Why the geopolymer theory is wrong for ancient Egypt

 I'd just like to mention upfront that I hope the research into possibilities of use of geopolymer continues,  I'm sure it will be found to be much more prevalent in antiquity than current thinking ascribes. There seems to be some basis in certain applications and places such as South America possibly,  who knows.

This is not a post which is meant to sideline the geopolymer school of thought in ancient megalithic engineering/building. This is a quick synopsis of why it doesn't solve the primary mysteries of the anomalous works of stone, or the associated logistical and operational feats so obviously beyond the means attributed so unforgivably to the peoples of the time.

1) We have the quarries with the clear signatures of the biggest sites. Some, like those in Giza, have had specific blocks actually matched to the squares removed from bedrock quarries.

2) Some,  like the unfinished obelisk of Aswan quarry, are still there, about two thirds completed.

3) Certain structures, like the pyramids, contain up to 2 million blocks and about 1.3 million are different shapes and sizes to each other. Making that many moulds seems to be more of a task almost than quarrying the granite in the first place.

4) Granite is very different to any form of concrete or polymer. Also each quarry produces different rock that can be linked definitively to megalithic construction sites.

5) No records for polymer industry on such scales exists and no associated tools.

6) The critical blocks have a variety of tooling marks on them, this is already a source of much debate in Egyptology VS Engineering (and Stonmasonry).

⏪ A stunning revision of the past which could be as unbelievable as any science fiction blockbuster (Part 1)

INTRODUCTION 

The requirement of a frame of reference.

"What if the defining catastrophe of the human part of world history has no observable equivalent occurrences today? Surely, we would entirely leave it out of our picture?"

According to Wikipedia, which represents the establishment view of most matters, the substance and starting point of our history is as follows:

Quote

"The history of the world, in common parlance, is the history of humanity (or human history), as determined from archaeology, anthropology, genetics, linguistics, and other disciplines; and, for periods since the invention of writing, from recorded history and from secondary sources and studies.

Humanity's written history was preceded by its prehistory, beginning with the Palaeolithic Era ("Early Stone Age"), followed by the Neolithic Era ("New Stone Age"). The Neolithic saw the Agricultural Revolution begin, between 8000 and 5000 BCE, in the Near East's Fertile Crescent. During this period, humans began the systematic husbandry of plants and animals.^[2] As agriculture advanced, most humans transitioned from a nomadic to a settled lifestyle as farmers in permanent settlements. The relative security and increased productivity provided by farming allowed communities to expand into increasingly larger units, fostered by advances in transportation."

End Quote

I don't think the untouchable status the above synopsis once had is given as much credence as it once had.  At the very least it would be fair to say it has lost its reverence. Academics and professionals (and amateurs for that matter) have found various anomalies which don't allow for the established view to stand up to scrutiny.  We may not have a specific nomination of a single "for certain" replacement theory but this is a very exciting time in the landscape. I'd like to give what I consider the leading contenders are for the disruption of the narrative. The clues about our real history.  They all come together in surprisingly supportive ways, although those telling these stories may not really fully understand this themselves.

Download the delightful and fascinating book  "Maps Of The Ancient Sea Kings: HERE

(I chose a link where you can view first before downloading because default downloads of large docs annoy me too)

What new evidence is at odds with current thinking?

The reason I have dedicated two full posts just to give the briefest possible outline of slow collapse of the narrative is because there is not one "slam-dunk" reason for it.  Much of the challenge is emerging from fresh thinking emerging out of the information era and sharing of ideas occurring a bit more outside of prevailing structures these days. Always reserve judgement and keep an open mind.  Be mindful of the tendency that the status quo has become ossified and reacts defensively in those instances where points of contention are raised by scientists, academics and engineers from outside of the structures of anthropology, archeology, Egyptology and conventional ancient history.  Even more so when amateurs, authors or journalists contest the prevailing story, and the challenges are never addressed or become lost in a sea of ad hominem attacks usually playing the man and not the ball.  This happens even in cases involving the most well-evidenced or well-made cases.  That is why it is vital that you do not get drawn in by such an approach.  It stems from a political mindset of individual agendas of no interest to you and I.  If you are curious about the subject matter as I am you will surely agree that the quest for an objective perspective can only be nurtured by the decision to always and only focus on the caliber and academic fortitude of whichever case is being subjected to scrutiny. 

1) Clandestine Cover Ups

We all enjoy scandal and intrigue. Conspiracy (especially ancient conspiracy) is interesting.   While there are surely and surprisingly many of these controversies in play, we must not lose perspective.  The damage done by those seeking to protect past interests have done incalculable damage to our ability to fully understand our own past.  This involves a cast of characters to broad to mention but just to give a sense of the problem it's worth noting how diverse they are in range.  From the Jesuits whose agenda is impossible to fully assess, to colonial agendas, the Catholic Church at the height of its power and even the ideologically motivated seemingly sober minded monks that rewrote so many historical texts (often by first destroying the original source documents).  Don't think of it as artifact of past power structures, I assure you it happens even today and is no less prevalent.  Players like ARCE and the Smithsonian immediately spring to mind with their endless mischief while they enjoy unquestioned admiration from institutions of the prevailing establishment.  That being said, these cover-ups still represent the minority of "things that don't add up" in ancient history, since so many things don't add up. Just ask any regular tour guide in Egypt and you will hear about how boring old history is surrounded by more drama, lying and politics than the US Department of State.

I think a good place to start would first be a quick mention of the corruption inherent in the protection of the standard narrative. There are a variety of motives and so many examples that in order to avoid that theme hijacking this post I have decided to make it the subject of its own upcoming post. Scandal is always interesting.  To give a few clues as to the scale of the known deceit and regular cover up going on, where Egyptology (very relevant here) is a serial worst offender. This tip off sent into a known YouTube channel is a great example out of many known to plague the field. I will focus on academic examples in my upcoming post, I've chosen an example that demonstrates that open-source contributions can be made by anyone willing to travel that is willing to wander from the beaten path. To save time (if you are in a hurry) skip the intro of this particular example and track to 5.20 .

The above example is an easy to post example of what I mean, but in reality these examples are everywhere. To see what I mean listen to the background discussion in most of the clips I include in this post, the reason I always add multimedia is that it can give an expanded sense of the atmosphere. There are often grumbles of secret digs, sealed off corridor's or missing archaeological artefact's and physical evidence that mysteriously goes missing, without the expected investigation following it.

2) Standard political or commercial cover-ups. 

Another form of cover up involves less mysterious motives and usually involves the prosaic fact that archeological digs take up lots of time and involve the zoning of land. That is to say that the prospect of land going to commercial or industrial interests for development starts to appear being out of the question. Either that or in some similar way interferes with some or other special interest group or government.  The below example involving the cover up of the great Labyrinth of Egypt.  This famous site is of no less historical status and reputation than the Pyramids on the Giza Plateau themselves and just like the Great Pyramid was part of the super prestigious list of wonders of the ancient world.  How could anyone believe that such a find was discovered and then covered up by Egypt's own government?  Believe it!  In fact, that site never stood a chance, and the reason is just as clear and obvious as it is frustrating.

Ben van Kerkwyk explains how the construction of the Aswan Dam, a modern-day mega-engineering project in Egypt, caused a rise in the water table of several meters, making the prospect of a dig costing billions loom large for the authorities, a gamble they were not prepared to take and a decision they were not prepared to admit they made. 

3) Denial, consensus cover-ups, protecting monopolies on public funding, public understanding of science, careers, tenure & nepotism

There is no single citation that does this cover up justice because 90% of all cover ups likely fall into this category.  Most of the rest of the post as well as the follow up post, part 2, falls into this category.  Although, between you and I, deep down inside I harbor suspicion that a fair bit more actually falls into category 1 above. However, since I cannot prove such a thing, I cannot state it categorically.