Coral Castle seems to be a never ending mystery. You may not have seen the
castle itself, but if you have airline tickets to a nearby area, it is definitely worth
taking a look. It is not often you get the chance to see an ancient Megalith
construction. In the mean time why not read the following on the topic?
On Proving
Ancient Megalith Construction
by Jim Solley
Elizabeth
City, NC |
Copyright by
Jim Solley
All rights reserved.
Reprinted with permission
|
Coral
Castle is an unsolved megalith whose secrets of construction can be
uncovered and proved using only information found on the Internet.
This article presents the proof and links the technology used to
construct it to a scientist's theory for Egyptian pyramid
construction that was rejected several decades ago.
Acknowledgment
CHRIST
JESUS – HIS help was essential.
Preface
“Rely
not on what you see, but what you know.”
---[Remo Williams: The
Adventure Begins] ---Chuin
Define
the problem. Determine the cause. Eliminate the cause. These three
sentences describe the three-step problem-solving method used by the
US Military circa WWII. It is an effective tool that can be applied
to all kinds of problems---not just those encountered on a
battlefield.
This
is the second and final rewrite of this article. The earlier versions
were written at a time when it seemed to me that pyramid construction
would never be proved---but not because it was beyond our capability.
There was no discussion of the three-step method in those versions,
hence the problem definition was never stated. It may be useful for
this version to know that the three-step method was used, and the
problem definition that was of interest to me was: In 1969, modern
man accomplished the amazing technological feat of going to the moon
and safely returning, but in the early years of the next century with
far more advanced technology, we still can't prove how the pyramids
were constructed. Ancient men all over the globe solved the problem,
but given all of our advantages, no modern man can. What's wrong with
this picture? What's stopping us?
That
was the right question to ask because once I knew what was stopping
us, it wasn't long before I knew the solution. Once I knew the
solution, then I soon found evidence that a sizable number of modern
men and women owned the same theory. Various media, websites, forums,
and blogs show this, and some of the media is from the early '70s.
The problem wasn't that no one could solve the mystery; it was that
the theory was impossible to prove until recently.
The
idea was presented in the earlier versions that the current cause of
failure is that inaccessibility to the pyramids forces us to use the
wrong methodology. The general consensus of opinion is that pyramid
construction is an engineering problem. Hence, most interested
parties are explicitly or implicitly using the engineering
methodology to attempt to solve it. Engineers think in terms of, How
do you take the resources that are available and use them to build
things? But this is the wrong methodology for solving the pyramids.
When we think like an engineer, we get our ideas of how to build
things. Since everyone has their own idea, there are many theories.
In the case of pyramid construction, we don't want our ideas; we want
ancient man's. He did the engineering. To get his ideas requires use
of the reverse engineering methodology. To reverse engineer an
object, it is necessary to have access to the object so that we may
do the opposite of building it which is to take it apart, break it
down into its most basic components, and analyze them. But it's
impossible to take anything apart if you don't have access to it. As
virtually no one on the planet has access to the pyramids, virtually
no one has any chance of proving them. Of the few archaeologists who
do have access, they weren't permitted to take them apart until
recently. Thus, no modern man could prove how they were built.
The
earlier versions of this article were focused on exposing the current
primary cause of failure as being inaccessibility. Once the cause is
determined, then we know what must be done to eliminate it.
Near
the beginning of 2006, I learned that a team of archaeologists with
the appropriate skills and equipment had been granted access in the
Summer of 2005. That called for this final rewrite as the earlier
versions had been made obsolete. No longer was there a need to argue
for doing reverse engineering when it currently was being done. This
rewrite contains a preview of the expected results that I anticipated
would be ready for presentation in the second half of 2008 and a
proof of Coral Castle construction to show its relationship to the
anticipated results.
On
1 December 2006, however, there was a surprise that called for this
Preface to be written. An announcement was made that the theory
proposed by this article had been proved by a different team of
scientists. They were an international team of materials scientists
that included Dr. Michel Barsoum of Drexel University in Pennsylvania
and Dr. Giles Hug of the French National Aerospace Research Agency. I
can only surmise that the reason this team of non-archaeologists was
chosen was for their special skills and that they weren't attempting
to prove their own theory. Hence, they were unbiased. Their purpose
was to prove or disprove the theory proposed by another scientist.
The result of their work is that the theory was proved.
All
versions of this article are now obsolete because the theory proposed
herein no longer is a theory. It has been promoted to an established
scientific fact that has been published in a scientific journal.
Thus, the only remaining reasons for reading this article are to see
the proof of Coral Castle and view the thought processes that went
into solving it from a lay person's perspective.
Of
all unsolved stone megaliths, Coral Castle is the only one that can
be proved without having access and permission to take it apart. One
among several reasons is that others have had access and permission,
have partially taken it apart, and have made their findings available
to the public. That public information is sufficient to prove the
general concept used to construct it. It is insufficient to get all
the details, but the general concept can be proved, and it is a match
for the now-proved means used to construct the pyramids.
This
is the
link
to the announcement of the pyramids having been proved.
Reverse
engineering and detective work employ the same principles. The
explanations to follow are from the perspective of detective work as
that is generally more familiar.
Introduction
The
article begins with a discussion of proof to establish a basis for
the quality of proof to be measured. Next, a brief history of a
rejected theory for Egyptian pyramid construction is presented.
Following that is a proof of Coral Castle construction. Last, a
frequently asked question is answered.
The
term pyramids refers to the Egyptian pyramids.
Proof
An
extract from a dictionary defines proof as: That degree of evidence
which convinces the mind of any truth or fact, and produces belief.
Proof
relies exclusively upon the amount and quality of evidence. This
applies to a trial in a court of law and to scientific theories, and
many of the same rules apply. All theories are innocent (they didn't
do it) until they are proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The
owner of a theory is the prosecutor who is responsible for proving
that the suspect (his or her theory) is guilty.
In
the western world, the symbol for justice is a blindfolded lady
holding a scale. Nothing but evidence is placed on the scale, and we
are the jury who weighs it. If all theories have about the same
amount and weight of evidence, then the scale barely tips, and we may
find it impossible to determine which, if any, is correct. If a
theory has heavy evidence to support it, then the scale tips in its
favor and causes us to believe that it is correct. There are times,
however, when we don't have all of the important evidence. Missing
evidence that is crucial to a case can cause us to convict innocent
theories and/or acquit guilty theories. If we render the wrong
verdict because we are missing crucial evidence, then it is
unfortunate, but we are blameless because no one can weigh evidence
that they don't have.
For
example, circa 340BC, Aristotle proposed a theory that the world is
round. He knew that a lunar eclipse occurs when Earth blocks the
light of the Sun and that the leading and trailing edges of the
shadow on the Moon always are opposing arcs of a circle. He noticed
that the North Star is closer to the horizon in the South (Egypt)
than it is in the North (Greece). If the world was flat, then it
should appear at the same height everywhere. He noticed that when
ships sail beyond the horizon and irrespective of their direction of
travel, always the last thing visible is the tips of their sails. But
to prove that a round world is feasible, evidence must be produced
that proves that we won't fall off of a round world. Aristotle
couldn't produce it. Missing evidence about gravity meant that there
was reasonable doubt. Round was acquitted, and flat remained
convicted. Before we would change our minds, overwhelming evidence
had to be found in the form of a demonstration by Christopher
Columbus that proved that it is feasible for us not to fall off of a
round world.
Aristotle
couldn't get a conviction for round, but it was useful to science for
him to present his evidence and put forth his observations. Some
would find his interpretation of the evidence to be worthy of further
investigation. Since double jeopardy doesn't apply to scientific
theories, it is not necessarily a bad thing for a scientist to
present a theory that can't be convicted at the time it is presented.
In fact, a number of scientists have done this for the pyramids.
Evidence
is any actual or implied statement or claim that has been verified to
be true or false. Verified statements and claims are facts, and facts
are evidence. Anyone can verify a statement or claim, but after
initial verification, others must be able to repeat the verification
and get the same result.
Verification
is the foundation of detective work and the means by which detectives
acquire all the important facts about a case that are essential to
proving it. For example, after they hear an alibi which is a
statement made by a suspect, it is unknown if the suspect is being
truthful. Unless the alibi is verified, it is not evidence. To
convert it to evidence the detectives verify it. If it is found to be
true, then it becomes evidence that supports the theory that the
suspect is innocent. If it is found to be false, then it becomes
evidence that supports the theory that the suspect is guilty. Either
way the detectives gain information that helps them make progress. If
the alibi is true, then they can eliminate the suspect and pursue
another path. If the alibi is false, then they have a path to follow
for further investigation. Evidence shows the paths to avoid, and it
reveals the path that should be followed through the maze to arrive
at the truth.
An
unverified statement or claim is an assumption, also known as a
guess. Guessing gives us an initial path to try, but only
verification can tell us if it is the correct path. Consider the
alibi just mentioned. If we assume that the suspect is being truthful
and treat it as if it were factual without verifying it, then we may
be making a mistake by avoiding the correct path. If a guilty suspect
is eliminated, then there is zero chance of solving the case unless
that suspect is reexamined at some future date. One wrong guess is
all it takes to become hopelessly lost. That is why the prime
directive of detective work is, Verify everything.
Since
no modern man witnessed Egyptian pyramid construction, all of us are
guessing. Guessing is good. It gives us a great number of paths to
try, but because no modern man witnessed their construction, guesses
must be verified using only hard evidence---not someone's story or
opinion. Unverified stories, opinions, statements, and claims are
potential sources of confusion that can lead to the wrong path. The
only safe way to handle them is to keep them in mind and investigate
any that seem promising, but don't accept them as facts and don't
commit to that path until they have been verified.
Science
is flexible. It only accepts theories that have that degree of
evidence that produces belief at the time they are presented, but it
recognizes that future discoveries could produce evidence that would
tip the scale in another direction. It handles this possibility by
giving every theory for pyramid construction a permanent right to be
evaluated or reevaluated as soon as that degree of evidence becomes
available to support it. This holds true even if another theory
currently is considered to be proved. The idea is that if a proved
theory truly is correct as it stands, then it will stand for all time
because no competing theory will ever be able to mount that degree of
evidence against it. If, however, missing evidence has caused us to
render the wrong verdict, then science wants to know about it, and
corrections will be made as soon as it is discovered that corrections
are necessary. Thus, the playing field of science is level and fair
to every owner of every theory.
The
following paragraphs describe the kind of evidence needed to prove
the pyramids.
When
we plan a project, the first thing we do is an evaluation to
determine technologies that would be well-suited to it. For example,
if we plan to till the earth, then we wouldn't consider using a table
saw because it is ill-suited. If we have a hoe, then it would be
considered because it is well-suited. If we have a plow, a mule, and
a chicken, then the plow and mule would be considered, but not the
chicken.
When
more than one technology is well-suited to a project, people tend to
use the most efficient. If the earth to be tilled is a
six-foot-diameter circular flower bed with a brick border around its
perimeter and a tree at its center, then the tendency is to use the
hoe because it would be more efficient than the plow and mule. If the
earth to be tilled is a 40-acre field, then the tendency is to use
the plow and mule rather than the hoe. If we also have a tractor,
then the tendency is to use it rather than the plow and mule. For us,
it is just a matter of choosing the most efficient technology at our
disposal because the most efficient is the best-suited. But
irrespective of efficiency, it is impossible for us to use anything
that we don't have. If we don't have a tractor at our disposal, then
it is impossible for us to use one.
Therefore,
to do a project, the minimum requirements are that we must use
technology that is well-suited to it, and we must have that
technology. If both requirements are met, then we have a feasible
technology that we can use. If either requirement is unmet, then the
technology is infeasible, and we can't use it.
When
proving how others performed a project, we must consider the same
things for them that we would for ourselves. Whatever technology a
theory proposes, evidence must be produced that proves that those who
performed the project had the technology, and evidence must be
produced that proves that the technology is well-suited. A
demonstration comprises evidence of suitability. Producing documents
written by those who performed the project that describes the
technology and/or producing an example of the technology found near
the project that has been dated to the time of the project or earlier
comprises evidence that they had the technology. A proposed
technology must be proved to be feasible before it has any chance of
being convicted by the scientific community with one exception soon
to be discussed.
Unsolved
stone megaliths can be divided into two categories with respect to
feasibility. For convenience, let's call them non-extreme and
extreme. Any unsolved stone megalith that has one or more feasible
technologies proposed for its construction is a member of the
non-extreme category. Examples are the pyramids and Stonehenge.
Examples of feasible technologies that have been proposed for their
construction are rollers, sledges, and levers. Members of the
non-extreme category have stones whose individual features present
construction problems that have a level of difficulty comparable to
the stones found in most other unsolved stone megaliths.
There
is only one way to prove how a member of the non-extreme category was
constructed. Overwhelming hard evidence must be found that proves
that the technology proposed by a theory was used. If it can be
proved that a technology was used, then obviously that technology is
well-suited, and obviously those who performed the project had it. It
would pass the feasibility test. But the most difficult stone
megaliths to prove are members of the non-extreme category.
Any
unsolved stone megalith that has no feasible technologies proposed
for its construction is a member of the extreme category. Examples
are the retaining wall at the Temple of Jupiter and Coral Castle.
Members of the extreme category have stones whose individual features
present construction problems that have a level of difficulty that is
extreme when compared to the stones found in most other unsolved
stone megaliths. For example, there are only 27 blocks of limestone
in the retaining wall at the Temple of Jupiter, but the lightest
weighs about 675,000 pounds. There are three that rest about 20 feet
above ground that each weigh about 1,750,000 pounds. Only in the last
century were machines invented that are capable of lifting that much
weight. It seems that ancient man must have had a machine with modern
capabilities, but there is no evidence that he had one. Without such
a machine, it seems that no well-suited technology even exists. Thus,
no theories for construction of the retaining wall have passed the
feasibility test.
A
member of the extreme category may be proved using the same means
that must be used to prove a member of the non-extreme category, and
it may also be proved by using an alternate means that only requires
the proposed technology to pass part of the feasibility test. The
alternate means is to propose a technology and produce hard
evidence that proves that it is the only technology that is
well-suited to the project that is within reach of the builders to
acquire and use. Within reach means that the builders had all the
resources including knowledge, skills, and materials that are
essential to manufacturing and using the technology. The alternate
means doesn't produce hard evidence that the builders had the
technology, but the quality of the evidence is that degree of
evidence needed to convince the mind that the builders had the
technology and that they used it, and that fits the definition of
proof. The easiest stone megaliths to prove are members of the
extreme category because there are two ways to prove them, and the
alternate means is much simpler.
The
technology soon to be discussed is well-suited to raising blocks of
stone that weigh 1,750,000 pounds to a height of 20 feet without
using machines, and it can be demonstrated to prove its suitability.
A strong case can be made for it on that basis alone, but a problem
at the Temple of Jupiter is that, to the best of my limited
knowledge, the identity of the builders of the retaining wall hasn't
been verified with hard evidence, meaning ancient documents. Most
scholars believe that it was built by the Romans, and it is clear
that the Romans built the Temple. But the retaining wall is
questionable. While there is uncertainty about the identity of its
builders, the problem is to prove that an unknown people had the
knowledge to manufacture and use the technology. That's impossible.
The retaining wall serves as an excellent example of a member of the
extreme category, but Coral Castle is a better choice to prove.
One
reason among several for choosing Coral Castle is that the identity
of the builder is well known. Another is that the exact amount of
manpower used to construct it is known. That information greatly
simplifies the proof as it allows accurate estimates to be made about
the builder's capabilities. Yet another is that all information
needed to prove Coral Castle is available on the Internet which means
that anyone can verify the claims made by the proof without leaving
their chair. Coral Castle will be proved by using the alternate
means, but first, the theory is presented.
A
brief history of a rejected theory
Circa
2662BC, ancient Egyptians began building the pyramids. Several
thousand years later, archaeologists became interested in discovering
how they were built. Some evidence for ancient construction has been
found in the form of ancient drawings that show groups of men
dragging huge blocks of stone, but evidence is missing that shows
specifically how the huge blocks for the pyramids were lifted and
precisely set in place.
Circa
1979AD,
Joseph
Davidovits, a neophyte archaeologist who
had an unusual skill for an archaeologist entered the picture. He was
doing research in chemistry at that time. He is the first, for lack
of a better word, forensic archaeologist. He believes that ancient
man had a technology for pyramid construction that doesn't involve
dragging the huge stones. It involves carrying them in pieces and
reassembling them in situ. His
theory is that the stones aren't natural stones but are
an ancient form of concrete (man-made stone) that appears to be
identical with natural stones.
Aside:
When
everyone is part way through the maze of a mystery and all become
stuck at the same place, chances are that something hasn't been
verified, and an incorrect guess has caused a wrong path to be taken
somewhere prior to the place where everyone is stuck. At the
pyramids, we believe that huge stones were quarried and dragged to
the construction site. At this point everyone becomes stuck trying to
prove how they were lifted. If there is an incorrect guess, then it
will be related to quarrying or dragging. Since we know that we'll
become stuck if we take the quarry-huge-stones-and-drag-them path, we
should go back to the beginning and find a different path. If it
seems that there is no other path, then we should begin thinking in
terms of deception. Something may be wrong with the way we perceive
the problem. When deception is suspected, and it is always a
possibility when everyone is stuck, it helps to envision everything
as having characteristics that are precisely the opposite of what we
perceive. Why? Because the precise opposite of false is true.
If
we begin a journey at a T intersection in a road, and we know where
we want to go, but we're not sure how to get there, we could turn
left, or we could turn right, but only one of the choices will take
us to our destination. If we turn left and that happens to be the
wrong choice, then after a few thousand years we realize that we
should be there by now, but we aren't. So, we turn around and go back
in the opposite direction to the beginning, the T intersection, and
we continue past it. This is the equivalent of having made a right
turn at that intersection, and soon we arrive at our destination.
We
perceive armies of men dragging huge blocks of stone. That claim must
be true or false. We have assumed it to be true in the past, but
because we can't get to our destination on that path, we will now
assume it to be false. Starting at the beginning, the means to quarry
stones is the first decision we face. The opposite of quarrying huge
stones is quarrying pebbles or grains of sand. They will be carried,
which is the opposite of dragging, by a few, which is the opposite of
armies. On the surface it seems that only a mad scientist would take
this path, but if we check to determine whether any progress has been
made, then we discover that this path solves the lifting problem, and
it simplifies all the other problems if only we can put Humpty Dumpty
back together again. In fact, it is a unified theory. There is no
need to have a separate theory for transportation, a separate theory
for lifting, and a separate theory for precision construction.
Instead of having a kludge of theories, one elegant unified theory
solves all problems and makes life much easier for ancient man. This
is the other path that should be investigated and verified.
End
of Aside
Professor
Davidovits's theory implies that the missing evidence hasn't been
found because it is invisible just as DNA evidence is invisible. It
also implies that this missing evidence has caused us to judge
incorrectly that the stones are natural. In turn, that belief
comprises misleading information that has caused many theories to be
conceived that are based upon natural stone, none of which can be
proved.
His
theory is far more efficient than theories based upon natural stone.
It meets every challenge of construction irrespective of the problems
associated with transportation, complexity, precision, levelness,
weight, or the height at which the stones must be placed. Although
the theory is building-material sensitive, Professor Davidovits has
produced a variety of man-made stones in granite, limestone,
sandstone, and others using the relatively simple technology that he
calls geopolymers. Thus, his theory is potentially applicable
not only to Egyptian pyramid construction but to stone megalith
construction around the globe. The amount of manpower estimated to
have been used to construct the pyramids ranges anywhere from 1,600
to 100,000 men. The geopolymer theory requires a number at or near
the minimum. Because it is the most efficient theory, it is the
best-suited and most probable. So, why was it rejected?
When
Professor Davidovits presented the theory in 1979 to the second
International Congress of Egyptologists, substantial amounts of
high-quality external evidence was available to support it, and he
could demonstrate it to show that it is extremely well-suited. But he
had no ancient documents that described the technology, and modern
technology that could examine the internal structure of the stones
and distinguish between natural and man-made stone didn't exist. The
external evidence and demonstration is logical evidence, but there
was no physical evidence to prove that the pyramid stones are
anything other than natural stone. Without the physical evidence,
there was no means to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that ancient
man had the geopolymer technology. The theory couldn't pass the
feasibility test, and the only prudent thing to do was what the
scientists did. They rejected it.
In
1982, one of the archaeologists who opposed the theory, Jean-Philippe
Lauer, regardless of the disagreement gave Professor Davidovits one
of his samples of pyramid stones. That act was good science. In later
years sophisticated technology became available that could
distinguish between natural and man-made stone. Eventually Professor
Davidovits completed testing the sample, and the test results were
positive that it is a fragment of a geopolymer. Now, he had the
physical evidence, but the theory had already been rejected, and the
provenance of the sample was suspect. The Egyptian Supreme Council of
Antiquities wouldn't allow samples with certified provenance to be
gathered for testing, and unless new evidence could be found, there
would be no appeal.
In
2001, two other forensic archaeologists, Joel Bertho and Suzanne
Raynaud with skills in geophysics and geology respectively, found
new
external evidence to support the rejected theory,
and they applied for permission to open a new study. But the theory
was
again denied in 2002 because it contradicts well-established
beliefs such as the location of quarries.
In
the case of pyramid construction, it isn't a question of the
intelligence of those who are weighing the evidence. It's a question
of the evidence that is being weighed. There are two groups of
scientists who are making mutually exclusive claims. One group must
be correct, and the other must be wrong, yet both groups have
excellent credentials. The reason for their polar opposite claims is
that man-made stone hasn't been verified, so it isn't evidence to
group one, and it can't be weighed. If the stones are natural, then
the conclusions of group one absolutely are correct. Group two,
however, has extended the range of human perception into the
invisible by using test equipment and tests to gather the forensic
evidence. Although their sample has questionable provenance, group
two trusts its provenance. They are weighing more evidence than group
one, and the additional evidence is heavy evidence that tips the
scale in another direction.
“It
is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence. It biases the judgment.”
---A
Study In Scarlet ---Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
Whenever
a theory is proposed that claims that heavy evidence is missing, this
is a fundamental issue that must be resolved as soon as it is within
our power to do so because it implies that our judgment may be
biased. We have always believed that the stones are natural because
our senses tell us that they are, but there is subtlety here. The
claim that the stones are man made has never been verified by testing
pyramid stones that have certified provenance, but the subtlety is
that neither has the claim that they are natural. Group one should
not be weighing evidence that the stones are natural because it's not
evidence until it has been verified. Therefore, while the stones
remain untested and the nature of the building material remains
uncertain, there can be no proof of any theory. In June 2005,
permission
was granted to Joel Bertho and Suzanne Raynaud to open a new
study and settle this fundamental issue once and for all. The study
is underway and is due to be completed in 2008.
Minus
samples of pyramid stones that have certified provenance, skills, and
equipment to test them, no one can prove whether they are natural or
man made. But there are many unsolved megaliths around the globe.
Coral Castle, the youngest unsolved megalith, has stones that have
extreme features that make it possible to prove that they are
man-made using only external evidence found on the Internet.
Coral
Castle
Coral Castle was built in the early part of the 20th century
by Edward Leedskalnin. Ed was a stonemason who weighed 100 pounds and
stood just over 5 feet tall.
He worked alone under cover of darkness
using lantern light to assure that he would not be seen. He used only
hand tools and a simple hoist. The average weight of his blocks of
coral stone is 12,000 pounds. The average weight of the blocks of
limestone used in the casing of the Great Pyramid is 5,000 pounds. Ed
did not own an automobile, and there was no wired electricity at
Coral Castle. He acquired an automobile generator from a junkyard,
but that was after he built Coral Castle. It could not have been used
during construction, and he made no claim that it was needed.
“I
have discovered the secrets of the pyramids, and have found out how
the Egyptians and the ancient builders in Peru, Yucatan, and Asia,
with only primitive tools, raised and set in place blocks of stone
weighing many tons!”
---Edward
Leedskalnin
Ed
was a recluse who passed in December of 1951 without ever disclosing
the secrets.
The
nine-ton gate
The
nine-ton gate
has extreme features that make it possible to prove that it is
man-made stone. The Coral Castle web site reports that this 18,000
pound gate is so perfectly balanced that it can be opened with the
simple push of a finger. It closes to within a quarter inch on either
side of the frame opening. It broke in 1986. Six men and a 50-ton
crane were needed to remove and repair it. What they found was that
Ed had centered and balanced it using an iron shaft and truck
bearing. He found the perfect center of gravity and drilled an
almost-perfect-round eight-foot hole for the shaft using only hand
tools. Today a laser-guided drill bit would be used to achieve such
extreme precision.
The Nine-ton Gate at the Coral Castle
Source:
http://www.coralcastle.com/9tonbig.htm
Evidence
reveals the path through the maze
Figure
1 is a photograph from the gallery of the Coral Castle web site that
shows Ed using a hoist to lift a block of coral stone. There are only
two possibilities with respect to this photograph. One is that he
used this hoist to lift the huge blocks of stone exactly as shown.
The other is that he didn't. If he did, then there is no mystery
about Coral Castle construction because this is a photograph of the
solution. If he didn't, then there can be no other purpose for this
photograph than to deceive us because it depicts something that is
false, and that would be misleading information. It is crucial to
verify the implied statement that Ed used the hoist as depicted so
that we know what path to take. Is that statement true---or is it
false?
Figure
1: Ed using a hoist
The
mechanical advantage (a multiplier of effort) of a hoist equals the
number of chain segments ascending from its movable block of pulleys
at the bottom to the fixed block of pulleys at the top. The
photograph is unclear, but with a little eye strain 6 segments can be
seen. If Ed grasped the fall of this hoist and suspended himself by
hanging from it, then the effort of his 100 pound body weight would
have been multiplied by a factor of 6, and he would have produced a
lifting force of 100 X 6 = 600 pounds. This means that he couldn't
lift more than 600 pounds with this hoist, but the stone shown being
lifted weighs at least ten times that.
“The
coral Walls approximately weigh 125 pounds per cubic foot.” ---paragraph
seven in the
Who's
Ed section of the Coral Castle website
Using
Ed's known height of 5 feet for a reference, a conservative estimate
of the stone's dimensions and volume is 4' X 4' X 3' = 48 cubic feet.
A conservative estimate of its weight based upon a density of 125
pounds per cubic foot, is 48 X 125 = 6,000 pounds. There is a huge
discrepancy between the weight of this stone and the maximum amount
of weight that Ed could lift.
Because
it was impossible for Ed to have lifted this stone with this hoist,
the only possible explanations for what is seen are that the
photograph was tampered, or the stone is a hollow shell that weighed
only a few hundred pounds. Either would be deceptive, but the latter
is more probable because it is more efficient. There is no need for
Ed to have skills in creating special effects in photographs. He only
needs his stonemason skills to make a hollow shell and the broken
stone in the background. The purpose of the broken stone is to
convince us that he was not lifting a hollow shell.
Some
hoist theories recognize that the stone in Figure 1 can't be lifted
by Ed and his hoist alone. One claims that he used a motor hidden in
the mysterious box at the top of the tripod regardless that there is
no room for a motor, no source of electricity, and no drive chain and
pulley. Another claims that the motor is hidden within and connected
directly to the pulleys. Yet another claims that a winch was used.
The
theories in the previous paragraph are unprovable because no
electricity, motors, or winches have been found at Coral Castle, no
hard evidence has been found that indicates that they ever existed
there, and no hard evidence has been found that proves that Ed had
the knowledge, skills, and materials needed to invent these items.
But even if such evidence had been found, it wouldn't solve Ed's
problem of transporting the stone. Examination of the tripod in the
photograph reveals that it has no wheels. It would have been
impossible for Ed to transport the stone from the quarry to his
creation under construction using this arrangement.
Notice
the number and difficulty of the obstacles that Ed must overcome to
use hoists. First, we see him lifting a 6,000 pound block of stone,
but laws of physics prove that he can't lift it without a motor. He
must somehow acquire and mount a motor, but a motor needs
electricity. He must somehow acquire a source of electricity and wire
it to the motor. Since the tripod has no wheels, he must somehow
acquire a means to transfer the stone from the hoist to a mechanical
transport. He must somehow acquire the mechanical transport. He must
have skills in electrical and mechanical engineering. Thus far, these
are six obstacles that Ed must overcome before he can even begin
building Coral Castle using hoists. Hard evidence must be found to
prove that all of these things were within his reach, and overcoming
these six obstacles only allows him to get the block of stone to the
creation under construction. There are more obstacles soon to be
presented.
Because
analysis of the photographic evidence proves that it was impossible
for Ed to construct Coral Castle using hoists in the manner shown,
this scene is a grandiose, well-staged, and effective attempt to
deceive us.
“When
you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however
improbable, must be the truth.”
--- The
Sign of the Four ---Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
It
was impossible for Ed to use the hoist as depicted, and with only
hand tools it was impossible for him to lift and transport the 18,000
pound gate all at once. These are eliminated. The only remaining
possibility, however improbable, is that he lifted and transported
the gate a piece at a time. As he could only lift pieces of the gate,
then by default he must have made mud, clay, cement, or concrete from
coral stone. Mud, clay, cement,
or concrete henceforth will be identified as ancient
cement or man-made stone which are treated as synonyms
and used interchangeably.
Man-made
stone is a general concept---not a specific formula. No attempt is
made to prove the specific formula or stonemason techniques that are
involved. To discover those requires hands-on testing of samples of
Coral Castle stones by experts. The only concern here is to produce
hard evidence that proves that man-made stone is the only technology
that is well-suited to the construction of Coral Castle that is fully
within Ed's reach to manufacture and use.
Evidence
reveals that the path leads toward man-made blocks of coral stone,
and that becomes the path to follow.
More
evidence
Ancient
cement presents Ed with only three obstacles that are minor to a
highly skilled stonemason. To claim that ancient cement is fully
within Ed's reach requires verification that he could overcome them.
The first is that he must have knowledge of and be able to
manufacture ancient cement from coral stone. The second is that he
must be able to construct forms (wooden containers) for use with
ancient cement. The third is that he must be able to disguise his
man-made coral stone to make it appear to be natural coral stone. The
first two must be directly verified, but the latter is indirectly
verified by default if it is proved that ancient cement is the only
well-suited technology that is within his reach.
As
cement is a standard tool employed by stonemasons, Ed would have had
knowledge of cement. The patent for Portland cement, the most widely
distributed cement in the world, was awarded to Joseph Aspdin in
1824. Mr. Aspdin was a stonemason from Leeds, North Yorkshire,
England.
Coral
stone is one of Ed's many deceptions. It seems only to be an
innocently convenient building material indigenous to the area, but
it's not. It is rich in calcium
carbonate, the primary chemical compound used to manufacture modern
cement. The lower left quadrant of this
Bamburi
Cement, LTD. web page shows that they use coral stone for their
source of calcium carbonate. Coral stone is well-suited to
manufacturing ancient cement.
Ed
worked in lumber camps for a number of years prior to building Rock
Gate Park, his deceptive choice of a name that was changed to Coral
Castle after he passed. He was exposed to woodworking techniques in
those camps. His woodworking skills are well-suited to making forms
for use with ancient cement.
Evidence
must be presented that proves that ancient cement is well-suited to
building every creation at Coral Castle. If even one creation can't
be built by a lone stonemason who only uses hand tools and ancient
cement, then ancient cement must have assistance from one or more
additional theories to solve the challenges that it can't meet.
“This
chamber is occupied by only a leather hammock and a crude, wooden
table piled with primitive tools—chains, saws, drills, wedges,
hammers, chisels and crowbars. Tools also festoon the walls.”
“Among
its oddities is a scattering of oversized chairs made of coral, each
one weighing a half-ton. Although they look extremely uncomfortable,
the chairs are, in fact, exceptionally restful and balanced into
perfect rockers. Remarkably, not a single tool mark has been found on
any of them.”
---Extracts
from
Atlantis
Rising Sampler 59, Passion In Coral
by Frank Joseph (requires a
browser with the Adobe PDF Plugin)
After
Ed passed, his tool collection was examined. It included chains,
saws, drills, wedges, hammers, chisels, and crowbars, but there is no
mention of an eight-foot drill bit the exact diameter of the shaft of
the nine-ton gate. If Ed's need for saws and drills was to facilitate
making forms for use with ancient cement, then that would explain the
presence of a scattering of oversize half-ton chairs that have no
tool marks on them. If they were carved, then tool marks should be
present, but missing tool marks is a byproduct of using forms and
cement.
Ed
was a professional stonemason-magician-entertainer. His purpose was
to impress and amaze people. When visitors see Coral Castle, they are
impressed and amazed by the size of his creations---not by missing
minutia. As virtually no one would be impressed by missing tool marks
because virtually no one would notice, it is far more probable that
missing tool marks is a byproduct of his technology than that he
deliberately spent time ensuring that he left no tool marks. Ancient
cement is the only stone technology that Ed could have employed that
has missing tool marks as a natural byproduct.
Ancient
cement is well-suited to making chairs with no tool marks, but every
theory based upon natural stone faces a daunting challenge. Each
owner of a natural-stone theory must propose a means for Ed to carve
chairs without leaving tool marks and produce evidence that proves
that it is well-suited and within Ed's reach. If the proposed means
requires Ed to do anything, then it is less efficient than ancient
cement which requires him to do nothing.
Coincidentally,
there are no tool marks on the remaining casing stones of the Great
Pyramid which are made of limestone. Limestone is the source of
calcium carbonate used in manufacturing Portland cement. It is a
non-clastic sedimentary rock formed from deposits of coral reefs and
a relative of coral stone.
Gate
construction procedure
Ed
had stonemason skills, woodworking skills, hand tools, natural
forces, and natural resources. These are the same things that ancient
man had. He built the nine-ton gate using those plus an iron shaft
and a truck bearing.
The
procedure that follows is not intended to represent the exact
procedure that Ed used. Its purpose is to describe the difficulties
that Ed would encounter while using ancient cement to show how it
would help him overcome them. This will prove that ancient cement is
well-suited for use by a lone stonemason who wants to build a
nine-ton gate using only the items listed in the previous paragraph.
There is no need to do an actual demonstration to prove suitability
because cement is a well-known technology. There are enormous numbers
of alternate examples of cement that prove its capabilities, and
virtually every adult on the planet is familiar with the operational
behavior of cement. But for those who would like to see an actual
demonstration, a link to a video of a demonstration by Professor
Davidovits is provided near the end of this proof. Please recall that
there is no attempt to prove the specific techniques that Ed used to
disguise the stones. Those techniques are cosmetic issues that are
unrelated to the suitability of cement for construction.
The
following procedure is based upon using homemade ancient cement that
contains no gypsum, an additive used in modern commercial cement
manufacturing that reduces the time needed for the cement to cure
(harden). This allows Ed more time to work before the cement begins
to set when compared with modern commercial cement.
WARNING:
DO NOT TRY THIS. NO LIABILITY IS ACCEPTED FOR ANY CONSEQUENCES
RESULTING FROM FOLLOWING THESE INSTRUCTIONS.
Given
that the gate frame was constructed and ready, Ed snapped chalk lines
along the diagonals of the top interior of the frame. He marked the
exact center where they crossed, attached a plumb bob to that mark,
dropped it, and marked the bottom. Using the top and bottom reference
marks, he installed the iron shaft and truck bearing correctly
centered and perfectly vertically aligned. Next, he placed shims such
as small ball bearings on the bottom of the frame and surrounding
area. Following that, he placed two boards atop the shims, one on
each side of the shaft. The parts of the boards that were adjacent to
the truck bearing had cutouts that matched the diameter of the
bearing. Using these boards as the base, a wooden form shaped like
the gate was built around the shaft. The form was built slightly
wider than the frame opening and perpendicular to it. Building the
form perpendicular to the frame opening facilitates removing it after
curing is complete, and building it slightly wider than the frame
opening facilitates adjusting the gate to cause it to close within a
quarter inch on either side of the frame opening.
Following
form construction, Ed filled it with ancient cement. (Note: It is
possible that he accelerated task completion by using the large
hoists to lift buckets of cement that weighed several hundred
pounds.) When the cement had cured, he removed the form. Then, he
shaved the ends of the gate until it would close to within a quarter
inch of the gate frame opening and changed its appearance to conceal
that it was man-made stone. Construction was complete.
Overwhelming
evidence
Ed's
perfect round eight-foot hole is the overwhelming evidence within the
gate itself that confirms that it is man-made stone. Virtually every
theory for Coral Castle construction is focused on solving only the
lifting problem, but the hole is unrelated to lifting. If the owner
of a theory that is focused on lifting such as a hoist theory can't
produce evidence that a hoist is well-suited to making a perfect
eight-foot hole, then it must have assistance. A second theory must
be proposed to make the perfect hole and evidence produced that shows
that it is well-suited and within Ed's reach. Ancient cement requires
no assistance.
The
Coral Castle web site reports that a laser-guided drill bit would be
needed to achieve the level of precision of this hole, but Ed had
only hand tools. Hand tools are ill-suited and infeasible for
drilling a laser-perfect hole, but there it is. If its diameter was a
tiny fraction too small, then
the shaft wouldn't pass through and if a tiny fraction too large,
then the precision wouldn't rival that of a hole drilled by a
laser-guided drill bit.
Three
requirements must be met to achieve perfect balance of the gate. The
shaft must be sturdy, it must be mounted perfectly vertical, and its
diameter must be perfectly matched to the hole. That is all. The
latter requirement verifies that the claim made by the Coral Castle
web site about the perfection of the hole is true, else the gate
would not have been perfectly balanced.
The
Coral Castle web site also reports that the hole passes through the
perfect center of gravity of the gate thus enabling it to be opened
by the simple push of a finger and that no one can discover how Ed
accomplished this amazing feat. This claim is suspect. Because the
hole was positioned near the center of the gate, it is possible that
it passes through the perfect center of gravity. But if it does, then
it is vastly more probable that it was an accidental accomplishment
rather than a deliberate one because the hole passing through the
perfect center of gravity is not one of the three requirements for
achieving perfect balance. Therefore, there was no reason for Ed to
try to find the perfect center of gravity. The position of the hole
has no effect upon the balance of the gate nor the ease with which it
can be opened, and the following paragraph verifies this claim.
Imagine
a standard door in your home that has had the customary two or three
hinges replaced with one long hinge that runs the full length of the
door from top to bottom. There is a matching hinge pin. The center of
gravity of the door is located somewhere near its center, but the
hinge is located at its edge. Because the hinge is sturdy, perfectly
vertical, and the hinge pin perfectly matches the hinge, the door
opens easily, is perfectly balanced, and stays wherever it is placed
regardless that all of its weight is distributed on one side of the
hinge. If a saw was used to remove an arbitrarily large segment of
the door, the location of the center of gravity would change, but the
segment that remained attached to the hinge still would be perfectly
balanced and easy to open. Therefore, once the ancient cement had
cured, Ed could shave the ends of the gate so that it would close to
within a quarter inch on either side of the frame and make all other
changes he deemed necessary with no concern that he might destroy the
delicate balance.
In
the gate-construction-procedure section, the shaft was easily mounted
perfectly vertical and correctly centered as there was no weight on
it when it was mounted. Ed could take all the time he needed to
assure himself that it was correctly mounted. Ancient cement is
well-suited to helping Ed solve the shaft mounting problem, but every
theory based upon natural stone faces another daunting challenge.
Each owner of a natural-stone theory must propose a means for Ed to
mount the shaft perfectly vertical and correctly centered while there
is an 18,000 pound block of stone surrounding it and produce evidence
that proves that it is well-suited and within Ed's reach.
Ed
didn't need an eight-foot drill bit the exact diameter of the shaft
because no hole was drilled. The liquid cement merely surrounded the
shaft, closed tight against it, and cured. When the shaft was removed
during gate repair, Mother Nature's perfect-round eight-foot hole was
discovered, and a laser-guided drill bit couldn't do a better job.
Ancient cement is well-suited to making the perfect hole as it is a
byproduct of the technology, but every theory based upon natural
stone faces yet another daunting challenge. Each owner of a
natural-stone theory must propose a means for Ed to drill a perfect
eight-foot hole using only ill-suited hand tools and produce evidence
that proves that it is well-suited and within Ed's reach. If the
proposed means requires Ed to do anything, then it is less efficient
than ancient cement which requires him to do nothing.
Coral
Castle proved
Ed
would have known that ancient man had skills, hand tools, natural
forces, and natural resources comparable to his own. This explains
how he could claim to know how ancient man raised huge blocks of
stone using only primitive tools. In fact, ancient cement itself is a
primitive tool because modern chemical engineers have a nickname.
They're known as toolmakers.
Ancient
cement is the only theory that explains why Ed would build hoists
that are unusable as depicted, for if the stones are natural, then
there is no reason to try to deceive us into believing that they are
natural. It allows him to work in the dark in relative safety when
compared with the idea of working with huge blocks of natural stone.
It explains how he built chairs with no tool marks on them.
Manufacturing ancient cement from coral stone has been proved to be
within his reach. Building forms has been proved to be within his
reach. Ancient cement has been proved to be well-suited to
transporting, lifting, precision construction, making chairs with no
tool marks, making the perfect hole, and mounting and balancing the
nine-ton gate.
Hard
evidence has been produced that Ed's hoist could only be used to lift
stones that weigh a few hundred pounds, and without wheels on the
tripod, it couldn't be used to transport stones. Hoists are
ill-suited for making a perfect hole and for making chairs with no
tool marks.
Many
theories have been proposed for Coral Castle, but only ancient cement
and hoists have been proved to be within Ed's reach, and only ancient
cement can be demonstrated to show that it can pass the well-suited
part of the feasibility test. Until some other theory can be
demonstrated to show that it is well-suited and hard evidence
produced to prove that it was within Ed's reach, there are no other
challengers. The requirements have been met for proof of the ancient
cement concept having been used to construct Coral
Castle's nine-ton gate. Because every creation at Coral Castle is
made of coral stone, every creation can be constructed using ancient
cement. Coral Castle construction
is proved.
Proof
of Coral Castle construction,
however, does not prove that the pyramids were built using man
made stone. Only scientists can prove or disprove that by testing the
stones. What Coral Castle proves is that man-made stone can appear
indistinguishable from natural stone and that stones can be
disassembled and reassembled using a simple process that doesn't
require machinery or rotary kilns like those used in modern cement
manufacture. Those are statements that Professor Davidovits implied
or made for pyramid construction, and Coral Castle provides a model
that supports those statements.
An
established scientific fact
Thousands
of years have passed since the pyramids were built, and no theory
based upon natural stone has ever found overwhelming evidence to
support it. Since all evidence for natural-stone-based theories is
visible, if overwhelming evidence exists, then it should have been
found by now. Since it hasn't been found, it is reasonable to
conclude that either it has been destroyed by time, or that it never
existed. If either of those is true, then no theory based upon
natural stone, known laws of physics, and ancient man building the
pyramids without assistance from intelligent beings such as aliens,
time travelers, or Merlin the Magician can ever be proved.
The
only remaining place where overwhelming evidence might be found that
hasn't been exhaustively examined is the internal structure of the
stones. If their examination proves that they are natural, then the
overwhelming evidence must have been destroyed by time. If it proves
that they are man-made, then the man-made-stone theory is correct.
Since multiple types of building materials were used in the pyramids,
it is possible that a mixture of man-made and natural stone was used,
but only testing can determine that.
Professor
Davidovits has a
video
available for download from his web site that demonstrates the
suitability of the geopolymer technology. In the video, he produced
several multi-ton blocks of limestone concrete. Joel Bertho and
Suzanne Raynaud are gathering forensic evidence from testing pyramid
stones that have certified provenance. Their initial indication is
that the stones are man made. If the initial indication holds, then
this will be hard evidence that proves that ancient man had the
geopolymer technology and that he used it. In that case, it is
probable that the next time this theory is presented to the
scientific community, it will lose its status as a theory and become
an established scientific fact.
This
link
to a press kit in
Adobe PDF format that was released in 2004 offers a 15 page summary
of the story from Professor Davidovits's point of view. It contains a
photograph of a number of different building materials that were made
using geopolymer chemistry.
The
prosecution rests.
FAQ
How
did Ed move his creations from Florida City to Homestead?
All
attacks against ancient cement at Coral Castle have been based upon
unverified stories and opinions. The above question is based on the
unverified statement that the move took place. The question that
needs to be answered first is, Did Ed move his creations from Florida
City to Homestead? There are many who claim that he did, but until
this story is verified with hard evidence, it is not a fact.
I
claim that the move was another of Ed's deceptions, that he was
parading hollow shells of some of his creations, that he destroyed
them once the deception was complete, and that he rebuilt replicas of
his Florida City creations in Homestead. But there is a problem with
verifying my claim.
Suppose
that I was able to compare photographs of all of Ed's creations in
Florida City with photographs of all of his creations in Homestead,
and suppose that none that were in Florida City are identical with
their counterpart in Homestead. That would seem to be overwhelming
evidence that the move didn't take place, but it isn't. The reason is
that it could be claimed that Ed moved the creations and upgraded
them over time. Although all evidence presented thus far indicates
that the move could not have taken place with his real creations, it
is impossible for me to verify that it didn't. On the other hand, it
hasn't been verified that it did take place either.
If
someone has Florida City photographs and wants to attempt to verify
that the move took place, then they have a potentially simple task.
All they need do is find one creation currently in Homestead or in
any Homestead photograph that can be proved to be identical with its
counterpart in any Florida City photograph.
Copyright by
Jim Solley
All rights reserved.
Reprinted with permission.
Source:
Website of
Jim Solley
Contact Author
Email: slimebug
at adelphia dot net - Please add the word 'megaliths' to the subject line to
authorize your email to pass through my spam blocker.
Editor's PS
Note about concrete
In construction, concrete is a composite building material made
from the combination of aggregate and cement binder.
The most common form of concrete consists of Portland cement,
mineral aggregates (generally gravel and sand) and water. Contrary
to common belief, concrete does not solidify from drying after
mixing and placement. Instead, the cement hydrates, gluing the other
components together and eventually creating a stone-like material.
When used in the generic sense, this is the material referred to by
the term concrete. Concrete is used to make pavements, building
structures, foundations, motorways/roads, overpasses, parking
structures, brick/block walls and bases for gates, fences and poles.
Concrete is used more than any other man-made material on the
planet, with water being the only substance on Earth we utilize
more. An old name for concrete is liquid stone.
Source:
Wikipedia
|
