Proponents of the Prosaic (or PP's, for short) has been weighed, measured, and has been found wanting, an apologist must arrive to rescue bad logic from defeat. So, lets change the argument from Ed did this using prosaic means which I cannot replicate, instead to an argument that is formed based on a prosaic, but impractical technique, given the weights that Ed was working with, along with his own diminutive size, and a technique which, to my knowledge, no one even thinks Ed used, on material Wally Wallington didn't cut by hand, nor quarry or lift using Ed's methods, or even bother using real stone.
Wally Wallington is not moving stone. He is moving concrete. Stone is denser, and less forgiving than concrete. He did not have to quarry the concrete out of the ground, did he? He didnt have to cut it on all four sides, and then somehow the bottom, lift it out of the ground, or even bring it to his site. Right off the bat, this is a false standard for scientific comparison. We cant just assume our way around the bits we don't like, or cant intelligently refute.
He shows that he can, under perfect conditions, and even unfair ones in comparison to Ed, that he can pivot a block of concrete on a pebble. Wow *clapping* Ask yourself, Why doesn't Wally Wallington drive at least 8, 3 ft long, 3 1/2 inch wide soft steel wedges 18 inches deep into coral bedrock, around the block, with just a sledgehammer? The get down in that pit and somehow break it loose from the bottom, then somehow get a side elevated to put the 5 ton chain around the 20-30 ton block, and then somehow figure a way for your 100 lb. 5 ft. frame to lift that massive 60,000 lbs. stone out of the ground using three pieces of Florida Pine, some pulleys, a couple of hoists, and 5 ton chain. Then once you miracle it up out of the ground, and survive your ordeal of doing everything in the mathematically impossible manner suggested by your comparison , and doing that feat as recklessly, some might even argue, as practically suicidal as possible, how do you move it to its designated spot 150 yards away?
That's what Ed did. Mr. Wallington isn't doing anything that Ed did, or trying to do them the same way, yet somehow this is supposed to serve as some analagous display of equitable skill and knowledge with Ed Leedskalnin and the ancient Egyptians, and the pre-Inca cultures, who all built actual megalithic-sized structures? This is folly.
Did Ed Leedskalnin spend his life studying pebbles? No, he spent it studying magnetism, electricity, physics,and astronomy. I have proven to any reasonable mind in my book, The Leedskalnin Codex That Ed spent his life carving this information into the Coral Castle itself, as well as encoding puzzles and clues to be found at a later time. He was not encoding the "Secret Life of Pebbles". He was building into his temple the secrets (in other words, scientific information we do not possess, or understand the same way) which allowed it to be built, just like the cultures he learned it from. John Anthony West's Magical Egypt series is a treasure trove of esoteric revelations, proving that the secrets were built into the temple, and the Priest would decode it for the Initiates who were committed to learning, mastering, and continuing this line of knowledge.
This is far removed from old news. What I have found is not only bakery fresh, but it is also exciting, it is provable, and it is relevant to the same mission as Graham and many others have in finding what keeps tracing back to the single ancient source of this information, and I think, based on the evidence, that the Coral Castle is the best shot we have to discovering it. It is the most recently built megalithic structure using primitive means, Ed Leedskalnin provably left secrets and clues behind, he spoke and wrote in English, he took photographs of his tools and work, and we can go and study it for ourselves anytime we want in the U.S.
So, to put this to bed, once and for all...If you think that Ed Leedskalnin did this using prosaic means, it can only be because you are 1. In an emotion-based denial , or 2. You may not possess the full scope of the mathematical and physical limitations, nor the practical experience associated with actual megalithic stone building, and therefore cannot mount an adequate scientific argument to defend what you may "feel" is the answer. If, you could perform some experiments to show me how this prosaic method using Ed's tool's and methods works, I am sure that it would turn some heads, and you would have a world-class "I told you so," chamois to wring in perpetuity. But you wont. And, neither will anyone else, because it is simply impossible, and the prosaic argument, of all of the theories I have heard, is by FAR the least scientific explanation of them all. Its so easily disproven, and I can do it using an engineering calculator and simple math. Oh, and also by the lack of evidence produced by those who claim to know how to build a megalithic structure the same way as Ed Leedskalnin, but have never been able to do so. The prosaic explanation should be the easiest thing in the world to prove, right? If it really was just straight ahead, meat and potatoes, and pebbles, and chicken bones, or whatever the PP's claim it was done with, then why can none of you do it and prove yourselves right? Im wondering what all of these engineers are waiting on?