Maybe it's that your first notion, that these were simple farmers is incorrect. It certainly seems contradictory regardless. Either these people ~5,000 years ago were simple farmers with simple tools or there were advanced civilizations building them? It seems like a major contradiction to me.
I think what
@Bocephus86 said is correct, people underestimate human capabilities. People have difficulty relating our current lives and place in the timeline of humanity's existence with the past. Human beings were not remarkably more or less capable of anything even thousands of years ago. The biggest difference we see is technological knowledge built on successive centuries and millennia over time.
CHANCES ARE that human brains were then what they are now, incredibly adept at problem-solving, creativity, ingenuity, etc...So they figured out how to solve problems then much like we do now.
If you're wondering why there was a major lull in production, well you can look at recent times for examples of that as well. There are major cultural changes, governance changes, ecological changes, etc...that dictate whether or not these things are prioritized. Egyptian society was collapsing right around the time Alexander the Great rolled through. The Nile was drying up and the Egyptians, over time, somehow forgot or didn't know effective agricultural and irrigation techniques. Civilizations rise and fall via completely verifiable reasons throughout history. There's no reason to think there was some advanced society we're miraculously unaware of that was responsible for things we don't' have full answers for. It's completely sensationalist and guys like Hancock and Carlsson make a profit off of it.
You want to talk about "big money" in science? Where's the billion dollar industry behind archaeology? Where's the profit motive? Because it seems to me the people profiting from this currently are Graham Hancock and Randle Carlsson with their alternative theories.
I was quoting the OP when I said simple farmers (it was not my notion), he said that the evidence says that it was simple farmers who settled ancient Egypt 4000-5000 years ago. Given how many mathematical calculations were made in building it + it's relation to astronomy, we know it wasn't "simple farmers" rather people who had a great understanding of our world. I don't deny that it was a very advanced group of humans that built it, I don't think we are anywhere near the level of sophistication they were at. I just don't buy the hypothesis that it was the ancient Egyptians of 4000-5000 years ago, who suddenly just forgot all their history about how and when they built the pyramid and it was never verbally passed down, nor was it explained to the Greeks who interacted with them.
Let's assume for a second that the 4000-5000 year old hypothesis is correct, it still doesn't explain the weathering that's been caused by rainfall, considering it wasn't raining heavily at that time period.
I fully agree humans are capable of many things, and I do believe the ancient people were very likely more sophisticated and advanced than us. However we know from ancient Greek history that they interacted a lot with the Egyptians, there are zero accounts for how those structures were built. Also all the subsequent pyramids that were built were significantly worse in quality and workmanship than the great one. So we're suggesting that they forgot or got significantly worse in building ?
As for the profit motive, now I am not saying this is the case. However, if there was a significantly more efficient way to build, or say move heavy objects, or a significantly cheaper energy alternative, do you think the giant corporations and industries who's assets are valued in the billions would want that alternative to become a reality and used everyday? From a business standpoint, absolutely not. Why would you want your product or assets value to diminish and be replaced by a better alternative. Let's say you're a massive oil company that is worth billions and profits billions off of peoples reliance on oil. Then an alternative is discovered that renders your product obsolete, what is that corporations stance on the introduction of that new product in the market? They will act in their own interest, which is to suppress the new product/technology or whatever you want to call it.
My Covid vaccine example was a prime example of this, we know big pharma was censoring doctors and people who were giving people alternatives which were extremely effective and even more effective than the vaccine. We now know they were intentionally being censored by the US government and big Pharma. Why ? If there is a cheaper alternative, which is easily accessible, your product is essentially worthless.
We also know they were censoring doctors or anyone who said that there actual health risks to taking the Vaccine but most of us took it anyways, why ? Because the people speaking out were silenced. Again why ? Profit.
I don't necessarily think archaeologists are making money off pushing certain narratives. But I do know if there was a technology or method to say move heavy objects or if there was an easily accessible form of energy in abundance, it would make a lot of these billion dollar corporations who we rely on for energy/machinery go bankrupt, as their product is replaced with a much more efficient alternative.
Given what we know happened over the last 5 years, I have a hard time believing these billion dollar corporations are acting in our best interest, but rather they are operating as what they are, which is a business. If what you're selling isn't a need anymore, guess what ? You're out of business.
If someone was to discover a technique or method to make things like energy more accessible and cheaper for the public, guess what ? You're screwed.
So what do I think ? billion dollar corporations have a LOT to lose if people discovered a superior alternative to the product they're selling, the product that allows our civilization to operate as it does. So if you need an incentive as to why archaeology or archaeologists might push a certain narrative, there it is. Not saying that, that is the case but if you want a reason why someone would be against discovering a lost technology, there it is.
Usually when big tech or big pharma tries to silence people that oppose them or people that provide alternatives to their product, there is a reason, 99.999 percent of the time the reason is money.
But in simple terms, here's what it is
1) There is literally no record anywhere of who built the pyramids and when, not from the ancient Egyptians who inhabited them nor the Greeks who were in contact with them and traded with them. When the people who lived there themselves had no story or explanation of they were built, it should raise some questions.
2) According to geologists specifically Schoch, the weathering on the stones is consistent with that, that occurs from thousands of years of heavy rainfall, not from wind/sand storms. We know it didn't rain in that region in that time period of 4000-5000 years ago, but it did around 12000 years ago. The weathering has vertical lines, not horizontal (consistent with weathering from rainfall, not sand or a rising water level)
3) There are several measurements incorporated in the Pyramid, that we know the ancient Egyptians of 5000 years ago didn't know. For example, the fact that you can calculate the circumference of the Earth using the math incorporated in the Pyramid. The Greeks figured it out 2300 ish years ago by comparing shadows in different locations, which helped them confirm that the earth is sphere and the size of it.
But archaeologists say it was just a crazy coincidence.
4) There is no record oral or written, or any physical evidence, of what could have been used to carry 15 ton granite blocks, 1000 feet and elevated to heights near 500 feet. It's simply not possible with just leverage. We're supposed to believe that these people just forgot how to move 15 ton blocks with "simple tools" ? The methods of cutting these stones and moving them that you guys are providing is not viable. I don't think you understand how heavy 15 tons are, and some of the blocks inside the pyramid are even up to 70 tons. But these people just forgot how to do that and never passed it down ?
Lets assume the ramp theory is correct, how strong does that ramp have to be, what is it made of, how long is it and what angle is it built on to support the ability to carry that much weight ? Also keep in mind, there are 2.3 million of these stones, it's not a small feat. And none of the methods suggested by conventional scientists makes sense.
5) The sphinx is a Lion, if you went back 12000 years ago, the sphinx would have been staring at the Leo (lion) constellation
It's just that there are so many "coincidences" but when you really look at it, what are the chances of all of these "coincidences" existing ? VS the idea that it was planned methodically and not just an accident.
The chances of all these crazy mathematical and astronomical coincidences ALL existing are literally a fraction of a percent. There is math used and math coded into the pyramid , that we KNOW the Egyptians of 4000-5000 years ago didn't know.
I think it is SIGNIFICANTLY more likely, that the great pyramid was a planned project. Planned with an understanding of math and our planet that we know they didn't have at that time. About a 99.999 percent chance it was planned vs things just being a coincidence. But when you say it was planned, then you ask the question, how did they know these things ? Answer, the Egyptians of 4000-5000 years ago didn't know some of these things (such as the size of the Earth), so then how do they exist in that time period ? Answer, it is pretty likely that they simply inhabited a structure/area that was already built. That's not to say they weren't an advanced civilization themselves.
It's just very difficult to believe the Egyptians of that time period are the ones who built it, there is a chance it was them but I think it's legitimately like 99999:1 odds when you consider what information they had vs what information is encoded in the actual structure.
You would have the be the luckiest person to have ever existed, to simply get all of those crazy "coincidences" incorporated into the pyramid by accient.
