Puma Punku

[steve mccarron]

Originally Posted by The Don

Presuming the bolded part is the part to which you want a response.....

Ductile Iron is a subtype of cast iron.

Ductile Iron is more ductile than other forms of cast iron and yes, it is ductile at room temperature.

http://www.ductile.org/didata/Sectio...s/pfig3_20.htm

Cast iron is also ductile at room temperature, but significantly less so.

Granite is described as ductile netherless, as are other materials.

[DC]

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

This is very dissapointing. No body has commented on my stone working narrative.

Also, some of you are being a bit silly and saying I am not very knowlegeable or skilled. That's not very nice is it?

I worked at Witley court, Worcestershire for 7 years apart from everywhere else. I was described by English Heritage as the resident stonemason. I wrote the specification for the restoration of the perseus and flora fountains there. The report was commissioned by Nicol, Jones and Lomax and was described as setting a bench mark for it's clarity and method. During this time, I had students seconded to me as part of thier degree, or other educational courses. I lectured visiting groups of architects, schoolchildren, historical groups etc.

I designed a stone dome and constructed it without centering. I carved the most difficult curved tympanum above a doorway on the south terrace.

There was nothing ordainary I acomplished during this time, I worked with and assisted archaeologists routineley. I also wrote the specification for the restoration of the finest baroque church in england. Saint Michael and All Angels, great witley church.

Trying to say I'm somehow not qualified is a bit silly, isn't it? Leave it out, you just sound stupid and confrontational. No wonder I'm upset.

you know what is depressing? when there is a guy that says i have problems believing the academics explenations for this and that, and when you ask the guy wich are those academics explenations he cannot come up with an answer.
its very telling.

[steve mccarron]

Originally Posted by RoboTimbo

Archeaologists who know what they're talking about have a clear, evidence based belief that the work could have been and in fact was done using period tools and techniques. Those archeologists' opinions do matter and do carry weight. They would welcome you to supply evidence to the contrary.

The trouble is, the evidence based belief is based on circumspection rather than real trials. That is why there are not definitive claims of understanding with schoolchildren etc replicating these wonderous revelations and students trying these methods out for themselves.

Why isn't the internet full of videos of people cutting and working stones in this way then?, can anybody explain why.

[Marduk]

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

Granite is described as ductile netherless, as are other materials.

from geology 102
http://quizlet.com/11582980/print/

Quote:

high temp favors ductile (plastic) behavior
high confining pressure favors ductile behavior
low strain rate (rate as which stress is applied) favors ductile behavior
rock type: shales and schists favor ductile; granite, gneisses, and sandstones favor brittle behavior

I tried to find a site that supported your claim of ductile granite but have been unable to, they all describe it as brittle
so you'll have to retract that statement or support it yourself
sorry

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

Why isn't the internet full of videos of people cutting and working stones in this way then?, can anybody explain why.

you've already been linked to videos and webpages that show exactly that in this thread
you have chosen to ignore them in favour of your "belief"
ergo, your belief is erroneous

[The Don]

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

Granite is described as ductile netherless, as are other materials.

Evidence ?


edited to add.

Specifically that granite is described as ductile.

[steve mccarron]

Originally Posted by DC

you know what is depressing? when there is a guy that says i have problems believing the academics explenations for this and that, and when you ask the guy wich are those academics explenations he cannot come up with an answer.
its very telling.

Whats more depressing is when somebody is so obtuse they can talk but not listen or read.

Cutting granite with a copper blade and sand and with or without water

Drilling granite with copper drills

Accepting that core drills were used without questioning HOW

Accepting that stone pummelling was used to create dimensional stone


If you look over the previous pages, I think you will see a trend in what my objections are.

Whenever individuals question the commonly held views about ancient masonry manufacture, they are slapped down and the EXPERTS are shown to be paragons of virtue.

I do not beleive the majority of explanations, or find the reasoning simplistic.

Tell me, how would you attach a precious stone to a cutting tool?

[steve mccarron]

Originally Posted by The Don

Evidence ?


edited to add.

Specifically that granite is described as ductile.

Daily, in chatter with architects, fellow workers, you know within the industry.
Granite dosent shatter like marble, we call it ductility, sorry if that upsets you.

Move on now?

[The Don]

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

Daily, in chatter with architects, fellow workers, you know within the industry.
Granite dosent shatter like marble, we call it ductility, sorry if that upsets you.

Move on now?

So no evidence then......

[steve mccarron]

Why isn't the internet full of videos of people cutting and working stones in this way then?, can anybody explain why not.

The biggest landmark buildings, the largest enigmas and what have we got. Nothing, suprising.

[Marduk]

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

Why isn't the internet full of videos of people cutting and working stones in this way then?, can anybody explain why not.

The biggest landmark buildings, the largest enigmas and what have we got. Nothing, suprising.

this is the third time I've told you this now and numerous other posters have said the same, videos showing exactly that have been posted in this thread, so again, your belief is erroneous

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

Dear Don, become a stonemason.

well, he's tried asking a stonemason, but apparently the guy was clueless to help

[DC]

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

Whats more depressing is when somebody is so obtuse they can talk but not listen or read.

Cutting granite with a copper blade and sand and with or without water

Drilling granite with copper drills

Accepting that core drills were used without questioning HOW

Accepting that stone pummelling was used to create dimensional stone


If you look over the previous pages, I think you will see a trend in what my objections are.

Whenever individuals question the commonly held views about ancient masonry manufacture, they are slapped down and the EXPERTS are shown to be paragons of virtue.

I do not beleive the majority of explanations, or find the reasoning simplistic.

Tell me, how would you attach a precious stone to a cutting tool?

so you do not have any idea what academics are actually saying about it, you merely object to the explenations given on the internet.

you are the one that said you have problems with the academics explenations. I don't know those explenations, i googled quickly and didn't find anything scientific. so i assumed you know the academics explenations and can link to some of their publications wich you have troubles with. but somehow you are not able to.
to me that looks like you didnt even search for those explenations but for some strange reason you have troubles believing those....

a last time i ask. wich academics explenations do you have troubles with?

[RoboTimbo]

Originally Posted by Marduk

source
Ancient Aliens, Giorgio A. Tsoukalos

So that's where he is getting his thoughts from.

[The Don]

Edited by kmortis:

Removed previously moderated content

Just provide a link to a site where the stone industry definition of ductile is provided and I'll be happy to concede that there is some specific definition of ductile that runs contrary to general usage and that used in materials science.

[steve mccarron]

Originally Posted by Marduk

this is the third time I've told you this now, videos showing exactly that have been posted in this thread, so again, your belief is erroneous

I have NEVER been shown a video of a peice of granite being cut from start to finish with a copper blade.

If you can send me the link, anybody, I will go away never to return.

I have seen a video of somebody APPEARING to do this in a block of stone which had already been partially cut. They struggle and then add water and then the blade jams, as it will because the particles get stuck IN the blades sides. At that point, there is no more cutting.

You can tell that it was pre cut from the shoulders.

[GeeMack]

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

This is very dissapointing. No body has commented on my stone working narrative.

Also, some of you are being a bit silly and saying I am not very knowlegeable or skilled. That's not very nice is it?

I worked at Witley court, Worcestershire for 7 years apart from everywhere else. I was described by English Heritage as the resident stonemason. I wrote the specification for the restoration of the perseus and flora fountains there. The report was commissioned by Nicol, Jones and Lomax and was described as setting a bench mark for it's clarity and method. During this time, I had students seconded to me as part of thier degree, or other educational courses. I lectured visiting groups of architects, schoolchildren, historical groups etc.

I designed a stone dome and constructed it without centering. I carved the most difficult curved tympanum above a doorway on the south terrace.

There was nothing ordainary I acomplished during this time, I worked with and assisted archaeologists routineley. I also wrote the specification for the restoration of the finest baroque church in england. Saint Michael and All Angels, great witley church.

You keep bragging up your alleged qualifications, but when it gets right down to it, those supposed qualifications have not provided you the answers to your questions. As knowledgeable as you seem to think you are, you still don't know how the monuments at Puma Punku were made.

Quote:

Trying to say I'm somehow not qualified is a bit silly, isn't it? Leave it out, you just sound stupid and confrontational. No wonder I'm upset.

You're the one who seems to consider your qualifications relevant to the discussion since you continue to bring up the issue. But the truth is, objectively assessed, your qualifications fall short of those necessary to understand how the Puma Punku structures were made. That lack of qualification seems to be the source of your incredulity.

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

If you look over the previous pages, I think you will see a trend in what my objections are.

Yes. In short, you don't know how the structures were made, you don't believe any explanations you've heard, and you have no explanation of your own.

[steve mccarron]

I have NEVER been shown a video of a peice of granite being cut from start to finish with a copper blade.

If you can send me the link, anybody, I will go away never to return.

I have seen a video of somebody APPEARING to do this in a block of stone which had already been partially cut. They struggle and then add water and then the blade jams, as it will because the particles get stuck IN the blades sides. At that point, there is no more cutting.

You can tell that it was pre cut from the shoulders.

[Marduk]

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

I have NEVER been shown a video of a peice of granite being cut from start to finish with a copper blade.

.

thats because no one but you is claiming that method was ever used at all by the Inca
you are remarkably uninformed for a claimed professional.

but your claim that the academics are saying that I have your source
it was
source
Ancient Aliens, Giorgio A. Tsoukalos
again

[Moss]

I do think it is somewhat odd that Mr. McCarron has not tried the techniques proposed by the experimental archeologists himself. Because I'd think he'd be in a position to actuallly either verify or falsify them. Am I mistaken in that?

[steve mccarron]

Originally Posted by Marduk

thats because no one but you is claiming that method was ever used at all by the Inca
you are remarkably uninformed for a claimed professional.

but your claim that the academics are saying that I have your source
it was
source
Ancient Aliens, Giorgio A. Tsoukalos
again

Ha, ha, ha, ha , ha ha. Very good

[GeeMack]

Originally Posted by RoboTimbo

So that's where he is getting his thoughts from.

It would seem so. Sort of like the 9/11 Truthers who start with an opening post, "I'm not a Truther, but how could a skyscraper possibly...?" Or the Christian fundy who makes his first post, "I actually lean more toward atheism, but I have some questions..." They're lying. It looks like we may not get any further along with the questionably qualified OP here.

[steve mccarron]

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

I have NEVER been shown a video of a peice of granite being cut from start to finish with a copper blade.

If you can send me the link, anybody, I will go away never to return.

I have seen a video of somebody APPEARING to do this in a block of stone which had already been partially cut. They struggle and then add water and then the blade jams, as it will because the particles get stuck IN the blades sides. At that point, there is no more cutting.

You can tell that it was pre cut from the shoulders.

Still waiting........

[steve mccarron]

It it is claimed for the egyptians however, and it goes hand in glove with all the other rubbish assertions.

Still waiting......................

[steve mccarron]

Does anybody fancy going up Clee Hill with some bronze chisels?, I'll supply the tools, better wear gloves though.

Still waiting for that video

[carlitos]

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

Why isn't the internet full of videos of people cutting and working stones in this way then?, can anybody explain why not.

Why isn't the internet full of videos proving that the world is round?
Why isn't the internet full of videos of people producing buggy whips?
Why isn't the internet full of videos showing that storks don't deliver babies?

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity

[steve mccarron]

Originally Posted by GeeMack

It would seem so. Sort of like the 9/11 Truthers who start with an opening post, "I'm not a Truther, but how could a skyscraper possibly...?" Or the Christian fundy who makes his first post, "I actually lean more toward atheism, but I have some questions..." They're lying. It looks like we may not get any further along with the questionably qualified OP here.

Have you seen this video?, you know, the hard evidence, and why didn't they carry on with these techniques if they were so good?

[The Don]

Could the discussion please return to the working (or not working) of andesite by the Tiwanaku using stone and/or bronze tools less than 1,500 years ago rather than the working (or not working) of granite by the Egyptians using copper tools over 4,000 years ago ?



Edited to add...

So steve mccarron, if the Tiwanaku didn't use stone and/or bronze tools, do you have an alternative explanation ?

[steve mccarron]

Originally Posted by carlitos

Why isn't the internet full of videos proving that the world is round?
Why isn't the internet full of videos of people producing buggy whips?
Why isn't the internet full of videos showing that storks don't deliver babies?

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity

C'mon, just one little video. Theres nothing extreme here, Just perfect for you tube. Try not to be silly, I know it's hard, you being all logical and such.

Where is the video, is it under your chair, or under my desk.

Still waiting, and so is the world really.

[steve mccarron]

Originally Posted by The Don

Could the discussion please return to the working (or not working) of andesite by the Tiwanaku using stone and/or bronze tools less than 1,500 years ago rather than the working (or not working) of granite by the Egyptians using copper tools over 4,000 years ago ?

They share the same suspensions of logic and therefore are related. The same MO is used in both cases, which is why they are inseperable.

Granite cutting video please, anyone???

[GeeMack]

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

Still waiting........

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

It it is claimed for the egyptians however, and it goes hand in glove with all the other rubbish assertions.

Still waiting......................

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

Does anybody fancy going up Clee Hill with some bronze chisels?, I'll supply the tools, better wear gloves though.

Still waiting for that video

The dishonest conspiracy-theorist/crackpot strategy is noted. What you've got there is an argument from incredulity, as carlitos mentioned. That added to your persistent argument from ignorance, and dishonest attempts to shift the burden of proof, and a sprinkle of Dunning-Kruger... Face it, Steve, you've got nothing. Whatever the point is you're trying to make, you've failed.

[DC]

ppf still waiting for that guy naming one academic explenation.... nothing so far... very telling.

[steve mccarron]

Originally Posted by The Don

Could the discussion please return to the working (or not working) of andesite by the Tiwanaku using stone and/or bronze tools less than 1,500 years ago rather than the working (or not working) of granite by the Egyptians using copper tools over 4,000 years ago ?



Edited to add...

So steve mccarron, if the Tiwanaku didn't use stone and/or bronze tools, do you have an alternative explanation ?

No, I do not. But it is wrong to accept ANY explanations just because there does not appear to be a clearer alternative. The existing proposals are daft by and large but it is in our nature to Have to know regardless.

[carlitos]

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

I have NEVER been shown a video of a peice of granite being cut from start to finish with a copper blade.

Can I ask what this has to do with the subject matter at hand? The Puma Punku stones were mainly red sandstone, right?

[carlitos]

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

C'mon, just one little video. Theres nothing extreme here, Just perfect for you tube. Try not to be silly, I know it's hard, you being all logical and such.

Where is the video, is it under your chair, or under my desk.

Still waiting, and so is the world really.

The world is not really waiting.

You dismissed all of the explanations, articles and journal cites that I posted in my first post in this thread without even reading them. Now you want me to find you another video. Not interested.

You want to overturn consensus history and archaeology and to support that view you offer nothing bar incredulity and ignorance. That's not going to accomplish anything in the real world.

[steve mccarron]

Originally Posted by DC

ppf still waiting for that guy naming one academic explenation.... nothing so far... very telling.

Do you know what ORIGINAL thinking is.

Have you ever worked something scientific out all on your own because you had a hunch and nothing more.

Would you like to be paid to do that kind of thing.

Operating without the safety net of academic explanation.

Heady stuff eh..


Wheres the video??, do you know?

[The Don]

Going all the way back to the OP.......

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

I have over 30 years experience in building restoration and am probably the only person in the uk to have carved architectural granite with fire hardened tools (not tungsten tipped) which requires constant re-tempering and re-tipping.
I am also experienced in carving basalt. I have vast experience of hand work and the use of power tools. In other words, I have worked all the stones mentioned, in all sorts of ways in these debates.

Congratulations !

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

Why haven't experienced hands on craftspersons ever been consulted to put forward their views on this particular architectural marvel and other similar architectural anomalies accross the world. In our industry, the worst and least practical persons hypothesising about any aspect of our profession (and getting it wrong) are the very same characters served up to pass comment on something they have no knowlege of to start off with. I canott believe some of the proposals they have for the production of these masonry units. I completeley support the notion that even with the tools we have today it would be difficult to replicate this work and still time consuming. One of the most exausting challenges to a mason is working masonry blind, ie, into a dead end. Even after drilling a multiude of holes to facilitate the removal of masonry by chiseling and splitting it is a daunting task.

How do you know that experienced craftspeople have not been consulted ?

If they have not, why hasn't someone like yourself come forward and offered your insight about such feats may have been achieved with the technology available at the time.

It seems from earlier in the thread that at least sometimes local craftspeople have been consulted (the granite cutting is and example). I presume, but cannot guarantee, that experimental archaeologists have acquired skills though their experimentation and so can offer insight of their own.

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

The 'H' stones all required this technique, and then on a material that is defiantly ductile.

The reason the narrow channels (1cmx1cm at) Puma Punku attract so much interest is that they defy every logic and means of material production, as does the whole site.

The reason that debate continues on this subject is because people who know better refuse to be fobbed of by the propriatorial nonsense of copper drills, saws and suchlike by 'So called' experts. I know loads of them, we all do, by and large their opinions count for nothing.

For your enjoyment I have enclosed a picture of a capital I have carved in Aber marble. It weighes 15 tons and adjacent to it are other capitals, not replaced, carved by the Victorians using the tools available at the time. The difference is VERY obvious, as they struggled with this very hard stone with their 'fire hardened technology'


Steve McCarron

I'm very impressed by your experience of working marble with modern tools.....

So, what insight can you offer into the working of andesite with tools available to a bronze-age civilisation.

[carlitos]

Question for those who know -

Is the mohs scale logarithmic, by chance? Is 8.0 twice as hard as 7.0, for example? How does "granite" compare to red sandstone in terms of absolute hardness?

[DC]

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

Do you know what ORIGINAL thinking is.

Have you ever worked something scientific out all on your own because you had a hunch and nothing more.

Would you like to be paid to do that kind of thing.

Operating without the safety net of academic explanation.

Heady stuff eh..


Wheres the video??, do you know?

why should i work out anything when it is you that has problem with already published academics explenation, i merely asked you what those explenations are, you are not even able to name them. very strange, now you want me to work it out on my own? wth?

and where is the video of you doing mason work?

[GeeMack]

Originally Posted by steve mccarron

No, I do not.

So okay, your qualifications are insufficient to explain it. We got that far in your OP.

Quote:

But it is wrong to accept ANY explanations just because there does not appear to be a clearer alternative.

Nobody here is accepting just any explanation. For example, we aren't accepting that it was done by magic. We aren't accepting that it was done with some kind of lost advanced technology. We aren't accepting that space aliens stepped in and gave them a hand. We aren't accepting any of those explanations because there isn't a lick of evidence to suggest any of them are true. And if you think any of them are true, you certainly haven't offered any support.

Quote:

The existing proposals are daft by and large but it is in our nature to Have to know regardless.

You continue to claim this, yet you haven't shown that you understand, or are even aware of many of the existing proposals. That lack of knowledge appears to be the source of your argument from ignorance.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by carlitos

Question for those who know -

Is the mohs scale logarithmic, by chance? Is 8.0 twice as hard as 7.0, for example? How does "granite" compare to red sandstone in terms of absolute hardness?

Nope, neither linear nor logarithmic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohs_sc...neral_hardness

Quote:

The Mohs scale is a purely ordinal scale. For example, corundum (9) is twice as hard as topaz (8), but diamond (10) is four times as hard as corundum.

[Professor Yaffle]

Originally Posted by carlitos

Question for those who know -

Is the mohs scale logarithmic, by chance? Is 8.0 twice as hard as 7.0, for example? How does "granite" compare to red sandstone in terms of absolute hardness?

As far as I know, it is purely ordinal.