Revisions | Conspiracies - Conspiracy Theories & Facts

"How the stones were moved from where they were quarried to their final locations is uncertain."

Let me get this text transcript.

So, the largest stone blocks ever cut, the largest stone blocks ever moved, the largest stone blocks ever lifted, as well as the largest solid stone columns in the history of ancient human civilization are all located in the same exact location, Balbeck-Lebanon. And for some reason, mainstream historians and archaeologists give 100% of the credit to the Romans, despite the fact that the Romans did not have the physical or technological capability to move or lift these stones. Let me start off by showing you the three massive stone blocks located at the Temple of Jupiter, also referred to as the Trilathon, or Trilathon Stones. These three stone blocks are 70 feet long, 14 feet high, and 10 feet wide, and were somehow lifted more than 30 feet off the ground. What's even crazier is that they come from a quarry more than 800 meters or more than a half mile away, and they were somehow brought uphill to this site. And when you take a look at these three stone blocks, look at the layer below them. These seven stone blocks are estimated to be 350 tons of peace. Just compare these stone blocks to other people, as you can see here standing next to them, so you can get an idea for just how massive these blocks are. Again, the largest blocks ever cut or moved or lifted in the history of human existence are all at this site, and you can see them right here. But these aren't the only massive stone blocks at this site, which is also referred to as the Heliopolis, by the way. As you can see here, between the Temple of Bacchus and the Temple of Jupiter, you have this row of massive blocks more than 800 tons of peace estimated, one of which is estimated to be between 900 and 1,000 tons, and you can see it right here next to the staircase. And just compare it again to people standing next to it, so you can get a feel for just how incredibly large these blocks are. Also take a look, by the way, while mentioning it, the Temple of Bacchus and the foundation stones that it's built upon, more than 12 feet high, compare it next to people and it's difficult to find good photos of this, but you get an idea. So the question becomes, how on earth were these stones moved a half mile uphill to this site and how were they lifted? The mainstream idea or theory I should say is that they were moved on logs, literally that they put these things on top of logs and the hundreds of people strapped to ropes and they dragged them uphill. But that of course just doesn't pass the common sense test. And by the way, it needs to be mentioned that none of these theories have ever been tested. They're simply just guessing and it really doesn't make sense. Can you imagine being at the back of this thing where they have hundreds of people holding a two million pound block to prevent it from sliding backwards as they go uphill? I mean, that's just ridiculous. Another theory is that they hooked up 800 oxes to ropes and to the stone to drag them to the current location. 800 oxes is based on how much weight one ox can pull. But there are so many things wrong with this. I mean, it doesn't pass the common sense test. Could you imagine what it would take to line up 800 oxes? I mean, just to coordinate a six or an eight horse hitch carriage is incredibly difficult. It requires an tremendous amount of coordination. But to do this with 800 oxes, I mean, how are they going to pull that off? How long would it take to even hook these things up? And not to mention the very nature of the stone itself, the shape of it would dig into the earth as it's being pulled and imagine the amount of weight that it'd be held up against. It just doesn't make any sense. To put all this in perspective, what does it take to do in modern times to move a tremendous amount of weight? Well, let's look at the example back in 2012, how the Los Angeles County Museum of the Arts moved a 340 ton stone block more than 100 miles. And to do so, they had to custom build a truck that was 295 feet long and had get this 196 wheels. Now how they move these stone blocks in ancient times in Balbeck is the subject of much debate. But let's discuss what it would take to lift them because moving versus lifting are two totally different things. So the most powerful crane from Roman times is as you see here and it could lift approximately 6,000 kilograms, which is equivalent to 6.6 tons. So wait a second. The strongest crane in the existence of the Roman Empire could lift only 6.6 tons, which is impressive by the way, as it didn't have hydraulics. But let's go back to the Trilathon stones at let's say 800 tons apiece. That means if you do the math, that would require 121 individual Roman cranes. Or even let's just look at the 350 ton stone blocks below. That would require 53 individual cranes like that, that's ridiculous. You couldn't even, you don't even have enough space to move and surround one of these blocks with that many cranes. It doesn't make any sense, does it? Now to again give it an example from modern times, take a look at this crane here. You see cranes like this driving down the freeway, they take up more than one lane. Each one of these 12 tires is up to your neck. And this specific crane here has a max lift of 330 tons, which is incredible. Now although this is not nearly the strongest crane in existence by any means, it's just to paint you a picture here that when you see massive cranes like this with the ability to lift a max of 330 tons, and we're supposed to believe that the Romans had some sort of primitive methods, even though the physical and scientific evidence completely debunks that they had the capability of lifting these stones. So this is where people say, well hold on, they did it though, so how do you explain that? You just, you do lack the imagination of what humans are capable of, no. What I'm suggesting is that this was done by an advanced civilization that dates back tens of thousands of years, as I've discussed in many other videos. Now a lot of people will look at the example of the Colosseum in Rome and say, wait a second, if the Romans could build that, why don't you think that they can move and lift these massive stone blocks? Well, upon a closer inspection of the Colosseum, they're made up of significantly smaller blocks in cement, none of which compare even remotely close to any of these blocks in Balbec. In fact, just to clarify, the largest stone block in all of Rome is 53 tons, which is the capital block of the Trajan column, as you can see here. 53 tons is the largest stone block in all of Rome. Now mainstream archaeologists and historians will tell you that the Romans did Balbec to show off to outsiders on how they're, they're incredible capabilities, but you know, this is 1400 miles away from Rome, and Rome has nothing that even compares to that. I mean, does that really make sense? Now speaking of massive blocks, over in Balbec, at the quarry where these stones came from, the largest stone ever cut is the stone of the pregnant woman as it's been called. This stone block is more than 20 meters long or 67 feet long, 16 feet wide and 14 feet high and is estimated to be at least 1200 tons. And actually it is no longer the largest stone block ever found as in 2014, right below and next to it, they found an even larger stone block, which is estimated to be between 1600 and 1800 tons, 64 feet long, 20 feet wide and 18 feet tall, absolutely huge. Now academics will tell you that they cut these blocks once they realize that they were too heavy to move, they just abandoned them, but it's like, wait a second, why would they cut multiple stone blocks? And by the way, it's also worth mentioning that they believe now that there are more stones like this also buried underneath. So the question becomes, why would they cut more than one block, which would of course would be an incredible difficulty. I mean, this is limestone by the way, which isn't particularly, it's not a hard stone, but what the methods that the Romans did have, did they even have tools large enough to cut these? I'm not going to debate on cutting these stones as it's limestone, but I mean, just the fact that they would have been so dumb to cut a few of them before realizing they couldn't move one of them. I mean, that doesn't make sense either, does it? But the bottom line is this, the Romans did not have the physical or technological capability to move or lift these massive stone blocks. They found them just like we've seen in other examples throughout the world, whether it's in Cusco, Peru and Machu Picchu, as well as in Egypt, where people come in and find other remnants from other civilizations and they simply build on top of them. And that is exactly what you're seeing here in Balbeck Lebanon. And there is evidence to support this because at this very site in Balbeck on this hill, there's evidence dating back of human civilization, dating back more than 9,000 years ago. That's 3,000 years before history ever started at 6,000 years ago. So the evidence is all here that humans were there. They had capabilities that exceed anything that we ever thought possible and that we can only do today with advanced heavy machinery. Again, this is the subject of much debates.

Part 2.

Ancient Rome Did Not Build This Part 2 - World's Largest Stone Columns - Baalbek

Somebody else's video:

"Baalbek Megaliths" 25 minutes long.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKevpBjecDE

Up to 12 minutes. These gigantic ones at the bottom have more erosion and seem older. All the other Roman stuff is smaller and newer.

21 minutes he talks about this..

temple mount "western stone"

"The "Western Stone," also known as the Nidbach Raba or Great Stone, is a massive, ~600-ton block of local limestone located in the tunnels beneath Jerusalem's Western Wall. Laid during Herod the Great's reconstruction of the Second Temple about 2,000 years ago, it's one of the largest known building blocks in the world, with dimensions of approximately 45 feet long, 10 feet high, and 11 feet wide. The stone is part of the Herodian masonry of the Western Wall and remains a subject of fascination due to the mysterious methods used to quarry and place it."

Looking this up..

"Nidbach Raba - The Great Stone of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem" 14 minutes long. He gets into it at 10 minutes in.. goes down there.

93 days ago

1 score

Reason: None provided.

"How the stones were moved from where they were quarried to their final locations is uncertain."

Let me get this text transcript.

So, the largest stone blocks ever cut, the largest stone blocks ever moved, the largest stone blocks ever lifted, as well as the largest solid stone columns in the history of ancient human civilization are all located in the same exact location, Balbeck-Lebanon. And for some reason, mainstream historians and archaeologists give 100% of the credit to the Romans, despite the fact that the Romans did not have the physical or technological capability to move or lift these stones. Let me start off by showing you the three massive stone blocks located at the Temple of Jupiter, also referred to as the Trilathon, or Trilathon Stones. These three stone blocks are 70 feet long, 14 feet high, and 10 feet wide, and were somehow lifted more than 30 feet off the ground. What's even crazier is that they come from a quarry more than 800 meters or more than a half mile away, and they were somehow brought uphill to this site. And when you take a look at these three stone blocks, look at the layer below them. These seven stone blocks are estimated to be 350 tons of peace. Just compare these stone blocks to other people, as you can see here standing next to them, so you can get an idea for just how massive these blocks are. Again, the largest blocks ever cut or moved or lifted in the history of human existence are all at this site, and you can see them right here. But these aren't the only massive stone blocks at this site, which is also referred to as the Heliopolis, by the way. As you can see here, between the Temple of Bacchus and the Temple of Jupiter, you have this row of massive blocks more than 800 tons of peace estimated, one of which is estimated to be between 900 and 1,000 tons, and you can see it right here next to the staircase. And just compare it again to people standing next to it, so you can get a feel for just how incredibly large these blocks are. Also take a look, by the way, while mentioning it, the Temple of Bacchus and the foundation stones that it's built upon, more than 12 feet high, compare it next to people and it's difficult to find good photos of this, but you get an idea. So the question becomes, how on earth were these stones moved a half mile uphill to this site and how were they lifted? The mainstream idea or theory I should say is that they were moved on logs, literally that they put these things on top of logs and the hundreds of people strapped to ropes and they dragged them uphill. But that of course just doesn't pass the common sense test. And by the way, it needs to be mentioned that none of these theories have ever been tested. They're simply just guessing and it really doesn't make sense. Can you imagine being at the back of this thing where they have hundreds of people holding a two million pound block to prevent it from sliding backwards as they go uphill? I mean, that's just ridiculous. Another theory is that they hooked up 800 oxes to ropes and to the stone to drag them to the current location. 800 oxes is based on how much weight one ox can pull. But there are so many things wrong with this. I mean, it doesn't pass the common sense test. Could you imagine what it would take to line up 800 oxes? I mean, just to coordinate a six or an eight horse hitch carriage is incredibly difficult. It requires an tremendous amount of coordination. But to do this with 800 oxes, I mean, how are they going to pull that off? How long would it take to even hook these things up? And not to mention the very nature of the stone itself, the shape of it would dig into the earth as it's being pulled and imagine the amount of weight that it'd be held up against. It just doesn't make any sense. To put all this in perspective, what does it take to do in modern times to move a tremendous amount of weight? Well, let's look at the example back in 2012, how the Los Angeles County Museum of the Arts moved a 340 ton stone block more than 100 miles. And to do so, they had to custom build a truck that was 295 feet long and had get this 196 wheels. Now how they move these stone blocks in ancient times in Balbeck is the subject of much debate. But let's discuss what it would take to lift them because moving versus lifting are two totally different things. So the most powerful crane from Roman times is as you see here and it could lift approximately 6,000 kilograms, which is equivalent to 6.6 tons. So wait a second. The strongest crane in the existence of the Roman Empire could lift only 6.6 tons, which is impressive by the way, as it didn't have hydraulics. But let's go back to the Trilathon stones at let's say 800 tons apiece. That means if you do the math, that would require 121 individual Roman cranes. Or even let's just look at the 350 ton stone blocks below. That would require 53 individual cranes like that, that's ridiculous. You couldn't even, you don't even have enough space to move and surround one of these blocks with that many cranes. It doesn't make any sense, does it? Now to again give it an example from modern times, take a look at this crane here. You see cranes like this driving down the freeway, they take up more than one lane. Each one of these 12 tires is up to your neck. And this specific crane here has a max lift of 330 tons, which is incredible. Now although this is not nearly the strongest crane in existence by any means, it's just to paint you a picture here that when you see massive cranes like this with the ability to lift a max of 330 tons, and we're supposed to believe that the Romans had some sort of primitive methods, even though the physical and scientific evidence completely debunks that they had the capability of lifting these stones. So this is where people say, well hold on, they did it though, so how do you explain that? You just, you do lack the imagination of what humans are capable of, no. What I'm suggesting is that this was done by an advanced civilization that dates back tens of thousands of years, as I've discussed in many other videos. Now a lot of people will look at the example of the Colosseum in Rome and say, wait a second, if the Romans could build that, why don't you think that they can move and lift these massive stone blocks? Well, upon a closer inspection of the Colosseum, they're made up of significantly smaller blocks in cement, none of which compare even remotely close to any of these blocks in Balbec. In fact, just to clarify, the largest stone block in all of Rome is 53 tons, which is the capital block of the Trajan column, as you can see here. 53 tons is the largest stone block in all of Rome. Now mainstream archaeologists and historians will tell you that the Romans did Balbec to show off to outsiders on how they're, they're incredible capabilities, but you know, this is 1400 miles away from Rome, and Rome has nothing that even compares to that. I mean, does that really make sense? Now speaking of massive blocks, over in Balbec, at the quarry where these stones came from, the largest stone ever cut is the stone of the pregnant woman as it's been called. This stone block is more than 20 meters long or 67 feet long, 16 feet wide and 14 feet high and is estimated to be at least 1200 tons. And actually it is no longer the largest stone block ever found as in 2014, right below and next to it, they found an even larger stone block, which is estimated to be between 1600 and 1800 tons, 64 feet long, 20 feet wide and 18 feet tall, absolutely huge. Now academics will tell you that they cut these blocks once they realize that they were too heavy to move, they just abandoned them, but it's like, wait a second, why would they cut multiple stone blocks? And by the way, it's also worth mentioning that they believe now that there are more stones like this also buried underneath. So the question becomes, why would they cut more than one block, which would of course would be an incredible difficulty. I mean, this is limestone by the way, which isn't particularly, it's not a hard stone, but what the methods that the Romans did have, did they even have tools large enough to cut these? I'm not going to debate on cutting these stones as it's limestone, but I mean, just the fact that they would have been so dumb to cut a few of them before realizing they couldn't move one of them. I mean, that doesn't make sense either, does it? But the bottom line is this, the Romans did not have the physical or technological capability to move or lift these massive stone blocks. They found them just like we've seen in other examples throughout the world, whether it's in Cusco, Peru and Machu Picchu, as well as in Egypt, where people come in and find other remnants from other civilizations and they simply build on top of them. And that is exactly what you're seeing here in Balbeck Lebanon. And there is evidence to support this because at this very site in Balbeck on this hill, there's evidence dating back of human civilization, dating back more than 9,000 years ago. That's 3,000 years before history ever started at 6,000 years ago. So the evidence is all here that humans were there. They had capabilities that exceed anything that we ever thought possible and that we can only do today with advanced heavy machinery. Again, this is the subject of much debates.

Part 2.

Ancient Rome Did Not Build This Part 2 - World's Largest Stone Columns - Baalbek

Somebody else's video:

"Baalbek Megaliths" 25 minutes long.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKevpBjecDE

Up to 12 minutes. These gigantic ones at the bottom have more erosion and seem older. All the other Roman stuff is smaller and newer.

21 minutes he talks about this..

temple mount "western stone"

"The "Western Stone," also known as the Nidbach Raba or Great Stone, is a massive, ~600-ton block of local limestone located in the tunnels beneath Jerusalem's Western Wall. Laid during Herod the Great's reconstruction of the Second Temple about 2,000 years ago, it's one of the largest known building blocks in the world, with dimensions of approximately 45 feet long, 10 feet high, and 11 feet wide. The stone is part of the Herodian masonry of the Western Wall and remains a subject of fascination due to the mysterious methods used to quarry and place it."

Looking this up..

"Nidbach Raba - The Great Stone of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem" 14 minutes long.

93 days ago

1 score

Reason: None provided.

"How the stones were moved from where they were quarried to their final locations is uncertain."

Let me get this text transcript.

So, the largest stone blocks ever cut, the largest stone blocks ever moved, the largest stone blocks ever lifted, as well as the largest solid stone columns in the history of ancient human civilization are all located in the same exact location, Balbeck-Lebanon. And for some reason, mainstream historians and archaeologists give 100% of the credit to the Romans, despite the fact that the Romans did not have the physical or technological capability to move or lift these stones. Let me start off by showing you the three massive stone blocks located at the Temple of Jupiter, also referred to as the Trilathon, or Trilathon Stones. These three stone blocks are 70 feet long, 14 feet high, and 10 feet wide, and were somehow lifted more than 30 feet off the ground. What's even crazier is that they come from a quarry more than 800 meters or more than a half mile away, and they were somehow brought uphill to this site. And when you take a look at these three stone blocks, look at the layer below them. These seven stone blocks are estimated to be 350 tons of peace. Just compare these stone blocks to other people, as you can see here standing next to them, so you can get an idea for just how massive these blocks are. Again, the largest blocks ever cut or moved or lifted in the history of human existence are all at this site, and you can see them right here. But these aren't the only massive stone blocks at this site, which is also referred to as the Heliopolis, by the way. As you can see here, between the Temple of Bacchus and the Temple of Jupiter, you have this row of massive blocks more than 800 tons of peace estimated, one of which is estimated to be between 900 and 1,000 tons, and you can see it right here next to the staircase. And just compare it again to people standing next to it, so you can get a feel for just how incredibly large these blocks are. Also take a look, by the way, while mentioning it, the Temple of Bacchus and the foundation stones that it's built upon, more than 12 feet high, compare it next to people and it's difficult to find good photos of this, but you get an idea. So the question becomes, how on earth were these stones moved a half mile uphill to this site and how were they lifted? The mainstream idea or theory I should say is that they were moved on logs, literally that they put these things on top of logs and the hundreds of people strapped to ropes and they dragged them uphill. But that of course just doesn't pass the common sense test. And by the way, it needs to be mentioned that none of these theories have ever been tested. They're simply just guessing and it really doesn't make sense. Can you imagine being at the back of this thing where they have hundreds of people holding a two million pound block to prevent it from sliding backwards as they go uphill? I mean, that's just ridiculous. Another theory is that they hooked up 800 oxes to ropes and to the stone to drag them to the current location. 800 oxes is based on how much weight one ox can pull. But there are so many things wrong with this. I mean, it doesn't pass the common sense test. Could you imagine what it would take to line up 800 oxes? I mean, just to coordinate a six or an eight horse hitch carriage is incredibly difficult. It requires an tremendous amount of coordination. But to do this with 800 oxes, I mean, how are they going to pull that off? How long would it take to even hook these things up? And not to mention the very nature of the stone itself, the shape of it would dig into the earth as it's being pulled and imagine the amount of weight that it'd be held up against. It just doesn't make any sense. To put all this in perspective, what does it take to do in modern times to move a tremendous amount of weight? Well, let's look at the example back in 2012, how the Los Angeles County Museum of the Arts moved a 340 ton stone block more than 100 miles. And to do so, they had to custom build a truck that was 295 feet long and had get this 196 wheels. Now how they move these stone blocks in ancient times in Balbeck is the subject of much debate. But let's discuss what it would take to lift them because moving versus lifting are two totally different things. So the most powerful crane from Roman times is as you see here and it could lift approximately 6,000 kilograms, which is equivalent to 6.6 tons. So wait a second. The strongest crane in the existence of the Roman Empire could lift only 6.6 tons, which is impressive by the way, as it didn't have hydraulics. But let's go back to the Trilathon stones at let's say 800 tons apiece. That means if you do the math, that would require 121 individual Roman cranes. Or even let's just look at the 350 ton stone blocks below. That would require 53 individual cranes like that, that's ridiculous. You couldn't even, you don't even have enough space to move and surround one of these blocks with that many cranes. It doesn't make any sense, does it? Now to again give it an example from modern times, take a look at this crane here. You see cranes like this driving down the freeway, they take up more than one lane. Each one of these 12 tires is up to your neck. And this specific crane here has a max lift of 330 tons, which is incredible. Now although this is not nearly the strongest crane in existence by any means, it's just to paint you a picture here that when you see massive cranes like this with the ability to lift a max of 330 tons, and we're supposed to believe that the Romans had some sort of primitive methods, even though the physical and scientific evidence completely debunks that they had the capability of lifting these stones. So this is where people say, well hold on, they did it though, so how do you explain that? You just, you do lack the imagination of what humans are capable of, no. What I'm suggesting is that this was done by an advanced civilization that dates back tens of thousands of years, as I've discussed in many other videos. Now a lot of people will look at the example of the Colosseum in Rome and say, wait a second, if the Romans could build that, why don't you think that they can move and lift these massive stone blocks? Well, upon a closer inspection of the Colosseum, they're made up of significantly smaller blocks in cement, none of which compare even remotely close to any of these blocks in Balbec. In fact, just to clarify, the largest stone block in all of Rome is 53 tons, which is the capital block of the Trajan column, as you can see here. 53 tons is the largest stone block in all of Rome. Now mainstream archaeologists and historians will tell you that the Romans did Balbec to show off to outsiders on how they're, they're incredible capabilities, but you know, this is 1400 miles away from Rome, and Rome has nothing that even compares to that. I mean, does that really make sense? Now speaking of massive blocks, over in Balbec, at the quarry where these stones came from, the largest stone ever cut is the stone of the pregnant woman as it's been called. This stone block is more than 20 meters long or 67 feet long, 16 feet wide and 14 feet high and is estimated to be at least 1200 tons. And actually it is no longer the largest stone block ever found as in 2014, right below and next to it, they found an even larger stone block, which is estimated to be between 1600 and 1800 tons, 64 feet long, 20 feet wide and 18 feet tall, absolutely huge. Now academics will tell you that they cut these blocks once they realize that they were too heavy to move, they just abandoned them, but it's like, wait a second, why would they cut multiple stone blocks? And by the way, it's also worth mentioning that they believe now that there are more stones like this also buried underneath. So the question becomes, why would they cut more than one block, which would of course would be an incredible difficulty. I mean, this is limestone by the way, which isn't particularly, it's not a hard stone, but what the methods that the Romans did have, did they even have tools large enough to cut these? I'm not going to debate on cutting these stones as it's limestone, but I mean, just the fact that they would have been so dumb to cut a few of them before realizing they couldn't move one of them. I mean, that doesn't make sense either, does it? But the bottom line is this, the Romans did not have the physical or technological capability to move or lift these massive stone blocks. They found them just like we've seen in other examples throughout the world, whether it's in Cusco, Peru and Machu Picchu, as well as in Egypt, where people come in and find other remnants from other civilizations and they simply build on top of them. And that is exactly what you're seeing here in Balbeck Lebanon. And there is evidence to support this because at this very site in Balbeck on this hill, there's evidence dating back of human civilization, dating back more than 9,000 years ago. That's 3,000 years before history ever started at 6,000 years ago. So the evidence is all here that humans were there. They had capabilities that exceed anything that we ever thought possible and that we can only do today with advanced heavy machinery. Again, this is the subject of much debates.

Part 2.

Ancient Rome Did Not Build This Part 2 - World's Largest Stone Columns - Baalbek

Somebody else's video:

"Baalbek Megaliths" 25 minutes long.

Up to 12 minutes. These gigantic ones at the bottom have more erosion and seem older. All the other Roman stuff is smaller and newer.

21 minutes he talks about this..

temple mount "western stone"

"The "Western Stone," also known as the Nidbach Raba or Great Stone, is a massive, ~600-ton block of local limestone located in the tunnels beneath Jerusalem's Western Wall. Laid during Herod the Great's reconstruction of the Second Temple about 2,000 years ago, it's one of the largest known building blocks in the world, with dimensions of approximately 45 feet long, 10 feet high, and 11 feet wide. The stone is part of the Herodian masonry of the Western Wall and remains a subject of fascination due to the mysterious methods used to quarry and place it."

93 days ago

1 score

Reason: None provided.

"How the stones were moved from where they were quarried to their final locations is uncertain."

Let me get this text transcript.

So, the largest stone blocks ever cut, the largest stone blocks ever moved, the largest stone blocks ever lifted, as well as the largest solid stone columns in the history of ancient human civilization are all located in the same exact location, Balbeck-Lebanon. And for some reason, mainstream historians and archaeologists give 100% of the credit to the Romans, despite the fact that the Romans did not have the physical or technological capability to move or lift these stones. Let me start off by showing you the three massive stone blocks located at the Temple of Jupiter, also referred to as the Trilathon, or Trilathon Stones. These three stone blocks are 70 feet long, 14 feet high, and 10 feet wide, and were somehow lifted more than 30 feet off the ground. What's even crazier is that they come from a quarry more than 800 meters or more than a half mile away, and they were somehow brought uphill to this site. And when you take a look at these three stone blocks, look at the layer below them. These seven stone blocks are estimated to be 350 tons of peace. Just compare these stone blocks to other people, as you can see here standing next to them, so you can get an idea for just how massive these blocks are. Again, the largest blocks ever cut or moved or lifted in the history of human existence are all at this site, and you can see them right here. But these aren't the only massive stone blocks at this site, which is also referred to as the Heliopolis, by the way. As you can see here, between the Temple of Bacchus and the Temple of Jupiter, you have this row of massive blocks more than 800 tons of peace estimated, one of which is estimated to be between 900 and 1,000 tons, and you can see it right here next to the staircase. And just compare it again to people standing next to it, so you can get a feel for just how incredibly large these blocks are. Also take a look, by the way, while mentioning it, the Temple of Bacchus and the foundation stones that it's built upon, more than 12 feet high, compare it next to people and it's difficult to find good photos of this, but you get an idea. So the question becomes, how on earth were these stones moved a half mile uphill to this site and how were they lifted? The mainstream idea or theory I should say is that they were moved on logs, literally that they put these things on top of logs and the hundreds of people strapped to ropes and they dragged them uphill. But that of course just doesn't pass the common sense test. And by the way, it needs to be mentioned that none of these theories have ever been tested. They're simply just guessing and it really doesn't make sense. Can you imagine being at the back of this thing where they have hundreds of people holding a two million pound block to prevent it from sliding backwards as they go uphill? I mean, that's just ridiculous. Another theory is that they hooked up 800 oxes to ropes and to the stone to drag them to the current location. 800 oxes is based on how much weight one ox can pull. But there are so many things wrong with this. I mean, it doesn't pass the common sense test. Could you imagine what it would take to line up 800 oxes? I mean, just to coordinate a six or an eight horse hitch carriage is incredibly difficult. It requires an tremendous amount of coordination. But to do this with 800 oxes, I mean, how are they going to pull that off? How long would it take to even hook these things up? And not to mention the very nature of the stone itself, the shape of it would dig into the earth as it's being pulled and imagine the amount of weight that it'd be held up against. It just doesn't make any sense. To put all this in perspective, what does it take to do in modern times to move a tremendous amount of weight? Well, let's look at the example back in 2012, how the Los Angeles County Museum of the Arts moved a 340 ton stone block more than 100 miles. And to do so, they had to custom build a truck that was 295 feet long and had get this 196 wheels. Now how they move these stone blocks in ancient times in Balbeck is the subject of much debate. But let's discuss what it would take to lift them because moving versus lifting are two totally different things. So the most powerful crane from Roman times is as you see here and it could lift approximately 6,000 kilograms, which is equivalent to 6.6 tons. So wait a second. The strongest crane in the existence of the Roman Empire could lift only 6.6 tons, which is impressive by the way, as it didn't have hydraulics. But let's go back to the Trilathon stones at let's say 800 tons apiece. That means if you do the math, that would require 121 individual Roman cranes. Or even let's just look at the 350 ton stone blocks below. That would require 53 individual cranes like that, that's ridiculous. You couldn't even, you don't even have enough space to move and surround one of these blocks with that many cranes. It doesn't make any sense, does it? Now to again give it an example from modern times, take a look at this crane here. You see cranes like this driving down the freeway, they take up more than one lane. Each one of these 12 tires is up to your neck. And this specific crane here has a max lift of 330 tons, which is incredible. Now although this is not nearly the strongest crane in existence by any means, it's just to paint you a picture here that when you see massive cranes like this with the ability to lift a max of 330 tons, and we're supposed to believe that the Romans had some sort of primitive methods, even though the physical and scientific evidence completely debunks that they had the capability of lifting these stones. So this is where people say, well hold on, they did it though, so how do you explain that? You just, you do lack the imagination of what humans are capable of, no. What I'm suggesting is that this was done by an advanced civilization that dates back tens of thousands of years, as I've discussed in many other videos. Now a lot of people will look at the example of the Colosseum in Rome and say, wait a second, if the Romans could build that, why don't you think that they can move and lift these massive stone blocks? Well, upon a closer inspection of the Colosseum, they're made up of significantly smaller blocks in cement, none of which compare even remotely close to any of these blocks in Balbec. In fact, just to clarify, the largest stone block in all of Rome is 53 tons, which is the capital block of the Trajan column, as you can see here. 53 tons is the largest stone block in all of Rome. Now mainstream archaeologists and historians will tell you that the Romans did Balbec to show off to outsiders on how they're, they're incredible capabilities, but you know, this is 1400 miles away from Rome, and Rome has nothing that even compares to that. I mean, does that really make sense? Now speaking of massive blocks, over in Balbec, at the quarry where these stones came from, the largest stone ever cut is the stone of the pregnant woman as it's been called. This stone block is more than 20 meters long or 67 feet long, 16 feet wide and 14 feet high and is estimated to be at least 1200 tons. And actually it is no longer the largest stone block ever found as in 2014, right below and next to it, they found an even larger stone block, which is estimated to be between 1600 and 1800 tons, 64 feet long, 20 feet wide and 18 feet tall, absolutely huge. Now academics will tell you that they cut these blocks once they realize that they were too heavy to move, they just abandoned them, but it's like, wait a second, why would they cut multiple stone blocks? And by the way, it's also worth mentioning that they believe now that there are more stones like this also buried underneath. So the question becomes, why would they cut more than one block, which would of course would be an incredible difficulty. I mean, this is limestone by the way, which isn't particularly, it's not a hard stone, but what the methods that the Romans did have, did they even have tools large enough to cut these? I'm not going to debate on cutting these stones as it's limestone, but I mean, just the fact that they would have been so dumb to cut a few of them before realizing they couldn't move one of them. I mean, that doesn't make sense either, does it? But the bottom line is this, the Romans did not have the physical or technological capability to move or lift these massive stone blocks. They found them just like we've seen in other examples throughout the world, whether it's in Cusco, Peru and Machu Picchu, as well as in Egypt, where people come in and find other remnants from other civilizations and they simply build on top of them. And that is exactly what you're seeing here in Balbeck Lebanon. And there is evidence to support this because at this very site in Balbeck on this hill, there's evidence dating back of human civilization, dating back more than 9,000 years ago. That's 3,000 years before history ever started at 6,000 years ago. So the evidence is all here that humans were there. They had capabilities that exceed anything that we ever thought possible and that we can only do today with advanced heavy machinery. Again, this is the subject of much debates.

Part 2.

Ancient Rome Did Not Build This Part 2 - World's Largest Stone Columns - Baalbek

Somebody else's video:

"Baalbek Megaliths" 25 minutes long.

Up to 12 minutes. These gigantic ones at the bottom have more erosion and seem older. All the other Roman stuff is smaller and newer.

93 days ago

1 score

Reason: None provided.

"How the stones were moved from where they were quarried to their final locations is uncertain."

Let me get this text transcript.

So, the largest stone blocks ever cut, the largest stone blocks ever moved, the largest stone blocks ever lifted, as well as the largest solid stone columns in the history of ancient human civilization are all located in the same exact location, Balbeck-Lebanon. And for some reason, mainstream historians and archaeologists give 100% of the credit to the Romans, despite the fact that the Romans did not have the physical or technological capability to move or lift these stones. Let me start off by showing you the three massive stone blocks located at the Temple of Jupiter, also referred to as the Trilathon, or Trilathon Stones. These three stone blocks are 70 feet long, 14 feet high, and 10 feet wide, and were somehow lifted more than 30 feet off the ground. What's even crazier is that they come from a quarry more than 800 meters or more than a half mile away, and they were somehow brought uphill to this site. And when you take a look at these three stone blocks, look at the layer below them. These seven stone blocks are estimated to be 350 tons of peace. Just compare these stone blocks to other people, as you can see here standing next to them, so you can get an idea for just how massive these blocks are. Again, the largest blocks ever cut or moved or lifted in the history of human existence are all at this site, and you can see them right here. But these aren't the only massive stone blocks at this site, which is also referred to as the Heliopolis, by the way. As you can see here, between the Temple of Bacchus and the Temple of Jupiter, you have this row of massive blocks more than 800 tons of peace estimated, one of which is estimated to be between 900 and 1,000 tons, and you can see it right here next to the staircase. And just compare it again to people standing next to it, so you can get a feel for just how incredibly large these blocks are. Also take a look, by the way, while mentioning it, the Temple of Bacchus and the foundation stones that it's built upon, more than 12 feet high, compare it next to people and it's difficult to find good photos of this, but you get an idea. So the question becomes, how on earth were these stones moved a half mile uphill to this site and how were they lifted? The mainstream idea or theory I should say is that they were moved on logs, literally that they put these things on top of logs and the hundreds of people strapped to ropes and they dragged them uphill. But that of course just doesn't pass the common sense test. And by the way, it needs to be mentioned that none of these theories have ever been tested. They're simply just guessing and it really doesn't make sense. Can you imagine being at the back of this thing where they have hundreds of people holding a two million pound block to prevent it from sliding backwards as they go uphill? I mean, that's just ridiculous. Another theory is that they hooked up 800 oxes to ropes and to the stone to drag them to the current location. 800 oxes is based on how much weight one ox can pull. But there are so many things wrong with this. I mean, it doesn't pass the common sense test. Could you imagine what it would take to line up 800 oxes? I mean, just to coordinate a six or an eight horse hitch carriage is incredibly difficult. It requires an tremendous amount of coordination. But to do this with 800 oxes, I mean, how are they going to pull that off? How long would it take to even hook these things up? And not to mention the very nature of the stone itself, the shape of it would dig into the earth as it's being pulled and imagine the amount of weight that it'd be held up against. It just doesn't make any sense. To put all this in perspective, what does it take to do in modern times to move a tremendous amount of weight? Well, let's look at the example back in 2012, how the Los Angeles County Museum of the Arts moved a 340 ton stone block more than 100 miles. And to do so, they had to custom build a truck that was 295 feet long and had get this 196 wheels. Now how they move these stone blocks in ancient times in Balbeck is the subject of much debate. But let's discuss what it would take to lift them because moving versus lifting are two totally different things. So the most powerful crane from Roman times is as you see here and it could lift approximately 6,000 kilograms, which is equivalent to 6.6 tons. So wait a second. The strongest crane in the existence of the Roman Empire could lift only 6.6 tons, which is impressive by the way, as it didn't have hydraulics. But let's go back to the Trilathon stones at let's say 800 tons apiece. That means if you do the math, that would require 121 individual Roman cranes. Or even let's just look at the 350 ton stone blocks below. That would require 53 individual cranes like that, that's ridiculous. You couldn't even, you don't even have enough space to move and surround one of these blocks with that many cranes. It doesn't make any sense, does it? Now to again give it an example from modern times, take a look at this crane here. You see cranes like this driving down the freeway, they take up more than one lane. Each one of these 12 tires is up to your neck. And this specific crane here has a max lift of 330 tons, which is incredible. Now although this is not nearly the strongest crane in existence by any means, it's just to paint you a picture here that when you see massive cranes like this with the ability to lift a max of 330 tons, and we're supposed to believe that the Romans had some sort of primitive methods, even though the physical and scientific evidence completely debunks that they had the capability of lifting these stones. So this is where people say, well hold on, they did it though, so how do you explain that? You just, you do lack the imagination of what humans are capable of, no. What I'm suggesting is that this was done by an advanced civilization that dates back tens of thousands of years, as I've discussed in many other videos. Now a lot of people will look at the example of the Colosseum in Rome and say, wait a second, if the Romans could build that, why don't you think that they can move and lift these massive stone blocks? Well, upon a closer inspection of the Colosseum, they're made up of significantly smaller blocks in cement, none of which compare even remotely close to any of these blocks in Balbec. In fact, just to clarify, the largest stone block in all of Rome is 53 tons, which is the capital block of the Trajan column, as you can see here. 53 tons is the largest stone block in all of Rome. Now mainstream archaeologists and historians will tell you that the Romans did Balbec to show off to outsiders on how they're, they're incredible capabilities, but you know, this is 1400 miles away from Rome, and Rome has nothing that even compares to that. I mean, does that really make sense? Now speaking of massive blocks, over in Balbec, at the quarry where these stones came from, the largest stone ever cut is the stone of the pregnant woman as it's been called. This stone block is more than 20 meters long or 67 feet long, 16 feet wide and 14 feet high and is estimated to be at least 1200 tons. And actually it is no longer the largest stone block ever found as in 2014, right below and next to it, they found an even larger stone block, which is estimated to be between 1600 and 1800 tons, 64 feet long, 20 feet wide and 18 feet tall, absolutely huge. Now academics will tell you that they cut these blocks once they realize that they were too heavy to move, they just abandoned them, but it's like, wait a second, why would they cut multiple stone blocks? And by the way, it's also worth mentioning that they believe now that there are more stones like this also buried underneath. So the question becomes, why would they cut more than one block, which would of course would be an incredible difficulty. I mean, this is limestone by the way, which isn't particularly, it's not a hard stone, but what the methods that the Romans did have, did they even have tools large enough to cut these? I'm not going to debate on cutting these stones as it's limestone, but I mean, just the fact that they would have been so dumb to cut a few of them before realizing they couldn't move one of them. I mean, that doesn't make sense either, does it? But the bottom line is this, the Romans did not have the physical or technological capability to move or lift these massive stone blocks. They found them just like we've seen in other examples throughout the world, whether it's in Cusco, Peru and Machu Picchu, as well as in Egypt, where people come in and find other remnants from other civilizations and they simply build on top of them. And that is exactly what you're seeing here in Balbeck Lebanon. And there is evidence to support this because at this very site in Balbeck on this hill, there's evidence dating back of human civilization, dating back more than 9,000 years ago. That's 3,000 years before history ever started at 6,000 years ago. So the evidence is all here that humans were there. They had capabilities that exceed anything that we ever thought possible and that we can only do today with advanced heavy machinery. Again, this is the subject of much debates.

Part 2.

Ancient Rome Did Not Build This Part 2 - World's Largest Stone Columns - Baalbek

93 days ago

1 score

Reason: Original