Demythologizing the Giant Stone Boxes of Egypt


The belief that otherworldly beings with intelligences superior to that of humans were responsible for designing and constructing great works of architecture in the distant past is one of the most persistent and common forms of the argument from Personal Incredulity. Such beliefs are symptomatic of a cynical view of humans as incapable of amazing architectural feats. This cynicism in turn stems from the desire of people to believe that our species has not been alone in our sojourn as the only intelligent animals on earth.

Instances of the belief in superiorly-intelligent aliens aiding lowly humans in building monuments to ingenuity is everywhere to be found on the Internet. Here I offer my critique on just one instance that recently came to my attention, a claim concerning giant underground stones that exist beneath the pyramids of Egypt. These massive stones have stimulated the personal incredulity of Brien Foerster, an author and self-described “adventurer” who has appeared multiple times on the History Channel show Ancient Aliens.

In a YouTube video titled “Giant Underground Stone Boxes near the Pyramids in Egypt,” Foerster takes his viewers along on a trip to Egypt, where he visits the Serapeum of Saqqara. Situated to the northwest of the Pyramid of Djoser, this particular serapeum is an underground tomb or necropolis located near Memphis, Egypt. It was built in the 13th century BCE during the reign of Ramesses II. The word “necropolis” derives from an ancient Greek word literally meaning “city of the dead.”

In the video under consideration, Foerster is filming a walkthrough of the Serapeum of Saqqara. This is not a secret underground cavern worthy of an intrepid adventurer. The Serapeum is a public attraction open to tourists. There are a large number of people walking around in the necropolis with Foerster and his friends. The latter apparently imagine that they are about to share an astounding discovery that has evaded the notice of all the other tourists. This enigmatic find turns out to be large stone “boxes” made out of granite blocks weighing between 50 and 100 tons. These huge masses of granite once served as very large coffins (sarcophagi), larger than is necessary to contain the average human body.

Foerster films as his colleague Christopher Dunn measures the interior of one of the boxes and finds that they are extremely precise. As Foerster states in the video, “The interior surface of this is within a few ten-thousandths of an inch in terms of being perfectly flat.” The interior’s surface is also polished to a mirror-like finish. Foerster is also intrigued by the corners of the stone boxes:

The corners are 90 degrees – not 89, not 91. But he [Dunn] has a precision square that he uses in the manufacturing industry. That’s what he used, and he found that the corners were exactly-ish 90 degrees.

Yes, Foerster really does say “exactly-ish” in the video.

During the course of this measuring exposition, text is flashed over the video: “This precise to bury a bull?” According to historians and Egyptologists, the Serapeum of Saqqara was used to bury bulls in reverence to the bull-deity Apis. Foerster’s personal incredulity kicks in, and he finds it insane that ancient Egyptians would go to such great trouble to create painstakingly precise granite boxes just to hold dead bulls. “The idea that it was made for bulls, no matter how special they were, is just ridiculous,” he says.

Skeptical activist Rebecca Watson, founder of the Skepchick Network and co-host of the Skeptics’ Guide to the Universe podcast, did a fine job of refuting Foerster’s implications in a recent Popular Science article on the subject. She shows that Foerster is clearly ignorant of ancient Egyptian culture and mythology:

The Apis bulls were incredibly sacred creatures to many ancient Egyptians, having been one of the first cults in Egyptian history. Bulls represented strength, determination, and virility, and so were often associated with pharoahs [sic]. The Apis bull was both a deity and manifestation of the pharaohs.

If there’s one thing the ancient Egyptians loved, it was post-mortal conspicuous consumption, so it’s impressive but not exactly beyond belief that they would spend so much time and effort to build elaborate tombs for the beings they worshipped.

Indeed, Foerster and his colleagues seem oblivious to the fact that throughout human history, people are prone to undertake elaborate rituals just for their belief system. The fact that such human behavior is unthinkable to him is indicative of a severely limited parochial mindset. And believers say us skeptics are unimaginative!

Foerster is also unappreciative or ignorant of the level of understanding and knowledge the ancient Egyptians had attained in the fields of applied mathematics and geometry more than 500 years before the Serapeum of Saqqara was built. Watson points this out in her article as well:

It’s also not surprising that they could create a flat surface or angles that are exactly-ish 90 degrees. The Egyptians boast some of the earliest known texts on geometry, like the Rhind Papyrus (from around 1650 BCE) and the Moscow papyrus (from about 1850 BCE). The latter papyrus indicates that the Egyptians could approximate pi (as 3.16049) and find the volume of a truncated pyramid. It stands to reason that 500 years later, they would be able to carve a flat surface and make a corner of exactly-ish 90 degrees.

“Aww, what’s in the Box?”

If Foerster does not believe that the ancient Egyptians were capable of pulling off these architectural feats, and denies that the Saqqara stone boxes were intended to hold bulls, what does he believe the purpose of these sarcophagi to have been? He does not tell us his views on the matter in the video, being content to allow the fringe blogosphere to provide their own speculations and assertions. And this they have been willing and eager to do. Searching Google with the title of Foerster’s video turns up a number of blogs and forums that feature breathless and bizarre commentary on the video.

By far, the most common answer as to the stone boxes’ origin is that ancient aliens built them. The tinfoil-hat views expressed on the blog 2012: The Big Picture is representative of this line of thought:

I think you’ll find that these boxes underscore the fact that ancient man alone—as described in the Illuminati-approved history books— could not possibly have constructed these boxes, nor the pyramids themselves.

If the Egyptians had the technology to do this many thousands of years ago, where would they—and we—be now in our ability to construct buildings and excavate and relocate stone?

The answer I believe to be true: that technology came from the stars, and when the star beings left, or died off, their technology went with them, or was destroyed by those who wished to control us.

What did the ancient aliens of Egypt intend to bury in these sarcophagi? One claim, propagated on the forums of the online conspiracy/UFO believer community Godlike Productions, is that they were used to entomb the giants which roamed the earth back in those days.

Other fringe bloggers hold different views concerning the origin of the Saqqara boxes. Some implicate ancient angels in their construction. This strikes me as not much different than the alien hypothesis. After all, what criteria distinguish aliens from angels? If the celestial beings called angels really exist, wouldn’t they qualify as aliens under most modern definitions? But apparently the more biblically intoxicated woo-blogs, such as Tim Clark’s NoWorksSalvationApocalypseNow, have firmly-held doctrinal reasons for preferring angels to aliens. Clark describes himself as a “retired biblical archaeologist” and writes,

I think that this type of archaeology is amazing especially when you consider history based on the Bible. It is obvious that the technology displayed in Egypt was not from the local Egyptians. The world wants to give credit to Ancient Aliens to avoid discussing the Bible. However, If you believe the Bible and the story of the Fallen Angels, you will look at things differently. . . . I think that a case can be made for these giant boxes as being made for Nephilim hybrids, possibly the hybrid gods of ancient Egypt like Anubis. Of course, there are no remains in these tombs but who is to say what was in these sites before the public was allowed to view them.

“Who is to say” indeed? In the absence of any confirming evidence of Clark’s extraordinary claim, the reasonable and rational approach is to opt for the null hypothesis. The lack of any remains in the Saqqara tombs does not justify filling that gap in our knowledge with Nephilim hybrids.

For those who don’t follow Bible mythology or Christian UFOlogy, “Nephilim” are the giant offspring of fallen angels who are said to have come to earth in the distant past to copulate with human women in order to produce a hybrid race. There is, of course, no archaeological, paleontological or biological evidence of any kind to indicate that giant Nephilim once roamed our planet. I refer interested readers to Brett Palmer’s excellent 4-part documentary series on YouTube titled Giants of the Bible, which skeptically examines claims made by believers regarding biblical giants.

It makes orders of magnitude more sense to conclude that the Serapeum of Saqqara and the giant stone boxes it contains were built by humans who had a fondness for bulls and were about as intelligent as humans are known to be. There is no anomaly that rationally justifies invoking the existence of ancient aliens or angels. Not only is such a postulation too extraordinary in the absence of confirmatory evidence, it also demeans and belittles the ingenuity and creativity of human effort, which is far more awe-inspiring than the infantile notion that aliens or angels were compelled to think and act for us.

Related Posts

Edward Snowden and the Alien Conspiracy

Iguana Found on Mars?

The $100 Apocalypse


About Nathan Dickey

I am a freelance writer trying to finish my degree in Journalism. I attended Southern Oregon University in Ashland, Oregon. My interests are many, and include investigative reporting, science, philosophy, history, classic rock music, and pop culture analysis. My motivation in writing is to contribute what I can to the promotion of science and skepticism among the public. My goal is to use my journalism training to be active in the skeptical and freethought movement, analyzing dubious but popularly-believed claims involving the supernatural, the paranormal and religion.
This entry was posted in Conspiracy Theories, Skepticism and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

54 Responses to Demythologizing the Giant Stone Boxes of Egypt

  1. Ben Ringer says:

    You mild ad hominem argument is typical of pseudoskeptics who will not consider any evidence that challenges their view. Brien.Foersters approach to Egypt is based on two investigative sources: Khemitology, the native oral tradition. The typically biased approach of Western academia has been to ignore indigenous history, for example the native history states that the Great Pyramid was not a tomb.
    The second source, is the research of engineers like Christopher.Dunn, who are far more qualified to discuss the evidence and implications of precision manufacturing in Eygpt than you are. Your article suggests that you have not familiarized your self with the research of Christopher.Dunn who presents the obvious evidence and argument that the Eygptians would not of been capable of working granite to such precision with copper and stone tools. It’s axiomatic to any one who is capable of critical thinking and who is DISINTERESTED in the implications that can be drawn from such an analysis. The fact that engineers and scienctists are still confounded about how the Great Pyramid was built is loaded with implications, it’s time for an honest assessment of the evidence not ignorant rebuttals.

    • I am sufficiently familiar with the work of Christopher Dunn, enough to know that he is not taken seriously by any reputable archaeologists. The argument that “the Eygptians [sic] would not of [sic] been capable of working granite to such precision with copper and stone tools” is “obvious” only to those who, like Dunn, have approached the question with a preset conclusion already in mind. And no, there is no evidence for such a claim.

      “It’s axiomatic to any one who is capable of critical thinking and who is DISINTERESTED in the implications that can be drawn from such an analysis.”

      Wrong. I do not think you understand what “axiomatic” means. There is no logical, axiomatic progression from amazing ancient architecture to “It must have been the work of superior beings.” The implications drawn by Foerster and Dunn and others like them do not represent the work of a disinterested analysis. Again, they have approached the subject of Egyptian history and culture with a pre-formed conclusion and then tried to fit the data to that foregone conclusion.

      “The fact that engineers and scienctists [sic] are still confounded about how the Great Pyramid was built is loaded with implications, it’s time for an honest assessment of the evidence not ignorant rebuttals.”

      Wrong again. Engineers and scientists are NOT confounded about the building techniques that went into building the Pyramids. You are obviously not familiar with the work done by qualified researchers demonstrating that using ONLY ancient technology and muscle, human beings can move large stone blocks and set them in place piece-by-piece. Read Penn State University’s findings at the following link:

      Brien Foerster’s approach to the origins of Egyptian architecture is not based on honest evaluation and unbiased analysis. His approach is the same as yours: a glaringly obvious Argument from Ignorance / Argument from Personal Incredulity. You are essentially asserting that just because YOU cannot figure out how ancient Egyptians could have accomplished their architectural feats, therefore this means NO ONE can figure it out. In addition to being demonstrably wrong, this “aliens-of-the gaps” approach betrays an arrogant mindset that is borderline solipsistic in its subjective self-referential bias.

      • Totte says:

        Hi Nathan, you should really look for all the info online of the evidence that no simple tools have been used. For example the cross drilling with start inside one of the drill holes that don’t have an opening. If you search for the largest object moved you will find 6K ton light house that was moved on flat surface. It took them about a month to move 500m with todays technology. How do you explain the movement hundreds of stones that weigh +1K ton around the world. Some of them have been move km from mountains over valleys and up to mountains. It seems more realistic that the pyramids and the other amazing ruins around the world was built by men/women with advanced machines and that the technology was lost during some event in the past. New civilizations have come and claimed the lost broken cities and tried to rebuild. Some have made up some ridiculous stories of gods and made people to slaves and so on. Made the structures to graves etc. because they don’t know better. If you look at the big picture it becomes clear. You have a Ice age cycle. You have earth quakes. Our solar system have a cycle in our galaxy. all this = Cycle of destruction. The oldest bones of men that have been found is 160 000 years and that is just what have been found, so we have been around much longer. In the end it will always be speculations what happen in the past. The only thing that remains during time is stone. If we all died the only evidence that we have existed would be the big stone structures but even them will be gone with time. Metal concrete wood plastic etc will disappear in only a few thousand years. Technology can be lost in a few generations. We have reinvented a lot of things many times and we still do it today. If you are an experienced engineer you will understand that. There are no evidence that exist that tells who build all these amazing structures. But all the evidence say that the builders had advance technology.

      • This is hack job. Details to come.

  2. Ben Ringer says:

    I’m well aware of the work of Professor Michel Barsoum but as that article notes:

    “Although these findings answer some of the questions about the pyramids, Barsoum says the mystery of how they were built is far from solved. For example, he has been unable to determine how granite beams — spanning kings’ chambers and weighing as much as 70 tons each — were cut with nothing harder than copper and hauled in place….and

    ….The type of concrete pyramid builders used could reduce pollution and outlast Portland cement, the most common type of modern cement.”

    It begs the question of how a culture that was just out of the Stone Age had the chemical knowledge to make geo polymers better than we can now; we’re actually learning from them!

    I would add that they also moved the 70 ton granite from a quarry 500 miles away, raised it up the structure of the pyramid to a height of 140 feet+ and aligned the Great Pyramid to true north to within .05 degrees. The great pyramid is aligned as accurately as the Paris observatory.

    There is no evidence that the Eygptians could work granite with stone and copper tools, to precision that is within modern industrial standards; as attested by engineers like Chris.Dunn et al who have discovered tolerances comparable to a human hair by measursing the surface and corners in granite boxes with a modern precision square. There is plenty of evidence that is being ignored because it dose not fit our understanding of history, and the principal of Occam’s razor dose not hold when the simplist explanation dose not satisfy the evidence of superlative workmanship. This is the most plausible theory on the Great Pyramid and the sophistication in Giza:

  3. Pingback: Demythologizing the Martian Beacon | Skeptical Inquests: A Blog by Nathan Dickey

  4. Ben Ringer says:

    And one more thing, who mentioned aliens?

  5. What do the hieroglyphs say, on the sides of the stone boxes? Why does no one mention it?

  6. Phil Retford says:

    I too would like to know what the hieroglyphs say.

  7. Clearly you have not been able to comprehend that technologically speaking, the dynastic Egyptians could not have made the boxes in the Serapeum. I have never referred to the actual creators of these boxes being aliens or Nephilim.

    • And have you actually been to Egypt yourself?

    • Brien, notice that I never implied that you yourself have made reference to aliens or Nephilim. I am aware of your consistent vague and noncommittal approach on the subject of who or what you think built all the structures featured in your videos. The second part of my post is simply a commentary on the fringe belief in alien/Nephilim, the adherents of which are attracted to your content, whether you knowingly cater to them or not.

      Also, your name is associated with the “Ancient Aliens” pseudohistory series. Without having to peg you as a believer in that sort of thing, that association does make one wonder.

      Why couldn’t the dynastic Egyptians have made the Serapeum boxes? As I pointed out in the article, there is no real anomaly that requires us to take credit away from the dynastic Egyptians in this case. They were not stupid or intellectually inferior just because they lived a long time ago. That is what you have been unable to comprehend.

      I have never been to Egypt myself, but it doesn’t matter. My research and fact-checking suffices for the scope of what I discuss in this article. But more importantly, you are the one making the extraordinary claim. The burden of proof is yours.

      • your “source”

        only mentions how blocks were pulled to a pyramid, which as we all know is out in the open, plenty of space for 1000 men here and 1000 men there

        but this article is about the seraphium at saqqara

        It IS NOT a wide open space

        There IS NOT clearance for 1000 men or whatever number required to pull 70 ton (140,000 LBS!) pieces

        There IS NOT evidence of mummified bulls in the boxes

      • Fredrick says:

        I think Ben has made some great points and took some steam out of your “skeptical” analysis of the video. I agree that the personal statements made about “no way for a bull” is ridiculous, humans have historically wasted precious resources in the pursuit of illumination. The fact is that copper/stone tools are not able to create works of this precision and tolerance. And microscopic analysis should reveal the type of tools to both rough and polish these surfaces. According to Wiki much of this site was already excavated in “ancient” times so no wonder there are no artifacts left.

        As far as engineers NOT being confounded about being able to move large blocks I have one word; Baalbeck These stones DO confound scientists/engineers. Several blocks over 500 tonnes and no flat surface.. Granted, the largest (1650 tonne) may have not been moved.

        It’s doubtful that Aliens created these structures but the classically trained archeologists seem to be incapable of imagining advanced HUMAN civilization that may have existed thousands or even hundreds of thousands of years ago. Remember, in a thousand years from now our own current technology will be stone age and our successors with be the “aliens”

      • Fredrick says:

        I would also like to add that I think it is possible for craftsmen to work stone to these tolerances without lasers, ion drills or whatever.. We just haven’t figured out how they did it yet. I don’t know if diamonds were prevalent in Egypt or South America but perhaps they saw the value in this gem as a tool. I’m also quite intrigued by Joseph Davidovits’s theory of forms and geopolymeres. It’s a brilliant possibility but does not explain everything..

  8. Pingback: The Elusive Giants of Ancient Arkansas | Skeptical Inquests: A Blog by Nathan Dickey

  9. Stuart says:

    All i can take from this article is that in the end – everyone has postulated their opinions (including the armchair critics) – and basically no one has a clue or knows what the 50-100 Ton Serapeum carved boxes with lids were for… it is another mystery our so called ‘modern civilization’ will never comprehend like so many others in ancient history…

  10. Kester Fernando says:

    I am very interested to hear Nathan’s point of view in terms of Ben Ringer’s last post. Nathan what are your thoughts please?
    Additionally I am extremely interested also on your analysis of how you believe the Dynastic Egyptians were able to insert those boxes into an underground chamber? I am also not subscribing to Angels nor Aliens, however, I do believe that from documented and scientifically accepted historical evidence and facts that the Egyptians did not possess the relevant enabling technology. Therefore if the Egyptians themselves were unable to do so then Brian’s point of enquiry is a valid one which does not yet have a satisfactory answer.
    So in terms of getting to the bottom of the matter I think we ought to be exploring the answer to the question he poses.

  11. Mark L says:

    Brien is not quick to say “Aliens” as he mainly points out lost technology…. But here’s a most interesting short Video that make a lot of sense on how these big stone were worked and moved:

  12. FattyZ says:

    Giants with laser cutting tools.

  13. derp says:

    it where they store their beer mate

  14. Doc Lemm says:

    No one knows it all about what was going way back in the early dynasties, Brien may offer his rendition but it’s nothing get riled about… Your attack on Brien is way over done.

    The Stone Aphis Bull Coffins at Giza, were machined and there is no denying that… Or else show us how it was done. In other words, prove your point. If you ever had any precision manufacturing experience you would understand what Dunn and Brien are talking about. I got years of it, made parts to a ten thousandths of an inch. You need special equipment to do that and even measure it. Don’t be so thick headed please.

    The so called Ancient Astronaut theories very and mostly are presented in the form of speculation and postulations because “science” itself is speculating. To this day the experts are still guessing. Anyone guess is as good as another until you add up the evidence.

    The Annunaki, are the most famous group of “aliens” and they created man as a work slave and if you doubt that then you haven’t been paying attention to what the Sumerians themselves wrote.
    The “Gods” didn’t build anything, they had the humans do it. Understand?

    • Yes. They were all machined by factory workers with big hard cutting machines made by machine makers using copper and stone machine making tools. How else would they have made them except this way!!!! I used to make cow drinking troughs that weight 8 tons because the cows were big in my days. I only used a copper spoon and a stone axe to carve them out. It took 8 years to half finish 1 third of the based and twice that long to straighten out the bumps but eventually the water leaked out through the cracks caused by heating to boiling point and then throwing cold water over it 72 times. The crack was very straight but the spoon was bent. I saw my father spooning a 22 ton milk jug for big Bertha, the largest cow, only for her to pish on it and break it in two!! Her pish was hot stuff. The Egyptians were the first gypsies and that’s were they learned how to make tin Tinkers) And tin expands when heated and breaks stone if inserted into a crack. My Granny inserted one into hers, it got so wide Grand Pa couldn’t fill it ever after.

  15. hashish says:

    what was the point of this blog, other than a huge rant and waste of everyones time.

    that cant be built even today is the point, you don’t explain how they were made, all points are irrelevant regarding what was it used for by the egyptians, as they may have just found them and used them for other purposes.

    I am all for debunking but actually bring something to the table.

  16. Philbert says:

    What a waste of time this article is. It does nothing to de-mythologize anything, or to expand our knowledge or even address the questions about the Serapeum and the giant granite boxes. After misunderstanding & insulting Ben Ringer in an adolescent youtube comments battle type fashion, in conclusion Nathan Dickey goes on to support the official sad story that consistently ignores the fact that it is impossible to cut rose granite with the bronze tools of the dynastic Egyptians. Evidence shows also that the boxes that were blasted open in 1850 with dynamite held nothing – no bulls, in any of them. There is no evidence offered for the construction of the narrow tunnels, how the boxes were dragged 400 miles and placed underground in these narrow chambers, or why the hieroglyphics are merely scratched into the surface, instead of being impressively cut deeply into it.
    It would be nice for a change to see someone who intelligently allows for the fact that it is possible for someone to be unconvinced by the official story, whilst not automatically being an avid ancient alien believer – it is possible to be open and undecided, especially in the face of the facts.
    As for the burden of proof – it applies more to the archaeologists who claim and offer very little evidence for their bull story.
    The facts themselves are proof, and they may be a burden – but you just can’t dismiss them offhand by hiding behind the mainstream.

  17. allan says:

    ill tell u how egyptians did it…working toghter something we forgot many many years ago.. the end

  18. Everything can be done if you have all the time and manpower in the world. Ancient Egyptians had them both.

  19. hesligus says:

    Why assume it was Aliens or primitive Egyptians. Why can it not be very clever Egyptians. Anyone with Engineering experience would recognise that it is not the moving alone of these stone objects that is remarkable, it is the manufacture of the boxes and other objects from this period in Egypt. Anyone who has manufactured objects to high tolerances know that is much harder to work to the degree of precision exhibited in some cases here than it is just to that detectable to the human eye.
    History is very clear that the Egyptians worshiped the Apis Bulls and it is uncontestable that man will go to great lengths to build and manufacture amazing things to this end. That does not explain what is exhibited in the boxes here and all over ancient Egypt.
    It is reasonable to assume from the perspective of an engineer that the historians and archeologists view of Egyptian technology is lacking. It is not enough to have geometry. Machining Stone to this level of accuracy is very difficult. Can I respectfully suggest that our understanding of technology for this period is at best incomplete. Further I would suggest that though you seem to be well educated and intelligent your expertise in this area is lacking.

  20. Max Ximenez says:

    Well, if the granite is too hard and it would just be possible to be carved out with steel tools wich we know are recent, tham How Could you explain that stone boxes of 80 tons. each could be manipulated???

  21. JackyR says:

    Once you’ve chosen a side or the other, you’re stuck !

  22. Chris says:

    So you’re saying that since they really liked bulls they were able to make the boxes and move them into place. Got it. Thanks for the bulletproof insight.

  23. Florimond says:

    Don’t worry Nathan, you are not the first one and you won’t be the last to fall into the trap, of criticising the form instead of the content of the question. You are indeed criticising the conclusion of the author and the authors beliefs itself, which I do not agree either myself (it’s just an opinion), instead of looking at the real issue here. Is it possible to manufacture such a tomb, made of granit, with such a level of precision and with the simplest of tools? As a Mechanical engineer I would say, no. To reach a flatness with a tolerance of 0,01 inch, or even finer, would require mechanical tools, as the a human being cannot perform and control at that level of precision without laser, computer or optical guided tools. How can I say such a thing? because we’ve achieve such a level of precision with modern methods and so far we haven’t come anywhere close with simple or primitive tools.

    So far we have only proven that Ancient Egyptians didn’t have any slaves working around the pyramid. Which makes sense as you would need qualified and skilled workers to built these incredible monuments. All other attempts of proving that it was possible to built high precision megalithic structures with simple tools have been failures, such as a Japanese team in 1978 or PBS with the Nova project in 1991.

    All we can say for certain is that we don’t know and everything that has been said about the pyramids are just theories which need to be proven with the help of structure and mechanical engineers, geologists, architects, mathematicians, etc, using the scientific method.

    • I joked earlier in this thread but on a serious note, a mother may have been ordered to bear a child specifically for smoothing stone. He or she would have polished for hours every day seven days per week for ten years, or more, using other types of indigenous rock or even copper for that matter (How do we know that iron was not accidentally found in some hot molten pit and brought here by the ancients?).

  24. I’ve got three points in response to your comment, Florimond,

    1. Most of the stone structures in Egypt, including the pyramids, were made of sandstone, not granite. The Serapeum of Saqqara boxes are an exception to this general rule.

    2. Building precision structures IS possible without lasers, computers and optical guides. The Greek Parthenon and the Roman Coliseum were precision built. So was the entire city of Aberdeen in Scotland, many hundreds of years ago. And oh by the way, Aberdeen was also constructed from granite (hence its nickname “Granite City”).

    3. The pyramids were not built by slave labor (you imply that I assume this). But they WERE built by skilled and qualified workers. Ancient Egypt had entire permanent townships dedicated to skilled workers. The notion that the pyramids or any other structure in ancient Egypt was built solely by slave labor is a myth. Here’s a good article on the subject:

    • Florimond says:

      Hello Nathan,

      Thank you for your interesting reply. First of all your third point actually confirmed what I said. I do know the Ancient Egyptian used qualified workers and no slaves. As I said it makes sense as you would need skilled workers to achieve something of great quality.

      Then regarding the stone structures, they were indeed mostly made of sandstone AND limestone. Which makes the use of granite even more interesting when we know they had to bring it all the way from Aswan, 500 miles south from Giza and Memphis. And in the end they still made the Serapeum out of granite, which brings the questions of how, and why in granite when they could have made it so much more easily with limestone. In the end it does not take away the level of precision achieved.

      And regarding the precision level on the Serapeum and the memphis and Giza complex in general, we are talking to the millimetre or tenth or hundredth of millimetres. Something whch as only been achieved with machines and/or modern tools. For the Parthenon and the Colosseum we are talking of a precision at least ten time less.

      Also you are taking for argument that it is normal to think that Ancient Egyptians knew how to make high precision buildings because the Greeks and Romans knew how to make high precision building. First of all the Parthenon and the Colosseum were built 2000 and 2500 years AFTER the pyramid golden age (2600 – 2500 BC). It is a bit like saying that the precision found in the Parthenon is normal because we can find it in the 17th century buildings… Second, the Parthenon was made out of marble, which is heavier but softer than limestone and the Romans used also tons of concrete to build the Colosseum which help greatly with the masonry to achieve higher precision.

      And finally I want to thank you for mentioning Aberdeen, which gives me another excuse to go to Scotland. So I did a bit of research and it looks like that most of the granite buildings were made in the 18th and 19th century, which makes me wonder. Do you think that the Scots had, even in the 12th century, as primitive tools as in the Old Kingdom to make your comparison valid? Or you just couldn’t find any other example of granit monument that you though “what the hell, I just might throw Aberdeen in the mix just to confuse everyone a bit more.”?

      Looking forward to your feedback.

  25. Pat says:

    Nathan only picks debates with the people who he thinks he’s got a chance with, I’ve seen so many people call you out on certain questions and you don’t want to answer, you gave 0 evidence as to what the egyptions used to move or make all of the megalithic stones with the technology they had, ramble the outlines but give no insight or detail as to what you’re talking about in this article. Typical

  26. Zain says:

    The only reason people believe in the Ancient Alien theory ( which is farcical ! ) is because modern science wants to claim that our ancestors were morons that could barely feed themselves.
    What we are finding all over the world at megalithic sites contradicts EVERYTHING we have been
    taught. Petra,Baalbek and Cappadocia are just a few sites that prove modern science is WRONG about our ancestors and this is based on artifacts found at these sites …
    we can not move stones that weigh 1650 tonnes over terrain that trucks have no access to,FACT !
    Science claims ( Mohs hardness scale ) that copper rates at 2.5-3.0 in hardness
    Granite ( Quartz ) has a rating of 7 so scientifically speaking the Egyptians did not use
    copper to shape there granite stones …PERIOD !
    Wood has a hardness rating of 3,Copper has a hardness rating 2.5 – 3.0
    Can wood carve granite ?
    Why do People like Rebecca Watson and yourself ignore SCIENCE ?

  27. Nick Russo says:

    This article made me mad at first, but then the well educated replies that followed it gave me a sense of peace. I still find it amazing thou, that some people take the “official” academic views like untouchable truth, and by consequence, denying even the most serious research, for the sole reason that it challenges the above mentioned views.
    Furthermore, anybody saying that Chris Dunn’s work isnt worth a dime, because “reputable” archeologists say so (people like Zahi Hawass and the likes, i suppose) clearly havent even read the preface on any of his books, cause even you have a hard time with the power plant theory, which i can understand, to a point, his analysis of ancient stonework is unbiased and true to the scientific method, something that cant be said for most archeological theories, which are mostly based on unverifiable written records and very debatable dating.
    These pointless attaks to anybody challenging academia are childish at best, lead us nowhere and most important, dont give any sort of explaination, but instead denigrate the ones that try.
    And this is actually a good article, written by an engieer, and about, you guessed it, engineering!
    I re post it in the hope you will read it.

  28. What a waste of time reading this article. The comments however just prove to me that there are many questions still unanswered and this is a case that’s going to be ‘open’ for a very long time. So thanks, uneducated skeptic for posting this! It’s allowed me to find the truth, not in your scepticism, but in the replies it’s invited.

  29. c kealhofer says:

    If the granite boxes in the serapeaum were not made to bury bulls, then what were they for? As somebody mentioned, I haven’t seen any other theories. I would like to present my own idea for discussion. In one of the videos of Chris Dunne investigating the boxes, he notes that the precision fit of the lids would create an air tight seal. They obviously went to great efforts to preserve SOMETHING for posterity. Could it have been intended to store their records? It appears that they were still working on the boxes when work abruptly stopped, and so maybe something happened and they weren’t able to fill the boxes as was the plan. The hall of records without the records!

  30. cymatx144 says:

    We need to keep in mind that this is research and research is the systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions. That is..New conclusions are exactly what is required for a better understanding of what was actually going on in ancient times. We need people/ researchers with a fresh angle on the subject. Even with all the explanations given forth to this day there are a great many things we still can not far as this little essay goes it was not a waste of time as far as i see it we are all doing research here..thanks to all of you.

  31. I love the part where the slave is carrying blocks. Right what kind of human can carry 50 ton stones? I believe it shows Mud bricks.

  32. jwdavis1957 says:

    And the authors ignorance of Biblical fact is proof of his disinterest in exploring all possibilities. I, too, used to scoff at the idea of giants, but years of sincerely seeking the truth proved to me that the giants did exist, and in rather large numbers on every continent.

    • But were you really “sincerely seeking the truth,” or simply looking for confirmation of a preconceived conclusion? As a skeptic, I personally see no reason to scoff the claim that giants once existed. It’s not the most constructive approach, at least. But I am skeptical of the claim because it is an extraordinary one that requires extraordinary evidence. If giants existed “in rather large numbers on every continent,” where are the skeletal remains and other hard anthropological evidence? Where can I see this evidence for myself (not simply a blog post, website, or conspiracy documentary)? Why isn’t the supposed existence of giants an accepted part of the established, peer-reviewed scholarly literature?

      • Matt D says:

        Recently I learned that any “evidence” that does not fit the orthodox ideology is classified as “an anomaly” and is subsequently swept under the rug, giving no one else the opportunity to study it. If Science would accept that it does not know the answers sometimes, perhaps we could start to examine some of these “anomalies” and piece together a whole other story. The giants…I believe many skeletal remains have been found over time, are immediately reported to “the authorities”, and are never seen again.

        I have thoroughly enjoyed reading this article because I accept many different points of view in search of the ‘truth’. I still have not discovered how the truth will change anything, but I have a feeling that those who would not want the truth to be exposed, know exactly why they are keeping it from the public.

  33. Nathan says:




  35. Jake says:

    I liked the article but liked the responses even more. Especially Florimond’s view on this subject and how he successfully challenged Nathan.
    I believe that there are things we simply cannot explain, therefore the mainstream scientist’s opinion is as valid as the person whole challenges that belief. We have to take in consideration that people on both side made their research so it always annoys me how somebody like Nathan says “well how can you ignore the research on this”, when he clearly ignores the research done by people of the other side of the spectrum. And when you take UFOs as evidence of extraterrestrial visitors (and there’s a lot of debating there too) as well as the records of the Sumerians about gods from the stars descending down to earth and teaching humans knowledge, then even the ancient aliens theory can be taken more seriously!

  36. ( There is, of course, no archaeological, paleontological or biological evidence of any kind to indicate that giant Nephilim once roamed our planet) .. This statement is totally unfair – and the series of videos “Giants of the Bible” to prove that there were no Giants is not convinced .. he is just repeating the word “It cant be” – “it is impossible”, without working on providing proofs.
    Please check “huge axe in crete island, Giant coffins in Egyptian museum, Horemheb rings Egyptian ring in louver museum” to see that there is real human tools that needs some attention

  37. Liman says:

    I read the article and the comments.

    I am using this opportunity to ask a few questions because I am trying to find some answers.
    I am in no way an expert and English is not my main tongue.

    If someone can point to scientific data, a page, a link that is relevant to my question please.

    1. Is there any public data on the age of the “Stone Boxes Of The Serapeum”? I mean scientific analysis of any element within the complex?

    2. What is below the boxes? Has a thermal scan, space archaeology scan been made or any scan at all to check what is immediately under the boxes? How about deeper under the complex? water, iron, tunnels, anything?

    3. This question is already here but I am going to ask again since time has passed and google is not showing any results whatsoever; have the hieroglyphs been translated?

    I am asking number one because I am not eager to take everything for granted what wikipedia is writing. There I read that the work on this site lasted from 1350 BC to 361BC, that is around 1000 years. NO records of the site on any tablet, painting, stonewall or anywhere else after it was there for a millennia?

    Question number two is because of the 2015 discovery of the Hawara Labyrinth in Egypt, with the use of space archaeology. It is possible to go as deep as 6 kilometers.

    question three is something obvious, why is there no translation of the hieroglyphs, 2 years after the discovery

    I personally like the the idea mentioned in the video by Brien about them being capacitors or batteries.

    If there is an underground iron deposit or a flow of underground water it would generate an electromagnetic field which would support the piezoelectric effect. The quartz in the granite would be the key.

    after all granite is an igneous rock with between 20% and 60% quartz by volume

    Thank you for your time and possible answers.

    “My comment is in no way meant to be negative in any way or form.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s