I guess we can exclude the Herodian construction of the Kotel with similarly weighted-stone, because those you can at least stick a piece of paper into.
Joke aside, I've found this to be a claim that becomes too vague to worry about. You're free to call me lazy again, but I'm not inclined to find out exactly what the meaning or application of "can't fit a razor blade" would be. Logically given any two touching stones of any shape, there will be places razors can't fit, and places they can. Most of these photos look like a razor would fit, or they look like they have mortar equivalents. So it isn't proven by photos. I don't have any data that disproves the idea that high-quality quarry planing is incapable of the phenomenon described.
I see no reason to doubt what I've heard, that the biggest such structures are 3 pyramids and they could each have taken 20 years for 100,000 people to build, which were certainly within the parameters. The general logistics were worked out; DeMille even popularized some in Ten Commandments for raising an obelisk. Now, I'm not opposed to saying that demons, giants (nephilim), and golems were all involved; but that doesn't change the likelihood any because none are necessary.
I'd love to interact with specific reports rather than generic ideas. You link (1) a 2-hour pyramid video without transcript or summary, which I respectfully decline; (2) an article on the thesis that many tons of copper were traded between Michigan and the Near East 4,000 to 3,000 years ago, a subject on which I have no prior experience and are therefore agnostic despite its rather novel claims; and (3) another reference to your interested in multiple cyclical catastrophes, which both opposes the Biblical record and is irrelevant to the period covered by OP. So I don't know that you have your blocks put together.
I have no interest in spending two hours on new doubt-raising experiences for topics that I already am comfortable with reasonable answers about.
In my youth I was a bit concerned about how these things were built because I didn't have reasonable answers. I put in the time and now I'm comfortable. You could easily attempt to pique my doubt again by listing 5-10 top unanswered questions, but since you already made one attempt with the links and it fell flat to me I don't think I'd be interested. Atlantis stuff, that might be interesting. You posted a photo of humans standing next to a giant (about 8-foot) body, and I say, great, more proof of known acromegaly in the Americas, and what's it to me, and your answer has been something like "but don't you get it" and you post about starting newspapers on fire with body heat. No, I don't get it, and the things of yours I don't get I haven't been inspired to get. You've posted things I've wanted to get, and I look through them until I get them. These aren't they.
You never actually dive into the stuff I share and invite you to dive into. You’ve never shared your thoughts on the Gospel of Thomas despite multiple occasions and invitations, nor the Tao Te Ching, nor John Chang and Mo Pai, nor gTummo yoga, nor any of the “prehistory” stuff I’ve shared (including this). If you do ever comment, it’s usually gay and passive aggressive like these last two, and never about the substance of the post. Only retards are convinced the earth is 6,000 years old - why would I design my posts around retards?
As Elwood Dowd might say: now, you mean 6,017 years, let's stick to the facts.
I've interacted with Gospel of Thomas quite a bit, and with the one passage of Tao te Ching, and answered about Chang and friends, and I generally support and interact with prehistory. But you don't like what I say, and the topic goes away after a bit (especially when you descend into namecalling those who are actually interested in the general field). Somehow I'm not giving you the approval you seek. Even when I throw you something freely about the fact that I don't doubt golems were involved but I'd like more than just photos and razor talk, that doesn't stroke you, golems are not "substance".
If you wanted to me keel over and admit that any of these things proves undeniably that the earth is more than 6,017 years old; or that there's more to theology than can fit within Christianity; then I repeat that I have enough evidence to keep me sustained on those propositions for quite some time and that it'd take a lot of effort on both our parts. If you don't want to put in that design effort, that's why you get the comments you did.
OP is a cute conspiracy-tweaking group of nondescript photos that asks a loaded question that is easily parried by ignorant normies who know that people are still building tall buildings, even pyramids, today and don't care about showing off stone when they can show off glass and steel. I gave it more time than it deserved. I read most of your fascinating link on a subject new to me, Michigan copper, and found that more interesting, declaring myself agnostic rather than slamming it to the ground with prejudgment. If we want to compare effort, maybe I should just redirect my effort to those who give evidence of wanting to put in similar effort with me.
I guess we can exclude the Herodian construction of the Kotel with similarly weighted-stone, because those you can at least stick a piece of paper into.
Joke aside, I've found this to be a claim that becomes too vague to worry about. You're free to call me lazy again, but I'm not inclined to find out exactly what the meaning or application of "can't fit a razor blade" would be. Logically given any two touching stones of any shape, there will be places razors can't fit, and places they can. Most of these photos look like a razor would fit, or they look like they have mortar equivalents. So it isn't proven by photos. I don't have any data that disproves the idea that high-quality quarry planing is incapable of the phenomenon described.
I see no reason to doubt what I've heard, that the biggest such structures are 3 pyramids and they could each have taken 20 years for 100,000 people to build, which were certainly within the parameters. The general logistics were worked out; DeMille even popularized some in Ten Commandments for raising an obelisk. Now, I'm not opposed to saying that demons, giants (nephilim), and golems were all involved; but that doesn't change the likelihood any because none are necessary.
I'd love to interact with specific reports rather than generic ideas. You link (1) a 2-hour pyramid video without transcript or summary, which I respectfully decline; (2) an article on the thesis that many tons of copper were traded between Michigan and the Near East 4,000 to 3,000 years ago, a subject on which I have no prior experience and are therefore agnostic despite its rather novel claims; and (3) another reference to your interested in multiple cyclical catastrophes, which both opposes the Biblical record and is irrelevant to the period covered by OP. So I don't know that you have your blocks put together.
Watch the documentary gaylord, this is a forum post not a symposium
I have no interest in spending two hours on new doubt-raising experiences for topics that I already am comfortable with reasonable answers about.
In my youth I was a bit concerned about how these things were built because I didn't have reasonable answers. I put in the time and now I'm comfortable. You could easily attempt to pique my doubt again by listing 5-10 top unanswered questions, but since you already made one attempt with the links and it fell flat to me I don't think I'd be interested. Atlantis stuff, that might be interesting. You posted a photo of humans standing next to a giant (about 8-foot) body, and I say, great, more proof of known acromegaly in the Americas, and what's it to me, and your answer has been something like "but don't you get it" and you post about starting newspapers on fire with body heat. No, I don't get it, and the things of yours I don't get I haven't been inspired to get. You've posted things I've wanted to get, and I look through them until I get them. These aren't they.
You never actually dive into the stuff I share and invite you to dive into. You’ve never shared your thoughts on the Gospel of Thomas despite multiple occasions and invitations, nor the Tao Te Ching, nor John Chang and Mo Pai, nor gTummo yoga, nor any of the “prehistory” stuff I’ve shared (including this). If you do ever comment, it’s usually gay and passive aggressive like these last two, and never about the substance of the post. Only retards are convinced the earth is 6,000 years old - why would I design my posts around retards?
As Elwood Dowd might say: now, you mean 6,017 years, let's stick to the facts.
I've interacted with Gospel of Thomas quite a bit, and with the one passage of Tao te Ching, and answered about Chang and friends, and I generally support and interact with prehistory. But you don't like what I say, and the topic goes away after a bit (especially when you descend into namecalling those who are actually interested in the general field). Somehow I'm not giving you the approval you seek. Even when I throw you something freely about the fact that I don't doubt golems were involved but I'd like more than just photos and razor talk, that doesn't stroke you, golems are not "substance".
If you wanted to me keel over and admit that any of these things proves undeniably that the earth is more than 6,017 years old; or that there's more to theology than can fit within Christianity; then I repeat that I have enough evidence to keep me sustained on those propositions for quite some time and that it'd take a lot of effort on both our parts. If you don't want to put in that design effort, that's why you get the comments you did.
OP is a cute conspiracy-tweaking group of nondescript photos that asks a loaded question that is easily parried by ignorant normies who know that people are still building tall buildings, even pyramids, today and don't care about showing off stone when they can show off glass and steel. I gave it more time than it deserved. I read most of your fascinating link on a subject new to me, Michigan copper, and found that more interesting, declaring myself agnostic rather than slamming it to the ground with prejudgment. If we want to compare effort, maybe I should just redirect my effort to those who give evidence of wanting to put in similar effort with me.