Pyramid Building Solved?

[Burke]

There was a book posted on another website a while back 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 was news to me at the time so I thought I would present it to you in its original text. It seems that how the pyramids were built could be solved.

Excerpt from the book

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?

more...

[Burke]

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

[justpeter]

I haven't read everything you posted above but it does seem to be concerned only with limestone. So even if that was the solution, how did the Egyptians, Incas and others move the huge granite blocks that have been found? Many of them weigh hundreds of tons.

If you look-up Edgar Cayce, I think you'll find he said they had anti-gravity technology from Atlantis. Nassim Haramein seems to agree and I believe he says it works by using vibrations. Whatever the actual method, I would have thought some kind of anti-gravity technology was more likely to be the answer.

[Sunny d]

Posted by justpeter (here)
how did the Egyptians, Incas and others move the huge granite blocks that have been found? Many of them weigh hundreds of tons.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=oK1Rzch89Dw

[justpeter]

Sunny_d, that was a very simplistic answer but I guess my question should have been more precise. Ok, I'll try again. How did, for example, the people in South America move blocks weighing possibly hundreds of tons over mountains and through forests then manipulate them to build a pyramid where not only are the blocks a perfect fit, with no gaps, but also perfectly aligned to astronomical events? Building stonehenge is hardly the same thing. It seems to me that some kind of anti-gravity technology is more likely unless someone knows different?

[Sunny d]

i posted the vid to show how simple solutions sometimes are.........! (the title is moving heavy objects in the past) There must have been tools or maybe help from the gods,............its still one of the unrevealed and fascinating mysteries

peace

[john.d]

from the 'Ra Material' :

Questioner: Yes. You mentioned that the pyramids were an outgrowth of this. Could you expand a little on that? Were you responsible for the building of the pyramid, and what was the purpose of the pyramid?

Ra: I am Ra. The larger pyramids were built by our ability using the forces of One. The stones are alive. It has not been so understood by the mind/body/spirit distortions of your culture. The purposes of the pyramids were two:

Firstly, to have a properly oriented place of initiation for those who wished to become purified or initiated channels for the Law of One.

Two, we wished then to carefully guide the initiates in developing a healing of the people whom they sought to aid, and of the planet itself. Pyramid after pyramid charged by the crystal and Initiate were designed to balance the incoming energy of the One Creation with the many and multiple distortions of the planetary mind/body/spirit. In this effort we were able to continue work that brothers within the Confederation had effected through building of other crystal-bearing structures and thus complete a ring, if you will, of these about the Earth’s, as this instrument would have us vibrate it, surface .

Questioner: Was the pyramid then built by the mutual action of many?

Ra: I am Ra. The pyramids which we thought/built were constructed thought-forms created by our social memory complex.

Questioner: Then the rock was created in place rather than moved from some place else? Is that correct?

Ra: I am Ra. We built with everlasting rock the Great Pyramid, as you call it. Other of the pyramids were built with stone moved from one place to another.

Questioner: I understood you to say in an earlier session that pyramids were built to ring the Earth. How many pyramids were built?

Ra: l am Ra. There are six balancing pyramids and fifty-two others built for additional healing and initiatory work among your mind/body/spirit social complexes.

Questioner: Is there currently any use for the pyramid shape at all that is beneficial?

Ra: I am Ra. This is in the affirmative if carefully used.

The pyramid may be used for the improvement of the meditative state as long as the shape is such that the entity is in Queen’s Chamber position or entities are in balanced configuration about this central point.

The small pyramid shape, placed beneath a portion of the body complex may energize this body complex. This should be done for brief periods only, not to exceed 30 of your minutes.

The use of the pyramid to balance planetary energies still functions to a slight extent, but due to earth changes, the pyramids are no longer aligned properly for this work.

Questioner: What would the height be, in centimeters, of one of these pyramids for best functioning?

Ra: I am Ra. It matters not. Only the proportion of the height of the pyramid from base to apex to the perimeter of the base is at all important.

Questioner: In the Giza pyramid there was no chamber at position two. Do you ever make use of position two by putting a chamber in that position on other planets or in other pyramids?

Ra: I am Ra. This position is useful only to those whose abilities are such that they are capable of serving as conductors of this type of focused spiral. One would not wish to attempt to train third-density entities in such disciplines.

Questioner: Then is the large underwater pyramid off the Florida coast one of the balancing pyramids that Ra constructed or did some other social memory complex construct it and if so, which one?

Ra: I am Ra. That pyramid of which you speak was one whose construction was aided by sixth-density entities of a social memory complex working with Atlanteans prior to our working with the, as you call them, Egyptians.

Questioner: This is rather trivial, but I was wondering why the pyramid was built with many blocks rather than creating the whole thing as one form created at once?

Ra: I am Ra. There is a law which we believe to be one of the more significant primal distortions of the Law of One. That is the Law of Confusion. You have called this the Law of Free Will. We wished to make an healing machine, or time/space ratio complex which was as efficacious as possible. However, we did not desire to allow the mystery to be penetrated by the peoples in such a way that we became worshipped as builders of a miraculous pyramid. Thus it appears to be made, not thought.


John

[justpeter]

Good post john.d. That's what I was getting at, though I wasn't doing a good job of it I knew that The Law Of One covered this, as did Edgar Cayce, as does Nassim Haramein and they all agree that the stones were manipulated by some kind of force that was known to the builders at that time - in other words, using the natural laws of the universe.

[Burke]

Posted by justpeter (here)
I haven't read everything you posted above but it does seem to be concerned only with limestone. So even if that was the solution, how did the Egyptians, Incas and others move the huge granite blocks that have been found? Many of them weigh hundreds of tons.

If you look-up Edgar Cayce, I think you'll find he said they had anti-gravity technology from Atlantis. Nassim Haramein seems to agree and I believe he says it works by using vibrations. Whatever the actual method, I would have thought some kind of anti-gravity technology was more likely to be the answer.

well first off...I really don't know how it was done. I simply found these theories plausible and acceptable in accordance with many of the anomalies found in their building.

concerning the South American structures the book refers to a early "Indiana Jones" type character named Colonel Percy Fawcett who's exploits are well documented and was contracted by governments at the time (due to his extensive ability to traverse the jungles of South America in earlier expeditions) to use surveyor equipment to map the borders of some of the countries of South America.

He came across other explorers occasionally in which they would then camp together and trade stories and info from the rest of the world as they would be in the bush for years at a time. He kept extensive journals and he eventually disappeared in search of lost civilizations of the like you would find in some of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's The Lost World



hmm on second thought... let me copy some pics and upload them to make this more pleasing to the eye and I will toss out another excerpt on this...

[Burke]

Further excerpts from book on South American structures:

Colonel Fawcett had first heard these strange stories some time after he had accepted his first
survey contract. Until he had known of them, his South American expeditions were completely
oriented toward civil and engineering work though even while performing his daily tasks he
continued to nurture a keen interest in the forest. During his surveys he also made copious
amounts of notes containing detailed observations about everything he saw, especially the ways
of the white settlers, the Indians of the forest, and the forest wildlife all of which are recorded in
detail in his book. However after Fawcett became familiar with the story of Francisco Raposo his
attentions and interests began to shift away from just pure engineering and more toward ventures of exploration and discovery.

In one place in his diaries he records a remarkable conversation with another explorer
concerning an unusual forest bird that nests in perfect round holes in rock cliffs. The man had
actually spent 25 years living in the forests with the local natives and he had this to say:

“They make the holes themselves. I've seen how they do it, many a time. I've watched, I have,
and seen the birds come to the cliff with leaves of some sort in their beaks, and cling to the rock
like woodpeckers to a tree while they rubbed the leaves in a circular motion over the surface.

Then they would fly off, and come back with more leaves, and carry on with the rubbing process.
After three or four repetitions they dropped the leaves and started pecking at the place with their
sharp beaks, and—here's the marvelous part—they would soon open out a round hole in the
stone...”

"'Do you mean to say that the bird's beak can penetrate solid rock?'

“...No, I don't think the bird can get through solid rock. I believe, as everyone who has watched
them believes, that those birds know of a leaf with juice that can soften up rock till it's like wet
clay.’'

"The man continued with a personal story about his nephew. He had walked through the thick
bush to a nearby camp to retrieve his horse, which had gone lame and had been left there
temporarily. He noticed, when he arrived, that his New Mexican spurs had been eaten away
almost completely. The owner of the camp asked him if he had walked through a certain plant
about a foot high, with dark reddish leaves. The young man said he had walked through a wide
area that was completely covered with such plants.

“'That's it!’ they said, ‘That’s what's eaten your spurs away! That's the stuff the Incas used for
shaping stones. The juice will soften rock up till it's like paste. You must show me where you
found the plants.' But when they retraced the young man's steps they were unable to locate them.”

There is also an interesting footnote to Fawcett’s story about these birds that lends further
credence to the tale. A man who had been a member of the Yale Peruvian Expedition that
discovered Machu Pichu in 1911 wrote this strange story in his notes:

“Some years ago, when I was working in the mining camp at Cerro de Pasco (a place 14,000
feet up in the Andes of Central Peru), I went out one Sunday with some other Gringos to visit
some old Inca or Pre-Inca graves—to see if we could find anything worth while. We took our
grub with us, and, of course, a few bottles of pisco and beer, and a peon—a cholo—to help us
dig. Well, we had our lunch when we got to the burial place, and afterwards started to open up
some graves that seemed to be untouched. We worked hard, and knocked off every now and then for a drink. I don't drink myself, but the others did, especially one chap who poured too much pisco into himself and was inclined to be noisy. When we knocked off, all we had found was an earthenware jar of about a quart capacity, and with liquid inside it.

"’I bet its chicha!" said the noisy one. “Let’s try it and see what sort of stuff the Incas drank!"
"’Probably poison us if we do." observed another.
"’Tell you what, then—let's try in on the peon!"
“’They dug the seal and stopper out of the jar's mouth, sniffed at the contents and called the
peon over to them.
"’Take a drink of this chicha," ordered the drunk. The peon took the jar, hesitated, and then
with an expression of fear spreading over his face thrust it into the drunk's hands and backed
away.

"’No, no, señor," he murmured. "Not that. That's not chicha!" He turned and made off.

“The drunk put the jar down on a flat-topped rock and set off in pursuit. “Come on, boys—
catch him!" he yelled. They caught the wretched man, dragged him back, and ordered him to
drink the contents of the jar. The peon struggled madly, his eyes popping. There was a bit of a
scrimmage, and the jar was knocked over and broken, its contents forming a puddle on top of the
rock. Then the peon broke free and took to his heels.

“Everyone laughed. It was a huge joke. But the exercise had made them thirsty and they went
over to the sack where the beer- bottles lay.

“About ten minutes later I bent over the rock and casually examined the pool of spilled liquid.
It was no longer liquid; the whole patch where it had been, and the rock under it, were as soft as
wet cement! It was as though the stone had melted, like wax under the influence of heat.”

The head of the Machu Pichu expedition Hiram Bingham also tells a similar tale that was
related to him by natives of how the edges of great stones would be rubbed with the juices of a
certain plant which would render them like clay to and create a perfect joint.
The possibility of such a plant existing is not at all unreasonable. There are still a myriad of
undiscovered species in the Amazon basin. Unfortunately though, due to the rapid rate of
deforestation that is occurring there, we may fast be running out of time to find it.
Bingham himself never put much faith in the story as he could never conceive of how such
enormous stones would have been lifted in the first place for such rubbing of the edges to have
taken place, let alone placed it into its position in the wall. Local legends have always insisted the
task was done by giants and Bingham himself surmised that such could only be the case.

more...

[Burke]

continued...

Impossible Buildings

The ability to soften stone would certainly go a long way in explaining the unique stonework
found in the Mayan structures and before you laugh the thought off as ludicrous, consider that
many of the fortresses actually bear some very unusual markings that could easily be explained
by tooling the surface while it was still soft. It should also be realized that many of the stones
used in these structures are truly immense, some as tall as three meters and virtually impossible to
maneuver into place using any of our our current expertise. And not to forget that some of the
stones, like this famous one at Cuzco (fig.64), have up to twelve perfectly fitting angles, and that
is just the ones that are visible on the face. Beneath the face, the back and side sections are also
perfect, In fact, so perfect that a razor blade cannot fit between the joints and it is the same over

fig.64

the entirety of the wall on every block of stone! Consider that fact when looking at the wall at
Sacsayhuaman (fig.65). Apart from it resembling a wall made of grey ‘play dough’ from a
distance, such precision is, as yet, impossible using any kind of cutting tool and even if it were
possible to cut the stones with such precision, how on earth would they have then been
maneuvered into place? Presumably, if they were hewn and then placed in the walls, the process
would also have been repeated many times over for each block for fine adjustments to be made to the angles in order to reach the absolute precision obtained in every block. Such a method is not only implausible but is nothing short of impossible and so it stands to reason that the obvious and somewhat disturbing explanation is that the joining edges, quite simply, were not cut in any
conventional sense. It is known that the stones were in fact quarried and transported to the site for the quarries they came from have been located. But how were they worked to such perfection and then transported to the site which is located 13,000 feet (Four Kilometers) above sea level and how were the joints perfected? When one looks at these Mayan structures they certainly do have
the appearance of a wall that is made of clay that has solidified. Again, take the wall at
Sacsayhuaman (fig.65); it seems enormously strange, and also highly unlikely, for the builders to
have gone to such incredible trouble to make sure the stones fitted together with what is an
absolutely ridiculous degree of perfection, while using the most difficult shapes imaginable, only
then to leave the visible face of the wall virtually covered with a myriad of imperfections that
makes them look rough and unfinished.

fig.65

To be honest, that is an interesting enough point in itself. But what does an even closer
examination of some of these imperfections on the walls produce?

fig.66

There is a section of a great wall at Ollantaytambo, Peru (fig.66) has some highly unusual and
very tell tale markings on it. Notice the flat section near the top of the stone marked on the right
and the long scrape marks on the stone marked on the left? These marks simply don’t look as if
they have been purposely carved onto the walls in any way at all. Another section of the
Sacsayhuaman wall (fig.67) that bears a number of strange scrape marks and dents on its surface
that look very much like tool marks. Interestingly, if you prod a lump of soft clay or cement with
the end of a stick and let it dry, you can create marks and dents that look just like these.
The stonework at Ollantaytambo is nothing less than spectacular and not by using all our
advanced laser and computer systems combined nor by gathering all the technology we could

fig.67

muster, could we begin to come even close to achieving what has been done in the construction of
these Jungle megaliths of ancient times. Softening the stones seems to be the only logical
explanation of how these walls were built. It’s the only thing that can adequately explain the
precision fit of the stones which would then naturally settle snuggly together under their own
weight easily creating a perfect and gapless joint.
On another section of the walls at Ollantaytambo we can notice the small plugs protruding
from the bottom of each small filling stone between the larger ones such as you might see used to
provide stability in concrete form work? (fig.69). It is commonly believed that the protrusions
found on the stones in these walls were used to hang gold plating or for tying ropes to for
handling. Unfortunately for both of these theories, the protrusions are of completely insufficient
size or shape and are too randomly placed to be effective for either of those uses.
They could however, be formed by making marks in the support structure. And interestingly,
when working with a substance of such great weight, such protrusions would in fact, actually be
necessary to prevent any uncontrolled movement of the heavy and wet material on the outer face
of the wall while it solidified.
No-one has adequately explained how the people of ancient times built these structures, or
even why on earth they would have thought it necessary to go to so much trouble. All we know is
that they did, because the structures are there and still defying our analysis. Archeological and
documented evidence suggests the actual builders of these incredible megalithic fortresses may in fact date back to a period far before the Mayans inhabited the area to when the dominant race was the Olmecs. There is also further evidence to suggest that the actual purpose of these structures may have been vastly more profound than simply temples or fortresses. This will be discussed further in a later chapter.

more...

[Burke]

continued...

fig.68

This is a particularly enigmatic stone from the Ollantaytambo wall (fig.68): Although the surface of the stone is quite rough and could very well have been hewn, it is very difficult to explain the zigzagging pattern on the face of the stone.
While it is true that the ‘stairway’ pattern is a motif common to many Mayan structures, notice how the bottom section of the lower zigzag appears to have protruded slightly and sagged a little. It seems quite unlikely and somewhat unreasonable to think that something like this would have been purposely carved onto the surface of the wall? Other sections look as if they have been slapped with blocks or prodded with the end of sticks while the material was still soft
and just look at the narrow ‘filler’ stones between the large slabs.

It is obvious that the ancients actually did know of a way to soften stone. It seems to be the
only thing that fits. How else could it have been done?

fig.69

Local legends repeatedly maintain that the walls were erected by giants, gods who raised the
stones in a single night. Legends also tell of how the edges of the stones would be rubbed with the
juice of a special plant which would soften the stone like clay and thus perfect the joint.
To think that simply because we have not yet located the small crimson plant Fawcett spoke of
in the myriad of unknown species that have yet to be discovered in the Amazon jungle certainly
does not mean that such a plant does not exist. To rule something out completely because it has
been found yet would be nothing short of foolhardy, with such an attitude we would never have
discovered electricity, that’s a given.
One of the more unfortunate things in the dilemma though, is that time is fast running out. We
may now never find any such plant. Not now that the main Amazon basin has been ruined by
American oil interests and the remaining forests are still being destroyed at the rate of at least 3
football fields a day. It’s almost like they’re trying to make sure all evidence of such a thing is
destroyed. But then, one should never attribute an action to malice when it can be adequately
explained by stupidity. Though, when one is considering the actions, motives and attitudes of
modern governments, unfortunately it’s usually the former. Such a plant may have already
become a victim of industry, lost forever in the technological crunch.
But then, thanks to a remarkable man, we may not need to find it...
Recent discoveries and work by a Dr Joseph Davidovits of the Geopolymer Institute have
produced some remarkable insights into the processes the ancients may well have used to
construct these amazing fortresses.

Softening Stone with Plant Extracts

Amazingly, a recent ethnological discovery has actually shown that some witch-doctors of the
HUANKA tradition remarkably, use no tools in the making of small stone objects, but in fact still
use a chemical solution made from plant extracts to actually soften the stone material!
According to Dr. Davidovits, in a paper that was written by Dr. Davidovits, A. Bonnett and
A.M. Marriote and presented at the 21st International Symposium for Archaeometry at
Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York, USA in 1981:

“The starting stone material (silicate or silico-aluminate) is dissolved by the organic extracts,
and the viscous slurry is then poured into a mould where it hardens. This technique, when
mastered, allows a sort of cement to be made by dissolving rocks; statues which could have been
made by the technique of the pre-incan HUANKA, by dissolution followed by geopolymeric
agglomeration, are found to contain Ca-oxalate in the stone.”
The trio then proposed the hypothesis that the large stones in found in the Mayan Fortresses
and monuments were in reality, artificial and had in fact been agglomerated with a binder after
certain rocks had been slowly disaggregated, an idea that fits very well with what the walls look
like and also happens to be in total agreement with local legends and traditions such as those that
were told to Fawcett.
The group then even went on to present to the meeting some actual samples of stone that had
dissolved and re-aggregated themselves to prove it!
“We present here the first results on plant extracts on the dissolution or dis-aggregation of
calcium carbonate containing rocks (Bio-tooling action). The feasibility of chemically working
calcium carbonate with various carboxylic acids found in plants (acetic, oxalic and citric acid)
has been studied. Maximum bio-tooling action is obtained with a solution containing:
Vinegar (1 M) (acetic acid)
Oxalic acid (0.9 M)
Citric acid (0.78 M)
The great surprise was actually to discover very ancient references to their use since Neolithic
times for working materials which are very hard but easily attacked by acids, such as chalk.
Thus, a bas-relief from the tomb of Mera, at SAQQARAH (VI dynasty, 3Millenium B.C., Egypt)
shows the hollowing out of "Egyptian alabaster" (CaCO3) vases by a liquid contained in a water
skin or bladder. An experiment of interest was to compare the "bio-tooling" technique with the
shaping of a hole using a steel tool and the quartz sand technique recommended by prehistorians.
The hole resulting from sand abrasion has rough walls, whereas bio-tooling gives a
smooth finish.”
The work by Dr. Davidovits is nothing short of brilliant and also very refreshing. It’s also
interesting to note how quickly the problem was solved once the right approach to dealing with it
had been adapted.
There is now very little doubt about how the Ancients actually built these incredible structures
and indeed, softened or perhaps melting the stone has always really been the only possible
explanation. The ancient Mayans were indeed quite capable of producing very large quantities of
the acids that were used by Dr Davidovits in his experiments from many plants that were quite
common to the region in the distant past.
Plants such as: Fruits, Potatoes, Maize, Rhubarb, Rumex, Agave Americana, Opuntia, Ficus
Indica and Garlic to name a few.
It is highly feasible that the stones were quarried, then broken or crushed to manageable sizes
for transportation to the locations and re-aggregated on site while being cast back into the
megalithic slabs we now see, after all, since we have seen that they certainly had and knew about
the means to do it, it somehow seems absurd to think they would not have made use of the
knowledge.
Once again, the simplest and most likely explanation is usually correct.
But all of this knowledge still does not answer the fundamental questions: Who actually built
them and Why?

[Burke]

ok thats most of what I could find in the book on these structures

I am not selling the idea here...just found it as very interesting and seems very occam's razor ish to me....I found it very intriguing

what do I believe? I simply don't know so I am keeping my options open on this

[Burke]

another interesting not to make on this theory is: you will find in the Klaus Dona interview at Camelot http://projectcamelot.org/klaus_dona.html at around 52 min he is talking about the human hair they found embedded in one of the Egyptian pyramid stones which also supports the aggregate theory that they were cast instead of carved

simply fascinating

[scanner]

The accounts given do not fit the facts in anyway ,2,5000,000 hundred ton blocks imported and we have no lifting gear that could lift some of the larger blocks to day , 25 years to build with copper malets and pullies that did not exsist at that time . Looking down 1/4 inch out of centre point in acres squares, can't be done today with all the tech we got . My point they think we're stupid and will believe what we are told to believe and most people do . Research Gilbecki tepe (sorry if spelling incorrect) it will open your eyes built 12000 yrs ago in what we are told was the end of the ice age and we so we are told ,still lived in caves . Arn't you glad you took the red pill now lol.

[K626]

This theory is nonsense basically.

[Burke]

Posted by K626 (here)
This theory is nonsense basically.

very interested in why you think so

do elaborate and share your views...some source info would also be great!

[Burke]

Posted by scanner (here)
The accounts given do not fit the facts in anyway ,2,5000,000 hundred ton blocks imported and we have no lifting gear that could lift some of the larger blocks to day , 25 years to build with copper malets and pullies that did not exsist at that time . Looking down 1/4 inch out of centre point in acres squares, can't be done today with all the tech we got . My point they think we're stupid and will believe what we are told to believe and most people do . Research Gilbecki tepe (sorry if spelling incorrect) it will open your eyes built 12000 yrs ago in what we are told was the end of the ice age and we so we are told ,still lived in caves . Arn't you glad you took the red pill now lol.

totally agree with you...what we are told that the ancients were like and the tools they used seems to be growing more and more in the a "conspiracy theory"

i am a firm believer in a global society in ancient times...for now anyway, ask me tomorrow and you may get a diff answer as I get more data

[scanner]

Thanks Heretic for posting this makes my grey matter start working , I think all bets are open just now .

[K626]

Posted by Heretic (here)
very interested in why you think so

do elaborate and share your views...some source info would also be great!

Who is this guy who wrote the book?

I appreciate you've got into this in detail and I haven't, but at first glance alone, those huge granite blocks at Giza weren't softened and show no signs of being 'softened'.