution. The ape doesn't merely cease to exist because the human took charge. But perhaps populations of apes were outcompeted by humans or predated by humans. The gorilla, for instance.

I would also ask you to follow your own advice.

If I've cited some reference that is incorrect, or stated some fact that isn't true, please let me know. But I will only cite that with which I've been able to see the evidence. If I "hear" of something, I look it up. In a credible source.

Just because one theory is accepted as fact, doesn't make it so.

"Accepted" theories are so because they are supported by testable hypotheses. These have far more credibility than untested or untestable hypotheses. That isn't to say that a theory can't some day be revised due to new information/data. But this is a far cry from the pseudoscience dribble that comes from the likes of Hancock.

IMO, The origins of the Pyramids(ect.) are still very debatable.

How so? There is a preponderance of artifactual and epigraphical evidence. Do you know of some new evidence?

Has anyone else been puzzled by the fact that there seems to be pyramid structures in so many of our Ancient cultures?

As stated before, the pyramid is a common sense structure due to stability. But in examining pyramids of different cultures, such as the Egyptian and the Mesoamerican, we can note the many differences beyond pyramid shape.

Mesoamerican pyramids were constructed for ceremonial purpose rather than funerary. You might also note that Mesoamerican pyramids were designed to be climbed after construction, which probably lent reason to the lower angle than their Egyptian counterparts. The pyramid is merely a logical method of creating a large structure that needs to rely upon gravity for stability.

If pyramids were build by aliens why wouldnt they use mortar or cement to hold the stones together? Surely any space faring race would be familiar with the concepts of holding shit together. No one wants tall buildings falling down all round the place now do they? :eek: If they build them as monuments to last through the ages why wouldn't they use the extra precaution of cementing them with mortar? unless of course it was merely humans who built them and they hadn't invented mortar yet.

Now is when someone steps in and tells me they did use mortar to build the pyramids, in which case you should all disregard this entire post, coz I really didn't bother looking into it... :p :m:

This is true, but the quibble that archaeologists have among themselves is usually on the order of a few hundred (sometimes within a hundred) years. Certainly not within the magnitude of difference that Graham Hancock and his cohorts suggest (10,000+ years).

In reference to the debated issue of 'the age of the Pyramids/Sphinx at Giza',,,, I don't believe the difference is with a few hundred years. Graham Hancock isn't the only one suggesting a much older time frame. There are others, even geologist who state that the weathering on the Sphinx is clearly caused by water. Specifically, water falling from above(rain water), not flooding. There is a distinct difference, and one the Egyptologist have yet to explain.

Skinwalker, there is a very large ego factor that the Egyptologist have regarding their current views of Giza. They're very reluctant to accept new theories based on new evidence in part because they've developed so many additional theories around the age theories. For them to accept the new evidence, or to even consider it, they would have to rethink much of the area's history. Thus far, they respond to this new evidence with smirks and giggles. Very unprofessional if you ask me, but then again, not surprising. The arrogance of man knows few boundries.

Another question that's always puzzled me. Why doesn't the Great Pyramid(or the other 2), have any hyrogliphics writings inside? The Egyptians documented nearly everything, yet no writings inside their greatest achievement, and no documentation of when/how it was built. This just doesn't make sense to me.

Yes, but Robert Schoch is more or less alone in his hypothesis of the real date of the Sphinx. His contention is that the weathering of the limestone used in its construction is proof of the age, however, there are many other geologic features that suggest that the limestone indeed would have weathered as it did from the 4th Dynasty.

Schoch's "theory" is right in line with Hancock's and Bauval's, however, and, not surprisingly, they embrace him very readily. The important thing to consider here is that there is only one geologist who contends a new age of the Sphinx (that I'm aware of). And he's not a ver experienced one at that.

Schoch believes that it has to be prior to 5000 BCE due to the lack of erosional water in the vicinity of the Sphinx after that point, though he doesn't consider seasonal and subsurface moisture related to the nearby river; and he points out that in 10500 BCE, the Sphinx would be facing the constellation Leo (never mind that Leo wasn't a constellation that the Egyptians recognized).

One thing is for sure: no other monument in the world is dated based upon erosional forces. And I can think of no geologist (my minor is in geology, so I know a few) that uses star alignments to corroborate anything. Dating methods likely employed with the Sphinx include radiocarbon, dendrochronology, stratigraphy (a relative dating method), etc. I'll have to look through some notes and see if there were any specific methods, but there were more than one used and they basically supported and corroborated each other.

So yes. The Sphinx was very likely constructed in the Fourth Dynasty.

Hawass, Z., and M.Lehner (1994). "Remnant of a Lost Civilisation?" Archaeology September/October: 44-47

Skinwalker,

I don't put much credence into the Leo aspect of the Sphinx connection either. But, I think one of the questions we have here is whether or not the Egyptians of that time even built it.

Could you elaborte on the other geological features of the Sphinx that point towards its construction during the 4th dynasty? The only real evidence I know of, besides chemical dating methods, is the Pharoah who is supposedly carved on the face of the Sphinx. Using his time as ruler of Egypt to date the Sphinx.

Can you comment on my other questions regarding the documenting of the Great Pyramid's construction, and the lack of hyrogliphics within its walls. This to me, is very damaging to the standard theories. Where is the documentation for its construction?

Now is when someone steps in and tells me they did use mortar to build the pyramids, in which case you should all disregard this entire post, coz I really didn't bother looking into it...

Actually, they did use mortar :D , particularly in the larger seams. It was typically irregular limestone pieces and globs of gypsum (the actual mortar matrix). Within the mortar have been found fired reddish clay particles, bits of stone tools, evidence of tool use by flecks of green copper (from chisels) and even pot sherds. The interesting thing is that it can contain small bits of charcoal, in sample sizes (some of which can be used for dating) but this charcoal indicates that a heating process was used with the gypsum.

:cool:

Now is when someone steps in and tells me they did use mortar to build the pyramids, in which case you should all disregard this entire post, coz I really didn't bother looking into it...

Actually, they did use mortar :D , particularly in the larger seams. It was typically irregular limestone pieces and globs of gypsum (the actual mortar matrix). Within the mortar have been found fired reddish clay particles, bits of stone tools, evidence of tool use by flecks of green copper (from chisels) and even pot sherds. The interesting thing is that it can contain small bits of charcoal, in sample sizes (some of which can be used for dating) but this charcoal indicates that a heating process was used with the gypsum.

:cool:

@VRob: I'll have to get back to you later tonight on those questions. They're intriguing, but the lack of epigraphical evidence inside the pyramid is an ethnographic problem rather than a extraterrestrial one.

@VRob: I'll have to get back to you later tonight on those questions. They're intriguing, but the lack of epigraphical evidence inside the pyramid is an ethnographic problem rather than a extraterrestrial one.

Skinwalker,

I have not mentioned an extraterrestial incident.

In fact, I wasn't even thinking about one. If I was to take a guess, I'd say the Giza structures could be remnants from a pre-Egyptian civilization. We know that the current sea level is well over 200 ft. above what it was around 10,000 BC. Today, 90% of our population resides on or very near a coast. Could it be that a pre-Egyptian/pre-Sumarian society could have existed?

Look at the newly found ruins just off the shores of Cuba, or Japan.

Actually, they did use mortar

Guddammit! This always happens when I shoot my mouth off when stoned. You'd think I'd learn...

Skinwalker,

I have not mentioned an extraterrestial incident.

No, you didn't. Sorry... I didn't mean to imply that. The original poster/thread starter began with a question about Graham Hancock, who does imply the "extraterrestrial" influance. That's what I've been trying to keep my posts relavant to.

Look at the newly found ruins just off the shores of Cuba, or Japan.

Which ones? I know there is a very questionable find in deep water of "megaliths," but to date, nothing has been shown that suggests it's any less natural than the "bimini road" formation (which is demonstrably natural, btw). There have been some other recent finds, but the details elude me at the moment.

I'll have to get back to this more later.... just slipping on between classes.

SkinWalker, I'm not trying to be a smartass, but you did say to correct any errors you
may have posted. I suppose you overlooked it, because I know you know better!
================================================== ==========
by SkinWalker:
"
There is a preponderance of evidence that suggests that the pyramids were manmade and no more than 2500 - 3000 years old."
================================================== ==============
I'm sure you know the generally accepted date for the construction of the Great Pyramid was around 2560 B.C. That means 4564 years old, of course.
In another post, you mentioned Heroditus as recording the construction as:
"Heroditus recorded the building of pyramids in his writings: "The work went on in three-monthly shifts, 100,000 men in a shift. It took ten years of this oppressive slave labour to build the track along which the blocks were hauled..." Though current evidence supports that at least some of the pyramids were constructed by paid workers."
The references I saw listed said 20 years instead of 10 years, but that is not the issue. Heroditus was a Fifth century Greek historian. He reported that his information
on the construction came from his Egyptian GUIDES, for Christ sake! Why do you quote such as this when you supposedly rely on the "scientific method?"

SkinWalker, I'm not trying to be a smartass, but you did say to correct any errors you
may have posted. I suppose you overlooked it, because I know you know better!
================================================== ==========
by SkinWalker:
"
There is a preponderance of evidence that suggests that the pyramids were manmade and no more than 2500 - 3000 years old."
================================================== ==============

I'm sure you know the generally accepted date for the construction of the Great Pyramid was around 2560 B.C. That means 4564 years old, of course.

Hehe... you got me. I was thinking 2500 - 3000 BCE, but somehow the neurons between my brain and fingers created "years old." I'm sure it's caffeine related :D

In another post, you mentioned Heroditus ... He reported that his information
on the construction came from his Egyptian GUIDES, for Christ sake! Why do you quote such as this when you supposedly rely on the "scientific method?"

I have to agree with you about Heroditus, he was more of a "tourist" than a "historian." Still, his writings were based on actual travels as best as we can tell, and the account, while likely the result of some Egyptian guide's embelishment and "stringing along" to keep his business, can give us a clear indication that the labor itself occured. I'm sure if there were any fantastic means at work (other than 100,000 laborers), Heroditus would have been the first write it up.

I wouldn't use works of early literaries for exclusive evidence, but they can offer some of the color or feel of a period that stict adherence to interpreting artifacts cannot.

But Heroditus "toured" Egypt in the 5th century B.C., not the 25th century B.C. Two
thousand years later is not exactly the same period.

I have only the words of Col. Jessup (http://www.moviewavs.com/Movies/Few_Good_Men/feellike.wav) to offer.

I suppose I should read Heroditus more carefully..... I always had the impression that he was there during one of the construction periods....

Now... where did I leave my crow sandwich?

No problem. I figure you were somehow confusing the Fifth Dynasty with the Fifth
Century B.C.

Could you elaborte on the other geological features of the Sphinx that point towards its construction during the 4th dynasty? The only real evidence I know of, besides chemical dating methods, is the Pharoah who is supposedly carved on the face of the Sphinx. Using his time as ruler of Egypt to date the Sphinx.

There are two leading theories by geo-archaeologists (Harrell and Reader come to mind) on the age of the Sphinx based on the weathering of the Limestone. Much of this is connected with the amount of time needed for weathering to have done the job as well as whether or not there was sufficient water available (and when) to do the job.

Reader suggests that the Sphinx was constructed during the 2nd Dynasty (Reader, 1999) between 5000 and 7000 BCE. Harrell maintains that it was during the 4th Dynasty, between 2500 and 3000 BCE.

Reader, who's actually a geological engineer, points out that the sand and debris filled limestone quarry nearby (which dates to the 4th Dynasty) collects surface runoff and, therefore, prevents the surface hydrology from eroding the Sphinx.

Harrell contends that there is significant anecdotal accounts of current surface runoff actually reaching the Sphinx and that if surface water (from storms, flash-flood type torrents, etc.) reaches the Sphinx now, then it certainly did throughout history. He also disagrees with Reader's point that most of the runoff would remain surface flow and contends that a significant amount would become sub-surface flow after absorbtion by the limestone.

In short, Harrell sees the erosion as physical and chemical weathering brought on by surface and subsurface hydrology.

Either way, the evidence seems clear that the Sphinx is no older than the 2nd Dynasty and this is based upon the stratigraphy of the area. The strata that the Sphinx doesn't intrude upon are older than 7000 BCE.

Here's a link that I had from some college notes... to be fair, I only skimmed it, but it appears to sum up both the "old Sphinx" and the "young Sphinx" arguments. www.uiowa.edu (http://www.uiowa.edu/~anthro/webcourse/lost/sphinx/introduction.html).

I, personally, find the debate fascinating and both sides are persuasive (Reader and Harrell). I don't, however, give Schoch and West much credit... their contention that the Sphinx and the Giza plateau constructions are the work of other-than-Egyptians doesn't appear to hold much water.

Can you comment on my other questions regarding the documenting of the Great Pyramid's construction, and the lack of hyrogliphics within its walls. This to me, is very damaging to the standard theories. Where is the documentation for its construction?

I really couldn't say... I also couldn't find any literature on the topic. But I suspect that this is an ethnographical problem. The purpose of the Egyptian pyramids was a funerary one. Perhaps the builders didn't see the logic in leaving behind a record of their work inside a tomb. Even if the dead do rise, they wouldn't stay there in the dark, they'll exit the tomb.

That's but one hypothesis, and quite off the cuff at that.

Sources:

J.A. Harrell, (1994). "The Sphinx Controversy - Another Look at the Geological Evidence (http://www.antiquityofman.com/harrell.html)", [i]KMT Vol 5 No. 2, p70-74.

Reader, Colin (1999). Khufu Knew the Sphinx (http://www.ianlawton.com/as1.htm). To date, unpublished, but Reader has used this for numerous lectures, etc. (http://www.nunki.net/isis/spring01reader.htm).

The other thing I think is that perhaps at the time they were made Titans ruled the Earth. That wouldn't make it so hard to build the pyramids if a race of Titans built them.


:eek: w0w! :eek:


I think you just might be special :eek:

Medicine Woman
Has a very valid concept. The Nephilim of old were supposed to be the off spring of “fallen angels” ET?, and mankind. Many of the legends speak of them. What gifts of powers (technological gadgets hidden in swords and shields *grins*) may have been given we don’t know. Our education system in the usa is so damned biased, and act like fanatical religionists just as much as the scientists do, that pure research looking for true answers and not a bunch of mumbo jumbo get very difficult and frustrating. The answers are there, just digging through all the crap to get to them makes it a pain in the ass. Then when you want to discuss these investigations there seems to be ones that want to twist the topic, and the topic poster, till they leave in frustration. Ever wonder why?

Medicine Woman
Has a very valid concept.

Not at all. There isn't a shred of validity to the idea of "Titans" roaming the planet prior to early dynistic egypt.

The Nephilim of old were supposed to be the off spring of ?fallen angels? ET?, and mankind. Many of the legends speak of them.

There are many legends and superstitions in the world... there were many things that early civilizations couldn't explain, so they created metaphysical explanations. The metaphysical has no place in science since it cannot by definition be measured.

Our education system in the usa is so damned biased, and act like fanatical religionists just as much as the scientists do, that pure research looking for true answers and not a bunch of mumbo jumbo get very difficult and frustrating.

Don't you mean, "the metaphysical and speculative explanations get sidestepped for explanations and theories that are supported by evidence?" In that case, the bias is justified. Metaphysical garbage (UFOs, magic, religion, esp...) has no place in the classroom.

The answers are there, just digging through all the crap to get to them makes it a pain in the ass.

"Digging through all the crap" to get answers is the lifelong passion of many, if not most, scientists. But the metaphysical explanations (i.e. the consideration that an ancient civilization's explanation for something is empirical evidence of ET's) are necessarily discarded.

Then when you want to discuss these investigations there seems to be ones that want to twist the topic, and the topic poster, till they leave in frustration. Ever wonder why?

Nope. They can leave. Fuck em. This is a "Science" board and the "Pseudoscience" forum is about discussing that garbage to expose the faults in pseudo- and alternative sciences as far as I'm concerned. You kooks can avoid sciforums altogether and I won't miss you.

Oh but we would miss the science boards self-appointed preacher like TheVisitor is in religion. If yah can’t beat the evidence, beat up on the one presenting it, Wonderful tactic Skinwalker. The evidence is there, but you wont and cant refute it, only muddy and spoil the clarity of what someone posts.

The evidence is there, but you wont and cant refute it, only muddy and spoil the clarity of what someone posts.

Evidence of some advanced civilization circa 10000 BCE?

I can't refute what you keep in your brain-housing-group.

Was a date ever mentioned?...10000 BCE?
We never mentioned a date of 10,000 BCE

"We?" I don't recall you saying anything at all in this thread. But okay... let me revise to this: "evidence of some advanced civilization prior to the dynastic Egypt? I can't refute what either of you keep in your brain-housing groups."

Better? Thanks for pointing out my mistake.

But that wasnt in any post by me or her,,, yer funny, and cant read either.

But that wasnt in any post by me or her.

Then perhaps we're speaking of two different things. I was referring to MedicineWoman when she said:

I believe they were made by an intelligent race with the use of precise technology and possibly anti-gravity. The other thing I think is that perhaps at the time they were made Titans ruled the Earth.

And then you said:

Has a very valid concept.

And I said, "Not at all. There isn't a shred of validity to the idea of "Titans" roaming the planet prior to early dynistic egypt."

And you said:

The evidence is there, but you wont and cant refute it.

But I still can't refute "evidence" locked away in your brain-housing group.

yer funny, and cant read either.

If yah can?t beat the evidence, beat up on the one presenting it,

The Nephilim were known to be giants and have six fingers and six toes. The Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D. C., has or had human skeletal remains in particular femar of huge size. There are records of humans born even today with six fingers and six toes.

The Nephilim were known to be giants and have six fingers and six toes.

Known to whom? The only reference to this mythological being that I recall is from the Book of Genesis, which refers to Nephilim as the offspring of marriages between "daughters of humans" and "sons of God."

The Bible, particularly Genesis, is a dubious source of information at best.

Give a citation to a "Nephilim" discovery or the "giants of the Smithsonian," and perhaps I'll believe what you saying.

Try using your typing skills in the search engines SkinWalker, all you do is flap your fingers at the keys and see what you track down. Who knows you may just find something that isn’t know here? Or at least KNOWN to those that have already done those searches. Most are tired of bottle feeding people like you that refute with out evidence of their own. Well except the evidence of naivete and ignoring of posted information. Like, 1957 – Smithsonian – femur – 20+ feet. Type that into your address bar for a search about it. Besides, those that want to post about this kind of research, do you really think that they give a shit IF YOU believe? Get some social skills would yah?

Try using your typing skills in the search engines SkinWalker, all you do is flap your fingers at the keys and see what you track down.

I rarely rely on "search engines" as you put it. Google is good to get a direction to go in, look for a bit of current information, etc., but when it comes to anthropological information like you just mentioned I utilize databases such as Anthropology Plus to get the citation and then track down the article in a specific journal

Who knows you may just find something that isn?t know here?

I tried to translate that in babelfish.com, then I realized you were just "flapping at the keyboard." There's nothing regarding "giants" or "nephilim" to find anywhere except on the kook boards.

You come in here and try to talk the talk, but in the end you can't do it. Simply applying some scientific sounding words to your half-baked ideas doesn't make your theories true. All it does is create a bit of ambiguous credibility for those that are already gullible. You overtly appeal to authority in many of your posts, citing how NASA is interested in your "research" and how you've "submitted proposals for funding," etc, but then admonish those who "are too blind" to see your brand of evidence.

Or at least KNOWN to those that have already done those searches. Most are tired of bottle feeding people like you that refute with out evidence of their own.

So stop talking bullshit and provide a direct citation to something that you claim. You seem to think that the burdon of proof for your wild-ass claims needs to be on those that read your posts. Only the gullible will accept what someon like you says at face value. But I'm not running to Google or other search engines just to find something on a kook board to back you up. Put up or shut the fuck up.

Well except the evidence of naivete and ignoring of posted information. Like, 1957 ? Smithsonian ? femur ? 20+ feet. Type that into your address bar for a search about it.

And just for the sake of argument, I did. Here's what came back. (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=1957+Smithsonian+femur+20%2B+feet&btnG=Google+Search) Show me what I was supposed to see.

Besides, those that want to post about this kind of research, do you really think that they give a shit IF YOU believe? Get some social skills would yah?

If they are actually doing research, yes. The goal of research is to explain. If they are concocting half-baked ideas based on some bullshit they read on the kook boards, no. I'd expect that they would stay on the kook boards and off of the science boards and my social skills would be moot only.

The babel continues. :(

Sorry, I had made an assumption that wasn’t true. Quite apparently by your link everyone can see I was wrong in my afforded assumption you had computer research skills. :cool:

There are other words that you may want to try, but try them each also. Words like giant
giants
Nephelim (with various spellings)
help on search engine usage
kook sites
.edu sites

:p

:eek: Yesterday (04/25/04) on one of the Discovery A&E Channels I viewed the program entitled "UFOs vs. The Government"
I became interested in this SOBEPS group and the following of the "Belgium Wave"

On a number of eyewitness accounts they make mentioning to the building (where the UFO was hovering over a kind of housing for elderly people.

I'd like to know if anyone got a list names of the occupants in the housing complext??? :eek:

I really couldn't say... I also couldn't find any literature on the topic. But I suspect that this is an ethnographical problem. The purpose of the Egyptian pyramids was a funerary one. Perhaps the builders didn't see the logic in leaving behind a record of their work inside a tomb. Even if the dead do rise, they wouldn't stay there in the dark, they'll exit the tomb.
That's but one hypothesis, and quite off the cuff at that.

I don't have any particular history book to quote now, but...
All the rest of the pyramids(also the proposed more ancient ones than the Great pyramid) have stone carwings and drawings in them (did you know that the outside of the pyramids was actually painted in colours?:)) Early theories said that pyramids were used for grain keeping, nowaday we say that it is for funeral purposes, but as I've been studing egyptian mythology (a hobby) I see that pyramids are not tombs (as resting places) , but constructs that were made with 2 purposes.
1. for the safekeeping of pharaohs body (no life in afterlife if your body is severly damaged by whatever factors in the living world).
2. they were the doors for the pharaohs Ka (spirit) to the land of the dead. You see, ancient egyptans believed that one first has to get to the land of the dead and that the fact of dying is not enough. A life in the land of the dead would mean immortality (as long as the body preserves) so even pharaohs who were god-kings had to earn their share of immortality. This was done by passing a varies of tests and also the Ka was weighted.Several ridles had to be answered, "word formulas" had to be spoken.
You see, egyptians were sneaky and they knew what questions they'd be asked so as every student today if he get's the exam questions prior to the exam itself you do two things- study the question, make a small paper in order to cheat. This iswhat the ancient egyptians did. Each pyramid has these guidelines of how to pass the test in the underworld: preset answers to questions that have to be answered, to which authoroty to turn to etc etc etc... these were preset instructions for every man, the particular personality wasn't important. And these word formulas... well my subjective oppinon-> Without such a formula before your eyes you'd have to have a hell of an exellent memory to pass the test. A pharaoh would have to be a "professor of divine science" to pass it /sarcasticaly speaking/
-> and also ->
when the soul was wighted in the underworld not only questions were asked but the person had to prove his identity and his good deads, his social standing, that he deserves to be a god after death (egyptian pharaohs had the privilege to become real gods after their death, not only immortal inhabitants of the land of the dead)
So there were carvings and paintings with pharaohs deeds and accomplishments. as every pharaohs name his name was inscribed and with a circle around it to point to his(her) divine rights. without the pharaohs name in the tomb pharaoh couldn't get through the trials, it was like an ID card/passport nowadays.
(of course to show his wealth treasures were put besides him and food and drinks and slaves to make his life in the underworld merrier, but that is not in the carving subject)
-> so for a pyramid to offer it's second most important
(in no priorities of order) function it simply had to have these guidlines, cheats, id cards and other evidence of pharaohs divinity. Without these no afterlife and afterlife was the whole point to even build that pyramid.
So a pyramid was useless to it's functions if it didn't have these carvings.

that is why the Great pyramid is so interesting. It seems that it was not built with the thought of ensuring immortality to a pharaoh or any other pharaoh to come because there were not the preset guidlines that each individual had, personality not important.
. I am not suggesting any other functions myself , I don't wan to speculate, I simply don't have any facts to work on, but to my knowledge the Great pyramid was/is useless as a doorway to immortality. and I don't think egyptians (or any other civilization) would have built smthing without a purpose. Purpose there was.


Well, as I'm a supporter of a pre-egyptian/summerian civilization I have an assumption which is only mine and you don't have to make anything of it (but the written above still counts as it deals with the egyptian civilization, which I don't think anyone of you would say - it didn't exist /smiles)
my proposal is that the great pyramid was built by a previous civilization for their own special unknown purposes, because the Great pyramid contradicts the very essence why egyptians built them.

and also it is interesting to note that all the later day pyramids were only copies of the great pyramid, they were smaller and less grand. well, maybe it had to do smthing with funding lol - I'm not suggesting this as proof for my assumption/theory, it's only a fact for you to think on yourselves.

----
this post was dedicated not to show that some pre-egyptian civilization existed, it was to show tha the great pyramid is outside of egyptian society, mythology, culture and religion. It doesn't fulfill it's functions, it has no afterlife function (just entombment of a body won't get you immortality). Therefore there are 3 versions:
1. it looks as if it is non-egyptian , then it was built by some others
2. it is of egyptian making, but is totally outside their culture (it was centered on death/afterlife). it doesn't do what a pyramid has to do. Like an arf with no strings - useless. If it was made by egyptians then the purpose is a real mystery and it certainly was other than afterlife and immortality of the pharaoh.
3. stone carvers were on strike (insert any other social event)
but to my mind it would be redicilous, because pharaohs powers were of a god-king.

p.s. pyramids cost an enormous sums of money and resources to build.
why didn't some later day pharaoh just use the empty pyramid, carve his name in it and make it his divine ascent place (they have done such things with simpler tombs)? maybe the Great pyramid had some very special purpose unlike other pyramids and was a taboo to touch.

pyramids cost an enormous sums of money and resources to build.
My research indicates they didnt cost so much money, they were built for the pharaohs as you say but the labour was free and the stone blocks were only made for the purpose of building pyramids, it was built for the pharaoh because he demanded it and because they were thought to be close to the gods everyone contributed to it, almost as a thankyou for being our glorious ruler sort of thing, your correct about resources and manpower though.

MW--"How else could we have evolved beyond apes?"
Language. Actually for a very long time we were rather smart apes, but we could only pass on what we learned in a limited way. We might have used fire and clubs, but only in a limited way. We can see this from excavations of Dragon Bone Hill in China. Human culture existed relatively unchanged for hundreds of thousands of years. We scavenged off the kills of larger predators. The evolution of the human tapeworm shows this. Then, something radical happened, and technology developed rapidly, coinciding with the loss of our massive skulls, which was replaced with brain mass. I believe this was the result of language. Language allowed hunting technology to accumulate. Even the tapeworm took advantage of our skills, and evolved a separate line, just for humans. With the leisure time afforded by adequate food supply, culture evolved. It is quite amazing, but hardly supernatural.

As to the accomplishments of the ancients, they spent much more time outdoors, and were quite clever, they also had loads of free time, since they didn't have jobs. They used celestial guides to draw straight lines in Nasca, Peru, much like Pacific Islanders used stars to navigate.

My research indicates they didnt cost so much money, they were built for the pharaohs as you say but the labour was free and the stone blocks were only made for the purpose of building pyramids, it was built for the pharaoh because he demanded it and because they were thought to be close to the gods everyone contributed to it, almost as a thankyou for being our glorious ruler sort of thing, your correct about resources and manpower though.
Your research is outdated.

According to the latest research the workers were paid with clothes, food, housing, free healthcare and maybe even tax cuts.
There are many carvings that show pyramid workers getting paid in food and clothing. There are many sceletons that show signs of mended bones and that the person had been cured and continued to work after. There were many traumas and doctors were all but free in the ancient world.
and that goes only for big hard larbour mass, highly qualified and well-paid workers (intellectual) were well paid in gold and exellent housing (not just housing).
You don't just build a pyramid by calling together 40 000 peasants, even with today's general education.
and of coure don't forget the "office" workers (distribution of food, clothes, money, paying the wages, organising it all, etc etc
and don't forget that in the ancient world gold and money was quite rare. Most things were paid not in shiny metal pieces, but in food, clothes, state benefits, tools (axes, jars, etc) things you could use everyday. And that was all over the world. Money usually was used just by the most rich people, not the general peasant.

and these all resources were given from the state budget

From what i've read i always thought they were all assigned jobs and given all they required to live in return for their services(food, clothes, pottery etc) as you say they had very little in the form of money so this was the easiest way to do things, i didnt see it is comming out of the state budget as most of what they produced was from resources in their own lands and by these same workers, there wasnt so much a circulation of money more a circulation of what was produced. The theory goes that the people that built the pyramids were farm workers from along the nile during the months when the nile flooded and they had little work to do, only a small party was left behind all year round(at least small compared to the numbers they had from the farms).

as I told you. in the ancient world and even in early middle age europe money was used only by aristocrats and rich people. paid worker ment that he got payment in natural products/tools/household goods/clothes.

And because they were free people/farmers, then all the clothes, food etc they got from the government was payment. If they'd been slaves then they would get all these things all year round.

besides, about budget. Who do you think gave them those clothes?
it's a bit unlogical - make clothes ourselves, then give them to ourselves.
they paid to the state in tax (natural products), craftmen made tools, clothes, sold them to those who wanted it, paid state in tax with what they created and/or money.
now state has a huge pile of food/tools/clothes that it then redistributes to it's needs.
nowadays money is = currency
then money was = gold, silver, rings, gold/silver coins, tools, food, clothes, pottery, jewlery, etc, etc.

people usually are too much attached to nowaday standarts to understand the same concept as it was in the past.

they paid to the state in tax (natural products), craftmen made tools, clothes, sold them to those who wanted it, paid state in tax with what they created and/or money.
now state has a huge pile of food/tools/clothes that it then redistributes to it's needs.
I thought that was pretty much what i said, guess i didnt explain myself as well as i thought, basically i was getting at the fact the reason farmers got paid all year round was because they worked on the pyramids when the farms were flooded and they couldnt work, i did say you was right about the money, thats why i said they didnt cost money because the costs were paid in products produced by the workers in the state, there was effectively a distributed wealth but with some kept back by the state for export purposes(papyrus and certain other goods were worth a lot of money).

basically i was getting at the fact the reason farmers got paid all year round was because they worked on the pyramids when the farms were flooded and they couldnt work
I had the impression that at the period the farmers didn't work at the pyramids they were not paid by the state when farming, but worked in a kinda free market where high taxes had to be paid. basically the state didn't pay them, they paid the state in taxes and what was left used for themselves. so it isn't that the state paid them all year round.
but I can be wrong and you are really welcome to prove me wrong. my interest is only the truth.

about the redistributed wealth -
the same as happens today, only nowadays the state redistributes money not goods (oh btw in NK the state still redistributes goods nowadays (tv's, cars, books etc), because it doesn't have any free money)

edit: this is a good conversation/discussion , could be transfered to the history forum :p

this is a good conversation/discussion , could be transfered to the history forum
Probably should be, my facts about the egyptians might be sketchy and out of date, but i guess thats ancient history for you, seems you have the facts sorted but then somebody else finds something that changes everything, im not sure how anybody can prove a lot to do with the pyramids, most of its still a mystery, and theres even a theory the great pyramid was a giant boom box, its all interesting to debate i guess, and we'll probably never know what it was all really about.
but I can be wrong and you are really welcome to prove me wrong. my interest is only the truth.
I have the same interest, im incredably curious when it comes to history as theres so many theorys about almost everything and its near impossible to find the truth for most things, i enjoy reading up on theorys though, and yours makes more sense than mine really.:)

then somebody else finds something that changes everything
last time this happened I had tears in my eyes from joy and excitement
it was when I watched this program :)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2004/stardisc.shtml

Very interesting, cant believe i missed the programme, i take it they concluded civilization evolved in europe before egypt? I wonder why theres no signs of it(until this).

not neceseraly a civilization, just an aspect of it, just proved that in some ways the until recently thought barbars were really advanced for that age compared to the rest of the world.
and also if you watch the programe, we can conclude that in those ancient times (as I had suspected before, but this is a good evidence) the "international" communications were really umm active. People weren't isolated (as up until now thought), but all of that time biggest civilizations had good communications with each other.

This might be the case where there is found cocain on egyptian mummies (cocain growns only in CA/SA)

This might be the case where there is found cocain on egyptian mummies (cocain growns only in CA/SA)
Thats very possible, the reason i say that is because the vikings are now thought to have discovered america and anybody with a reasonably large sized ship should be able to make the same journey along the coastline, the egyptians had juggernaughts and triremes that should be capable of the journey with a bit of luck, though its probably most likely a trading civilazation(such as the minoans) actually discovered far away lands like america so they could bring new goods back.

about the vikings : not now thought, but known for sure for some decades.
btw- know of the Kon Tiki and RA II expedition?

The balsa wood raft Kon-Tiki was built as a copy of a prehistoric South American vessel. Constructed of nine balsa logs collected from Equador, a crew of six men sailed the raft from Callao in Peru the 28th of April 1947 and landed on the island of Raroia in Polynesia after 101 days. This successful voyage of c.4300 miles proved that the islands in Polynesia were within the range of this type of prehistoric South American vessel. A documentary of the voyage won an Oscar in 1951 and the book about the expedition has been translated into no fewer than 66 languages.

Thor Heyerdahl built this 45 foot long copy of an ancient Egyptian papyrus vessel in 1969, with the aid of members of the Burundi tribe from Chad in Central Africa. Constructed at the foot of the Pyramids and named after the sun god Ra, it was later transported to Safi in Morocco, from where it set sail for Barbados. After c. 3000 miles there were problems with the construction of the stern, which could not take the strain. Just a short distance from Barbados the ship had to be abandoned. Ten months later four Aymara Indians from Bolivia, who still mastered the traditional art of building reed boats, built Ra II. This boat went on to complete a successful transatlantic crossing, covering the 4000 miles to Barbados in just 57 days. The voyages with Ra I and II proved that it had been possible with transatlantic contacts between the old civilisations and the Americas.

about the vikings : not now thought, but known for sure for some decades.
I didnt realise it had been accepted as fact, last i checked they still teach that christopher columbus discovered america.
Those accounts are very interesting, though did they take the weather into account before setting sail in both accounts? Theres a lot of storms in those areas and while it would be possible it would probably be very difficult to make a decent trade route from it

teach where, in the usa?
I was taught that at school years ago. and it's in all the history books.
and about the discovery from Europe...
Columbus thought he had found a new route to India for the remaining of his life,
Vikings knew that they had discovered a new land.
They called indians - skraelings and the new land - Vineland
Who's the discoverer?

Theres a lot of storms in those areas and while it would be possible it would probably be very difficult to make a decent trade route from it
here again is the money concept. you see, back in those days just one such raft returned would make the ones who did that millionares. they would have a decent living for the rest of their life. and there were many many poor people starving.
see the logic? there would be hundreds of wanabees each year once the route is known. so if just 3 of the ~100 returned knews about their voyage would be the same as we going to the moon. Again new wanabees would want to become millionares. So the weather isn't really a problem here.

Its still a lot of lives lost each year. As for the viking thing i cant remember the name of the person who discovered Vinland, it shouldnt be too hard to find out as Vinlandsaga is an incredably famous viking tale. And as for the teaching i live in england and they still teach it here as chris columbus, though i'd already heard of Vinlandsaga when i was taught it so i didnt care too much.

and about the ships- viking sea ships called Knarr(s) [meaning: cargo ship] were far superior to those used by Columbus. They were larger and more stable, more sturdy to survive a long journey.
This freighter averaged 16 metres in length, 5 metres in width, and over 2 metres in height from keel to gunwale. It had a draft of 1 metre and could not navigate the shoals as well as the lighter longship. Under full sail, it could travel at 10 knots, about a fast walking pace.
Lief Erikson and other Viking explorers used a knarr for their voyages to North America.

Its still a lot of lives lost each year. life was cheap those days, besides look at nowaday emigrants from africa and south pacific and asia, hundreds die each year in trying to get to the promissed land in Europe, North America or Australia. and there doesn't seem to be a shortage of them

Theres a lot more people nowadays than there was back then, population growth and all you know, its hardly shocking nowadays.
I'll get back to you with the viking name tomorrow, the first viking to discover america was in a longboat, the cargo ships were dragged across land at one part of the journey to avoid shallow water werent they? I saw a documentary on it where they tried it with a group of people and a replica longboat.

they were dragged over land on the route to Byzantium (or Miklagrod as it was called by the vikings) and to the Black Sea to trade with Arabs.
By the way, one of the most popular routes was from the Baltic sea and through Latvia using the river Daugava. :)

Theres a lot more people nowadays than there was back then, population growth
of course, but a few hundred don't matter, even in those days it wasn't a shocking number , especially if it took ~40 000 to build a pyramid

This viking experiment was in greenland or iceland, to show that they could reach america, its not surprising vikings did it in other places aswel there technology was greatly advanced, they are more intelligent than people give them credit for, their boats were built for speed and the hull was specially shaped and incredably well crafted.

a note: shore warships indeed were built for speed (they were used as river trade ships as well), but knorrs were built for durability and freight load capacity.
I think that nobody dragged a knorr by land, it's HEAVY and is/was made for the sea/ocean voyages not rivers. It's too big for that.

p.s. we nowadays assume they hired oxen from the local people to help them in dragging

edit: and yes, they were exellent sailors

I think the experiment was with a longboat, but i could be wrong.

a longboat may be, but not a knorr. I'd like to see the slaves who would have done it
or they used a tractor?
knorrs weren't used on rivers. that is pretty much known. it's a sea ship.
there are accounts of vikings themselves talking that no sane man would take a river ship on a long sea voyage [that's some historical saga, forgot which-not important]. thus you see that they themselves devided the two. sea ships, and river/coastline ships.
besides, you don't see sea freighters nowadays going through rivers

but maybe they used miniature knorr copies on rivers
that is very much possible
because their boats also vere miniature copies of ships

Yes thats possible,, i just recall seeing them pull a replica longboat across land, and they sailed it there first from norway i think, i cant remember if they sailed it on to america but it was a good experiment, especially as none of them had ever done something like that before.

of course they dragged the ship on wooden slades, yes?

Slades? I havnt heard that term before, i take it you mean like logs that help movement? Yes.