Old Project Avalon Forum (ARCHIVE)

Old Project Avalon Forum (ARCHIVE) (http://projectavalon.net/forum/index.php)
-   Project Camelot General Discussion (http://projectavalon.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Pyramid Building Solved? (http://projectavalon.net/forum/showthread.php?t=9182)

Heretic 12-20-2008 06:39 AM

Pyramid Building Solved?
There was a book posted on ATS called Earth's Forbidden Secrets which I read and found intriguing. I am not sure if this conclusion has been already proposed and discussed before but it is news to me so I thought I would present it to you in its original text. It seems that how the pyramids were build has been all solved.

Egyptologists have long claimed that no ancient records exist that describe how the Pyramids were built yet at around the age of 17, I became aware of another, very curious, Stele that is engraved on a stone on the island of Sehel, near Elephantine, north of Aswan in Egypt (fig.84). For some strange reason this Stele, known as ‘the Famine Stele’, has never been deemed worthy of serious research by scholars and is merely considered to be an interesting oddity by the Society of Egyptology. Yet after even a cursory investigation of the artifact one cannot help but question the unfathomable reasoning behind this conclusion.

The Famine Stele actually describes an ancient method for manufacturing limestone. It names the aggregates needed for the raw material and the plant extracts that are required to then bond the mixture of aggregates together. Could the pyramids have actually been cast instead of built by teams of men maneuvering hewn blocks?

Now correct me if I’m wrong, but surely the fact that such a Stele even exists at all should give scholars a reason to at least examine the methods described in the ancient text to see if there is any validity to them. Indeed, I believe the Famine Stele needs to be made the subject of some very serious and rigorous research before being so readily dismissed. The simple fact that people of ancient times bothered to right this text down (carved in stone so it would last a very long time) coupled with the fact that the Stele describes such a thing as manufacturing stone should give cause for even the most mentally obtuse to consider it worthy of some serious investigation.


The Famine Stele was discovered in 1889 by C.E. Wilbour and was subsequently deciphered by various scholars: first Brugsch in 1891, then Pleyte in1891, Morgan in 1894, Sethe in 1901 and finally by Barguet in 1953. The hieroglyphic text was then examined and the previous translations were all compared with each other. Unfortunately the Stele is slightly incomplete and somewhat damaged with a section that has been broken off near the top but we can still glean enough information from what does exist to kind of ‘fill in the blanks.’

One third of the Stele deals with the building of monuments involving three of the most renowned characters of ancient Egypt: the Pharaoh Zoser, the Scribe Imhotep and the God Khnum. The remainder of the Stele speaks of various aggregates and plant extracts to be used in the process of manufacturing stone, possibly even for the monuments mentioned.

The text contained in this unique artifact has almost exclusively been considered to be interesting but fanciful and has been dismissed as a topic of no real use to any serious investigator of Egyptian antiquities. Yet in studying the Stele an intriguing question emerges: What would happen if we actually tried it and did what they described? Could the stone of the Pyramids have actually been mixed and poured into place at the site using plant extracts and aggregates available in Egypt? And also, would such aggregates and extracts have been available at the location at the time of their construction?

The answer to both these questions is very a resounding: Yes, they could have, quite easily! So surely if one can follow the methods described in the famine stele text and in doing, create a mixture that will solidify into a stone of comparable texture and composition to the stone used in the Pyramids, then is it not conceivable that it is most likely the method that was used in their construction. Indeed, it is the only really possible way it could have been done.

The true answer as to how the monuments were constructed may have suddenly become quite blatantly obvious. Indeed, it would appear that the builders even wrote it down for us. The question is: Why is this Stele still being ignored by Egyptology?

Heretic 12-20-2008 06:40 AM

Re: Pyramid Building Solved?
Modern Techniques for Synthesizing Limestone

Then at last, someone came to the fore with a radical new theory in the now familiar form of Prof. Joseph Davidovits of the Geopolymer Institute, who also proposed the plant extract theory in the Mayan process and again, all credit must be given to the man. Ten Points! Prof Davidovits wrote a fascinating report in 1998 in which he proposed the idea that the pyramids were indeed constructed using aggregated limestone rather than by manipulating quarried blocks. His theory was then finally published in 1999 in a book entitled: "The Pyramids: an enigma solved”.

In the book he put forth the very sound, though academically radical theory that outcrops of relatively soft limestone could simply have been quarried and easily disaggregated with water and then the muddy limestone sludge (including the fossil-shells) mixed with lime and some kind of tecto-alumino-silicate forming material such as kaolin clay, silt, or the Egyptian salt ‘Natron’ which is a basic sodium carbonate. The limestone mud could then easily have been carried up by the bucketful and then poured, packed or rammed into formwork molds made of wood, stone, clay or brick that had been erected on the pyramid sides. The re-agglomerated limestone, thus bonded by basic geochemical reaction into a substance known as geopolymer cement, would then have hardened into resistant Limestone blocks as it dried actually solidifying into a substance a great deal harder and stronger than the original starting material.

Critics of this theory argue that Davidovits has never proved that Giza limestone really is geopolymer (and of course this is impossible to do because neither he nor anyone else is ever permitted to remove any material for testing) and they firmly state that the fact that the limestone blocks at Giza contain intact fossil remains substantially proves that they can not be manufactured stone or geopolymers but are in fact hewn blocks of natural limestone.

Interestingly, no-one specifies exactly why they think that intact fossil shells in the pyramid blocks prove that they are not manufactured blocks as even the most fundamental knowledge of Davidovits cast-stone theory clearly suggests that it was the Giza quarries themselves (where else?) that provided the limestone rubble for the aggregates of the pyramid blocks. Such intact fossils actually exist in abundance in the limestone of the Giza quarries.

Since that time, scientists at the Geopolymer Institute have successfully managed to manufacture and cast re-agglomerated limestone. Because it is (of course) prohibited to remove any material from the site of the actual pyramid for testing, for the purpose of the test the scientists selected a soft material containing a high percentage of fossilized shells from a quarry in France to ensure the geological material used in the experiment was very similar to that which is found in the quarries of the Giza plateau in Egypt. The purpose of the test was to demonstrate that this type of soft limestone material is indeed perfect for re-agglomeration.

The scientists then disaggregated the material with water, they then mixed the muddy limestone and its fossil shells with kaolin clay and a basic geopolymeric binder. The limestone mud was then packed into a pyramid shaped mould. The re-agglomerated limestone they created, bonded by geochemical reaction, then hardened into a resistant geopolymer limestone block (fig.85,86) that turned out to be a great deal harder than the original starting material exactly as they had predicted it would.

It was very notable that the whole process had the effect of strengthening the softer stone thereby making it more resistant to such things as weather, pollution, acid rain, temperature
variations and all those things that will generally just mess up your megalithic monument. Because the Institute was not authorized to sample original materials from the Giza plateau quarries (naturally), they were not able to use the exact formula described in the ancient Egyptian text. The French limestone that was used in the test is very similar but unlike the Giza limestone, had no reactive clay in it and the team was forced to add some. Nevertheless, the final result was extremely close to the constituency of that which is found in Egypt both chemically and geologically.


According to Davidovits, with the Egyptian formula, the result is also slightly different because it requires bigger blocks for a better cohesion and is not particularly suitable for smaller items. However even with the slight change of formula due to differences in the materials, these ground-breaking tests have clearly demonstrated that the process is quite possible and the only real key to the complete success of the procedure is in using the appropriate raw materials to begin with.

During a Television special filmed in 1991 called ‘This Old Pyramid’, Prof. Davidovits had the opportunity to demonstrate his cutting-edge theory and in the process, to also demonstrate a unique property of the Giza limestone that further supports the idea. In the presentation a chunk of limestone taken from the nearby Giza quarry was very easily disaggregated in water within 24 hours, leaving the clay and the other constituents gently separated from each other.

This demonstration showed that the existing fossils in the limestone would naturally remain intact as it would not have even been necessary to crush the stone during the manufacturing process as unlike other limestone, material from the Giza quarry simply breaks down in water all on its own.

As I mentioned before all credit must be given to Prof. Joseph Davidovits of the Geopolymer Institute for his groundbreaking study into this process and I highly recommend reading his work on the subject.

This certainly may go a good deal in helping explain how these ancient masses of stone may have been constructed but again we are still left with the question: By whom were they made and for what purpose?

Geopolymer Institute
Category: Archeology

Geopolymer Science Applied to Archeology

Heretic 12-20-2008 06:40 AM

Re: Pyramid Building Solved?
there is more to this type of building too:

Early explorers found a plant in South America who's juices soften certain types of rock, including boot spurs. Birds would grab this plant in its beak and rub it on the cliff walls, then peck at it like a woodpecker and hollow themselves out a hole to nest in. Jars of this stuff had been found in graves so it was somehow prized. There are other accounts of this stuff from a number of explores in the rain forest of Brazil and Peru and in the Andes mountains.

This stuff turns rock into a clay like texture. This is how some of the Mayan and other megalithic structures were built. No one hauled these huge rocks around, they broke them up and transported them then re-made them into huge hewn looking rocks.


Ashatav 12-21-2008 05:42 AM

Re: Pyramid Building Solved?
Yeah, in eastern island and in Perú there are the same kind of rocky odd-shaped-fits-perfectly constructions than in Egypt, is odd because the shapes of the rocks have in some cases up to twelve sides who fits perfectly with the others rocks.

Is odd to because they are so distant and the Eastern Islanders says that they comes from an Island-realm who sunk in the pacific eons ago and have Great thecnologies like anty gravity -they called it "mana" to the "force" of that technology and other uniques like an strange greenhouse they have.

You know, the Moais wasn's transported using brute force because the Break!, some time ago people transported a little a moai using ropes and the ropes only do an irreparable damage to the stone, who is volcan rock super breakeable haha.

I you look at the book from Jonathan Grey called "Dead Men's Secrets" you will find a Lot of answerds of shuch sincronicities of technologies. Is an amazing book.


Heretic 12-21-2008 01:38 PM

Re: Pyramid Building Solved?
I wonder if this stuff can alter crystal the same way as that offers a viable method to make the Mitchell-Hedges Crystal Skull

GaiaLove 12-21-2008 02:50 PM

Re: Pyramid Building Solved?

click for higher res image

The Famine Stele, describing how the king offered land to the god Khnum to end years of famine.
At the top, Djoser (left) faces three Egyptian deities: Khnum, Satis and Anuket. Underneath, some carved sections are missing.

I have been looking into this since i read your post Heretic but have not found anything to corroborate it yet.

The text describes how the king is upset and worried, as the land of Egypt has been in the grip of a drought for seven years, during which time the Nile has not flooded the nearby lands. Djoser asks the priests of his minister Imhotep for help. They decide to investigate in the archives of the temple of Thoth in Hermopolis. A priest informs the king that the Nile flooding is controlled by Khnum at Elephantine Island, in the south of the valley: the god Khnum is angry, and for this reason, he does not allow the waters of the Nile to flow properly. Djoser orders offerings to be carried to the south, to try and placate the god. In the following night, the king has a dream in which he sees Khnum, who promises an end to the famine. The king issues a decree in which he grants the temple of Khnum at Elephantine the region between Aswan and Takompso with all its wealth, as well as a share of all the imports from Nubia.
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine_Stela

Heretic 12-22-2008 12:31 AM

Re: Pyramid Building Solved?
yeah I have done such searches myself and got nothing. One of the reasons I made this post was to search for some cooberation I may be unaware of. This is supposedly rather hush hush in Egyptology as this would destroy the heritage of the Egyptian people, which Dr. Zahi Hawass and others before him protect at all costs and will actually expel archaeological researchers who investigate such theories that do not fall in line with the scientific status quo.

These guys actually "dismiss" steles and other evidence as "anomalies" or outright "mistakes" (4k year old "mistakes" mind you) because they do not fit into their current desired theories. Dr. Zahi Hawass and Co even shut down archaeological sites that contain features or implications that upset academia, all in the name of preserving the site for future study by "sanctioned" archaeologist.

It is not uncommon to have incredible archaeological finds (forbidden archeology) totally swept under the rug because the implications of these finds literally re-write history, destroying the heritage of entire nations and demands a re-examination of their culture.

This kind of mentality in the scientific community is rather common, therefore sources such as Wiki and any other explanations from officialdom will probably not include such cooberation. My mind is open that this may be some wild misrepresentation of the Famine Stele for some cooked up scheme, yet I also can't help but to find the demonstrations of the Geopolymer Institute as "self evident".

In all honesty I have never seen this theory before reading this book, so I am questioning it too, yet so far it does a good job of explaining most, if not all of the enigmas concerning how Earth's ancient megalithic structures were built.

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Project Avalon