As far as I can tell, the main reason some people are proposing that "someone else" may have built [the great pyramids] is  that there seems to be a distinct possibility that it [the Great Pyramid] wasn't built in the 3rd millennium BC at all, and that's largely because there's no hard evidence that it was, and in fact there are several compelling reasons to suggest that it wasn't.
What are those "several compelling reasons", specifically evidence, that the great pyramids (and by extension, the other AE megalithic monuments, stoneware, and statuary) were built before the 3rd millennium BC? I would expand this time for sake of argument to prior to the Naqada period which began c. 4,000BC as before this time no evidence of any population has yet been found sufficient enough to do the work regardless of their abilities. Please give responses in list form.
And so that we do not get bogged down by the same tired cop-out reply "it is not the responsibility of those who hold this belief to prove it was built before this time but rather only incumbent on those to prove it was built after the 3rd millenium", let's assume the AE did not build the pyramids. Let's assume the AE just walked in off the desert, from somewhere c. 4,000BC, and found all of this stuff: all the pyramids, all the granite and megalithic temples from one end of the Nile to the other, all the fantastic stone vases and statues all just sitting there. On, and on, and on.
What is the evidence, or "several compelling reasons" as it were, that any of these objects or construction predated 4,000BC?
Let this be our guide:
Those of us working on an alternative history of humanity need to hold ourselves to standards of evidence AT LEAST AS HIGH as is demanded of mainstream scholars if we are ever to get history rewritten. Graham Hancock.
ADDED: Please do not derail the conversation with unrelated self absorbed topics. This is a very simple thread. I am asking for a list of evidence that shows the megalithic monuments and stone artifacts were built prior to 4,000BC which already makes the assumption they were not made by the AE therefore we do not need to argue about what they could or could not do or what tools they had or not. This evidence does not need to be of the "smoking gun" variety, just credible evidence, circumstantial or otherwise, of a nature that is normally used to traditionally date such cultures and artifacts which some of us might otherwise refer to as actual "higher standards of proof".
Edited 12 time(s). Last edit at 12-Jul-16 05:47 by Thanos5150.