TH2UD

[Byrd]

Interesting retort. You do realize that it would be far easier, to make individual casts or moldings for each stone, than chiseling them down, right?

No.

They would have to build molds for every single stone, and wait for the polymer to harden, then disassemble the mold and make an entirely new mold that's not the same shape instead of just casting another.  Concrete blocks in that size take years to harden... and the finished size of the cured polymer is usually a bit less than the size of the mold (or you couldn't get it out.)

So you need material (not wood in Egypt...it's too scarce..) AND you need a source of raw materials (large scale mining operations, for one, and transport for this) AND a place to store them until needed AND a mixing area for the slurry AND a way of pouring or piping them in (which requires your civilization using pipes and pumps unless it's an elevated storage area) AND a way of curing it evenly ("pouring stuff in" does not work.  It won't distribute evenly)

So you'd have a horkin' big assembly area with the remains of a lot of chemicals (even if the tools had disintegrated over time) -- among other things.


And the idea that "they used crushed stone"-- it would have taken them far longer to turn stone into powder than it would to chop out a block of it.   And no, they didn't use sand.  None of the blocks are sandstone.

[Hanslune]

No.

They would have to build molds for every single stone, and wait for the polymer to harden, then disassemble the mold and make an entirely new mold that's not the same shape instead of just casting another.  Concrete blocks in that size take years to harden... and the finished size of the cured polymer is usually a bit less than the size of the mold (or you couldn't get it out.)

So you need material (not wood in Egypt...it's too scarce..) AND you need a source of raw materials (large scale mining operations, for one, and transport for this) AND a place to store them until needed AND a mixing area for the slurry AND a way of pouring or piping them in (which requires your civilization using pipes and pumps unless it's an elevated storage area) AND a way of curing it evenly ("pouring stuff in" does not work.  It won't distribute evenly)

So you'd have a horkin' big assembly area with the remains of a lot of chemicals (even if the tools had disintegrated over time) -- among other things.


And the idea that "they used crushed stone"-- it would have taken them far longer to turn stone into powder than it would to chop out a block of it.   And no, they didn't use sand.  None of the blocks are sandstone.

I believe when they cleared the quarries on Giza they were mainly full of limestone chips (spalls) from masonry - why would they be there if they were using ground up limestone? Why not grind up the bits from shaping? Oh wait they weren't shaping so where did all those limestone masonry chips/spalls come from? Given the quarries show squares stones were bashed out - it all doesn't make any sense does it? Especially if you take into account for the fossils still being in the blocks..............

[Harte]

Awesome! You've been there! You also know a lot of details of the monument. Now, explain how they built it.

It was built the way the Inca told the Spanish they built it.
Something like this.
https://digitalassets.lib.berkeley.edu/a...24-004.pdf

Harte

[Harte]

Yes, it's clear they used geopolymer. Get Hanslune to admit that. Then get him to explain how they did it thousands of years ago.

Explain this with your geopolymer.
Harte

[Hanslune]

Explain this with your geopolymer.
[Image: https://denyignorance.com/uploader/image... wall..JPG]Harte

Well I was trying to keep this thread about Egypt only. I foolish hoped that those interested in Incan masonry would start a thread for that. Anyway.... yeah random rocks, if one walks over to the quarry that shows that they had a rubble field and also cut stone out it.

[Hanslune]

Explain this with your geopolymer.
[Image: https://denyignorance.com/uploader/image... wall..JPG]Harte

https://i.imgur.com/POkjJKL.jpg, https://i.imgur.com/nN4MrV3.jpg, https://i.imgur.com/mfQo4JG.jpg, https://i.imgur.com/S2gJE7I.jpg, https://i.imgur.com/gi4gHXL.jpg

[KKLoco]

No.

They would have to build molds for every single stone, and wait for the polymer to harden, then disassemble the mold and make an entirely new mold that's not the same shape instead of just casting another.  Concrete blocks in that size take years to harden... and the finished size of the cured polymer is usually a bit less than the size of the mold (or you couldn't get it out.)

So you need material (not wood in Egypt...it's too scarce..) AND you need a source of raw materials (large scale mining operations, for one, and transport for this) AND a place to store them until needed AND a mixing area for the slurry AND a way of pouring or piping them in (which requires your civilization using pipes and pumps unless it's an elevated storage area) AND a way of curing it evenly ("pouring stuff in" does not work.  It won't distribute evenly)

So you'd have a horkin' big assembly area with the remains of a lot of chemicals (even if the tools had disintegrated over time) -- among other things.


And the idea that "they used crushed stone"-- it would have taken them far longer to turn stone into powder than it would to chop out a block of it.   And no, they didn't use sand.  None of the blocks are sandstone.

Yes, I love how all of you keep using modern day techniques to describe the building methods. Yet, the big fat elephant in the room -- no one can explain how it was done. We don't hav the type of sophistication to this day. Please, once again, explain how they knew their techniques were anti-seismic in construction. Our structure today last maybe 100 years with constant maintenance. Theirs have lasted 10's of thousands with zero maintenance. Such primitive beings, with such advanced knowledge..........

[Hanslune]

Yes, I love how all of you keep using modern day techniques to describe the building methods. Yet, the big fat elephant in the room -- no one can explain how it was done. We don't hav the type of sophistication to this day. Please, once again, explain how they knew their techniques were anti-seismic in construction. Our structure today last maybe 100 years with constant maintenance. Theirs have lasted 10's of thousands with zero maintenance. Such primitive beings, with such advanced knowledge..........

Were you born outraged? Chuckle. By experience and experimentation and luck, the Inca had four types of architecture. Don't you think it is odd that they used the least anti-earthquake style for the most important temples? The best masonry the Inca did was in their Sun temple and the best anti-seismic was in a fortification. The pyramids are big piles of stones, many many structures from the past have been utterly destroyed by earthquakes. Earthquakes were the most common cause, destroying the Pharos lighthouse and the mausoleum at Halicarnassus. I use to do clearing and pre-restoration work on Mayan structures - the jungle tears them apart, you'll find long lasting building mainly in deserts or high altitude where vegetation is kept a bay, that 'anti-earthquake' effect is incidental and not planned. https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uaVB4JDce1o/Y...5%2529.jpg, https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-c9nT6tWuM_o/Y...7%2529.jpg, if the Giza pyramid or Sacsayhuaman had been built in jungles after 4,500 years they'd be rubble

[KKLoco]

Were you born outraged? Chuckle. By experience and experimentation and luck, the Inca had four types of architecture. Don't you think it is odd that they used the least anti-earthquake style for the most important temples? The best masonry the Inca did was in their Sun temple and the best anti-seismic was in a fortification. The pyramids are big piles of stones, many many structures from the past have been utterly destroyed by earthquakes. Earthquakes were the most common cause, destroying the Pharos lighthouse and the mausoleum at Halicarnassus. I use to do clearing and pre-restoration work on Mayan structures - the jungle tears them apart, you'll find long lasting building mainly in deserts or high altitude where vegetation is kept a bay, that 'anti-earthquake' effect is incidental and not planned. https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uaVB4JDce1o/Y...5%2529.jpg, https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-c9nT6tWuM_o/Y...7%2529.jpg, if the Giza pyramid or Sacsayhuaman had been built in jungles after 4,500 years they'd be rubble

This is rich. The Inca themselves, proclaimed they did not build the foundations.....

I do believe this is the end of the conversation.

[Harte]

Well I was trying to keep this thread about Egypt only. I foolish hoped that those interested in Incan masonry would start a thread for that. Anyway.... yeah random rocks, if one walks over to the quarry that shows that they had a rubble field and also cut stone out it.

Excuse me, but isn't "Harte" part of the titular acronym of this thread? :D

Harte