Zablorg wrote:You know, someone who claimed that the pyramids were built by aliens cited the fact that the were built across the horizon as evidence. WTF.
Accross the horizon from WHAT?
The sun horizon. Sorry.
Thanks. I was thinking "They're right next to each other, not across the horizon."
Sorry if my post sounded angry, I was just confused.
Stuart: The only problem is, I'm losing track of which universe I'm in.
You kinda look like Jesus. With a lightsaber.- Peregrin Toker
Surlethe wrote:Why would they build landing sites when they have huge flat deserts right next to the goddamned Nile? And wouldn't limestone be crushed under the weight of the spaceships, anyway?
And if they need to land on a pyramid, how did they land the first time they arrived?
Besides, a real landing facility for a high-tech civilization would probably involve some kind of instrumentation. So I would expect to see some sort of transmitter to help guide down spacecraft, otherwise there's really no point to this thing at all. Except, of course, the one archaeologists have been describing: giant self-aggrandizement tombs for the pharoahs.
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
Not only would the limestone probably be crushed... Why would you want a building which you would need to perform an incredible balancing act to land on? Unless the spaceships are really small...
Turin wrote:Oh there's the rub. Usually the idiots who think they were built by aliens also think that they are beacons or landing sites, and that the tombs are lies or cover-up conspiracies.
Yup, because when we make a landing beacon for an airport or such, the first thing we do is dump 5 million tonnes of rock on the runway.
That is sig-worthy.
As much fun as the Stargate series is, the concept is pretty much based on rubbish; anyhow, any junk about them being along a 'straight line' is bull. Look at aerial photos, they're not on any line that you could chart with a straight edge.
Molyneux wrote:anyhow, any junk about them being along a 'straight line' is bull. Look at aerial photos, they're not on any line that you could chart with a straight edge.
The story I heard on their geographical arrangement was the ancient Egyptians were trying to make a copy the constellation Orion on the ground. The three Pyramids at Giza are supposed to be the belt.
"everytime a person is born the Earth weighs just a little more."--DMJ on StarTrek.com
"You see now you are using your thinking and that is not a good thing!" DMJay on StarTrek.com
"Watching Sarli argue with Vympel, Stas, Schatten and the others is as bizarre as the idea of the 40-year-old Virgin telling Hugh Hefner that Hef knows nothing about pussy, and that he is the expert."--Elfdart
Molyneux wrote:anyhow, any junk about them being along a 'straight line' is bull. Look at aerial photos, they're not on any line that you could chart with a straight edge.
The story I heard on their geographical arrangement was the ancient Egyptians were trying to make a copy the constellation Orion on the ground. The three Pyramids at Giza are supposed to be the belt.
...possible, but then again, it's a set of three pyramids in a vague line, with one offset, at roughly equal distances. There's nothing to particularly point to Orion's belt. Given that the rightmost star in the Belt is the least bright, and the seemingly corresponding pyramid is the smallest of the three, I guess it's feasible that the arrangement was intentional, but still no more than an interesting possibility.
I read that someone thought the Pyramids looked kind of like Orion's belt, but then found out that they weren't, so they extrapolated it and found out that they only matched Orion's belt 10,500 years ago, so they said that's when the Pyramids were built. (I think this is what people call the "cart before the horse")
OmegaGuy wrote:I read that someone thought the Pyramids looked kind of like Orion's belt, but then found out that they weren't, so they extrapolated it and found out that they only matched Orion's belt 10,500 years ago, so they said that's when the Pyramids were built. (I think this is what people call the "cart before the horse")
What would "matching Orion's belt" even mean? It's a trio of stars in a straight line, that "revolves" around the Earth with respect to the viewer.
Even if it does... so what? Plenty of ancient people built their monuments based on astronomical phenomena. Ancient people paid a lot of attention to what happened above their heads compared to the vast majority of people today (i.e. non-scientific people). That happens when you live in an agrarian society. Big deal.
Darth Wong wrote:Besides, a real landing facility for a high-tech civilization would probably involve some kind of instrumentation. So I would expect to see some sort of transmitter to help guide down spacecraft, otherwise there's really no point to this thing at all. Except, of course, the one archaeologists have been describing: giant self-aggrandizement tombs for the pharoahs.
No, don't you get it? The aliens navigate via psychic lay-lines. The mystical power of the pyramid shape forms an extradimensional nexus that the aliens pick up with their telepathic power. Boy, for an engineer you sure are a dope.
Turin wrote:
No, don't you get it? The aliens navigate via psychic lay-lines. The mystical power of the pyramid shape forms an extradimensional nexus that the aliens pick up with their telepathic power. Boy, for an engineer you sure are a dope.
Well,this just shows that we can do it better than mysterious psyhich aliens from outer space.
After all, we simply need a few large tracking stations to guide our spacecraft down.
