Not even close, 1. Look at the mess made at 12:00 compared to the straight marks down the side and I believe across the top of the unfinished obelisk 2. Even if you say the brick walls somehow set a perfect line to stop the rock past it being effected at all that only works at ground level, as you go down there would be no way to protect it (which I think you realised so you stopped you windows paint drawing at 14:40 ) 3. You started your windows paint drawing to show us how you could do an undercut (again with neat groves) using fire setting but the drawing has nothing to do with what you are trying to explain In summary, you would destroy the stone you were trying to quarry out and it wouldn't be a neat job either way the stone would crack off at random not in straight lines.
right back at you, nope not even close 1- they are removing mass not trying to make a straight line, even in modern quarries it looks like a mess to start with so no. 2-once you go down the material on side is not exposed to heat so no, also lots of ways to protect such as applying mud, problem solving 101 3- in previous video of Aswan quarry series i show a simple solution for undercutting, with a bit of rope and a stick you can swing it and make it a very easy job.problem solving 101 You would not destroy the stone because you apply it directly to the area and for a very short time. Since it's bed rock and has poor heat conductivity it won't go much further than the area directly in contact. Your critique is not even close, it seems a bit desperate really. I can't believe the inability to solve such basic problems is genuine. It has to be a mechanism to protect a belief.
This is a great example of the LAHT cult 'Moving the Goalposts' gambit, wherein they demand incrementally greater demonstrations of practical evidence, starting small (copper chisels can't do XYZ) and culminating in the actual recreation of the pyramids. In this case, their usual outlook on the obelisk is that lulz you couldn't possibly work this material with chisels or pounders. When that is shown to be possible, it's not mathematically fast enough. When fire is shown to be an accelerant, it's all about the scoop marks. Eventually, you will be ordered to replicate the process wearing loincloths. All this while, at the same time, believing fervently in Atlantean power tools despite no actual, physical shred of their existence.
@petertaylor4758 this is what people always do, it dosent have to be one extreme or the other. It just obvious that pounding stones was not feasible and the marks on this unfinished piece prove that this wasn't how it was done anyway.
Surprisingly, the phenomenon of the “tired” stones is found not only in South America. So, for example, there is the “tired” Aswan obelisk in Africa and the well-known no less “tired” Baalbek parallelepipeds in the Middle East. After a crack appeared in the Aswan obelisk, its cutting was stopped, and the quarry, attention, was closed forever. Only the latter circumstance can explain the fact that the obelisk has survived to this day. However, this is impossible in a real quarry, where a discarded large granite block similar to the Aswan is manually split by means of a sledgehammer and steel wedges almost during a day into smaller parts, which are sent to other customers the next day. In the case of the Baalbek parallelepipeds, the fairy tale story has been repeated again.
For hundreds of years, empires arose and collapsed, devastating wars were waged, others came to the place of some peoples on the territories, where the mentioned monuments are located, but, as in Peru, we again see the amazing preservation of these weakened and finally exhausted stone megaliths. Of course, such preservation is impossible without participation of local authorities. So, all this time some powers forced the local authorities to ensure strictly that nothing happened to these artifacts of the “distant” past.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded Yes, there are traces of attempts to split the unfinished Aswan obelisk. There are also traces of attempts to split the Baalbek parallelepipeds. All these are the results of the activities of some local initiators who simply did not know that these stones should not be touched. The actions of these initiators were stopped by local authorities at an early stage, I suppose. SacredGeometryDecoded, you have demonstrated many real quarries in your videos. Do the places with the unfinished Aswan obelisk and the Baalbek parallelepipeds look like real quarries? I only see imitation of quarries.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded Yes, there are traces of attempts to split the unfinished Aswan obelisk. There are also traces of attempts to split the Baalbek parallelepipeds. All these are the results of the activities of some local initiators who simply did not know that these stones should not be touched. The actions of these initiators were stopped by local authorities at an early stage, I suppose. SacredGeometryDecoded, you have demonstrated many real quarries in your videos. Do the places with the unfinished Aswan obelisk and the Baalbek parallelepipeds look like real quarries? I only see imitation of quarries.
Yes, there are traces of attempts to split the unfinished Aswan obelisk. There are also traces of attempts to split the Baalbek parallelepipeds. All these are the results of the activities of some local initiators who simply did not know that these stones should not be touched. The actions of these initiators were stopped by local authorities at an early stage, I suppose. SacredGeometryDecoded, you have demonstrated many real quarries in your videos. Do the places with the unfinished Aswan obelisk and the Baalbek parallelepipeds look like real quarries? I only see imitation of quarries.
Yep. Everything you said in this video is absolutely correct!! I've been saying this for years to people in comment sections and in person. How fire affects materials is something I know A LOT about, and so did the ancients. I've taken a volcanic rock and heated it in my forge until it became almost plastic and pushed a steel spike right through the center making a hole. Rock can be worked using many methods including fire, sawing, drilling, chiseling, ect. and has been done so for thousands of years. Great video, thanks!!
Because people don't know how they built the Pyramids they over think the construction. They always say how did they lift stone blocks weighing several ton? They didn't they never lifted them they Dragged them into place leaving all the weight on the ground.. Most of the internal stones in the Pyramids are only around 2 ton. I work in a factory where we get big 2 ton rolls of metal on wooden pallets and it only takes 5 or 6 of us to drag the pallet across the floor. History has shown that huge multi ton blocks can be dragged about, there are videos of this. Also lets not forget they also used Beasts of Burden like Cattle and Donkeys to move things.
funny, camping out in Yosemite I learned NOT to use granite rocks in a campfire to support a pot of water; they disintegrate and collapse, even without pounding. Your point is correct, fire would be used to rough out the form and gain access to its surfaces, not as a final finishing technique.
At 3500 + degrees fahrenheit, it becomes a finishing technique, but they didn't have acccess to a controlled flame to do so, which also requires moving quickly
Imo the fire might also explain some of the deep scoopmarks. The fire affected zone is pounded away, which leaves sort of a scoop shape. Then, a new fire is applied, deepening the scoop, etc etc. Good video
Yes, agreed. Most likely not a lot of fire needed to work one specific area. The scoop marks probably indicate indeed the size of the fire. The walls in between the holes are easily broken away, without the need of further weakening it with fire. Stone is hard, but will break easily when it is not supported by mass. A relatively thin wall of granite you can easily smash to pieces. The same is true when you want to break a concrete path in your garden. If you drill in the middle; it is hard to break apart. If you put the drill on the side of the concrete pavement, aiming outwards; it'll break very easily. The Laht community only thinks; Stone hard thus impossible. Anyone who did low level Physics and Architecture, knows Stone can deal well with pressure, but not with tension. ; that's why we use rebar in concrete. That's why you do not see a lintel made of 1 singular stone, spanning a large distance. ...but you know and I agree; many small fires, repeatedly and fully controlled.
Yes it is possible. The "scoop" appearance can also be accomplished via = abrasion. Envision a row of workers sitting down facing the side of the obelisk. Using dolerite pounders they chip away at the area in front of them - each responsible for a given section of obelisk - as well as reaching up as high as they can = rubbing the pounder up/down along the side towards their feet. That combination of chipping away and abrading the section of stone in front of them can over time yield your scoop marks. Then periodically as you alluded to the workers leave for a time and the area is reheated and cooled via quenching to soften the granite = and upon the area cooling down the workers resume their systematic removal. Blowing sand and occasional rain over millennia can do the rest to smooth the area out.
If this constitutes evidence to you.. i could make a similar video... amd edit it exactly as this vid.. but instead of fire.. use strawberry jam and get the same magical results... someone needs to ACTUALLY carve out a large stone, say 10ft x 10ft.. and do it using this technique..
I like the idea of contained fire nearby that can be controlled and hot coals dropped to the bottom as needed. And since I'm making things up...I also like the idea of the diorite fastened on the ends of long poles for the main smashing, with multiple workers on each ( like a pile driver). Then ashes and the big chunks of stone get cleared out..then they go back down with hand pounders
Great vid. I had not known about the video of the Kelaney experiment. As he said, the experiment was simple and intended to prove a concept. Playing with the variables of fire size, time of applied fire, etc would allow the most efficient techniques to be utilized.
Thanks and yes a skill to be refined. Also if the process was a little more organised, the fire and coals moved along to the next section rather than extinguished the amount of material removed in a day would be massive. Using dung fires or the trash from the harvest as fuel as low temps are good enough.
When we channel burn in granite quarries, we have to scale off 3-4 inches *minimum from block sides that were part of the flamed channel. Too many microfissures which make the block portion unusable.
It’s crazy I remember camping in Colorado wilderness for a week and the rocks would crack and splinter after a few days of the burning the in the same place. I even started experimenting with splitting big rocks with fire. The cold nights there created such a difference in Temp I didn’t even need water.
This will certainly chaff the LAHT's arse....... 🤣 As an aside for additional interest. On the segment showing the dolerite pounders one can partially make out Kelany's paper in the background. He indicated that dolerite pounders as alluded to were initially rough and upon being "rounded out" from use appeared to have been discarded. So they were exploiting the pounders' sharp edges to cut through the bedrock until they were probably too small and round for practical use. Also Egyptologists found pounders with the names of the mason painted on them indicating they maintained their own personal pounder supply. Final note. At 2:30 in the video where you see the aerial view of the obelisk = note the opened area to its' side where some of the test pits were found. They were clearly opening the space laterally to the obelisk in its pit - why??? The most logical answer would be upon the obelisk being completed it would have been pulled laterally from its pit into that open space which exceeds the size of the obelisk itself. Then if you look at the general topography of the area you'll note that open area is near the modern road running nearby which follows the natural grade of the area down towards the nearby Nile. So per Kelany the obelisk upon being hauled sideways from its pit into the open area could have then been hauled downhill along that natural slope following the modern road to a nearby wadi area along the banks of the river where a harbor area/barge would have been built. Then pulling it up a ramp on one end of the barge onto its deck - while the pullers went down a ramp on the opposite end - the obelisk could have been situated and the rest of the ship assembled around it to await the next annual Nile flood. Then the dikes created to hold back the Nile could be opened -----> the wadi area flooded with the obelisk on a barge being raised = to tow it out into the Nile to destinate where a corresponding harbor area would be built.
Yes, a canal extension confirmed by Kelany in that very spot. Plus the the road itself used to be below flood level prior to the Aswan High Dam. Such a short distance to get it to place ready for transportation. 50 to 150 metres maximum. Though to hear it from Rogan and LAHT crowd it was over mountains. Hyperbole is far too tame of a word for those type of descriptions.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded Absolutely. As noted previously on the video relating to the Colossi = in the time before the creation of the Aswan dam in the 1960's the Nile during its annual flood would spill its' banks to encroach much closer to these now dry areas. They are only dry - and thus appear to be further from the river = because of the dam which now regulates the downstream flow of the Nile. That coincidentally was the purpose of the Aswan Dam = to reduce the annual flood downstream so as to open up more arable lands along the banks of the Nile + to create a reservoir in the form of Lake Nasser to support that new agriculture. This is how as an example people find in their stores linens made from "Egyptian cotton" as that newly drained land went to producing crops like this.
@@varyolla435 I spent hours on google earth once following the river looking for spots it could spill over in the flood creating wetlands. Pondering what a paradise i might have been, apart from crocodiles or hippos that might take residence.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded Yes = hence the historical bounty of the Nile. Your reference of canals found that lends to this. The Nile flooding its' banks each year would compel the ancient Egyptians who primarily built from mud brick to construct their communities = beyond those annual flood zones. This would by necessity lend to their developing a mastery of canals and dikes to contain and channel the river + to connect their communities built outside of the floodplain to the river upon which they owed so much + to allow them to access that floodplain which represented their farmable lands during the rest of the year. The ancient Egyptians therefore would have been experts in geo/hydro-engineering and shipbuilding. There must have once been endless canals and areas of habitation interspersed among those wetland areas connecting the villages and cities via countless harbor areas while the river would be filled with ships of all size and manner transporting everything they required.
just posted a longer comment but it's not showing so I apologize if this is a double post... where is the hieroglyph at the 40 second mark from? Great channel by the way... (don't feel like retyping what I just typed, however iI will say I think it's beyond frustrating to listen to people who've never put hammer and chisel to stone proclaim matter of factly what is and is not possible to do with stone... people who've never moved nor lifted a stone their whole life proclaim matter of factly what is and is not possible to do moving stone... people who are not artists or craftsmen taking away the achievement of skilled artists and craftsmen and giving it to sci fi fantasy fan fiction characters like aliens or Atlanteans all because they themselves can't figure out how someone made something... the hubris, audacity, arrogance and ignorance is astounding)
"it's not feasible because it's messy and time consuming" I get those types of comments so often. It's as if history began with the convenience of modern power tools and international jet travel. People used to spend months on a sail ship, very messy and time consuming travel. Ploughing fields without an air conditioned GPS guided tractor?!! It's messy and time consuming therefore not feasible. Hard messy work was life even only a few generations ago and in many parts of the world it still is reality. It's very hard to understand how they could be so ignorant of recent history and yet seem to have an interest in ancient history. if the internet shut down and they couldn't google "how to swing a hammer" I think they'd grab the wrong end. it's scary how clueless people have become, if they ever have to go through a genuine hardship they wouldn't survive. It's not the lack of skills but basic problem solving. You can pick up the skills through trial and error but their attitude seems to be "it's impossible don't even try".
@@SacredGeometryDecoded Any time I see people proclaim something would take too long, it just proves to me they've never spent any time themselves working on something... be it spending months or over a year on working on a piece of art or months or over years working on a construction or landscaping project. It's the reason why we respect craftsmanship, when we see that an artist or craftsman spent seemingly endless hours pouring their time and energy and creativity and passion and their physical body into making something... we stand in awe of their devotion and passion and hard work, we appreciate and are willing to pay more for quality craftsmanship...we don't say "I don't believe you could spend this much time on this because I can't personally imagine myself doing that, therefore you didn't make it, someone else did"... and yet this is exactly what people do to the ancient Egyptian artists and craftsmen. What's scary is not just how clueless people have become, but at the same time thinking they know more about things they have no experience in then people who devote their lives to a field of study. People will refuse to look at the work of egyptologists or archeologists because they think 1) an entire field of study, every person involved across the world in different institutions is 100% corrupt and full of people being deceptive and in cahoots to "hide the truth" and 2) they think they know more then people who've devoted their lives to egyptology or archeology, then people who were so passionate about egyptology or archeology that they went to school to study it and made it their career and then went out into the world and worked on sites and never stopped studying and learning about the subject they are so passionate about they made it their life and career over the course of decades. And they have to suffer being heckled and slandered by amateurs with a casual interest and hobby in the field of study that they devoted their lives to. That's the scary thing... an ever growing population of people who are proudly and arrogantly willing to blindly refuse to give people who have studied and become professionals and experts in their field their respect and due and instead slander them and accuse them of being liars and deceivers all because they don't agree with, and can refute, the theories of passersby and hobbyists. Part of being a learning human being, is learning from those who have studied and who have experience in the field they are teaching... in all aspects of human life, you don't want to be taught by an amateur with no experience, you want to be taught by an expert. You want to be taught by those who've studied and worked in field you wish to learn about. You don't shun them and accuse them of being liars because they can point out all the flaws in your own personal opinions or thoughts on a subject they know far more about then you. It'd be like saying all electricians are liars and in cahoots all trying to hide free energy from you, and they laugh at you when you mention you think free energy was mentioned in a story Plato wrote.... therefore you proclaim the entire field of electrical work to be corrupted and never to be trusted and full of propaganda designed to hide the truth. It is not a sign of intelligence, or thinking "outside the mainstream", to disregard entire fields of study simply because they don't agree with your personal theories.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." You and others in the camp of denial to advanced civilizations much older than previously thought are much less popular by fractions in views and interest alone for a reason. People arent stupid. Your studity will all die within this generation thank god. Goodbye dinosaurs
I'd like to see an actual study comparing just heat with heat then quenched with water . Seems like the water might create a few other issues that may not make it worth it.
Great presentation Alan. Some of the earliest known traces of controlled fire were found at the Daughters of Jacob Bridge, Israel, and dated to ~790,000 years ago. Fire-setting has been used since prehistoric times up to the Middle Ages in mining operations.
@TheMoneypresident you get no practical result by simply using fire as a torch method, just carbon soot buildup. The flame temp is too low for quick thermal spalling which requires 3,500 degrees fahrenheit +
@GroberWeisenstein you don't understand. Person claims fire settings were done in a time. Article was misread. It states they simply were using fire for warmth light or cooking. Not in any way shape or form were they using fire to shape rock.
@GroberWeisenstein doesn't matter what I have done. I will type even slower so you can catch on. The original post states fire setting has been in use for 790,000 years. That statement is not true. I have read pages from that site. Not anywhere does it say firesetting was in use. All it says is they had the ability to make fire. What is so difficult to understand?
You are 100% correct, less is more when firesetting. The main goal is to gradually spall the granite in controllable layers, alternating water dowsing with striking using 10-20 lb stone balls or stone hammers. If a fire burns for too long, the risk increases for opening up tight seams that would have otherwise been passable or creating new faults.
It is baffling to me how some people can look at an unfinished obelisk full of rough irregular scoop marks and with large round stones laying all over the place and claim that some sort of machines or whatever had to be involved. Or would 4K year old ultrasonic stoneworking machines leave marks that look just like the work was done by a bunch of guys swinging round rocks all day along?
Machines are not all perfect. Not everything is made perfectly by machines. You can use a machine and make a messy looking stuff. This was obvious machine was used . Science existed in The past
@@kungfumaster12 I didn't say anything about expecting perfection, but if machines were used one might expect to see something that looks a bit different than if it was done by using stone pounders. It would be like saying that Native Americans 500 years ago used machines for cutting down trees but they left cut marks identical to those made by a stone axes. Sorry, just doesn't track.
@jackrifleman562 wrong. It would look like a machine pounded the rock. So it creates the same look as if done by hand. Machine imitate human outcomes. We create machines to do what we do. Just stop being ignorant. And thinking ancient humans wasn't smart enough to make machines. It only proves your lack of intelligence. Not theirs. We have a lot of proof of their intelligence and technology. Smh. This channel is proof of it. 😆 🤣 😂
@@kungfumaster12 Amazing. The machine replicated scoop marks that not only look like humans using pounding rocks but also replicated the size and angles of scoop marks made by humans using pounding stones. Would think they would have gone bigger with something akin to using a bulldozer or backhoe to do what people use shovels or trowels to do, or maybe something like a jackhammer that would leave quite different marks, but who am I to let reality infringe on this. You've won me over. I'm gonna max out my credit card and head to Egypt on the next Unchartedx tour. Thanks!
Building with stone. Used everywhere in the world, by all cultures, to one degree or another, for untold millennia . Everyone uses stacked rock as a place to bulid fires for heat , cooking, etc....thermal shock, would have been known by most peoples only a hundred or so years ago.
Take a tray of water, freeze it, now pour water on it...boom polygonal masonry. If you look at polygonal masonry you have to think that they separated a huge block, heated it with fire, then quenched it which made it crack like polygonal shapes, then they just numbered it and reassembled it as a wall. The one argument I still have is time, the great pyramid has about 3million stones. If you break that down to 30years (a single rulers life) then they would have had to have a cycle time of 5 min/stone. I think you overlook the time factor quite a bit. Long story short, there was a preflood advanced civilization, but the dynastic Egyptians and many other ancient post flood civilizations were also pretty genius at copying the truly ancient stuff. I would enjoy nothing more than to discuss this stuff with you for many many hours. I think Ben from Uncharted X would love to have you on as a devils advocate, we could all learn a thing or two from a good unorthodox challenging if ideas.
It would be interesting to see some samples under a microscope to see whats going after the heat process. I think the heat causes gasses withing the rock to expand and create cracks. Great video.
I would guess that granite is made of many minerals and each different mineral would expand and contract at different speeds thus breaking the bonds between them.
Another day = another observation folks. At the beginning of the video = freeze it. Look at the folks on the left side of the screen above the inset window. That is the side as alluded to previously in a prior comment which opens up to a large open space into which the obelisk had it not been abandoned would have been removed from its' pit. So look at the bedrock to the right of the obelisk as far as its' somewhat smooth texture = now look at the pockmarked surface of the section of stone on the left which already had a small section removed + which the tourists are walking upon. Moral of the story: clearly they were hammering upon that segment of stone on the left which opens just beyond that space. So if not using dolerite pounders as the LAHT claim so as to remove the bedrock = why the pockmarked appearance then??? Does granite naturally form to such textures?? - not when compared to the bedrock on the opposite side of the obelisk. So a picture can be worth a thousand words as the saying goes = and they can also as we see provide you loads of data - IF - you use your eyes to objectively consider what you see. Enjoy your day folks.
“Breach and fire” was used for demolitions, for millennia, until the invention of dynamite. You can see this ancient technique used by Fred Dibnah, he was the last person to do it (other than Al Qeada). If the ancients used fire for demolition, it follows that they also used it for construction.
Yes. A famous example would be the siege of Rochester Castle during the Middle Ages. Attackers being unable to overcome the castle defenders opted to undermine its' stone walls via fire as you alluded to. They had engineers dig under a section of stone wall and then took = 40 pigs and sealed them in and set the area ablaze. All that "rendered fat" generating a lot of heat as any grease fire will do subsequently caused a weakening of the stone wall above leading to collapse and the castle was taken. p.s. - there coincidentally was movie made about this starring the actor Paul Giamatti.
We have sandstone and more sandstone in the Sydney area so I never really noticed that as a child. Only much later when i saw some people on TV in Africa digging an irrigation canal and a huge boulder was in their way. They stopped, made a big bonfire over it and then used that to have a cool party BBQ, Then splash. Boulder was nothing but manageable pieces. It was cool. I like to think the people at the quarry took advantage of their fires too to make a meal. Or do it in early morning and evening to stay warm rather than middle of a hot day.
I live on post glacial area so we have all kinds of stones just laying around, yeah breaking stones after camp fire was part of the childhood fun activities, we made a fire on the big boulder once, it was during winter, it was cold, like -10 or something, anyway, stone just broke in half
Thanks SGD. Guessing you've already seen the unfinished Moai (?) in the Easter Island quarries that show all the signs of fire setting (I wonder if the deforestation of Easter Island was connected with this work). Lebanon mother stone too, whatever it's called. ...Altar stone lain in the middle of stone henge too. Early Iberian sites - cave quarrying. ...Sigaria (?) Sri Lanka a likely site too. ...I've noted that early Egyptian petroglyphs appear to show a two-tone colouration between the surface and the interior of the cuts... this seems to have gone unnoticed - by my reckoning at least, after a few thousand years, the cut should be the same tone as the surface - not so. So I wonder if they began fire-working stone as a way of creating a two-tone image on a stone face then it developed into quarrying. There is a very interesting stone on a plain in Iceland which I found on g. Image search but could never find any info on... it shows this two tone colouration very clearly, I'm guessing it more recent, 1000 years old at the most. It has an image of a woman cut into the face. My thought is that they'd set a fire round the stone so it discoloured the "shell" then cut that away, creating a contrasting image. The Dragon Stones of Armenia may show similar changes to the colouration of the outer stone as if heated - there are a few with cracked off lumps showing a cross-section. Mmm. Good work. Keep on rocking in the free world!
I suspect deforestation in Egypt as well, at least in the north. The whole Eastern Med. Similar to England having to preserve oak forests for the ship building. Now just a few tiny patches of Cedar in Lebanon. I heard during the Civil War there a local warlord/chief whatever his title took special care to preserve those remaining patches.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded Aye... tis a particularly interesting question that I find - the potential in that of the first real environmental impact we created - to those people I would guess that would have been a very notable change... eating of woodlands to fuel mighty aspirations. I've slowly moved away from my old dragon/serpent origins hypothesis there but still I wonder if those events are at the root of much religious dichotomy, the temptation of man, the loss off innocence in Eden with the coming of new knowledge etc. ...Lot there to create a conflict of interests with hunter gatherers etc. and generate cautionary tales. Mmm. I can't help but wonder if we're missing that as regards deforestation for agriculture - was that, in part, or initially, in places, actually due to to deforestation from megalithic works then forcing the development of agriculture on the spoiled land when the local ecosystems could no longer support those dwelling there...? Questions, questions, questions. 🧐🐉
@@SacredGeometryDecoded not all petroglyphs show that two-tone quality incidentally, but some do... The few bits of stonework I did as a teen are now all uniformly coloured, after just a couple of decades, that's sandstone but it doesn't seem right that the difference in colouration between outer surface and cut should remain for thousands of years. I may be missing something there, some very slow oxidisation of the outer surface of certain stone types... but given that a stone face blackened and discoloured by a campfire would invite a budding scribe... mmm. Anyhow, I digress, as one does... get on with your editing Jesse!
This could be a clue as to how granite,(andesite), was converted to sand, then transported and made into the matrix of artificial stone, on the spot, with molds and special, presumably alchemical processes, to cure into an artificial stone. This type of study should be done at the quarries opposite the valley at Ollantaytambo, Peru. Sandstone and andesitic granite stones at Puma Puncku have been analyzed already by materials scientist Joseph Davidovits and found to be artificial; that is, the sandstone matrix doesn't match native sandstone and the andesite has clearly visible organic inclusions seen by NMR-EM studies.
🤦 Oh gee...... = another "geopolymer" moppet....... - here we go again folks. So one more time shall we: 1 - yes the ancient Egyptians used gypsum mortar. Yes that mortar was created via various elements mixed together sourced from various locations. The gypsum as an example typically came from the Fayum region of Egypt. So let's move on shall we. 2 - when Sneferu created his Bent Pyramid the sides began to subside causing collapse. Subsequently his engineers attempted various things to try to shore up the sides. One of the things they tried = was applying gypsum mortar........ 3 - so Davidovits took a sample of = the mortar repair work ------> and *EXTRAPOLATED* that to supposedly indicate the Egyptians were castings blocks from it - nope. 4 - the blocks themselves and the nearby quarries clearly showing them removing "blocks" from the bedrock. Further limestone being sedimentary results in your seeing on blocks on the pyramids the strata layers consistent with what is seen in the quarries they came from. 5 - finally blocks made from a mixture would by definition be uniform in size/shape/and consistency as reflected from coming from standardized molds using a uniformly blended mixture. You see = absolutely none of this with the blocks of the pyramids......... - nada. p.s. - here is your freebie. *THINK* about what is required to cast thousands of blocks from a mixture and molds. The labor alone - to say nothing of the time and resources required = exceeds that required for simple quarrying efforts..... In other words it would require exponentially more work/time and more resources to cast blocks than to simply quarry them.
What is the metric vis a vis high performance engines as far as rating output?? Answer: *HORSE* power......... - think about that. Hence we built engines to accomplish what was once done using = human and animal power. So to consider how a thing was moved you must place it in the proper period and then consider what tech was available then. Pre-Iron age then wooden sledges and man and animal power along with levers etc. could be used. Once we had iron/steel however then wheeled transportation becomes feasible. As far as transporting over water see the recent video from this channel dealing with ancient ships. It does not require an ocean liner sized vessel to move large blocks weighing 1,000 tons.
Just an aside. I am see some "familiar faces" here trolling these videos - while other channels like this have seen a downtick in trolling activity. Further the ones currently trolling here are pulling out "golden oldie" rationalizations and commentary long ago debunked in previous videos. Moral of the story: this bespeaks of one of two things. Either you have a core of butthurt LAHT fanatics who are obsessive about trolling videos which debunk their whimsical beliefs - or there is a concerted disinformation effort against channels like this. Either outcome I'm afraid does not reflect well upon the trolls in question. Enjoy your day folks. Carry on.......
If granite is an igneous rock, why is it so sensitive to the effects of fire? Especially considering that it's marketed as fireplace surrounds and heat-resistant work tops? Just asking before the LAHT Larpers do! 🤣 {:o:O:}
I think the difference would be that people don't build a roaring fire in the fireplace and get the surrounding rock mucho hot and then beat on it with a pounding rock? My guess.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded Yes = "Thermal shock". Heat stone or anything else made from "composites" and as it heats the electrons get excited and you can get expansion - microscopic. If however something is cooled too quickly the matrix being exposed to sudden contraction can fracture as the video demonstration showed.
14:30 they used hydrogen gas powered torches to heat up the granite to make it easier to break. I been proved this method. Only further proving ancient humans had technology. Not just chisels and rocks. 😅😅😅😅
@@kungfumaster12 So reaction of a metal with an acid is the choice? Ok. First, there are no "traces of zinc" in the queen's chamber as Dunn claims. Or, if there are, I am unable to find a single reference to this. Second, his references to "salt" found in the queen's chamber is more likely simple efflorescence than the product of some chemical reaction. Third, assuming zinc was used, where are the mines? Sinai? There are lead-zinc deposits there, but as far as I can tell they were never mined by the ancient egyptians. If they were, where are the mines and the piles of residual lead from refining the zinc? Fourth, if this is in fact the method used, approximately 67.5 pounds of ZnCl2 are produced for every pound of H2 gas. That's a lot of waste. Where are the chemical dumps full of ZnCl2? Finally, if H2 was produced this way, how was it collected, captured and stored? H2 is typically stored at over 1000 psi, so the egyptians needed compressors, high pressure pipe and storage vessels. All these things require other industries to support their manufacture. Where are the signs/traces/remnants of these industries? Where is the equipment? There is no evidence for any of this whatsoever.
how did they make and pressurize the hydrogen gas and oxygen, contain and regulate both? Hydrogen gas is very thin and requires hi-pressure regulators. Aside from these basic impossibilities burning hydrogen gas produces no hydrocarbons and there is plenty of residual carbon, that is not atmospheric, embedded in the stone pores where they worked.
Brilliant. Now lets figure out how they hoisted 100ton obelisks out and transported etc. someone look around the big ass obelisk. Were they planning to roll it out of there? If so, are there pits in front? Looked like a cliff at the ass end. 'Splain please
Cliff? On the side closest to the river the stone mostly removed. During the flood season the water rises to within a 100 metres or so. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-pFKU_r7p5XI.html
@@SacredGeometryDecoded so the water rises so how do they move a 100 ton block of granite in the water. Are you going to spin some yarn about boats again without providing the science behind the size of boat needed to move a 100 ton block of granite.
How did they cut underneath horizontally if they couldn't see the natural fractures? Good video mate, but I've been working with stone for nearly 30 years, and the craftsmanship in Egypt is rediculously good, I'm all too familiar with granite cracking under high temps, as I had a piece explode, fly up my shorts and burn my ass cheek quite severely, it's unpredictable... It doesn't explain the objects that are within a thousands of an inch in accuracy, look at the stone box at Aswan, look at the stone vases, look at William Petries core number 7. The unfinished obelisk is 1200 tonnes, the craftsmanship in various sites is rediculous, 80 tonne stones moved into position with 4 joints bottom, and 4 vertical joints up the sides so tight that you couldn't fit a hair between, and they didn't chip any corners. I challenge any group of stone masons to do that by hand today, even with steel and diamond tools, it wouldn't happen.
Well you are on the correct channel to begin understanding. The problem is that entertainment channels would have you believe in precision, and tolerances and parallelism that just does not exist. Core 7 discussions can also be found here in the video list.
Core 7 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-VwRYm0uXN2Q.html serapeum boxes ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-CxgZGQwWQas.html statues ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-GJkDrsz4PGc.html I have a long playlist of experiments in granite and primitive tools , scientists against myths also. Those are heavily censored by the lost tech types.
I would note that something determined to be "thousands of an inch" in accuracy only really is = if it is presupposed that was the aim during its' creation. In other words if you create a stone statue and you sand it smooth based upon what you consider to be aesthetically what you want and someone thousands of years later measures it to decry it reflects "X thousands of an inch" = what does that matter to you...... Were you trying to achieve those dimensions - probably not. As such unless someone is attempting to duplicate the object and those dimensions using a specific method than the dimensional outcome of the object in question is actually = happenstance. Dimensions only really have meaning when one intends to achieve them using specific methods.
@@varyolla435 I showed how to get 4/10,000ths of an inch with a crude hand drill. It might be better than that even but my vernier only good down to 0.01mm. Once again the lost tech people won;t show it let alone dare to repeat lest it succeed as they know it will. The principle is incredibly simple and used by artisans for centuries at least. Rotate regularly to cancel out the bias.
We know there is a million ways to skin a cat. But you and unchartedX haven't proven which method was actually used. Y'all are still guessing. At least i figured out how they cut and moved and stacked the stone. And even If im wrong. At least i showed the best logical method to use. 😅
@SacredGeometryDecoded from the evidence we know of and the evidence we yet to know of. 😏 the known, unknowns. 😆 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-2msQwpzatQc.htmlsi=_543lkwAeCHKKeng
@@kungfumaster12 ok, i'll just keep ignoring it. If you want to have a genuine exchange ok, If you want to text a teenager load up with emojis every single time. That's your choice to make. Other people too will just skip right past it as well.
Wow, never heard about this before! Why don't they talk about this in egyptology 🤔 I do find it pretty interesting/amazing that they can just walk up to some of these areas and see tools on the ground, used charcoal and bricks, from supposedly thousands of years ago.. just lying there 😂 Something about that seems off still.
_"supposedly"........_ = nuff said - and hence the basis of all your problems. p.s. - "Egyptology" talks about loads of stuff = even if you remain blissfully ignorant of that fact...... Also you should have watched the video I guess since the man in it talking about firesetting and overseeing the demonstration = is an Egyptologist.......
Can you secure an area with surface granite? It will need a crew so you’ll need to pay for them as well. Insurance will be necessary too. You really couldn’t make a trench? Is that how low you think of human ability?
@@SacredGeometryDecoded I'd love to create an obelisk out of granite using ancient tech. I think it can be done, I am sure of it. (It's weird to assume it can not be done, because, yea; obelisks exist. So, I guess we need 2 years with a team. A small monolithic obelisk is 9 meter, according to google, so if you figure each person needs a meter, you can have 20 workers working at once; We need to work in shifts, so let's do 2 shifts, = 40 dedicated workers. Modern Man needs 24.000 euro per year to just survive, so 40 x 24.000 = 980.000 euro. So, 2 years is twice as much.... plus: Travel costs; let's assume 2000 euro per person, so another 80.000. That's already 2 million euro without calculating details or being exact.... I am sure it can be less... ...but before you know it more; because yea; modern man is expensive. Also, modern man, me, would love to make an obelisk, but is also aware that pounding rock day in day out might be boring. We need an extra few million to compensate.
@@YATESA8 You could use volunteers, the cost would be greatly reduced, I know a guy who spent 15 years as a volunteer just repairing dry stone walls, so it is do-able.
@@maddogames I do not doubt it is doable. Also agree costs can be very low if we use volunteers or slaves. :D ....but my comment was to illustrate it can be done in these times, but it would cost you a lot. Even with volunteers; it would then cost a lot of time, because they usually do not work full time. I have read some estimate a large obelisk being done in 18 months. With 40 dedicated (thus paid) workers, we can do a small obelisk in 2 years using primitive methods. If you want me to prove this; I need 2 million euro and 2 years, just to be sure it is done. If anyone can do it for less; let us know! :D
I pin dissenting comments rather than censor them. If you want to an echo chamber comment section go to the stone pointers who think polishing is some kind of technological miracle.
