Mysteries :
The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board).
Author: Corpuscles ()
Date: March 16, 2020 05:34AM
---------------------------------
Steve
Your hypothesis is an inferior version of Frank Lohnrs except that you replace the "rope roll" with a wider girth rotating pulley or windlass contraption. (that's smart)
The deficiency is that he has the weight of the pullers going down a steep slope (using their weight)
You have them pulling but at the top say 120m they only have 36m space to haul by arm not by movement.
So when the rock went up say to 72 m height, how did the rocks get taken to their specific place?
YOU are going to say the AE dragged them there !?
They didn't have an unworkable debunked funicular on top to the pyramid to place them . They hauled dragged them!
They dragged them from the quarry too, or did they make a funicular to every part of the quarry?
I think it (some aspects of your hypothesis) has some merit.
But is get confused when:
a) You are so innumerate such that you fail to understand that your proposed funicular cannot mathematically work (or had you forgotten?)
b) you seek attention from sycophantic idiots (easily identified by all) with their own crazy theories to try to boost your fragile fantasy case.
Yeah bored goodbye.
But for curiosity, and all others sake, answer the bolded question please!?
Cheers
Hi Corpuscles,
So, this diatribe of yours, was caused by my "stone pullers" comment ???
FYI... we were talking about those individuals who believe they used ramps, as in the picture below. Can you see the men in the picture, pulling stones up those ramps. Those are the stone pullers you seem so offended by.
>Your hypothesis is an inferior version of Frank Lohnrs except that you replace the "rope roll".
His name is Franz Lohner. An easy mistake. I often send people there, for his many calculations. Franz was not the first person to mention using the face of the Pyramid. He added his "rope roll "to the concept. He additionally proposed working directly on the face, while I do not. His "rope roll", would need to be sized up, to have any chance of working. There is little difference between his "rope roll" and my (currently proposed) vertically standing pulley. I added an additional layer of copper, which would reduce the coefficient of friction down to 1. Franz uses more wood in his proposal. Wood was scarce in Egypt. I am using men in a single pull and when my platform reaches the top, the skid being level, is simply pulled off. I do not need to unattach the rope(s) from the skids. My approach uses two such platforms, so that one can be loaded, while the other is being offloaded.
I'm sorry, if you are not intuitive enough to understand my drawings. Must I really show you tracks on top of the Pyramid, moving stones to different locations?
>fail to understand that your proposed funicular cannot mathematically work (or had you forgotten?)
No Corpuscles.. your the one who is confused. I've forgotten nothing. What you are referring to, is the attempt to use the Funicular, to pull the stones up the face of the Pyramid. After spending good money with an engineer, I abandoned only that element. The math for the Funicular moving stones from the harbor up to the front of the Temple, is mathematically feasible, and there are videos showing this principle. Google Water Funiculars. I suspect you know that, though your true intent, is to just undermine me, as much as possible.
>They dragged them from the quarry too, or did they make a funicular to every part of the quarry?
They would have dragged the stones downhill, and loaded them on barges, in the same manner they did, from quarries upstream on the Nile. Then floated them over, into the Funicular system, as it is effortless. I suspect you could go sideways, midway in the system, and pulled them onto the deck of an empty barge. Though that would still take more men and energy, rather than simply going downhill, and using gravity to lessen the work.
Why do you insist on pulling stones uphill, in the dirt? If you believe that, then this picture below is right up your alley.
>But for curiosity, and all others sake, answer the bolded question please!? Yeah bored goodbye.
If you are so bored, why are you asking questions!?
>Yeah bored goodbye...
the same back at you Corpuscles... Go join your mindless friends up on the ramp.
Date: March 16, 2020 05:34AM
---------------------------------
Steve
Your hypothesis is an inferior version of Frank Lohnrs except that you replace the "rope roll" with a wider girth rotating pulley or windlass contraption. (that's smart)
The deficiency is that he has the weight of the pullers going down a steep slope (using their weight)
You have them pulling but at the top say 120m they only have 36m space to haul by arm not by movement.
So when the rock went up say to 72 m height, how did the rocks get taken to their specific place?
YOU are going to say the AE dragged them there !?
They didn't have an unworkable debunked funicular on top to the pyramid to place them . They hauled dragged them!
They dragged them from the quarry too, or did they make a funicular to every part of the quarry?
I think it (some aspects of your hypothesis) has some merit.
But is get confused when:
a) You are so innumerate such that you fail to understand that your proposed funicular cannot mathematically work (or had you forgotten?)
b) you seek attention from sycophantic idiots (easily identified by all) with their own crazy theories to try to boost your fragile fantasy case.
Yeah bored goodbye.
But for curiosity, and all others sake, answer the bolded question please!?
Cheers
Hi Corpuscles,
So, this diatribe of yours, was caused by my "stone pullers" comment ???
FYI... we were talking about those individuals who believe they used ramps, as in the picture below. Can you see the men in the picture, pulling stones up those ramps. Those are the stone pullers you seem so offended by.
>Your hypothesis is an inferior version of Frank Lohnrs except that you replace the "rope roll".
His name is Franz Lohner. An easy mistake. I often send people there, for his many calculations. Franz was not the first person to mention using the face of the Pyramid. He added his "rope roll "to the concept. He additionally proposed working directly on the face, while I do not. His "rope roll", would need to be sized up, to have any chance of working. There is little difference between his "rope roll" and my (currently proposed) vertically standing pulley. I added an additional layer of copper, which would reduce the coefficient of friction down to 1. Franz uses more wood in his proposal. Wood was scarce in Egypt. I am using men in a single pull and when my platform reaches the top, the skid being level, is simply pulled off. I do not need to unattach the rope(s) from the skids. My approach uses two such platforms, so that one can be loaded, while the other is being offloaded.
I'm sorry, if you are not intuitive enough to understand my drawings. Must I really show you tracks on top of the Pyramid, moving stones to different locations?
>fail to understand that your proposed funicular cannot mathematically work (or had you forgotten?)
No Corpuscles.. your the one who is confused. I've forgotten nothing. What you are referring to, is the attempt to use the Funicular, to pull the stones up the face of the Pyramid. After spending good money with an engineer, I abandoned only that element. The math for the Funicular moving stones from the harbor up to the front of the Temple, is mathematically feasible, and there are videos showing this principle. Google Water Funiculars. I suspect you know that, though your true intent, is to just undermine me, as much as possible.
>They dragged them from the quarry too, or did they make a funicular to every part of the quarry?
They would have dragged the stones downhill, and loaded them on barges, in the same manner they did, from quarries upstream on the Nile. Then floated them over, into the Funicular system, as it is effortless. I suspect you could go sideways, midway in the system, and pulled them onto the deck of an empty barge. Though that would still take more men and energy, rather than simply going downhill, and using gravity to lessen the work.
Why do you insist on pulling stones uphill, in the dirt? If you believe that, then this picture below is right up your alley.
>But for curiosity, and all others sake, answer the bolded question please!? Yeah bored goodbye.
If you are so bored, why are you asking questions!?
>Yeah bored goodbye...
the same back at you Corpuscles... Go join your mindless friends up on the ramp.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.