> So, all is possible, and can be shown to work.
> This is a workable scenario, and in my opinion
> answers how the Pyramids were built. It uses less
> men, and the assets we all can see, without
> building something elaborate, ie. Spiral
> tunnels/ramps and/or other building proposals.
> Proposals which there is no evidence of... No
> scarring of the land, or large additional rocks
> laying about. Nothing of the sort. Though there is
> a massive Causeway and 4 Walls built, which no one
> seems to have an answer for.
Like all the infrastructure Egyptologists see religion and magic instead of the means to build pyramids. "Causeways" are "Holy Walkways", "dams" define "Holy Precincts", and the pavement becomes the "Holy Precinct" itself. If you're superstitious enough you don't need a means or infrastructure to build pyramids and you don't leave evidence even after cutting, moving, and stacking 6 1/2 million tons of stone.
Of course there's no evidence for ramps since ramps are profane and were removed as soon as the job was complete. It all makes perfect sense just so long as you don't look too closely at the facts.
> They needed to harvest
> water for the building operation, and even a small
> stream dumping into the Wall enclosure all night,
> would be beneficial. As with the Causeway, this is
> why they expended so much time and energy, in
> building the Walls. Both were critical. The AE
> were proficient canal builders, and this is well
I think it's a given that the water source to operate the funiculars is key. I say this principally because I've looked so long for it and it is invisible. Where the water was held is clearly visible but the source itself is not. Yes, it could have been a few different things including your canals, aqueducts, or artesian wells. It could have been a natural conduit from high up the Nile or the Ur Nile. It could have been geysers. But this is about it. It seems that the origin of the water is important only if it were geysers but I don't believe this is strictly true. But obviously some improbable system was in place. It was improbable because vast quantities of water are not often high up on a plateau unless massive earth works brought it there and no such ruins are visible.
I simply believe "sky arcs" are the key to this source. Of the list above only geysers would create "rainbows" and as the proper interpretation of "steps of light", "bows", and "light scatterer of the sky" this makes the ancient writing literally true and consistent. How else can we know anything from experiment to ancient gobbledty gook has been understood until it all shakes out to make perfect sense? All humans have always tried to make sense of everything. You've made sense of the causeway and the water catchment device.
We don't see any evidence for ramps not because they were removed but because they never existed at all.