Westall incident

[Cyber]

Meanwhile, back at the ranch

Experts clash over claims of underground city beneath Egypt pyramids

 

[Mary Terry]

I think Charles Atlas' ancestors were personally acquainted with Archimedes' "give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world" metaphor for human ingenuity.

I don't believe in space aliens or magic pixie dust.

 

[Judge]

Physical mysteries need not default to speculating about aliens.

It just reflects that science has yet to unravel some mysteries which probably still have conventional and explainable origins. After all, science is just a benchmark for the limits of mans' understanding at any given point in time. Just because they haven't figured something out presently doesn't rule out more logical possibilities to determine in the future.

Then again given the infinite aspects of space, it's also possible that aliens are out there, but are out-of-reach relative to our scientific lack of interstellar travel on our part. And that any potentially advanced civilizations may have little or limited interest in us as a species given both our human nature and limited scientific achievements.

Scientists Figure Out Where Stonehenge Stones Came From, Still Don’t Know How They Got to Stonehenge

 

[Jonn]

I don't believe in space aliens or magic pixie dust.

A very closed-minded attitude there.
Shame on you!

 

[Cyber]

Nobody actually said aliens, but claiming to have solved how prehistoric people with basically stone age tools (yes pounding stones) knew how to cut, move over hundreds of km and toss around 1000 tonne megaliths into incredible positions is somewhat presumptuous.

Same with the Westall incident. take away aliens and "faux" hysteria claims and what it looks like is a government clean-up job to hide secret tech. Problem in 1966 is if you had craft with some type of anti-gravity propulsion then why have we been burning toxic petrochemicals in combustion engines for decades possibly risking our entire human existence, and for what exactly?

Like Westall, the current congressional UAP hearings are asking the wrong questions. when you see dozens SUV sized drones emerging from the ocean and flying over Jersey silently and with no propulsion system you need to ask
a) if its an foreign power then why the DOD and FAA twiddling their thumbs?
b) if its a US asset then why are we burning toxic fossil fuels?

 

[RemyZee]

Lizzad peeple

 

[Cyber]

According to google - Sleestak refers to the reptilian, humanoid monsters from the 1970s television show Land of the Lost. In slang, it can mean an unappealing or promiscuous woman

 

[Hypnalis]

cut, move over hundreds of km and toss around 1000 tonne megaliths

Not even close to that heavy, especially with actual stone-age tech..

There's also information in what they couldn't do. In late prehistory (e.g. Stonehenge) they still didn't make the blocks regular and they didn't build very high. If they could make better blocks, move larger ones significant distances (**), and lift them vertically more easily, they would have done so.

* The bluestone rocks at Stonehenge (average 3 tonnes, max is mid single-digit tonnes) were moved over 200km. But "single-digit tonne" objects are easy to move with wooden tools and a a team of workers
* The big ones (average 25 tonnes, largest 40 tonnes) were moved approx 30km. Still a lot of effort, but obviously possible, because it was done independently in many different places.

It's like the use of Columnar Basalt to make structures. They seem impressive for the tech level of the builders ... until you factor in that they were just moving and stacking them (hardly any forming) and were using blocks that are literally light enough for a team of people to pick up (they'd have used more efficient means though: above 300 or 400 kg levers are better).

Lifting or moving objects in the hundreds of tonnes is another matter. It can (and has been) done with manpower and low-tech tooling, but only in large, well organized "post-neolithic" societies (e.g. ancient Egypt - they had copper, so presumably "Bronze Age").

But AFAIK nobody actually moved anything in the thousands of tonnes. It's no problem to create one in a quarry OFC. And possible to roll it a quarter of a turn after the top, sides, and part of the bottom is formed.
After that they'd discover they need levers and supports that would need to be impractically strong (or far too big) if made of wood.

(**)

 

[Cyber]

But AFAIK nobody actually moved anything in the thousands of tonnes. It's no problem to create one in a quarry OFC. And possible to roll it a quarter of a turn after the top, sides, and part of the bottom is formed.
After that they'd discover they need levers and supports that would need to be impractically strong (or far too big) if made of wood.

(**)

I'm saying it, from Cleopatra's needles to the Baalbek megaliths. even with the controversy over dating (so called "pyramididiots" dispute both dating and origin of megalithic structures) It's difficult to see how 1000+ tonne individual stones could be moved by egyptians or Romans. Remember somebody cut 1000 tonne blocks in Baalbek (most likely well before the Romans) using pounding stones transported and then lifted them 23 feet on top of each other with a level of engineering precision that you couldn't slide a paper between the masonry.

I know the triathlon foundation stones under the Roman temple of Jupiter in Baalbek is attributed to the Romans, but they themselves (historically happy to brag over their many building feats from roads, bridges, monuments urban buildings) make no mention of the construction of the Baalbek foundation stones and nowhere else in Rome did they ever build using such large foundation stones. And you find this in Egypt, the Mediterranean, South America, Pacific, and Asia where large megaliths were placed in impossible positions and no instruction manuals or megalomaniac kings building monuments to themselves (as seen in ancient Egypt. Greece, Rome, Persia and China).

A simple logic test is pharaonic Egypt, the pharaohs from the beginning of the old kingdom narcissistically put hieroglyphs glorifying their greatness on every single giant monument on the Giza plateau. So its strange that the oldest structures likely using the greatest amount of manpower (Pyramids, Sphinx and underground tunnels containing structures like the 60 tonne granite Apis bull sarcophagi which were manoeuvred into impossibly tight spaces) are completely devoid of any mention of one pharaoh. I know the sphinx is attributed to Cheops, but his so called head looks like a bodgy job hastily slapped onto the body of the sphinx, totally out of symmetry with rest of the carefully crafted body (which clearly was once a beautifully carved lion). Also the stellae at the base of the sphinxes paws could easily have been put there thousands of years after the sphinx was built.

 

[Hypnalis]

IMO you'd need iron (preferably steel) tools to move really large blocks.

Small lifts and very short moves could possibly be done with very large wooden levers, but the process would be unwieldy at best.

BTW the Roman's wouldn't have needed very large blocks as foundations. They had very good concrete, good mortar, and good techniques for building foundations.

I doubt they'd have used large stones often - maybe once or twice just to impress people.
Moving that big obelisk to Rome from Egypt was definitely a flex /lol.

 

[Outdated]

A curious thought I had many years ago, but the mere suggestion is highly offensive to Egyptians because they prefer to believe existing versions of history.

One conspiracy theorist pointed out that repetitive carvings on rows of stones were just too identical to have been created by human hands, and this is my idea of how that could be achieved.

Creating identical copies of objects is something we've been doing for thousands of years now - by using molds. What if the majority of the stone blocks were not quarried and then transported but were instead created in situ where they were needed.

Rammed Earth building is a very ancient technique with examples in China dating back more than 7000 years. It's used in some of the more arid regions in Australia too, very little water is required.

Rammed earth - Wikipedia

 

[Cyber]

BTW the Roman's wouldn't have needed very large blocks as foundations. They had very good concrete, good mortar, and good techniques for building foundations.

which is why logic suggest the Romans used the foundational ruins of an earlier structure (triathalons) to build the temple of Jupiter which were suspected to have already been there. Funny enough the Greek Parthenon is built on older foundations as well. Seems to have been a common practice.