Don,

Two amature points, then I'll leave it to far better educated amongst us...
(From the link)

1) "If these quarry marks distinctively identify the people who created the pyramids, why would they engage in such a tremendous amount of extremely difficult work...?"

Simply because laboring was the laborer’s place in the balance of order.
IF you invented a tool to make a year long job only a week long one, do you honestly think you would have been acclaimed in ancient Egypt? More likely you would have been seen as an agent of chaos; taking away the value of a stonemason's contribution!

2) "The tools displayed by Egyptologists as instruments for the creation of many of these incredible artifacts are physically incapable of reproducing them."

He cannot make such a statement until he either;
A) Physically does the labor, or
Runs a computer wear vs. wear analysis. study.

We KNOW water dripping on stone will wear a cup out, and eventually will carve right through it. Please note the Grand Canyon as evidence.
By his logic this cannot be, since the water isn't harder than the stone!

It's simply a trade off of tool wear, tool replacement rate, and sheer physical labor.
Could you wear out 3 foot of copper to chisel down 1 foot of granite? Certainly!
Now, how bad does Pharaoh want the work done? And are there laborers to do it?
Yes to both? Get CRACKING!

Finally, on a personal note, was that drilled core in pink granite on link 2 done by the author? It looks fresh.
If so, SHAME on him. How can he justify even scratching 4500 year old work to prove a (imho) fringe theory?

Jammer