Easy enough to say, but not so easy to accomplish.
Its completely trivial to drill a hole in the stones and analyse
it chemically. Concrete is completely different to stone.
And we can see where they quarried the stone too and
check that whats left there is stone and not concrete too.
Do you have a photo of a modern wall built with similar
construction techniques and similar close fitting stones?
Irrelevant to whether they are stone or not.
Because once we invented stone tools, there was no point
in doing walls using that very much more laborious process.
I wonder what went wrong here:
<
http://aboutfacts.net/History/H70/Stock.xching/603596_11287651_IncaStoneWall.jpg>
Looks like an original Inca wall at the bottom,
and some kind of repair or reconstruction on top.
Or someone just decided to make it much higher later on.
As for the Egyptians using copper tools, there aren't
enough such tools found in museums to build a small
tomb, much less a major structure like a pyramid.
All that shows is that copper was too valuable to just discard.
If copper tools, which become dull very quickly, were used
to quarry the pyramid stones, they should be more abundant.
Or they just wore out.
Also, please find me one reference that actually believes
that copper chisels were used to quarry granite:
<
https://www.google.com/#sclient=psy-ab&q=copper+tools+to+cut+stone>
Having fun thrashing that straw man ?
The Incas did those walls without any copper tools at all.
I went though the first 2 pages of hits and didn't find a single one
that even suggested that it was possible. Most suggest that they
used an abrasive (sand) with copper drill and saws. Yet when I
tracked down people who have actually tried to do something
more than a trivial attempt at grinding through stone, they all
showed that it didn't work too well.
It clearly worked fine for the Incas.
Also, I failed to find any YouTube videos showing how
expansion of water soaked wood wedges will split stone.
All that shows is that your searching 'skills' are woefully inadequate.
Cool. Got any photos of modern stone walls that fit
together like the Inca stone walls? I couldn't find any.
Because it's a much more laborious process than using
metal tools to do stone walls the way we do them now.
Well, that's true, but the opposite is also true. Just
because you claim I'm wrong, doesn't make it wrong.
I didn't just claim you are wrong, I proved that the claim
that those inca walls are concrete is just plain wrong.
There is no point in those very complicated shaped blocks
if they were concrete. There is when you have to start with
the existing fractures in the rock and grind the rocks back
to what will fit so beautifully together.
I try to provide some substantiation to my claims.
ALL you did is wave around some loon claiming something
that completely trivial to prove is just plain wrong.
You simply declare me to be wrong.
Everyone can see for themselves that that is a lie
with the post you are replying to right now alone.
How do you know if you haven't read it?
Because it makes absolutely no sense at all to do those very
complicated shapes that are seen in the Inca walls if you are
making them with concrete. It makes a lot of sense when you
realise that since they did not have any metal tools, that they
had to exploit the existing fractures in the rock the started with.
I spent quite a bit of time reading about things I disagree with,
It makes a lot more sense to read what those who have worked
out how the Incas did those walls have to say about how its done.
and about things I know little.
Everyone knows little about how the Incas did those walls at one time.
It's not enough to know everything about your position.
You should know something about the point of view
expressed by those with whom you disagree.
ALL we need to know is that stupid claim that those Inca walls
are concrete and the evidence that proves that they are not.
The Egyptian tombs were entered by looters and
treasure hunters long before they were 1000 years old.
Some of them were, plenty of them weren't.
And that didn't stop the pyramids continuing fine anyway.
Most of them worked on building the tombs, making it an inside job.
You don't know that.
Only Tutankhamen escaped the pillaging.
And they are ALL still standing fine with the later ones.
It took a while longer with the pyramids, mostly because the
original potential looters knew that there was nothing of value
inside. Entry required gunpowder and then modern tunneling
equipment to get around the hard granite barriers, via the
softer limestone blocks. Given sufficient incentive, nothing
is impervious to a determined looter or archaeologist.
And those Inca walls didn't need any guards or maintenance crew either.
The Inca walls did not have anything of value inside to protect.
So you don't have anything of value to protect in his cryo system either.
My guess(tm) is that after only 100 years, any sealed
structure will become an archaeological target.
That hasn't happened with hordes of stuff older than that.
Certainly by 1000 years, the curiosity seekers
and treasure hunters would have broken in.
How odd that they didn't with those Inca walls.
I'll have to take your word for it.
No you don't, I gave you the cites that show that plenty do.
I've never been there and have no plans to visit.
We do have this funky system called the internet
that allows you to check that any time you like.
I was under the impression it was sparsely populated.
<
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Territory>
233,000 population over 1/2 million square miles, with
half the population in Darwin, does seem a bit sparse.
Irrelevant to your original where your claimed
that no one would want to live there. Plenty do.
