If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Gizmodo)   Scientists discover how ancient Egyptians moved 2.5 ton blocks to build pyramids, condos made of stone-a   (gizmodo.com) divider line 32
    More: Spiffy, Egyptians, Egyptologists, University of Amsterdam, pyramids, condos, pileup, Middle Kingdom, rocks  
•       •       •

20624 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 May 2014 at 3:53 AM (20 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-05-01 03:03:43 AM
10 votes:
www.quickmeme.com
2014-04-30 10:52:08 PM
6 votes:
1.bp.blogspot.com
2014-05-01 05:43:21 AM
4 votes:

Sgygus: Frederick: It just doesnt pass the logic test.  We're to believe Pharaohs dedicated the entire countries wealth and resources to building pyramids as burial chambers -some 20 years supposedly in the making- and then planned no security?  And who exactly was robbing these places?  Good god it should take an army....

The established narrative just doesnt pass the logic test.

It's not easy to hire someone to maintain site security for the necessary thousands of years.


i0.wp.com
2014-05-01 04:07:33 AM
4 votes:
They had whips, Rimmer. Massive, massive whips."
2014-05-01 12:18:24 AM
4 votes:
The ancient statue man appears to be masturbating.
2014-05-01 05:29:11 AM
3 votes:

Old enough to know better: J. Frank Parnell: Except the stones the great pyramids are made of weigh so much more. Like 70 or 200 tons more. Our best modern cranes can't lift the things, and we're supposed to believe they floated them many miles downriver from where they were quarried on rafts made of reeds, then put logs under them and rolled them over sand for many more miles. Yes, sand.

There are even some megalithic stones around the world which weigh over a thousand tons. Something is definitely up when we're supposed to believe primitive cultures did things we still can't.

Seems a lot more believable than "A bunch of bored aliens did it for shiats and giggles", or whatever your pet theory is.


vivimilano.corriere.it
2014-05-01 08:19:18 PM
2 votes:
i.imgur.com
2014-05-01 08:26:41 AM
2 votes:

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Huh... I thought they poured Jews on it


Jews are like 70 percent water!
2014-05-01 08:09:49 AM
2 votes:

Shakin_Haitian: impaler: doglover: Scientists don't really discover a whole lot. Discoveries are usually engineers and laypeople.

As an engineer, let me celebrate how fuking ignorant your anti-intellectual ass is.

Engineers don't discover, we use the discoveries of scientists to make awesome shiat.

They also have sky high rates of denialism, creationism, and conservatism. Probably due to the fact that if that know one or two facts about a subject, then they have enough information to figure out the entire subject.

/engineer in training.



www.smbc-comics.com
2014-05-01 04:47:03 AM
2 votes:

gfid: If Steve Martin were here on Fark today, he'd probably frown on this.


Well, ex-CUUUUUUUUUUUUSE ME!
2014-05-01 04:09:15 AM
2 votes:
Only ancient astronauts could have built the pyramids.
2014-05-01 02:00:03 AM
2 votes:
media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com
Some things never change.
2014-05-01 01:17:59 AM
2 votes:
Huh... I thought they poured Jews on it
2014-05-02 08:06:15 AM
1 votes:
Pharoahs hate him!  Learn how this Egyptian foreman used this one weird trick...
2014-05-01 11:13:40 AM
1 votes:
SpectroBoy:

A) To pee you have to drink first.

Do you know how I know you're not an old man?
2014-05-01 10:27:19 AM
1 votes:
Did You Know the Pyramids Were a Mistake?

www.marketmenot.com
2014-05-01 10:15:03 AM
1 votes:

LavenderWolf: So with about 14-15 guys, we moved those stones. By hand, with no mechanical assistance whatsoever, without breaking a single stone or suffering a single injury. We set them up to border his front lawn.

I have absolutely zero trouble believing the ancient Egyptians could have moved the pyramid stones - because I've done similar, on a slightly smaller scale.


Ergo, LavenderWolf is an alien.  Or is doing a poor job of giving credit to the aliens that told him how to do it.

/Can I have my own History Channel show now?
2014-05-01 09:29:42 AM
1 votes:

DubtodaIll: J. Frank Parnell: Except the stones the great pyramids are made of weigh so much more. Like 70 or 200 tons more. Our best modern cranes can't lift the things, and we're supposed to believe they floated them many miles downriver from where they were quarried on rafts made of reeds, then put logs under them and rolled them over sand for many more miles. Yes, sand.

There are even some megalithic stones around the world which weigh over a thousand tons. Something is definitely up when we're supposed to believe primitive cultures did things we still can't.

I'm going to go ahead and assume you're just making a joke or something.  We have cranes that can lift upwards of 5.5million pounds, or roughly 2750 tons.  We can put 200ton cranes on wheels.  And power it with roughly 500hp, which is about the same force you could get out of ~3000 organized laborers.    As far as the article goes, 2.5 tons is not all that much weight and could easily be moved with enough people and enough time which the Egyptians had plenty of each.
What a 200ton crane might light like:
[image.made-in-china.com image 800x532]


A few years ago I worked in a convenience store, and various neighbourhood folks would stop by and chat for a while every day.

One of my regulars asked, one day, when I got off work and if I'd be willing to help move "some stones." I said I'd be off in a couple hours (plenty of daylight left) and I'd love to help out.

So I get to the dude's place and there's another dozen or so guys milling about. The guy who asked for my help gathered us all up and we walked a few hundred meters away to some giant masonry stones weighing 1-3 tons, used in the construction of the local canal a century prior.

So with about 14-15 guys, we moved those stones. By hand, with no mechanical assistance whatsoever, without breaking a single stone or suffering a single injury. We set them up to border his front lawn.

I have absolutely zero trouble believing the ancient Egyptians could have moved the pyramid stones - because I've done similar, on a slightly smaller scale.
2014-05-01 09:00:46 AM
1 votes:

gfid: the late great Steve Martin


Whaaaa.....?  Don't tell me Vigoda got anouther one.
2014-05-01 08:21:49 AM
1 votes:
www.morethings.com
2014-05-01 08:01:11 AM
1 votes:
Uh pretty sure it was because gravity was less back then. it goes through cycles. in the future it will continue to get to the point where gravity changes each day. there will be good and bad gravity days.

/Mildly obscure?
//probably not...its fark
///slashies
2014-05-01 07:14:21 AM
1 votes:
My theory is that the pyramids were built underground with whatever was there by carving the pyramids out of the bedrock.  Then, they just cleared all the sand and shipped it to resorts around the world to create fantastic beaches.

You'll spend a relaxing 4 days and 4 nights at this beautiful beach while sailing in YOUR BRAND NEW BOAT!

All of this can be yours, IF the price is right.
2014-05-01 06:57:16 AM
1 votes:
encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
2014-05-01 06:33:57 AM
1 votes:

Frederick: Most likely the three pyramids of Giza were not burial chambers.


Look, I've read Alan F. Alford and Neil Freer and Zacharia Sitchin and Erich von Daniken too, and the only thing I got out of my "ancient astronaut" phase is that those guys, from a pure investigative inquiry perspective, are full of shiat.
2014-05-01 06:07:53 AM
1 votes:
Saw cut in pyramid stone. Black and Decker?
www.oocities.org
2014-05-01 04:33:47 AM
1 votes:

Frederick: Here's a troubling fact Egyptologists dont like to discuss: Ever see pics from the inside of a typical Egyptian king burial chamber (example Tutankhamen)? All the of the wall space is covered in artwork. All of it. Ever see the burial chamber artwork from the 3 great pyramids?


And here we come to the problem when people talk about Ancient Egypt: They keep addressing it as if it was one contiguous, unbroken civilization that was unchanging and everlasting, and that it was the same way at the end that it was at the beginning, with no real cultural changes, values or attitude differences. This is wrong.

Ancient Egypt lasted 3000 years! You have any idea how farking long that is? It lasted through 3 Ages, Six major periods and over 30 dynasties. Its religion, culture, and politics constantly changed with the interests and dynamics of its leaders. Some gods that were important at the beginning fell out of favor later on, and they were heavily influenced by their neighbors especially considering that they were occupied by foreigners for nearly 1/3 of their existence.

To address your point, the Pyramid of Khufu and the tomb of Tutankhamen are separated by over 1300 years of cultural drift. We can't even get languages to last that long, what makes you think King Tut's people valued the same things as Khufu's people? Why would you assume that the Old Kingdom ought to draw all over their walls just because the Middle Kingdom did? The Old Kingdom was all about the pyramids. They built over 100 of them. That stopped during the Intermediate Period -- some 600 years later, before even Hammurabi.

The Middle Kingdom was all about the Valley of the Kings because they learned that putting their dead Pharaohs with all their stuff in giant above-ground mausoleums was pretty stupid because it made them easy targets for graverobbers. The new hotness was to try and hide their dead kings and even boobytrap the tombs. The New Kingdom was even more non-descript: Some Pharoahs were just buried with all their stuff in a hillside, with nary a marker or any indication that they were there. That still didn't stop the graverobbers from finding them.

Egypt is not one monolithic entity. It evolved and changed over time like the world around it, and to assert that parts of it don't look like other parts without recognizing the immense timespan between them is short-changing the mutability of Egyptian religion and culture in the ancient world.
2014-05-01 04:11:59 AM
1 votes:

Lukeonia1: Nope, the general consensus is that the folks who built the pyramids were paid laborers. After all, would you want your monument carved by a surly, unpaid slave?


It's not that they were paid laborers, it's that the Nile river floods like clockwork for three months every year. So you have this massive agrarian population who literally have nothing to do, waiting for the waters to recede so they could plant/harvest their crops.

Well, the Pharaohs found something for them to do.
2014-05-01 03:07:04 AM
1 votes:

Frederick: Lukeonia1: mamoru: Slaves? Is the answer slaves?
Nope, the general consensus is that the folks who built the pyramids were paid laborers. After all, would you want your monument carved by a surly, unpaid slave?

The general consensus of Egyptologists; that is.  Which, frankly, isnt very credible.  Zahi Hawass is/was nothing more than an fanboy.  A lot of the Egyptologist consensus is unchallenged utter BS.

Even their own narratives are often contradictory.  Watch any show on Egypt and you will hear how they get historical information from statues, burial chambers, murals, etc.  And then later will say how successive rulers would often alter or erase written works of previous rulers.  Well, fark then -who's to say what is accurate?  Oh yeah -Egyptologists.

Here's a troubling fact Egyptologists dont like to discuss:  Ever see pics from the inside of a typical Egyptian king burial chamber (example Tutankhamen)?  All the of the wall space is covered in artwork.  All of it.  Ever see the burial chamber artwork from the 3 great pyramids?


Zahi Hawass is an attention whoring turdknocker who doesn't know even half of what he pretends to know. Plus he has a very punchable face.
2014-05-01 02:52:39 AM
1 votes:
How the fark did they cut them so perfectly and form them into giant weapons that destroyed planet x explain that!
2014-05-01 01:51:08 AM
1 votes:

impaler: doglover: Scientists don't really discover a whole lot. Discoveries are usually engineers and laypeople.

As an engineer, let me celebrate how fuking ignorant your anti-intellectual ass is.

Engineers don't discover, we use the discoveries of scientists to make awesome shiat.


I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the past 6,000 years and all the awesome stuff that was discovered by people who weren't limited to a single vocation in a lifetime.

For a large chunk of history, scientists were the engineers. All the best stuff was discovered by someone trying to finish a project trying something novel to solve an issue. It's only recently the "research scientist" has even existed. Before the 1700s, you were a polymath or out on your ath.
2014-05-01 12:53:05 AM
1 votes:

mamoru: Slaves? Is the answer slaves?

*RTFA*

Ah. Slaves and moistening the sand ahead of the sledges on which they were dragging the huge blocks to make it (the sand) more firm.

Although, I'm sure it was probably really aliens because for some reason humans back then weren't smart enough to have been able to figure out such engineering on their own. :p


Ancient people were surprisingly observant.

Also it probably wasn't water.  It was probably urine.

(water in a desert is hard to come by.  but you have hundreds of slaves pulling shiat, give THEM the water and let them go to town "wetting the sand").
2014-04-30 10:16:04 PM
1 votes:
...with their minds!!!!

/oh, it was water.
 
Displayed 32 of 32 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report