Archaeologists confirm slaves did NOT build pyramids

[Michael]

From Discovery Archaeology News

Egypt displayed on Monday newly discovered tombs more than 4,000 years old and said they belonged to people who worked on the Great Pyramids of Giza, putting the discovery forth as more evidence that slaves did not build the ancient monuments.

The series of modest nine-foot-deep shafts held a dozen skeletons of pyramid builders, perfectly preserved by dry desert sand along with jars that once contained beer and bread meant for the workers' afterlife.

The mud-brick tombs were uncovered last week in the backyard of the Giza pyramids, stretching beyond a burial site first discovered in the 1990s and dating to the 4th Dynasty (2575 B.C. to 2467 B.C.), when the great pyramids were built on the fringes of present-day Cairo.

Read the full article here.

[august]

I think that title might more accurately read "A couple of archaeologists find some graves of some people who may not have been slaves but may have worked on one pyramid, and speculate that perhaps slaves did not build pyramids."

[Michael]

That would have been much too long and far less sensational.

[august]

Touche!

How about "Archaologists raise Anna Nicole's baby while reading Twilight books?"

[Radrook]

Some claim that the Nephilim described in the Bible as giants built the pyramids and other such structures that defy explanation.

[RobRoy]

Originally Posted by Radrook

Some claim that the Nephilim described in the Bible as giants built the pyramids and other such structures that defy explanation.

Which structures defy explanation? There are certainly structures that are marvels to behold, but none that defy reasonable, mundane explanation. Multiple explanations at that, and far more reasonable than half-angelic giants moving about stone for Pharoh.

[Radrook]

Originally Posted by RobRoy

Which structures defy explanation? There are certainly structures that are marvels to behold, but none that defy reasonable, mundane explanation. Multiple explanations at that, and far more reasonable than half-angelic giants moving about stone for Pharoh.

Certain documentaries I've watched concerning the archaeological sites of Muchu Pichu, Stone Henge, and the Egyptian pyramids, expressed great doubt that humans could maneuver such massive rocks around that way with the technology available at that time.


Maybe their bafflement rubbed off on me.


LOL

[RobRoy]

Originally Posted by Radrook

Certain documentaries I've watched concerning the archaeological sites of Muchu Pichu, Stone Henge, and the Egyptian pyramids, expressed great doubt that humans could maneuver such massive rocks around that way with the technology available at that time.


Maybe their bafflement rubbed off on me.

Maybe it has. In my experience, such “documentaries” are look toward sensationalism to increase ratings, rather than uncover truths or express plausible explanations.

No harm, no foul of course. While we have a great number of potential theories on how such sites were made (although I’ll admit I’d never heard that Machu Picchu was a site that had any doubt of its construction) they are just that, theories. No one actually knows how those sites were created or what actual methods were employed. Still, there are many plausible ones that do not rely on mythical intervention to create the sites.

It’s interesting to consider alternative explanations and even apply them as fictional accounts.

[Michael]

Well, if "defy explanation" means we cannot explain how those structures were built, I have to say that Radrook's use is correct. We still don't know how the Egyptians built the pyramids (or even how they erected obelisks).

[RobRoy]

Originally Posted by Michael

Well, if "defy explanation" means we cannot explain how those structures were built, I have to say that Radrook's use is correct. We still don't know how the Egyptians built the pyramids (or even how they erected obelisks).

Sorry Michael, while we don’t know exactly the method by which the stones were moved into place, we do know where they were quarried, how they were shipped and we have plenty of evidence that points to likely suspects of construction. They hardly “defy explanation”. The Egyptian pyramids of the 4th Dynasty (Khufu, Khafre and Menkaure) didn’t suddenly appear, they were the culmination of efforts over many centuries. We still have their predecessors to view so we know a good deal about how they were constructed and how the techniques improved over time. From mastabas to the step pyramids to the 4th Dynasty pyramids we know and love today, we can see the progression of architectural and engineering understanding. Further, we have illustrations left to us by the builders themselves, such as the Tomb of Djehutihotep (sledge technique), and we have the writings of Herodotus and Diodorus (though contradictory accounts) which tell us of ramp and lever techniques. Archeologists have also unearthed cradle-like machines that appear to have been employed in pyramid construction.

Scientists can’t agree as to how the 4th Dynasty pyramids were constructed, but they don’t “defy explanation”. There are plenty of well-researched, well-supported and highly plausible theories. There’s just no YouTube videos we can watch.

[august]

How about "defy easy explanation agreed on by all?" Oh ye hair-splitters and syntax-parsers.....

[RobRoy]

Originally Posted by august

How about "defy easy explanation agreed on by all?" Oh ye hair-splitters and syntax-parsers.....

Oh yeah, sure, they certainly do that. I certainly prefer to eschew verbose obfuscation, but it seems pretty clear what Radrook was aiming at. It’s an interesting theory, and I’ve done some fictional writing on the Nephilim myself (because, ya know, human-angel hybrid=coolness). But there’s no reason to go into the mythical to figure out how something happened.

Scientist can’t agree on the cause of the dinosaurs’ extinction, but it doesn’t “defy explanation”.

[august]

Originally Posted by RobRoy

I’ve done some fictional writing on the Nephilim myself (because, ya know, human-angel hybrid=coolness).

You need to check out the Casper Van Dien opus The Fallen Ones. As its star observed, "I thought it was intelligently written, for a 42-foot-tall mummy movie."

[inked]

Nephilim

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Nephilim

Nephilim definition

(Gen. 6:4; Num. 13:33, R.V.), giants, the Hebrew word left untranslated by the Revisers, the name of one of the Canaanitish tribes. The Revisers have, however, translated the Hebrew gibborim, in Gen. 6:4, "mighty men."
Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary
__________________________________________________ _____

http://thesaurus.com/browse/Nephilim?__utma=1.310892401.1269916155.1274312623. 1278707254.5&__utmb=1.4.9.1278708829636&__utmc=1&_ _utmx=-&__utmz=1.1271558988.2.2.utmcsr=themcj.com|utmccn= %28referral%29|utmcmd=referral|utmcct=/&__utmv=-&__utmk=262306956

Check out the left-hand "Related Searches" for stuff.

I did not see "human-angel hybrid=coolness" in the list, so RR, ya need to get busy!

[RobRoy]

Originally Posted by august

You need to check out the Casper Van Dien opus The Fallen Ones. As its star observed, "I thought it was intelligently written, for a 42-foot-tall mummy movie."

Looks . . . mediocre . . . but interesting.

Originally Posted by inked

I did not see "human-angel hybrid=coolness" in the list, so RR, ya need to get busy!

The Nephilim were on the earth in those days – and also after [the Flood] – when the sons of God [angels] went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown. (Genesis 6:4)

What’s fun about the Nephilim is that because of the ambiguous nature of the etymology, you can pretty much pick and choose how you want them to appear when you’re working on a fictional story. I liked the idea that they were angel-human hybrids; offspring based on a forbidden union, so that’s what I worked with.