>Be ancient egyptians>Build an insane group of pyramids>Leave absolutely zero explanation as to how you built them and just assume everyone will already know how you did itWhy?
>if something isn't found it doesn't exist and hasn't ever existedNice logic there OP. This would mean that something only comes in existence when someone finds it.
>>18684722Are you 12? They're pyramids. Literally the easiest shape to make?
>>18684722>Leave absolutely zero explanation as to how you built them and just assume everyone will already know how you did itBased>Why?They had faith that humanity in the future would be smart enough to figure it out, without inventing alien conspiracy theories. South Americans and the Chinese didn't leave detailed explanations when they built their pyramids in ancient history either. So what lol? We understand moundbuilding. We understand ziggurats. We understand pyramids. It's not some enigmatic mystery that we're still scratching our heads over, trying to figure out in the 21st century.
>>18684722they're literally piles of rocks you fucking retard
>>18684801You need a very high IQ to make a basic pyramid shaped structure (you know the ones that 5 year olds make when they make a sandcastle on the beach).Only absolute retards find pyramid structures impressive
>>18684722>Leave absolutely zero explanation as to how you built themExcept for all the earlier periods and other mausoleums showing the development of construction techniques over generations.
>>18684722>explanation as to how you built them >assume everyone will already know how you did itWhy would they care? Sharing ideas for free is a recent thing. For most of history people guarded their knowledge because it's valuable.
>>18684805>Only absolute retards find pyramid structures impressiveStructurally they are incredibly impressive. What are you talking about? They've stood standing, sound, for thousands of years, longer than any kingdom or empire has lasted. Do you mean to say the "shape" isn't impressive? 5 year olds sandcastle doesn't last more than a single afternoon.
>>18684816Firstly a 5 year old sandcastle is made out of sand which the sea swallows. The pyramids are out in the desert and don't have to deal with constant water erosion you fucking retard.And just because they are structurally stable doesn't mean it's impressive that the egyptians were able to construct it. It's just survivorship bias, they were dozens of much more impressive buildings in the ancient world but because they didnt decide to build an ugly block and actually had impressive detail they unfortunately didn't survive until now.Only someone with a below average IQ would find a massive block impressive.Also not to mention that they are the ugliest pyramids on Earth by far. Look at the pyramids the native americans built. Not saying these were impressive but at the very least they are much more aesthetically pleasing than these boring block buildings.
>>18684816>They've stood standing, sound, for thousands of years, longer than any kingdom or empire has lasted.A cone is literally the most stable design for a building, and pyramids approach that. These days, we build mile-high vertical towers that require infinitely more advanced physics to make stable.
it's a pyramid. As far the building shapes go, that's literally the easiest one to build
>>18684722Why would they need to leave an explanation for it? Everyone already knew how they did it, which is how they kept building pyramids for centuries. The ones are Giza are especially impressive for very simple reasons: building pyramids was fashionable and Egypt was centralized and stable at the time. A series of pharaohs that were interested in building pyramids were able to pool enormous amounts of resources of decades to built increasingly large and complex pyramids. Later generations still knew how to build pyramids but were unable to spend as much time and money on them. >A: build a luxurious mansion with a budget of $100 billion and a time window of 25 years>B: build a luxurious mansion with a budget of $100 million and a time window of 2.5 yearsYou're essentially asking why A didn't write down instructions for B on how to build luxurious mansions, which is pointless, because B already knows, B is just working under different constraints.
>>18684722the Jews are hiding the truth about our past
>>18684794>>18684804>>18684805>>18684919>"HURR DURR IF ITS EASY TO DRAW IT MEANS ITS EASY TO BUILD!"Please, please, PLEASE for the sake of the little hope I have left in humanity, tell me these posts are either ironic, or actually made by some alien theorist falseflagging as a mainstream narrative gobbler in order to make them look bad.Nobody can be *THIS* stupid and ignorant at the same time, right? RIGHT??
>>18685441Shills are real, they're paid full time, and work around the clock on shifts.But the pyramids are, on the inside, mostly gravel filler or natural rocks arranged more or less homogenously for support. Only the outer two layers and various internal channels and passages are cut, the inner layer is obviously rough cut but the outer layer of casing stones is hard to explain until you realize it's actually reconstituted limestone (I'll see if I can find the .gov site which explains this, basically nanoscale electromicroscopy proves it) and Herodotus' strange report about the pyramid being built from the top down is a telephone game and really they set the top stones first because the smaller surface area means it's easier to measure rigorously and the rest of the slope was poured according to it's dimension and angle.Like, if you tried to start doing that from the bottom it wouldn't work.Because any minute error in measuring the enormous base would compound as you go upwards, resulting in complete failure and having to start over.
>Microstructural Evidence of Reconstituted Limestone Blocks https://beta.nsf.gov/news/surprising-truth-behind-construction-great-pyramids>Were the stone blocks carved from natural limestone or cast with an early version of concrete? A materials science research team provides evidence ...""..." National Science Foundation-supported researcher Michel Barsoum ... As a well respected researcher in the field of ceramics, Barsoum never expected his career to take him down a path of history, archaeology and "political" science, with materials research mixed in.""... caller, the mysteries had actually been solved by Joseph Davidovits, director of the Geopolymer Institute in St. Quentin, France, more than two decades ago. Davidovits claimed that the stones of the pyramids were actually made of a very early form of concrete created using a mixture of limestone, clay, lime and water.""... scanning electron microscope (SEM) observations and other testing, Barsoum and his research group finally began to draw some conclusions about the pyramids ... the tiniest structures within the inner and outer casing stones were indeed consistent with a reconstituted limestone. The cement binding the limestone aggregate was either silicon dioxide (the building block of quartz) or a calcium and magnesium-rich silicate mineral.... high water content--unusual for the normally dry, natural limestone found on the Giza plateau--and the cementing phases, in both the inner and outer casing stones, were amorphous""... do not exist anywhere in nature. "Therefore," says Barsoum, "it's very improbable that the outer and inner casing stones that we examined were chiseled from a natural limestone block."Barsoum ... recently discovered the presence of silicon dioxide nanoscale spheres (diameters only billionths of a meter across) in one of the samples. ... confirms that these blocks are not natural limestone."https://ceramics.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1551-2916.2006.01308.x
>>18685732so unfortunately the top link I posted 4 years ago is dead now for whatever reason and I can't find the original report anywhere elsebut it's all true, that image was gotten originally from that very page
>>18684722having domesticated the aurochs, the white man was capable of many wonders hitherto thought of as impossibilities
>>18685722>Shills are real, they're paid full time, and work around the clock on shifts.Shills that work for who? The Sea Peoples?
>>18685732Here is a live science article that you can use to replace your NSF link.https://www.livescience.com/1554-surprising-truth-great-pyramids-built.html
>>18684833>Firstly a 5 year old sandcastle is made out of sand which the sea swallows. The pyramids are out in the desert and don't have to deal with constant water erosion you fucking retard.Okay. Very stupid comparison in the first place, I'm glad you can see that now. >Only someone with a below average IQ would find a massive block impressive.You're retarded. The inside of the pyramids, the network of chambers, and how preserved it is despite being thousands of years old, are what's impressive to people. >Also not to mention that they are the ugliest pyramids on Earth by far.From the outside sure. You're acting like this matter of opinion is somehow a competition, and it makes you look really stupid though. We can appreciate all the pyramids for different reasons. It's fine.>>18684857>These days, we build mile-high vertical towers that require infinitely more advanced physics to make stable.Well yeah, modern engineering and architecture design mogs everything in ancient history. Our ancestors only had raw materials, blood, sweat, and slaves to build their cool shit. They did the best they could, despite most of it being shit, but some of it ended up being pretty legendary
>>18684722>Build flat rectangle tomb called a Mastaba>Want to show how cool you are so you build a second mini Mastaba on top of your Mastaba>Then someone wants to look even cooler and puts a Mastaba on top of a Mastaba on top of a Mastaba>Then Imhotep decides to fill in the "steps" between the stacked Mastabas to create a single smooth surface.
>>18684722>18684801>18684806>18684807>>18684816>>18684999>>18685441>>18685885>Leave absolutely zero explanation as to how you built themThis isn't true though, we have documentation of some of the builders talking about how they transported some of the limestone blocks, and the logistics of feeding workers, etchttps://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/13c10pc/why_didnt_egyptians_just_write_the_method_of/https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/ancient-egypt-shipping-mining-farming-economy-pyramids-180956619/https://amers.hypotheses.org/wp-content/blogs.dir/2495/files/2017/03/1705_Tallet.pdfAnd if we're talking Egyptian pyramids in general, not just the Great Pyramids of Giza, then there's even more records: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/7xplv1/is_it_true_that_two_hundred_years_after_the_last/
>>18685910
We can literally see their first few pyramids where they were experimenting and figuring out the process
I only respect the "it's specifically and only the pyramids of giza that are special and unexplainable" crowd, the "all pyramids on earth must have been built by one hyper-advanced civilization" ones are a bit too ridiculous
After looking into how the Andeans moved MUCH larger stones than the ones used for the pyramids, they became a lot less impressive. The Inca were able to do it over much longer distances and rougher terrain with just numbers, ropes, roller logs, and dirt ramps. I don't see why the Egyptians couldnt have done it the same way, especially since most of the stone for the pyramids was quarried on site and wouldnt have had to move nearly as far, and they had oxen to help them out. You really can accomplish pretty much anything with enough time and manpower.
>>18684722>Leave absolutely zero explanationperhaps they left plenty of explanation. the ptolemaics gathered all the scrolls of every library of egypt and situated them at alexandria. greek scholars would visit there and learn the language just to read the scrolls. and then they would leave with wondrous inventions. romans too. the place was leveled eventually. my guess is that it was looted first. there's a couple of papyri, moscow and rhind from ~1850bc apparently copies of older work, one of those has computation of a truncated pyramid volume, methodology is sort of a proto-calculus. something you'd need if you were trying to compute resource requirements for building one. that's just a couple of scrolls out of maybe a million that once were
>>18687448they aren't, see >>18686196>>18687449Andean masonry like this also isn't as mysterious as people think a lot (though not all) of the time, the super tight fit you see from the outside is just a facade and the majority of the interior structure is more haphazardly filled inhttps://old.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/3hx31g/all_in_all_its_just_another_12_sided_block_in_the/https://earthasweknowit.com/pages/inca_constructionhttps://youtu.be/watch?v=m7BqcP15auQ
>>18684722>thinking humans were responsible for creating the pyramids
>>18685441Are you actually going to address the argument or chimp out and attach anime gifs for some reason? You're probably a tranny faggot so fuck off retard
>>18687449>The Inca were able to do it over much longer distances and rougher terrain with just numbers, ropes, roller logs, and dirt ramps.Yeah sure if Snopes says so it must certainly be true.Why use simple and easily transportable bricks when you can waste enormous amount of time, effort and manpower to move gigantic boulders and shape them in impossible and weird shapes with absolutely no aesthetic nor functional purpose?Seems legit.
The answer is staring you in the face OP. But you are still too blind to see.
>>18685885you think a pyramid is impressive because it has rooms inside of it? bro are u 12?
>>18688347Without iron or more sophisticated tools, making perfectly straight blocks of the same size would have been way more difficult than taking advantage of natural fractures in the granite and getting blocks of different sizes and then figuring out how to fit them together. The Incas at least considered ashlar masonry to be highest form of masonry, but they couldn't do it in large quantities because of how difficult it was so it was reserved for their most important structures like their principal temple.
>>18688347Nigga you can see them. They're right there in the picture>>18688704This is also incorrect they used uniform bricks all the time. Fitting matching bricks together is infinitely less complex than cyclopean masonry, that is precisely WHY Andeans build things in the cyclopean style, that and a complex set of religious beliefs about rocks
I think it's funny whenever retards use the simpler Inca buildings that aren't built in the super impressive Sacsayhuaman style as proof that they weren't the ones who built it, it's like saying that early modern France couldn't possibly have built the Palace of Versailles because utilitarian military warehouses and rural peasant dwellings exist and are way too simplistic in comparison
>>18688704>blocks of the same size would have been way more difficultWay more difficult than carving them into slightly curved but still perfectly interlocking shapes? Are you fucking serious?>than taking advantage of natural fractures in the graniteDude did you even take a look at the pic you posted? Those shapes are blatantly NOT made by "taking advantage of natural fractures"
>>18689073>Dude did you even take a look at the pic you posted?Different anons, I am not retarded and understand how complex and impressive Sacsayhuaman was
