Great pyramid of Giza -- Could we rebuild it?

Nathyn said:
I was arguing with a creationist, and they claimed that humanity is becoming less advanced as an argument against evolution.

*snip*

He responded by claiming that we couldn't rebuild the Great Pyramid of Giza, because we couldn't cut and arrange stones with their same amount of precision.
Click to expand...

Hey cool. You had this argument with that creationist, regarding how less advanced we are becoming, over the phone? Or was it in person, after this creationist had seen the pyramids himself, flying there in an airconditioned 747? Well, maybe he has just seen them on TV, concluding how less and less advanced mankind becomes. How old was this guy, older than 40? I bet he is in good health and has perfect teeth. Just like those Egyptian craftsmen 4500 years ago. :rolleyes:
 
NobbyNobbs said:
I think you meant "pi". Phi, the golden ratio, is a different number entirely.

I seem to recall a Nova special where some engineers decided to build a (miniature) pyramid using only the technology of the day. It was very interesting.
Click to expand...

(Blushes) Me silly dane no talkie eeengleesh to good.... :) Pi [3.1425726) off course

Yes i think i saw that one too. Actually i saw something just recently. A researcher believed that the egyptians ROLLED the stones up the pyramids. He had discovered some weird wooden constructions sortof like the Letter "D" but he realised that if you tied 8 of those to a block you could roll it like a giant wheel. It wouldn't take nearly the manpower it would take if they used sleighs, which has been the opinion until now
 
Let's make one full-sized out of recycled Styrofoam blocks! Then all the precision fitting would be easy, we'd save the environment, and we'd have a great tourist attraction.
 
boloboffin said:
Let's make one full-sized out of recycled Styrofoam blocks! Then all the precision fitting would be easy, we'd save the environment, and we'd have a great tourist attraction.
Click to expand...

It would blow away in the first storm ;)
 
See, the ancient Egyptians knew that which is why they elected to use rock instead.
Ancient technology - ancient wisdom. They knew it all, you know.
 
richardm said:
See, the ancient Egyptians knew that which is why they elected to use rock instead.
Ancient technology - ancient wisdom. They knew it all, you know.
Click to expand...

Besides, :they didn't have styrofoam back then. Oil was an irritating substance that polluted wells. :)
 
Nathyn said:
I was arguing with a creationist, and they claimed that humanity is becoming less advanced as an argument against evolution. They cited the well-known linguistics study a while back in which asserted that human language overall is becoming less complex.
Click to expand...

A linguistics student once told me that the longer a language survives, the "lazier" it gets gramatically which leads to contractions and easier pronunciation ("waistcoat" becomes "wescott", "gunwale" becomes "gunnel"). Maybe that's what your creationist friend is talking about. But in this sense, "lazy" is an academic term. In practical terms, the language is being streamlined and simplified. And grammar is only part of language. I'll bet we have a larger vocabulary than the ancients had.

Nathyn said:
He responded by claiming that we couldn't rebuild the Great Pyramid of Giza, because we couldn't cut and arrange stones with their same amount of precision.
Click to expand...

It's been established here already that we could build pyramids as well as, or better than, the ancient Egyptians. The fact that we don't build obscenely extravagant monuments to megalomaniacal, self-proclaimed gods makes us a lot smarter as a species than we were then.
 
I am told that English language has simplified a lot because several times a significant percentage of the population had to learn it. Not enough for another language to take it over but enough for many changes to happen. For example the general rule is to make a word plural then you add s, say printer -> printers. In other languages there are two separate words. A few words like that still exist in English Child -> children.

Vikings, French (Norman) and Latin speakers all had to use English.
 
hgc said:
Faster Pyramids for the New Age. The Age of Kinetic Monumental Architecture.
Click to expand...

Great massive herds of majestic pyramids, roaming free across the Serengeti. Now THAT's a tourist attraction.
 
NobbyNobbs said:
I seem to recall a Nova special where some engineers decided to build a (miniature) pyramid using only the technology of the day. It was very interesting.
Click to expand...

It was called "This Old Pyramid" and teamed up a stoneworker from Massachusetts (with a very heavy Boston accent) and an archaeologist. It was pretty funny because the stone worker kept saying "You can't do that!" "It won't work!" and then when they tried the archaeologists techniques, he was surprised to see that they actually did work.
 
Darat said:
And perhaps even a cup of water.
Click to expand...
Use a frozen lake, remove the ice sheet, it will be perfectly flat (earth curvature notwithstanding) then transport this template of either a future wall, or a floor back to Sahara :)
 
NobbyNobbs said:
I think you meant "pi". Phi, the golden ratio, is a different number entirely.

I seem to recall a Nova special where some engineers decided to build a (miniature) pyramid using only the technology of the day. It was very interesting.
Click to expand...
Shouldn't it be either PhiPit-agoras?

The technology of the day included a frontloader used off camera. Interesting, indeed:) It was a very pseudoscientific experiment, more like propaganda exercise.
 
Tumblehome said:
A linguistics student once told me that the longer a language survives, the "lazier" it gets gramatically which leads to contractions and easier pronunciation ("waistcoat" becomes "wescott", "gunwale" becomes "gunnel"). Maybe that's what your creationist friend is talking about. But in this sense, "lazy" is an academic term. In practical terms, the language is being streamlined and simplified. And grammar is only part of language. I'll bet we have a larger vocabulary than the ancients had.



It's been established here already that we could build pyramids as well as, or better than, the ancient Egyptians. The fact that we don't build obscenely extravagant monuments to megalomaniacal, self-proclaimed gods makes us a lot smarter as a species than we were then.
Click to expand...
Where does such wild optimism come from? Today, if some key people go crazy, the world plunges into the nuclear abyss, entire races can be wiped out by designer micro-organisms, and humanity's actions make prophets out of those guys with signs "The End is Near!"
 
Jiri said:
Shouldn't it be either PhiPit-agoras?

The technology of the day included a frontloader used off camera. Interesting, indeed:) It was a very pseudoscientific experiment, more like propaganda exercise.
Click to expand...
See Margaret Morris' review of "This Old Pyramid" --
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/cu.../002-2835836-0202450?ie=UTF8&n=404272&s=video

Some excerpts: "NOVA built its mini pyramid with a front-end loader (see the Houston Chronicle (Wrap-up, Saturday, November 13, 1993), while leading its audience to believe that the NOVA pyramid was built using strictly ancient means . . . The front-end loader even placed those few blocks onto NOVA's mini-ramp. . . Other fatal flaws make this misleading film useless as documentary . . . First, although the film stated that only ancient means would be used, NOVA used modern steel tools to quarry and shape all of its pyramid blocks. . . Second, the film advocates that copper tools were used to shape ancient pyramid blocks, ignoring the most up-to-date Egyptology. For instance, Arnold's Building in Egypt acknowledges that copper tools could not have been used. Aside from the inadequacy of copper tools, the mines could not have supplied the amount of copper needed . . . Third, while ramps are suitable for building small pyramids, engineers, including Peter Hodges, showed that the Great Pyramid would not exist if its construction depended on any kind of ramp. NOVA should not have implied that its experiment solved major problems of building the Great Pyramid. Yet, the film concluded by claiming that NOVA solved the major unresolved problems . . . NOVA suggested that using a spiral ramp solves outstanding construction problems. However, such a device produces more problems than it solves with regard to the Great Pyramid's construction . . . This misleading film is an affront to scientific methodology. It sends a terrible message to students, who need to learn honesty and respect for scientific method."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom