> Hello Jon
> I couldn't agree more.
> Let me add some information that can be relevant on this issue.
> On one hand, it is true that some megalithic structures have
> been considered "earthquake-proof" but not particulary for the
> size and weight of the stones but because of the way the stones
> were put on the wall, with many angles and rounded corners
> which reinforced the stability of the entire structure (see
> Cuzco, Sacsayhuaman, Khafre's valley temple, etc.)
> On the other hand, the Romans were able to build extraordinary
> and long lasting structures (without using very large blocks),
> which have arrived at our times with no or little restoration
> work. For example, there is a famous bridge in Spain called
> "Puente de Alcantara", built by a Roman engineer called Gaius
> Iulius Lacer in the second century A.D., and there is an
> inscription -in a temple next to the bridge- in which Lacer
> stated that "this bridge will last as long as centuries last".
> And he was right, the bridge is still there (with no megalithic
> In my opinion, as I said in previous posts, it is very unlikely
> that the Romans decided to build a megalithic platform with a
> technique that was alien to them. (Sorry for using the word
> "alien", as I know that Zecharia Sitchin wrote that Baalbek was
> a main base for the Anunnaki starships...!)
What fascinates me is that those huge slabs seem deliberately quarried into that shape. I assume it was done by humans (but when you get upwards around 1600 tons a few millennia ago, I'm honestly starting to wonder whether any double helix could really be capable of such a thing!).
I think it's fair to go in with the assumption that whoever/whatever quarried those slabs had a damn good reason to do so, that they knew what they were doing, that they knew exactly what they wanted to do with those slabs, and that they had the wherewithal to actaully DO it.
I don't buy the "earthquake" proposal because, as we've seen, the average 2.5 ton blocks of G1 have held up admirably over the millennia with no signs of any block dislodging more than 1/50 of an inch in all that time.
And I do believe that Baalbek was constructed on top of a far older slab installed there by a much earlier, and long gone, ancient civilization. Those rocks might just as well be a million years old.
I think it would be an absolute gold mine to continue revealing those large 1000 ton slabs in that quarry. Any loose soil shoudl be removed down to raw bedrock through the entire quarry. As it stands now, we have no idea at all what lies beneath the surface. As far as we know, those 3 or 4 megaliths might be the tip of a larger masonry-berg under the surface, covered by weathering over MANY millennia.
One thing is for sure, there will be many alternative theorists claim similar things about that field until it has been thoroughly excavated. So the sooner we get to the bottom of it (literally) the better.
Maybe we'll find some mega-machines buried under there.
...or 100,000 slaves in a mass grave alongside their chisels and hauling ropes!
Post Edited (06-Dec-14 02:49)
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?