Canadian Inventor: Pyramids Were Rocked Into Place

seafortn writes "A Canadian man is claiming he has solved the mystery of the construction of the pyramids - the ancient Egyptians attached curved boards to the building blocks and rolled them into place."

Comments

The Reason for the Mystery

[oni]

The reason this is such a mystery is that the great pyramid is made of over two million blocks, each weighing two and a half tons. Our best estimates for construction time are that it took around 20 years to build. Assuming a 10 to 12 hour work day and no holidays (365 days a year) that means the ancient Egyptians placed a block every 20 to 30 seconds.

Today, even with modern equipment, we could not make that happen. Maybe we could place a block every 5 minutes or every 10 minutes, but I can't imagine we could do it under a minute continuously. It's just an amazing feet. You can see why people are so impressed.

There are so many examples of humans achieving such greatness, and accomplishing such feats, that later generations do not comprehend. I suppose our generation has the Apollo moon landings, and maybe a couple of other things. It really stands as a testament to our potential. So, when we start murdering each other wholesale I like to think about these achievements because it gives me hope that we can rise above our destructive nature.

Re:Summary of Article.

[Slowping]

It's also possible that they used the ramps to roll the stones up the sides of the pyramid, using stoppers and wedges as they go to prevent a catastrophic backwards roll.

I also think that many people (and judging by many of the responses on this forum so far) are too quick to dismiss the ideas that come from people not in academia. We all need to keep an open mind to ideas; after all, Einstein was once just a lowly patent clerk. And sometimes it takes a "hick" with a lifetime of rock moving experience to come up with a clever solution that a bunch of bookworms might otherwise never think of.

Confusing hypothesis with evidence

[SnappingTurtle]

The dude certainly has some neat ideas. His theory sounds plausible to the casual observer (i.e. me).

Unforunately, he's confusing hypothesis with evidence. He's given some good anecdotal evidence that it could have been done that way, but no evidence that it was done that way. Produce some tangible evidence and he may be on to something.