There’s a Giant Flaw in Human History

[stevevw]

You claimed it lined certain shafts and chambers because of their electrical properties. I was merely pointing out that the prestige and implied wealth of using granite was a better explanation. It as if you said the pyramid was capped with gold because it was a conductor, when ostentatious display of wealth and power would be better. (I've heard the capped with gold claim before, though I don't think it is still thought to be the case.)

This shows how the same evidence can be seen with two different explanations. It seems to me that many examples are explained away as decoration. Like everything was for looks and no function. Thus relegating the Egyptians to artists rather than knowledgable.

Which I think stems back to the design verses naturalistic worldview. Skeptics resist attributing any agency or design to anything humans do as it suggests design in nature or that there is such a thing as a mind capable of actually changing or creating objective reality.

I'm not sure you've learned it. Batteries, like piezoelectric crystals, can't be a power source unless they are wired together. The trunk-load of batteries and the quartz crystals in granite aren't wired together and you can't make an electrical power source out of them.

From what I understand the power source needs to be connected in the proper sequence and aligned to be able to work in the first place. The piezoelectric crystals have to fall within a certain range or oscilation to generate or enhance the effect.

Thus the pyramid itself being located in a constantly vibrating location and with additional sources of activity such as siezmic activity or the natural subterrainian activities of the waterways and caverns.

With the additional effects of the pyramids internal layout with specific stones layered in ways that enhance the piezoelectric effect when is concentrated into the chambers and especially the Kings chamber.

For all this to happen I don't think it was an accident or coincident that these specific locations, layouts and other evidence of purposeful treatments to the structure such as thermal activity show some sort of experimentation was going on. I know thats a laymans explanations but it is something along these lines.

Your "AI" (artificial idiot)

Its funny how your side uses the same but its ok for them.

is slamming random things together. "quartz has piezoelectric properties" + "granite contains quartz" + your leading question + a dash of your favorite nutters and their "electric pyramid nonsense" in the "training data" and you get responses like this. LLMs (like the "AI chatbots") are useful tools, but they are just that, tools. GIGO or if you don't know how to use it you will get nonsense results.

I did not ask any leading questions. I simply put in your statement and not anything I said and that is exactly what popped out. No mention of pyramid power, Atlantis, aliens. Just the simple question (is Granite is a piezoelectric power source).

Once again it is you who keeps injecting the conspiracies of "electric pyramid nonsense". Your taking the simple question about the piezoelectric effects of granite and how it can generate electrical energy through pressure or other forces and assuming its about some conspiracy about alien power.

I am simply looking at the material involved and how it is structured and the possible activities it was subject to to show that it is ideal for generating such activity. Thats it. Step one. Not some conspiracy down the raod that you think its about.

How?

By the possible methods the articles have been mentioning. The premise being if the pyramid was built in a certain location to maximize potential natural energy. That the specific internal layout and material also being conducive.

That subjecting the pyramid itself and the internal structures such as shafts and chambers through stressses of various sorts such as heat or sound. Will potentially generate certain effects that will produce desired outcomes such as a concentration of energy in the chambers.

If all the setup and materials can potentially achieve this then this is the logical conclusion. If tests can show that these setups and arrangements can produce the effects. Then its a case of whether this was actually being done. That we find evidence of that stress within the pyramid and stones seems to support this premise.

lol

What, lol. Isn't it funny. When I actually link peer review its just laughed at.

lol

What "eyewitness testimony"? Pyramids have been there for millennia.

The testimony from the ancients themselves that tell us they had this knowledge. That it was from the gods or for the gods. You don't believe them like you don't believe the witnesses of Christ who they said came back from the dead. The fundemental skepticism of all things non naturalistic is a belief and not science.

Though this is not on topic, it is also false. Eye witnesses are *not* good sources. Our knowledge of Jesus of Nazareth is not based on eyewitness testimony anyway. I suggest you go read a proper source on the origins of the Gospels. But there is no need to discuss it here as it is not the topic.

So if there is evidence for Christ and the gospels then whats stopping people from then taking up what was claimed as truth.

Or are you just talking about a certain kind of knowledge that can never convince that the supernatural events happened. Or there there can be such alternative knowledge and reality in the first place.

Which is utterly irrelevant to the principle (ancient, unknown civilizations) and secondary claims (lost ancient rock shaping technology) you have made in this thread.

This is a either/or fallacy. Its not just about 'rock shaping' but ancient lost alternative and/or advanced knowledge and the possible tech that came from this.

Fundementally as I said and the OP pointed this out. That this is a epistemic and metaphysical belief and not just the science of specific examples. Though they may show the advanced knowledge.

Part of that is labelling good people by assumption and stereotypes of conspiracies and making up stuff simply because they believe or propose an alternative idea about what knowledge is.

That includes Christian scientists or those who are open to alternative metaphysics who can hold both the scientific causes and the alternative ones that could range from spirituality to consciousness beyond brain.

Some skeptics automatically lump everyone into the conspiracy when its not and don't support the claims about the specific ideas that even Hancock have suggested. Even if I also think some like Hancock can drift into spectualtion. He also holds some pretty well accepted and verified ideas. But you don't seem to have the capacity to be able to entertain both sides at the same time. Its either all your way or the highway.

 

[BCP1928]

But if the knowledge stems from some transcedent source then it is a possible source that science cannot measure that may be involved.

How would you know that the source was transcendent?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Show me which ones and the words coming out of their mouth that they are supporting some unreal conspiracy about aliens or Atlantis.

If we do discuss the Atlantean nonsense and orgins of your ancient advanced tech sources, will you honestly deal with them, or will you deflect?

Also I wish to correct a fallacy thats being snuck in here. That suggesting there might to a real even that sparked the Atlantis legend is not a conspiracy in itself. This is the bait and switch tactic. Falsely make out that if someone mentions the legand of Atlantis and how it may have come about through the sciences is making a conspiract theory.

Please stop quoting fallacies. You don't seem to know what they are.

Plato made up "Atlantis" as a morality tale. Connolly made up most of the modern version whole cloth from his fantastical understanding of prehistoric Ameria. Neither is based on any historical event.

You keep mentioning conspiracy theories. No one is talking about conspiracy theories. There is no "conspiracy" I am claiming is being made about the past. Just a lot of liars, fools, and grifters.

This is false and even mainstream science has had an interest is discovering if there is any truth to legends. Often they find there was a real event that led to the creation of the legend. Like the Flood myths are based on real flood events and not some complete fairy tale. So you are making a conflation of the real science and myths yourself.

I don't find the myths interesting, nor do I think they have any real probative value in understanding the past. The understanding of ancient myths and beliefs are only interesting to the extent that peoples of the time motivated them in the past.

Oooh a Hancock fan, Take him to the dungeon.

If only it were that simple.

You really need to get over this Hancock derangement syndrome lol. You have brought this in dozens of times. Your not making me see anything.

This is becoming clear.

I am completely aware that some of these sites include stuff from Hancock and others.

And you don't see the problem in basing information on the work of a liar?

Its bound too as they all come under 'alternative knowledge and tech'. Like the UAP's this is a natural human intuition and belief. We have been doing it forever lol and never will stop. Because there is something real beyond that we are trying to get at. Its in our DNA so to speak.

This isn't about UFOs or DNA.

But look at the specific people involved. The host of UnchartedX clearly states he is not promoting woo or conspiracy. But supporting what is said with evidence.

He says that, but he is one of the flakiest of them all. Only Dunn has him beaten on that front. When I was trying to view some of the "Michael Button" content, "UnchartedX" kept appearing in the side feed with woo nonsense about a variety of subjects, not just Egyptology.

The guy from the OP clearly states he is treating the investigation academically.

That seems to be his grift or his delusion. I'm not going to take the time to figure out if he is a liar or just a true believer.

Your fixating on this so much that any suggestion or link to Hancok alone wipes out a persons credibility before you even find out what they believe themselves.

Frankly it should. If anyone claims to love ancient history and adores the work of Graham "The Fraud" Hancock, then they are just not credible on ancient history. Again, I don't care if they are just brainwashed members of the Hancock cult, or fellow grifters.

Its classic ad hominem.

It is not an ad hom to note that someone making claims about area X is involved with people doing very unsavory things in area X. It is no different than dismissing a "financial advisor" who professes admiration for propagators of Ponzi schemes.

Like I said show me the words coming out of the people specifically that they are promoting some unreal idea or not supporting what they actually say with at least an attempt at the science. I mean re the signatures they say they don't know. They say its not modern machines or aliens. They just don't know.

You just told me you don't care if they are Hancock acolytes or not. Why should I bother at this point? Are you going to listen?

When they do attempt to explain how its usually by some logical method like a lathe or some way of generating power through hydro or tapping into some form of energy they discovered. Which is certainly not aliens or far fetchs myths and a possibility. We just discovered they created some modern form of cement that looks like the real thing and lasts 5,000 plus years. So why not.
Fair enough.
Thats what I am doing. Like I said you have mentions Hancock and Atlantis and conspiracies more than a conspiracy theorist lol. Enough so to actually create one in this thread.

No one is discussing conspiracies.

 

[Hans Blaster]

This shows how the same evidence can be seen with two different explanations. It seems to me that many examples are explained away as decoration. Like everything was for looks and no function. Thus relegating the Egyptians to artists rather than knowledgable.

The artists were artists. We are talking about the burial chamber. If you go to a tomb like that of "Tut" there are lots of fancy objects, a fancy coffin, and paintings on the walls. The burial chambers of wealthy Egyptians *were* artistic. The rest of the pyramid is structural engineering and made of rough limestone blocks.

Which I think stems back to the design verses naturalistic worldview. Skeptics resist attributing any agency or design to anything humans do as it suggests design in nature or that there is such a thing as a mind capable of actually changing or creating objective reality.

You are reading things into this.

From what I understand the power source needs to be connected in the proper sequence and aligned to be able to work in the first place. The piezoelectric crystals have to fall within a certain range or oscilation to generate or enhance the effect.

The quartz grains in granite *ARE NOT* wired together. That was the whole point.

Thus the pyramid itself being located in a constantly vibrating location and with additional sources of activity such as siezmic activity or the natural subterrainian activities of the waterways and caverns.

With the additional effects of the pyramids internal layout with specific stones layered in ways that enhance the piezoelectric effect when is concentrated into the chambers and especially the Kings chamber.

For all this to happen I don't think it was an accident or coincident that these specific locations, layouts and other evidence of purposeful treatments to the structure such as thermal activity show some sort of experimentation was going on. I know thats a laymans explanations but it is something along these lines.

You are grasping at straws.

Its funny how your side uses the same but its ok for them.

"My side"? I'm not on a side and I HAVE NEVER USED "ai" for ANYTHING, ANYWHERE. (And frankly I don't really think it is "OK".)

I did not ask any leading questions. I simply put in your statement and not anything I said and that is exactly what popped out. No mention of pyramid power, Atlantis, aliens. Just the simple question (is Granite is a piezoelectric power source).

Once again it is you who keeps injecting the conspiracies of "electric pyramid nonsense". Your taking the simple question about the piezoelectric effects of granite and how it can generate electrical energy through pressure or other forces and assuming its about some conspiracy about alien power.

I have no idea what chat bot you used or what it was trained with. This is another good reason to avoid "ai" if you don't know exactly what it is up to.

I am simply looking at the material involved and how it is structured and the possible activities it was subject to to show that it is ideal for generating such activity. Thats it. Step one. Not some conspiracy down the raod that you think its about.

I have never invoked "conspiracy". Not once. Even more so --- I HAVE TOLD YOU A COUPLE DOZEN TIMES THAT THIS ISN'T ABOUT "CONSPIRACY" and I AM NOT MAKING ANY "CONSPIRACY CLAIMS". Are you incapable of understanding this or of telling the truth?

By the possible methods the articles have been mentioning. The premise being if the pyramid was built in a certain location to maximize potential natural energy. That the specific internal layout and material also being conducive.

These fantasy theories are built on things that the Egyptians had no inkling of. We can read what they write. We know what they did and believed. They did not know about electricity. Period.

That subjecting the pyramid itself and the internal structures such as shafts and chambers through stressses of various sorts such as heat or sound. Will potentially generate certain effects that will produce desired outcomes such as a concentration of energy in the chambers.

If all the setup and materials can potentially achieve this then this is the logical conclusion. If tests can show that these setups and arrangements can produce the effects. Then its a case of whether this was actually being done. That we find evidence of that stress within the pyramid and stones seems to support this premise.

We don't need your excuse-making "explanations" for how some fantasy ancient tech worked.

What, lol. Isn't it funny. When I actually link peer review its just laughed at.

At least one of those papers was a joke. Complete nonsense.

The testimony from the ancients themselves that tell us they had this knowledge. That it was from the gods or for the gods.

This is the same reading of ancient supernatural claims into modern discoveries that no one connected until the scientific discovery was made. I don't think you buy the Muslim claim that they knew the Universe was expanding because of some verse about "stretching out the tent of the heavens over the Earth", do you?

You don't believe them like you don't believe the witnesses of Christ who they said came back from the dead. The fundemental skepticism of all things non naturalistic is a belief and not science.

So if there is evidence for Christ and the gospels then whats stopping people from then taking up what was claimed as truth.

The only documents in the NT that are signed by their authors (I, X, wrote this) are the letters of Paul and Paul never met Jesus and did not write about his life, but only the "spiritual aspects" of the gospel and various bits of advice and theology. The Gospels are certainly not written by those whose names are attached to them now, nor by any eyewitness. Whatever information about Jesus made it into them did so indirectly after many decades.

Or are you just talking about a certain kind of knowledge that can never convince that the supernatural events happened. Or there there can be such alternative knowledge and reality in the first place.

This is a either/or fallacy. Its not just about 'rock shaping' but ancient lost alternative and/or advanced knowledge and the possible tech that came from this.

Fundementally as I said and the OP pointed this out. That this is a epistemic and metaphysical belief and not just the science of specific examples. Though they may show the advanced knowledge.

Part of that is labelling good people by assumption and stereotypes of conspiracies and making up stuff simply because they believe or propose an alternative idea about what knowledge is.

That includes Christian scientists or those who are open to alternative metaphysics who can hold both the scientific causes and the alternative ones that could range from spirituality to consciousness beyond brain.

Some skeptics automatically lump everyone into the conspiracy when its not and don't support the claims about the specific ideas that even Hancock have suggested. Even if I also think some like Hancock can drift into spectualtion. He also holds some pretty well accepted and verified ideas. But you don't seem to have the capacity to be able to entertain both sides at the same time. Its either all your way or the highway.

I AM NOT CLAIMING ANY OF THIS IS A CONSPIRACY. Please get this through your skull and into that bit of meat inside that is meant for thinking.

 

[Stopped_lurking]

I am not sure. But that is what the Schumann effect is. A naturally occurring phenomena where there is more electromagnetic waves on the surface and a constant vibration.

Why do you believe that it interacts with the quartz crystal in the granite then?

Until they get access to the pyramids, they can do tests at home.

Why don't you ever try to to connect your claims to the egyptians? What they actually did? Your handwaving disparate guesses and when pressed you reference piezoelectricity in general, the Schumann resonance in general etc. These things would be interesting if you actually tried to connect them with tests that show that the egyptians used them, as it stands now it is just obscurantism.

 

[stevevw]

How would you know that the source was transcendent?

Ah this is the age old question about substance and where is the line between the material and immaterial. The Mind/Body Duality or mind over matter.

Some areas of science are even toying with the idea of an Information or Mind s fundemental. What exactly is transcedent.

What about phenomenal belief. Is that real and transcedent. What about conscious experiences. What if conscious experiences of nature and reality which is a direct experience of what is happening and not a 3rd party measure.

What if these experiences allow a deeper knowledge of reality that allowed ancients to discover how to manipulate it. Is that not how nature is designed. That becoming part of that nature or one with the world you are therefore becoming part of it more fully and able to experience and know it better.

Mary could not know the experience of colors like red. When she did she came to know and understand something about reality that all her academic knowledge could not tell her. This was new knowledge and insight into nature and reality.

By the same logic if the ancients were more immersed in the direct experiences of nature and reality they would also come to know similar knowledge about reality that material science could not rteveal. Which enable them to utilise and manipulate it.