Summary Of Why We Know What We Know About The Pyramids.
1. There is virtually no evidence that the Pyramids were built by Pharoanic Egypt. Besides perhaps some tiny amount of Pharoanic propaganda to that effect.
2. The Pharoahs could not have built them. This is a physical impossibility. No-one who had the ability to build the pyramids would have built them out of stones, IF THEY HAD TO MAKE THE STONES FROM SCRATCH.
3. We already know the Sphinx is many thousands of years older than the quakademia reckons the pyramids are supposed to be. This has been proven. Why then assume that the Pyramids are newer, or a great deal newer than the Sphinx? The rains stopped after 5100 years ago. The Sphinx was severely rain damaged. That proves the Sphinx predates Kemi civilisation right there.
4. Those people who built the pyramids, whoever they were, were higher tech than us. By virtue of the fact that they were capable of building the pyramids. So why did they use the impractical big stones? And as well even bigger ones for various temples, and still larger ones for the stones at Baalbeck?
5. Technology is imbedded in capital accumulation and capital update. The economy progresses via the lengthening of the structure of production wherein the GDR grows disproportionate to GDP. This higher tech society would have undoubtedly, therefore, had a longer structure of production, in the general, then what we have. Even though the number of humans on earth may have been good deal less than now.
6. That being the case the “Velanovins” (my phrase) would have hit up against a constraint where energy usage was becoming ridiculously disproportionate to GDP.
7. Squaring that circle would find that society becoming built up on the coast. Since shipping is so powerfully effective for heavy transport.
8. But to be built up along the coast with your factories with ready access to the water, you would need the big stone blocks and in fact nothing else would do. Your output ought to be sent straight onto the water. So your factory needs to be above the water. You need a levee made of these big stone blocks.
9. But in fact the sea level during the glacial period is highly variable. And the seas astonishingly rough. Hence the high-tech society, far more high-tech then our own (as proven by them building the pyramids), would have had an almost insatiable need for these really big blocks. And they would have cut these blocks to exploit the ocean more fully, over hundreds of years.
10. But the Quarternary extinction event would have destroyed all their cities and put the big blocks underwater. The few survivors would have had immense capital goods per capita (although most of it in need of repair) and all these big blocks to retrieve underwater.
11. These guys had suffered from the Vela Supernova explosion. Only 800 light-years from us. So these guys had been through a shocking gamma ray attack, massive flooding, earthquakes, tsunamis, repeated coronal mass-ejections …. and so forth … and perhaps even some sort of earth crustal displacement. They would have to believe that they had to build some sort of sanctuary against the possibility of this utter disaster happening again.
12. The Ocean would now be regarded as the gravest danger to the Velanovins. So is it not clear what they did? Is it not obvious? What would you have done?
They repaired some of their gear. Set up a convoy of stones from their now submerged cities. And still built close to the water. But close to the less threatening waters of the Nile. So all these survivors from North-East Africa, probably West Europe and other coastal peoples with direct shipping access to North-East Africa. All of them would have formed this consensus that building next to the water is what it was all about (since what else would they have known) but lets build next to the less threatening water of the Nile.
So they built a sanctuary against another supernova attack. Thats what this whole deal is about. Nothing else accounts for it. But life on the banks of the Nile could not replicate the same powerful technological effectiveness that they must have had prior to the disaster. As well they would have become addicted to the pseudo-subsidy of cannibalising capital goods built prior to the disaster. And an economy based on cannibalising old capital goods would have to prove unsustainable. Such a way of doing things would eventually lend itself to statism and decay. It looks like there really was a golden age after all.
Seriously. It simply could not have happened any other way. There is no close competing paradigm.
If I’m right in this there are serious implications. And serious implications for the alleged mystery of Fermi’s Paradox. Those that are thinking that the big extinction event (comprising a biblical cavalcade of misfortunes) is coming soon, appear to be heading for the hills. We all have to do what we can. But the serious solution is to design some sort of structure that could survive independent of whether it is situated inland or by the ocean. We need a generic design of building, such that when the damage is done we can move these surviving structures right down to the coast, and have them in array, so as to immediately have the basis to start again with a structure of production that can be readily lengthened. As a hint to what that generic structure will look like: If the Velanovins had built more pyramids before the disaster, perhaps they would not have had the felt need, to build these giant white elephant pyramids after that disaster. We can and we must do better. Or they and their high-tech coastal civilisation will have been decimated in vain.