cladking Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...basis of the theory is simply that the
> pyramids are orders of
> magnitude greater than primitive people should be
> able to achieve with the
> simple tools which have usually been ascribed to
> them.


There was nothing primitive about the ancient Egyptians. They were as smart, or smarter, than you or I. The evidence of their technologies have abundant references in the evidenciary record.

Your idea is founded upon this simple premise:

Quote

The absence of evidence in this case has little bearing since almost no evidence would survive.

That isn't science. That isn't history. That's special pleading.

Natural fissures in limestone exist all over the world. The other factors you mention, for the most part, have culturally specific explanations. When you take the time to study the culture, you'll find that much of what you consider "evidence" is actually just being lifted out of its proper context because it appears to support your case.

Good studying.

Anthony

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him think.