this post was submitted on 18 May 2024
172 points (93.0% liked)

World News

38583 readers
1936 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Believe it or not, no aliens were likely involved! Just some very smart humans and a massive amount of labor.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

My takeaway was that the scientists he claim support this idea that they weren't dragged do not say they weren't dragged.

I'm not sure why you think "their claim about what those scientists said isn't true" isn't good enough...

[–] AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm not even sure where you've developed that strawman from what the dude said, his original statement or his future back and forth with you. He said that the brute force argument isn't the best one based on research like the water experimentation on dry sand. That doesn't mean they didn't use brute force in labor, just that it may have been supplemented by techniques we're still investigating. He's not saying they used magic.

Now we know they not only had a easy source of water, we know they had enough water to supplement the power of human labor. You just really wanted to argue so you focused on whatever points you could find disagreement.

The whole argument is based on you really wanting to be unequivocally right about your understanding of how something was built when the article you posted is about a literal groundbreaking discovery that may change our understanding of how it was built. Just seems silly on this one I guess.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

He’s not saying they used magic.

No, just a simple machine that no one has ever discovered since.

Which is pretty close to magic.

[–] AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Unlikely, yes. More likely an implementation of principles in ways we just don't have reference for in documentation, we just discovered that Roman concrete was mixed hot with quick lime. This shit always seems crazy until we figure it out.

Although I don't see anyone saying there were as low as 1,600 workers on the great pyramid. So you right to question that one.

Actually I bet this is where that number came from lol:

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna46485163