conventional methods of explaining the pyramid construction would take too long for it to have been done, especially with bronze tools.

the only workable explanation in the time frame with the tools they had would be floating blocks up with vertical aquaduct shafts, its a newer theory but not well supported in academia.

so from an academic standpoint we simply cant explain how the pyramids were build, let alone planned.

i believe in the float theory, but if someone doesnt then occams razor actually suggests aliens.

A million times no.... all of this is just.... so wrong.

We have several potential ways to build the pyramids with bronze tools. The question isn't if they could but which way they decided to do it"

Additionally, even if we assume a very advanced civilization, it's virtually guaranteed they wouldn't be able to reach us. Ignoring that it's not 100% guaranteed there's another civilization since we only have one example of a hospitable planet and you can't draw statistical conclusions from N=1.

nice

So which methods are you referencing? the spiral ramp method and/or linear ramp method?

im a big egypt nut, probably watched dozens of how were the built documentaries by now. just trying to gauge what you're talking about.

as to space, no. at least not according to the space scientists who claim the universe is so vast that its a 100% guarantee other more advanced lifeforms exist. and no im not talking about ancient aliens hacks, NDT and other space scientists believe this. havent u hear the "somewhere in the vastness of space is a version of u but with different hair" type statements?

Honestly, it doesn't matter what method. "The people who lived there, with a written history of the construction and physical evidence they did it" will always be a simpler explanation than an advanced space-faring civilization that traveled trillions of miles and only left stacked rocks as evidence of their arrival.

The "space scientists" talking on documentaries and interviews aren't exactly the authority on the subject (their authority is when they are writing in peer reviewed scientific publications), and will usually talk about interesting things regardless of their scientific validity in those interviews because they're acting as a communicator to the public. The fact of the matter is that right now we have one example of a hospitable planet that we've been able to probe for life. You cannot draw conclusions from N=1 no matter how vast the potential sample size is.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jul 31 2020 10:40am

we also have written evidence the kings were gods. we have 100x more of that written down than we do of the pyramid construction, and no blue prints or plans at all of their construction. are you familiar with the math involve on block placement given the spiral ramp method? it all but invalidates the linear ramp method, as if that wasn't already in question given the amount of dirt and time it would have taken to build it. im not getting many specifics from you, it seems more like you're working off of logic. but i dont believe in aliens either for constructing it, im simply saying from a statistical standpoint putting 2 and 2 together when we dont have a workable construction theory its an interesting thought. its not a workable theory, as its disproving a negative, just a thought experiment.

as to the n=1 stuff that reads like you're a theist, i dont know of a single person in space science that believes thats even a possibility. especially since we have some limited evidence that other planets could host life.

I think there were plenty of more human cities we didn't know about on the coast and then when the water rose up only the landlocked people survive. Atlantis for example. Human civilization is older than the Greeks, Sumerians, and the Egyptians. Like now the most educated and affluent lived near the coast. They were swallowed by the ocean.

This post was edited by Skinned on Jul 31 2020 11:07am