The Precision-Engineered Great Pyramid, she is leaning against granite blocks Perfectly Flat...

Now we proceed to the mystery that all other mysteries on earth bow to. The monument that has baffled countless millions of people for at least 5,000 years.

It sits in somber, silence anonymous, no hieroglyphs announce its builders; no dedication plaque anywhere to be seen; no colorful murals were ever found decorating the interior walls; no pharaoh’s remains were ever discovered.

The Great Pyramid, the last of the Ancient 7 Wonders of the World still standing…

The massive edifice stands 481’ (48 stories) tall. The base covers 13.5 acres (588,060 sq. ft.) that were levelled flat with great accuracy. An estimated 2.3 million quarried and cut stone-blocks were used in its construction.

The total weight of the pyramid has been projected to be in the range of 6-6.5 million tons. Moreover, it stood as the tallest building on the earth for 3,800 years until the Lincoln Cathedral was built in 1300.

In spite of the foregoing facts, we are asked to believe that a culture, using primitive tools and methods, constructed the pyramid in 2,500 BC, more or less. This is an extraordinary, problematic thesis on many counts. As Carl Sagan, so aptly noted “extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.

Here I am simply going to focus on a few features of the GP andl show that 1) no such evidence has ever been provided by those that have and still do propose it as constituting a bona fide history and 2) the proposed native builders lacked the knowledge, technology, and methods needed to construct the Great Pyramid.

The first problem emerges with the task of leveling the natural, limestone outcrop chosen to build the edifice upon. That was native, irregular, rough and uneven limestone bedrock.

As we know the tools we are told that the Egyptian workers had to use to get this job done, were primitive, rounded, granite hammer-stones.      

It is true that a granite hammer could chip and grind native limestone. However, very doubtful to the flat, truly level finish, across 13 acres, described in the report, “the accuracy achieved with laser technology today.”

However, the second task presents an even more formidable challenge. The Descending Passage had to be excavated before the blocks of the superstructure were laid down. That task required digging a tunnel into the bedrock to a length of 340-feet.

Again, the workmen would have had hammer-stones to complete this job. However, the specs of the tunnel make this an extremely difficult, if not impossible task. The passage was designed to the following specifications: 3.94 ft. height, 3.4 ft. width.

How would a workmen wield a hammer-stone in such a confined space?

Moreover, there are more severe challenges this task posed. It was designed to be set at an incline of 26-degrees for its entire length. This was accurately achieved, but how and with what technology?

Furthermore, the tunnel was engineered with precision and was arrow straight for its entire length as well. Measured, it was determined that it only deviated ¼ inch over its length. How was this level of precision achieved?

One even more vexing problem is that to our knowledge the workmen achieved all of the foregoing without lighting. (Same as Saqqar tunnel) No traces of soot, smudge marks or smoke have ever been found in the Descending Passage.

We see that already in the first two basic tasks on the foreman’s ‘To Do’ list, our native Egyptian builder’s fall far short of being equal to the challenges posed.

The key issue with these tasks are the high levels of precision the finished work displays. To create it required technology capable of producing it. Stone Age technology hardly qualifies and the early Egyptians of the Old Kingdom had post-Stone Age tech at best.

All of this we established in prior chapters. However, the Great Pyramid so far exceeds anything that has ever been built the points need to be driven home.

The next task takes place at the quarry.

Here the quarrymen had to excavate the nearby limestone bedrock and produce rough stones. Then stonemasons had to carve them into useable building blocks. Those blocks had an average size of 4 by 4 x? and weighed about 2.5 tons each.

We shall concede that these tasks could be achieved because it is remotely plausible. However, there is one quarrying, transport and placement challenge that will not be conceded. The Great Pyramid is largely comprised of yellow limestone quarried on site.

But granite was used to frame in the King’s Chamber.

The particular granite used was quarried at the Aswan dam. That is 500 miles upstream along the Nile, from the building site. In addition, the blocks used to create the King’s Chamber weigh up to 70 tons.

There is simply no way that the native Egyptians could have successfully quarried a 70-ton granite block first of all. To achieve that would require that they performed the following tasks:

Cut a deep trench in the granite bedrock. 2) Undercut the block to free it from the bedrock. 3) Lifted the block out of the hole. 4) Transported it to the Nile River. 5) Ferried it 500 miles downriver to Giza. 6) Managed to drag the 70-ton block up the pyramid 150’ vertical feet to where the chamber was to be constructed.

This set of tasks would require technology capable of machining granite to the smooth finish we see in the King’s Chamber. In addition, equipment with the capacity to lift 70 tons and a barge capable of handling that load.

There is zero evidence showing that the native Egyptians had the necessary technologies. Moreover, the 28’long 70-ton block(s) could not have been hauled up any system of ramps.

The massive weight in addition to the inertial resistance posed by the ramp incline would require hundreds of rope haulers. Each side of the GP is 755’long. How could a team large enough to pull the load up a ramp be fit within that length?

The added problem comes when the team approaches the end of the ramp they are on and must turn up the next side. Obviously they would be out of the pulling loop as they climbed up the next side of the ramp.

Ramp theorists forget that they do not have the luxury of the wide open space available on the ground level. The ramps are limited in length and width, which tightly restricts the numbers of men on the hauling team.  

The 70-ton block of granite in the King’s Chamber busts the accepted thesis of who built the pyramid and how it was done.

It is quite plain to see that the Egyptians could not have met any step of the ‘rose granite’ challenge. (We shall return to the KC shortly.) The blocks in the KC also show a high level of precision stonemasonry skills and very accurate placement. They are tightly fit together and the walls are completely smooth.

It would simply not be possible to create these blocks from granite using granite tools. They would leave gouges, abrasions, rough and uneven surfaces. However, if archaeologists beg to differ they can arrange demonstrations to prove the validity of their concepts.

Thus far we have seen that the conventionally accepted thesis has been falsified in three out of the first four steps. We conceded it might be feasible that the limestone block challenge could be accomplished as Egyptologists claim.

However, there are more formidable tasks and challenges in front of us. The Ascending Passage was designed to be set at an angle of 26 degrees. It was given the same cramped dimensions as the lower passage already described.

The upper passage leads to the Queens chamber and then the Grand Gallery. The latter was given a vaulted space. (Insert text dimensions)

There are 36 ceiling stones in the roof of the Grand Gallery, each of them was individually removable. The Gallery serves as a ramp that leads into the King’s Chamber.

Returning to the King’s Chamber we find it is situated at the 50th course of masonry. There are 21 stones comprising the floor alone. The walls are comprised of 101 granite blocks and there are 9 immense beams forming the ceiling.

All of the foregoing multiples the ‘Aswan quarry problem’ described above many, many times over. The chamber measures 10.45 meters by 5.20 meters, and is 5.8 meters high.

Stripped of the Egyptologist narrative, it is a meticulously constructed, empty chamber containing a single box and a very austere room at that.

The problems which the construction of this chamber are many and difficult. How were those massive blocks hauled up 50 tiers? Then how were they fit together with such accuracy? We are talking about a crew that only had brute physical strength, primitive methods and technologies.

Above the King’s Chamber we find 38 or so blocks, each weighing from 50+ tons that were placed on top of the ceiling of the chamber. They form what archaeologist’s call “relieving compartments”. Their architectural purpose is a hotly contested issue. (Isn’t everything on Giza?)

Leaving that aside, we continue to add more mass that had to be lifted, transported up many ramps and precisely positioned. The technically illiterate brush the physical (physics) realities aside and plow forth.

They go on churning out new drawings of how it was done on fresh sketch pads to persuade others ostensibly, as technically illiterate, that the conventional thesis is correct.

Would that one of them would fund the experiment to test the hypothesis. If not that, then at least join the team of day laborers as they set about the task of lifting a 70-ton block of stone off the ground. (One inch would be sufficient.)

That was not said in jest. In fact it is high time to quit all the tomfoolery and get down to proof of concept. (I proposed that Egyptologists conduct a simple experiment in my latest book)

Within the Kings Chamber there is a small vent (shown in above insert), which is in fact the opening into a shaft. Egyptologists use to claim that it was an “air shaft” that allowed the pharaoh’s soul to escape. Wrong!

This brings us to the next feature that demonstrates the face that the Great Pyramid is a precision-engineered structure.

For those of you that want to really dig into this deeply please visit Rufolf Gatenbrink’s website. He is the scientist that designed the robot probe that went into the ‘vents’ and found them blocked by small doors.

He has an excellent presentation that covers the design and engineering it took to build the tunnels. That includes a criticism of the technical illiteracy of Egyptologists.

It is too serious and complex an issue to get into the Gatenbrink discoveries in a small section of one chapter. There is one other major piece of engineering that went into the construction of the pyramid. That is the fact that has eight sides, not four.

That too is too complex a piece of engineering to examine in this volume. However, an aerial photo, which is the only way it can be detected conveys the actual level of architectural and engineering knowledge needed to build the edifice. (insert pic)

The mystery of who built the great pyramid and how, has been with us for many millennia. It is only with the rise of archaeology, and Egyptology, that anyone thought they could explain it. Here it must be noted that those disciples are not considered in the category of hard sciences.

Therefore, their explanations are more cultural/historical than technical. Moreover, their proposals are not ‘scientific’ since 1) they have not been tested and 2) do not address and resolve the real issues.

In fact, the GP is a precision-engineered, geometric structure the likes of which does not exist elsewhere on earth. Any attribution of any artifact to a specific period and culture has to be connected with technology capable of producing it.

There is no evidence in the record showing the Egyptians had that. Hammer-stones, wooden sledges, ropes and muscle-power are not adequate to the task. Egyptologist’s seem to assert those primitive tools were adequate appear to base their claim on the fact that they have no other known culture to point to.

I admit that I do not have on either and that is why this issue remains enigmatic. Falsely ascribing the pyramid is worse than simply not knowing, the former is misleading and unscientific.