Explain me how Egyptians made the Pyramids without the help of machines?

First of all, they did have machines. A lever itself is a machine, and they used levers in their everyday lives.

The Discovery Channel News says, and I quote: "Physicists at the University of Amsterdam investigated the forces needed to pull weighty objects on a giant sled over desert sand, and discovered that dampening the sand in front of the primitive device reduces friction on the sled, making it easier to operate... It turns out that wetting Egyptian desert sand can reduce the friction by quite a bit, which implies you need only half of the people to pull a sledge on wet sand, compared to dry sand," Bonn said. "

Library.cornell.edu says: "At the time of the first pyramid, basic devices to pull heavy stones such as the windlass were very much in use. The windlass is a wheel and axle machine where the axle is fasten to the wheel. On both sides of the axle are large wheels, poles, or bars much larger than the axle. Let us say that the diameter of the wheel is ten feet and the diameter of the axle is one foot. By winding a rope around the axle and turning the wheel a mechanical advantage equal to the ratio of the diameter of the wheel to that of the axle is realized. Therefore, in this case the ratio would be one to ten. With a windlass ratio of 1:10, and considering the bearings as frictionless, a 2000-lb load could be lifted by applying a 200-lb force. With suitable bearings, bedding, and geometry, even a smaller force would be required to slide the load. Thus, it would require 900-pounds of force to pull a 9,000-pound stone, or six men applying a force of 150-pounds each. By putting the stone on a skid and using the windlass, 6 men could move the stone across the surface much easier. Also, by putting the windlass on the level of the pyramid they are working on, the 6 men could hoist stone up the side of the pyramid on a narrow ramp."

Well with the math that exists out there, people have calculated that the possibility of life being out there is fully possible. From what I know, or have been told, life began in a pool of water (Not like a man made pool, but a small pond like thing)

That is assuming that life was formed via evolution. I believe in intelligent design by an omnipotent God, who created everything in 6 literal days.

Yep, years and years and years. But in all seriousness, you can't climb a 10 tonnes rock only by humans, can you? Also, the pyramids were all perfect and the rocks that were part of its floor were nearly perfectly flat. Look at the top of that rock. These days it's pretty hard to make rocks that flat without any machine. What about then?

[/quote]

Wikipedia says: "[T]he stones forming the core of the pyramids were roughly cut, especially in the Great Pyramid."

This means that they had many less stones to polish.

Also, just as we use sandpaper, they could have used sand to polish the rocks (it's not like they would run out). They could have used saw-like tools as well, and those cut fairly smoothly.

From touregypt.com: "We believe that the ancient builders could have achieved a precise right angle in any of three ways. The first method would have involved the use of an A-shaped set square. The set square would have been placed along the established orientation line and the perpendicular taken from the other leg of the square. The set square would then be flipped and the measurements repeated. The exact 90 degree angle would then be taken by taking into account the small error of the angle between the two measurements."

Yes. Considering the Universe is so massive, it's extremely unlikely we're on the only planet that has life.

Here you are drawing a conclusion based on a logical fallacy called "Argument from Ignorance," which is assuming that a claim is true because it has not been or cannot be proven false, or vice versa.

Saying alien life doesn't exist is like scooping up some water out of the ocean into a cup and saying whales don't live in the ocean

This is not true, because even if a whale was right above the cup as you lifted it out of the water, it wouldn't fit in.

I don't believe in a god, and it is said that everything was made from nothing. But there would need to be a 'god' to make the nothing. And where would he come from?

So this is proof that your theory is correct and mine isn't? Another logical fallacy.

You can all disagree with me, but in my opinion is every ancient gods mentioned were aliens.
It's the likely and the reasonable explanation (or it's just me watching one too many Ancient Aliens episodes). I don't know if any of you know about this, but the pyramids of Giza are directly aligned with the stars of Orion. There is no way that could be possible by a Pharaoh with a few thousand slaves.

What about this from touregypt.com? "Pyramids, unlike many other types of religious structures, required strict orientation to the cardinal points. Pyramid alignment may have been carried out through a number of different means, including some methods we have probably never thought of. The primary theory of how the ancient Egyptians oriented most any building that had to conform to true primary coordinates has been by stellar measurements. This involved building a small, circular wall of perhaps mudbrick that had to be perfectly level at the top. Within the circle, a man would stand and through a straight pole with a forked top called a bay, sight a circumpolar star as it rises. A second man at the perimeter of the small circular wall would then "spot" the wall where the star rose. Using a type of plumb line, or merkhet, he would also spot the mark at the bottom of the wall. When the star set, the process would be repeated. Measuring between the two spots would then provide true north from the center sighting pole.

Recently several other theories have been raised, all of which involve some sort of astronomical measurements. A British scholar named K. Spence believes that the Egyptians used two circumpolar stars (Delta Ursae Majoris and Beta Urae Minoris or Epsilon Usae Majoris and Gamma Urae Minors) Another theory set out by a Slovak Egyptologist, D. Magdolen, believes that the ancient Egyptians oriented their monuments using the sun, by means of wooden stakes and ropes. There is in fact a reference in ancient text referring to "the shadow" and the "stride of Ra".

The sun rises and sets in equal but opposite angles to true north. Using a plumb line, a pole would have been set as vertically as possible. Then, about three hours before noon, its shadow would be measured. This length then becomes the radius of a circle. As the sun rises higher, the shadow shrinks back from the line and then becomes longer in the afternoon. When it reaches the circle again it forms an angle with the morning's line. The bisection of the angle is true north. However, this method would be less accurate than the stellar method, but could be fairly accurate during the solstices."

Give me a logical explanation of how totally different cultures with a totally different location can have the exact same structures unless someone traveled to both locations, which would be impossible by boat/foot.

The same way that when you were little you learned that you can't stack a two-by-four on top of a domino tower. The more weight located at the bottom of a structor relative to the overall weight, the more stable the object.

Now I have a question for you: If super intelligent aliens with advanced computers made all of the pyramids, then why did they mess up on the Sneferu's pyramid (the bent pyramid)?


And why are pyramids different all over the world if they were made by the same race of aliens? Also, why would the Egyptians be the only ones with smooth pyramids if the same group made all of the pyramids?

Then how can you flatten rocks?

Maybe with the same tools you used to cut it out of the ground in the first place?

What about the Nazca lines? Did those get calculated by simple primitive math? No, I don't think so. You would need to be very high up in the air to see the full picture of what you're trying to make. With the technology in that time, I doubt they could get that high.

First of all: "Contrary to the popular belief that the lines and figures can only be seen with the aid of flight, they are visible from atop the surrounding foothills. The first mention of the Nazca Lines in print was by Pedro Cieza de León in his book of 1553, where he mistook them for trail markers.[4] Interest in them lapsed until the Peruvian archaeologist Toribio Mejia Xesspe spotted them while he was hiking through the foothills in 1927. He discussed them at a conference in Lima in 1939."

And: "Phyllis Pitluga, senior astronomer at the Adler Planetarium and Astronomy Museum and a protégé of Reiche, performed computer-aided studies of star alignments. She asserted the giant spider figure is an anamorphic diagram of the constellation Orion. She further suggested the three of the straight lines leading to the figure were used to track the changing declinations of the three stars of Orion's Belt."

Both quotes from Wikipedia.

Finally, they could just draw a small version, plan out the curves and line and say "Hey you, dig that a trench at an x degree curve for x feet."

Ancient people were more crafty than we give them credit for, aliens didn't aid them lol. Give your ancestors more credit.

That is very true. Discovery magazine says: "John Hawks is in the middle of explaining his research on human evolution when he drops a bombshell. Running down a list of changes that have occurred in our skeleton and skull since the Stone Age, the University of Wisconsin anthropologist nonchalantly adds, “And it’s also clear the brain has been shrinking.”

So even if you believe in evolution, people were smarter overall when the pyramids were built.

SasukeUchiha2214

TheShadbusher

SasukeUchiha2214
I'm glad that he chose to express his opinion, but we all know that someone that does believe in a higher figure, such as god, will be very mad at that post

Do I sound mad to you?

You may not be, but someone will be

I'm not angered by people saying that, just saddened and sorry for them.

gyazo.com/4566bf25a662ebedb681790a93366e5c somehow the first 5 look similar but the last one looks smarter meaning at that point is when the martians came in/ 60k years ago

You're basing you scientific standpoint off of how a render artist thought a handful of bones would look like with a complete body?

it's a bit narcissistic to think we're alone in the universe

No, it's a bit narcissistic to think that even if there were aliens that they would care about earth and come and build pyramids for our kings.

Yes, that is what evolution dictates and there is proof of it happening. The reason we haven't seen fish evolve is because it takes millions of years and humans have not been around long enough to see it happen. Today's fish are simply evolved forms of life that existed millions of years ago, and the fish from millions of years ago are now other kinds of animals.

So if there were so many transitional creatures, can you show me some of their fossils or an animal that is currently evolving?

If you have actual evidence that proves evolution is wrong, or have found legitimate flaws with the fact of evolution, i invite you to publish it. It would be quite a surprise to the whole scientific community. If it is not the case that you have actual evidence against evolution, i would kindly ask you to not imply a gigantic conspiracy on the behalf of scientists, as every major biologist agrees about evolution, and it is kind of hard to see what incentive scientists would have of keeping up a falsehood.

Here is is, and it already was published: https://answersingenesis.org/origin-of-life/can-natural-processes-explain-the-origin-of-life/

There is bacteria life on Mars.
Boom. Aliens DO exist.

Rt.com says: "The NASA Curiosity rover that was thought to bring only cameras, sensors, and scientific equipment when it traveled to Mars in August 2012 may have brought along dozens of species of bacteria that originated on Earth, according to a new study."

http://rt.com/usa/160636-mars-curiosity-rover-bacteria/

Well they have no proof that there is currently any form of life on Mars, but they found fossilized bacteria in a meteor found in Antarctica that they know is from Mars.

How do they know it was from Mars if they are not even sure if Martian bacteria actually is Martian? Did they carry out DNA tests on the fossils that re-entered the atmosphere? The heat would have destroyed any genetic material.

McJackson3180

The_Big_Dish

AnimeFanFTWThere is bacteria life on Mars.
Boom. Aliens DO exist.

I just looked this up, they haven't found anything actually but they are still looking :/

(it would be huge news if they did find bacteria though)

http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=2986

From the link: "We know the meteor is from Mars because it contains traces of the Martian atmosphere."
Mars' atmosphere contains the same things that earth's does. Would you listen to me if I found a helium balloon and said it was from another planet. I mean, you should because it contains helium, and that alien planet's atmosphere contains helium.