Guest Articles by Will Hart
About the Author
Will Hart is a freelance journalist, book author, nature photographer and
documentary filmmaker. He has been
investigating ancient mysteries and evidence of extraterrestrial
intervention on Earth since 1969. He lives in Arizona.
All articles on this page are
© 2004-2007 by Will Hart.
Reprinted with permission.
Egyptologists: It is Time to Prove Your Claims
by Will Hart
Egyptologists are displaying irrational and unscientific fixations by stubbornly
clinging to ideas that have already been discredited. Mr. Lerhner and Mr. Hawass
use every public forum to repeat their unproven speculations about how the
ancient (Egyptian) builders quarried, transported, lifted, dressed and precisely
positioned blocks of stone weighing from 50 to 200 tons.
The problem is that they have not proven that the primitive tools and methods
that they assert the builders used are equal to the task. In fact, several
well-documented attempts over the past 30 years have actually failed to
replicate what the builders achieved. In the 1970s a Japanese team funded by
Nissan tried to build a one-third, scale model of the Great Pyramid using the
methods Egyptologists claim the ancient engineers employed. They could not
duplicate a single step of the process.
They gave up and called on modern technology. Even with the aid of trucks and
helicopters they could not position the stones accurately and the finished
pyramid turned out to be a haphazard mess. Then in the 1990s NOVA filmed another
effort aimed at proving that Egyptologists were right. It was nowhere near as
ambitious as the Japanese project. This time a team of experts tried set about
the task of quarrying a 35-ton obelisk -- rather small by Egyptian standards --
using dolorite hammers, then transporting it on wooden skids and lifting it into
place via a dirt ramp.
The NOVA team gave up rather quickly so slow was the quarrying process. They
soon realized that the ancient method of transport was also hopeless and they
called in a bulldozer to quarry the stone and a truck to carry it to the site.
The first difficult steps having been performed with the aid of modern machinery
they tried to lift the obelisk into place using their primitive scheme. That
Now consider that the blocks of granite forming the ceiling of the King's
Chamber weigh 50-tons and they had to be lifted to that height and precisely manoeuvred
into a difficult position. Furthermore, the largest obelisk in Egypt weighs ten
times as much as the one the NOVA team struggled with unsuccessfully. We have to
keep in mind that the only tools and sources of power that Egyptologists are
willing to allow were primitive. They had no steel hammers or chisels, no
pulleys and no horse drawn wheeled vehicles. The builders had to quarry the
blocks with stone hammers and haul them using ropes, wooden sleds and manpower.
Many modern day engineers, physicists and other scientists have scratched
their heads in wonder when they have come face-to-face with the problem. Some
have been willing to publicly voice their doubts as to whether the ancients
could have built the pyramid and raised the obelisks using primitive methods.
Independent researchers have raised a number of serious questions and several
have posed alternate theories.
The debate has raged on for decades without resolution. But there is a
simple, definitive way to end the controversy once and for all.
I propose that an independent panel of scientists and civil engineers devise
a straightforward test to see if blocks of stone weighing 50 to 200 tons can be
manipulated, moved and lifted into place using the primitive methods that
Egyptologists claim the ancients employed.
Using smaller stones proves nothing, you have to successfully manipulate the
largest blocks not the smallest.
This challenge is proposed in the true spirit of scientific inquiry and
public disclosure. There is no reason to accord a free lunch to any group of
social scientists and no reason to accept unsubstantiated (historical) theories
that are based on little more than idle speculation and wishful thinking. There
is also no good reason to allow a protracted controversy to reign when the means
of disposing of it are readily available.
Human history is a universal reality that belongs to all people and the
pursuit of its underlying truth is more important than catering to the interests
of any individual(s) or group(s).
© 2002 by Will Hart
Something is Wrong with this Picture!
by Will Hart
Everyone including Egyptologists, historians, alternative researchers and
tourists agree on one thing: the Great Pyramid is awesome. The experts claim
that it was constructed about 4500 years ago by the early Egyptians using
primitive tools and methods to serve as a tomb for the reigning Pharaoh Khufu.
Egyptian scholar's claim that it was built in 23 years with stone hammers,
cooper chisels, wooden sledges, ramps and manpower. But is this possible? Let's
look at the facts and statistics first. The Great Pyramid is estimated to be
composed of 2.3 million blocks of stone having a combined mass of 6 million
tons. The stone blocks weigh from 1 to 70 tons and the average is about 2.5
Logic, common sense and basic math tell us that there is a serious problem
with the formula and timeline presented by Egyptologists. We will assume that
the builders were intent on finishing the massive project before Khufu died so
they worked every day of the year for 20 years. That gives us a total of 7300
days to build the pyramid. Now we take the 2.3 million blocks that had to be
quarried, transported, dressed and placed into position and divide that by 7300
and we come up 315 blocks.
So to build the pyramid in 20 years the builders had to place 315 blocks per
day on average. We can further break that down into hours and minutes. Using a
ten-hour workday they had to place between 31 and 32 per hour or about 2 blocks
per minute. To further refine and conform the formula to the real world the
experts tell us the builders only worked seasonally, about 120 days per year. So
we can throw out the above average delivery rate because we have a massive
"peak" delivery rate to configure.
To finish the pyramid on time working seasonally they would have had to
radically increase the delivery rate to about 900 blocks per day or about one
every 45 seconds. Is this possible? The truth is, none of it is possible and a
careful analysis of the actual construction process using the primitive tools
and methods clearly demonstrates that these scholars need to go back to the
drawing board and quick.
For starters the closest quarry is about 1,000' from the site. It takes an
average walker about 3 to 4 minutes to cover that distance. Now let's include
the ramps. The pyramid is about 700' on each side. That means the lowest ramp
would have to be at least 1000' long since it is on an incline. So if we walk
from the quarry to the site and up the first ramp we have used up 7 to 8
minutes. Probably more since it is uphill.
Clearly a crew pulling a sledge bearing a 2.5-ton load is going to take
longer, much longer. Conservatively we could triple the walking time and say 24
minutes. But we have to back up and add the quarrying process. How long does it
take to quarry the average block of limestone? The quarry crew has to cut a
trench around the blocks, then undercut the block and finally lift it out and
onto a waiting sledge. Could this possibly take less than 20 minutes?
Actually, we have to account for two lifts, one from the quarry to the sledge
and then off the sledge at the delivery point. It is as plain as day that the
quarry-lift-transport-delivery-lift-and-place process, which is unavoidable
given the tools and methods, would have taken at least 45-50 minutes per block.
Anything less is physically impossible and that assertion can be easily proven.
We have added the practical physical steps and constraints into a real world
formula as opposed to the abstract one that Egyptian scholars have made to fit
their scenario. In addition to the average size blocks we have 30-70 ton granite
megaliths and 140,000 outer casing stones weighing from 10 to 15 tons to factor
in. Studies performed by Denys Stocks, the leading expert on ancient Egyptian
stone working, have shown that using primitive hammer-stones required massive
amounts of time to quarry large granite blocks. The Aswan quarry was 500 miles
The casing stones also pose a significant challenge. They were cut from the
Tura and Masara quarries east of Cairo across the river. These quarries produce
high-grade limestone that polishes into marble as it ages. The rough-hewn blocks
were probably 40 tons apiece. Engineers have marveled over how precisely these
casing stones were cut and finished at right angles on all sides except the
outer surface, which was honed to a 51-degree plane. There are no tool marks on
the remaining casing blocks and the accuracy with which they were set into
position is stunning.
How long did it take to haul these blocks from the quarry? Then they had to
be finished and carefully set into place, some more than 400 feet up the
pyramid. It is laughable to think this was supposed to have been done by men
pulling wooden sledges or stone- masons pounding the blocks perfectly smooth
with hammer-stones and then sanding them. 300 blocks per day for 20 years…more
like 20 blocks per day for 300 years!
By what series of miracles did the ancient builders quarry, transport and
position the huge granite slabs above the King's Chamber that are more than 150
vertical feet above the base? Egyptologists should get close to a group of
computer programmers, systems analysts, mathematicians and construction
engineers because their formula is not viable -- and does not matter if it
includes levers, poles and spiral ramps -- it is embarrassingly flawed and
© 2002 by Will Hart