The Pyramids vis a vis the Flood

I doubt the casting stones would prevent us from seeing any water damage.

quote:

---

please don't tell me that this is the level of discussion here.
per the very first post in this thread, the question is posed.

​

why are there no watermarks on the outside of the Great Pyramid?

---

No. The first post is asking about watermarks on the insides - not the outsides - and of the pyramids in general - not just the Great Pyramid.I suggest that you raise the level of discussion by making it clear exactly which points you are attempting to answer - and try harder to avoid making obvious errors.Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

is there anything concrete which backs up ancient legends that watermarks could be found halfway up the sides of the pyramid?has the salt water inclusion been debunked?and what i refer to about level of discussion is the automatic knee jerk response i receive when the casing stones are mentioned.

Well, you're the one that posted just one sentence, I gleamed from it what I could. No. The first post talks about water on the INSIDE of ANY pyramid. Ok, I apologise for that one then, but it's not the first time I've seen people make such wacky statements. If you had been a bit clearer though, this could've been avoided.

---

I hunt for the truth

true, i could have been clearer, the first post is asking for evidence to be found within the great pyramid. and maybe I am the only one constraining the discussion to the Great Pyramid of Giza?Edited by hyperqube, : clarityEdited by hyperqube, : clarity

I haven't heard of that. But wouldn't the water line then also be visible on the stones underneath the casing stones? Yes, I'm sorry. But you'll be amazed at some of the things I've heard people claim.P.s. Here's a little nice tip for you. if you want to reply to a specific message, click the little reply button on the bottom right of that message, that way it's easier to track.

---

I hunt for the truth

Why do you limit the options to either before the flood or shortly after the flood? Why don't you consider the possibility that the pyramids were built many generations after the flood?The soil underneath the pyramids consist of limestone. The geologic principle of superposition states that this soil was deposited before the pyramids were built. Limestone is formed in a marine environment. The flood happened long before the pyramids were built.Archaeologists have found the bones of pyramid workersThe quotes below are from The Discovery of the Tombs of the Pyramid Builders at Giza: Dr. Zahi Hawass“Skeletons of both men and women, particularly those from the lower burials, show such signs of heavy labor.Simple and multiple limb fractures were found in skeletons from both the lower and upper burials. The most frequent were fractures of the ulna and radius, the bones of the upper arm, and of the fibula, the more delicate of the two lower leg bones.Depressed fractures of the frontal or parietal skull bones were found in skulls of both males and females. The parietal lesions tended to be left-sided, which may indicate that the injuries resulted from face to face assault by right-handed attackers.”Inspite of this evidence, Dr Zahi claims it is a popular misconception, "The scenario of whip-drive slaves received support from the biblical account of Moses and the Exodus and the first-century A.D. historian Josephus. In our era, Cecil B. de Mille's galvanizing screen images reinforced this popular misconception."The book of Exodus records that Egyptians were cruel to their slaves and bones have been found that confirm this. The saddest part of this story is that God wanted Joseph in Egypt to save them from famine.The book of Genesis records a 7 year famine, where a dreamer saved Egypt.Ancient Egyptian writings record a very similar story.Quotes from University of Wisconsin-MilwaukeeIn a period of seven years.Grain was scant,Kernels were dried up,Scarce was every kind of food.As I slept in peace, I found the god standing before me. I propitiated him by adoring him and praying to him. He revealed himself to me with kindly face; he said:"I am Khnum, your maker!My arms are around you,

You do realise that the formation times are greater than 6000 years, don't you?

Because the flood is widely held to have happened about 4500 years ago, which is around the time the oldest pyramids were built. The "geologic principle of superposition" says NOTHING about the ground underneath manmade structures. Of course the limestone was allready there, what mechanism could possibly place it there AFTER the pyramids were built? And as LArni pointed out, you do realise it takes more then 1 year (the duration of the flood) for limestone to be deposited in that quantity. They sure have. And those bones led to the conclusion that slaves were NOT used in the building of the pyramids. Yes, they were working at a construction site which used MASSIVE stones, accidents happen, you know. The fact the bones were found in normal graves and smost of them showed they had healed after receiving the injuries tells us they were NOT slaves. First, his name is Dr. Hawass, Zahi is his first name. And what evidence are you talking about? As I pointed out to you, the broken bones could've esaily happened by accident. In fact, most of them show healing, you don't take care of slaves like that do you? The biblical account can claim what it likes, it's NOT evidence slaves were used. Furthermore, it is widely held to take place long AFTER the pyramids were built. I don't know what Josephus said about it, but he was a jew, so it is likely he simply took his info from the old testament. Yes, and they were proven wrong when the homes and graves of the pyramid builders were found. Perhaps they were, slaves were NOT used in the building of the pyramids however. How nice of god, apparently he approves of slavery then..... Yes, do you have any evidnece this actually happened? Exactly, a story. Nice little poetry, doesn't seem finished though. And anyway, since when's poetry evidence?Edited by Huntard, : Got the flood date wrong, silly me!(thanks coyote)

---

I hunt for the truth

The commonly accepted date for the "global flood" is about 4,350 years ago.The limestone you are describing is most likely many millions of years old.How do you reconcile the vast difference in dates?As a second issue, many of the pyramids were built before 4,350 years ago. Why were they not affected by the flood? For that matter, why were the Egyptians not affected by the flood? We are being asked to believe that they and the rest of the world were miles under water. They don't seem to have been bothered much by it.I think the conclusion we can reach here is that there was no flood during historic times. The flood story is a tribal myth.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Experiments have been done to determine how long it takes for limestone to form. G. Friedman placed a sardine can in an area of sea-level highstands. He found the sardine can one year later and found that it was lithified to approximately 382 g of hard oolitic limestone. (Refer Google Sites: Sign-in )In the book “Geochemical Investigations in Earth and Space Science” by Ronald Jay Hill et al., Friedman describes another experiment done in 1919 where beach sand got converted to beach rock within 1 year.I have replied to Larni inspite of him not giving any experimental proof to back up his beliefs. Whoever else who wants me to reply to their posts should give some experimental proof or observational data to prove their point.

OK, here is some data.There is a cave in southern Alaska, called On Your Knees Cave. Human remains dated to 10,300 years ago produced mtDNA of a particular type (D4h3). A number of living individuals with that particular type are found on the west coasts of North and South America.This documents a continuity of mtDNA types in the New World. (I have a similar example from my own work spanning 5,300 years).This shows that there was no disruption by a global flood.(We also have continuity of sediments and fauna and flora, as well as human cultures. We would have none of these if there was a global flood at the appointed time of 4,350 years ago.)You wanted data--there it is.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

If Coyote's dates are right, then they were antediluvian.So show us a rock that got wet four and a half thousand years ago
so we can compare it with the pyramid's rocks.

---

There no doubt exist natural laws, but once this fine reason of ours was corrupted, it corrupted everything.
Pascal

peace, please take the time to read a proper petrology textbook.That is where you will find your 'proof' -- if that's actually what you are looking for. It is much harder for us to post citations to research because we don't have access to all the literature. Besides that, proving anything during an online discussion is impossible. That's what the books and technical journals are for. You might also try keeping to the last decade. Although some of those old papers are excellent resources, we've come a long way since 1919.And for your information, there is a significant difference between oolitic limestone (composed of millimeter-sized grains), which forms in carbonate supersaturated, shallow-water/high-energy environments (often in association with fresh water which aids the lithification process), and micritic limestone which constitutes the bulk of limestone and is formed in quiet, deep-water shelf to intertidal environments. Micritic limestone was originally composed of microscopic carbonate needles that recrystallized to clay-sized grains of calcite. While some micritic limestone can form in shallow water environments, much of it forms in deeper water. Therefore, Friedman was NOT in any way suggesting that a rapidly-lithified, shallow-water oolitic limestone is an appropriate analogue for deep-water micritic limestone. For you to suggest such a ridiculous thing is disingenuous.How do you propose to get trillions upon trillions upon trillions of microscopic aragonite needles to settle down through several hundred meters of seawater and then harden into the several thousand meters of limestone found in the geologic record over the course of days, weeks, months, or years?Not only that, you have to make sure the water chemistry is just right, the water temperature is just right, the water depth is just right, and strictly limit the amount of siliciclastic input before CaCO3 will even precipitate.How is this possible during the chaos of the great flood?Don't forget, within the context of a global flood, you will also have to:1) estimate amount of compression during diagenesis;
2) explain the presence of trace and other fossils;
3) explain the fact that fossil types change in a consistent known order with stratigraphic height;
4) explain the presence also of bentonite seams and other sedimentologic units (shales, siltstones, sandstones, glauconite concentrations, etc.) and bedding features (cross-bedding, ripple marks, etc.);
5) explain the reason for carbonate dissolution during deposition;
6) explain dolomite formation;
7) explain the concentric shells of the ooids themselves;
8) explain the formation of FRESH WATER LIMESTONE (not all limestone is of marine origin);
9) explain microscopic laminations;
10)explain consistent correlation between some trace elements (e.g., Sr), isotopes, and fossils;
11)explain reef complexes;
12)explain the formation of microscopic aragonite needle... etc. ad nauseum.The above is a short, short list of some of the things you need to explain.For you to even suggest that you and other creationists can refute decades or even centuries of sedimentologic research with one or two paragraphs of geo-illiterate techni-babble is truly mind boggling.Edited by roxrkool, : No reason given.Edited by roxrkool, : No reason given.

So evidently you don't know the time scales involved.Keep up, mate.