Okay, after a long intro and a reference to Grimault and the theory of alignment of monuments (another apophenia as I showed the last time you brought it up, and I'm not sure you didn't just use the same video again that I previously skimmed), in the 6th minute I find an engineer saying the same argument from ignorance that is commonly called the "gee-whiz" argument. Some of the tolerances are stated to be .02 inches. (Incidentally, razor blades are .005-.01 inches thick). The pyramids comprise 8 listed feats of engineering. There is nothing there about impossibility, only about undesirability. Our own sky-scraping buildings have similar feats of engineering so as to make them marvels; the Egyptians just wanted something with a different awe factor than steel and glass. So I still don't see what's so shocking to you. Do you want me to search now without bias for detailed analyses of how large stones were placed to meet tolerances of sometimes .02 inches, which I'm confident exist? Seeing as you have a history of not wanting to seek out contrary evidence to your own confirmation biases?
No, the King's Chamber in the Great Pyramid was not constructed with mortar; the massive, precision-cut granite blocks were fitted together with extremely tight, mortar-free joints. While some mortar was used to bind the core and casing stones of the pyramid, the interior chambers like the King's Chamber and Queen's Chamber were built with an exceptionally high degree of precision using heavy, solid blocks of granite.
Right at the start
Okay, after a long intro and a reference to Grimault and the theory of alignment of monuments (another apophenia as I showed the last time you brought it up, and I'm not sure you didn't just use the same video again that I previously skimmed), in the 6th minute I find an engineer saying the same argument from ignorance that is commonly called the "gee-whiz" argument. Some of the tolerances are stated to be .02 inches. (Incidentally, razor blades are .005-.01 inches thick). The pyramids comprise 8 listed feats of engineering. There is nothing there about impossibility, only about undesirability. Our own sky-scraping buildings have similar feats of engineering so as to make them marvels; the Egyptians just wanted something with a different awe factor than steel and glass. So I still don't see what's so shocking to you. Do you want me to search now without bias for detailed analyses of how large stones were placed to meet tolerances of sometimes .02 inches, which I'm confident exist? Seeing as you have a history of not wanting to seek out contrary evidence to your own confirmation biases?
JWTFD
Here's some data on the sledge of Djehutihotep, various ramp theories, man-hour calculations, and gypsum mortar. So the question there is not how the high tolerances were achieved (it was by mortar), but how the energy to make the mortar was derived (squabbling about carbon-dating of burnt wood). Sounds very doable to me, but then I'm skeptically credulous.
>disingenuous yappy retard alert
Lmfao