cladking wrote:

>No! There is no trace of ramps on the pyramids.

Oh ok, I see so now it's no trace of ramps on the pyramids themselves. Yes that is correct they would have removed the ramps completely to allow the casing to be properly attached. But there are traces of ramps on the Plateau that the pyramid is built on, right?

>This is no small matter when you can see literally hundreds of
>lines on the great pyramids and every single one of those lines
>is horizontal or vertical to the surface. This strongly
>indicates (virtually proves) there were no spiral ramps and
>that was about the last leg for ramp proponents to stand on.
>There's still some possibility of internal ramps or one side
>ramps but these will fail on closer inspection as well.

So you say.... does not seem to bother the people who have studied the Great Pyramid in detail from coming up with plausible ramp designs for its construction. I like switchbacks, as well as that proposal by the Klemms' as shown in Frank Dörnenburg new book.

[www.grahamhancock.com]

>While the 50 ton slabs being elevated to such a low level isn't
>of itself so very impressive we're still left with no visible
>means of support for the top of the pyramid. There were no
>ramps and it's not reasonable to suppose millions of tons of
>stone were levered up the sides of the pyramid.

Well, the block size does decreases as they go up. The ones at the top, or at least what is now about 15 levels down since the rest are missing, are really not that big. In fact many of them look like irregular masonry fill of varying sizes. Did not need much of a ramp or any other means to get them up there.... every look into how people quarry Carrara marble and then move the large blocks from the quarry in past ages, often quite perilous.

Archae Solenhofen (solenhofen@hotmail.com)