Agree. You might want to add the requirement that these ivory-tower academics who claim they have "solved" the mystery build the same sized walls without the use of modern cranes, airplanes or any electric machinery and also quarry the huge rocks from far away transporting them over mountains, rivers and valleys. lol.
I came over to this video from a video of a guy moving 10t blocks only using "sticks and stones" and his bare hands in an attempt to build his own Stonehenge but mostly because he likes to move heavy objects like whole barns and massive stone blocks 😄 th-cam.com/video/E5pZ7uR6v8c/w-d-xo.html
The reader just is not able to read aloud understanding at the same time the meaning or what he is reading. I am at 5th minute and there is still a "preparation" for genius idea. Already am thinking that the final will be disappointing (as usual for that type of "eureka") So why to suffer?
You see the large flat "temple" floors ..most of the building blocks are flat on the bottom. Step one: Spread your "paste" and pyrite over that floor and take larger blocks and slide them slowly to "burn" them flat
Was a stone Mason's helper for many years and I've never seen such precision work. I've shaped tons of stone and am amazed at how good they were . Joint patterns that don't even matter or nesisary but always link up 🤔
Whenever I look at this finely jointed masonry I get the feeling they were showing off their skill. It's almost like they were leaving a message to future generations: "Lets see if you can figure out how we did this!".
@@martinharris5017 from what I've learned here about this subject is that its only on one side that everything looks perfect and behind the walls they used smaller fill in rocks.
@@ericabarca5871 You understand correctly: It's all about the appearance of perfection. Same is true for Great Pyramid in Egypt. Nevertheless it's still extraordinary workmanship considering what they had at their disposal. I've yet to see any experts today replicate either the technique or the style, and certainly not on this scale. AND it's survived hundreds of years of seismic disturbance.
@@martinharris5017 This video was quite compelling. Acids are very interesting. Apparently, Incans had abundant access to acid... LOL Seriously, it is definitely a compelling argument as to how the Incans did it.
@@thomassicard3733 I have many hundreds of old books in my home library. can't remember which one, it might be Exploration Fawcett possibly, but there is a story related about some Western explorers in the Brazillian region who found a very old bottle with a stopper in it. Thinking it might possibly be an alcoholic brew but not wanting to test it, they asked one of their porters, a local native, to take a swig. he refused to do so and protested that it wasn't for drinking. In the altercation the bottle was knocked over and the fluid spilled onto a rock. As the men watched in amazement, the surface of the rock began to soften. Over the years I've read and heard numerous anecdotes about acidic substances being used to soften and sculpt rock, and it certainly explains much about the smooth, sculpted look of South American monuments and masonry. I've always believed the claims had substance to them, and these latest findings appear to vindicate the stories and explain the material evidence.
I love your effort BUT, it seems to me that the first question to answer is, how they Quarried and moved each piece. Next question is what was the mechanism that allowed them to place and remove each piece possibly several times to ensure the tight fit. I was a journeyman Finnish carpenter for many years and any multiangle joint would take several fit checks and they did not usually weight more than 2000 lbs. These builders were amazing.
Place and remove several times? If you would be trying to duplicate the same construction with an ordinary housebrick you would have to do it at least fifty times with todays tools. Then. Who knows howmany times. Its looks like as though 'they' had heated the stone to a plastercene consistency and then moulded them into place. Way too many unanswered questions that even the most experienced and knowleable stonemasons today have no idea
The blocks were not cut or carved. They were poured into place. They are concrete walls. So, no cutting, no transport and no fitting impossible angles together. Using formwork they poured each 'block' into place in situ. It's a simple answer that has been kept secret until now.
@@nephos100 Did you miss the bit where he explained which kinds of stone were used? Clearly there have been tests conducted to identify the type of stone in each block. And they certainly didn't grind feldspar, granite, etc into a fine paste, mix it with a binding agent, and then pour it into place.
@@HowlinWilf13 Didn't miss any bit. You are certainly right about that one thing: "And they didn't grind feldspar, granite, etc into a fine paste, mix it with a binding agent and then pour it into place." That's spot on. They certainly didn't do it that way.
@@nephos100 Nephos, It's an interesting thought but it is very easy test the rock to see if it is concrete, I hope someone has already done that. My understanding on that topic is that they know where the Stone quarry is. However, making forms is another technology. I'm not saying that they did not have that technology But, I would think that the idea of conservation of energy ,time ,materials and craftsmen would create even greater pressure on the population.
Yes I was thinking it would be quite interesting to see if it can be reproduced. Something like that would need to be crowd funded though, and it would take quite a bit of money and human physical and mental power to get the job done, I'd think.
Very good point by Daryl. Sounds like a very easy experiment to replicate. Trial and error, find a compound that will soften rock. If the Inca could do it, then modern science labs should be able to do it too.
@@MrRecklessryan Yep, I totally agree with that statement. One way to "soften" stone is to toss it into a volcano and wait till it melts. That's the easy part. The hard part is reaching into the molten magma with your bare hands and picking it back out again. (grin)
@@MrRecklessryan No you would have to fit at least 3 stones together. National Geographic and the Smithsonian could fund it, but they will not because they cannot do the precision stone fitting.
they had a lot less to distract them back then. And they used what they saw around them. But yes, I agree. I feel after reading the other comments that we have only gotten less and less intelligent.
You don't know how right you are. Take a look at the cave dwellings in Cappadocia Turkey. That's where the Flintstones lived. Barney and Betty rubble lived in Darren kuiu turkey. If you don't want your mind blown don't bother.
If that doesn't bother you enough listen to a few Aussies and Kiwis whose inflection goes up at the end of each sentence. It'll drive you nuts. Every sentence sounds like a question, not a statement.
It is just that it is the exact same inflection every time. It sound disingenuous, as if he isn't speaking about something he really has thoughts or feelings about. This just isn't how a normal person would talk normally about something. After enough videos you kind of stop noticing it for the most part, but it can be distracting.
I thought I was the only one who finds the constant inflections annoying. I can't take it, lol. I find myself saying the statements out loud and realizing that it's not that hard to not emphasize every statement the same way every single time. Don't get me wrong I like the fun theories this channel produces, the lack of scientific evidence is an issue, but it is just someone pumping out content. Yet, the inflections are just so annoying I have never made it through an entire video. For me it keeps from being engaging.
lol 3 minutes in and it became so grating and i anticipated it at the end of every sentence, which is distracting as hell. takes serious willpower to listen to the end. had to scroll the comments to make sure it wasn't just me.
Fine research Matt, but many questions remain: 1. How deep into this hard stone does the stated chemical process work? Is it more than surface corrosion/softening, because these stones appear softened and molded to significant depths. 2. What do you have to say about the Inca themselves reporting that the walls were already present when they arrived? 3. Nagging problem of how such massive stones were transported long distances without advanced technology. 4. What to make of the very obvious distinctions in building styles--sophisticated and crude--often right on top of one another for no apparent reason. -Cheers!
@@maksymilianzienkiewicz1776 right I thought of that after posting. Uncanny resemblances in building stores across oceans. Matt mentioned it in passing, but didn't factor it into the analysis.
@@frosty6960 Sounds like you have direct experience with or knowledge of the process described in the video. This concurs with my own doubts just based upon years of house building and working with various materials. Once corrosion sets in, like you say it's very difficult to control or stop the process without introducing a neutralizing agent--say baking soda on car battery terminals. Very hard to do with a 10 ton rock covering up your good work! So, I have serious doubts about this theory for this and other reasons mentioned. Cheers!
Great video! Fascinating. I'd love to see some chemists, stone masons and geologist get together and try to recreate this process to build a stone wall.
Yeh, nice photos of the great stone walls. But absolut nothing more than speculation around how it was buildt. I think that is something ewerybody with a camera and fantasy can do
Well Brian Braden. I think you made a wicked statement. The video makes it all sound simple . but no one will take up your challenge as the professionals no it can't be done
Researchers have at least recreated the paste and fused rocks together using the same chemical you'd find in the red mud. The rocks seal together with a similar smooth, glassy texture found in incan ruins. It's known today, as part of popular tradition in andrean natives, you can mix the red mud with an additive extracted from local tree sap (containing oxalic acid). The oxalic acid makes the already potent naturally occurring acid 10x stronger.
@@wolfumz I've been to these ruins. Many of those rocks are the size of an SUV yet the surfaces fit perfect. The Incas didn't even care if the stone was not square. In 2020, we cant even get the fender gap anywhere near as precise on that SUV using computer aided methods. Having acid paste is one thing but I challenge anyone to physically try to do this on rocks 1/10 the size.
@@Salty.Peasants I do not know the name of the paste. Several sources call the clay used “llàncac allpa”. I don't know a specific plant, but early chroniclers report a plant was mixed in to the red clay mortar. Oxalic acid is naturally occuring in many leafy plants, it is not a rare chemical. When it is mixed with sulfuric acid between stones, the oxalic acid decomposes, releases heat, and reacts with silicates in rocks. Heating the mixture increases the potency, and the reaction could have been self-heating. You can free English language research on the topic by searching the author's name: "HELMUT TRIBUTSCH". Early chroniclers of Incan construction said workers would lift and drop the same stone many times into place before it was fitted. No cranes, no pulleys, no ruler, no square, no beasts of burden, no iron tools. Hard to imagine.
I saw another vid on this, and the guys claimed the Inkas had "since forgotten and lost tricks and methods", and since they did it so much they were experts at it. VERY SCIENTIFIC EH? LOL. Fact is, the Inkas could not have done it.
I know a guy named Michaelangelo made statues far more intricate and complicated than these interlocked blocks. I know he did it with a hammer and chisel. That does not mean that I can do what he did if I had a chisel and hammer.
@@furtim1 they statue that you're referring to is tiny tiny tiny compared to Machu Picchu. Do you understand what this fact implements? I doubt it because people now have the same IQ as their pet dog. And dogs do not understand size.
@@donniebaker5984 I doubt very much you are a real person, rather than a bot. Still, I will respond. Having seen both in person, I assure you that I do know the difference in size between some boulders at Machu Pichu or Tikal and the statues of ancient Greece or the Renaissance. However, this video isn't about the movement or placement of the materials, but the care and exactness of the carving. Carving a 10 ton block into a really well shaped blob is not any more miraculous than carving 3 ton block into a beautiful woman on a chariot of fire. It is just a matter of tools, skill, and time. So, what was your point? That they aren't the same mass? Yes. Agreed.
Just like you don't need someone to replicate the Mona Lisa to prove it was actually painted, you don't need someone to rebuild the Machu Picchu to prove it was built. We already know the techniques used and are able to replicate it on a small scale. You can find videos on youtube of people doing this. The burden of proof lies upon those who claim this was done with "advanced" or "lost" technology as I've yet to see any kind of replication or proof that would back up these theories.
It's so unpopular to say that the Incas just used acid plus hard work. I am glad you have shared this for all the people who think aliens and big foot made these walls with magic.
Not aliens etc possible machinery of unknown design and fuel used. Also I would like to know how long it takes to process the huge blocks in this way, how long does it take for the acid compound mentioned to achieve the effect on display in sites worldwide of remarkably similar construction?
@@timothyjohnfarr6544 the real question is- were all these stones carved in place out of an outcropping? then did the carvings cause breaks in the lines they carved? So, let's disassemble a wall, or will it even separate?
i love your channel for relentlessly going after these questions without blindly believing "classic" theories but also not explaining everything with aliens.
Agree, just a theory. Never heard anyone has tried this ever in modern times. How were they able to move this highly acidic material from modern Ecuador to Chile, wherever you find those colossal stones with perfect joints, of course it's not only Sacsayhuaman. Also, never read either anyone has ever moved those monster rocks from their location to confirm how they fit with side rocks. How did they come up with essentially a 3D free form model to chisel out of rock, and lift to a perfect fit, that remains the question.
Agree... If this is a 1 man channel, then i would understand that this guy probably dont want to pay people to narrate his videos... Computer/TTS voices are usually not a better alternative - but there are at least a few REALLY good ones... If he already writes down the narration to these videos, then it would actually require LESS work...
He's got a medical condition and so splices short clips of his own commentary. He's unable to do long continuous speech. He explained it in comments some time ago.
Notice that there are typically 2 nubs. This is why. As the stones are being quarried, The bottom of the stone is chipped away so that it is supported with 4 pillars. The front 2 pillars are then replaced with wood blocks. When the blocks are knocked out it breaks the rear two pillars of stone. Not all blocks will have nubs because some blocks are broken from larger stones once they are laying horizontal
I have seen a monument laid on its side at Machu Pichue. The bottom of the concrete pour shows air holes where the concrete on the dirt wasn't vibrated and trapped air. It showed the monument was poured in place and not chiseled from stone. I'm a cement Mason and this opened my eyes.
@sr4087 How come the nubs are always in pairs and at the the bottom of the blocks where they are evident. I think it's more than a coincidence and your answer is way to simple. Erosion ?
I'm with you. I believe that these civilizations found these structures when they migrate into these areas. The Incas, could not have created such huge megaliths.
@@plaguemouse5549 I think he is referring to the fact that, by the time the Spanish arrived in numbers, the civilization was already in decline and the newer structures were sloppy by comparison to the older ones. You can see this for yourself if you go there. Beautiful stonework supporting rather haphazard rock and mortar work.
The Inca literally believed they were the first civilization to ever exist and they killed anyone that contested that. They would never say "someone was here building our stuff before us", and they have never said that. What did happen was that when Inca met anyone civilization that was clearly older than them they would claim that the locals said they didn't build their cities, someone before them did. Because then the Inca could claim that older Inca or Inca gods built the cities that were older than them.
In traveling around Machu Picchu and Ollantaytambo, looking up at the mountains you see huge square depressions cut out of the mountain faces which match the size of the boulders creating these gigantic walls . . . and you wonder, how in the world did they do that⁉️
I did stone work years ago for quite a few years, helped build homes, cutting/shaping all kinds of stone; and just from researching this particular site and also Pumu Punku, the only way this is possible; the rounded edges and beveling, the way they are formed and fit, would be if they were poured, or molded, or the molecular structure of the stone was able to be altered some how. All of the people who try to claim that monkeys with hammers (obviously exaggerating) just chiseled these stones, should have their degrees revoked. And not one time has anyone been able to re create any of this stuff with a “hammer and chisel”.
These blocks, their size aside, are nothing compared to stoneworks that we know for a fact were made with hammers and chisels, like Michaelangelo's statue of Moses. Is your position that one person with a chisel can make that statue in a few years, but thousands of people with chisels cannot make odd shaped blocks that fit together?
It must have been done by advanced atlanteans, or Atlantis survivors after the younger dryas global cataclysm who fled to peru and influenced the natives and showed them how to do it, Graham Hancock knows just listen to him
Around the 5th minute I came to comments to see if anyone else was having trouble with the sing-songy up and down infection every 5 or 6 words. It very unfortunate that this is happening as I will try to have to find the info on how the walls were built...someplace else if I can.
@@hih-meh1344 there's no Giants according to the Bible measurements Goliath was only about 10 to 12 ft tall if that he'll the average man back then was only five foot six and we have basketball players that are 8 feet and world record holder 8 feet 11
It's ALL Geo-polymer.....it has to be. Can you imagine cutting each one of those megalithic boulders/bricks, to fit EVERY conceivable angle perfectly to fit together. Never would happen, the mason would have killed himself before he finished 10 blocks, becaus eit would have taken him 1,000 tries to get 10 as perfect as these were made. Forms had to of been used, the geo-polymer was mixed, a thin dissolvable material along with (now this acid mud) was placed between adjoining boulders, the polymer was poured, the forms were removed when it was still malleable, to round the edges and texture the surface. Now you're not moving impossible loads, but sacks of pulverized material and mixing on sight. It's how the great pyramid was built as well. I don't care if they tested the megalithic boulders and confirmed it's solid rock....they're wrong & need better equipment or they're LYING and we're ALL just dealing with ANOTHER Pseudo-Science Fraud that been passed down like one of Man's Religions. You have to think about these topics in a way that asks the question, "How would YOU Replicate what was built here?" and then you figure it out, if tasked...what would be your steps. What tools would you use today and then you'll find the answer. The Inca's didn't build the Megalithic portion or precision cut stones or precision drilled holes at these sites....That was done by the Ancient Megalithic Builders that employed the Polygonal Geo-polymer masonry engineering ALL over the World...On just about every continent you can find their work, from Easter Island to New Zealand to Japan and the list goes on. Since Mainstream Academia (Archaeology) refuses to connect the dots on Polygonal construction throughout the World, it simply translates as EVIDENCE as to their blatant disregard for TRUTH/Science & is PROOF of their Corruption or at the very least, limited intelligence. They're all pretty smart, so I'm going to vote for CORRUPTION...Indoctrination can also be an excuse, BUT this dumb Pollack armchair Warrior can figure it out, so should EVERYONE else. This is just more Pseudo-Science that has infested every sector of our Modern day Society of Dogmas'....Archaeology/Megaliths/Origin of Species all fit nicely with all the others....i.e.. *MAINSTREAM EMF Science is Pseudo-Science i.e. Industry PAID Agenda Junk Science, no different than VACCINE Pseudo-Science & Tobacco Science & Asbestos Science & Glyphosate/Round-Up Science & Cannabis Science & Bovine Growth Hormone Science & 2,4-d Science & Mercury Amalgam Science & GMO Science & Anthropogenic Climate Change Science & Lead Gas Science & Artificial Sweeteners Science & Pregnant Women-Fetus X-Ray Science & Downwinders Science & Nagasaki/Hiroshima Radiation Science & Fukushima Radiation Navy Sailors Science & Gulf War Syndrome Science & Depleted Uranium Science & DDT Science & Agent Orange Science & Geo-engineering Science & Cholesterol Science & Bio-SOLIDS Science & Autism Science* & I can go on & on & On , folks! *These are ALL Non-Replicable Agenda BIASED Science that VIOLATE the SCIENTIFIC METHOD = CORRUPTION/FRAUDULENT....FACT!!!* Hence, It's US against Them (the Remorseless Psychopaths, Fraudulent Scientists & *SKEPTIC Paid SHILLS* ) Either, you're with the PEOPLE or the Psychopaths in Washington (& their buddies; DOJ, Saddam, VICP, Osama, Noriega, the Shah, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Trilateral Commission, Saudi's, Likud Coalition, Stalin, Israeli Govt., Hitler, etc.). It's real simple Folks.. P.S. If you ever get pregnant or you have CHILDREN, especially a daughter, do not carry your cell phone on you OR work/sleep next to Wifi's/Smart Meters/EMF's, etc.. This is from the Yale University Medical *(don't listen to me)* , here's some honest ethical PHD's/MD's that are actually trying to improve the Health & Well being of the People. Developing fetuses are at EXTREME RISK, then Little Girls, because they are born with a *finite number of eggs, once those eggs are damaged it's PERMANENT.* Men can regenerate sperm, which is a positive for us, but CHILDREN in general have thinner skulls & more water in their brains, so the EMF's penetrate & persist worse. *Lab experiments with Rats & Mice, exposed to normal EMF's experience Fertility issues. By the 3rd Generation 40% were STERILE and by the 5th Generation ALL were STERILE. Our cells are no different than theirs.....(Mammals)* EVERYBODY BETTER WAKE UP or it WILL cost you TIME from your Life or worse, a Loved One & your Genealogy!! www.babysafeproject.org/ www.bioinitiative.org/conclusions/ (EMF's cause DNA Damage, even the mitochondrial DNA!) Mobile Phone Mast Effects on Common Frogs (Rana temporaria) Tadpoles: The City Turned into a Laboratory www.researchgate.net/publication/44685415_Mobile_Phone_Mast_Effects_on_Common_Frog_Rana_temporaria_Tadpoles_The_City_Turned_into_a_Laboratory In closing, if anyone has a child that has been diagnosed with Autism or you suspect your child may have some of the attributes that are associated within the spectrums known as Autism. I'd invite you to research a Kerri Rivera with AutismONE. These folks have *CURED well over 402 kids of their spectrum diagnosis and have helped literally 1,000's upon 1,000's of kids all around the World in over 70 Countries. Western Medicine has NOT CURED ONE CHILD!!* ..... in addition *states it is IMPOSSIBLE to CURE Autism?.... nor are they even INTERESTED in LEARNING from someone who is SUCCESSFUL at HELPING ALL these KIDS & YOUNG ADULTS* ....WHAT??? This is the TRUTH and the FACT of the matter!?!? This is yet another PRIME example of Western Medicine FAILING the population of the ENTIRE world....PERIOD!! There is a CURE for Autism do NOT give up hope. Peace to all caring, logical, and ethical human beings.
Compelling but until I see a demo with this method I’m not completely sold. How could you work with such a caustic material without burns on the skin? How do you stop the reaction once the stones are fitting properly in areas which aren’t accessible? Too many new questions...
All those questions are valid... but consider that if the above process is valid, the site wouldn't be inhabited while under construction. the historical account confirms a very large workforce working on this full time. I wish it included which construction site he observed this process was in use at and if that site was ever actually completed or inhabited. I'm also wondering if the historical account wasn't from observing Inca doing this to the walls of pre-Inca construction out of maintenance of the existing pre-Inca construction. because the smooth scorched fronts and smooth fit lines on only the exposed surface of the wall could indicate an example of decades or hundreds of years of acid washing the pre-Inca walls for aesthetic, sanitation, remove or prevent organic material like plants from building up on the walls, beautification (?) perhaps the acid wash also provided a temporary look/effect/appearance that the Inca liked(?)... etc I don't know but it's an extension to the described process up above. I'm going to see if I can make it through the paper itself and find out how much research was performed and confirmed with real-world testing... to the author and Anci-Arch credit, the investigation and research isn't complete on this but this paper provides a valid amount of in-depth theory, testing, and progress to justify that something be published about their findings up to this point. it will or has instigated or inspired more people to look into it further, but at where they are now instead of from scratch like it would have been without its publication.
There are a lot of comments on here about acids and melting, acids that erode silica substances are not necessarily immediately corrosive to human skin. And, molten rock is a different process to acid erosion.
Even if this hypothesis is proven to be correct, you still have to be amazed at their knowledge of the materials and their functions in the utilization of building these walls. They were obviously more scientifically knowledgeable and engineering sophisticated than we are nowadays in the building of these walls.
@Steve Warlee The proper term is "soilcrete" or "dirtcrete", and it was used to build roads in the USA. low-percentage cement mixed with local soils, a relatively small amount of water when compared to concrete, and compacted really well. You don't have to believe me, you can search on youtube by yourself. Also known as "rammed earth". Here's are videos, as proof: "Paving with Soil Cement (1962)" and "Soil Stabilization with Cement (1959)". TH-cam codes are: *DkbMGm44xYc* , *5ATbLDLtwCs* .
@Steve Warlee Thanks! The people who explain those things often explain them for the people who already know lots of things, and just need to tie the loose ends, or people who are going to do research by themselves. Those topics would get a lot more believable if they used real-life mainstream-approved techniques and technologies which were already in use for many years. I think a channel focused on categorizing information strategically so people can understand how the "conspiracies" are a lot less "theories" and a lot more "fact", would have a lot of success. But someone needs to put in the work, for that to become reality.
@Steve Warlee No, I'm talking something which is supported by science. Ash can be processed into cement. It might not be comparable with modern cement, or even with limestone, in terms of cement properties, but there's also the mainstream process of making highways out of cement and soil/dirt. Here's a video you can watch, to see the exact process for ash-cement: "Primitive Technology: Wood Ash Cement" by "Primitive Technology" on TH-cam. Video ID code: *DP0t2MmOMEA* And here are two videos for mixing soil and cement, to make highways: "Paving with Soil Cement (1962)" and "Soil Stabilization with Cement (1959)". TH-cam codes are: *DkbMGm44xYc* , *5ATbLDLtwCs* . The process is similar to that for rammed earth, which is a soil-cement mixture which is compacted using a flat weight on a handle. The google-able term is "manual concrete compactor".
@Steve Warlee First of all, checking back the comments, to see if I missed something, your comment saying "I suppose they had a flyash plant" didn't get into my noitifications. Secondly, although flyash a kind of cement, most biomass ash can be turned into a kind of cement, from my knowledge, not just the flyash component, if properly separated.
Remember: The "testimony of the historic chroniclers" regarding acidic paste/mortar, large teams of diligent workers, and remarkable patience pertains only to the latter, cruder, upper parts of the structures. No one witnessed how the lower, perfectly-fit parts were constructed. This was done -- no one knows -- but maybe 1,000 years earlier.
its the same bulldust as before , scientist trying to solve without actually knowing , there is no chemical reaction in 21st century chemistry knowledge that actually explains nor can be reproduced ... how many times did the narator , use the words theory , would ,should could , they still have zero clue , but say many words to justify their doctrates and PHD's .. we have lost the high tech that produced moulded melted stonework without fusion or the remains of stonework with precision cuts and lines that we can only reproduce with industrial diamond drilling and these muppets want to explain it was just patience and done with coarse to fine sand and polished with human hair over time ,,lol . From the "trumpets "of Jericho and Arc of the Covenant to the ancient Egyptians to the Tibetans and south American there are still living stories of the use of Vibration cones/cannons/trumpets to lift large stones , at least we have had success in in using this tech today but in its infancy we can only lift what we could by hand
I still have a question. If the rocks are molten, why aren't they fused together? And it still leaves the riddle of how blocks of more than 100 tons could be moved from one place to another.
A few ideas on how such rocks could be moved with reasonable man power: 1) "walk them" like legend suggested the large statues on Easter Island were moved, a method that has been demonstrated with only a couple dozen people and no extreme effort. 2) cut blocks all with a similar square cross-section (random length ok) and roll them on a wooden saw-tooth 'road' specifically designed for a given square size, if it's too much to build a miles long road of that sorts then they could roll say 10 or 20 at a time, pause to pick up the wood section behind and place in front and do it again. Heavy square blocks can be rolled quite easily if the saw tooth pattern is correct. 3) have you ever seen several men struggle with a heavy refirgerator and then see ONE man easily 'walk it' by tilting up on one edge and rocking-stepping it forward? 4) quarry them cylindrical enough to roll them on a hard packed surface and square them on site.
@@Mrbfgray Thanks, Bo. I also have read about one idea that, at least in Egypt, has worked. Use Archimedes' principle. That is, dig a canal, and make floaters around the blocks. In water such blocks are lighter due to their buoyancy, and the floaters could increase that so much, that they float. You could also use buoyancy to put them in place. That is, I think, how the pyramids were built. This method presupposes the availability of lots of water. That in itself shows that the pyramids were build at a time when there was a lot of water in Egypt. And that makes the pyramids much, much older than claimed by the archaeologists. I think that in the past the earth was tilted, and had a different equator. This is important, because the huge structures we see are aligned. They were probably all built within and before the last ice-age. Only around the equator there would be no ice, and plenty of water. That is why we see all of those anciend huge structures aligned along the old equator. It does not necessarily require a huge impact of a comet or something else for the axis of the earth to tilt in a different direction, because with so many planets around the movement of the earth around its axis is chaotic. So, from time to time the axis of the earth shifts all by its own. The moon in particular keeps this from happening very often. But it DOES sometimes, and very rarely happen. It follows from the laws of physics directly, as we know them now. In fact, there is one story in the Bible that corroborates this. It says something like that the stars and the sun stood still for 3 days.
They aren't molten, stone hammers leave behind physical marks that can be easily identifiable, that's why scholars are sure, unlike this ignorant. Is also the reason we can differentiate between pre- and post-conquest Inca-stile ashlar work, you see in instances ashlar architecture continued to be employed during the very very early colony of the central Andes region (the territory of the Inca Empire) but with the only difference they used hard metal tools (such as steel or iron) leaving behind very distinctive marks on the ashlar work, such is case in some walls of Chinchero, from afar indistinguishable but upon closer examination both pre- and post-conquest workers leave behind distinctive marks on their work.
@@konradswart4069 NO WAY the stars stood still for 3 days, that's ridiculous, how do you stop earths rotation and restart it without astronomical impacts, like getting hit by mars twice in exactly the opposite fashion, such a hit would completely destroy the planet. The Bible is full of shit. You are falling for some silly nonsense here but that's the worst of it.
@Ancient Architects the reason we don't see this simple method being used now is because it doesn't work. How about you obtain some of those materials and show the world that you are right?
We don't do it now because it's a massive convoluted balls ache. This doesn't mean that it doesn't work. They used very specific kinds of stone in very specific ways for a purpose, their infrastructure was geared towards facilitating and supporting this methodology. Our modern world largely doesn't.
you clearly didnt understand what he said. it takes a long time for the acids to even the stones. they clearly were not as perfectly stacked back then. Were you even paying attention?
Gabions mate. Put crap rubble in the middle - hardcore and rubble and the nice stuff on the outside. Works a treat.th-cam.com/video/gmiBY9zmC08/w-d-xo.html
I've never been so confused... I'm sooo intrigued by the material/content/info, but I literally drifted off twice during this video. Why do you talk like this? Why would anyone talk like this? He sounds like he's falling asleep too...
i think thats one reason people with college degrees tend to get employed easily. the employer is like wow if you can get a degree in this boring shit then working here will be easy and fun for you lol.
It is unwise to use the word “scientific fact”. Everything is a hypothesis and the average life of a hypothesis is 15 years. Presented here is information that could form the basis of a working hypothesis. However, until it is tested, it pure speculation. So I suggest an experiment is carried out where 100, ten-tonne blocks are quarried, moved, assembled and finished using the tools postulated and the reactive agents suggested. Once this is done and replicated at a number of locations and by different teams, then you can begin to suggest that a working hypothesis has strong evidence to suggest this may have been the way theses structures were built.
British scientists have discovered that the phrase "british scientists have discovered" was discovered by british scientists. They've sold more stories about the past than anyone else.
Yes, but we MAY be one step closer to understanding how it was done. ...maybe those mentioned protrusions are a hint as to how they were placed and/or transported. I sure like this line of logic a LOT better than aliens or whatever, BUT since we haven't definitively solved all of these world-wide architectural mysteries, I'm gonna listen to all of the theories; even Aliens! I'll also say, "This one is pleasing my brain".
I was slowly losing my mind with how the granite could be cut, and you have no idea how important this video was to me! Thank you so much for putting this together, you just earned a subscriber and avid watcher.
Really appreciate the effort in researching and providing the details on how the stone walls are built such perfectly. But, one thing to be mentioned is that, our ancestors are more skillful than we know and they have used great technologies which we are unable to still explain. Hence, I feel we always need to say "This is how they "MIGHT" have built the stone walls, instead of saying that "This is how it is built". We cannot conclude anything based on the limited information we have which happened 1000's of years ago.
Spanish chronicler Cieza de Leon 1553, pg 176: “As for laying foundations, making strong buildings, they do this very well; it was they who built the houses and dwellings of the Spaniards, and they made the bricks and tiles, and laid large, heavy stones, putting them together so skillfully that it is hard to see the joinings. They also make statues and other larger thins, and in many places it is clear that they have carved them with no other tools than stones and their great wit”. “Stones too big to be carried were moved on rollers with the aid of wooden pry bars and large crews of men pulling with ropes.‘ The blocks were raised into position by building a ramp of earth and stones up to the height of the wall and running the blocks up on their rollers. Cobo saw this technique used by Indian workmen employed on the construction of the Cuzco cathedral (1890-95, bk. 14, ch. 12), and a half-finished chullpa at Sillustani in Puno has such a ramp still in place” “The tools used were few and simple. Bronze and wooden crow- bars and levers were used for moving stone; the former are numerous in archeological collections. (A specimen from Machu Picobu was illustrated by Bingham, 1915 b, p. 182, No. 3.) Bronze chisels of several different shapes have also been found, and were probably used for drilling holes in stone and for woodworking (University Museum, Cuzco; and see Mead, 1915, fig. 3, e).” Spanish chroniclers “El Inca” Garcilaso de la Vega: “they had no other tools to work the stones than some black stones hihuana with which they dress the stone by pounding rather than cutting.” “Stones were generally worked with stone hammers, preferably of hematite or other heavy ores (Cobo, 1890-95, bk. 14, oh. 12; specimens). The hammer marks can still be seen on the Yucay limestone blocks of which the fortifications at Sacsahuaman are built. The process of working stones with stone hammers is not as slow and laborious as many people who have never tried it are inclined to believe. Sand and water were probably used for polishing when a smooth surface was desired.” “The mit’a.-The Inca taxpayer’s second labor obligation was the MIT’A, or labor service. The Government required each taxpayer to perform a certain amount of work annually.” … “Thirty thousand men at a time are said to have worked in the construction of the Sacsahuaman fortress, which was probably the greatest single construction job undertaken by the Inca.” (Cieza de Leon mentions 20,000, based on incan oral history) Chronicler Guaman poma de ayala, an inca descendent, also has drawings from shortly after the spanish conquest showing how they moved them, with a team of men pulling the megaliths with ropes, similar to the ropes that they used for the inca bridges. There have been studies by archeologists testing the strength of those ropes, where each was capable of holding at least five thousand pounds when about two inches in diameter. They did also have thicker ropes.
That is true. Bit I'll bet as long as you postulate a lot of people doing it over a long enough period of time it was possible and could be done today just like they did it.
And we lost the technology to go to the moon too right? The only technologies that have gone backwards; architecture and space travel. Could it be that they're both a big lie?
Local guides say that the stones were lifted and placed many times while sanding down to make the perfect fit. Some have those little knobs to lift the rocks. Its really hard to believe tbh Ive been there many times and there are some HUGE rocks
@@xacob3 "local guides" are spewing nonsense....nobody on this Earth knows who, when, why, or how megalithic structures all over the Earth were built...All we know for sure is that whoever did it understood a technology that we do not.
The people who find accents other than their own incomprehensible or intolerable also seem to be those who learned nothing from this brilliant demonstration of how the wall-builders used observational science and engineering to solve problems we still face today (e.g., architecture in earthquake zones). Their loss.
It's certainly an good theory, but my question is how did they move 100-200-300 ton stones across the the sacred valley from the quarry up the side of a mountain to Machu Picchu? I'll stick with the pre Incan lost civilization that had a technology far more advanced that even today's masonry abilities. In some place the quarries were 35 or more Kilometers away.
We just cant accept our ancestor was more advance than us in some fields. Well, here the example, they have like 1000 years to improve their tech, they are as smart as us, they surely can achieve something. Look at us, we have industry revolution like 400 years, and look at where we are now. We are so proud with our biology where gen is in big doubt amongs scientist now. We are so proud of our physic where quantum physic, string theory still unable to touch 4th dimension. I am sure, somewhere, somehow in ancient time, there was a civilization that able to completely manipulate 4th dimension.
like you say, the movement is another big problem, still today we are not able to move such stones up to a mountain, unless we build huge roads etc. But the question remains how, for example, they created the terrace in Baalbek, the so-called trilithons, 20 meters long, 5 meters wide and 4 meters high, each block weighing an astonishing 800 tons. These are precisely placed next to each other. In order to cast them, you would have had to build a mold first. How these 800-ton blocks were then moved is unknown. Most astonishing part is, modern archaeologist don't seems to bother. In Laos they found a valley full of stone jars, each several tons, nobody knows who de it!
@@roberttaylor7064 and time. You take your time anything can be accomplished. They didn't have the stupid attitude of today of wanting everything "now" !
@@sonnyshaw3962 None of those stones were anywhere near 100 tons, 2 tons is more like it, Egyptians did move 5, 70 ton Block to the Inside of Kings chamber though.
I believe the stones were shaped via the hard labor of many who were given a binary option of shaping rocks every day for long hours or being forced to listen to this narrator every day. It's clear everyone would have chosen stone grinding over the latter. With the obvious exception of the deaf...
This would make a good "spy tell me everything" threat, they would sing like a canary after a few hours. At least we got 3 or 4 adds to break up the monotony. Halfway through, I figured the worst was over so why not continue. Aside from the tone, it was interesting though.
I love this channel, but I have commented before that he should change the way he speaks, with the exact same tones at the end of every sentence portion. It's so annoying you have to REALLY focus on what he is saying, because no one actually speaks like they are bored out of their minds.
I’ve seen a photo of something that looks like it may have been attached to the stone where the stumps are seen. The caption on the photo said “did the Inca know how to melt rock?” as the object looked very round and smooth without tool marks Basically it looked a slightly flattened spinning top, plum-bob or spindle with a short neck which looked like it had broken. Looking at the wall stones made me think of the photo I’d seen as the stumps on the blocks look like something was attached at some point. It’s got me thinking the object might have been a lifting point for a rope pulley system? The melted or rather lack of tool marks noted in the photo may be from ropes wearing away at the rock as they pulled and lifted the stone into position. I can imagine a counterweight pulley system which could take the weight and allow the masons to perfect their fitting and craftsmanship. They may have even moved the stone from the quarry to site using a similar system replacing counter weight with manpower?
@@charliedilltarde9881 Yes it is strange the Inca say they didnt build it....most people/civilizations who come across or take over an area will try to claim their accomplishments as theirs yet they dont.
You know nobody's right all the time, but most people will never admit it. This is why I appreciate you and your channel so much. In a world that's more and more increasingly filled with people subscribing to delusions and expecting everybody else to go along with it, here it's a person who subscribes to the truth! I'm with you my friend thank you.
Interesting and credible theory. As a small heads up, can you please work on doing the audio in a more conversational tone. Your presenting tone has an annoying repetitive rise in a tone at the end of each and every sentence which grates after five minutes of it and distracts from your good work and research you are presenting. I mention this, as it will improve the watchability of your videos.
😂 Yeah it certainly sounds like he's reading a really boring book to us.. I think good speaking is a skill that can be trained (don't think I possess it either...) but at least he has the skill of coherently and vividly presenting research, so I personally can overlook the repetitive tone. I see it more as a channel trademark by now
I like this idea, certainly opens a very interesting avenue for exploration - but I would like some one to try this out. Considering how much huge work was done in several locations it strikes me as unlikely that the ancients found industrial quantities of concentrated acids (like that left behind by modern day mining wastes) of the raw materials needed to shape so many huge stones following this hypothesis. Also, the presence of the stone protrusions or nodes ("bumps") on otherwise smooth surfaces seem an unlikely desired outcome of the original builders who shaped and set the stones with such care regardless of how it was done unless they wanted them to be there.
Why would they be unlikely to have enough of the material? Based on what? Why would you think the supply would be so limited? I see no reason at all to think this. And I'm not sure where the significance lies in the fact that you can't figure out why the nodes are there. Seems to me that the rope hypothesis is a perfectly reasonable one
@@gregorsamsa1364 Yes but how are they getting on the surfaces of the rocks before stacking them? i guess ropes and what not with cranes and pulleys. Very interesting concept to say the least.
Like you, I am in two camps with this theory. It would explain the construction as I think they were inventive enough to move stones of that size. It would also explain how El Dorado could have been lost. It was never a city of gold, just one decorated with large quantities of pyrite. And when it fell into ruin it was left to tarnish, losing it's gold lustre. However, some stones are of gargantuan size and I think the only recorded attempt to move one resulted in several thousand dying when it slipped. It doesn't explain how, according to the standard historic model, their craftsmanship deteriorated so dramatically over a short period of time. You could suggest that the mine's by-product was spent. But then I put it to you, how could it be that every ancient site across the world had a nearby pyrite mine and ones large enough to facilitate the unbelievable amount of masonry found there.
This technique can be found all over the world, in every continent... Even on Easter Island. It really hits you hard when you use Google Earth to go visit the sites and SEE the stone work for yourself. You want to be there, touching that stone, feeling thousands of years flash through your fingertips, into your imagination. It's just an amazing, mysterious, awe-inspiring feeling.
I can confirm this... I poured some acid on a 20 ton stone block, then it changed shape and carried itself up a mountain and plonked itself on top of a wall.
@@kravmaga7070 You can estimate this. First you calculate a "pseudo-time" for the acid paste. The lab dissolution rate of granite at pH 1 is ~ 1*10^(-10) mol rock/m^2 second (and I am including a little added heat of reaction). A mol of granite is someplace around 80-100 grams. Pretend the rock surface is 1 square meter. A wet paste of AMD clay and crushed pyrite spread over the surface will dissolve (if I did the math right) 1*10^(-8) grams per second. To get any progress you need to dissolve at least a gram. So you will need 10^8 seconds which is about 3 years (pseudo-time). Coincidentally, this is about how fast scientists have said each rock could take to shape by hand alone (the larger ones). Using a "neutral wet paste", the pseudo-time is 30 years. So, it would speed them up about 10x. So, instead of 3 years (assuming that the estimated hand tooling time and "neutral paste" time are the same), it would take 0.3 years - or about 4 months for a larger stone. Some other interesting things. Molten gold looks like any other molten metal. But pyrite slurry looks like liquid gold. Dry crushed pyrite can be mistaken for bitumen in small amounts - it's black and smells like sulfur if it is fresh. Of course, its very heavy though. This process would be rather dangerous and the paste would have to be removed from the rock when finished. Without great skill - folks would get hurt. It would leave hematite (red) and black pyrite behind as a residue (Fe and S). It could also cause some toxic waste problems. The proof is in doing it - but there is some merit to this theory - unlike most of the others I have heard. Thing is, getting AMD clay is kinda hard. You can make it, but I'm not gonna be that guy.
Steve J. He looks a little old to be doing any stone masonry work but I can tell you. How they did it. Just like the pharaohs in Egypt’s pyramids slave labor in fear for their lives can do astonishing things
@Vadim VeeVoit Dude if you can replicate these walls you will be rich, imagine all the rich snobs that would adore a stone fireplace in this style. You should look into the use of acids in repositioned stones like in the article. Perhaps just use sulfuric acid instead.
I have read that some 'Inca' stonework walls was built by earlier Andean civilizations and was added to by Incas. You can see this in the walls when it goes from big blocks to smaller blocks. Has anyone else read that? Also, the video discussed using molten metal (lead, silver, gold) to help bind stone blocks in the royal buildings-in Classical Greece the Doric Columns used on the Parthenon were discovered to have wood alignment 'pins' and cast lead 'connectors' between consecutive marble blocks. Parallel development, it seems.
That "earlier civilization" theory is predicated on the Inca being too stupid to figure out how to build the walls themselves. There is NO evidence that an earlier "advanced civilization" ever existed. Only incredulity.
@@dat2ra Some of the anecdotal evidence of earlier civilizations came from Inca verbal history. We already know there were earlier Andean civilizations that preceded the Inca in dominance, or do you contest that as well? The Inca Empire was preceded by two large-scale empires in the Andes: the Tiwanaku (c. 300-1100 AD), based around Lake Titicaca, and the Wari or Huari (c. 600-1100 AD), centered near the city of Ayacucho.
That is fake news. The small stones are renovation attempts but if you look at the ild pictyre you will not see small stones. Sachsyhuaman is actually unfinished you can see the progression from completed walls to walls that are partly finiahed then to parts that were about to be started. The knobs are for lifting the blocks by using a fulcrum and lever. Once finiahed the knobs are removed or can be left as it is. Same technique used by modern builders of samurai walls but they use steel crowbars the inca used wood that is why you needd large knobs
The incan descendent laugh at the thought they made the large stone work. They believed these structures were from deep antiquity perhaps the 1st world.( we are presently in the 5th world). This is what they told me back in the 60's.
@@ridgewalker5718I can dig it man. Has that been confirmed or how can it even be confirmed? I ain’t a pro, but I do love a good detective story mixed with archaeology.
@@aununally4274 I have read several of the Chronicles, some of them in the original medieval Spanish. The Inca never said any such thing. They said that they didn't build Piq'illacta (which the Huari built) or Puma Punq'u (which the Tiahuanacu built), but they told the Spanish which Inca built which megalithic site. Ollantaytambo and Quito were still under construction when the Spanish barbarians arrived, for the gods' sake! I don't know where that lie originated, but it's utter bullshit.
Yeah, if you'd actually visited these places and seen these stones up close you'd know this theory doesn't add up. The stones are 3D interlocked - the entire stone blocks have been moulded/melted/liquidified to fit them into place. It's not just the edges you see. It also does not explain the vitified surfaces. There's only so much you can ascertain from a picture. Visit these places.
Agreed. I live here and can attest to that fact. The stones just don't fit at angles and recede at 90 degree angles, but I have noticed that the sides have different irregular sloped angles from front to back. This is something I don't think any modern mason can do today without putting in a HUGE amount of work.
The Inca did not build the Megalithic Stone Walls, buildings, or other structures. Now, the Inca did build on top of or next to the structures, and it is easy to see the distinct differences in the styles. The Inca told the Spanish, who conquered them, that they did not build the Megalithic Structures. Check into the historical accounts written by the Spanish at the time. Have traveled around Peru and have touched many of the stoneworks.
In woodworking, to join two boads together we use a couple techniques, but one in particular seems to fit the technique of joining rock. Usually we'd start by planing one side of a board, then sandpaper would be added between the planed board and unplanned board, working the two back and forth until you get an almost perfect fit. Or method two, place both boards beside one another and plane joining sides together. When you place them together you get an exact match. I'm not saying this is the one true method but, if you can do it with wood, its not a stretch to translate these methods to rock. Great video! Enjoyed watching, thank you.
Makes sense. Sandpaper is simply graded silicate sand glued to a paper surface, so grinding two granitic stones together would eventually smooth and align the surfaces.
I don't disagree this could work in theory, but when you add that this isn't just normal rock, it's INCREDIBLY hard granite and with weights up to and over 100 tons, this seems less and less likely.
No. Science proves nothing. What science does is investigate, theorise and propose how things might work. That theory then holds until or unless someone can disprove it. What I have seen here is an excellent theory. It makes sense. If someone doesn't believe it disprove it, find evidence to the contrary.
@@PanglossDr You forgot to mention that once one proposes a hypothesis, the majority of the scientific community must actually AGREE & SUPPORT their hypothesis in order for it to become a legitimate theory. That’s what all of the peer-reviewed journals are for, & the importance of “being published” in one (because before publication, one’s research manuscript must be ACCEPTED by a journal, which can itself be the end for some). Many have hypothesized & proposed how something might work, only to be disagreed with, unsupported, or occasionally defamed by the scientific community. Sometimes that simply means they must refine their manuscript, other times they must continue their research & include more compelling evidence before reapplying, & then sometimes it ruins their credibility or their entire career if it ruffles too many feathers, disproves a popular theory that’s become entrenched, or poses a threat to certain entities (no one wants to jeopardize their precious grants, after all. 🤭).
@@RuinedTemple Rubbish. The Scientific community is huge and very segmented. The idea that a majority should support something is ridiculous. Peer review is no longer meaningful in most areas of science. If a paper does not conform to the current orthodoxy it is impossible to get anything published. Climate Change is probably the best example of this.
@@PanglossDr This is a hypothesis, not a theory. And as with any hypothesis, it is not up to others to "disprove" it, it is up to the person making the claim to prove it.
Has a study been carried out on the soil and sedimentary layers below the walls? if so, the acidic leachate from the process could be detected in higher levels than that which occurs normally in the local soils. If detected, this could add validity to the hypothesis. It could also aide in dating the process and give a possible date of construction. Just a thought.... This type of investigation would also possibly work with the hypothesis you put forward for constructing the Egyptian pyramids using salt... love your work
LOVED this! Many thanks! I've always rebelled against the laser cuts, liquid stone, and exoterrestrial help theories. They're an easy retreat from hard research. People go there when they run out of brains and haven't yet fathomed the ingenuity and soul-crushing hard work of ancient peoples. This explanation holds together very well.
It doesn’t. This technique wouldn’t mould rock like this. Science will tell you that. This theory - although interstitial, would not affect the overall shape of the rock. Only mm of the surface. If this theory is anywhere near the truth, then show an example of cutting two huge rocks with multiple angle cuts together. It’s a wafty anecdote at best.
@@JEXDESIGNS How do you think it was done? Science can't tell you anything. It doesn't talk. Science is a method that could be applied to the question: " how was this done? " You can devise a test that may help to determine whether a given hypothesis ( guess ) about how this was done is likely true or false. That's what Helmut T. was doing. Does claiming that this was done far earlier than " mainstream archaeology " says, make it any easier to explain?
There was a video I watched showing how a single man used small stones to move very large bolders and raising larger stone of at least 1 ton all by himself to recreate stacked structures like Stone Henge
My eyes rolled when I read the cocksure wording of the title of this video: "This Is How They Built". I find the theory highly implausible. Even if such a rock-softening paste could be 'easily' manufactured in the said region, I cannot imagine that it could affect the kind of interlocking joints that we see. Yes, perhaps such a stone-softening substance could have been created at this location, but what about the other locations around the world, where the same baffling ancient masonry style can be seen: Egypt, Japan, etc?
That's a good point. Even if the theory works, how on earth could so many far-flung ancient civilizations all happen to have such advanced chemical knowledge and the right materials or means of acquiring or them? Not to mention working with such caustic materials.
it looks in photographs i've seen to be obvious bags filled, secured, and fitted into place, w/ the knot (tie) tucked into the one adjacent - forming a kind of 'lock-notch'. what substances filled the bags? that remains to be seen - but it was a very long time ago and the earth was not as it is now. the desert of Giza was green and lush! the climate completely opposite from today! the Nile may have been used to float the stones via locks - the light source inside the pyramids may have come from Nile dwelling giant glow worms kept in long (and large) glass jars! the climate, flora and fauna were much changed since those times, and who can say what minerals might have been available to builders of the south american regions thousands of years ago? i can tell you one thing i've taken notice of though - the men from south of the border do exquisite work in stone/earthen masonry - as though w/ innate special talent - it is apparently intuitive to them and they perform w/ great skill and quickness! you can see examples on YT...
@@megenberg8 I"ve never seen an earth/concrete bag make a perfect L shape or anything more complex shaped like how these stones fit together. Now if the stones were all perfectly square shaped it might be a different story.
@@michaeld4861 they appear tb be none other than bags configured together in the photos. to explain: the bags were not stacked as in running brick. the bags were positioned into wells or forms - walls of support (such as we see today in double rigid foam insulated foundation walls), bagged masonry substance infilled and acting as it's own level and at any rate manipulated to conformity. the forms removed when project cured. it is noted that clear evidence of form impression(s) can seen readily in places. it merely required a bit of detective work after all the years of assumption. p.s. the walls may have thae been plastered over very smooth and embellised in any number of ways e.g., painted and/or embossed, carved or slabs of flat stone attached. whatever was to be had in that locale or brought in.
You know I saw some other video about the stone softening thing - all about some quarry mud and mixing some plant or other in with it or something - and I was just about convinced. But I just had a thought - if you've got two 'softened' pieces of rock rubbing together like that why wouldn't they simply merge together into one rock, at least in some places? And another thought: if you've got a 'softened' piece of rock why bother making both surfaces flat? The softening would allow a perfect match one against the other if there were imperfections in the plane of one, wouldn't it? In short: I'm no longer convinced. But I do think there's a serious lack of scientific study. Or perhaps they've done the science and we just haven't heard about it. Like if they can use luminescence dating to know how long since a piece of rock last saw light of day and can measure isotopes in tiny fragments of rock I'm sure they could discover and isolate any 'foreign' chemicals or crystal formations within a rock couldn't they?
I certainly like the sandbag hypothesis. You suggest the rocks have been analyzed and the quarries located and that destroys your hypothesis. On the contrary, like cement, you need ingredients and crushed granite from the quarry would be needed for the "mix" you use in the sandbags to form these walls. Why not try building one of these walls using cement bags and see if you come close.
Shouldn't be too hard to recreate then. I'd need to see that test to not be sceptical of this theory. Seems a stretch that acid at a surface could make the rock at parts other than the immediate surface malleable. Just think how many inches back from the face the rock would have to be effected for some of those finer joins to happen. Also, it seems like you'd never get any of those right angled step joins, since the acid would be effecting both contributing faces simultaneously; presumably you'd get more flowing, organic contacts were that the case. That's to say nothing of the joining material potentially effecting the crystalline components of the rock differently. I dunno, not doing it for me. Doesn't address the stages of building that we see in all of Brian Forester's vids either.
Perhaps there is still something missing here. Something traditionally whacky like using a tuning fork to vibrate the stone as it pushed its way down to accelerate the process. The idea is probably nonsense but i'm just implying that we've maybe only scratched the surface of the entire process.
@@commandernullex6774 Oh come on, the Incas used stone tools but yet they built metal "tuning forks"? If they could come up with a tuning fork then they could have constructed stainless steel tools to cut rock.
Great point by Kiel Mitchell. If you could "soften" stone, then if you forced two pieces together then it would be like pushing two pieces of play dough or silly putty together. While it would be a tight fit, it would not result in straight 90 degree angles.
@Nobody Knows That is correct. Besides that, any chemical applied to a rock's surface would alter the rock's composition. So it seems unlikely that the majority of the rock would turn to jelly, and then later solidify back into rock, and still look exactly how it did before. Its just this simple, someone has to show this process being done before I will believe it. Personally, I don't believe rock can be altered. But I can be proven wrong by someone making video that shows it. (hint)
@@Saugaverse Nor would it result in concave, vertical, "L" shaped cornerstones that weigh over five tons. I agree with those who declare that seeing is believing. When someone demonstrates how any megalithic ancient stonework, found anywhere in the world, was done using the same materials and methods available to the ancient builders in life-sized construction projects of at least fifty to one hundred five ton blocks, then, and only then will I accept their fantasized theories.
Wow this is the best video I've seen on this subject and most of the comments appear to be bashing it (probably because they come here to support their theories about ancient aliens and prehistoric high tech lost civilizations)
I love the effort to come up with a theory for the building techniques. Im not convinced but it is a cool idea. I wonder if this idea makes any sense when applied to all the other sites in locations in India, Egypt, Easter island, etc that all show have this type of polygonal masonry.
Yeah I am not convinced either, like how did they cut the stone with other stone? How they transport the stones? How did they lift and set them? This theory is full is holes
@@James-to7pi carbon dating from substances found inside the pyramids confirm that they are about 5000 years old, which is actually older than zahi hawass would like them to be, but not even close to 12000 years. thats just stupid.
Exactly. I wish I was not so obsessed with this topic in general. it is going on forever, but no credible explanations, or restrictions on information. Its so obvious something RADICAL was afoot everywhere for millenia(ago and lasted for). i'm getting tired of hearing the same ol' shizz, basically. Maybe I must just make peace with the fact that as brilliant and as advanced as our technology is we may never know the answers. So far, its moving that way. NEVER know. Imagine that? So impossibly advanced those marvels of past civilisations were, that we may never know their secrets. Scary stuff. Those builders all over the planet I think were here 100's of thousands of years ago. So long ago we have zero reference for where to start. Millions of years ago perhaps. All starting to look like something like this. Ancient ancient ancient ancient civilisations that only left these marvels of their civilisations out of the fact that they needed them for whatever reason. We got no clue at all. The research by us, tells us this. We are literally clueless. Imagine who these people were? Scary stuff. Time to get our heads out of our....(u know what I mean).
Puma Punku used another brilliant solution, completely different. They used natural geopolymers. Reade the paper in the link... doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2018.10.033
a very interesting video and the linked research paper is highly worth reading. This would make for a good practical building test project. A refreshing change to see intelligent investigation on this subject rather than the fantastical leaping to conclude that, because it's hard to work out, it must have been "aliens" or some other nearly-magical idea. Thank you. Subscribed.
This video is historic. It`s elementary for understanding all those miracles. Thank you Sir ! I would suggest: Maybe you make a REUPLOAD (ARTE has to work this way, when the licences of productions run out. It causes a new actuality about reports of timeless value, basic education... like this one! It simply deserves, not being forgotten in the current streams of attractions, sensations or mystifications.. down until to pure fake and nonesense. Please don`t mention those in this special case, who might say ''I already saw it, it`s old, I am bored...'' I do not understand those attitudes - because there are documentations here on YT and especially in your channel, I watch or listen to several times :) God bless you Sir, Love from here... Thank you !
I made a large snow scupture out of packed snow blocks using a recycling bin to form the blocks which were aprox 1.5' x 1.5' x 2' and wieghed about 50 lbs. I put at least 50 of these blocks together and fitted them closely using two techniques. The stacked joint was fitted by grinding the top block ontop of the bottom block by rocking, shifting and twisting. The edge joints were made by running a cutting edge between the blocks and pushing sideways until the blocks fit tightly. My snow blocks are very crumbly and easy to work so I imagine the same techniques would work on softer rock using abrasive material. The vertical joints can be made with a rope impregnated with the same abrasive and would look like a straight edge when finished. This years project was an Easter Island Moai Statue that lasted for 2 months on my front lawn. Just wait until next year!!!
Hey mate - what source says they were already there? Just haven’t found it but more than happy to follow the evidence. If Pre-Inca, this method is still the most likely in my opinion.
Small details. Who built them vs how they were built. The video says it needs to be worked out how they were built before deciding who built them. Perhaps.
Matthew Smith I am completely open to the age of these structures. I call them “Inca Stone Walls” in the title as that is what people generally search for. But if Pre-Inca - am happy to accept that.
@@AncientArchitects See my other comment. But the strangest oddity is the obvious differences between highly sophisticated advanced stonework often below more crudely placed cobblestones. This doesn't jive with the hypothesis of one culture of builders, or even of the same epoch.
And we have the audacity to call these 'primitive civilizations'..... I am blown away. It kinda looks like there's so much detail that it can not possibly be wrong and this was just a general look into the process. Thank you very much for sharing this.
Its a very compelling idea, but it seems this is currently just a hypothesis and needs to be proven. If someone can demonstrate the technique with large blocks of stone, producing the same perfect, tight joints and the vitrification we see, then it becomes extremely plausible. I find it amusing you say it can be built without the need for high technology!! To me, if proven, this would be an ingenious construction technique employing knowledge of physics and chemistry well beyond the knowledge of the time - surely that's the very definition of a high technology!! I don't think it answers who or when these sites were constructed, whether it was Inca or pre-Inca? I will say however, if this construction technique is proven and it was easy for them to build such structures, then why is the poorer stonework present at all?? Why are the repairs done so poorly if all the had to do was rebuild with blocks and this paste to achieve the same original finish? There is no doubt two distinct phases of construction are present at these sites, phase one knew and employed whatever technique was used and phase two clearly did not...and that is where the mystery lies.
Very good points, a well written comment to this video. NOTE, There are actually at least FOUR distinct phases to this work. One is when the Spanish invaded and created their own construction. And another is modern day "re-construction" of many of the sites that were in need of repair, etc.
There is no question, they were built by the Incas, listen to the video and do not cherry pick, organic material under the walls has been confirmed as being from the Inca’s time.
I couldn't finish the video because it sounded like he was reading the instructions off of the back of a cake box. Mix the SIX EGGS with THE BATTER, until NO LUMPS REMAIN in the mix.😑
The nodes mentioned at the end could be used to prop the stones upward to apply extra paste or do fine grinding, slowly lowering the pieces into place. They look positioned according to weight distribution of the stone
We also see such nodes in mediaeval cathedrals. They are usually explained as supports for wooden scaffolding, but they could have also helped with placement by ropes and cranes.
Great content and video. One suggestion: perhaps get some advice about tone etc in your voiceover. Every sentence has the same tonal structure which is not as natural as it could be and is very distracting.
Agree. Good content and writing, but a really unnatural delivery. Shouldn’t be hard to adjust. Every sentence shouldn’t have the same tonal structure, sequence and down tone on completion. Take a look at the professionals and consider how they do it. Treat it like music - you’ll hear it differently.
My guess is economics and the discovery of portland cement displaced the technique. We (21st century man) have an alternative building material that requires a much smaller work force. I'm no expert. If someone has a better idea, I'd love to learn!
Maybe because the paper explaining this technique is fairly recent, and no one has raised funds to test the hypothesis yet, especially at scale (i.e. with giant rocks)? Nobody has replicated alien levitation rays etc. either.
The day you build a stone wall like the one they build, then I believe you found out how they did it.
Exactly
Say the same to all "alternative archeologist " and their theories. Say it loud!
I dont have the space land time money or materials. But i could
@@mikekasich836 i can teleport... i just wont show you!
Agree. You might want to add the requirement that these ivory-tower academics who claim they have "solved" the mystery build the same sized walls without the use of modern cranes, airplanes or any electric machinery and also quarry the huge rocks from far away transporting them over mountains, rivers and valleys. lol.
Well it's certainly a worthy hypothesis but I want to see this done in real time , and I want to know how they moved the stones while fitting them .
I came over to this video from a video of a guy moving 10t blocks only using "sticks and stones" and his bare hands in an attempt to build his own Stonehenge but mostly because he likes to move heavy objects like whole barns and massive stone blocks 😄
th-cam.com/video/E5pZ7uR6v8c/w-d-xo.html
Strictly hypothetical if you ask me they can't even figure out how they moved all those megalithic stones
they probably fused smaller rocks with the same technique, like, they made the "massive" rocks on the spot.
@@andreasneu302 I saw this video,too...what an amazingly simple method he employed
@@Sw33t_ag0ny we'd notice if they did that..it would be obvious.
Good video, but your sing song tone is really distracting.
It is so repetitive.
As interested as I was in the subject matter I bailed after 4 min. because of his annoying delivery.
I tried watching it with auto generated captioning turned on and the volume turned right down, but it is still annoying.
More than distracting. A-PHAHCKn-nnoying.
The reader just is not able to read aloud understanding at the same time the meaning or what he is reading. I am at 5th minute and there is still a "preparation" for genius idea. Already am thinking that the final will be disappointing (as usual for that type of "eureka") So why to suffer?
You see the large flat "temple" floors ..most of the building blocks are flat on the bottom. Step one: Spread your "paste" and pyrite over that floor and take larger blocks and slide them slowly to "burn" them flat
I think you're perfectly Correct how possibly it was done! 😊❤
However the same technique may Not apply to bricks and stones in the WALL!!!!😮😮😮😢😢😢😅😅😅😊❤
Was a stone Mason's helper for many years and I've never seen such precision work. I've shaped tons of stone and am amazed at how good they were . Joint patterns that don't even matter or nesisary but always link up 🤔
Whenever I look at this finely jointed masonry I get the feeling they were showing off their skill. It's almost like they were leaving a message to future generations: "Lets see if you can figure out how we did this!".
@@martinharris5017 from what I've learned here about this subject is that its only on one side that everything looks perfect and behind the walls they used smaller fill in rocks.
@@ericabarca5871 You understand correctly: It's all about the appearance of perfection. Same is true for Great Pyramid in Egypt. Nevertheless it's still extraordinary workmanship considering what they had at their disposal. I've yet to see any experts today replicate either the technique or the style, and certainly not on this scale. AND it's survived hundreds of years of seismic disturbance.
@@martinharris5017 This video was quite compelling. Acids are very interesting. Apparently, Incans had abundant access to acid...
LOL
Seriously, it is definitely a compelling argument as to how the Incans did it.
@@thomassicard3733 I have many hundreds of old books in my home library. can't remember which one, it might be Exploration Fawcett possibly, but there is a story related about some Western explorers in the Brazillian region who found a very old bottle with a stopper in it. Thinking it might possibly be an alcoholic brew but not wanting to test it, they asked one of their porters, a local native, to take a swig. he refused to do so and protested that it wasn't for drinking. In the altercation the bottle was knocked over and the fluid spilled onto a rock. As the men watched in amazement, the surface of the rock began to soften.
Over the years I've read and heard numerous anecdotes about acidic substances being used to soften and sculpt rock, and it certainly explains much about the smooth, sculpted look of South American monuments and masonry.
I've always believed the claims had substance to them, and these latest findings appear to vindicate the stories and explain the material evidence.
I love your effort BUT, it seems to me that the first question to answer is, how they Quarried and moved each piece. Next question is what was the mechanism that allowed them to place and remove each piece possibly several times to ensure the tight fit.
I was a journeyman Finnish carpenter for many years and any multiangle joint would take several fit checks and they did not usually weight more than 2000 lbs. These builders were amazing.
Place and remove several times?
If you would be trying to duplicate the same construction with an ordinary housebrick you would have to do it at least fifty times
with todays tools. Then. Who knows howmany times.
Its looks like as though 'they' had heated the stone to a plastercene consistency and then moulded them into place.
Way too many unanswered questions that even the most experienced and knowleable stonemasons today have no idea
The blocks were not cut or carved. They were poured into place. They are concrete walls. So, no cutting, no transport and no fitting impossible angles together. Using formwork they poured each 'block' into place in situ. It's a simple answer that has been kept secret until now.
@@nephos100 Did you miss the bit where he explained which kinds of stone were used? Clearly there have been tests conducted to identify the type of stone in each block. And they certainly didn't grind feldspar, granite, etc into a fine paste, mix it with a binding agent, and then pour it into place.
@@HowlinWilf13 Didn't miss any bit. You are certainly right about that one thing: "And they didn't grind feldspar, granite, etc into a fine paste, mix it with a binding agent and then pour it into place." That's spot on. They certainly didn't do it that way.
@@nephos100 Nephos, It's an interesting thought but it is very easy test the rock to see if it is concrete, I hope someone has already done that. My understanding on that topic is that they know where the Stone quarry is.
However, making forms is another technology. I'm not saying that they did not have that technology But, I would think that the idea of conservation of energy ,time ,materials and craftsmen would create even greater pressure on the population.
If this is how its done, replicate it and then announce it. Why leave it at theory when this "simple" technology is available to test now.
Yes I was thinking it would be quite interesting to see if it can be reproduced. Something like that would need to be crowd funded though, and it would take quite a bit of money and human physical and mental power to get the job done, I'd think.
@@MrRecklessryan Yeah i suppose you're right.
Very good point by Daryl.
Sounds like a very easy experiment to replicate.
Trial and error, find a compound that will soften rock.
If the Inca could do it, then modern science labs should be able to do it too.
@@MrRecklessryan Yep, I totally agree with that statement.
One way to "soften" stone is to toss it into a volcano and wait till it melts.
That's the easy part.
The hard part is reaching into the molten magma with your bare hands and picking it back out again. (grin)
@@MrRecklessryan No you would have to fit at least 3 stones together. National Geographic and the Smithsonian could fund it, but they will not because they cannot do the precision stone fitting.
Our ancients are very very smart...
they had a lot less to distract them back then. And they used what they saw around them. But yes, I agree. I feel after reading the other comments that we have only gotten less and less intelligent.
These blocks are from the original BC Lego Company . Fred Flintstone was the foreman...
Yaba Daba Doooo…...
Andy Body that is why the dark ages lasted so long ..not about Fred but all about you
LOL
You don't know how right you are. Take a look at the cave dwellings in Cappadocia Turkey. That's where the Flintstones lived. Barney and Betty rubble lived in Darren kuiu turkey. If you don't want your mind blown don't bother.
I thought it was the accent people were annoyed about. But they're right, that downward inflection at the end of EVERY sentence is ridiculous.
If that doesn't bother you enough listen to a few Aussies and Kiwis whose inflection goes up at the end of each sentence. It'll drive you nuts. Every sentence sounds like a question, not a statement.
It is just that it is the exact same inflection every time. It sound disingenuous, as if he isn't speaking about something he really has thoughts or feelings about. This just isn't how a normal person would talk normally about something.
After enough videos you kind of stop noticing it for the most part, but it can be distracting.
I thought I was the only one who finds the constant inflections annoying. I can't take it, lol. I find myself saying the statements out loud and realizing that it's not that hard to not emphasize every statement the same way every single time. Don't get me wrong I like the fun theories this channel produces, the lack of scientific evidence is an issue, but it is just someone pumping out content. Yet, the inflections are just so annoying I have never made it through an entire video. For me it keeps from being engaging.
Maybe it's a program that reads text? Anyway, fucking annoying.
lol 3 minutes in and it became so grating and i anticipated it at the end of every sentence, which is distracting as hell. takes serious willpower to listen to the end. had to scroll the comments to make sure it wasn't just me.
Fine research Matt, but many questions remain:
1. How deep into this hard stone does the stated chemical process work? Is it more than surface corrosion/softening, because these stones appear softened and molded to significant depths.
2. What do you have to say about the Inca themselves reporting that the walls were already present when they arrived?
3. Nagging problem of how such massive stones were transported long distances without advanced technology.
4. What to make of the very obvious distinctions in building styles--sophisticated and crude--often right on top of one another for no apparent reason.
-Cheers!
Add 5. who did tell egypt about this method before they even thought about pyramids.
@@maksymilianzienkiewicz1776 right I thought of that after posting. Uncanny resemblances in building stores across oceans. Matt mentioned it in passing, but didn't factor it into the analysis.
@@MarvelousOldWorld
Add 6. ...and the civilisation on Easter Island?
@@frosty6960 Sounds like you have direct experience with or knowledge of the process described in the video. This concurs with my own doubts just based upon years of house building and working with various materials. Once corrosion sets in, like you say it's very difficult to control or stop the process without introducing a neutralizing agent--say baking soda on car battery terminals. Very hard to do with a 10 ton rock covering up your good work! So, I have serious doubts about this theory for this and other reasons mentioned. Cheers!
th-cam.com/video/BsqOLCXYznE/w-d-xo.html
Combine physics and chemistry
I talk to my pets like this
Great video! Fascinating. I'd love to see some chemists, stone masons and geologist get together and try to recreate this process to build a stone wall.
The best artisans/craftsmen always know just how many cigarettes to smoke between stages of the work...
;-)
Yeh, nice photos of the great stone walls.
But absolut nothing more than speculation around how it was buildt.
I think that is something ewerybody with a camera and fantasy can do
Me too. Sounds doable.
Well Brian Braden. I think you made a wicked statement. The video makes it all sound simple . but no one will take up your challenge as the professionals no it can't be done
Don't to forget to hire some movers!
To prove this, you have to recreate it convincingly.
Yep, and until they have recreated it, it's just a theory
Researchers have at least recreated the paste and fused rocks together using the same chemical you'd find in the red mud. The rocks seal together with a similar smooth, glassy texture found in incan ruins.
It's known today, as part of popular tradition in andrean natives, you can mix the red mud with an additive extracted from local tree sap (containing oxalic acid). The oxalic acid makes the already potent naturally occurring acid 10x stronger.
@@wolfumz what's the paste called?
@@wolfumz I've been to these ruins. Many of those rocks are the size of an SUV yet the surfaces fit perfect. The Incas didn't even care if the stone was not square. In 2020, we cant even get the fender gap anywhere near as precise on that SUV using computer aided methods. Having acid paste is one thing but I challenge anyone to physically try to do this on rocks 1/10 the size.
@@Salty.Peasants I do not know the name of the paste. Several sources call the clay used “llàncac allpa”. I don't know a specific plant, but early chroniclers report a plant was mixed in to the red clay mortar. Oxalic acid is naturally occuring in many leafy plants, it is not a rare chemical. When it is mixed with sulfuric acid between stones, the oxalic acid decomposes, releases heat, and reacts with silicates in rocks. Heating the mixture increases the potency, and the reaction could have been self-heating.
You can free English language research on the topic by searching the author's name: "HELMUT TRIBUTSCH".
Early chroniclers of Incan construction said workers would lift and drop the same stone many times into place before it was fitted. No cranes, no pulleys, no ruler, no square, no beasts of burden, no iron tools. Hard to imagine.
So, shouldn't be a problem to reproduce this simplistic technology and build a small example for us. Looming forward to your demonstration.
I saw another vid on this, and the guys claimed the Inkas had "since forgotten and lost tricks and methods", and since they did it so much they were experts at it. VERY SCIENTIFIC EH? LOL. Fact is, the Inkas could not have done it.
I know a guy named Michaelangelo made statues far more intricate and complicated than these interlocked blocks. I know he did it with a hammer and chisel. That does not mean that I can do what he did if I had a chisel and hammer.
@@furtim1 they statue that you're referring to is tiny tiny tiny compared to Machu Picchu. Do you understand what this fact implements? I doubt it because people now have the same IQ as their pet dog. And dogs do not understand size.
@@donniebaker5984 I doubt very much you are a real person, rather than a bot. Still, I will respond. Having seen both in person, I assure you that I do know the difference in size between some boulders at Machu Pichu or Tikal and the statues of ancient Greece or the Renaissance. However, this video isn't about the movement or placement of the materials, but the care and exactness of the carving. Carving a 10 ton block into a really well shaped blob is not any more miraculous than carving 3 ton block into a beautiful woman on a chariot of fire. It is just a matter of tools, skill, and time. So, what was your point? That they aren't the same mass? Yes. Agreed.
Just like you don't need someone to replicate the Mona Lisa to prove it was actually painted, you don't need someone to rebuild the Machu Picchu to prove it was built. We already know the techniques used and are able to replicate it on a small scale. You can find videos on youtube of people doing this.
The burden of proof lies upon those who claim this was done with "advanced" or "lost" technology as I've yet to see any kind of replication or proof that would back up these theories.
It's so unpopular to say that the Incas just used acid plus hard work. I am glad you have shared this for all the people who think aliens and big foot made these walls with magic.
No dragons?
Not aliens etc possible machinery of unknown design and fuel used.
Also I would like to know how long it takes to process the huge blocks in this way, how long does it take for the acid compound mentioned to achieve the effect on display in sites worldwide of remarkably similar construction?
@@timothyjohnfarr6544 the real question is- were all these stones carved in place out of an outcropping? then did the carvings cause breaks in the lines they carved? So, let's disassemble a wall, or will it even separate?
i love your channel for relentlessly going after these questions without blindly believing "classic" theories but also not explaining everything with aliens.
How much are the aliens paying you
Cool theory!
Love to see someone try to replicate this method
Spoiler alert no one has because its theoretical nonsense.
Me too,talk is cheap!
Agree, just a theory.
Never heard anyone has tried this ever in modern times. How were they able to move this highly acidic material from modern Ecuador to Chile, wherever you find those colossal stones with perfect joints, of course it's not only Sacsayhuaman. Also, never read either anyone has ever moved those monster rocks from their location to confirm how they fit with side rocks. How did they come up with essentially a 3D free form model to chisel out of rock, and lift to a perfect fit, that remains the question.
I was thinking the same thing, seems like it would be easy to replicate.
Don' hold your breath...
the narrator voice is not suitable for this documentary
you're still too kind
I couldn't watch past four minutes
Agree... If this is a 1 man channel, then i would understand that this guy probably dont want to pay people to narrate his videos... Computer/TTS voices are usually not a better alternative - but there are at least a few REALLY good ones... If he already writes down the narration to these videos, then it would actually require LESS work...
He's got a medical condition and so splices short clips of his own commentary. He's unable to do long continuous speech. He explained it in comments some time ago.
Yeah, let's strangle the messenger before he educates us!
Notice that there are typically 2 nubs. This is why. As the stones are being quarried, The bottom of the stone is chipped away so that it is supported with 4 pillars. The front 2 pillars are then replaced with wood blocks. When the blocks are knocked out it breaks the rear two pillars of stone. Not all blocks will have nubs because some blocks are broken from larger stones once they are laying horizontal
Lol
Nubs are there because softer stone weathers away and leaves the nibs
I have seen a monument laid on its side at Machu Pichue. The bottom of the concrete pour shows air holes where the concrete on the dirt wasn't vibrated and trapped air. It showed the monument was poured in place and not chiseled from stone. I'm a cement Mason and this opened my eyes.
@sr4087 How come the nubs are always in pairs and at the the bottom of the blocks where they are evident. I think it's more than a coincidence and your answer is way to simple. Erosion ?
I'd really like to see somebody actually use such acid and fit a few large rocks together the way the megalith builders did
I asked the same question, they didn't like it!
It is not rock snd for this kind of thinking from the start , you'll never figure it out !
Yes go out and build stones
walls just like them then I'll believe them
I would like to see anyone, with any modern method cut these blocks. I’ll wait
And how did they transport those hugh rocks (100 metric tons and more) from 200Km away to the construcción place????
According to the Inca, they did not build these stone walls. Inca said that they were built by "those who came before us".
I'm with you. I believe that these civilizations found these structures when they migrate into these areas. The Incas, could not have created such huge megaliths.
No they didn't. You just heard that on Ancient Aliens.
@@plaguemouse5549 I think he is referring to the fact that, by the time the Spanish arrived in numbers, the civilization was already in decline and the newer structures were sloppy by comparison to the older ones. You can see this for yourself if you go there. Beautiful stonework supporting rather haphazard rock and mortar work.
Well it definitely wasn't the people that came AFTER THEM!!??🖕
The Inca literally believed they were the first civilization to ever exist and they killed anyone that contested that.
They would never say "someone was here building our stuff before us", and they have never said that.
What did happen was that when Inca met anyone civilization that was clearly older than them they would claim that the locals said they didn't build their cities, someone before them did. Because then the Inca could claim that older Inca or Inca gods built the cities that were older than them.
In traveling around Machu Picchu and Ollantaytambo, looking up at the mountains you see huge square depressions cut out of the mountain faces which match the size of the boulders creating these gigantic walls . . . and you wonder, how in the world did they do that⁉️
easy
th-cam.com/users/shorts3YKT2AeevWs?feature=share
@@placebogazebo9671 All it takes is gravity and time
Bookmarked
The valley was flooded they hooked it right to a floating barge
@@placebogazebo9671 Good examples are shown if you watch films about the unfinished obelisks in egypt.
I did stone work years ago for quite a few years, helped build homes, cutting/shaping all kinds of stone; and just from researching this particular site and also Pumu Punku, the only way this is possible; the rounded edges and beveling, the way they are formed and fit, would be if they were poured, or molded, or the molecular structure of the stone was able to be altered some how. All of the people who try to claim that monkeys with hammers (obviously exaggerating) just chiseled these stones, should have their degrees revoked. And not one time has anyone been able to re create any of this stuff with a “hammer and chisel”.
These blocks, their size aside, are nothing compared to stoneworks that we know for a fact were made with hammers and chisels, like Michaelangelo's statue of Moses. Is your position that one person with a chisel can make that statue in a few years, but thousands of people with chisels cannot make odd shaped blocks that fit together?
@@furtim1granite blocks carved with copper or stone chisels….sure bud.
As with most professionals in any profession, it holds also for archaeologists, most of them are dogmatic fools.
It must have been done by advanced atlanteans, or Atlantis survivors after the younger dryas global cataclysm who fled to peru and influenced the natives and showed them how to do it, Graham Hancock knows just listen to him
@@silverbackag9790 It's been done.
Viewers: Computer narrators are annoying.
Ancient Architects: Hold my beer.
Grinds my head in.
This is a real guy
He sounds like a preacher at times
this is a real person
Around the 5th minute I came to comments to see if anyone else was having trouble with the sing-songy up and down infection every 5 or 6 words.
It very unfortunate that this is happening as I will try to have to find the info on how the walls were built...someplace else if I can.
Interesting, but it needs to be tested, and it still doesn't explain how the giant stones were moved from the quarry and put in place.
I wonder if there is a demonstration of this theory being planned?
True dat.. It seems these were an awesome constructions like art work done by the ancient giants aka Nephilim..
aliens
@@hih-meh1344 there's no Giants according to the Bible measurements Goliath was only about 10 to 12 ft tall if that he'll the average man back then was only five foot six and we have basketball players that are 8 feet and world record holder 8 feet 11
It's ALL Geo-polymer.....it has to be. Can you imagine cutting each one of those megalithic boulders/bricks, to fit EVERY conceivable angle perfectly to fit together. Never would happen, the mason would have killed himself before he finished 10 blocks, becaus eit would have taken him 1,000 tries to get 10 as perfect as these were made. Forms had to of been used, the geo-polymer was mixed, a thin dissolvable material along with (now this acid mud) was placed between adjoining boulders, the polymer was poured, the forms were removed when it was still malleable, to round the edges and texture the surface. Now you're not moving impossible loads, but sacks of pulverized material and mixing on sight. It's how the great pyramid was built as well. I don't care if they tested the megalithic boulders and confirmed it's solid rock....they're wrong & need better equipment or they're LYING and we're ALL just dealing with ANOTHER Pseudo-Science Fraud that been passed down like one of Man's Religions. You have to think about these topics in a way that asks the question, "How would YOU Replicate what was built here?" and then you figure it out, if tasked...what would be your steps. What tools would you use today and then you'll find the answer. The Inca's didn't build the Megalithic portion or precision cut stones or precision drilled holes at these sites....That was done by the Ancient Megalithic Builders that employed the Polygonal Geo-polymer masonry engineering ALL over the World...On just about every continent you can find their work, from Easter Island to New Zealand to Japan and the list goes on. Since Mainstream Academia (Archaeology) refuses to connect the dots on Polygonal construction throughout the World, it simply translates as EVIDENCE as to their blatant disregard for TRUTH/Science & is PROOF of their Corruption or at the very least, limited intelligence. They're all pretty smart, so I'm going to vote for CORRUPTION...Indoctrination can also be an excuse, BUT this dumb Pollack armchair Warrior can figure it out, so should EVERYONE else. This is just more Pseudo-Science that has infested every sector of our Modern day Society of Dogmas'....Archaeology/Megaliths/Origin of Species all fit nicely with all the others....i.e..
*MAINSTREAM EMF Science is Pseudo-Science i.e. Industry PAID Agenda Junk Science, no different than VACCINE Pseudo-Science & Tobacco Science & Asbestos Science & Glyphosate/Round-Up Science & Cannabis Science & Bovine Growth Hormone Science & 2,4-d Science & Mercury Amalgam Science & GMO Science & Anthropogenic Climate Change Science & Lead Gas Science & Artificial Sweeteners Science & Pregnant Women-Fetus X-Ray Science & Downwinders Science & Nagasaki/Hiroshima Radiation Science & Fukushima Radiation Navy Sailors Science & Gulf War Syndrome Science & Depleted Uranium Science & DDT Science & Agent Orange Science & Geo-engineering Science & Cholesterol Science & Bio-SOLIDS Science & Autism Science* & I can go on & on & On , folks! *These are ALL Non-Replicable Agenda BIASED Science that VIOLATE the SCIENTIFIC METHOD = CORRUPTION/FRAUDULENT....FACT!!!*
Hence, It's US against Them (the Remorseless Psychopaths, Fraudulent Scientists & *SKEPTIC Paid SHILLS* )
Either, you're with the PEOPLE or the Psychopaths in Washington (& their buddies; DOJ, Saddam, VICP, Osama, Noriega, the Shah, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Trilateral Commission, Saudi's, Likud Coalition, Stalin, Israeli Govt., Hitler, etc.). It's real simple Folks..
P.S. If you ever get pregnant or you have CHILDREN, especially a daughter, do not carry your cell phone on you OR work/sleep next to Wifi's/Smart Meters/EMF's, etc.. This is from the Yale University Medical *(don't listen to me)* , here's some honest ethical PHD's/MD's that are actually trying to improve the Health & Well being of the People. Developing fetuses are at EXTREME RISK, then Little Girls, because they are born with a *finite number of eggs, once those eggs are damaged it's PERMANENT.* Men can regenerate sperm, which is a positive for us, but CHILDREN in general have thinner skulls & more water in their brains, so the EMF's penetrate & persist worse. *Lab experiments with Rats & Mice, exposed to normal EMF's experience Fertility issues. By the 3rd Generation 40% were STERILE and by the 5th Generation ALL were STERILE. Our cells are no different than theirs.....(Mammals)*
EVERYBODY BETTER WAKE UP or it WILL cost you TIME from your Life or worse, a Loved One & your Genealogy!!
www.babysafeproject.org/
www.bioinitiative.org/conclusions/ (EMF's cause DNA Damage, even the mitochondrial DNA!)
Mobile Phone Mast Effects on Common Frogs (Rana temporaria) Tadpoles: The City Turned into a Laboratory
www.researchgate.net/publication/44685415_Mobile_Phone_Mast_Effects_on_Common_Frog_Rana_temporaria_Tadpoles_The_City_Turned_into_a_Laboratory
In closing, if anyone has a child that has been diagnosed with Autism or you suspect your child may have some of the attributes that are associated within the spectrums known as Autism. I'd invite you to research a Kerri Rivera with AutismONE. These folks have *CURED well over 402 kids of their spectrum diagnosis and have helped literally 1,000's upon 1,000's of kids all around the World in over 70 Countries. Western Medicine has NOT CURED ONE CHILD!!* ..... in addition *states it is IMPOSSIBLE to CURE Autism?.... nor are they even INTERESTED in LEARNING from someone who is SUCCESSFUL at HELPING ALL these KIDS & YOUNG ADULTS* ....WHAT??? This is the TRUTH and the FACT of the matter!?!? This is yet another PRIME example of Western Medicine FAILING the population of the ENTIRE world....PERIOD!! There is a CURE for Autism do NOT give up hope. Peace to all caring, logical, and ethical human beings.
Compelling but until I see a demo with this method I’m not completely sold.
How could you work with such a caustic material without burns on the skin?
How do you stop the reaction once the stones are fitting properly in areas which aren’t accessible?
Too many new questions...
All those questions are valid... but consider that if the above process is valid, the site wouldn't be inhabited while under construction. the historical account confirms a very large workforce working on this full time. I wish it included which construction site he observed this process was in use at and if that site was ever actually completed or inhabited. I'm also wondering if the historical account wasn't from observing Inca doing this to the walls of pre-Inca construction out of maintenance of the existing pre-Inca construction. because the smooth scorched fronts and smooth fit lines on only the exposed surface of the wall could indicate an example of decades or hundreds of years of acid washing the pre-Inca walls for aesthetic, sanitation, remove or prevent organic material like plants from building up on the walls, beautification (?) perhaps the acid wash also provided a temporary look/effect/appearance that the Inca liked(?)... etc I don't know but it's an extension to the described process up above. I'm going to see if I can make it through the paper itself and find out how much research was performed and confirmed with real-world testing... to the author and Anci-Arch credit, the investigation and research isn't complete on this but this paper provides a valid amount of in-depth theory, testing, and progress to justify that something be published about their findings up to this point. it will or has instigated or inspired more people to look into it further, but at where they are now instead of from scratch like it would have been without its publication.
Its at least doing better than "stone pounders". A little.
I was thinking same
Once the acid has become dilute enough by the process its acidity weakens and the chemical reaction stops.
There are a lot of comments on here about acids and melting, acids that erode silica substances are not necessarily immediately corrosive to human skin. And, molten rock is a different process to acid erosion.
Even if this hypothesis is proven to be correct, you still have to be amazed at their knowledge of the materials and their functions in the utilization of building these walls. They were obviously more scientifically knowledgeable and engineering sophisticated than we are nowadays in the building of these walls.
You may try to replicate a wall in a small scale, to show how it's done!!
@Steve Warlee The proper term is "soilcrete" or "dirtcrete", and it was used to build roads in the USA. low-percentage cement mixed with local soils, a relatively small amount of water when compared to concrete, and compacted really well. You don't have to believe me, you can search on youtube by yourself. Also known as "rammed earth".
Here's are videos, as proof: "Paving with Soil Cement (1962)" and "Soil Stabilization with Cement (1959)". TH-cam codes are: *DkbMGm44xYc* , *5ATbLDLtwCs* .
@Steve Warlee Thanks! The people who explain those things often explain them for the people who already know lots of things, and just need to tie the loose ends, or people who are going to do research by themselves. Those topics would get a lot more believable if they used real-life mainstream-approved techniques and technologies which were already in use for many years. I think a channel focused on categorizing information strategically so people can understand how the "conspiracies" are a lot less "theories" and a lot more "fact", would have a lot of success. But someone needs to put in the work, for that to become reality.
@Steve Warlee There is such a thing as ash cement, or cement made from ash, so by simply saving up that ash, they could make such bricks.
@Steve Warlee No, I'm talking something which is supported by science. Ash can be processed into cement. It might not be comparable with modern cement, or even with limestone, in terms of cement properties, but there's also the mainstream process of making highways out of cement and soil/dirt.
Here's a video you can watch, to see the exact process for ash-cement: "Primitive Technology: Wood Ash Cement" by "Primitive Technology" on TH-cam. Video ID code: *DP0t2MmOMEA*
And here are two videos for mixing soil and cement, to make highways: "Paving with Soil Cement (1962)" and "Soil Stabilization with Cement (1959)". TH-cam codes are: *DkbMGm44xYc* , *5ATbLDLtwCs* . The process is similar to that for rammed earth, which is a soil-cement mixture which is compacted using a flat weight on a handle. The google-able term is "manual concrete compactor".
@Steve Warlee First of all, checking back the comments, to see if I missed something, your comment saying "I suppose they had a flyash plant" didn't get into my noitifications. Secondly, although flyash a kind of cement, most biomass ash can be turned into a kind of cement, from my knowledge, not just the flyash component, if properly separated.
Remember: The "testimony of the historic chroniclers" regarding acidic paste/mortar, large teams of diligent workers, and remarkable patience pertains only to the latter, cruder, upper parts of the structures. No one witnessed how the lower, perfectly-fit parts were constructed. This was done -- no one knows -- but maybe 1,000 years earlier.
its the same bulldust as before , scientist trying to solve without actually knowing , there is no chemical reaction in 21st century chemistry knowledge that actually explains nor can be reproduced ... how many times did the narator , use the words theory , would ,should could , they still have zero clue , but say many words to justify their doctrates and PHD's .. we have lost the high tech that produced moulded melted stonework without fusion or the remains of stonework with precision cuts and lines that we can only reproduce with industrial diamond drilling and these muppets want to explain it was just patience and done with coarse to fine sand and polished with human hair over time ,,lol . From the "trumpets "of Jericho and Arc of the Covenant to the ancient Egyptians to the Tibetans and south American there are still living stories of the use of Vibration cones/cannons/trumpets to lift large stones , at least we have had success in in using this tech today but in its infancy we can only lift what we could by hand
@@pasbert4812
In other words...Horsesh¡t.
Made before the flood.
Did you actually watch the video
I still have a question. If the rocks are molten, why aren't they fused together?
And it still leaves the riddle of how blocks of more than 100 tons could be moved from one place to another.
The moving part is at least imaginable, the fit-up is astounding.
A few ideas on how such rocks could be moved with reasonable man power:
1) "walk them" like legend suggested the large statues on Easter Island were moved, a method that has been demonstrated with only a couple dozen people and no extreme effort.
2) cut blocks all with a similar square cross-section (random length ok) and roll them on a wooden saw-tooth 'road' specifically designed for a given square size, if it's too much to build a miles long road of that sorts then they could roll say 10 or 20 at a time, pause to pick up the wood section behind and place in front and do it again. Heavy square blocks can be rolled quite easily if the saw tooth pattern is correct.
3) have you ever seen several men struggle with a heavy refirgerator and then see ONE man easily 'walk it' by tilting up on one edge and rocking-stepping it forward?
4) quarry them cylindrical enough to roll them on a hard packed surface and square them on site.
@@Mrbfgray Thanks, Bo.
I also have read about one idea that, at least in Egypt, has worked. Use Archimedes' principle. That is, dig a canal, and make floaters around the blocks. In water such blocks are lighter due to their buoyancy, and the floaters could increase that so much, that they float.
You could also use buoyancy to put them in place. That is, I think, how the pyramids were built.
This method presupposes the availability of lots of water. That in itself shows that the pyramids were build at a time when there was a lot of water in Egypt. And that makes the pyramids much, much older than claimed by the archaeologists.
I think that in the past the earth was tilted, and had a different equator. This is important, because the huge structures we see are aligned. They were probably all built within and before the last ice-age. Only around the equator there would be no ice, and plenty of water. That is why we see all of those anciend huge structures aligned along the old equator.
It does not necessarily require a huge impact of a comet or something else for the axis of the earth to tilt in a different direction, because with so many planets around the movement of the earth around its axis is chaotic. So, from time to time the axis of the earth shifts all by its own. The moon in particular keeps this from happening very often. But it DOES sometimes, and very rarely happen. It follows from the laws of physics directly, as we know them now.
In fact, there is one story in the Bible that corroborates this. It says something like that the stars and the sun stood still for 3 days.
They aren't molten, stone hammers leave behind physical marks that can be easily identifiable, that's why scholars are sure, unlike this ignorant.
Is also the reason we can differentiate between pre- and post-conquest Inca-stile ashlar work, you see in instances ashlar architecture continued to be employed during the very very early colony of the central Andes region (the territory of the Inca Empire) but with the only difference they used hard metal tools (such as steel or iron) leaving behind very distinctive marks on the ashlar work, such is case in some walls of Chinchero, from afar indistinguishable but upon closer examination both pre- and post-conquest workers leave behind distinctive marks on their work.
@@konradswart4069 NO WAY the stars stood still for 3 days, that's ridiculous, how do you stop earths rotation and restart it without astronomical impacts, like getting hit by mars twice in exactly the opposite fashion, such a hit would completely destroy the planet. The Bible is full of shit. You are falling for some silly nonsense here but that's the worst of it.
@Ancient Architects the reason we don't see this simple method being used now is because it doesn't work. How about you obtain some of those materials and show the world that you are right?
We don't do it now because it's a massive convoluted balls ache. This doesn't mean that it doesn't work. They used very specific kinds of stone in very specific ways for a purpose, their infrastructure was geared towards facilitating and supporting this methodology. Our modern world largely doesn't.
Actually it is being used. It's called ferro cement construction.
@evanpenny348 post a video of you building at least half a quarter mile wall with 40 ton granite boulders like these 😏
you clearly didnt understand what he said. it takes a long time for the acids to even the stones. they clearly were not as perfectly stacked back then. Were you even paying attention?
Holy fuck, I thought the comments were being rude. But he really has the delivery of a Fable salesman.
Oh stop it ... been laughing for weeks..
Sounds pretty simple. OK, let's DO IT!
I like your can-do attitude👍
Excuse me if this has been said before, I’m a believer but,
“Now all we need is a video demonstration so I can get to building my new retaining wall.
Gabions mate. Put crap rubble in the middle - hardcore and rubble and the nice stuff on the outside. Works a treat.th-cam.com/video/gmiBY9zmC08/w-d-xo.html
Sign me up as a subscriber, I'd like a wall myself - though I'll probably scale it down.
ME TOO,I DONT CARE ABOUT THE JOINTS,I WANT TO KNOW HOW THEY MOVED THEM ,HOW THEY LIFTED THEM ,AND IF THEY WERE SO SMART,WHY DIDNT THEY HAVE STEEL ?
I've never been so confused... I'm sooo intrigued by the material/content/info, but I literally drifted off twice during this video. Why do you talk like this? Why would anyone talk like this? He sounds like he's falling asleep too...
Yeah, no shit
i think thats one reason people with college degrees tend to get employed easily. the employer is like wow if you can get a degree in this boring shit then working here will be easy and fun for you lol.
It is unwise to use the word “scientific fact”. Everything is a hypothesis and the average life of a hypothesis is 15 years. Presented here is information that could form the basis of a working hypothesis. However, until it is tested, it pure speculation. So I suggest an experiment is carried out where 100, ten-tonne blocks are quarried, moved, assembled and finished using the tools postulated and the reactive agents suggested. Once this is done and replicated at a number of locations and by different teams, then you can begin to suggest that a working hypothesis has strong evidence to suggest this may have been the way theses structures were built.
British scientists have discovered that the phrase "british scientists have discovered" was discovered by british scientists. They've sold more stories about the past than anyone else.
Great information, absolutely unlistenable after two minutes.
It's as if he's just learned how to read...
Agreed. The singsong tempo is like a water torture
I managed 6 minutes then had to turn the sound off. Interesting content though. Please get a VO artist for your next project.
Could you point me to the great information please
Thirty-seconds worth of skipping through and I just couldn't do it...
Inkas say they NOT put the biggest stones there. They was there when Inkas move there.
In summary ... we still have no idea how these walls were fitted or put into place.
That's why it's called a theory. One side actually tries to prove a way it could have been done, the other side knows exactly how it was done, aliens
Exactly. No idea whatsoever.
Thanks, saved me 19 mins
Yes, but we MAY be one step closer to understanding how it was done. ...maybe those mentioned protrusions are a hint as to how they were placed and/or transported. I sure like this line of logic a LOT better than aliens or whatever, BUT since we haven't definitively solved all of these world-wide architectural mysteries, I'm gonna listen to all of the theories; even Aliens! I'll also say, "This one is pleasing my brain".
The stones are actually a form of concrete that’s poured into a mold giving them the exact shape they needed.
I was slowly losing my mind with how the granite could be cut, and you have no idea how important this video was to me! Thank you so much for putting this together, you just earned a subscriber and avid watcher.
Really appreciate the effort in researching and providing the details on how the stone walls are built such perfectly.
But, one thing to be mentioned is that, our ancestors are more skillful than we know and they have used great technologies which we are unable to still explain. Hence, I feel we always need to say "This is how they "MIGHT" have built the stone walls, instead of saying that "This is how it is built". We cannot conclude anything based on the limited information we have which happened 1000's of years ago.
Spanish chronicler Cieza de Leon 1553, pg 176: “As for laying foundations, making strong buildings, they do this very well; it was they who built the houses and dwellings of the Spaniards, and they made the bricks and tiles, and laid large, heavy stones, putting them together so skillfully that it is hard to see the joinings. They also make statues and other larger thins, and in many places it is clear that they have carved them with no other tools than stones and their great wit”.
“Stones too big to be carried were moved on rollers with the aid of wooden pry bars and large crews of men pulling with ropes.‘ The blocks were raised into position by building a ramp of earth and stones up to the height of the wall and running the blocks up on their rollers. Cobo saw this technique used by Indian workmen employed on the construction of the Cuzco cathedral (1890-95, bk. 14, ch. 12), and a half-finished chullpa at Sillustani in Puno has such a ramp still in place”
“The tools used were few and simple. Bronze and wooden crow- bars and levers were used for moving stone; the former are numerous in archeological collections. (A specimen from Machu Picobu was illustrated by Bingham, 1915 b, p. 182, No. 3.) Bronze chisels of several different shapes have also been found, and were probably used for drilling holes in stone and for woodworking (University Museum, Cuzco; and see Mead, 1915, fig. 3, e).”
Spanish chroniclers “El Inca” Garcilaso de la Vega: “they had no other tools to work the stones than some black stones hihuana with which they dress the stone by pounding rather than cutting.”
“Stones were generally worked with stone hammers, preferably of hematite or other heavy ores (Cobo, 1890-95, bk. 14, oh. 12; specimens). The hammer marks can still be seen on the Yucay limestone blocks of which the fortifications at Sacsahuaman are built. The process of working stones with stone hammers is not as slow and laborious as many people who have never tried it are inclined to believe. Sand and water were probably used for polishing when a smooth surface was desired.”
“The mit’a.-The Inca taxpayer’s second labor obligation was the MIT’A, or labor service. The Government required each taxpayer to perform a certain amount of work annually.” … “Thirty thousand men at a time are said to have worked in the construction of the Sacsahuaman fortress, which was probably the greatest single construction job undertaken by the Inca.” (Cieza de Leon mentions 20,000, based on incan oral history)
Chronicler Guaman poma de ayala, an inca descendent, also has drawings from shortly after the spanish conquest showing how they moved them, with a team of men pulling the megaliths with ropes, similar to the ropes that they used for the inca bridges. There have been studies by archeologists testing the strength of those ropes, where each was capable of holding at least five thousand pounds when about two inches in diameter. They did also have thicker ropes.
That is true. Bit I'll bet as long as you postulate a lot of people doing it over a long enough period of time it was possible and could be done today just like they did it.
@@TonyTrupp if you can show me that you can do this even on a small scale I'll believe you
@@kensanity178 no way
And we lost the technology to go to the moon too right? The only technologies that have gone backwards; architecture and space travel. Could it be that they're both a big lie?
Well researched and good description of these walls. Less inclined to think about ancient aliens after this.
neglects to "prove" some small details like how they cut, extracted, transported, lifted , and precisely placed the megaliths
Exactly.
ya if you want to nit pick
Local guides say that the stones were lifted and placed many times while sanding down to make the perfect fit. Some have those little knobs to lift the rocks. Its really hard to believe tbh
Ive been there many times and there are some HUGE rocks
@@xacob3 "local guides" are spewing nonsense....nobody on this Earth knows who, when, why, or how megalithic structures all over the Earth were built...All we know for sure is that whoever did it understood a technology that we do not.
@@fudgedogbannanaYou're funny.
The people who find accents other than their own incomprehensible or intolerable also seem to be those who learned nothing from this brilliant demonstration of how the wall-builders used observational science and engineering to solve problems we still face today (e.g., architecture in earthquake zones). Their loss.
Terribly interesting. I hope we find out who it was that spread this knowledge around the world.
It's certainly an good theory, but my question is how did they move 100-200-300 ton stones across the the sacred valley from the quarry up the side of a mountain to Machu Picchu? I'll stick with the pre Incan lost civilization that had a technology far more advanced that even today's masonry abilities. In some place the quarries were 35 or more Kilometers away.
We just cant accept our ancestor was more advance than us in some fields. Well, here the example, they have like 1000 years to improve their tech, they are as smart as us, they surely can achieve something. Look at us, we have industry revolution like 400 years, and look at where we are now. We are so proud with our biology where gen is in big doubt amongs scientist now. We are so proud of our physic where quantum physic, string theory still unable to touch 4th dimension. I am sure, somewhere, somehow in ancient time, there was a civilization that able to completely manipulate 4th dimension.
Massive workforce, 20,000 men can accomplish just about anything.
like you say, the movement is another big problem, still today we are not able to move such stones up to a mountain, unless we build huge roads etc. But the question remains how, for example, they created the terrace in Baalbek, the so-called trilithons, 20 meters long, 5 meters wide and 4 meters high, each block weighing an astonishing 800 tons. These are precisely placed next to each other. In order to cast them, you would have had to build a mold first. How these 800-ton blocks were then moved is unknown. Most astonishing part is, modern archaeologist don't seems to bother. In Laos they found a valley full of stone jars, each several tons, nobody knows who de it!
@@roberttaylor7064 and time. You take your time anything can be accomplished. They didn't have the stupid attitude of today of wanting everything "now" !
@@sonnyshaw3962 None of those stones were anywhere near 100 tons, 2 tons is more like it, Egyptians did move 5, 70 ton Block to the Inside of Kings chamber though.
If they can replicate the more complex wall structures at scale we’ll start talking.
Without cranes that can lift more than 1200 tons.
only if you volunteer to be a labourer
I believe the stones were shaped via the hard labor of many who were given a binary option of shaping rocks every day for long hours or being forced to listen to this narrator every day. It's clear everyone would have chosen stone grinding over the latter. With the obvious exception of the deaf...
Chrystal clear
You are, well... right.
This would make a good "spy tell me everything" threat, they would sing like a canary after a few hours. At least we got 3 or 4 adds to break up the monotony. Halfway through, I figured the worst was over so why not continue. Aside from the tone, it was interesting though.
It’s like listening to a male Kardashian! I just can’t... Watch this muted and it’s amazing!
I love this channel, but I have commented before that he should change the way he speaks, with the exact same tones at the end of every sentence portion. It's so annoying you have to REALLY focus on what he is saying, because no one actually speaks like they are bored out of their minds.
C est un robot parlant🍷
I did the same, this guy definitely needs some elocution lessons.....
I thought only I was one developing a headache in 5mins.
Good to know that there are others too who are pissed off by the tone of his rendition.
This cretin is insufferable. Who talks like that ?? Nobody.
I’ve seen a photo of something that looks like it may have been attached to the stone where the stumps are seen. The caption on the photo said “did the Inca know how to melt rock?” as the object looked very round and smooth without tool marks Basically it looked a slightly flattened spinning top, plum-bob or spindle with a short neck which looked like it had broken. Looking at the wall stones made me think of the photo I’d seen as the stumps on the blocks look like something was attached at some point.
It’s got me thinking the object might have been a lifting point for a rope pulley system? The melted or rather lack of tool marks noted in the photo may be from ropes wearing away at the rock as they pulled and lifted the stone into position. I can imagine a counterweight pulley system which could take the weight and allow the masons to perfect their fitting and craftsmanship. They may have even moved the stone from the quarry to site using a similar system replacing counter weight with manpower?
I thought the rising inflection was bad. Sounds like the falling inflection is just as bad.
Depressing either way.
Rising blooooocksssss
Jeezus! I'd rather be water boarded. Outta here by 3:39.
@@jalspach9215 I made it to 1:30
Thanks for not answering the question in the most annoying way possible.
He totally answers the question
Except that the Inca said they didn't build these walls. The Inca said the walls were already there when they arrived.
"Inca said" what the hell does that mean?
i believe it
@@charliedilltarde9881 Yes it is strange the Inca say they didnt build it....most people/civilizations who come across or take over an area will try to claim their accomplishments as theirs yet they dont.
You are totally right! Incas came after, you can observe in Machu picchu, the new inca construction with smaller stones is on top of the old one
Where inca says that?
You know nobody's right all the time, but most people will never admit it. This is why I appreciate you and your channel so much. In a world that's more and more increasingly filled with people subscribing to delusions and expecting everybody else to go along with it, here it's a person who subscribes to the truth! I'm with you my friend thank you.
🤣
Interesting and credible theory. As a small heads up, can you please work on doing the audio in a more conversational tone. Your presenting tone has an annoying repetitive rise in a tone at the end of each and every sentence which grates after five minutes of it and distracts from your good work and research you are presenting. I mention this, as it will improve the watchability of your videos.
Do not watch. I’m not going to anymore
Yes, his speaking tone is very annoying. I shut it off and read the captions. Ugh.
I’m sick and tired of these LImey Queerdos Narrating
😂 Yeah it certainly sounds like he's reading a really boring book to us..
I think good speaking is a skill that can be trained (don't think I possess it either...) but at least he has the skill of coherently and vividly presenting research, so I personally can overlook the repetitive tone.
I see it more as a channel trademark by now
I like this idea, certainly opens a very interesting avenue for exploration - but I would like some one to try this out. Considering how much huge work was done in several locations it strikes me as unlikely that the ancients found industrial quantities of concentrated acids (like that left behind by modern day mining wastes) of the raw materials needed to shape so many huge stones following this hypothesis. Also, the presence of the stone protrusions or nodes ("bumps") on otherwise smooth surfaces seem an unlikely desired outcome of the original builders who shaped and set the stones with such care regardless of how it was done unless they wanted them to be there.
To add weight to your thought here; how would they have protected themselves from that concentrated acid?
Why would they be unlikely to have enough of the material? Based on what? Why would you think the supply would be so limited? I see no reason at all to think this.
And I'm not sure where the significance lies in the fact that you can't figure out why the nodes are there. Seems to me that the rope hypothesis is a perfectly reasonable one
@@thornhedge9639
If it's too acidic, don't touch it- apply with an applicator tool
@@gregorsamsa1364 Yes but how are they getting on the surfaces of the rocks before stacking them? i guess ropes and what not with cranes and pulleys. Very interesting concept to say the least.
Like you, I am in two camps with this theory. It would explain the construction as I think they were inventive enough to move stones of that size. It would also explain how El Dorado could have been lost. It was never a city of gold, just one decorated with large quantities of pyrite. And when it fell into ruin it was left to tarnish, losing it's gold lustre.
However, some stones are of gargantuan size and I think the only recorded attempt to move one resulted in several thousand dying when it slipped. It doesn't explain how, according to the standard historic model, their craftsmanship deteriorated so dramatically over a short period of time. You could suggest that the mine's by-product was spent. But then I put it to you, how could it be that every ancient site across the world had a nearby pyrite mine and ones large enough to facilitate the unbelievable amount of masonry found there.
This technique can be found all over the world, in every continent... Even on Easter Island. It really hits you hard when you use Google Earth to go visit the sites and SEE the stone work for yourself. You want to be there, touching that stone, feeling thousands of years flash through your fingertips, into your imagination. It's just an amazing, mysterious, awe-inspiring feeling.
These words are poetic. Thank you
Yes but what is the technique?
What a wonderful way to explain it!
They are almost all geopolymere, as the great pyramid is.........
but have you touched it on weed? so much better
I can confirm this... I poured some acid on a 20 ton stone block, then it changed shape and carried itself up a mountain and plonked itself on top of a wall.
😂😂😂
What an appropriate screen name .
Sure, dropping acid does that.. 😜
Wow ! That's incredible . Did you happen to get some video ?
😂
Well then, let’s see him replicate some stones into a wall to prove his theory.
It’s one thing to boast your theory, but it’s another to prove it!
EXACTLY but wouldnt it take 20 yrs maybe more to work?
@@kravmaga7070 You can estimate this. First you calculate a "pseudo-time" for the acid paste. The lab dissolution rate of granite at pH 1 is ~ 1*10^(-10) mol rock/m^2 second (and I am including a little added heat of reaction). A mol of granite is someplace around 80-100 grams. Pretend the rock surface is 1 square meter. A wet paste of AMD clay and crushed pyrite spread over the surface will dissolve (if I did the math right) 1*10^(-8) grams per second. To get any progress you need to dissolve at least a gram. So you will need 10^8 seconds which is about 3 years (pseudo-time). Coincidentally, this is about how fast scientists have said each rock could take to shape by hand alone (the larger ones). Using a "neutral wet paste", the pseudo-time is 30 years. So, it would speed them up about 10x. So, instead of 3 years (assuming that the estimated hand tooling time and "neutral paste" time are the same), it would take 0.3 years - or about 4 months for a larger stone. Some other interesting things. Molten gold looks like any other molten metal. But pyrite slurry looks like liquid gold. Dry crushed pyrite can be mistaken for bitumen in small amounts - it's black and smells like sulfur if it is fresh. Of course, its very heavy though. This process would be rather dangerous and the paste would have to be removed from the rock when finished. Without great skill - folks would get hurt. It would leave hematite (red) and black pyrite behind as a residue (Fe and S). It could also cause some toxic waste problems. The proof is in doing it - but there is some merit to this theory - unlike most of the others I have heard. Thing is, getting AMD clay is kinda hard. You can make it, but I'm not gonna be that guy.
Steve J. He looks a little old to be doing any stone masonry work but I can tell you. How they did it. Just like the pharaohs in Egypt’s pyramids slave labor in fear for their lives can do astonishing things
@@Justthemow The Egyptians didn't use slave labour to build the pyramids.
boris johnson I don’t even know what to say to this seriously you must just be a complete moron.
Even more absurd than his “concrete in bags” hypothesis. If he is correct then let him demonstrate the technique. His sing-song delivery is annoying.
Irritating more like it
..maybe computer generated....hard to tell on YT today.
@@Firebrand55 - no computer generated voiceover could be that horrible. I have pity for anyone that knows him in person.
@Vadim VeeVoit your full of crap
@Vadim VeeVoit Dude if you can replicate these walls you will be rich, imagine all the rich snobs that would adore a stone fireplace in this style. You should look into the use of acids in repositioned stones like in the article. Perhaps just use sulfuric acid instead.
I have read that some 'Inca' stonework walls was built by earlier Andean civilizations and was added to by Incas. You can see this in the walls when it goes from big blocks to smaller blocks. Has anyone else read that? Also, the video discussed using molten metal (lead, silver, gold) to help bind stone blocks in the royal buildings-in Classical Greece the Doric Columns used on the Parthenon were discovered to have wood alignment 'pins' and cast lead 'connectors' between consecutive marble blocks. Parallel development, it seems.
That "earlier civilization" theory is predicated on the Inca being too stupid to figure out how to build the walls themselves. There is NO evidence that an earlier "advanced civilization" ever existed. Only incredulity.
@@dat2ra Some of the anecdotal evidence of earlier civilizations came from Inca verbal history. We already know there were earlier Andean civilizations that preceded the Inca in dominance, or do you contest that as well? The Inca Empire was preceded by two large-scale empires in the Andes: the Tiwanaku (c. 300-1100 AD), based around Lake Titicaca, and the Wari or Huari (c. 600-1100 AD), centered near the city of Ayacucho.
That is fake news. The small stones are renovation attempts but if you look at the ild pictyre you will not see small stones. Sachsyhuaman is actually unfinished you can see the progression from completed walls to walls that are partly finiahed then to parts that were about to be started. The knobs are for lifting the blocks by using a fulcrum and lever. Once finiahed the knobs are removed or can be left as it is. Same technique used by modern builders of samurai walls but they use steel crowbars the inca used wood that is why you needd large knobs
The incan descendent laugh at the thought they made the large stone work. They believed these structures were from deep antiquity perhaps the 1st world.( we are presently in the 5th world). This is what they told me back in the 60's.
@@ridgewalker5718I can dig it man. Has that been confirmed or how can it even be confirmed? I ain’t a pro, but I do love a good detective story mixed with archaeology.
Great hypothesis. Now prove it by replicating the process.
Holy shoot! 30 second version. They dissolved the rock with acid from mining tailings. You're Welcome.
Interesting, if only we could see it tested
THE INCA THEMSELVES TOLD ALL THEY DID NOT I REPEAT (DID NOT) BUILD THESE everything other than this is a lie (FACT)
@@aununally4274 - I won't argue your point, but will simply add; well someone built them.
In this video it was a question of "HOW," not "WHO."
@@aununally4274 Machu Pichu was definitely an Inca construction from a to z
@@aununally4274 I have read several of the Chronicles, some of them in the original medieval Spanish. The Inca never said any such thing. They said that they didn't build Piq'illacta (which the Huari built) or Puma Punq'u (which the Tiahuanacu built), but they told the Spanish which Inca built which megalithic site. Ollantaytambo and Quito were still under construction when the Spanish barbarians arrived, for the gods' sake!
I don't know where that lie originated, but it's utter bullshit.
I'm going to end every sentence on this video like I'm falling off a cliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiif
foot lettuce
....OR, I'm Putting my self to sleep. With every word. And every sentence. That doesn't end. When I end the sentence.
Yeah, if you'd actually visited these places and seen these stones up close you'd know this theory doesn't add up. The stones are 3D interlocked - the entire stone blocks have been moulded/melted/liquidified to fit them into place. It's not just the edges you see. It also does not explain the vitified surfaces. There's only so much you can ascertain from a picture. Visit these places.
Agreed. I live here and can attest to that fact. The stones just don't fit at angles and recede at 90 degree angles, but I have noticed that the sides have different irregular sloped angles from front to back. This is something I don't think any modern mason can do today without putting in a HUGE amount of work.
The Inca did not build the Megalithic Stone Walls, buildings, or other structures. Now, the Inca did build on top of or next to the structures, and it is easy to see the distinct differences in the styles. The Inca told the Spanish, who conquered them, that they did not build the Megalithic Structures. Check into the historical accounts written by the Spanish at the time. Have traveled around Peru and have touched many of the stoneworks.
Thanks for that bit of info
who built it according to them?
@@tresojosAlliens??
In woodworking, to join two boads together we use a couple techniques, but one in particular seems to fit the technique of joining rock. Usually we'd start by planing one side of a board, then sandpaper would be added between the planed board and unplanned board, working the two back and forth until you get an almost perfect fit. Or method two, place both boards beside one another and plane joining sides together. When you place them together you get an exact match. I'm not saying this is the one true method but, if you can do it with wood, its not a stretch to translate these methods to rock. Great video! Enjoyed watching, thank you.
Makes sense. Sandpaper is simply graded silicate sand glued to a paper surface, so grinding two granitic stones together would eventually smooth and align the surfaces.
I don't disagree this could work in theory, but when you add that this isn't just normal rock, it's INCREDIBLY hard granite and with weights up to and over 100 tons, this seems less and less likely.
Get out of here with your experience, logic, and science! It could only be aliens or lost magic!
I was thinking the same thing, not realizing it was also a woodworking technique. Plausible enough to seriously consider.
How could you possibly move a block of that size and weight as if it was a tool?
"TO SUMMARIZE, I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT LOL"
Hahahahaha
? He knows exactly what he's talking about, its not his original thought, its been known a long time.
With all of the stones there, they would've needed one hell of a production facility for the acid solution.
Incas always preferred coca to lsd
And a lot of heavy duty rubber gloves to apply that stuff, they must have had some dry cracked hands.
many safety gloves supplyed by the union
This is the most logical explanation offered so far. It seems reasonable.
It's a new and interesting approach. Now all there is to do is to prove it.
No. Science proves nothing. What science does is investigate, theorise and propose how things might work. That theory then holds until or unless someone can disprove it.
What I have seen here is an excellent theory. It makes sense. If someone doesn't believe it disprove it, find evidence to the contrary.
Modern mining uses this technic called pastefill. There are also demonstrations done and called geopolymer concrete.
@@PanglossDr
You forgot to mention that once one proposes a hypothesis, the majority of the scientific community must actually AGREE & SUPPORT their hypothesis in order for it to become a legitimate theory.
That’s what all of the peer-reviewed journals are for, & the importance of “being published” in one (because before publication, one’s research manuscript must be ACCEPTED by a journal, which can itself be the end for some).
Many have hypothesized & proposed how something might work, only to be disagreed with, unsupported, or occasionally defamed by the scientific community.
Sometimes that simply means they must refine their manuscript, other times they must continue their research & include more compelling evidence before reapplying, & then sometimes it ruins their credibility or their entire career if it ruffles too many feathers, disproves a popular theory that’s become entrenched, or poses a threat to certain entities (no one wants to jeopardize their precious grants, after all. 🤭).
@@RuinedTemple Rubbish. The Scientific community is huge and very segmented. The idea that a majority should support something is ridiculous.
Peer review is no longer meaningful in most areas of science. If a paper does not conform to the current orthodoxy it is impossible to get anything published. Climate Change is probably the best example of this.
@@PanglossDr This is a hypothesis, not a theory. And as with any hypothesis, it is not up to others to "disprove" it, it is up to the person making the claim to prove it.
Has a study been carried out on the soil and sedimentary layers below the walls? if so, the acidic leachate from the process could be detected in higher levels than that which occurs normally in the local soils. If detected, this could add validity to the hypothesis. It could also aide in dating the process and give a possible date of construction. Just a thought.... This type of investigation would also possibly work with the hypothesis you put forward for constructing the Egyptian pyramids using salt... love your work
You are spot on! There is always going to be evidence of the process, whether its tailings from a mechanical process, or chemical residue.
LOVED this! Many thanks!
I've always rebelled against the laser cuts, liquid stone, and exoterrestrial help theories. They're an easy retreat from hard research. People go there when they run out of brains and haven't yet fathomed the ingenuity and soul-crushing hard work of ancient peoples.
This explanation holds together very well.
Not really. Much remains unexplained and generally impossible for the Inca culture.
@@timabels1825 Prove that it was impossible for the Inca culture. The evidence says otherwise.
@@russellmillar7132 not possible to prove a negative. Logic.
It doesn’t. This technique wouldn’t mould rock like this. Science will tell you that. This theory - although interstitial, would not affect the overall shape of the rock. Only mm of the surface.
If this theory is anywhere near the truth, then show an example of cutting two huge rocks with multiple angle cuts together.
It’s a wafty anecdote at best.
@@JEXDESIGNS How do you think it was done? Science can't tell you anything. It doesn't talk. Science is a method that could be applied to the question: " how was this done? " You can devise a test that may help to determine whether a given hypothesis ( guess ) about how this was done is likely true or false. That's what Helmut T. was doing.
Does claiming that this was done far earlier than " mainstream archaeology "
says, make it any easier to explain?
There was a video I watched showing how a single man used small stones to move very large bolders and raising larger stone of at least 1 ton all by himself to recreate stacked structures like Stone Henge
My eyes rolled when I read the cocksure wording of the title of this video: "This Is How They Built". I find the theory highly implausible. Even if such a rock-softening paste could be 'easily' manufactured in the said region, I cannot imagine that it could affect the kind of interlocking joints that we see. Yes, perhaps such a stone-softening substance could have been created at this location, but what about the other locations around the world, where the same baffling ancient masonry style can be seen: Egypt, Japan, etc?
That's a good point. Even if the theory works, how on earth could so many far-flung ancient civilizations all happen to have such advanced chemical knowledge and the right materials or means of acquiring or them? Not to mention working with such caustic materials.
it looks in photographs i've seen to be obvious bags filled, secured, and fitted into place, w/ the knot (tie) tucked into the one adjacent - forming a kind of 'lock-notch'. what substances filled the bags? that remains to be seen - but it was a very long time ago and the earth was not as it is now. the desert of Giza was green and lush! the climate completely opposite from today! the Nile may have been used to float the stones via locks - the light source inside the pyramids may have come from Nile dwelling giant glow worms kept in long (and large) glass jars! the climate, flora and fauna were much changed since those times, and who can say what minerals might have been available to builders of the south american regions thousands of years ago? i can tell you one thing i've taken notice of though - the men from south of the border do exquisite work in stone/earthen masonry - as though w/ innate special talent - it is apparently intuitive to them and they perform w/ great skill and quickness! you can see examples on YT...
@@megenberg8 I"ve never seen an earth/concrete bag make a perfect L shape or anything more complex shaped like how these stones fit together. Now if the stones were all perfectly square shaped it might be a different story.
@@michaeld4861 they appear tb be none other than bags configured together in the photos. to explain: the bags were not stacked as in running brick. the bags were positioned into wells or forms - walls of support (such as we see today in double rigid foam insulated foundation walls), bagged masonry substance infilled and acting as it's own level and at any rate manipulated to conformity. the forms removed when project cured. it is noted that clear evidence of form impression(s) can seen readily in places. it merely required a bit of detective work after all the years of assumption. p.s. the walls may have thae been plastered over very smooth and embellised in any number of ways e.g., painted and/or embossed, carved or slabs of flat stone attached. whatever was to be had in that locale or brought in.
You know I saw some other video about the stone softening thing - all about some quarry mud and mixing some plant or other in with it or something - and I was just about convinced.
But I just had a thought - if you've got two 'softened' pieces of rock rubbing together like that why wouldn't they simply merge together into one rock, at least in some places?
And another thought: if you've got a 'softened' piece of rock why bother making both surfaces flat? The softening would allow a perfect match one against the other if there were imperfections in the plane of one, wouldn't it?
In short: I'm no longer convinced.
But I do think there's a serious lack of scientific study. Or perhaps they've done the science and we just haven't heard about it.
Like if they can use luminescence dating to know how long since a piece of rock last saw light of day and can measure isotopes in tiny fragments of rock I'm sure they could discover and isolate any 'foreign' chemicals or crystal formations within a rock couldn't they?
I'm getting sea sick listening to this. Skipping this video.
Yeah a little.
The content was good, delivery not so good. Thank you for having a go.
I certainly like the sandbag hypothesis. You suggest the rocks have been analyzed and the quarries located and that destroys your hypothesis. On the contrary, like cement, you need ingredients and crushed granite from the quarry would be needed for the "mix" you use in the sandbags to form these walls. Why not try building one of these walls using cement bags and see if you come close.
Yes, but the problem with that theory is that they haven't located the remains of the bags. If they found that, then it would explain quite a lot.
What material did they use for the “bag”? Where is the evidence for the textiles that need to be grown, milled and woven in such huge quantities?
Shouldn't be too hard to recreate then. I'd need to see that test to not be sceptical of this theory. Seems a stretch that acid at a surface could make the rock at parts other than the immediate surface malleable. Just think how many inches back from the face the rock would have to be effected for some of those finer joins to happen. Also, it seems like you'd never get any of those right angled step joins, since the acid would be effecting both contributing faces simultaneously; presumably you'd get more flowing, organic contacts were that the case. That's to say nothing of the joining material potentially effecting the crystalline components of the rock differently. I dunno, not doing it for me. Doesn't address the stages of building that we see in all of Brian Forester's vids either.
Perhaps there is still something missing here. Something traditionally whacky like using a tuning fork to vibrate the stone as it pushed its way down to accelerate the process. The idea is probably nonsense but i'm just implying that we've maybe only scratched the surface of the entire process.
@@commandernullex6774 Oh come on, the Incas used stone tools but yet they built metal "tuning forks"?
If they could come up with a tuning fork then they could have constructed stainless steel tools to cut rock.
Great point by Kiel Mitchell.
If you could "soften" stone, then if you forced two pieces together then it would be like pushing two pieces of play dough or silly putty together. While it would be a tight fit, it would not result in straight 90 degree angles.
@Nobody Knows That is correct.
Besides that, any chemical applied to a rock's surface would alter the rock's composition.
So it seems unlikely that the majority of the rock would turn to jelly, and then later solidify back into rock, and still look exactly how it did before.
Its just this simple, someone has to show this process being done before I will believe it.
Personally, I don't believe rock can be altered.
But I can be proven wrong by someone making video that shows it. (hint)
@@Saugaverse Nor would it result in concave, vertical, "L" shaped cornerstones that weigh over five tons. I agree with those who declare that seeing is believing.
When someone demonstrates how any megalithic ancient stonework, found anywhere in the world, was done using the same materials and methods available to the ancient builders in life-sized construction projects of at least fifty to one hundred five ton blocks, then, and only then will I accept their fantasized theories.
Wow this is the best video I've seen on this subject and most of the comments appear to be bashing it (probably because they come here to support their theories about ancient aliens and prehistoric high tech lost civilizations)
Please, just REPLICATE it. and them, we will believe ya
I love the effort to come up with a theory for the building techniques. Im not convinced but it is a cool idea. I wonder if this idea makes any sense when applied to all the other sites in locations in India, Egypt, Easter island, etc that all show have this type of polygonal masonry.
They can't do their theory even with brick sized stones so what does that tell you.
Yeah I am not convinced either, like how did they cut the stone with other stone? How they transport the stones? How did they lift and set them? This theory is full is holes
@@James-to7pi carbon dating from substances found inside the pyramids confirm that they are about 5000 years old, which is actually older than zahi hawass would like them to be, but not even close to 12000 years. thats just stupid.
Exactly. I wish I was not so obsessed with this topic in general. it is going on forever, but no credible explanations, or restrictions on information. Its so obvious something RADICAL was afoot everywhere for millenia(ago and lasted for). i'm getting tired of hearing the same ol' shizz, basically. Maybe I must just make peace with the fact that as brilliant and as advanced as our technology is we may never know the answers. So far, its moving that way. NEVER know. Imagine that? So impossibly advanced those marvels of past civilisations were, that we may never know their secrets. Scary stuff. Those builders all over the planet I think were here 100's of thousands of years ago. So long ago we have zero reference for where to start. Millions of years ago perhaps. All starting to look like something like this. Ancient ancient ancient ancient civilisations that only left these marvels of their civilisations out of the fact that they needed them for whatever reason. We got no clue at all. The research by us, tells us this. We are literally clueless. Imagine who these people were? Scary stuff. Time to get our heads out of our....(u know what I mean).
Interesting, now it's time to demonstrate this hypothesis.
As a bricklayer/stone mason, it blows my mind how they built these structures... I think one of the most impressive not mentioned here is Puma Punku.
It is not stone , you start out wrong and you will end up wrong.
The truth has purposely been hidden !
@@NOTTHASAME what is it then, candyfloss?
Puma Punku used another brilliant solution, completely different. They used natural geopolymers. Reade the paper in the link... doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2018.10.033
Puma Punku is a different technology. You can not mold rectangular cutouts with sharp corners
@@1AnononA1 Don't be silly, tourists would have eaten it away.
a very interesting video and the linked research paper is highly worth reading. This would make for a good practical building test project. A refreshing change to see intelligent investigation on this subject rather than the fantastical leaping to conclude that, because it's hard to work out, it must have been "aliens" or some other nearly-magical idea. Thank you. Subscribed.
But he doesn't answer the most important question of all:
Was building all these walls a Union Contract, or a lowest bidder project ?
Union Contract obviously. Have you ever saw a "rat" outfit do that fine a work? Not hardly!
Free Masions?
This video is historic. It`s elementary for understanding all those miracles. Thank you Sir !
I would suggest: Maybe you make a REUPLOAD (ARTE has to work this way, when the licences of productions run out.
It causes a new actuality about reports of timeless value, basic education... like this one! It simply deserves, not being forgotten in the current streams of attractions, sensations or mystifications.. down until to pure fake and nonesense.
Please don`t mention those in this special case, who might say ''I already saw it, it`s old, I am bored...''
I do not understand those attitudes - because there are documentations here on YT and especially in your channel, I watch or listen to several times :) God bless you Sir, Love from here... Thank you !
I made a large snow scupture out of packed snow blocks using a recycling bin to form the blocks which were aprox 1.5' x 1.5' x 2' and wieghed about 50 lbs.
I put at least 50 of these blocks together and fitted them closely using two techniques. The stacked joint was fitted by grinding the top block ontop of the bottom block by rocking, shifting and twisting. The edge joints were made by running a cutting edge between the blocks and pushing sideways until the blocks fit tightly.
My snow blocks are very crumbly and easy to work so I imagine the same techniques would work on softer rock using abrasive material. The vertical joints can be made with a rope impregnated with the same abrasive and would look like a straight edge when finished. This years project was an Easter Island Moai Statue that lasted for 2 months on my front lawn. Just wait until next year!!!
You should post a video of your creations!
yes they used the weight of the blocks against itself
Photos please, that sounds like an amazing project!
The blocks aren’t flat or square 🤷🏻♂️ congrats on your snow creations but it doesn’t work for these precise stone blocks
Not far off the 200k Matt will done for a history/architect channel.
Nearly 😊
So the Inca built walls they say were already existing when they arrived? Huh?
Hey mate - what source says they were already there? Just haven’t found it but more than happy to follow the evidence. If Pre-Inca, this method is still the most likely in my opinion.
Small details. Who built them vs how they were built. The video says it needs to be worked out how they were built before deciding who built them. Perhaps.
Matthew Smith I am completely open to the age of these structures. I call them “Inca Stone Walls” in the title as that is what people generally search for. But if Pre-Inca - am happy to accept that.
@@AncientArchitects the Inca themselves told the Spanish they found these walls
@@AncientArchitects See my other comment. But the strangest oddity is the obvious differences between highly sophisticated advanced stonework often below more crudely placed cobblestones. This doesn't jive with the hypothesis of one culture of builders, or even of the same epoch.
And we have the audacity to call these 'primitive civilizations'..... I am blown away. It kinda looks like there's so much detail that it can not possibly be wrong and this was just a general look into the process.
Thank you very much for sharing this.
Its a very compelling idea, but it seems this is currently just a hypothesis and needs to be proven. If someone can demonstrate the technique with large blocks of stone, producing the same perfect, tight joints and the vitrification we see, then it becomes extremely plausible. I find it amusing you say it can be built without the need for high technology!! To me, if proven, this would be an ingenious construction technique employing knowledge of physics and chemistry well beyond the knowledge of the time - surely that's the very definition of a high technology!!
I don't think it answers who or when these sites were constructed, whether it was Inca or pre-Inca? I will say however, if this construction technique is proven and it was easy for them to build such structures, then why is the poorer stonework present at all?? Why are the repairs done so poorly if all the had to do was rebuild with blocks and this paste to achieve the same original finish?
There is no doubt two distinct phases of construction are present at these sites, phase one knew and employed whatever technique was used and phase two clearly did not...and that is where the mystery lies.
Very good points, a well written comment to this video.
NOTE, There are actually at least FOUR distinct phases to this work.
One is when the Spanish invaded and created their own construction.
And another is modern day "re-construction" of many of the sites that were in need of repair, etc.
There is no question, they were built by the Incas, listen to the video and do not cherry pick, organic material under the walls has been confirmed as being from
the Inca’s time.
OMG, this is maddening!!!!!
Being dumb enough to subject yourself to content you don't like? Haha, I bet.
I couldn't finish the video because it sounded like he was reading the instructions off of the back of a cake box.
Mix the SIX EGGS with THE BATTER, until NO LUMPS REMAIN in the mix.😑
The nodes mentioned at the end could be used to prop the stones upward to apply extra paste or do fine grinding, slowly lowering the pieces into place. They look positioned according to weight distribution of the stone
So why are they only on some of the stones.Besides those nubs can be seen in megaliths all over the world and appear to be "artistic"
We also see such nodes in mediaeval cathedrals. They are usually explained as supports for wooden scaffolding, but they could have also helped with placement by ropes and cranes.
Everyone used nubs back then to hold ropes in place as the stone was lifted. Most were chiseled off after final construction was completed.
How did I miss this video!? I'm the one who put you on to this! Thanks for posting. :)
Keep on doing the "put on" to folks who can bring the goods!!!
Not withstanding your very singular speaking style I found this completely fascinating. Great video.
My thoughts exactly.
@@pjqziggy The sandbag theory was acceptable to me. Then I switched to the rock softening technique as my final answer.
Great content and video. One suggestion: perhaps get some advice about tone etc in your voiceover. Every sentence has the same tonal structure which is not as natural as it could be and is very distracting.
Agree. Good content and writing, but a really unnatural delivery. Shouldn’t be hard to adjust. Every sentence shouldn’t have the same tonal structure, sequence and down tone on completion. Take a look at the professionals and consider how they do it. Treat it like music - you’ll hear it differently.
If it was true why hasn't anyone replicated it now in days
My guess is economics and the discovery of portland cement displaced the technique.
We (21st century man) have an alternative building material that requires a much smaller work force.
I'm no expert. If someone has a better idea, I'd love to learn!
freddie montes - because we can't. this video is BS.
Maybe because the paper explaining this technique is fairly recent, and no one has raised funds to test the hypothesis yet, especially at scale (i.e. with giant rocks)? Nobody has replicated alien levitation rays etc. either.
@@kevincrady2831 or if they had, certainly it would be repressed and we would never see it.