If Aliens were truly the masterminds behind the Great Pyramids then we wouldn’t be still arguing that assumption today. If an extraterrestrial species indeed built the pyramids then our current facts would be all turned upside down. Archaeological records today show proof of how the Egyptians strategically used advanced technology and seer man power to build the magnificent structures we still see today. Recent discoveries regarding the pyramids have uncovered the use of a sophisticated ramp structure that allowed the Egyptians to transport the heavy rocks used in building the pyramids. Along with the ramp system, archaeologist have also found proof of campsites or city areas were the Egyptian workers lived during the construction of the Pyramids. If extra terrestrial beings had a part in the creation of the pyramids, then why would there be so much labor and work behind it? Wouldn’t Aliens have used superior technology to create the pyramids sooner and in an easier fashion? More obviously, there would be evidence left behind of modern tools or heavier metals used in the process, but instead we have the hard evidence of the tools/labor of the Egyptians themselves. Some also argue that the tools the Egyptians had on hand would not be durable enough to cut limestone, but in reality, limestone is pretty soft. To add to the lack of physical objects left behind of Aliens, why was there no written evidence as well? The Egyptians used hieroglyphics to write their history and tell stories, so there should be written evidence of extraterrestrial intervention if there was any. The sheer lack of evidence of Aliens meddling with the pyramids should be proof enough that they were not there.
Going along with lack of evidence would be the idea that the Egyptians and Mayans came for the advanced civilization of Atlantis. The most important detail I believe is the fact we don’t even have proof that the city of Atlantis even fully existed, let alone that it sank into an ocean. Regardless of that major detail, there is also serious distinction between the Egyptians and Mayans pointing towards there being no correlation between them. Yes, they both created Pyramids, but for vastly different reasons. The Egyptian Pyramids were built way before the Mayans and served a purpose of being burial tombs for kings/Pharaohs. The Mayan Pyramids were used more for religious reasons and were not built to last as long as the Egyptian ones. IF both civilizations derived from Atlantis, then wouldn’t the purpose of the tombs be identical? Getting even more in depth in evidence would be their language or use of hieroglyphics. Both the Mayans and the Egyptians used the use of symbols to convey their language, but the use of symbols is the only clear similarity. Egyptian hieroglyphics read left to right and are more complex. Mayan Hieroglyphics were left to right, but also in a somewhat zig-zag pattern. The Egyptians also wrote on paper and many other things while the Mayans write only on stone. If both civilizations again came from Atlantis, then there would be no differences between the type of language and function of it. Not to mention that if the Mayans were after the Egyptians, shouldn’t they have used paper as well? Overall, you cannot dispute hard archaeological evidence separating all these cultures from early more advanced peoples by using “possible”, definitely not proven explanations.
I liked your use of specific evidence against the hypotheses. The recent discovery of the ramp mechanism used to transport heavy rocks and building materials is a great example of how actual archaeological evidence very clearly disproves the idea of aliens building the pyramids. I also liked how you posed specific questions that ancient alien “theorists” would struggle to explain. It would be interesting to see how these questions, and many others, would be answered, if we had the opportunity to confront Erich Von Daniken and others. Though, I am sure that instead of answers, we would simply receive more questions as a defense mechanism. These questions would consist of things like: Well, don’t you think the aliens would want to wipe any evidence of their being here? Isn’t that why there is no archaeological evidence? Or: Don’t you think the mainstream media and archaeologists are just trying to keep the evidence from us? It would turn into a conversation around conspiracy, not actual facts. Regarding the Atlantis hypothesis, I liked how you clearly explained that any correlation between the Maya and ancient Egyptians is purely coincidental, especially given that their motivations behind building their pyramids were completely different. Explaining these motivations really helped show just how different these ancient civilizations really were, and how it is absurd to assume that they both diffused from an older, lost civilization. Those explanations definitely helped show how coincidental the similarities are, and how there are many more differences than there are similarities.
I really like your response! It takes into account things that pseudoarchaeologists don’t, which is actual evidence seen in context. There is actual evidence supporting that the Egyptians had the means to build such amazing structures, and these theorists completely disregard it to supplement their own claims. The idea that if aliens were involved, why would there be working camps is something I personally think about when it comes to thinking about how theorists make these claims. If they had higher technology, why bother making the people do all the work that takes years if they could just levitate the blocks or some crazy notion like that? Though I suppose in these cases, it’s hard to rationalize with people who believe in these claims. They would simply bring up more and more questions, trying to justify themselves.
You also discussed some of the same things I did in your explanation of the Mayans and Egyptians coming from one civilization. How can people believe that Atlantis affected these civilizations when we don’t even have proof that Atlantis exists? Wouldn’t there at least be SOMETHING past the paper-thin arguments they use? You also mentioned the pyramids of the two civilizations have two completely different purposes, which I also discussed. Wouldn’t their purposes be identical? Wouldn’t the cultures be much more similar if they came from the same supposed mother civilization? I like how you brought language into the entire discussion as well. While they both use hieroglyphs, their writing systems were vastly different in terms of structure, not to mention they didn’t remotely speak the same language. Wouldn’t we expect their languages to be from the same family? To have some kind of similarity past “oh they used hieroglyphs”? The entire situation is frustrating.
I completely agree with your response! I like how you went completely in-depth about the different aspects used to build the pyramid from the ramp, tools, blocks and labor campsites. There are so many aspects of their argument that don’t make sense because like you said, why would the pyramids have taken that much time and labor if advanced civilizations were helping build them? Also, why wouldn’t the Egyptians have documented anything involving extraterrestrials in their account of building the pyramids. The pseudoarchaeologists also claim that there was no way to transport the blocks the miles from the mines but I found an article that described a scroll written by a crew leader who also explained that the limestone blocks were transported down the Nile to the pyramid site. With all of the evidence provided to us by the Egyptians, it should be very obvious to everyone that the pyramidiots have no valid argument at all.
I also really liked how you went into detail contrasting the Mayans and the Egyptians as well as their motivations/timing for their ideas. I talked about how there is no evidence of Atlantean-specific culture(based on Atlantis the Antediluvian World) but after reading your post I fully realized the extent of the differences between the Mayas and the Egyptians. The fact that there is no evidence supporting any aspect of the story of Atlantis puts their entire argument into perspective too because it points out how illogical the original idea is and makes the Atlantis diffusion idea seem even more ridiculous than before.
Overall, these claims that emerge as a way to explain the possibility of innovation keep getting more ridiculous and make no sense when looked at with any kind of logic. I realize that there is no logic involved in pseudological thinking but their ideas never fail to surprise me.