Using AI to further debunk ancient Egyptians used technologies to drill granite far beyond the current level.

[stevevw]

It's either this or politics, sometimes you have to dance in the pale moonlight...

Unfortunately, Steve has a difficult time keeping his posts to a single topic. He's always fighting all the battles at once. In this case all of the battles generated by the Wal Thornhill of ancient Egypt. Underneath these things he brings up there are some serious, straight up woo things pressed by Dunn that have been assiduously avoided. He let his own thread get moved to "history" and then it died. As for that other object that keeps coming up, I'm beginning to think Sen. Vreenak might have been correct about it...

I love it, lets you know your alive lol. Like you said better than talking politcs all the time or even religion lol. But its really a fascinating subject.

 

[stevevw]

This is completely backwards logic from the scientific viewpoint. The vase is the reference. The design of the grid is arbitrary.
We're not trying to prove how flat/symmetrical this thing is before its measured!?

Its not arbitrary. We know of math and geometry such as Phi, Pi and the Golden ratio and Sacred geometry. We know the certain geomatry that is within nature which conforms to mathmatics. Its not artibrary.

 

[stevevw]

I love how you all are more apt to argue with each other than present any real argument

Do you have an arguement. I would be interested to know.

 

[stevevw]

Is there some question about the date?

Petrie's core number 7 was found by Petrie in the Giza plateau. The Giza plateau is where all the great pyramids and underground chambers and temples are. Where all the images I have shown of the megaliths, boxes, machine cut basalt and granite, statues, vases and drill cores are. These works were all done within that 100 year period near 5,000 years ago or even earlier.

 

[SelfSim]

Its not arbitrary. We know of math and geometry such as Phi, Pi and the Golden ratio and Sacred geometry. We know the certain geomatry that is within nature which conforms to mathmatics. Its not artibrary.

Again backwards science. Math and geometry is used by humans to describe our observations with consistency. The purpose of describing what we observe in this way, is to eliminate misunderstandings amongst us humans. This is abundantly evidenced.
Word salad however has completely the opposite effect, (which I suspect, is its purpose).

 

[SelfSim]

Petrie's core number 7 was found by Petrie in the Giza plateau. The Giza plateau is where all the great pyramids and underground chambers and temples are. Where all the images I have shown of the megaliths, boxes, machine cut basalt and granite, statues, vases and drill cores are. These works were all done within that 100 year period near 5,000 years ago or even earlier.

What/where is the evidence supporting that Petrie's #7 core was actually drilled in that specific timeframe?

 

[stevevw]

Again backwards science. Math and geometry is used by humans to describe our observations with consistency. The purpose of describing what we observe in this way, is to eliminate misunderstandings amongst us humans. This is abundantly evidenced.
Word salad however has completely the opposite effect, (which I suspect, is its purpose).

So what are you saying that there is no geometry and math in nature or to reality beyond human arbitrary and subjective views.

 

[stevevw]

What/where is the evidence supporting that Petrie's #7 core was actually drilled in that specific timeframe?

Ah the entire Giza plateau, Saqqara and Dahshur which form the pyramid belt and all the pyramids and works in them come from a specific time frame which is very early pre dynastic and the first 4 dynasties. Most of the drill cores and precision works come from these areas.

For example the machine cut basalt blocks are part of the same basalt blocks that surround the great pyramids and we know when they were built. A drill hole in a box belonging to say Djoser whose architect Imhotep was responsible for many of these works from around 2700BCE can be dated to then. So around 5,000 years old.

But all of the works from all of those pyramids belong to the era the pyramids were built and they all fall between around 4,500 to 5,000 years ago. But there is evidence they go back even further as many of the works like the vases and boxes were already under the pyramids in the chambers which may have been built before the Pyramids.

For example Djoser had 40,000 vases under his pyramid but many were not his and collected from elsewhere pre pyramid from tombs. So obviously someone made them before Djoser which may be as old as 6,000 years or more.

This seems to be a common theme that the underground tombs and chambers were built first and we have evdience of these tombs and temples without pyramids throughout Giza.

But still even if we take 5,000 years thats a long time ago when these megaliths and precision works came about in a time when this level of works was not expected. Its like bang along comes these great works and then they are gone. The Egyptians themselves say that they inherited these works. So its very interesting where they originated. Where the knowledge and tech originated.

 

[stevevw]

if you have a crude rotary drill and spindle which is advanced by a crude screw, the spiral produced as the drill advances is then independent of the spiral produced by the drill bit itself as it rotates at say 100 rpm.

imagine a copper tubular drill, but it wobbles around on a .1" per inch pitch.. but is rotating at say 200 rpm.

you will still get a spiral pitch produced both on the core extracted and the inner diameter of the hole produced.. provided the tube wobbles around less than the cutting width of the end of the drill.

modern diamond drills are electroplated to typically at least .2 inch in depth. so as long as your drill wobbles around less than .2" pitch, you would never notice the spiral striations.

if instead you take a copper tube drill and just slight bend the edges out at the cutting end, you can drill an internally spiraled hole as your cuting bit wobbles around in the hole, while drilling the hole with abrasives, very slowly.


i could relatively easily take a modern diamond hole saw, 1" diameter .2" depth of diamonds, and wobble the drill around as i cut a hole and i could leave a .5" pitch spiral down the hole. i've done this before, not intentionally....

What about if say the cutting points in the drill are fixed and pressure is exerted down as it rotates. Would that not dig into the granite core walls and as pressure is exerted create a spiral pattern. Each rotation would dig deeper into the granite because the cutting points are fixed and being forced downwards.

This opposed to a copper tube using abrasion and little pressure but relying more on the wearing away of the granite. So the strirations if any are dependent on the movement of the copper tube marking the core and walls as it wobbles and as it grinds out the granite. The strirations would be more horizontal because the grinding is dependent on a horizontal wearing away.

I think this was the main disagreement that has been going on for over 100 years. The main thing objectors were singling out was that the cuts were not spiral but horizontal.

Because acknowledging they are horizontal means acknowledging a faster feed rate due to the fixed points cutting down further into the granite than non fixed points for each rotation.

 

[stevevw]

But "totally inadequate" is a judgement call, and I don't see any reason to accept your judgement or Dunn's.

Not really, we are not than dumb. We know that a kids plastic tool kit is totally inadequate for a real job. We know a butter knife is more inadequate that a proper screwdriver. We know that a screw driver set is better than 1 screwdriver as there may be different screws ect etc. There are some judgement calls which are based on facts that they are actually inadequate because they don't fit the works to be done.

Not on drill cores, not on large cuts, not on megalith transport, and not on stone vases. Basically, you guys lack the proper familiarity with the material to make a rational judgement.

That cannot be true. We see a 20 foot wooden sled in the records and then we see a 150 foot 1500 ton block and we can say thats inadequate. We see a 10 foot by 5 foot basalt slab cut with a perfectly flat surface with super sharp edges on the finished works and we can say a 2 foot hand saw is inadequate to produce such signatures.

You can go into how the worker may use the small saw and do it in stages taking 10 times as long. But we won't see the same finish and signatures. Doing it in stages leaves different signatures. Cutting with abrasion grinds the basalt and does leave sharp edges thus a different signature.

Let alone the sharp steps and indent cuts that go in and out like a planer or router on these stones which seem to exactly duplicate modern maching like a planer or router. I mean whats going on there. The small saw is not designed to do that.

 

[sjastro]

Staying on the AI theme, I requested GPT-4o to produce predictive spiral patterns for drilling into granite based on the following parameters.

(1) A tool using a fixed abrasive such as a diamond tipped tool, no tool wear and on a stable platform with no wobble.
(2) A copper tube and an abrasive slurry allowing some abrasive to be embedded in the copper but the bulk of the abrasive is mobile and dislocation of embedded copper being possible during the drilling process.
An unstable platform allowing some wobble to occur.

Here is its Python code and output.

As expected the fixed tool produced a spiral pattern of a constant pitch, while the copper and abrasive produced an irregular pitch.
What is interesting about the copper and abrasive diagram is the intersection of the spiral at various points, this is an AI prediction and corresponds to the converging of grooves which has been found in the Petrie and Russian experimental samples.

Finally GPT-4o's summary.

 

[sjastro]

Staying on the AI theme, I requested GPT-4o to produce predictive spiral patterns for drilling into granite based on the following parameters.

(1) A tool using a fixed abrasive such as a diamond tipped tool, no tool wear and on a stable platform with no wobble.
(2) A copper tube and an abrasive slurry allowing some abrasive to be embedded in the copper but the bulk of the abrasive is mobile and dislocation of embedded copper being possible during the drilling process.
An unstable platform allowing some wobble to occur.

Here is its Python code and output.

View attachment 358417

View attachment 358418​

As expected the fixed tool produced a spiral pattern of a constant pitch, while the copper and abrasive produced an irregular pitch.
What is interesting about the copper and abrasive diagram is the intersection of the spiral at various points, this is an AI prediction and corresponds to the converging of grooves which has been found in the Petrie and Russian experimental samples.

View attachment 358419​

Finally GPT-4o's summary.

View attachment 358421​

Incidentally the intersection of the spiral in the copper abrasive diagram corresponding to groove convergence was confirmed by GPT-4o.

 

[BCP1928]

Its not arbitrary. We know of math and geometry such as Phi, Pi and the Golden ratio and Sacred geometry. We know the certain geomatry that is within nature which conforms to mathmatics. Its not artibrary.

Oh, goody! Now we can argue about Mathematical Realism.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Not really, we are not than dumb. We know that a kids plastic tool kit is totally inadequate for a real job. We know a butter knife is more inadequate that a proper screwdriver. We know that a screw driver set is better than 1 screwdriver as there may be different screws ect etc. There are some judgement calls which are based on facts that they are actually inadequate because they don't fit the works to be done.

That cannot be true. We see a 20 foot wooden sled in the records and then we see a 150 foot 1500 ton block and we can say thats inadequate. We see a 10 foot by 5 foot basalt slab cut with a perfectly flat surface with super sharp edges on the finished works and we can say a 2 foot hand saw is inadequate to produce such signatures.

You can go into how the worker may use the small saw and do it in stages taking 10 times as long. But we won't see the same finish and signatures. Doing it in stages leaves different signatures. Cutting with abrasion grinds the basalt and does leave sharp edges thus a different signature.

Let alone the sharp steps and indent cuts that go in and out like a planer or router on these stones which seem to exactly duplicate modern maching like a planer or router. I mean whats going on there. The small saw is not designed to do that.

Nothing in this series of claims demonstrates that we should trust your gut any more than we didn't before

 

[Hans Blaster]

Most of the vases conform to an elipsoid meaning they don't fit any particular shape such as a circle or cyclinder ect.

An elipsoid is a particular shape and the cross section normal to one of the axes is a circle at all points along that axis.

How they determine the accuracy is by mapping 1,000s of reference points and then seeing what shapes and geometry fit onto those reference points. The more it fits to known geomtry the more precise it is.

So they measure it first and then determine what the shape is supposed to be?

For example just the flatness of the top lip can be reduced to 1,000s of reference points and the more you have the greater the flatness.

The more measurement points the more accurately you can measure the flatness, but having more measurement points doesn't make it more flat.

Then that horizontal axis can be used as a reference point itself to the bottom, sides, handles and many reference points. You gradually build up many reference points.

You can then create a cyclinder to the inside of the vase mouth and that creates a vertical axis which gives another basis for reference points. It goes on even down to circles mm small within the handles which can then be referenced against the rest of the jar. The more all these reference points conform to geometry and math the more precise it is.

The amazing thing is they all fit to within a hair thickness of each other which would be impossible just by freehand, touch and sight.

No one is claiming these vases are not very axisymmetric (not counting the handles of course). That certainly says something about the craftsmanship.

In fact a mathmatician put all the geometry into a CAD model and found that the vase could be reduced to a single math equation which could then be applied to other vases which also matched with very high accuracy.

Abstractions Set In Granite

This article will describe the preliminary results of our ongoing analysis of the Granite Artefact scan data, our CAD reconstruction, and some remarkable insights into the design of the object.

unsigned.io

That was just numerology.

OK so I am interested in whether there is such later precision and symmetry in later works compared to these early staues and vases for example and the fact that this precision and symmetric geometry is found very early some 5 or 6,000 years ago when we would think pre dated any such knowledge and kill. Considering that these precision works seem to stop and then are followed by less precise and quality works. At least in the hard stones.

And the quality of fine stone work *increases* during the early dynasties as the pharaohs had workshops that made such objects. When there was less concentration of resources to the pharaoh the number of skilled artisans working for him went down and quality declined.

But its transferable. For example with Petrie's core 7 his knowledge of tooling allows him to determine what sort of mechanism would be needed to produce the signatures in the core. In fact Petrie at that time was bewildered as to what could have caused the signatures because at that time we did not understand modern tech to explain it.

Is Dunn's knowledge of machining aluminum aircraft parts really transferable to working stone with ancient techniques? I am highly skeptical and I have seen nothing as I've learned more about him to think that it is.

Dunn proposed for example that some sort of sonic pulse like a modern hammer drill could produce the signatures and explains the mechanism as to why it would cut through quartz as easy or easier than feldspar due to sonic pulses which react to quartz in a way that increases pulse due to the quartz graver.

Sonic pulses. Good grief. THey didn't even have iron chisels and you want us to believe in some sort of "sonic pulses"?

Others had propsed different mechanisms but could only account for some of the signatures but Dunn worked out a method that is used today that could account for all the signatures. This is the level of analysis rather than experiements with ancient methods which try to replicate the looks rather than the minor details of the signatures in the stone.

These special "signatures"? Other than the strong axisymmetry, what are those exactly? (And don't give me any of that sacred geometry trash.)

Ah so you determine w9oo by the 'look' of a website. Have you read his stuff. He is definitely not a woo merchant as he has scientific calculations and evidence right through his hypothesis. Plus thats the point he describes this as a hypothesis and not a proven fact. You can see the adjustments to the ideas as new evdience is discovered. Which is good science.

Not by the look of his site, but by the content. It is 100% pure woo. (Pyramid power, sigh, what is this? The 1970s?)

Plus his ideas are all backed by other independent science which is only coming online recently when he was proposing some of these ideas very early. I reckon he is a pioneer and will be proven right in the end. Like I said he predicted the electrodes would be found behind the Queens chamber and he was right.

If you don't want me commenting about the pseudoscience and woo nature of Mr. Dunn's work on Egypt, you should stop bringing it up. It's not helping your case.

Actually the vases I was talking about with the super flat surfaces to within a hair were found under the Stepped pyramid under Djoser around 2670BCE. So there is nearly 5,000 years. Around 40,000 vases were found and there's evidence that many were from other earlier tombs that Djoser raided to collect for himself.

You keep talking about stone work 5-6000 years ago, when the relevant time frame is clearly a little less than 5000 years ago and not in that range.

The pyramid itself has an estimated date and theres evdience its older.

No there isn't.

Yes but much of this came later. We have plenty of evidence of these bow drills. Most of these are in softer stone. As with the ealier precision vases in the hardest stone like granite which seem to stop we see many examples of vases in softer stone like alibaster and drilling with bow drills depicted in wall paintings and we have many examples. But they are in soifter stone and are less precise.

What are you talking about? From everything I've seen the emergence of drilling technology corresponds with the first known appearences of these types of high quality stone vases.

Like they wanted to copy the earlier works but could not.

This is a claim straight from UnchartedX/Dunn that has no basis in fact.

View attachment 358408

Not sure what you mean by Dunn proving a vase is a modern forgery. Actually several vases have been measured and scanned now and they also very precise.

Here is a brief summary: IF the Dunn vase shows evidence high precision (smoothness, roundness, symmetry) and that technology was *NOT* within the capabilities of 3rd Dynasty royal stone working shops AND the vase can't be proven to exist before the 1980s, then it was likely manufactured for sale to modern collectors sometime before the 1980s. Now do you get it?

From what I gathered from that video (I skipped ahead several times when they got repatative and boring), they have a couple more "precision vases" with provenance to the 1960s from private collections. Not sure how this helps the case for ancient high technology or whatever.

Lol. I watch all things Egyptian at the moment. I don't watch TV but would rather watch docos or read history or science. UnchartedX is just one podcast of many I watch. I watch Rogan as well so does that disqualify me lol. But as with UnchartedX they have scientific references linked so you can go and check that out independent of them.

You brought up rogan, I didn't. Watching even part of an UnchartedX video lays out all of the classic alt-science narratives. The plucky outsiders who do the things the dogmatic mainstream won't touch. Blah, blah, blah.

The point is about this topic of advanced ancient tech is that practically no one in mainstream is doing it as they have already assumed it was with the tools in the records. Its surprising the lack of interest and work thats not being done rather than being done. So sites like UnchartedX are great in that sense and you can see for yourself and reject it of you want. Or learn something new that others don't want to touch.

Oh, look, the buzzwords.

Yeah its a good effort. But I get the sense that these methods reflect more what came later. We have plenty of examples in the records along with the primite methods.

It was literally a first try and not the product of a well funded and staffed royal workshop.

But the precision works of the predynastic Egyptians seems a one off set as though created by a different level industry that was very organised and high tech. Archeologist speak of a two tier industry seen in the ancient megalths and works and the later more rough and less quality works that tried to copy the earlier works.

Why are we talking about predynastic stuff. What we have evidence for appears in the early dynastic period when the organization and centralization of the Egyptian state jumps up and THEY BUILD GIANT PYRAMIDS.

Quite often you find the earlier megaliths such as at Sacsayhuaman with the tetra pillowed walls with large blocks and the later Inca works trying to copy them with smaller rough walls and works. This is reflected around the world.

The narrative, must state the narrative. Do you ever stop with the narrative?

 

[sjastro]

AI has a sense of humour.

 

[stevevw]

Oh, goody! Now we can argue about Mathematical Realism.

Yeah like how we use it to calculate gravity for space travel. Its real alright especially if you get the calculations wrong lol. What about if you miscalculate the numbers for engineering loads and it comes tumbling down or a a table that keeps falling over because you miscalculated the legs lol. Is that real enough that your drink spills all over the table.

 

[stevevw]

Nothing in this series of claims demonstrates that we should trust your gut any more than we didn't before

Seriously. What has gut feelings got to do with this. Its science. Science can prove a toy tool set cannot create an actual building for example. A 1 ton ute cannot carry a 10 ton load capacity. Its science not gut.

 

[stevevw]

An elipsoid is a particular shape and the cross section normal to one of the axes is a circle at all points along that axis.

Yes and that is one of the alignments these vases meet as well as other alignments associated with all the parts of the vase in relation to known geometric corordinates.

So they measure it first and then determine what the shape is supposed to be?

Actually the shapes are well know geometric forms like circles, cyclingers, angles ect which then conform to more complex geometry such as the Goldren ration, Pi and Phi ect. These are not random arbitray shapes but recognised within geometry and nature.

In fact that is one of the points being made is that the early Egyptians had sophisticated knowledge about these natural shapes and other elements of nature.

The more measurement points the more accurately you can measure the flatness, but having more measurement points doesn't make it more flat.

Yes it does. Because measuring say the flatness of the top rim your only getting a local reference. But when you then measure that against say the bottom, every rasdial along the elipsoid, the handles and the cylinder of the opening and its axis you then get multiple references to its flatness.

The same can be done with every part of the vase in relation to other parts and not just flatness but curves, circles, vertical relations, and then into more complex geometry such as the Godlen ratio ect.

No one is claiming these vases are not very axisymmetric (not counting the handles of course).

Thats the point the handles are amazingly corordinated to each other and the rest of the vase. This is the remarkable part because handles are usually created by a bullnose and cutting out the inbetween. That requires a tool change and different method to turning which can introduce errors.

But the in between spaces conform exactly like there was no handles and the handles are in perfect alignment and reference to all other points on the vase. Including the tiny holes in the handles and the handle curves which fit within a greater geometry conforming to the Golden ratio and Phi ect.

That certainly says something about the craftsmanship.

Not just craftmanship but knowledge and ability to incorporate that geometry into the vase without any guidenece. Its impossible to fluke all those cordinates by freehand.

Just a tool change, slight pressure or lack there of, a guess by sight as to the geometry will introduce errors that puts out all other reference points. They must have had some sort of template to follow as no human has even been able to do this unguided.

That was just numerology.

I find it amusing that these amazing feats are always deminished in order to keep the narrative. It may be just numerology but the issue is putting that from the calculations into a 3D object.

To understand that level of geometry and maths in the first place is amazing. To fluke getting them into the vase if they did not know is unbelievable and if they both know the numbers and also could reflect that in the vase then that is both amazing and unbelievable.

And the quality of fine stone work *increases* during the early dynasties as the pharaohs had workshops that made such objects. When there was less concentration of resources to the pharaoh the number of skilled artisans working for him went down and quality declined.

How do you know this was the case. The Egyptians continued to produce works at the same levels. They continued with the vases and producing more boxes and statues. But they were of less quality and in softer stone. Why not continue in the high quality to keep their gods happy.

Is Dunn's knowledge of machining aluminum aircraft parts really transferable to working stone with ancient techniques? I am highly skeptical and I have seen nothing as I've learned more about him to think that it is.

Well considering he is a specialist engineer in tooling and machining and recognising the signatures of tools in the works I'd say for what methods were used there is no better than an engineer who understands the mechanics and practicality of working with tools on anything.

Engineers work with stones all the time as we use stones and concrete in most of our buildings. Metal tools have to be understood in the context of working on rocks.

Sonic pulses. Good grief. THey didn't even have iron chisels and you want us to believe in some sort of "sonic pulses"?

They also didn't have electricty lol. But your creating a strawman because Dunn did not say that's what they used. This seems to be the constant conflation of making out that is what people are saying.

Dunn is simply as a good scientists will do is to explain what sort of mechanisms most meets the evdience, the signatures in the stones. Nothing else. He says that all the signatures best meet some sort of sonic action. You need to actually read his breakdown as to how and the evdience that supports this.

These special "signatures"? Other than the strong axisymmetry, what are those exactly? (And don't give me any of that sacred geometry trash.)

Why whats wrong with sacred geometry, its well recognised. The ancients used it. Are you denying that this influenced their knowledge.

The vases and statues don't just display axisymmetry they actually contain sophistiocated and precise geometry and math which is transferred somehow into a 3D vase. In other words this was pre designed to end up that way following some sort of template of method to ensure that outcome rather than luck or guessing.

Apart from that there are many others. Staying with the vases we have signatures that they were turned at speed. Considering that the wheel and electricity were around at that time this is strange.

I already linked images of the cut signatures. The unfinished box was one example. But many cuts I linked have signatures of machining marks. They are obvious. We know how planers and routers cut into the material. Or how machine saws cut flat pieces in one go like taking a slice off. None of that has the signature of a small hand saw. In fact its impossible for a small hand saw.

Theres plenty more but these ones I mention have been fobbed off so why introduce more.

Not by the look of his site, but by the content. It is 100% pure woo. (Pyramid power, sigh, what is this? The 1970s?)

You obviously have not read the content. I am not saying everything he proposes is correct. In fact Dunn himself calls it s hypothesis which will change with evdience. But something along those lines has been proposed by more and more people including scientists based on actual evidence within the pyramids themselves.

If Dunn is all woo then how did he predict that some sort of electrodes would be found and they then found them. If Dunn is all woo then why are all these other scientists making similar hypothesis.

Electromagnetic properties of the Great Pyramid: First multipole resonances and energy concentration

Electromagnetic properties of the Great Pyramid: First multipole resonances and energy concentration

Resonant response of the Great Pyramid interacting with external electromagnetic waves of the radio frequency range (the wavelength range is 200-600 m) is theoretically investigated. With the help of numerical simulations and multipole decomposition, it is found that spectra of the extinction...

ui.adsabs.harvard.edu

Study reveals the Great Pyramid of Giza can focus electromagnetic energy

Study reveals the Great Pyramid of Giza can focus electromagnetic energy

An international research group has applied methods of theoretical physics to investigate the electromagnetic response of the Great Pyramid to radio waves. Scientists predicted that under resonance conditions, the pyramid can concentrate electromagnetic energy in its internal chambers and under...

phys.org

If you don't want me commenting about the pseudoscience and woo nature of Mr. Dunn's work on Egypt, you should stop bringing it up. It's not helping your case.

That's just another fallacy on top of a fallacy. That you assume Dunn is all woo.

You keep talking about stone work 5-6000 years ago, when the relevant time frame is clearly a little less than 5000 years ago and not in that range. No there isn't.

Thats the mainstream guess. Theres plenty of evidence its much older. For starters Djoser ruled around 4,700 years ago. That's already a little less than 5,000 years. Djoser didn't just pop out of thin air with all his works. There is a long history before him. The First Dynasty of Egypt began around 3100 BC so thats more than 5,000 years.

But many of the works found in the first pyramid are predynastic such as the vases. In fact the Egyptians themselves say that their history goes back well beyond what mainstream say. The truth is the evidence is conflicting and we are not sure. Take the claim that the Sphinx is 10,000 years old due to the level of erosion on it.

What are you talking about? From everything I've seen the emergence of drilling technology corresponds with the first known appearences of these types of high quality stone vases.

No it doesn't. The bow drills, the depictions of flywheel drills on walls all related to a later period in Egypt which also happens to correspond with this method throughout the world. But none of these peoples had a history of drill holes. Vases in later periods is in softer stones and are less precise and quality.

Its like the pre dynastic hard stone precise works popped up for a short time and then disappeared. Only to be replaced by a copycat industry in softer stone and with the methods depicted on walls and with the tools we find in the records.

None are from the predynastic era. There were no wall depcitions of Egyptians making these granite and diorite vases. Its also the same for the boxes, pillars, statues and megalith structures. Its the same in many cultures as well.

This is a claim straight from UnchartedX/Dunn that has no basis in fact.

Don't forget Hancock lol. I am sure theres others lumped into the mix. Then tell me why we see a higher quality come first not just in Egypt but in other cultures like in Peru where megalths and precise walling is replaced with the later Inca rough smaller stone work that not only tries to repair the ealier work but honors it and tries to copy it.

I gave the example in Peru such as at Naupa Huaca and Sacsayhuamán. There is clear evidence in these cultures of two seperate and destoinct levels of works going on.

Here is a brief summary: IF the Dunn vase shows evidence high precision (smoothness, roundness, symmetry) and that technology was *NOT* within the capabilities of 3rd Dynasty royal stone working shops AND the vase can't be proven to exist before the 1980s, then it was likely manufactured for sale to modern collectors sometime before the 1980s. Now do you get it?

These vases were found under the Stepped pyramid and taken by Djoser from other pre dynastic tombs. Many are predynastic including the ones tested.

The issue of forgery had already been dealt with. At least one of the vases was authenticated as privately owned from the 60's and another from the 80's. They have the exact same hallmarks as the ones in museums. But I am glad you recognise that the tech should not have been around at that time. Thats right. Thats why its baffling.

From what I gathered from that video (I skipped ahead several times when they got repatative and boring), they have a couple more "precision vases" with provenance to the 1960s from private collections. Not sure how this helps the case for ancient high technology or whatever.

Well you did say to be genuine they need to come from pre 1980 when the tech came on board.

You brought up rogan, I didn't. Watching even part of an UnchartedX video lays out all of the classic alt-science narratives. The plucky outsiders who do the things the dogmatic mainstream won't touch. Blah, blah, blah.

I guess if theres a genuine dispute each side is going to feel like that. But that doesn't mean there's not a genuine difference in how the evidence is viewed or that mainstream are not biased in their views. Or that any side is not biased. This has already been evidenced in other areas so why not archeology. Theres a lot for them to lose afterall.

Oh, look, the buzzwords.

Oh look the fallacy.

Why are we talking about predynastic stuff. What we have evidence for appears in the early dynastic period when the organization and centralization of the Egyptian state jumps up and THEY BUILD GIANT PYRAMIDS.

The vases found under Djosers Stepped pyramid were taken by him for predynastic tombs that existed before him. The vases continued but they became less quality and in softer stone.

Other works from the first 4 dynasties also reflect this high quality and megalths. The Egyptians were still highly organised after the 4th dynasty and still did great things. It doesn't take an entire people to make vases or cut and carry blocks. But it just more or less disappears.

 

[stevevw]

AI has a sense of humour.

View attachment 358441​

The ironic thing is we can use 3D printers to make copies now. But there's nothing like the original and best.