cladking Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nemtinakht Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > The overseers of stone draggers would not
> have
> > been nobility per say, rather they likely
> would
> > have been drawn from the local village
> headmen.
>
> Your problem here is not just that there is no
> overseer of stone draggers but that no titles at
> all are consistent with ramps. Only a few can
> even be interpreted to be consistent with ramps.
> One can posit that "masons" cut, transported, and
> set the stones but then why are there so few
> mason? Why are no "quarry workers" known here
> but right in the workers cemetery, right in the
> middle of all those arthritic bone is there a
> "Overseer of Sculptors? The universe of known
> titles is inconsistent with building pyramids by
> any muscle based system. That the titles are all
> mixed up with people who likely didn't work on
> this project is simply irrelevant due to the fact
> that there are no titles consistent with muscle.
>
>
> > Along with the peasant conscripts who made up
> the
> > tremendous bulk of the unskilled
> workforce,...
>
> You are assuming there was an unskilled workforce.
> There is simply no evidence of an army of
> unskilled laborers who dragged, pried, or
> otherwise lifted these stones. The evidence that
> exists suggest just a few thousand men, women, and
> children worked on this site. Why would they
> employ young girls on a site where there was an
> army of men lifting stones by any method at all.
> You are assuming things that are nowhere in
> evidence.
>
> > Regarding the dilapidated state of the
> internal
> > ramp revealed in the gravimetric scan.
>
> No internal ramps of any nature or state have been
> found. They can not appear on the gravimetric
> scan but not thermal imaging. It is an
> impossibility.
>
> Sure you can still claim they used internal ramps
> and then they were all filled in to exactly the
> same (varying) density as the surrounding stones
> but then you're right back to there is no evidence
> of internal ramps. Logically internal ramps were
> always highly improbable because of the extreme
> conditions and constrictions that would have
> existed inside of them. They would be highly
> inefficient and then you'd need to turn the
> corners. 6 1/2 million tons up a narrow passage
> just doesn't make a lot of sense. If evidence is
> ever found then I can eat these words but in the
> meantime it has been established that stones were
> pulled straight up the side. Evidence and logic
> dictate this and this is quite possibly the reason
> that they refuse to release data. They likely
> feel a little foolish not realizing the
> construction issue was solved in 1988. I'm worse
> because I think I knew how it was built by 2006
> and never realized that the gravimetric scan was
> really all the evidence needed until ~2011. They
> built steps because they needed the platforms to
> work. They pulled the stones up the side. No
> matter what means was used to pull them up it was
> far more efficient than ramps.
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________
> Man fears the pyramid, time fears man.
>
>
>
> Edited 1 times. Last edit at 08/12/18 03:42AM by
> cladking.
why would one expect to find the job descriptions of common labourers anywhere?
and how the heck do you know what words they did or did not have??
YOU cannot read the language..stop pontificating about it s if you could.
this whole thread started with you not appreciating the long term effects of water on Limestone.
somehow you brought it back to the same Non arguments
Warwick
" I have always found that the main obstacle to free
association on these boards is the broad
misconception that what we do not know is more
significant than what we do know."
Warwick L Nixon, March 8, 2019