Posted by: graemebird | November 26, 2009

THE MYSTERY OF THE PYRAMIDS SOLVED.

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.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. “Citizen Ergas is in the Australian today with one of his magnificent op-eds. He denounces Citizen Hamilton, and then changing metaphor denounces Comrades Gillard and Rudd too.”

    There is the spirit. Well it looks like I have a very nasty thread to take private. We just try to appeal to the righteous side of people on this blog when we abuse them. Its not a putdown to their entire character. Of course we also try to work without the delusion of the over-emphasis of ones influence.

    I can tell you all straight up. Anyone showing some love to Henry and to Jennifer right now is likely to land in my good books.

  2. See the Japanese wave. Now imagine something far worse than that and worldwide. No levee could hold up under that attack. Even a levee built with huge stones and in order to withstand ice age seas.

    But canals and pyramid factories on the banks of those canals could withstand such a disaster. And so thats what we have to aim for.

  3. The Usurper Obama, gives Gaddaffi, the dictator ….. A GREEN LIGHT. Everything he said emphasised to Gaddafi that Gaddari has to move quickly and kill as many opponents as he can. The constant encouragement was like a drumbeat.

    The Ron Paul option would have been much better. Just refer matters to Congress. It is, under the constitution, the job of Congress to get stroppy.

    As soon as you announce that you are going to the UN, you are saying that you don’t want to kill regime leadership and split the country up into various Emirates. Ergo you now have no influence.

    Well what about this no-fly-zone story? Thats a guarantee that not only does Gaddafi reside in glorious security, but also not a hair on the head of any of his soldiers will be harmed. An iron clad guarantee of security for both the leadership AND their thugs.

    What about all this talk of condemnation of the Arab world and the UN? More confessions of weakness. What are they all going to do? Sit around and further blacken the Gaddafi family name?

    The very act of talking about all these crowds of people TALKY-TALK TALKING …… is telling anyone who wants to listen that they are guaranteeing that there be no attacks on Gaddafis person.

    If you want to influence the dictator actions are larger than words. And should come ahead of anyone talking too much. What would get Gaddafis attention is people being blow to bits in front of his eyes. What are people willing to do to get Gaddafi to do ? ….. what?

    Do what? What do they want Gaddaffi to do … Why … and how are the actions formed to break his will and make him determined to follow the path that would have been made for him?

    And what is all this trash-talk about the mission being clear? Do they want to get Gaddafi, and his dysfunctional family, and feed them naked to the city dogs, in front of hysterical crowds made up of the people that they have oppressed?

    What is this clear mission?

    To stop Gaddafi, killing civilians, by means of a no-fly zone?

    You have two wills. Gaddafis …… and someone elses. Whose? I don’t know. Perhaps Mr Sarkozy will show some sort of determination. Two fists push against eachother. One wins one loses. If you contest the will of Gaddafi, supposing you want to win, you’ve got to mean it. You’ve got to focus on the other fellow backing down or dying in the most humiliating way. But how can this be effected when no mobilisation is happening, you have ruled out unilateral action, you have ruled out ground forces, you have ruled out over-flying planes killing anyone ……

    This is all pretty bizzare.

  4. Bird, have you come up with your alternate hypothesis (photon free) on why glass is transparent?

    Why are you avoiding this, not just avoiding but trying to erase the question?

    IN YOUR OWN WORDS DESCRIBE WHY YOU THINK GLASS IS TRANSPARENT. IN FACT IT IS NOT TRANSPARENT TO ALL ELECTRO-MAGNETIC ENERGY. IT TENDS TO WEED OUT SOME OF THE SPECTRUM. I WOULD SAY ITS REGULAR STRUCTURE ALLOWS THE WAVE TO GET THROUGH. WHATS YOUR EXPLANATION?

    • IN YOUR OWN WORDS DESCRIBE WHY YOU THINK GLASS IS TRANSPARENT.

      Light, as photons, behaves in different ways, namely reflection, absorption, and transmission.

      Metals reflect strongly because of their ability to absorb and reemit a photon without losing energy to multiple electron orbital drops. Since glass is not metallic, and has few “free” electrons, only about 4% of the photons will be reflected.

      Photons that are not reflected will interact with the molecules of the matter. If the molecules of the substance in question have electron shells with energy differences that match the energy of the photon, then that photon will be absorbed, and it’s energy will serve to heat up the material.

      Glass so happens to not have energy transitions that match the energy of visible photons, so photons are absorbed then reemitted by each of the atoms it hits.

      IN FACT IT IS NOT TRANSPARENT TO ALL ELECTRO-MAGNETIC ENERGY. IT TENDS TO WEED OUT SOME OF THE SPECTRUM.
      Ok, I knew that before, so what? We are talking about visible light.

      I WOULD SAY ITS REGULAR STRUCTURE ALLOWS THE WAVE TO GET THROUGH. That is your explanation? LOL. Why doesn’t the regular structure of graphite for instance not allow “waves” to get through. What is the mechanism for this? What are the interactions in the material that cause this? Waves of what anyway?

      WHATS YOUR EXPLANATION?
      I’ve given it, now are you going to back up your claims with actual evidence? Maybe you need to get in touch with one of your pseudoscience heroes, the criminal crackpot Bill Gaede for some sort of answer. That answer will be wrong, but at least it might be better than “Aw gee, I’m not sure but I think that the wave gets through somehow……”

      • Come off it. Thats not an explanation. Thats an incantation.

  5. Yeah its definitely the regular structure that does it. Like with ice. Graphite won’t let the light through, but diamond potentially could when the carbon is arranged in the way that crystals tend to arrange themselves.

    Note that in your own screed, should you replace the word “photons” with the word light (as in waves of light) most of the explanation sounds equally as good. So the photon theory doesn’t shed light on anything.

  6. Under the Gaede theory, you have orthoganol ropes between protons. These ropes explain both light and gravity. So its very easy to see how light could make it through undamaged or how it may get scattered. Being as there is a pathway for the light to make it through. But there is no good way to provide a fantastic explanation without a lot of work. Still its easy to see how the potential is there for a good explanation without making up entirely impossible entities. And the photons don’t provide an explanation. Just a pseudo-explanation.

  7. “Glass so happens to not have energy transitions that match the energy of visible photons, so photons are absorbed then reemitted by each of the atoms it hits.”

    Absorbed …. then re-emitted. What your theory says is that the photons are destroyed …… and then created ex-nihilo.

    Public servants so hate manufacturing and they are so alien to REAL production processes that they are deluded into thinking that things can be created superfast. This was always bullshit and always will be bullshit.
    …………………………………………

    Absorbed …. then re-emitted. What your theory says is that the photons are destroyed …… and then created ex-nihilo. With absolutely no explanation as to how these photons, can manifest the full spectrum of wave-lengths.

    The transparency of glass refutes the theory of the photon. Since how is the initial order meant to be maintained with this massively faster than light process of destruction, and creation going on?

    Obviously, that the order is maintained proves that the light is not destroyed then re-created. But that it moves through with barely any interference at all.

    Now for a more fullsome debunking consider the case of cesium crystals. Experimenters have been able to send light through these crystals at many times the speed of light. For very tiny distances, FROM A HUMAN POINT OF VIEW … but in relation to individual atoms the distances are massive.

    Under your wrong theory the cesium atoms absorb (totally destroy) the photons, and recreate new ones, and they do this by having electrons jumping around. Electrons jumping hither and yon cannot create or destroy anything in the real world. But never mind.

    Under your wrong theory the electrons have to jump around vastly faster than light …. and creation and destruction must also go on much faster than the speed of light …… with no possible reason for any of this idiocy.

    This would be inexplicable. But it can be explained by the iron law of the public service. TAXEATERS ALWAYS REINFORCE AND BUILD ON THEIR MISTAKES.

    And thats really the end of this story.

    • OF COURSE HE’S WRONG. ARE YOU CLAIMING THAT ELECTRONS JUMP UP AND DOWN BETWEEN MAKE-BELIEVE SHELLS, MADE OF NOTHING, AT MANY TIMES THE SPEED OF LIGHT FOR NO REASON? AND THAT THIS JUMPING ABOUT CREATES AND DESTROYS PARTICLES, WITH NO CAUSAL REASON TO BELIEVE THIS????

      THIS IS ALL IDIOTIC FANTASY.

      • OF COURSE HE’S WRONG. ARE YOU CLAIMING THAT ELECTRONS JUMP UP AND DOWN BETWEEN MAKE-BELIEVE SHELLS, MADE OF NOTHING, AT MANY TIMES THE SPEED OF LIGHT FOR NO REASON? AND THAT THIS JUMPING ABOUT CREATES AND DESTROYS PARTICLES, WITH NO CAUSAL REASON TO BELIEVE THIS????

        THIS IS ALL IDIOTIC FANTASY.

  8. IRDSNEWWORLD
    Posted Sunday, 20 March 2011 at 4:48 pm | Permalink
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “Both are right and both are wrong. Just not at the same time.”

    Yes and the Pope is infallible ……. some of the time. Here we see the case of a priesthood, not subject to outside audit, has decided that logic does not apply to itself. This is typical public sector behavior and it need not surprise us.

    Its true that sometimes we wind up finding models useful when it sober reality we ought to know they are nonsense, or at best a “work-in-progress” For example we could use the standard model of the atom and photons, to show why light energy is only substantially transferred to thermal energy where we have substantial air pressure. But no matter how useful we find this model we must never forget that its fundamentally rubbish and a good example of the public service at work.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: