Susan Doris wrote:
> I wonder what you mean by 'advanced engineering'. The very fact
> that these huge monuments were built shows that the people -
> the people of that time - had the skills to do it and
> would have been justifiably proud of them, even though it must
> have cost many lives in the process.
What else could it mean? And what does advanced engineering have to do with pride or the number of people who may or may have not died during construction? 28,000 people died building the Panama Canal and was a great source of pride, yet the advanced engineering it took to accomplish the task is not debated. But yes, it is hard to argue with the idea that the fact something is there means whoever built it had the technology and means to do so.
> What do you mean 'casual'? I doubt very much whether this was
> done in a casual way; it must have been the equivalent of
> today's feats of Mars rovers or something. If you are referring
> to Archae's assessment of the work, I'd say that the word
> 'casual' is nowhere in sight.
In the context of what was written what else could it mean? It seems, Susan, that you often don't actually read the original post, but rather only the person you support who quotes it and responds to it, in this case Archae. If not, you would know that my comment had literally nothing to do with Archae's "work" and also what was meant by it. But if moving 100 ton blocks were the technological equivalent of the Mars rover then apparently going to space was relatively easy for ancient man and G1 would be akin to warp drive and 8 pack hot dog buns. You seem to have a very simplistic view of ancient man not consistent with the facts or the context of the greater ancient world as a whole. There's a little bit more here than just "blood sweat and tears".
Post Edited (05-Feb-13 20:03)