The Nonsense of Machine Marks, Advanced Ancient Technology, PRECISION Egyptian Stone Vases
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 08. 2021
- #unchartedx #lostancienthightechnology #debunk
WILL ANY OF THEM TAKE THE CHALLENGE, TO MAKE LOST ANCIENT HIGH TECHNOLOGY ARTEFACTS IN REAL TIME. Instead of censoring the information from their audience of truth seekers.
Uncharted X video- he includes the Sabu/Schist Disk as an example of Precision
• Incredible Precision S...
Flinders Petrie - On the Mechanical Methods of Ancient Egyptians
ia800708.us.archive.org/view_...
Archive including the photos of the stone vases escavated at Saqqara by Jean Phillipe Lauer
patrickchapuis.photoshelter.c...
Scientists Against Myths on drilling granite and the marks left by free abrasive powders. The knowledge the likes of Uncharted X go out of their way to hide in order to find the truth.
• Making Egyptian Drill ...
antropogenez.ru/drilling/
Playlist of most of the experiments in granite that anyone can replicate even though the Lost Ancient High Technologists are still telling people it's impossible
• Ancient Stone Working ...
As a Minecraft Master Mason, I can assert you: It's impossible to create these objects without advanced machines, but even with advanced machines I could not create these. As objects in Minecraft are not circular but made of square blocks.
It’s impossible to make an iPhone with primitive and even modern technology
@@SacredGeometryDecoded Well, _obviously_ it's reverse-engineered alien tech from the Roswell crash. 🤣
Not so sure about that. Some Russian guys were able to carve slate and sandstone into vessels, though I'm not sure about how they fared with diorite, which is pretty high on the Moh-scale.
🤣😂
@@emmetsweeney9236 Scientists against Myths. Took 6 months of stone hammering.
It would be interesting if you both had a long form discussion on it. I have been interested in this topic for a while, and there has been some new information coming out lately with the scans of one of these vases.
can you send me the new information, i also am very interested in this.
@@user-we7od8ql4x czcams.com/video/PrhFnai2TGs/video.html
@@user-we7od8ql4x I have been to see a few examples of these vases. They show exceptional craftsmanship. I would suggest if at all possible go and look for yourself and then decide. I study engineering and plainly to me they are machined…no two ways about it. Please let that not detract from your own observations and research. I am but a student. I would also suggest you read Petrie’s actual work rather than just this or the unchartedX videos. Both videos are rather sensationalist, as is the nature of the internet (note for example that had the author of this video no integrity, they might remove this comment). Do the proper research and make your own conclusion. That is the correct scientific way. Good luck!
@@oliverdobson5199
*_"I study engineering and plainly to me they are machined"_*
You need to ask for a refund. And no one would ever let you touch these things to examine them closely.
But you ARE correct, but you just don't realise why.
They ARE machined, by hand tools and hand-powered ancient Egyptian machines, using wheels, levers and so on.
{:o:O:}
@@ansfridaeyowulfsdottir8095 Plausible that high precision machines can still be made using multiple people for power. The question is then can you make 40,000 of these, at this level of precision? Maintaining radius around the handle areas is extremely difficult since you cannot turn them in the traditional way (as the handles are in the way…). There are also concerns regarding the material and cutting blade material, the fine smoothed surface of extremely hard material with large crystal inclusion. Pieces manufactured with impressive thinness. Add all of this to a time period where they are literally not given credit with the invention of the wheel yet and I’m just not at all convinced.
We need more analysis and scans of the existing collections. This seems to now be happening.
I’ve seen laser scans of an Egyptian vessel that is extremely “precise”. Within a few thousands of an inch of perfect symmetry. And how do you explain the work done on megalithic scale with an equal amount of “precision”?
I don’t doubt they were capable of grinding soft stone with some copper tubes but that is not explaining the massive status that are very symmetrical. I’ve seen them first hand and will attest to the accuracy. I measured some and they are exact, to the mm.
Drilling a hole is not the same as turning a vase, making the top flange perpendicular to 0.005", making the handle holes perfectly parallel to 0.001", making the space between the handles perfectly match each other side to side. Also at the top of the vase in some cases, the inside of the bowl is parallel to the outside of the bowl. This would be impossible to do by hand. We would not to be able to replicate this today without advanced machines.
Advanced machines popped up out of the Earth already made? Or where they, and still are in many case, calibrated with hand made items such as precision squares and surface plates.
joesph Whitworth would be someone looking up, he's the father of modern precision and had to hand make the first precision items.
@@SacredGeometryDecodedyou are really quite reprehensible
@@0001nikalol. It hurts being told the truth, eh? This guy's trying to save you, bro. The other guys are trying to bend you over.
@chiznowtch
How did they make these make such precise vases tho.
That to built machines that can do precise work you first need to have some other precise items to calibrate them doesn't explain or even address how the vases have been made so precise.
@kevinkonig3892 Excellent precision requires excellent craftsmanship and excellent techniques and incredible patience and effort. I don't buy the idea that it requires magic, highly advanced power tools, highly advanced metrology tools, aliens, or whatever. I also don't yet buy the idea that this one particular vase, which no one knows where it came from and no one except team UX has measured, is legit. I am shocked that so many people are completely bought in on this vase.
A baseball bat wrapped in ox leather with a flywheel drill powered by a leather belt by hand throw in some sand and water include beer as an incentive plus time and I can see these done on a mass scale. Now I can see where all that sand came from when they found those 40,000 plates, shoot, they used to make prisoners turn big rocks into little rocks in modern times, I imagine there were some enterprising task masters in ancient times.
This work wasn't done by slaves. It was done by workers. The payment workers receive is sufficient reward. The faster you can produce such items, the more money per hour you make. Humans are very enterprising when it comes to dirty hacks and shortcuts to achieve a goal. This is the basis of capitalism; it applies capital, and expertise, to produce increasing profit for reduced effort.
@@Chris.Davies That makes more sense than super advanced lost technology. Given the need, humans tend to find a way.
Beer plus young fella’s get any job done. Vodka not so much, that’s good to get young fella’s tearing it all back down again.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded Like they say about too much strong coffee, "Work faster! Make more mistakes!"
On the UnchartedX channel, they go over a pre-dynastic vase which was subjected to laser imaging. The results of the scan shows the level of precision and symmetry on that vase is truly remarkable. I'm curious about your thoughts
@LectionesScientiaArtis honestly I watched quite a few UnchartedX videos among others relating to lost ancient high technology and found them very interesting and compelling. I came across this channel and his refutations, which I also found to be compelling. The video which I'm talking about is rather recent, and would seemingly show evidence of high precision. The vase was subjected to 3-D laser imaging, the same imaging scans used in the development and manufacturing of aerospace parts. Through this scan a level of precision and symmetry is presented which is astounding.
@LectionesScientiaArtis I think that there is a point of precision which even skilled craftsmen can't reach when working with solely hand tools. If I remember correctly the relationship between the axises on the vase was only off 1/100 of an inch, less than a hairs width, and the difference between two parallel surfaces was 1/1000 of an inch. The scan is available online for download, and shows this precision consistently throughout. To me all this seems pretty compelling.
@@darienkinne1347 there's a big difference between using just hand tools and using a lathe with hand tools. Using a lathe makes it impossible to make the object non symmetrical as is also the case with tube drilling. You may not get the tube hole orientated perfectly in the object but the tube hole will always be symmetrical in itself.. that's the nature of turning things... revolutionary!
@@buzzandjim4265 a lathe would be impossible to use in the space between the handles on either side of this vase. The scan shows a consistency across the vase, which would I think mean a single tooling method, being that switching between tools can lead to minor errors. A lathe I do not think was that tool, at least not on the outside with said handles
@@buzzandjim4265 where are these damm tubes literally none anywhere we found the chisels and pounders
Much of the 'proof' was anecdotal or piecemeal, but there was some good examples of how we underestimate human ingenuity. The talent of the ancients was remarkable.
Yet, the relief carved by the master on granite was nothing like those of the Early Dynastic. Night and day.
They were masters.
Some of the points about precision being exaggerated haven't aged well given the more recent scanning and analysis of one of these granite stone vases.
Stone vessels crafted with precision and found strewn about in broken piles under a pyramid. The volume of 'em found, that's a signature characteristic that interests me. Piles and piles. It makes me think of us today with our almost literal mountains of used plastic bottles, cans and containers you can find strewn everywhere.
Somebody, at some time, had an ability and ease in creating vessels in stone that we equal today in plastics. And the sort of ease and sheer volume found implies an underlying support system was well in place to meet the needs of the average every day. Just like all the manufacturing infrastructure is in place today that allows our tsunami of waste detritus.
It makes me wonder. If we fell, today, due to some unforeseeable or unstoppable catastrophe, if our civilization was obliterated almost totally from species memory, would our descendants collect, use and venerate all our plastic vessels (and metal cans) that are sure to remain? Or at the very least wonder at? Especially if they were starting, again, from level zero? Yeah....probably.
John~
American Net'Zen
A museum of 20th century porcelain toilets
I think you’re right. I think the ancient Egyptians came across a lot of these things and were in just as much amazement as we are as to how perfect a lot of there work was. Look at the massive boxes underneath the Serapeum. It’s insane how massive, yet perfectly made they are, let alone how they would have moved those underground and maneuvered them around corners with almost no room. Very interesting stuff.
Spot on. The volume of these things is astounding. I have been to see some they are precision made. I study engineering and if I put one of these on my lecturers desk and said in 12 months somebody made it by hand they’d still laugh at me. The ‘machining disproved’ video where some “scientist” makes a poor quality stone replica, in the course of many months, which is subsequently cracked due to the primitive methods, and is also not made of material with large crystalline inclusion, is if anything evidence to the contrary. They made these things with relative ease. Some form of primitive lathe all the way up to (if the radial concurrence between the handles really is as good as the scans are said to show) something like a 5 axis cnc machine, or whatever the equivalent was x thousand years ago. Sure some of the vases aren’t perfect. You can see clearly. But many of them are eerily close. Weird eh
Hell yeah they would.
It just doesn't seem that way because of all the self-hate and anti-humanism in general that our culture practices today.
Whoever built the vases built them to last. The oldest single piece stone pot has been dated to a grave in turkey over 9k years ago. In 9k years, none of our metal or plastic will still be here. In truth we have nothing today that will stand the test of time and baffle future generations, because we dont build things with that intent. The only things we have that will still be here in a thousand years are made out of easily worked material like ceramics or concrete.
Has anyone been able to get a digital scan on some of these? This would show how precise, or not, these objects are.
Why not use a micrometer or a caliper?
Yes they have and it is just mind blowing czcams.com/video/WAyQQRNoQaE/video.html
Uncharted x has 2 guys on his recent vid who scanned and measured a vase. They break down the methods used to measure it and then the results. They are unbelievably precise
Yes, Christopher Dunn and other Aerospace Engineers have thoroughly analyzed some of these bowls, and they are remarkably precise. Equivalent to modern CNC lathe machining. They have no idea how the insides were hollowed out to create an incredibly uniform thickness throughout. It would require a custom made device. 0% chance this type of accuracy is possible with copper hand tools. This goof has been proven wrong by real engineers with proper equipment.
I mean these things would be a lot clearer if you just made a full jar with lugs and had it tested with the same machines as unchartedX
obviously how can we not mention the fact that these vases date back to the first dynasty and after that they weren't made anymore, maybe they were bored, and decided to make things easier, it doesn't make much sense
I'm not bothered what the bowls/vases are called. I want to see one replicate today with the tools they supposedly used back then. You only showed clips of hole making
You're not putting any effort into this. Just look around a bit
@@chiznowtch well the world is so vast, could you point to somewhere we can look?
@@odieabdlrheem1847 youtube
Some of this stuff make way more sense now, Thx for sharing
I am convinced you are right about the first point about the abrasives, but with Ben’s new video that just came out, I’m still not convinced that the whole precision argument is woo. There were some pretty incredible results from that video.
I was impressed by the video you are referring to, until I saw another vid by Night Scarab, which looks at all the details glossed over. Most people who are convinced that the ancients had backhoes, and diamond blades and CNC machines and water jets and batteries and alien assistance and whatever else, have never worked at a precision hand craft.
The striations you’ve achieved in your drilling are not spiral, they’re linear. Don’t the recovered tube drill cores display spiral striations? How do you explain the discrepancy here?
They are not spirals.
The little bits of asymmetrical aspects on the outside supports my theory that the outer portions of these vases/jars was made first. Especially since many have engravings that may have needed taps of hammers and stuff to make. It's harder to do if it's already cored out since it would be more delicate by then.
As far as hollowing it out, I don't think you'd necessarily need a perfectly bilateral and symmetrical drill per say. By nature those are hard to get into the small openings on the jars necks. I think they would have used a hook shaped bit at that point. So long as it has a pilot point on it to keep it centered it possibly they used a single arm that swept around inside them. Then they could also use a copper tube and cut slips on it sides but leave the bottom attached. Then when compressed it would flare out. I can thunk of many tricks that may work. Honestly tho I think the super tiny vase you showed that's about 2 inches is the most impressive now lol. That would definitely need a hook bit of some sort. They could have also used multi piece bits that are assembled inside the jar. Much like how romans used multi piece lugs to lift blocks using keyed out stone pocket holes. Same principle kinda. The lug when the center portion is slipped in only then fills the void and is not able to be removed. Hard to describe but it's fun to think about how it all was done. Good stuff bud
czcams.com/video/58oseo2tnFk/video.html
I tested splitting the ends method. Hollows out the interior shape as drilling drill. Do the exterior at same time to save time.
In the dishes I make at moment the tubes are home made from sheets. Not perfectly circular but drill perfect holes. The real trick is to rotate regularly so the bias in the hand drill gets cancelled out.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded yeah I watches ya do it. Good job bud
@SGD Sacred Geometry Decoded been slowly working to seeing all ya have slowly but surely lol
i watch many engineering channels like this old tony, ave etc and there are so many more on youtube. The precision they get is in thousandths of an inch, with accurate mills and lathes. They hardly leave a mark and they often form mirror finishes. That's what high technologist's aim for, not to leave scratches or tool marks. To say they used advanced techniques that we cannot replicate today is ridiculous and if the lost ancient alien technologists were so amazing, why do they leave any marks at all?
I have seen them use imperfections as evidence of machining and then say perfect is evidence of machining.
If mental gymnastics was an Olympic sport they’d win gold, silver and bronze.
I'm wearing AVE's "Skookum As Frig" tee shirt, right now.
@@CatastrophicNewEngland Ha ha brilliant love his channel, take it easy!
@Ethan R Example?
The mohs scale is just one scale? Where are the other hardness scales? There was no way to make precision objects by hand only. Look beyond modern tools and make something you're describing. To exacting detail as they did. No one on you tube has done this. They do really crappy recreations, yea the technique wields crappy results. They didn't in the past. So yea, can't be recreated
I've had debates (arguments) with people who love the debunking videos. They do not like to look at studies like this, do not like to fact check the commentary, nor do they ever visit these places or artifacts.
The biggest reason we can't get this information out is because the established academia are concerned ONLY with maintaining the status quo. Most governments and religions are founded on the idea that Ancient Sumer, Indus Valley, and Egypt were the first civilizations. The old thinking group sitting in their colleges and institutes do not like to go out in the world and research new material. To them, most of this is upstart pseudo science.
The thing I find utterly fascinating is that there is evidence for meteor strikes from the Indian Ocean, Arabian Peninsula, Egypt, the Mediterranean, and Austria, and these are being dated around 3100 BC. I especially like how ardently the establishment wants to try debunking the theories, claiming the craters found are erroneously dated or labeled.
We've been here before. The last era of Man prepared for the cataclysm; we havent.
It is incredible that a society as advanced as this one can be so egotistical about our origins. We admit our species has been this intelligent since, well, the beginning. We admit that timespan is hundreds of thousands of years, at least. We admit that the ancients were very creative and designed all sorts of cool objects. We also admit that there were other forms of the homo genus, walking the Earth with us, who had intellectual capacities on par (and maybe beyond) ours. We also admit there was crossbreeding between the species.
But we don't want to admit these peoples (whose history is unknown and extends potentially hundreds of thousands of years) could possibly have been technologically aware.
Even though we know we can design many modern amenities with stone; everything we use comes out of a stone, one way or another.
Lost tech con artists like Uncharted X made claims and challenges.
Then he ducks and censors anything that challenges him.
You are in the wrong place is you want to drop that waffle here.
The lost tech crowd are the ones covering up and concealing information.
They are liars and cowards. I am like Voldemort to them. Mentioning my name will get you blocked or shadow banned.
Move along fella. I’ve seen you in comment sections and you’re way out of your league here buddy. Standing challenge to all like you.
Come out of the comments and let’s do live stream demo in real time? That way we both do it and others follow along.
Out of the comments section and in real life.
Now grind some holes within 1000th of an inch symmetry and then carve the outside of the hole so its a 1/8th of an inch thickness with grinded outside and inside and i'll consider your points.
MOHs only measures the scratching of a material not how hard it is to break.
if we are talking about how to accuratly form/shape/sculpt a material then we care more about Hardness (MOHs) than Toghness ( how hard it is to break)
I like watching Brian Foerster and UX, but them banging on about Cataclysm, Power tools and Younger Dryas all the time wears me down a little. We probably find it difficult replicating this stuff because it’s a medium we seldom use to any great extent nowadays.....they are obviously going to be better than us at producing such items.
There's nothing in Egypt modern stone masons can't do,. Today's craftsmen can even exceed their precision and polish without using machines.
Stoneworking has always been a trade for a human being. The expertise of stoneworking has been passed down from one generation to the next for at least 165,000 generations - or 3+ million years.
During that time, improvements have been made. Stoneworkers today are superior to any stoneworkers in the past, but today they get paid a shit-ton more than they once did. Because today we don't create anything by stacking one stone on top of another, unless those stones are pre-formed concrete blocks, or bricks.
@@Chris.Davies It's only relatively modern economic systems that keep us humans from exercising our full potential to create the stone structures we could be creating.
What they should be focusing on instead of the "Hows", are the "whys" and "whens".
@@panicraptor2837 yes, i find Michaelangelo's works much more impressive in comparison. Sculptors still have a hard time replicating those. Egyptian stuff is much easier by comparison, it is much more technique than art but the former needs a synergy of both in high order which is the real mind blowing stuff. Or even stuff in asia of later periods etc fall in similar grade.
I saw the stick with fly wheel or rocks for weight and loved it. Reminded me of being a kid and playing with sticks not realizing it was the best toy i ever had,but looking back if my dad was around more he could of helped me turn it into many tools,
Much love to your work
The act like Granite is Kryptonite, soak it in water is easier to work with, thats why i think maybe they flooded the Obliesk everynight
Granitantium is the only thing harder than Wolverines claws.
I have been researching both sides for only a few months. You have changed my mind that large stones to build the pyramids and that core drilling perfect circles can be done with man made tools of the time. I would like to see someone explain the symmetry of the statues, how the faces are perfect from left to right, with this level of tooling
czcams.com/video/cwYc4W1m7WI/video.html
making giant statues including a symmetrical granite colossus made recently
I was wondering if they used beaten copper dishes to hold abrasive slurry.the curve of the dish would dictate the curve during finishing,and these "formers"would have been used on both sides leading to identical curvature.that,and very skilled draughtsmen
I would assume by a bunch of Picasso and Michaelangelo-leveled people.
@@dominicmogridge3920 23:45 the heiroglyph of the flywheel drill on the lower left certainly looks like it has bowed out edges.
@tsa3blol the sweatshop that made the fake vessel you're talking about was able to do it
Flaring out the slotted copper tool (upper right at 25:42) is a good idea. However how does one control the amount of flaring? Because you are going to have to flare the tool incrementally as you bore, and you'll have to flare it out while it is inside the jar. And then at the 1/2 (or close) you'll need to start slowly flaring back in, again while it is in the jar! I've seen other video of the jars and they ***definitely*** get wider in the inside. Then at 27:48 you say, "hollowing it out would be different story". Oh Yeah! A very different story. I see that multiple bores could be done...but man alive that would take some time, especially those bigger jars. And they found 30,000 of those jars.
they found 40,000 stone vessels and most were dishes and bowls primarily of alabaster. I can get 3-4cm an hour on harder marble. I have since made some dishes of marble and 4 hrs (2 day per person working alone- 250 working days a year x lets say just 10 people across the whole country adds up to a lot over just a decade. Yet again the average one is rather clunky and thick, i made my very first one to less than a couple of millimetres)
Finishing off a granite one at the moment, so thin as to be translucent- should be 22 hours working time on my first but half that with experience because i made some errors and spent time repairing an off centre mistake, plus wasted time by not taking full advantage os multiple drills.
The Scientists Against Myths team has been making vases includung a diorrite one but they only use bone and stone as tools. The 8 month build time will be dramatically reduced as when i start mine i will have a decent blank in a week or so. Then finishing off.
Again over a small number of workers over only a few years the number of actual detailed hard stone vases/jars which is nowhere near 30,000. There are a small number of the best examples that get shown as if they are the rule rather than the exceptions.
Anyways the dirorite one they made is thinner than most of the egyptian examples and more consistent then the best examples of vases.
Though it is possible to control the flares. By adjusting the tip it can be steered.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded still does not explain the inside working of the vases at all. The flairing tube is a clever idea, but does not work in reality to create many of the vases seen here as the tool would need to be expanded and shortened while being inside the workpiece.
@@Naatti922 it does work in objective reality. There are finer points to mastering it.
A lot of people have said it can’t be done or it won’t work when it comes to stone working. They’ve been wrong every single time.
Since then I’ve done many more experiments. I actually know what I’m talking about through experience.
You have no experience and a lack of understanding basic concepts since you’ve never worked with those materials.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded I've worked with said materials for years.
You made holes and have not provided any evidence that what you're saying is possible. Provide me with a video or images of vases that you made which are in the dimensions of those found at saccara. I bet you can't.
You're just gathering views by making bold claims and then not backing them up.
@@Naatti922 I am making a collection and will release all at once so people learn to avoid the mistakes I went through.
I should include a section with all the “expert” comments including fools like yourself. You have no idea what you’re talking about and I don’t believe you have any experience because that would mean you are incompetent.
People like yourself insisted many previous things are “impossible because I have experience”.
Wrong every single time.
I’m not just making them buddy I am learning how to make them quickly.
if you want to know about stone carving ..do not ask a "scientist" ask a stone carver.
2.5 millions stones that fit perfectly together. Still can't give an answer.
3.5 million stones? He internal blocks of great pyramid and the others are rough hewn and gaps are big between them. Only facing stones are dressed and even then they aren’t perfect.
Who told you this perfect fit nonsense?
I can answer a lit of things but the problem is people have Ben brainwashed by the “precision” BS.
Ironically, folks that believe uncharted x and Hancock are basically admitting they have less of a clue. There is so much more you need to explain if advanced tech is in play. Not only do you still not have a way to explain how it was built, you now have to explain where these people went, why there is no physical, agricultural, technological or genetic footprint of them anywhere and how THEY developed these advanced tools. It’s like how flat earthers make very to explain phenomena very hard to explain with their silly premise.
@@AIenSmithee yeah, but they have their rhetoric down perfectly.
Another one is that it requires a block every 3 minutes, which is true but implies that only one team is working. There is room for 500 teams to be working at once. Actually much more but being conservative.
The better way would be to say it takes 2.5 to 3 days per block per team.
Or another one, how did they get 2.5 million blocks 480 feet high? Well they only needed to get one block that high, the capstone. While the bulk of the pyramid is in its lower quarter, by the time they were half way up they were over 85% complete.
I love that bit you have of Hancock saying a ramp can only be ten degrees (rules of physics). That line actaully comes form Dr Mustafa of EGypt, a physician who went on to become a paranormal tv show host. ;-)
I couldn't begin to tell you how many "experienced" stone masons there are saying you can't do this or that either. stuff i was able to do as a non stone mason on my first attempt.
czcams.com/video/XY6SUTPV018/video.html
For some of those granite bowls it’s clear a lathe was used. At some point in the process they probably used leather with quartz sand and water to mimic sandpaper. I’m convinced there were stronger steal tools made from meteorite that the higher leveled stone masons used.
The copper tubes and Egyptian stone drill is a lathe. Only difference is the tool moves in regards to stone rather than the stone being rotated onto the tubes.
If you look up Scientists Against Myths channel they make vases/bowls and do use a simple lathe at times as well. But it still comes down to rotating and grinding.
Exactly, it's very similar to a lathe, but the results it produces are just a little bit more wobbly and it causes undercuts when the copper tip flares. This is exactly what you see when you look at the bowls, something that is like a lathe, but not quite as good.
they might even had their own version of sandpaper.
as of today, some knife makers still follow a century old practice of building abrasive wheels out of wood and leather, coated in a mix of hide glue and abrasive minerals.
You're right. They certainly hard iron tools, as some have actually been found, and iron is mentioned with great frequency in the Pyramid Texts.
Is it possible that these granite pots and bowls and statues were made inside the Kings Chamber inside the Great Pyramid❓️ They could put chunks of Granite above a mold of a pot or bowl or statue and heat up the chamber and then lower airtight stones down into the 2 shafts going down into the King's Chamber to increase the pressure inside the King's Chamber to replicate the pressures found deep underground where granite naturally forms❓️That's why these pots and bowls ans statues are not found anywhere else in the world.
You can actually cut granite, fyi. I'm a stonecarver and we use tungsten carbide tipped chisels to cut everything from limestone to granite. Have to sharpen it every ten minutes with the hard stones but it does work. We do use anglegrinders to get the bulk off and as you note they 'cut' by abrasion. But the surface can be cut with chisels. Not that anyone pre-20th century had access to tungsten carbide though!
Thanks for the video, very interesting! Regarding the measurements provided in the recent video on unchartedx where they scanned a small vase, the explanation would be that the vase is not an original Egyptian vase but a modern replica, correct? Or are the measurements provided doable with the methods you provide here?
The vase from private collection. A friend of Chris Dunn who has been a lost high tech fan.
I will address that soonish. I am currently making stone vessels and improving my skills and efficiency. I have shown in previous videos how Chris Dunn has fabricated experiments so I would be very dubious of anything he says. He has the means to fix a vase to those tolerances and a history of being deliberately dishonest.
You can definitely get very very close with basic techniques. I would stop short of that extreme level of precision.
Once I have a few more completed pieces and have reached higher efficiency I will post detailed how to videos as well as all the raw footage.
Though given that one vase that’s been in hands of people with means and motive has that high level I am very suspicious. What’s the chances that they have a one off and their very first and only example is the most perfect.
czcams.com/video/XzN8wtBF2Kw/video.html
auto translate from russian to get the details
They measured a series of vases, they have the same signatures as the one shown by Uncharted X, especially the interiors.
The replica made with bone, stone and wood tools is actually higher quality than these examples.
Thanks a lot Alan and keep up the good work. Hope you’re also having fun retro engineering ancient techniques.
I notice that the evidence of lost high technology tends to not survive scrutiny so far and I’d err on an explanation like the one you suggest.
On the other hand, I find the argument for extending the timeline of the existence of human societies comparable in terms of technology to the dynastic Egyptians as we know them, further back in time, quite convincing and likely to be true. Curious if you share the sentiment?
@@SacredGeometryDecoded thats not really explaining the point saying the vase is a fake is a cop out, as you cant just stick a block of granite on a lathe today and replicate it, are you saying its plastic ? 😂
@@SacredGeometryDecoded The chance is 0. They've now analyzed multiple vases, and they show similar levels of precision. You are simply wrong. The vases were not done with hand tools, and certainly not done with copper.
Obviously some craftsman were better than others. Just grinding a straight hole is one thing, dry expanding the grinding into oval shapes and oblong internal shapes. Then what about the outside. They have the same internal and opposite shapes. Try doing this by hand.
I'm wondering if you've seen unchartedx new video on precision. It seems pretty convincing but I admit I'm no expert. I'd love to hear your take as I respect that you've taken the time to actually do experiments and debunk claims in the past.
its convincing, because its his job to convince people. he doesnt have a good track record if it makes you feel better. i was once convinced by him and the others in that gang
@TaunTaun Rex I'm not invested or convinced one way or the other, all I'm really interested in is the truth whichever it is. It's still an open question in my mind.
I’ve got a feeling he’s either working on the rebuttal, or has gone crazy from arguing with CZcams people all the time. It looks like a full time job keeping up with the comments and experiments. Plus I would imagine he has some sort of actual job to pay the bills for his you tube hobby.
@@randylayhi Yea, its alright debunking showing someone today making some holes but I want to see more to be convinced😄
I'm really intrigued by the granite-flywheel abrasive tube drill. That is a remarakably simple and efficient way of producing the exact marks found on the artifacts, and is perfectly within the capabilities of conventional ancient technology.
Yours is the FIRST (and so far, only) channel I've stumbled across that actually reproduces "primitive" artifacts using period-accurate techniques in such a way that doesn't make a craftsman groan or scratch his head.
I'd almost given up seeing someone actually reproduce ancient technology instead of saying "rock hit rock, many slaves, much pyramid" without providing tangible, results-based solutions to seeming enigmas.
So often I've heard Egyptologists point-blanc say, "We're not interested in how these objects were made." But that just opens up the door to cranks and schizoids who find a complex, outlandish solurion because no one has provided a compellingly simple one.
You have done that with your flywheel tube drill.
The only critique/potential stumbling block (so to speak) is -- do you have an archaeological reference to that design? I fully accept that Old Kingdom craftsmen were capable of making hand-powered flywheel tube-drills -- but is there any such example from the archaeological record? Especially considering Old Kingdom Egyotians supposedly had no knowledge of the wheel -- and therefore, presumably, the flywheel?
You don't know how happy it makes me to FINALLY see some replicating these finds with period-capable technology.
It's such a research-barren field that, honestly, conspiracy theorists are no fools for swooping in and exploiting.
Thanks.
Yes many examples of them using these types of drills to make bowls and vases. Including attachment heads.
The old hieroglyph for stone masons drill is one of these as well.
There are a few cherry picked quotes of Egyptologists saying things like that but it's taken out of context. There was a study of vases where she says that the manufacture wasn't part of the study. That quote and similar have been used to claim they are not interested. There are several published works on Egyptian technology.
The Old Kingdom did have wheels such as potters wheels. There is a bit of confusion over that, they weren't using axled wheel carts like their neighbours because transport on the river and the muddy river bank better suited to sleds than wheels.
Check out the Scientists Against Myths channel, they have a scupltor making vases without even using copper. Just stone, bone and wood tools on diorite.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded Thanks for the references!
It's refreshing to see real, hands-on techniques in real-time...
Is it possible that these granite pots and bowls and statues were made inside the Kings Chamber inside the Great Pyramid❓️ They could put chunks of Granite above a mold of a pot or bowl or statue and heat up the chamber and then lower airtight stones down into the 2 shafts going down into the King's Chamber to increase the pressure inside the King's Chamber to replicate the pressures found deep underground where granite naturally forms❓️That's why these pots and bowls ans statues are not found anywhere else in the world.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded yea, the channel that still thinks obelisks were carved using the dolerite found around.... please.
@@aschnt-983 You still think they don't work? Please. They work exactly like steel tools so if you doubt that stone tools work you'll see lost unexplained mystery technology everywhere.
Alexander Column, you should look it into. Or traditional stone workers.
There's these things called patience and hard work. It built the world, now we are a species with amnesia in that we don't remember what life was like just a few generations ago.
There's a clay called Coade Stone
they form these vases out of ,
they mixture colors
to make it look like Marble
but it's harder and last longer
Someone needs to show this clip to that Australian dude that looks like Chum from Pawn Stars and has all sorts of wacky theories about ancient Egyptian technology. 🤣
What are your thoughts of the “ice cream scoop marks”? Any idea how that was done? It’s seen everywhere!
Don't hate the dolorite boulders. The scoop marks to my guess are a one worker's position. If one pounds at slavic crouch at a rock, one should expect a 'scoop mark' to appear.
Fire Setting and dolorite pounders, with a camp fire you can work granite very quickly,
czcams.com/video/CyauQ7_z-A0/video.html
There's a link in the description to a clip I use in the above video
SCAM YS EP#4 : IMPOSSIBLE DE TAILLER LE GRANITE SANS SUPER TECHNOLOGIE ATLANTE !
(Fire setting at Aswan to create 'scoop marks')
czcams.com/video/_EIUvMJKCeM/video.html
With just dolorite pounders the unfinished obelisk could be done in around 12 months with 100 people, if they used fire setting, seen elsewhere in Aswan that time would be drastically reduced.
Per Storemyer has done many studies on ancient quarry marks and techniques if you'd like to see more.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded how did they dig the test pit holes at the quarry
@@squidatsea mike Haduck masonry channel. He has some great videos including from Egypt. Shows some old timers drilling giant hole with a big stone.
I forget name but if you scroll through he has one of ancient tools with some demos on it.
Ice cream scoop marks and the smooth looking tool marks at the site in general is probably the result of the thousands of years being exposed to winds and sand, because the it's in a desert. It's like the very smooth broken glass you can find on beaches sometimes. The surface has been sand papered over thousands of years and that's why the scoop marks and the holes, trenches around the obelisk look so smooth.
It took me a minute to realize you were debunking these claims lol I laughed when he said the striations on the inside of the bowl meant it had to have been carved and not ground. If it had been carved you would expect to see more vertical lines from the material being chiseled away, not perfectly horizontal lines
You have no idea what you're talking about. carving something does not always mean with a chisel. When cutting metal or stone with an end mill if you look closely at the cutting edge of the mill you'll see that it cuts the material in a manner that can only be described as, if it's moving around the outside of the material, as carving it.
There's a joke that a topologist can't distinguish his donut from his coffee mug... too bad for LAHT physical reality is quite different... 😂
(PS the end cracked me up)
It’s crazy they would say something like that when everyday in the desert sand grinds away at limestone
do you have a video of making the vases, since they can be done very easily?
czcams.com/video/PLb6AV1EvUg/video.htmlsi=l5lav4OKYERLlbTT great example.
Thank you for putting so much effort into this. I really hope the message gets through to the public.
Thanks for watching
I kinda hope not- since the alien/flat-earth/conspiracy enthusiasts are such useful foils for reality.
@@SacredGeometryDecodedhorribly misleading video
Very interesting story!
Would you mind giving me the links of your movies in which you do various edits?
I can't find them myself.
Here's the playlist of my experiments
czcams.com/video/XY6SUTPV018/video.html
Look up the Mike Haduck Masonry channel, Scientists Against Myths also
czcams.com/video/PrhFnai2TGs/video.html
Yeah yeah, you don't need diamond to cut stone. Any Ideas on how the vases were made tho?
Way to go, a rare man indeed. Truth always comes to light. I use to fall for all that stuff but the claims just got so outlandish I lost interest. So glad you took this initiative.
Dude cant make any of the bowls....boxes.... explain the saw or scoop marks in the granite. How the 60ft rose granite columns where made to be perfect. This guy is a clown
Is it possible that these granite pots and bowls and statues were made inside the Kings Chamber inside the Great Pyramid❓️ They could put chunks of Granite above a mold of a pot or bowl or statue and heat up the chamber and then lower airtight stones down into the 2 shafts going down into the King's Chamber to increase the pressure inside the King's Chamber to replicate the pressures found deep underground where granite naturally forms❓️
@@winstonmontgomery8211 No.
@Mark Bradshaw Thanks for your opinion bud. 👍 I really do appreciate it.
You make some valid points but you can't judge symmetry from photos alone. The reasons are: 1) perspective projection (this is why the holes don't line up), 2) misalignment of the object's axis and the optical axis, 3) barrel distortion of the lens. What you show at 19:25 is not enough to make claims about symmetry. Take something which resembles a perfect sphere (e.g. a table tennis ball) and take a photo of it using your smartphone. Place the ball near the edge of the frame and it will look like a potato.
How do you carve the spindle shaped hollow of a vase and keep consistent thickness from the outside for those vases? All your demos were straight through grinding; or did I miss one where you demonstrated curved body grinding😅
You missed it, it’s there. 😂
@@SacredGeometryDecoded then put the handles on while you are at it
Ever use a dremel on something?? If you using a shaped stone or metal bit mounted horizontally such as you see with a modern lathe and you take a block of stone which you have already cored out somewhat = via holding the block as the lathe turns you can manipulate the block to carve out an interior shape. The bit does not move other than turning in place - rather you move the block this way and that to grind out an interior shape.
Now you simply remove - carefully and meticulously - stone from the outside of your block to achieve a desired shape. As an aside. Those "translucent" Egyptian vases as an example are often alabaster = and alabaster is a very soft stone. So its removal is actually not that difficult being on par with say limestone which is similarly soft. What you end up with can be polished to a translucent luster with your uniform thickness walls. Ergo you do not carve the outside and then remove stone from the inside. You rather remove the stone from the inside first - with the thick outer stone helping to prevent fracture - and only then do you remove stone from the exterior.
@@chew76 you haven’t seen the demos including making handles on diorite vases with the most primitive of primitive tools?
How about you join in and do some work too? At least repeat the experiments that have been done to start building up your skills? Or at least look at those who have taken the effort and expense to do something in search of truth.
Lost ancient high technology is a cult, a fundamentalist religion where all contrary reality is censored to protect the corrupt dogma, and the profits of the con men who make a living off lies.
@@varyolla435 No, they've achieved paper thickness on Granite and even harder stone in some of the vases. You're also describing modern techniques and power tools. These vases were made 5500 years ago, 1000 years before the pyramid. People were essentially still hunter-gatherer tribes at this point, they hadn't discovered the wheel, and didn't know mathematics, they certainly didn't have precision lathes (according to Egyptologists). You also haven't explained how they hollowed out the inside. Aerospace engineers have now analyzed multiple vases and they are remarkably precise. The wall thickness of these objects maintains a tolerance of 1-5 thousandths of an inch. Meaning they had an incredibly accurate tool for hollowing out the inside and maintaining a wall consistency only achievable with mechanical tools. You simply cannot maintain these tolerances on granite with copper and hand tools. The people who analyzed the vases are Aerospace engineers who produce parts for aircraft engines, and they are baffled. This youtuber is a layman who doesn't understand engineering tolerances and the tools needed to achieve them.
I truly believe that the lost high technologists have never set foot in a machine shop or watched stone masons work. They may learn that just because we can do better doesnt mean that it is cost effective to do so.
It’s just plain insulting to the better sculptors and masons still practicing traditional techniques. They get a few thousands views but some knucklehead, who doesn’t even understand sand paper, points at stones and gets the worlds attention and a healthy income.
you know they just put people write in the comments, like for example "wuuu I have worked 300 years as a stonemason and this impossible to achieve with modern tools". Every time.
Hi SGD
Could you make a short video showcasing the Roman alabaster crater with double curved handles, housed in the national archeological museum of Napels?
I saw it there a few months ago, before i started watching debunking videos about UnchartedX. It hit me then that he must be talking BS because that crater is a miracle.
Since they cant claim UFOs or high technology when it comes to Rome, it is the perfect showcase from history.
Greetings!
You have to check the comments under the videos of these "lost high technologists" and you will see that it's full of engineers and machinists who claim that these vases can't be done with primitive tools.
All their cherrypicked engineers and whack PhD's they cherry pick are totally blinded. Lo and behold, they also do these tours all the time that are pricey.
you make some very strong points sir. I have just learned about these amazing vessels and you've left no doubt in my mind that this would be achievable for stonemasons and craftsmen dedicated to their craft using very basic tools.
How many years would it take them? Suggest how they could cut granite to such tolerances without using diamond-tipped tools.
As suggested, watch the UnchartedX channel.
@@Kitties-of-Doom
*_"Im guessing you missed the latest video of Uncharted X"_*
Only a gullible imbecile would watch anything by UneducatedX.
He is a liar, a charlatan and a fraud and has been debunked a million times.
{:o:O:}
The trick is to not make up your mind about something when youre first starting to learn about it haha. You are describing falling into dunning Kruger....
It's hilarious how quickly LAHT folks become snobs about the relative quality of replicas v original ancient artifacts. One can do what SAM or you (SGD) do, demonstrate clearly that it IS possible to produce artifacts w/o power tools, and they sniff: "It's not as thin" or "it's not as precise" or "you can't prove that's how it was done", basically "It's not good enough to change my closed mind".
Now I can agree that a replica created by an archaeologist isn't going to be "the same", with respect to quality and accuracy, as a piece made by an artisan that was apprenticed to a sculptor, potter, or stone mason from the age of 13. DUH!!! I think it hugely disingenuous to continue to assert that the precision of a bowl or vase is "impossible" to do with hand tools, when the evidence indicates the opposite. Great video!
What was the tube drill you used made of?
Hes been saying LIKE CUTS LIKE in the entire video.. im guessing its erm.. LIKE!!
22:19 look at the smaller thing in front though…
23:12 the fact that the experimenter is able to do the work while matching the ancient depiction is pretty convincing
Is it possible that these granite pots and bowls and statues were made inside the Kings Chamber inside the Great Pyramid❓️ They could put chunks of Granite above a mold of a pot or bowl or statue and heat up the chamber and then lower airtight stones down into the 2 shafts going down into the King's Chamber to increase the pressure inside the King's Chamber to replicate the pressures found deep underground where granite naturally forms❓️That's why these pots and bowls ans statues are not found anywhere else in the world.
What was the drill tube made of? Thousands of precision vases were found in Egypt. Interestingly, the technology for producing objects like these was lost during dynastic Egyptian times. Later vessels were more crude and generally made from softer stone. Another lost technology is the production of polygonal stone architecture. Examples occur all over the world, even on Easter Island. Another display of high precision working with hard stone (like granite and basalt) to produce face fits that today are close to perfect. I've heard many theories but so far no one has reproduced any of this using the technology from those civilizations.
As a demo i once drilled granite with a pvc pipe. I make copper tubes by rolling sheets of copper.
Search on YT : From Workshop To Grave: Ancient Chinese Jades
Polygonal stone was still made relatively recently, places like Boosarmund Fortress prior to industrial revolution. Granite lightouses in UK are another with far more complex stone shapes.
Stone masons that work with apparent regular blocks still create cups and saucer to help the blocks sit.
Parthenon restoration to preserve original broken stone fit shattered pieces to new which is far far far more complex than any polygonal work. They use ancient techniques to do that.
It's just about removing stone to shape, whether steel or flint it's exactly the same process. Skilled workers.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded And how would you do that trial and error fitting with stones weighing tens of tons (Japan, Peru, Jordan, Egypt, etc.)? When Bomarsund was built steel tooling was available. And the fits, while good, are not nearly as precise as the average ancient structure. Aside, in Peru we know the Inca didn't do any of the polygonal megalithic work (because they said they didn't) so all that is pre-Inca.
@@fixbertha Peruvians do say they did it.
Spanish chroniclers said it. You should check into that a lot more because it is a falsehood that persists.
half finished stones in Peru reveal the method.
The large stone are only fitted at the front a short distance. Small stone fitted to the large ones. As with so much the weights are exaggerated too often.
I posted video of japanese masons dismantling and rebuilding one of those walls using traditional methods.
Steel is not a magical precision instrument. The skill of the worker is what counts.
NOT predynastic and NOT preinca
You are just repeating Hancock talking points and stating them as fact.
Look at more and better sources.
I gave your channel a plug on the most recent Randall Carlson Kosmographia podast episode. It seems a decent number of his fans are getting upset with his jumping onto the expensive tour bandwagon. Though they've been tours focused on ice age geology/younger dryas/catastrophic floods. He's not exactly a lost ancient high technologist, and sticks more to his evidence based focus of catastrophic events surrounding the end of the ice age, and sacred geometry/symbology. Of course catastrophic ice age ending events are connected with ancient human history, and ancient human stories, and ancient human structures where there are serious questions about the chronology... so he is pretty tight with the same crowd, especially with his overlapping interest of ancient Egypt.
I'm curious what you think about him? I think the two of you doing a podcast discussing sacred geometry would be pure gold.
I got into the geometry via Scott Onstott and his Secrets in Plain Sight series. Then dived into ancient metrology but a Randall Carlson series also an eye opener. He also got me interested in geology and specifically the Pacific north west. Though I found Nick Zentner and his lectures on that area, he has great lectures on the floods of that region. If you haven’t seen and are interested I couldn’t recommend high enough “nick zentner floods lecture” should get you there.
Cheers
Thanks for your comment really helpful
I really hope that you will have a finished piece. You know what they'll do, if you don't have a like for like product. People will also want to see every second of production, including any failures.
Good Luck.
will do, have one posted with the process description in short as well as all the raw footage.
Made a stone dish, more to come though as I get more efficient and better skilled
Even then they won't change their minds.
Respect, would LOVE to see a scientific buildoff/showdown. WHY are more attempts at replication not made??
Scientists Against Myths have a sculptor who made a couple vases already. She has a live feed of her diorite vase project. She doesn’t even use copper. Just stone, wood, leather and bone.
It takes time, you have to develop skills and many hours. Spending hours, or days or weeks or even months to make something the ancient alien types ignore.
Try leaving links to experiments on uncharted x. If not banned you’ll be shadow banned. The others are no better. If you get a comment on it’s lost in the clutter. Then they’ll lie about it their video “small scale experiment that doesn’t match tool marks.” Or people accuse me of using camera tricks
That’s why I challenge, in real time, on a live stream, done on both sides so no one can say funny business.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded I'd really, really love to see this challenge. If it wouldn't spoil things when you said you'd start small-what is the most difficult thing you can replicate? Do you know how the interior 90 degree cuts of the Serapeum? Do you have any theories on Polygonal Masonry?
@@airthrowDBT scientists against myths already made inner trihedral corners using only flint tools. Mike Haduck masonry channel used a copper pipe. That type of thing is amongst the earliest tests of a stone mason apprentice. Once you start looking you’ll see those corners everywhere. Just go to any historic building and look at the decorations carved. You’ll also notice beautiful curves in corners as well. All of f the matching hundreds of times over across the building.
Sculptors still use ancient pantograph technique to make copies of the best sculptures. Polygonal walls pretty tame in comparison. The ones with giant stone are only fitted together on the front side for the first few inches.
I haven’t seen anything that cannot be done with primitive tools and lifting techniques.
The only issue is time. The lost high tech people say things that can be done in hours or days take weeks or years.
The only arguments they have left is time. But stone masonry has always been a patient game.
I have a couple videos on it but take the Great Pyramid and the others. It’s actually full of rough cut rubble and mortar. Only the outer layers and internal walls are smooth.
Things like that these lost tech people never mention. They only give the impression everything is precise.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded DUDE, I didn't know thr pyramids were filled with rough stone and mortar until VERY recently and I've been studying them for YEARS, what the hell? Polygonal masonry is what I spend SO much time thinking about, even just getting the rocks to line up on the face is staggering, I don't care about the wall being roughly filled inside. I would LOVE to see a video of a high quality polygonal masonry face being made, all of the modern ones look like crap
Because in 2021, human beings have lost the concept of working for a long time to produce a single item using manual labour. Anything which takes longer than 7 minutes to achieve is a waste of time. And so, creating an alabaster vase, which takes dozens, or even hundreds of hours to produce, and involves a lot of hard, dirty, noisy work - to produce something which you can buy in a store for $10, doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?
No "showdown" is required, as ALL of this Ancient High Technology stuff has been debunked numerous times by properly informed people.
It's like saying humans couldn't create Khufu's Pyramid in 2021. That is a lie. Of course we could; and if we did, it would be substantially better than the existing one, because we WOULD use modern machinery, and standard block sizes to build it, so that there were no internal gaps.
Asking why no one builds pyramids today is a nonsense. The TIME taken to achieve such things was huge, and therefore the cost was huge as well. Building a pyramid today would also be a very expensive thing to do, because they do not use standard construction techniques which are intended to provide the largest internal spaces possible - the direct antithesis of the Pyramids, whose internal spaces are tiny and cramped due to the nature of the stone used to build them, and the imprecise nature of the construction.
We know, for example, that the bearers above the Kings chamber cracked during construction.
I would love to watch a live, unedited video of someone hand making one of the thin walled vases with a large belly and a small top/rim. Then I'd love to see one of the puzzle walls get made. I'm not convinced that there were ancient machines but I'm also not convinced that all of these stone works were made by hand either.
The vases are not thin walled. Petrie is used as the source and he reports thin neck of a Ptolemaic/Roman era vase. And a thin neck of a earlier Egyptian one but they didn’t have the long thin neck of later styles.
Though Fatamid era ewers are that thin throughout not just the neck.
The Russian team from Scientists Against Myths just finished a diorite vase based on Egyptian design. It was live-streamed.
If you look up Secrets of the Parthenon you can see them fitting shattered stones together. Much harder obviously, much much more complex.
They use ancient technique to do it, even with the modern techniques the restorers found the old way the best.
Look at the granite lighthouses of Uk or Bosarmund fortress for examples of brilliant craftsmanship.
The lighthouses especially make the polygonal walls look simple by comparison.
It’s not really necessary that people experimenting do that long effort since in recent history experienced professionals have done the same or better.
It just never gets covered by the lost high tech channels. If they didn’t ignore those details then they couldn’t accuse the “mai stream orthodox establishment” of covering up and ignoring the big questions.
Porphyry urns of the 1700s are another interesting one. Hand made and much better than Egyptian ones. They had steel of course but of course Stone Age tools work as shown in experiments. Some of them people have weeks of their time to the task.
Though would you really like to see a live unedited demo, hundreds or thousands of hours?
Hand tools can most definitely do it but it takes time.
If you want to contribute financially to help those people feed themselves through that time Scientists Against Myths has a Patreon and pay pal to help cover their costs.
Once I looked at the tour prices and the "khemit" stuff, I pieced together everything what was going on. In fact, I suspect the Egypt tourism department revels in the fact that there's this fakery and nonsense surrounding the whole thing, more people come there with this mysticism. Perhaps the most ridiculous part is all the implication of them being maybe capacitors or something of that sort. Like, how can these things be capacitors, exactly? The non granite ones with the seals have at least room for speculation but since these don't even have a seal, what is the possibility there? Total quackery on an enormous scale.
How did they made the vase handles?
The ancient high tech people will drop clues that something's not right. In his book "The Giza Power Plant", Christopher Dunn states that the Egyptians didn't have the wheel. Obviously they used chariots, which moved how exactly?
Context yo... Vases made in the early dynastic 3100-2800 BC....Chariots first appeared in Egypt about 1600 BC...
@@EQ_EnchantX It's a common misconception that Egyptians didn't have the wheel. War chariots were invented in the middle bronze age, but the wheel, wagons, carts, etc are much older.
The misconception comes from the fact that Egyptians dragged large stone on sleds, rails, and rollers, but this is because it's the optimal choice. They continued using these methods long after the chariot as well. Wheels can't support nearly as much weight and would get bogged down in the ground
@@histguy101 and your proof/evidence that they had them earlier than depicted is what?
@@EQ_EnchantXIn the tomb of Kaemheset @Saqqara, there's depicted a scaling ladder on wheels, dated to around the 5th dynasty, possibly 4th(26th-25th century bc). Also in the tomb of Intef at Thebes, there's a depiction of a siege tower on wheels, dated to the early 11th dynasty(22nd century bc).
War chariots were a major military innovation when they were introduced, but they didn't represent the invention of the wheel, or even wheeled vehicles.
@@histguy101 : "possibly 4th(26th-25th century bc)"
..."The 25th century BC was a century that lasted from the year 2500 BC to 2401 BC"....
"Vases made in the early dynastic 3100-2800 BC....Chariots first appeared in Egypt about 1600 BC..."
Do you have video on a vase like these that you made out of granite?
One thing that always stood out to me when they talk about the cores is it's always no7, no7, no7. Like, even if no7 does have a spiral groove, what about no1, 2, 3, 4.... where are all the other spiral grooves. I'm much more likely to believe it was a copper tube drill and as they added fresh abrasives a particularly large piece got stuck and worked a fresh groove as it traveled up and down trapped between the pipe. Like there are other ways to explain a single odd result. If he had 10 of them and it was fairly clearly a spiral groove I'd be far more interested. And grinding is literally just cutting on a much smaller scale, it's exactly the same thing as you say, just different applications.
It's a fucking shame honestly cause I've spent a lot of time watching Ben, there's a lot I personally like about his content and I think there are genuine questions, he could do genuine "essays" on this stuff and I'd love it but I don't trust him at all.
He does shut down discussion too, doesn't allow any of this sort of stuff in his discord. Which on the one hand I get, brigading and constant bickering would be annoying. On the other hand restrict it to a single channel and let people go nuts. It really does make it feel like a cult.
You and Scientists against myth are the only people I've come across that do actual decent work debunking though I'm sure there are more. I just wanna say though you both have the same issue, you are relentless with the personal attacks, which I absolutely get but they feel like... they are by extension personal attack against his viewers as well. Maybe not intentionally but that's how it comes across. I don't say this to say you're out of line, you're not, I just wanted to point it out. When you're preaching to the choir it doesn't matter, if you hope to help some of his more stalwart viewers it'll be an issue. I've never agreed with everything any of these people say, I've cringed in parts and kept an open curious mind everywhere else and it's still made me feel like shit. Catch more flies an all that.
I wish the CZcams algorithm gave both sides instead pouring on the same kind of videos . I found your channel through your comments. At least you are doing the work.
The mohs scale is used by Brien and his little helpers, as it has a firm basis within the words uttered from their brainless jaw movements.
Their entire super sonic technology, due to Humans being completely useless for the last 2000 years, so when you see Brien's Finger pointing at a Big Stone, he knows who used such large stones, and they could build anything, who are they..... well no one knows, but Brien assures everyone he knows that the pre historic civilisation not only had the capability to quarry stones weighing 20 tons, cut it and make the faces flat, they use it in a building 50km away. But Brien tell us please oh great one, how did the pre-historical people do it, but remember, Every time Brien says the word, pre-history, then all words used after and in correspondence to his delusions , they are nothing more that assumptions, guesses, wild stabs in the dark, unprovable and pointless, mindless BS..... or LOST Ancient High Technology, if using the terminology of Brien.
As SGD says it's a test for mineral hardness, by way of scratching the surface, unfortunately this doesn't take in to consideration force,, energy transference from large end of chisel which concentrates the energy to a blade or a point, where it is then expelled upon the stones. There are Hardness tests that use force in a controlled manner, such as the Rockwell test, or Vickers test.
In the methods they used to create these pots the Moh's obviously comes into use, but unlike the man making this video, who understands it's limits.... we have a complete gang of bullshit merchants attempting to plant a seed in the minds of people which if left will grow into the Brien Foresters, Bullshit Tree which bear low hanging Bulls Turds for easy pickings. As I'm sure even the most defined heads resembling a Dick knows that quarrying and hoisting Stone, dressing and cutting stone doesn't require any scratching or vigorous rubbing, but they use it regardless as it reinforces the LOST never to be found Pre-Historic Super Men and their Ancient Higher than high turbo technology, which he never describes, or even guesses as to what it is, he simply says he doesn't know, what it is or how it was used as it is LOST forever, removing the need to ever look for it, and allows the BS to freely flow from his mouth and dribble over his gigantic CHIN. Now Brtien has teamed up with Bright Insight Channel (or Dim short-sighted channel) if he wanted to bring some coherence between the name of the channel and it's contents.... and the bozo who thinks he knows everything about everything past present and future, the Unchartered X guy who will argue with anyone who has knowledge, degree's evidence proof in physical form and mathematic formulas and equations. Nothing matters it's all made up crap that he will never even pay attention to, because they didn't use chisels hammers, or their brains, they used a laser beams from their eyes, to cut blocks, performed dark magic to levitate 100 ton blocks to where ever needed, basically the more of a dick he looks and the more you want to throw rocks at his head the better it is for this guy, for the very simple reason, he is a complete 100% total Bellend. So with a full group of Bellend walking round some of the most well know ancient sites in the world, we are guaranteed that Brien's harvested the Bullshit Tree Fruity turds, and is armed and ready to ram new fresh bullshit down anyone's throat he believes has that look about them, they might just swallow it. The saddest part about it all, is that there is seemingly a worrying amount of Human Beings who are so ignorant and unaware of anything around them or themselves that accepting anything is how living life is dealt with... Shame really.
Great Video by the way mate, as always.
Yeah you should try a live debate with some of the "other side" of this argument. As a person who is simply after the truth trying to follow along both sides it's kind of annoying simply seeing "THERES NO WAY THEY COULD MAKE THIS" Versus "THEY DEFINITELY MADE THIS AND IT'S EASY". Personally I'm still not sold that they could create the wall at Sacsayhuaman Peru with tools from that time.
It’s basically marble at Sacsayhuaman. Copper tools would be fine there, flint works virtually as good as steel. No problems on that type of stone.
There’s a doco called secrets of the Parthenon, worth a watch , especially when they fit new stone onto shattered stone pieces for the restoration.
Makes those polygonal walls look like a piece of cake in comparison.
Instead of high tech scanning and machines they do it the old fashioned way.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded I hear what you are saying about the materials, but I was reading a chemical analysis of the stones and it found that they were all vitrified on the outside. The vitrification was verified to be man-made and nothing that was possible to happen naturally due to the way the molecules were layered in the structure. Even assuming they did have a way to evenly heat the surface of every single polygon all Stone, Vitrofication always changes the shape of the material and so that would make it almost impossible to have them fit together before and after vitrification. I'm not claiming to know what went on there, this is just something I enjoy researching on because it interests me a lot. I've also seen the video that you are mentioning, and while I agree it is quite amazing work I can't see how that would be possible for the miles of air tight stone in Peru. One of the most interesting facts about that place for me is that only a third of it or less remains since the Spanish decided to tear it apart when they got here in the 1500s
@@lordofleaves257 I'm gonna go on a limb and say 'ancient aliens' said that. SGD has covered this on his earlier videos. For example, heating certain types of existing stone makes it brittle and by that unusable for this application.
@@Akimos Ancient Aliens is a baseless Conspiracy Theory show, I would never use anything other than scientific studies and actual researched evidence to try and articulate my thought processes. Vitrification isn't so simple as just heating an object up, you have to evenly heat the object all around. A good example is when we put Clay and other types of mediums in a furnace for days sometimes just to get a proper vitrification. I've seen this guy's videos on sacsayhuaman and I was not impressed, which is why I am choosing to bring it up in this comments section.
@@lordofleaves257 The claims you accept about the surface of the stones, are false. Always check the source of all claims, and remember the following fact: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Excellent video. I argued that 'their' hypothesis was an empty one in that they made claims with questions but no suggested answer beyond aliens/ancients/gods [insert your favourite gap filler].
Your simple explanation provides confidence that contemporary craftsmen definitely had the tools and knowledge to craft these objects.
But since when has 'nothing to see here' sold a book?
Thank you.
Olga through Scientists Against Myths channel has been making stone vessels including diorite vases. Using only wood, stone and bone.
I have started myself as well, using egyptian flywheel drill and copper drill head. Starting with dishes and bowls including one so thin it is translucent.
Do you think they could have used this design to polish large surfaces? As in instead of a copper tube in the end, you would have a flat circular stone? And could it be used in wooden rails to create uniform flat surfaces?
Also maybe the obelisks were built inclined so you could have the force of gravity move the contraption along
It’s possible yes. Horizontal surfaces definitely. Vertically there’d be problems with that type of drill. Though a frame or rope support could overcome that.
I am making stone vessels and to get the bowl/dish shape I have multiple copper tubes. To polish I just shift from coarse abrasive to ever finer grit sizes.
There are in fact vases that the .05 thickness is carried through the body of the vase. Explain how you would use a core drill to accomplish this???
Thanks for putting this out there, I like your findings! Calling the other guys frauds, cowards, liars and the like, is probably not the way to go if you want to have them change their minds. I bet you think it is only fair to call them that, and it probably feels good, but if you are really serious about challenging them to rethink their views, humbleness combined with the facts at hand is probably a sharper tool.
cheers
Long before it came to be being brutally honest others and myself tried to be civil and engage with them. Conducting the very experiments they demanded.
Only to be blocked and shadow banned. Then they went on another tour selling things they know to be untrue.
They have zero interest in engaging with their critics, even after the experiments and examples they themselves demanded were presented.
I call them frauds and liars because that is exactly what they are, in the case of Christopher Dunn )the lost high tech guru) I presented the proof that he faked his experiments.
SCientists Against Myths is a good channel for debunking these things.
Also World of Antiquity, he was preblocked although being very civil and inviting.
There was a long road and many proofs before I came to calling the out for what they are.
I even took down certain incriminating evidence when they politely asked since it made them look so bad. I did it just so that it wouldn;t hang around their neck in the age of internet archaeology.
Spoiler but they haven't changed their tune or presented the information they asked for in the video that began it all.
They like all conmen rely (prey) on the ethics of others , knowing we won't resort to their bully boy tactics and lies. All the while playing the ethical truth seeker whose a victim to the system.
You've got to call a crook a crook, they themselves accuse others all the time, for doing the exact same thing they do themselves.
Several of my followers were ardent supporters of those channels and swapped over when they were blocked, deleted etc for asking those people to address the evidence provided by Scientists Against Myths as well as myself.
They have earned the titles of crooks, frauds and liars.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded Thanks a lot, I will try and find your proof of him faking the experiments. And I will also check out the other channels you recommend.
One thing strikes me as odd (from watching these guys on Joe Rogan, the other day, e.g. czcams.com/users/shorts3nxJ1kTdKfo ): the claimed extreme precision of the vase measured with a structured light scanner. Has this specific experimental result been refuted?
@@zycpata6146 I only just heard about it.
The question I would ask is have other era works been tested. They made absolutely beautiful stone vessels by hand prior to the industrial revolution.
Those guys asserted many things impossible by handled work before and easily refuted by getting hands dirty.
I don’t trust a single word they say to be frank.
Although I will take it as authentic
Soon enough I will begin with bowls and vases. I will tell you now I will get very good results with the method I will use. It would be very difficult not to get symmetrical results. The drill acts like a top, keeping it on the level. Also making perfect circles with imperfect tubes.
Apart from putting in the hours it’s not that hard. Even the handles. Hard to explain in short but I will include a flange on outside when I drill. Then remove the material to leave the handles. Physics will insist they match.
Sadly you are wrong nothing will sway the believers
@@SacredGeometryDecoded That is not an excuse at all, stay within yourself, take the higher ground, otherwise to newcomers like me who dont know enough about either side to be convinced by a single video just think your a bit of an ass
I'd really like to see your rebuttal to the newest video uncharted x made.
What do you think about the "new evidence" of UnchartedX about the high precision vase (see new joe rogan episode). Are they all lying there or is such a precision possible by hand or what is your opinion? Thanks a lot! 👍
Give it a little time. I will make one. He is very very wrong though when he talks about “impossible” circle opening.
What he describes as impossible , as with earlier claims, can be done.
He is blatantly lying though about spiral groove. That is 100% a lie because he knows it’s not true and still says it.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded thank you for your quick answer. Would be very interessting when you do a video about that claim with this high precision granit vase. In his recent stream he said he will public the 3d version of the vase in his next youtube video (this week) to download and he challenges people to do it themself and show how it is possible. I am already very curious if you will be able to do it and debunk him totally again :-) you have a great channel, keep it up !
Dear SGD,
any news about the vase scanning UnchartedX did? Do you think the vase itself is fake or is it possible to do by hand?
Hi. I LOVE your channel and your work. You are really inspiring, you make me want to do some of these experiments myself. I really need to go back and watch your instruction video on how to make the dust abrasives (which are great and I might speed up some parts with some hand crank centrifugation).
I wanted to make one suggestion. Respectfully, and I have a great deal of respect for you, I think you might want to include that you are making an assumption that some of the photos are shot in a way that you could tell if the side holes are symmetrical or aligned. I think some shots are taken where they really couldn't show if the holes are symmetrical or not and you are assuming they are. Now, having said that I've seen other videos which clearly show that they aren't, but in some of the shots you have here you can't really tell. This is just me being picky because some of the "super old aliens people" could come back at you with that disingenuously to try and poke holes in your work, so I'm hoping to strengthen your work by pointing this out. Because based on some other videos I've seen, you're right, just the still photos here don't entirely support what you are saying because of the single angle of the still photos.
Anyway, keep going! You are brilliantly destroying the grifters who don't want to give their ancestors (all of our ancestors really) credit, just so they can appear smart and bilk stupid people out of their money. People who would likely love to spend their money going to a workshop making some cool replicas themselves.
Cheers, thanks for watching :-)
@@SacredGeometryDecoded this is not a response to what they said.
@@wokeuptomorrow4533 of course not, It was posted in August 2021.
They haven’t responded to any of the challenges of theirs what were answered going back nearly 3 years now.
Maybe lobby them to address those first. They are still being very untruthful about those.
Great video. Finally someone who challenges those ignorant believers in lost ancient high technologies. No response so far. What are they afraid of? To get busted?
watch unchartedx latest video. They were made with serious tech. Not by hand.
@@bladetj in that UX video, they have mechanical engineer Christopher Dunn on for about 30 seconds. They try to get him to say it would take a CNC machine to do it, and he says "no, a simple lath could do it", he even mentions egyptians using ancient lathes & does say it is remarkable. So I don't know what you mean by serious tech. “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
-upton sinclair
Fascinating and food for thought, though it is one thing to actually make one of these objects and another to blow random holes through flat pieces of granite. I think that you might actually make one of those vessels, or have a skilled craftsman use your method to make one, and that would be more convincing. I've followed up a little on this concept, and other (totally believable) experimenters produced perhaps a centimeter of cut after 40 or so minutes of effort. It seems that it would take hundreds of hours to make a single vessel. It would be valuable if someone like yourself took a specific (and preferably more complicated vessel as an example, and took us step by step on how it could have been accomplished, and then, actually doing it.
czcams.com/video/MEuQK9bSyvU/video.html
She has made two others, the diorite vase is nearly complete. However she only uses stone, bone and wood tools.
When i begin my vases I will be using copper and this method to hollow them out, which will dramatically speed up the production rate.
czcams.com/video/58oseo2tnFk/video.html
I am nearly finished making a stone dish, of the 40000 found at Saqqara they are mostly alabaster (marble) as with the dish i am making at the moment. All up less than a working day to complete. With experience and prepared tools I could knock out at least two if not three a day.
Good job and keep at it. I'll subscribe.@@SacredGeometryDecoded
"Follow the shoe!", "No! Follow the Gourd!"
The vast majority of people in the comments here are not thinking about the proposed ideas here and in other contents creators videos objectively and reaching their own conclusions. They're simply picking a side.
Deciding which persons version they're going to believe without question going forward.
You have shattered my beliefs and for that I salute you. I recently subscribed to your channel and everything you say and show in your videos makes perfect sense. 👏👏👏
Thank you very much indeed. Makes it worthwhile. I was inside it too then was able to break free.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded Here's a channel that I think you will enjoy. Its fantastic and simple explanation from a retired engineer for a Djed, Flail and Crook and a few other Egyptian idea's of his. www.youtube.com/@stevett225/videos
This is awesome. Love too see someone taking them up on their challenges and debunking their nonsense.
thanks. Been on a hiatus but been making stone vessels and working on getting the procedure as efficient as possible.
Translucent granite incoming ;-)
Make one, don't drill a few holes. Make the most difficult one and prove them wrong!
Every step so far I’ve proved the wrong with demonstrations of the impossible. This is on the list.
Though I’ll bet it will be deleted and blocked.
Though to them and you its more than a bit rich to demand the labour of others.
I’ll do it to show how but it’s not about proving it to them or to you. Since obviously you don’t care too much or you’d and they would have done some work beforehand.
Now build me a grand cathedral, I declare it can’t be done with medieval tools and so you must prove me wrong. I have no responsibility at all, it’s up to the Rey of the world to do my work for me.
Or those Fatamid ewers or porphyry urns. Make me one. It’s all on you.
7:25 Mr. Trololo enters🤭🤭🤭
Just want to thank you for the time and effort you put into your channel. I too was one of the AHT sheep that blindly followed people like GH & UX. I went to Egypt and was made the fool by people that actually know what they are talking about. Unfortunately mysterious unknown techniques and technology is far more romantic than the truth. Live and learn 😂
czcams.com/video/WAyQQRNoQaE/video.html yeh right
Sounds to me you didn't have the arguments and indeed trusted blindly without thinking, looks like that's still the case. Live and learn as you say :)
@@aschnt-983 looks like you didn’t watch the video!
@@aschnt-983 hey! Thanks for the petty attempt at insulting me over the internet 😀 Have a great day 👍🏻
@@seraph.1 what he is saying is that YOU said with your own words that you believed what person A said, then went to a place where person B said the opposite, and then you believed that. Not sure how that is the insult you made it out to be. Did you consider what they said about believing in one or the other because they convinced you is the same thing? Being serious here. I don't believe unchartedx proves these things to be the case, but this guy's videos certainly do not either.
I would save 3k going on a brothel and opium den tour of south east Asia instead of their tour.
Ahhh, the old opium den and brothel tour, by god it’s been a while. Class and sophistication never go out of style by Jove.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded complimentary viagra and penicillin.
Hey man what are your thoughts on the vases that have been analyzed in Ben's latest vid? They are quite astonishing pieces of work I'm beginning to think maybe they aren't actually from Egypt they are that good lol
LOL yeah I busted Christopher Dunn for faking an experiment in drilling granite.
czcams.com/video/eYa3Im-Cetc/video.html
He used a machine to do it. He's a fraud, since their other "impossibles" all got possibled they mysteriously have high precision vases from private collections coming into the hands of lost tech enthusiasts. With excellent provenance. Source "Trust me bro"
There was and probably still is an industry and making fake artefacts including stone vases.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded The vases appear to look virtually identical to vases that are in museums.
Have you considered getting permission from a museum to study one of their granite vases using the same methodology? If you can't replicate the results then it would give weight to your argument that they're using counterfeit vases.
Otherwise, you're just making accusations with zero evidence to back it up.
@@ULTRATERM the accusation of faking the drill core is backed up by physics.
Have they approached museums? Scientists Against Myths got access for core 7 and showed it NOT to be a spiral. They also measured a number of vases.
Funny how lost high tech demands everyone else do their work for them, and when they do it they censor the results they don't like.
It is vital for them, given their history especially, to show that they are authentic.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded I'm discussing the vases and you keep trying to change the subject. You have not presented any evidence that the vases are counterfeit.
Do you agree that my proposed experiment, that is, selecting a vase from a museum that looks extremely similar to the vases in question and testing it using the exact same methodology, would serve to help determine if the vases are indeed fakes or not?
If the results can be reproduced in that manner, what would be your response?
They claim that museums have not given them access to their vases, which is why they're studying vases from private collections (with historical provenance records) instead.
@@ULTRATERM I've already started making mine and I post how to's.
I have spent many many hours replying to previous challenges doing the same. Creating IMPOSSIBLE precision and striations and high polishing, drilling, cutting all of that. I've done more than my share already and then a lot more. Yet no response?!
Yes, you should have them spend their time and money going to museums doing it. They claim they are blocked yet others have gained access to artefacts. Which museums have they applied to?
They are making the claims and it is up to them to do the work of going to find the proven vases. With the size of their audience and profits from their tours and such?
Even with a clean reputation it is still on the person with the claim to do the work.
Hey SDG. You know I am 100% positive everything is done with smart, but primitive methods and techniques. I do would love to hear how you think they did the handles on the bowls. When you create a bowl by using some shape of tube drill, you will not end up with the handles. I do know these handles are not 100% perfect; the holes in these are done by tube drill and the angles are a bit messed up, so it's no alien hi tech.... ...but how did they do it? Your thoughts/video is appreciated.
I will drill from top then from bottom leaving a donut around, then cut off the waste. A couple methods to play with to try and get best result.
I just a big sheet of copper and am prepped to start larger more complex experiments.
Oh and thank you so much for fighting the good fight!!! Genuine mysteries don’t need fantastical explanations! Just experimentation within reality!
Finally I found the real way this was done. Thanks for recommending this video
Also sacsayhwamen (spelled wrong maybe) is definitely a ancient type of geopolymer. They have done tests showing it so
Well done. I had wondered a little about the possibility of lathes perhaps being around just a tad earlier than the record showed, but after seeing your flywheel drill in action I can see that it's the perfect tool for making these almost "lathe-like", but still a little wobbly and flared pieces. Well done and how hilariously easy it was too with a bit of thought and practice.
That arsehole Christopher Dunn knows exactly what a surface plate is, how they're made, and is no doubt intimately acquainted with concepts such as the three plate method. What a fraud.
Unchartedx complains that archeologists have an interest (job and reputation) to preserve, so they are biased. But C. Dunn selling books isnt a problem for him. Bias!
Is it possible that these granite pots and bowls and statues were made inside the Kings Chamber inside the Great Pyramid❓️ They could put chunks of Granite above a mold of a pot or bowl or statue and heat up the chamber and then lower airtight stones down into the 2 shafts going down into the King's Chamber to increase the pressure inside the King's Chamber to replicate the pressures found deep underground where granite naturally forms❓️That's why these pots and bowls ans statues are not found anywhere else in the world.
@@winstonmontgomery8211 Your right ! Just like how we use nuclear reactors to make vasses today ...
@marxman00 Hey if you have a better theory let me know. There really isn't a need to be a wise guy haha 😅 I'm just saying that the pyramid could have served many different functions all at once. That would explain why there are so many theories on what the pyramid was built for.
ok, thank you for breaking my bubble, damn. However i think there should be shows on the most spectacular ones, and it does seem these were perfected before the pyramids, along with the amazing hard stone precision statues
Thank you for giving this information out to the world. I am a stonemason so I knew a lot of this stuff already (still managed to learn a bunch too), but so many people dismiss the knowledge and ability's of the older civilizations, pulling the "unexplained" or "aliens" card. It makes me happy that you took all this time to explain how all of this works for everyone who wants or needs to learn it. You are doing gods work
czcams.com/video/WAyQQRNoQaE/video.html No one can make these extremely precise objects simply by hand. Its never been demonstrated.
I think you should have a better look at this then. 27 years to quarry, cut and shape 8-10 million stones from a few tons to in some cases over 1000 tons.
Obviously the story does not add up, anyone can understand that. Have a look at the aswan quarry, granite bedrock that was built by pounding stones and using copper to remove thousands of tons of granite.
As someone who has worked with stones myself, I can tell it is plainly impossible.
this didnt age well 😅
You might want to keep up with later uploads . A lot of lost tech stuff hasn't aged well at all against experiments. 🤣
Weird that no one has heard about those? It's almost like Uncharted X is hiding things?
You might want to check the latest work Dunn and co did on those vases. It makes you look a bit silly
@@thatotheruniverse You might want to look at previous work I have done. Or the checks on the earlier claims of Chris Dunn.
Weird they spoken about them or the others who have answered their earlier challenges.
The data they provide with the machines, checked by other engineers is slightly more compelling than what you put on the table. Shoddy debunk work and reeks of jealousy that these people are really doing the research independently to forward their case. Rubbish like this channel keeps the establishment narrrative happy
@@thatotheruniverse LOL, I answered their earlier challenges and waiting for someone to accept the livestream in real time repsonse.
No one. Crickets
Chris Dunn is a fraud, he and Ben wouldn't dare go live because they would be exposed.
czcams.com/video/9ov6YjrGAP0/video.html
Replicate Dunn's "experiment" first. No one will because he faked it,
Your entire community is lazy and can't get out of the comment section because you are scared.
czcams.com/video/X8Q5A1FSWwk/video.html
Ben is a liar and he doesn't have the balls to come out from behind his wall.
Is there one man amongst your entire community? Seriously? I'm asking. Are you the one?
How would you make the hollowed inside with the flaired copper tube expand inside the piece, when it quickly would get stuck in the piece as the undercut gets larger than the opening?
Also how would you then pull those flaires back at the bottom to create the narrower hollow? This is a clever idea, but still merely an idea until you show a piece with a large undercut hollow made with this technique.
The copper flares out, it doesn't get stuck. Just like a spring you shape it to expand which is backed up by the downward force pushing it outwards. It is flexible and goes out the same same i got it in.
I've demonstrated it twice already. It's more than an idea. If you have doubt then you can always test it and at the same time you'll get a lot of practical experience with copper.
Here's a hint, 1 to 2mm thick copper is best.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded I'll belive it when you provide video or images of vases with 5cm rounded underhangs at the opening cut to the same thickness as those found at saccara (under one millimeter). And IMO you should've done this before you shit on people who've dedicated their lives to the study of the same thing you're studying.
@@Naatti922 dedicated their lives to study? The people who thought polishing was a mystery? The”impossible” striations from saw and drill marks? The same people who couldn’t be bothered looking into whitworth 3 plate technique and when they were told still carry on about “machined” flatness that can’t be done by hand? The same people who faked experiments and did so that badly that it’s tragic how obvious the fakery is with 5 minutes?
The same people who couldn’t remove a granite core with a copper wedge but somehow did manage to mangle the tool?
These people are frauds. New age religious canners who hasn’t looked into stone masonry after decades of allegedly researching stone working.
I can’t help shit on them because they belong in the bottom of crapper.
You can tell it’s a cult because the believers never show 1% the skepticism they do in the other direction.
In fact it’s less than 1% because not one, not a single one of them, even bothered to double check basic claims of precision etc.
Now a vase appears from private collection snd it must be replicated?
The same demands from the halfwits who demanded replica Serapeum boxes with perfect corners and flatness. Or symmetrical statues?
Nah buddy. Your teams credibility is shot.
Chris Dunn has faked data already and anyone should believe him.
Get that vase tested and compared.
First place to look is “precision” parts and compare surface to other her parts of the same and other vases with provenance.
This magic vase been sitting in Dunn’s friend collection all these years?
Appear now just as the rest of the nonsense begins falling apart all too long after it should have.
Nah buddy. They are liars and in no position to make any more demands.
And I don’t much appreciate your BS talking as if you’ve experience.
How about you or untruthful x address the other challenges first?
Then when that’s been done you or them have a legit stand on in asking for others to do work.
@@Naatti922lol 'dedicated their lives' to conning rubes like you
Where's water on the mohs scale?
good question never though of that.
H2O - hydrogen and oxygen are listed as N/A.
Water impurities such as calcium etc would lift it up from N/A but the trace elements so few as to make it irrelevant. A piece of granite might contain a few particles of diamond or corundum but it's like dropping a pinch of gatorade into an olympic pool
How did they do this? It’s simple.. they was actually hands on all day everyday, complete masters of hand craftsmanship instead of working with todays machines and sitting on the internet.
You can't convince the idiots though.
The reason that you are dead wrong is bc the vases and faces carved are perfectly symmetrical. This is not possible with any human free hand carving. This technology remains unknown to us.
@@debidaniels2201 and how does this make you correct? Also I’ve worked with stone masons at majority of Oxfords universities and seen some amazing stuff myself with just hand tools.
@@debidaniels2201 ....No you're dead wrong and believe any claim. If it was done by any other technology you would see exact duplicates of the same vases. You don't. So use your brain .
@@sodgie18lets see the measurements of the "amazing" hand made results
This wasn't a debunking, it was a slaughter...
How? This was bs
@@jeramykelton5304 I know, Ben's videos are full of bs. I'm glad people like SGD are starting to call him out on it.
@@MrAchile13 he called him out on all the WRONG things.
@@jeramykelton5304 Are you serious? Can you name only one such wrong thing, because I'm quite surprised by your claim.
It was kind of like watching Mike Tyson spar against Donald Trump, yes.
This sounds so convincing! 👍 Where is your complete replica?
czcams.com/video/58oseo2tnFk/video.html
This is the experiment explanation of the hollowing out method.
czcams.com/video/HysrT-GJQoQ/video.html
Here's the first completed experiment making a dish impossibly thin. The next one will be finished tomorrow if I can get the time, or the day after.
More coming, developing the skills more.
Follow along and make one of your own.
See my playlist
czcams.com/video/XY6SUTPV018/video.html
I will be taking all the above and ding it in granite and basalt now I have the most efficient techniques worked out.
Or check ou the Scientists Aginast Myths channel, they have made a few already including a diorite vase with handles using only stone, bone and wood.
I just want to make the process faster.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded great, I just can't wait to see final product.
@@dzonibravo7867I bet you're also just dying to see the evidence of the great LAHT power tools too, right?
@@chiznowtch I would be very excited to see final evidence how that piece was made. It would be more impressive if it was made using a primitive tool then power tool.
@@dzonibravo7867 you're in luck! sgd Did it w primitive tools. He's done a ton of experimenting w amazing results.
Nice rebuttal, but you never showed the finished product of a replica of a vase done with the tools of ancient Egypt. So go back to your shop & time-lapse a replica granite vase.
Russian scientist's created a vase with primitive tools. I believe their channel is called Scientists for Truth or something like that. Have you seen their videos?
@@cCiIcCoYes, but you can see the imperfections in it, and it hasn't been scanned or even measured.
@@robbsclassics Do you mean the vases that they have made? Of course they are imperfect, because they never made them before. But imagine what they would like if the scientists had more experience or if they were true sculpturers and were making these vases on a daily basis.
@@cCiIcCo I have a machining degree. Do you? If not, then who has more education to follow research machinists have done? I understand all the terms. I understand how to see if something is hand made vs on a machine. I stand by the ancient vases being made on precision machines. I don't claim to know what machine or how it was done, but I do claim some of the vases can't be done by hand.
@@robbsclassics Who said that they were made by hand? You didn't watch the video of the Russian scientists or did you
@ 23:50 mate are you sure that's a lapidary drill...I don't know, not so sure. It looks like an alien praying mantis.
This video has only a 1000 views, while the alternate stuff has millions of views even though they never ever explain anything.
PART 2:
6) Then you talk about the alabaster and make an utterly false claim that the hardness of material doesn't make it harder to work. "It just means it takes longer." Rubbish! a) taking longer is by definition "harder to work" and b) when the tool is softer than the material, it makes it impossible to work. Having worked for over thirty years using "modern machinery" I can say with certainty you do NOT just grind away longer with a softer material against a harder material and the entire point was how the tool marks show very clearly how the material was actually cut. Tool marks give away a feed rate. That has been highlighted repeatedly. You toss that out because it doesn't fit your narrative, Again, your lone example of a tublar drill was clearly NOT how it was done. Pure and simple
7) Its those softer materials that WERE made with "precision" in later periods, but in later periods, the harder materials were NO LONGER produced with equal precision.
8) Their main point of all: why is is it that the earliest examples are the most precise with the highest quaility? How did they magically "start" at the highest quality? There does seem to be be anything showing a build up of skills and techniques. Anyone with a functioning brain MUST surmise that we aren't seeing the earlist examples. We don't have anyone today able to reproduce the work done and we are supposed to belive the moment they picked up coppeor tools they went from zero experience to experts over night. The absolute earliest examples were the best and over time it went downhill. Why is that? The quality of later stomework on hard materials like granite are vastly different, anyone can see it with the naked eye. It doesn't even take precise measuring instruments, You conventiently and continuously cut out those examples. You also seem to focus on vases or "vessels" entirely. Its very, very obvious. Someone, somewhere at an earlier period started developing the the stonework skills. Its just not plausible at all that they just started with that level of expertise.
9) Are you aware that virtually 100% of all "tools" attributed to the ancient Egyptions came from the same source? There are very, very few examples and virtually all appear to come from where wooden boats were made and simply pottery, not where large stonework was completed. Are you even aware of that?
10) Why do people like you throw out that very important steel dagger that DOES exist? Mainstream archeology seems to belive it was made from a meteorite and perhaps it was, but do you think that is the ONLY item they could have made from much harder metals like that? Does it dawn on anyone that material is much harder than copper or bronze? Ancient Egyptians, obviously, could easily figure that out, and its LIKELY that they did and that they knew it would be uniquely beneficial to cut materials like granite. The absence of finding such a tool does NOT mean it was not in use or didn't exist; especially, when they have only found such a rediculously small sample size of actual tools that are arguably NOT the tools used to process hard stone. Its not just plausible they used harder materials than copper or bronze to cut stone, its more than likely.
11) You took images to "measure" symmetry. Did you impress yourself? While I am certain there are asymetrical examples. Your image hacking proves nothing. Images warp and cannot be relied for such measurements, unless done correctly (especially symmetrical measurements). Again, having manuafactured for over thirty years and having actually used precise measuring devices that use images to perform measurements. That could only done accurately with a very precise camera, with very specific lenses, at specific angles and distances where a substantial amount of effort is required to calibrate all items used for those measurements. In fact, all image-based measuring devices use algorithms to correct lens warping. Yes, I helped setup such technology to measure components with cameras at high speed. You cannot take a random image, at a random angle, with an unknown lens and precisely measure anything; especially symmetrical measurements. That is a mockery of science.
I could go on but instead: Why do you ignore the main point that its simply not plausible that ancient Eqgypt started at the highest level of expertise regarding stonework? You ignore that there MUST be earlier work done. There MUST have been a period of growth. You also ignore the clear decline over time from the "earliest" period to the end of that time period.
If we are to focus solely on "only simple copper and bronze tools were used", well the steel dagger alone throws that argument into the toliet with absolute certainty. There is no rebuttal. They can and did use harder metals. Case closed.
Limiting this to stonework and the assumption that only copper and bronze tools were used. You failed entriely to resprodduce what was highlighted in the videos. And I know you went on a cherry picking expedition.
Since this is so easily reproduced (your claims). Why are you not acting professional, reaching out to those from the video to ask for a specific list of items and what they find critical to reproduce, then go take measurements and photos yourself and simply reproduce what they highlight. Then please follow real science and have your results independently confimed and have the independent study published.
I know you won't. I could see clearly you are not reproducing anything like what was highlighted in the original videos. Your goal seems to mislead your viewers with your pseudo-science and unprofessional behavior. Again, instead of name-calling and using cherry picked video snippets, clearly intended to mislead... reach out to them. Act with respect, include all their examples and references and do real science. For example, don't make me laugh any harder with any more pathetic tube drill examples. That wobbly, slow, imprecise drill did zero to make YOUR point, it did prove THEIRS.
Unfortuantely, too many viewers don't have the experience or real expertise and they don't know better. I feel for every one of them that fell for your charade.
6 -BS working with primitive tools I have drilled multiple stones, it's the same method but granite takes longer , sandstone is much faster but it has the same Mohs hardness of granite, the hardness scale they always use.
I've created different types of striations at the same cutting rate, the core 7 "feed rate" argument is pure BS since it isnt a helical spiral, even from the pictures available for years that is very clear.
Put down the machines and do an experiment with the hand tools, a logger raised on chain saws has no place discussing hand saws
7 - BS where is this precision measured, youkeep saying it but it is meaningless without measures, and since the assymetry is obvious I can't take it or you seriously
8-BS they didnt start at the highest quality, there are earlier examples from the cultures that predate Egypt, and amongst those samples found at Saqqara you conveninetly forget the rougher ones
9- BS they have been found all over, this is a remarkably ignorant claim.
10- BS I never threw it out, it's a rare find and from a much later time, and iron in sub saharan africa goes back to before dynastic egypt. The point is your boys say it is IMPOSSIBLE with the tools found.
11- BS the samples they show as example of perfect symmetry are the ones with the assymetry.
I focus on those tools because your crowd say they don't work. They do, myself and others have shown it through experimentation.
You'll have to do a lot better than this, a hell of a lot better.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded Please look at the core sample everyone highlighlights. The one painstakingly measured and examined multiple times by actual experts. Do not count the the phony examination made by academics (not experts) who falied to measure with precision at all and just threw out a phony conclusion without actual measurements. The video evidence is overwhelming. It also matches many actual holes. The striation line IS shperical, concentric, one depth, and continuous throughout the whole cut. You are just plain wrong. The images show what i saw. A string can be placed in the groove and it follows one consistent tool mark the entire depth of the core sample. The core itself is also even.
So, please, quit calling BS. You are embarrassuing yourself.
Where are you core samples? That wobbly drill doesn't make very good cres, does it? Kinda hid that from everyone didn't you?'
Its not me that needs to do better. You need to stop being closed minded. Read my other reply. I made suggestions on improving your drill. Try it. You will like the results. When you do, come back and share. Maybe you will start being open minded.
@@trevorwesterdahl6245 you look at it, I have videos going through the photos that show the striations crossing and varying dramatically in distance, the same photos presented by Chris Dunn and such, all of them!!
Scientists against myths went to the Petrie museum and took hi res photos and mapped it. They presented their work. Meticulous!!
That core 7 argument about helical spiral and feed rate because of equidistant grooves is dead. It should never have become a thing, just look at the older photos put forward by lost high tech and simply trace the lines. It’s a joke.
I did and presented the info in video form so as not have to discuss it over and over.
The tapering on that core is said to be a mystery, my wobbly drill replicated it as well.
If you can’t do the physical work at least know what you’re talking about.
Stop wasting my time or come back when you’ve done the work.
That you reply so quickly tells me you aren’t to be taken seriously.
Stop being lazy and pretending to care about this.
I have dealt with the likes of you a 1000 times. You could at least pretend to have looked into it.
Now piss off and don’t come back until you’ve done at least the basics.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded Here id a link to a core sample (www.gizapower.com/petrie/Figure%2011_8.jpg
UC16036 (so you can have your item number).
Here is the string wrapped around those striations:
www.gizapower.com/petrie/Figure%2011_13.jpg
Your sample looks nothing like that. I have been doing this for over thrirty years, There is a sinngle continuos striation going in a cencentric pattern all the way through the core. And this is the core side which is always does have variation compared to the outer edge which in intended to be the "accurate" cut..
Where are you core samples? Where is anything cut with actual depth? You need a miniimum of four inches to make any comparison. 6-10 inches would be much better to make any determinaation.
What I see from you is a continued dance where every major point you avoid. You cherry picked less critical elements and discarded the critical ones.
1) Show the cores.
2) Show a deep hole (minimum 5 inches)
3) Show a drill hole that does not go through the material (at least five inches) and show that the bottom has clean cut marks and does NOT have oblong cut marks,
4) Show equally contretric tool marks, with even depth like the pictures I linked, Not your boloney reference pictures that you picked to represent a "sample". Most samples are from later periods and look like that. Picking one of those is rediculous.
Yes, you made holes. I see no other factior that is actually similar. I saw no core sample at all and belive I know why. That drill will make very rough cores likely to fracture. Frankly, I don't even know that is equivlently hard material. Lots of stone appears like granite, but is not.
Why is it so hard for you to believe they had better tools than what you are using? Do I need to show the other pics to everyone so they can see what you aren't sharing? Like the very deep and straight holes your drill is clearly not capable of creating? The pics I just shared are what you are supposed match, not what you put in thre video.
Again, you need that shaft not to wobble, Until you achieve that, you can rant all you want. Any tool wobbling like that is NOT prodicing an evenly straight hole. Period. No machinist in the world would agree with you.
Again, try my suggestion to guide your tool. Why is that so hard? Again, maybe then, you have a chance. Been doing this way too long. That sort of wobble tells me eveything I need to know.
Now viewers can at least compare to a real picture that the other video was truly referencing. Your pictures are NOT representative.
@@trevorwesterdahl6245 czcams.com/play/PL47iaGB6hlT5sYZWd_G7sHg9cSRv6WWS6.html
Viewers can make them for themselves.
Would you propose using a copper bore tool and flaring as you go with those bowls shown at 2:30...??? Are you going to grind for a minute then flare your tool a millimeter or so, then repeat? Repeat every minute until you have that bowl shape and a tool flared to 4 times the diameter that it started? The angle outward on those bowls is a long way from a straight bore. It looks like you would need a lathe. I see you made a few bore holes. Do you have bowl and jar samples you can show us?
What would yyou bet. I can do it near horizontally.
NO not every minute, maybe every 30 minutes or so yet even if it was every minute so what? If it was quick and easy there's be millions of those vases and they'd be worth nothing at all instead of being worth a lot of money because of their rarity.
I've just started getting back into this and in a short time I am making better dishes than the ones found. Declared to require a lathe by experts who have never even tried.
Replica vases have been made but they took some time though the maker hamstrung herself by not even using copper. Just wood, stone and bone.
There are images of these things being made with the tool shown here.
It's a diorite bowl that has the "thinness of a stout card" . The tin walled vase used in thumb nail shows how only the widest and most accessible part is thin, just above and below it gets much thicker.
The thin parts of the vases are at the necks making it very easy to do. And the best example of a thin interior comes from a greek/roman era funerary vase made of 3 pieces stuck together.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded Well I'll tell you what. You've brought up many good points. If you had an example bowl and jar to show us it would really help your argument, especially something like a vase with a narrow neck leading to a wide bulb part as can be seen in some of the artifacts from Egypt. On another topic, estimate time to carve this pillar top???
czcams.com/video/7LEt8VM42PY/video.html
I’m glad I’ve watched this, but its still insane on how perfect those vases are.
CharlatanX has new uploads on a vase that is so ultra-precision-dimansionally-concise, it could only be done on a 5 axis CNC. Maybe 7-axis (just to be safe).
@@leghunter9201zero class
@@0001nikait's true. They keep lying to their cultists, gleefully taking the rubes' money. Why do you keep supporting them?
@leghunter9201 you're just sad. Why don't you do something 1/4 as meaningful with your life bud?
PART 1: Having cut materials for over thirty years; especially hard materials, no one should listen to you.
First, you engaged in word salad from the moment you started showing steel disks: hard material embedded with even harder material (diamonds) and then tried to say that is still "grinding" when the whole point is academia refuses to admit they could have used anything like that.
1) Very large circular blades were in use (yet academia admits to none). Your examle of a small steel grinding disk was "the point". According to academia, there were none even though the tool marks, prove without question they were in use. You skipped the clear cicular cut marks entirely. This type of cherry picking is more than decptive to your viewers. Why do you cut out entirely the large cuts clearly made from a large circular saw blade (not a straight blade)? Why do you exclude the examples where the cut clearly went offline? That fact is NOT insignificant. Your slow plodding cutting technique would not allow such a mistake. It would be too easy to catch by anyone; even a non-skilled worker, let alone a highly skilled worker. Really? Someone continueed to cut offline for days? Yeah, no. It happened because the tool marks show it was a thin circular blade and the striations show the feedrate. The "tool marks" made clear the pace the granite was cut. At that pace, it could go offline for such a long distance. Hmmm. why was that excluded?
2) There are countless circular holes drilled into hard materials like granite. Academia (and you) provided a laughable example using a copper tubular drill that clearly does NOT match the speed or precision of what was used, not even close. Again the "tool marks" are perfectly consistent in the real life examples. What you showed was a joke. TYou did NOT match the roundness, the precision, nor cut at the speed performed on the actual examples cited in the video. You managed to cut oblong holes very slowly, very imprecisely, and without matching tool marks tat all. You acted like you did, but that isn't true at all. You also went all the way through the material (at least implied you did by showing holes, but we never saw you actually do it). You cut with no equivelent depth. The actual examples can go meters deep and even those holes that are only 6-10 inches deep, there is a clear edge of the tubluar drill at the bottom. Its a square and precise edge. You skip that. Your wobbly tube drill made no such marks: its impossible watching it wobble like that. No way is there a clean edge at the bottom of your holes. Please, go have those holes idependently confirmed and measured and have the results published before you make such claims. I can easily tell you did not. Again, who is dishonest? Your sample were nothing like what was highlighted in the videos (you picked what would appear to match).
3) Within the video snippet, he made a point about precision and did show an image where he made the comment that a vase has a round bottom like an egg... but UNLIKE an egg actually balances on that round bottom. Did you impress yourself throwing in the images of eggs? That image proved his point, not yours and you certainly did not show how you could reproduce the quality of that example. I deal with you later comments down further.
4) There are substantial differences in qualty from the earliest examples to later periods in Eqyptian stone work and you just skip over that. There is no mistaking the clear DECLINE in stone work over time. You just ignored and skipped those examples with impunity.
5) You then complain about listed precision because there is no item number provided for their specific vase example, then contradict yourself as the very next example does have an item number provided. Did you actually reach out and ask them for the number? I doubt it because you fail to act professional at all and immediately mock them. You also skip the actual measurements. Can you cut a vase (of any shape) with that precision? Doubt it and I think that is why you word salad danced around it. Further, in the next example, with an item number, you complain its not a vase (that was their point) and then YOU decide to swap the material entirely with ceramic and state you can prove how to make a ceramic bowl really thin. Its easy. So what? You just complely altered the scope of the the challenge entirely and YOU know it. Tossed out the more difficult material, tossed out the precission and replaced with "thin" and "ceramic".
1- BS I have cut off line, the slurry conceals it until you stop, it does allow for such a mistake, if a modern gangsaw was distupted it too would go off line and not be noticed until finished. My slow plodding cutting technique isn't that much slower than a gang saw. The cut wouldn't have been for days, you should try primitive techniques.
2- BS the cutting rate and the striations and the tapering match those examples, having made several in different types of granite with different abrasives and methods of adding them I can tailor make patterns to order. If you had bothered to try those methods rather than use 30 years of what I must assume is machine assisted cutting you;d know more.
3- are there not later stone vases that have similar. please
4-BS maybe if you looked into later stone vessels made before industrialisation you wouldn't be saying such nonsense. There is a clear decline in stonework, the thinnest example is a Roman funerary urn? Those are the measurements I skipped?
Can you sculpt a beautiful statue by hand, not on your first attempt but rest assured when I have the time I will be doing more, I already showed a test example of a curved granite piece (including a protuding base) that I have drilled.
5- BS the samples he highlights as precision have obvious assymetry, back to the earlier point, have you seen what skilled people can do, obviously not.
Please show your example. I looked at the actual cut marks. While it is a straight cut from the surface looking down, it is very rounded at depth. The cuts are very deep and are clearly from a very large circular saw with circular tool marks. So if you simply lay a large cut line on the surface, that wouldn't be the same cut at all.
The cut line is very deep and clearly was NOT from a line or blade, Also the cut warps to the side. Circular saws do that. Straight saws and line cuts do not. Really want to see how you can reproduce that. If you demo your cutting offline example, then I predict I can show images of how its not possible your demo is a match. Please know: there is a CURVE in the real life material and along with the curve are exactly matching curved striations> You can never do that with a cut line or blade line. I know its not possible.
I just looked at your hole cutting examples. You have wobbly, random striations at random depths. The real life examples are one tool mark at one very even depth that continuously cuts into the material like a cork screw. A string can be wrapped into the tool mark. Yours has no such thing and can never achieve that. Yours is simply a hole.
You do NOT have the ~1/8 inch CLEAN cut line at the bottom. Why do you ignore that again? It can’t happen when your drill wobbles like that. At least try to make something hold your drill in one position so it doesn't wobble. You also do not have the cleanly cut inner cores, Convenient that you provided no comparison of the cores?? Again, with that wobble, your cores have to be uneven with similarly uneven tool marks and likely break apart into chunks.
Yes, I believe simple tools can make: beautiful stonework, symetrical stonework, and detailed stonework. Never said that could not be done. Never inferred that.
I was saying there are stonework examples were NOT done with those simple tools. I am saying, along with many others, that certain cuts are obviously done with circular saws. That is it. Can a straight cut be done with a copper blade. Yes. Not the point. Those particular cuts were NOT.
Then you end by contradicting yourself. Perhaps many of the vessels or vases are asymmetric. So what. Your last line is interesting; "Have you seen what skilled people can do?" Answer: Yes, like make symmetrical vessels and vases, or a perfectly symmetrical face on not just one statue, but many. See how you contradicted yourself? They did make symmetrical vases and vessels and they ONLY exist from the EARLIEST period. All the later examples are clearly inferior in quality and precision. Why is that?
Again , you skipped that dagger too. Why? Clearly, they can and did forge a dagger out of harder metal than copper or bronze. Its actually idiotic to think they wouldn't use that same material to make tools. I will and should assume they did.
So, I am not disrespecting what you can do with those tools at all. I am saying there is clear evidence they used something other than copper and bronze and a makeshift drill. For example, metal tools made from material like the dagger, or a circular saw blade like so many cut marks proved were used..
NOTE: You could increase the accuracy of your drill substantially and easily. Drill out one your holes in granite. Feed your drill through it and use one piece of granite with a hole on the surface you wish to cut. Use another up around where the stone weight is. Between the two, it will keep the drill from wobbling so badly
Try it. Bet your precision increases substantially. Then imagine they used a drill bit made from the dagger material, not copper or bronze. Make one. Bet you see significantly better results. Don't you think the ancient Egyptians figured that out? I am positive they did. That is the point.
@@SacredGeometryDecoded Please show your example. I looked at the actual cut marks. While it is a straight cut from the surface looking down, it is very rounded at depth. The cuts are very deep and are clearly from a very large circular saw with circular tool marks. So if you simply lay a large cut line on the surface, that wouldn't be the same cut at all.
The cut line is very deep and clearly was NOT from a line or blade, Also the cut warps to the side. Circular saws do that. Straight saws and line cuts do not. Really want to see how you can reproduce that. If you demo your cutting offline example, then I predict I can show images of how its not possible your demo is a match. Please know: there is a CURVE in the real life material and along with the curve are exactly matching curved striations> You can never do that with a cut line or blade line. I know its not possible.
I just looked at your hole cutting examples. You have wobbly, random striations at random depths. The real life examples are one tool mark at one very even depth that continuously cuts into the material like a cork screw. A string can be wrapped into the tool mark. Yours has no such thing and can never achieve that. Yours is simply a hole.
You do NOT have the ~1/8 inch CLEAN cut line at the bottom. Why do you ignore that again? It can’t happen when your drill wobbles like that. At least try to make something hold your drill in one position so it doesn't wobble. You also do not have the cleanly cut inner cores, Convenient that you provided no comparison of the cores?? Again, with that wobble, your cores have to be uneven with similarly uneven tool marks and likely break apart into chunks.
Yes, I believe simple tools can make: beautiful stonework, symetrical stonework, and detailed stonework. Never said that could not be done. Never inferred that.
I was saying there are stonework examples were NOT done with those simple tools. I am saying, along with many others, that certain cuts are obviously done with circular saws. That is it. Can a straight cut be done with a copper blade. Yes. Not the point. Those particular cuts were NOT.
Then you end by contradicting yourself. Perhaps many of the vessels or vases are asymmetric. So what. Your last line is interesting; "Have you seen what skilled people can do?" Answer: Yes, like make symmetrical vessels and vases, or a perfectly symmetrical face on not just one statue, but many. See how you contradicted yourself? They did make symmetrical vases and vessels and they ONLY exist from the EARLIEST period. All the later examples are clearly inferior in quality and precision. Why is that?
Again , you skipped that dagger too. Why? Clearly, they can and did forge a dagger out of harder metal than copper or bronze. Its actually idiotic to think they wouldn't use that same material to make tools. I will and should assume they did.
So, I am not disrespecting what you can do with those tools at all. I am saying there is clear evidence they used something other than copper and bronze and a makeshift drill. For example, metal tools made from material like the dagger, or a circular saw blade like so many cut marks proved were used..
NOTE: You could increase the accuracy of your drill substantially and easily. Drill out one your holes in granite. Feed your drill through it and use one piece of granite with a hole on the surface you wish to cut. Use another up around where the stone weight is. Between the two, it will keep the drill from wobbling so badly
Try it. Bet your precision increases substantially. Then imagine they used a drill bit made from the dagger material, not copper or bronze. Make one. Bet you see significantly better results. Don't you think the ancient Egyptians figured that out? I am positive they did. That is the point.
@@trevorwesterdahl6245 I made video how to’s and posted them so as not have to explain things in long comments.
I have a demo doing what you say you you know to be impossible regarding curves.
See my playlist section and do it for yourself if you are in doubt.
The wobbly drill replicated the impossible tapering and is shown being used, as well as the hieroglyph for that tool.
I have already used pieces of drilled granite as a guide, to make impossibly thin granite rings.
Also in my playlist of how to’s.
One more point. There are numerous holes in granite that are perfectly round and straight that go through more than eight feet of granite. Don't know the length of the longest known hole, but its substantial. You know your drill can't do that at all. If you try to make one that can, it will be obvious to you that you can't just hold a handle with a weight and spin it all wobbly like that.
My suggestion will make more sense when you attempt to make a very deep hole, not your shallow holes. Something was used to make that drill spin evenly and without wobble. I gave you just one suggestion. Making a drill that cuts deep forces anyone to figure out how to make a long straight cut (like my suggestion to use granite with holes as a guide). They probably used animal fat, or something similar to lube it, too.
So, stop calling BS, use common sense, and think this through. That is all I am asking. Again, I guarantee the Egyptions used something harder than copper or bronze and I wouldn't be surpised at all if they figured out how to use a matterial similar to diamond to use as an abrassive that they actually forged into a metal tool. Not saying they did, it just wouldn't surpise me at all.
Go through the process to cut deep holes. It will open your mind and force you to change/modify your tools. Maybe then, you will make holes that actually match.