Audrey Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Steve Clayton Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> This was your original question:
>
> > > Your a pair of geniuses... How do you think
> they
> > > moved their obelisks down the Nile?
>
> So what happened to the "obelisks"? Which range in
> weight from 100-450 tons, and 40-100 ft in height.
>
> Are you saying the Abydos boats would float one of
> these?
>
> From your link
> [www.abc.se]
>

Quote

About 75 feet in length and seven to ten
> feet in width at the widest point, these boats are
> only about two feet deep, with narrowing prows and
> sterns.

>
> These are not barges. They may have transported
> jars and kings, but they did not transport 30 ton
> stones, let alone 50+ tons. The archeologists in
> your link don't even make this leap.
>
>

Quote

These boat graves contain actual and viable
> boats intended for a king's use in the
> afterlife.

>
> > These boats are estimated to be between 60 and
> 80
> > feet long. That's plenty large for 30+tons.
>
> Do you really think these long canoes would carry
> a 30 ton stone?
>

Quote
from your link
> The portion of the boat hull excavated revealed
> thick wooden planks, lashed together by rope fed
> through mortises. The seams between the planks
> were filled with bundles of reeds, while
> additional reeds carpeted the floor of the boat.
> Internal framing – a universal aspect of later
> shipbuilding – is not in evidence, and some of
> the boats in their graves appear twisted or
> lopsided, symptomatic of vessels without an
> internal structure to support them out of the
> water.

>
> > Archimedes’ principle: A submerged object
> > displaces a volume of liquid equal to the
> volume
> > of the object. Do you even know how to figure
> out
> > water displacement? A barge which can float 30
> > tons, is not an aircraft carrier.
> >
> [www.britannica.com]
>
> > ciple
>
> Are you saying they could make these calculations
> in the 4th dyn?
> Was this knowledge lost and then rediscovered by
> Archimedes?
> You can calculate water displacement until the
> cows come home, but you don't know that the AE
> could.
>
> > The lack
> > of evidence, is not evidence. It is simply, the
> > lack of evidence. If you believe in the great
> > flood, show me the boat. I can show you plenty
> of
> > paintings and inscriptions. Does that make it
> > real?
>
> Well even one painting or inscription would be
> long way forward as compared to you and Egyptology
> having nothing to show they floated obelisks down
> the Nile. Imagination doesn't make it real.
>
> > Most of Kufu's boat pits are plenty large
> enough
> > to float a 60 ton stone. , though there are no
> > boat/barges to be found. No painting or
> > inscriptions. Several of those pits are
> > rectangular, and not shaped of a boats. One of
> the
> > pits is huge, if it did contain a barge, and
> you
> > do the math, it would float several 60 ton
> stones.
>
> You mean one of these?
>
> IF it contained a barge! So far they do
> not. You can't float a stone down the Nile in a
> pit, so it looks like you're imagining evidence.
>
> > That's the capacity, though no prof or
> evidence.
> > You seem to think it requires something
> extremely
> > large to float 30 tons. Here are a few barges
> made
> > out of steel, that floats 75,000lbs. which will
> > handle 37.5 tons. Their size is 40' x 10"
> > (causeway width) x 5 ' deep, and will still have
> 1
> > foot of freeboard. This barge will fit into a
> few
> > of those Kufu pits.
>
> What does a modern steel barge have to do with
> what the AE had? Are you saying because we have
> steel barges now the AE also had wood barges of
> equal capacity?
>
> Bottom line is.... you have nothing to show the
> 4th dyn were able to transport these huge stones.
> You are imagining they did, just as the
> Egyptologists imagine.
>
> > >how do you know a causeway was needed to float
> > stones? FYI. The causeway(s) do not float
> stones
> > :) The Causeways are Incline Plains, which
> > transfer a portion of the weight being moved,
> down
> > into the Earth. How much is transferred, is
> > dependent on the angle of the Incline , and the
> > amount of friction (cof) encountered. Why don't
> > you open your eyes, ears, and mind and make an
> > effort to learn:
> > [www.youtube.com]
>
> I thought you had water running down your
> funicular, hence the "float".
>
> The amount of effort I expend to learn, is
> unbeknownst to you.
> This would be a good point for you to stop making
> absurd assumptions about the alts.
>
> > OK Audrey, your turn. If the AE didn't use
> barges
> > on the Nile, please tell us how all those
> 30+ton 50+
> > stones in the Kings chamber were transported?
>
> I don't know. Unlike the male population here, I
> don't aim to have all the answers. It doesn't
> bother me a bit to say I don't know, that you
> don't know, that no one knows. Especially the
> Egyptologists. But they sure as hell didn't do it
> with the boats they've uncovered so far. And there
> is nothing in monument or written record that
> shows how they did do it.
>
> But let's just imagine the evidence. Because the
> stones are there, so they "must have" done it.

This is yet another example that supports the notion of a pre-dynastic provenance. I think Steve's model has merit in that the tools and methods are plausible and there is physical evidence in the causways (size, shape, termination, and incline angle), but the timing is off. I'd feel a lot better about this model if it was placed well before the Dynastic era, early enough for any trace of those tools to be absorbed/resorbed and early enough to allow for technological amnesia before the Dynastics arrived at the scene.