AuthorTopic: Debunking 2012 Prophecy  (Read 2176 times)

Offline Ashvin

  • Troll
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3108
    • View Profile
Debunking 2012 Prophecy
« on: July 22, 2012, 11:22:53 PM »
Finally David Icke got something right, even if it's solely because he was instructed by his spirit guide that this particular 2012 "prophecy" is a bunch of BS. The only potential for cataclysm on 2012 will be an event planned by human beings, such as a false flag attack or "ET disclosure", just because these nefarious types have already deceived so many people into thinking Dec. 21, 2012 is a significant date. Such an event will have nothing to do with Mayan prophecy, Timewave Zero, galactic alignment, photon belts, cosmic evolutionary rays, or anything that goes beyond Earth. If a meteor crashes into the planet around that date, it would just be really bad and dumb luck for the false prognosticators.

There won't be any metaphysical revolution. If December 2012 comes and goes without anything outside of the usual calamities underway on this planet of ours, most of which are easily attributed to human behavior and science, then the prognosticators won't lose as much face as many of us suspect they would (and should). They will no doubt find clever ways to explain why nothing has happened yet, or to explain why the really bad stuff that is naturally happening can be attributed to some prophetic and cosmic evolutionary developments. I would be surprised if most of their followers DIDN'T continue to eat it all up.

As I said before, I'm mostly worried about some kind of human operation being planned to coincide with that time frame, which will not only result in mass casualties, but will further entrench the evil deception that is already underway. People will be amazed that the "prophecies" came true... even though they really didn't. In that sense, I don't necessarily agree with the people who say "there is no way anything significant will happen, and life will just go an usual...", because we all know that's not true. OTOH, the people/forces performing the magic do not need anything to happen at those specific dates for their deception to work, it would just help make it work a lot better. The rest of us simply need to be informed and aware that such a deception is underway, and use our brains to figure out who's behind it and why, so that we can recognize it when we see it.

The fact is that most legitimate scholars in the field of ancient history/cultures, Mayan history, archeology, etc. have, unfortunately, refused to touch this stuff with a 10-foot pole because they feel it would discredit them to even acknowledge it. That is the sad state of our institutional academic system. But if you insist on rational and logical arguments from people who know what they are talking about... there are more than just a few out there.


Second: The B’ak’tun date is not the “end of the calendar” we’ve heard so much about. It is the end of a cycle of 144,000 days, or 394 solar years. The calendar is mostly base-20, except in the second position, which clicks over to zero when it reaches 18 ( Try going to this site and typing in the Gregorian date 4772/10/15 ).

Third: Some Mayan inscriptions reference dates after 2012! What? Wait? How is that possible? Because, dear reader, the Mayan Calendar also has four “rarely used” (which is not the same as “non-existent”) higher order cycles!

As mentioned in the Syntax section, there are also four rarely-used higher-order periods above the b’ak’tun: piktun, kalabtun, k’inchiltun, and alautun.

It is a matter of dispute whether the first piktun occurs after 13 or after 20 b’ak’tun. Most Mayanists think that in the majority of inscriptions, where only the last five Long Count positions are used, the count recycles at 13 b’ak’tuns, whereas, if longer cycles are used, the count continues to the end of the 20th b’ak’tun (b’ak’tun 19) before a piktun is registered.[citation needed] In the same way, the fact that a 13-katun cycle was used, didn’t negate the fact that there are 20 katuns in a b’ak’tun.- ibid.

In their book A forest of Kings: The Untold Story of the Ancient Maya (Quill, 1990) the Mayan scholars Linda Schele and David Freidel contend that the end of the current Mayan long count is not due until day ( counting from the theoretical end of the previous world in 3114 BC ). Each column is equal to twenty times its predecessor, so that date lies some 41,341,049,999,999,999,999,999,994,879 years in the future!

It should be noted here that there are several unanswered questions with regard to interpreting the Mayan calendar dates, and that this is a field of ongoing research. It should also be noted that Argüelles hedges his bets when he talks about the date. It may be (according to Argüelles) that 2012 is not a cataclysm after all, but the beginning of a ‘spritual awakening’ (Woo, woo! Cue the harp and flute music!).


"It's August of 2011, do you know when your Apocalypse is?

There are 1000s of people who think that something important—if not the end or the world, then something—will happen on December 21, 2012. These speculations spring from a well-seasoned cultural melting pot, but a key ingredient is the writings and beliefs of both ancient and modern Maya people. In fact, the folks promoting the 2012 movement often frame themselves as experts in Maya traditions.

Here's the thing, though: There are actual experts in ancient Maya traditions, and actual experts who study the culture and religion of modern Maya living today. These archaeologists and anthropologists have, inadvertently, created some of the pop culture legends that spawned the 2012 movement. But, until very recently, they've largely ignored that movement. This is starting to change, however. Last January, archaeo-astronomers held a symposium on the 2012 phenomenon and those papers were recently published in The Proceedings of the International Astronomy Union. Meanwhile, a new scholarly book, collecting essays on the 2012 phenomenon by Mayanist researchers, is set to be published soon.

One of the researchers featured in that book is John Hoopes, an archaeologist and one of my former professors when I was an anthropology student at The University of Kansas.

Hoopes does field research, digging at archaeological sites in Costa Rica and other parts of Central and South America. But, as a side project, he's also developed some expertise in the way archaology—and, particularly, pseudo-archaeology—influence pop culture in the United States and Europe. I spoke with him about where 2012 myths come from, why scientists need to study and address pseudo-science movements, and why he thinks the 2012 phenomenon owes as much to H.P. Lovecraft and Aldous Huxley as it does to the ancient Maya."


MKB: What about the modern Maya? Has anyone gotten good documentation on what they think about this cultural phenomenon that's tied to their culture, but is also separate from it?

JH: I hope that that work is happening. In fact, I’ve encouraged some of my students who work with modern Maya to be doing just that. Because what’s happening now is a very active synchretism of the religions of living Maya groups with New Age thought.

Mayan belief has long been synchronistic. In the pre-Columbian era they were influenced by the cultures and beliefs of Teotihuacan, the Toltecs, the Olmecs, and then you get the Spanish and Catholicism, then evangelical Protestantism, and since the 1970s there’s been this influence of the New Age and that’s really intensified now with the 2012 thing.

Essentially, some very enthusiastic hippies have gone into remote Maya villages, bringing their ideas about the New Age, Buddhism, and theosophy. They are introducing them to the Maya themselves, who are in turn producing a new synchretism. I think there are a lot of places that are reinterpreting shamanism along the lines of what Western academics think shamanism to be. That makes it really hard to understand what those people originally believed. The religous studies scholars call it “The Pizza Effect,” it refers to what happens when a culture reflects back to a foreign influence as though it had always been there. The Hare Krishnas, for instance, were an American interpretation of Hinduism and were exported to India, where it became a religious movement in India that hadn’t been there all along.

The name comes from the history of the pizza, which is that the pizza was invented by Italian immigrants in New England creating a quick lunch. But as American tourists went to Italy in search of authentic pizza the restaurateurs were happy to oblige by inventing a history of the pizza in Italy. And now you have this “authentic” Italian pizza coming back to the U.S. I think that’s happening with 2012 as well. You have modern Maya talking about New Age secrets as if those were original parts of Maya culture, but those were things that were learned in the 60s and 70s.

It is authentic. Synchretic beliefs are absolutely authentic. You know, the authenticity argument is really one of, “Do these people authentically believe this,” and the reality is that many, many Maya are authentically evangelical Protestants. Yes, it’s recent. But it doesn’t mean it’s any less authentic. But there’s a difference between authenticity and tradition. And the arbiters of truth and what is tradition are changing. Ironically, this is happening at a point where we know more than we ever did before about ancient texts because we can actually read them so much better. And there’s nothing in there about aliens.

Well, I'll just stop there, because the debunking can literally go on forever... or until the world ends. Anyone who wants to find a lot more links can do so at Mike Heiser's excellent site, PaleoBabble - And below is an additional comprehensive video debunking of 2012 pseudo-astrology and science.

<a href="" target="_blank" class="new_win"></a>

Offline Ashvin

  • Troll
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3108
    • View Profile
Re: Debunking 2012 Prophecy
« Reply #1 on: July 25, 2012, 08:16:07 AM »
No mention of 2012 or an apocalyptic event in the oldest known Mayan Calendar...

Mayan astronomical charts found in Guatemalan jungle are oldest known

Ancient inscriptions on the walls of a looted house in the Guatemalan jungle are the oldest astronomical charts known from the Mayan civilisation.

Explorers chanced upon the writings while excavating a room buried under a collapsed building that was overgrown with rainforest vegetation in Xultún in the north-eastern region of Petén.

Researchers who dug debris from the room found bright and vivid paintings of the king and other figures preserved on the walls, leading them to speculate the owner might have been a royal relative.

One wall was covered with hundreds of small red and black symbols that tracked the phases of the moon, with others thought to represent the Mayan ceremonial calendar and cycles of the sun, Mars and Venus.

The hieroglyphs date to about AD814, making them considerably older than the Dresden codex, an 11th- or 12th-century Mayan book written on bark paper, which found its way to the Royal Library at Dresden in 1739. The Mayans kept detailed records of the heavens and tied traditional ceremonies to these celestial events.

"There are tiny glyphs all over the wall, bars and dots representing columns of numbers," said David Stuart, a professor of Mesoamerican art at the University of Texas at Austin, who deciphered the symbols. "It's the kind of thing that only appears in one place, the Dresden codex, which the Maya wrote many centuries later. We've never seen anything like it."

William Saturno, an archaeologist at Boston University who led the exploration and excavation, said some calculations predicted astronomical events 7,000 years into the future. Contrary to some theories, there was no sign that the Mayan calendar ended abruptly in 2012.

Archaeologists took an interest in the building, which lies among thousands of others, after Max Chamberlain, a student of Saturno, followed a looter's trench to the site in 2010. Looters have targeted Mayan temples throughout history, using tree saws to cut up and remove large wooden monuments in the 1970s, and more recently taking vases, figurines and jade to sell on the art market.

The building Chamberlain found sat over a room that had been loosely filled with soil and stone. When Chamberlain looked inside, he noticed two red marks on an exposed wall of the room, but it took several hours of excavation to reveal hints of the lavish artwork and calendars beneath.

Writing in the journal, Science, Saturno describes how he returned to the site in 2011 with a grant from National Geographic to excavate the room completely. The east wall was dominated with columns of numbers, represented by dots, bars and shell-like inscriptions, some of which tracked the moon or reconciled lunar phases with the solar calendar. Other tables of red numbers appear to be numerical corrections to make calculations more accurate.

"This is certainly our oldest Mayan astronomical table. It's the only one we have from the classical period. It's also the first time we get to look inside a scribe or astronomer's house and see the writing on the wall," Saturno told the Guardian. More enigmatic charts on the north wall appear to represent the 365-day solar calendar, the 584-day cycle of Venus and the 780-day cycle of Mars.

"They were keen on keeping track of all planetary motions. They liked to anchor the events of their lives in cosmic terms. What comes around today will repeat again in the future and is a symbol of what happened in the distant past," Saturno added.

Anthony Aveni, a co-author on the study at Colgate University in New York, said: "The most exciting point is that we now see that the Mayan were making such computations hundreds of years – and in places other than books – before they recorded them in the codices."

The excavation ultimately revealed figures on all four walls of the room. On the north wall, Saturno uncovered a portrait of the king, seated and wearing blue feathers, facing a figure in vibrant orange holding a stylus. Markings near the latter figure's face call him "Younger brother Obsidian", who could be the younger sibling or son of the king, and the scribe who lived in the house.

Around the image were fixtures for a curtain that allowed the painting to be covered up or exposed. The west wall was adorned with paintings of three men wearing large, feathered black mitres, white loin cloths and medallions around their necks.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2012, 09:11:57 AM by Ashvin »

Offline Ashvin

  • Troll
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3108
    • View Profile
Re: Debunking 2012 Prophecy
« Reply #2 on: July 25, 2012, 09:02:35 AM »
The 26,000 year precession cycle of Earth has nothing to do with the solar system's orbital location in the galaxy, or its alignment with the center of the galaxy...

Precession of Earth's rotational axis due to the tidal force raised on Earth by the gravity of the Moon and Sun.

Path of the point of vernal equinox along the ecliptic over a 6000 year period. The tradition of take the point of vernal equinox as defining the "sign of Aries" dates to Babylonian astrology, ca. 600 BC. It is apparent in this image that the main star of Aries, Hamal, was closest to the point of vernal equinox in ca. the 7th century BC.

2012: Six End-of-the-World Myths Debunked

Some sky-watchers believe 2012 will close with a "galactic alignment," which will occur for the first time in 26,000 years (for example, see the Web site Alignment 2012).

In this scenario, the path of the sun in the sky would appear to cross through what, from Earth, looks to be the midpoint of our galaxy, the Milky Way, which in good viewing conditions appears as a cloudy stripe across the night sky.

Some fear that the lineup will somehow expose Earth to powerful unknown galactic forces that will hasten its doom—perhaps through a "pole shift" (see above) or the stirring of the supermassive black hole at our galaxy's heart.

Others see the purported event in a positive light, as heralding the dawn of a new era in human consciousness.

NASA's Morrison has a different view.

"There is no 'galactic alignment' in 2012," he said, "or at least nothing out of the ordinary."

He explained that a type of "alignment" occurs during every winter solstice, when the sun, as seen from Earth, appears in the sky near what looks to be the midpoint of the Milky Way.

Horoscope writers may be excited by alignments, Morrison said. But "the reality is that alignments are of no interest to science. They mean nothing," he said. They create no changes in gravitational pull, solar radiation, planetary orbits, or anything else that would impact life on Earth.

The speculation over alignments isn't surprising, though, he said.

"Ordinary astronomical phenomena are imbued with a sense of threat by people who already think the world is going to end."

Regarding galactic alignments, University of Texas Maya expert David Stuart writes on his blog that "no ancient Maya text or artwork makes reference to anything of the kind."

Even so, the end date of the current Long Count cycle—winter solstice 2012—may be evidence of Maya astronomical skill, said Aveni, the archaeoastronomer.

"I don't rule out the likelihood that astronomy played a role" in the selection of 2012 as the cycle's terminus, he said.

Maya astronomers built observatories and, by observing the night skies and using mathematics, learned to accurately predict eclipses and other celestial phenomena. Aveni notes that the start date of the current cycle was likely tied to a solar zenith passage, when the sun crosses directly overhead, and its terminal date will fall on a December solstice, perhaps by design.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2012, 09:08:12 AM by Ashvin »

Offline Ashvin

  • Troll
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3108
    • View Profile
Re: Debunking 2012 Prophecy
« Reply #3 on: July 28, 2012, 01:07:04 PM »
Planet X or "Nibiru" is nowhere to be found in ancient Sumerian texts as a planet that passes through our solar system every 3600 years...

Sitchin's Nibiru Hypothesis

Those familiar with either the writings of Zecharia Sitchin or the current internet rantings about “the return of Planet X” are likely familiar with the word “nibiru”. According to self-proclaimed ancient languages scholar Zecharia Sitchin, the Sumerians knew of an extra planet beyond Pluto. This extra planet was called Nibiru. Sitchin goes on to claim that Nibiru passes through our solar system every 3600 years. Some believers in Sitchin’s theory also refer to Nibiru as “Planet X”, the name given to a planet that is allegedly located within our solar system but beyond Pluto. Adherents to the “returning Planet X hypothesis” believe the return of this wandering planet will bring cataclysmic consequences to earth.

Is Sitchin correct – Is Nibiru a 12th planet that passes through our solar system every 3600 years? Did the Sumerians know this? Unfortunately for Sitchin and his followers, the answer to each of these questions is no. But how do I know? The cuneiform record in such texts as the one on the left, the astronomical text known as MUL.APIN (The "Plough Star").

Readers can click here for a summary paper I wrote on the word nibiru in cuneiform texts. What follows draws from that paper and, in the case of the video, demonstrates the accuracy of my contention that there isn't a single text in the entire cuneiform record that:

    -Has nibiru as a planet beyond Pluto
    -Connects nibiru with the Anunnaki
    -Has nibiru cycling through our solar system every 3600 years

Searching for Nibiru in Cuneiform Texts

Here is a video that I created showing you where to find the leading dictionary of cuneiform words online (for free). Viewers can find that source and do what I do in the rest of the video: look up the entry for nibiru (spelled neberu in scholarly transliteration) and check to see if any of the above ideas are found in any Akkadian or Sumerian texts that mention nibiru. Spoiler: there aren't any -- but don't take my word for it. Look it up yourself.

Offline Ashvin

  • Troll
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3108
    • View Profile
Re: Debunking 2012 Prophecy
« Reply #4 on: July 28, 2012, 01:12:49 PM »
Debunking the psuedo-science of a "pole shift" as a sudden and catastrophic event that will happen in December 2012...

What really happens during a Geomagnetic Reversal?

Theories concerning geomagnetic reversals have been circulating every media outlet playing to 2012 worriers and wonder-ers possible over the past few years. The name itself can be off-putting, but simply stated, a geomagnetic reversal is just that: the change of orientation (reversal) in Earth's magnetic field (geomagnetic) in regards to the magnetic north and south poles. I'm sure those of you either studying or worrying about Y2012 have wondered if we would or even could undergo a geomagnetic reversal during that time and if that reversal would cause the catastrophes the media has foretold (see the movie, 2012).
In short, the answer is no. The longer version, however, gets a bit more complex. Reversals traditionally happen every 300,000 years or so. We are now considered overdue since the last reversal was close to 780,000 years ago and is often referred to as the Brunhes-Matuyama reversal. It is not known exactly how long the reversal took, but geologists estimate the reversal took  between 1,200 and 10,000 years to complete the process.

Regardless of when, it is imperative that our focus remains on the "how" when trying to negate Doomsayers. These are the people who use a base of fact to allow their own far-fetched ideas to gather power through fear, and thus validation. In regards to geomagnetic reversal as a theory to cause the devastating results we have come to expect from the Media's 2012, the loudest voice of doom come from Patrick Geryl.

Patrick Geryl believes that a Geomagnetic Reversal is directly linked to a Rotational Pole Shift. Earth's magnetic field is formed by electrical currents that are generated by motions within the fluid outer core(1). Note that it's the liquid outer core not the solid inner core that produces magnetism. Geryl seems to think that magnetism is generated at the solid inner core.

According to Geryl, these geomagnetic reversals happen like clock-work. The last being 11,803 years ago and for Braden it was about 13,000 years ago. (3) This is obviously not the case since the last reversal was known to have happened closer to 800,000 years ago then 12,000. In addition, they are hardly cyclical as the doomsayers would like you to think.

Gregg Braden writes in his books that the "falling magnetic field" is directly linked to our consciousness. When the magnetic field is weaker, we are much more vulnerable to be "changed."(2) Both Braden and Geryl theorize that these reversals are much more common than mainstream science acknowledges.

The difference between Braden and Geryl is obvious. Geryl predicts complete and utter devastation and death. Braden's theory does not advocate the selling of fear. In the end, you do not need to fear Geomagnetic Reversals. There is no reason whatsoever to believe that they cause harm to life on Earth. There is also no reason to believe that the reversal will take place in our lifetimes. These reversals take time. When a geologist states that a magnetic reversal happens rapidly, you need to realize what rapidly means to a geologist. Thousands, tens of thousand, hundreds of thousands and even millions of years can mean rapidly for a geologist. Other than having to re-orient compasses and navigational devices, life will not be affected by a reversal.

(1) Rothery, D. (2008) Teach Yourself: Geology. London: The McGraw-Hills Company, Inc.

(2) Aveni, A.(2009)The End of Time: The Maya Mystery of 2012. Boulder: University Press of  Colorado.

(3) Stray. G.(2009) Beyond 2012: Catastrophe or Awakening. Rochester: Bear & Company.

Offline Surly1

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 18654
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: Debunking 2012 Prophecy
« Reply #5 on: July 28, 2012, 02:56:41 PM »
Debunking the psuedo-science of a "pole shift" as a sudden and catastrophic event that will happen in December 2012...

What really happens during a Geomagnetic Reversal?

Reposted on new DD FB page!
"...reprehensible lying communist..."

Offline Ashvin

  • Troll
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3108
    • View Profile
Re: Debunking 2012 Prophecy
« Reply #6 on: September 01, 2012, 04:11:32 PM »
Not directly tied to 2012 prophecy, but somewhat related. Many of those who believe in a 2012 upheaval/transformation of some sort also cling to the idea of panspermia or ancient astronaut theory, in which aliens have had a huge role to play in the development of human civilization. Here is a debunking of one facet of their argument - megalithic structures of the ancient world.

PaleoBabble readers know that ancient astronaut theorists suffer from a fixation on megalithic construction. The “impossibility” of moving stones of great size and tremendous weight appears to them as proof of alien assistance. This argument of course is simply reduced to “since I can’t figure out how it was done, it must have been aliens.” Rather than focus on the absurdity of this logic, I’ve tried to introduce readers to peer-reviewed scholarship on ancient construction and engineering. Egypt’s pyramids have received a lot of attention here in that regard. I want to turn now to Baalbek, specifically the famous trilithon (the three stones at the base of the Roman temple at the site).

There isn’t much written on this that’s available to the non-specialist, and most of what is available isn’t in English. At the risk of directing readers to a source that won’t be much use since it’s in French, I still think it’s useful to demonstrate that scholars have put serious thought into the trilithon, and have come up with workable solutions that have been successful in analogous situations (in this case, something even bigger than the trilithon – yes, ancient alien enthusiasts, the trilithon is NOT the largest object moved without modern machines; keep reading). A very good (and lengthy) scholarly journal article in French about moving the trilithon by ancient mechanical means is available on the web: Jean-Pierre Adam, “A propos du trilithon de Baalbek. Le transport et la mise en oeuvre des megaliths,” Syria 54:1-2 (1977): 31-63 (English translation: “Concerning the trilithon of Baalbek: Transportation and the Implementation of the Megaliths”). Two caveats on the article: (1) It’s very technical. It’s filled with mathematical discussion since its author is quite familiar with analyzing such problems via applied physics; (2) my French stinks. As such, I converted the article to text and used Google Translate, then went through and smoothed things out. I did not do this for the full article (I have better things to do). However, I have given readers important excerpts of this 32 page article. If you read French, then you can check on the translation and send me updates.

On pages 34-37 the author discusses ancient writers who described construction techniques for moving large stone objects. He writes:

“The advantage of this unique publication is exacerbated by the fact that, although written during the reign of Augustus, the treaty made a broad appeal to the art of building Greeks whose author cites the lost works of theorists and the most famous architects. In the context of this brief study, our interest is in the tenth book of Vitruvius, where we find a detailed description of the process and machinery used on construction sites of Greece and Rome and the author mentions at the same time the efficient and widespread job. The transport of megaliths is not forgotten . . .

Vitruvius cites two anecdotes relating to the construction . . . He sank both ends of “column each iron bolts made of Swallow-tailed and are sealed” with lead, having taken the precaution to put in the pieces of wood cross-sectional “dirty iron rings, in which bolts came in as “hubs. In addition, he strengthens his machine by attaching the two “pieces of oak ties, so that when the horse pulling the” bolts turned so easily into the rings, all the “shafts of the columns rolled easily on land to their destination.”

The second transport means for the megaliths described by Vitruvius . . . consisted of wheels twelve feet (approx. 3.60 m) and “locked both ends of the architraves in the middle of the wheels. He put “as bolts and iron rings, so that when the horse” pulling the machine, put the bolts in the iron rings were “turning the wheels. Thus, the architraves, which were in the wheels “as axles, were dragged and taken on the spot.”

He provides the following drawing to illustrate these techniques (Fig 2). Note how the absence of a round shape was no obstacle to moving something like a whole large pillar or obelisk — you simply gave it roundness at the ends to roll it. Very clever.

On page 42 the author introduces what will become for him an analogous point of reference for his proposed solution to moving the trilithon of Baalbek:

“. . . 1,250,000 kilograms . . . is the weight of the great block of granite the Empress Catherine II of Russia (1762-1796) . . . carried to St. Petersburg (now Leningrad) to serve as a colossal base to the equestrian statue of Peter the Great. This is likely the largest stone ever moved by man, one and a half times the weight trilithon blocks [at Baalbek.]”

Hope you caught that — an object 1.5 times the weight of the trilithon was successfully moved in the 18th century — no modern cranes. They did it with manpower, not alien know-how. He mentions other large objects successfully moved by human engineers, but this one gets special attention because it was a larger problem than the trilithon.

The rest of the article is devoted to Baalbek’s trilithon. Throughout pages 52-63, the author discusses the physics and engineering problems and solutions. Some excerpts:

“To appreciate the magnitude of the work, and justify the solution adapted to it, it is necessary to give the figures for to the heavier blocks, namely those of trilithon As its name suggests this set consists of three stones measuring respectively, 19.60 m, 19.30 m and 19.10 m long, 4.34 m high, 3.65 m deep. Their average weight is nearly 800 tons. . . . every stone has nearly 10 m in length for an average weight of 350 tonnes . . . After recalling the experiences of St. Petersburg, Luxor, and Carrara, we can obtain a more lucidly clean solution for this megalithic structure and more particularly to the construction of the trilithon.”

The author discusses using ox power to move the stones, a solution he will reject because of the lack of space on the site for the oxen:

“To solve the problem of Baalbek in the most comprehensive, we will consider the establishment of one of the heaviest blocks, that is to say one of the stones of 800,000 kg constituting the trilithon; the interventions for elements lighter in the deduction will be logical.

So either one of these stones completely detached from the rock and relaxing on logs. The floor beams receiving the convoy has a rolling flat surface to reduce the weight hauled to 66,600 kg. Knowing that an ox can provide a work of 80 kgm per second, continuously for one hour, we deduce there should be 825 of these animals to transport one of trilithon stones on a horizontal floor. Traditionally, it is estimated that an ox can pull a load 1.000 kg placed on a chariot. If we consider the block of 800,000 kg of the trilithon, it follows that 800 oxen are needed to move it.”

The author notes some logistical problems with using oxen before moving to a human solution:

“Certainly the yoke was known to mate the oxen, and in the case normal load, the pole was attached directly to the yoke between two animals, but when it came to transport heavy, each torque cattle was connected to the load by a cable or pole. . . . Xenophon gives us a confirmation on the use of this type coupling in the description he gives us the means employed by Cyrus to ensure the movement of heavy battle rounds . . . Each turn with wheels, was equipped with 8 drawbars which were harnessed eight pairs of oxen pulling front.

Despite the apparent simplicity of this energy source, we prefer to look to the human powered, with which the weakness in muscle is compensated by the extreme technical elaboration of the device multiplier used. In the event of a traction provided by the duration of the capstans, movement is a bit longer, since it multiplies the distance traveled by the load, in favor of the force and must ensure the in place and anchor machinery. The advantage of this method lies in the extremely small number of workers needed and the greater accuracy of the progression, allowing rigorous implementation of blocks the one above and beside the other. . . . Each capstan bar with four men using it would make 24 in total. . . . The force exerted directly by the capstan 24 men and six bar is at 20 kg per man of 480 kg. Taking center force application to 1.70 m from the center of rotation and a radius of drum of 10 cm, this force becomes (by a form winch) 8160 kg. Four cables of hemp, each providing four tons of traction, wind around the drum and by acting on the load through a hoist with two pulleys, generate a power of 16,320 kg of the machine; 13,056 kg reduced power by the coefficient of friction. Six of these machines, involving 144 men and providing traction power of 78,336 kg must allow, with a margin of excess power always useful, the transportation of each block of trilithon.”

Since the above is hard to conceptualize, the author includes a drawing of the simple, yet effective solution to moving the trilithon.

Simple, workable, and human. Once again, the ancient alien theorist’s low view of human intelligence and practical engineering prowess is demonstrated.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2012, 04:16:26 PM by Ashvin »