Ancient Solid Granite was Concrete

[brillbilly]

This is a Must watch!..Superb!


The new Documentary reveals how Ancient Egyptians built the pyramids using man-made stones, which look exactly like natural rocks. The limestone blocks were cast in situ, employing an advanced technology that was later lost, leaving a puzzle hidden for thousands of years inside the pyramid stones. This theory undoubtedly shed an amazing new light on what really happened in Ancient Egypt in that remote era.

As the documentary shows, it is a theory that gives indigestion to mainstream archaeologists. Namely, that some of the immense blocks of the Great Pyramids of Egypt might have been cast from synthetic material - the world's first concrete - not just carved whole from quarries and lugged into place by armies of toilers.

Such an innovation would have saved millions of man-hours of grunting and heaving in construction of the enigmatic edifices on the Giza Plateau. The Ancient Egyptians could have been the true inventors of the poured substance that is humanity's most common building material.

[grishnakh]

I'll check this out later, I imagine they are confusing concrete with plaster...

the limestone blocks were quarried its proven, because the quarry still has blocks in place which prove thats where they came from....  

[brillbilly]

Jul 2, 2017 21:17:53 GMT grishnakh said:

I'll check this out later, I imagine they are confusing concrete with plaster...

the limestone blocks were quarried its proven, because the quarry still has blocks in place which prove thats where they came from....  

no confusing man it's worth watching..also the limestone was always quarried locally for sure,but i question why they had to travel 600 miles to aquire specific granite for the internal structure.!..From my own research the tomb theory is MS bull..I believe these pyramid had a functional purpose.This is just my honest opinion and in no way does it outrule others opinions!

[grishnakh]

I agree the tomb theory is wack bro, the vid was interesting I feel that guy has little experience though with cement and concrete casting procedures. His comments about the statue around the 4 min mark confirmed this, for starters if this was cast would be incredibly well done even by todays standards. We cast in situ concrete panels on site here so I see it done regularly, you can't take the shutters off until the concrete is fully set, I don't understand how he thinks an object could be pushed into the soft concrete statue to make that square relief. It would be impossible. 

There are a few interesting videos lurking about in regards to the stone working, surprisingly very little has been done by actual accredited scientist which is a shame. 



this was one I watched awhile ago bro, the comments about the rock appearing as if it were soft like clay and the ease at which the stone cutters tools must have cut are common themes. The accidental nicks and over cuts are obvious to a stone worker, and it seems that the cutting blades of the ancients were on par or superseded that of today. 

Its also obvious in the architecture of the stonework that there were several different types of techniques used, the oldest being the most precise and technical moving forward in time, its almost as if these techniques were lost or forgotten. 

[brillbilly]

Quote : Its also obvious in the architecture of the stonework that there were several different types of techniques used, the oldest being the most precise and technical moving forward in time, its almost as if these techniques were lost or forgotten.

I agree, im not ruling out that this knowledge has been suppressed,and guarded by a select few.!..The rest of us are are left with indoctrinated amnesia.!