How was a 1000-ton stone cut off from a rock in Baalbek?

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2024-01-10 19:46

The southern stone in Baalbek has been known to the civilized world for more or less the last 150 years since the appearance of photography in the middle of the 19th century. I already wrote in another article that in 2014 there was a breakthrough, which is still little known even to those who are interested in these issues. German and Lebanese archaeologists finally decided to look under the South Stone, began to dig and dug up at least several more megaliths of even larger size, weighing up to 2000 tons. More details here

But, the most amazing thing is that the famous "South Stone" refused to be sawn off from the bottom of the rock base:

Maybe, of course, this is just a line only around the megalith, but not through, no one has yet checked whether it is through. To check, you need to raise this brick with a jack from one end, which is quite realistic. There are jacks for hundreds of tons. But, most likely, the line is through.

How they managed to make this horizontal cut along the stone - I cannot imagine. The first thing that comes to mind is that two people will stand on opposite sides of the stone, pull a string or cable and start sawing, passing along the stone. But how to maintain a straight line? Then you need to stretch the guides along the megalith, and 2 carts with a string stretched between them will go along them. If the string breaks, you will have to re-saw from the beginning. To avoid this, it is necessary to make a thick cut and lay some kind of support so that a gap remains between the surfaces, and one end of the string could be pushed into this gap. But, where did you go after the whole process of backing up? Maybe they were already flattened and rotted, or they were made of ice and already melted and absorbed. This is my very approximate fantasy, I do not pretend to be correct. Just thinking out loud. Suggest your versions in the comments.

The simplest explanation is a natural fracture in the rock, or in other words, the boundary between two layers of the rock. I don't know if this happens at all. I have to ask the geologists. But, this version explains a lot. For example, it becomes clear why this megalith is located at an angle, and not horizontally. It was made so that one facet turned out to be ready-made automatically - it was fitted to the ready-made natural border which nature made inclined.

On the other side of the quarry, a large crack is visible, but, from the photographs, it is quite clearly visible that that line on the opposite wall of the quarry lies in a different plane below:

A group of LAI researchers Oksana Lyuti, Sergey Vantsak, Alexey Klevtsov in March 2014 (before the start of excavations) took a photo of this closeness crack:

In the depth of the crack, on the vertical surface, a light trace is visible, presumably scratched by something.

This is what they write in their report.

I emphasize that they wrote this before the excavations and before the discovery of a cut under the South Stone as a result of these excavations. And they are not talking about a cut under a megalith, but about a cut in a quarry. This can be of a different nature of the cuts. Indeed, in that quarry, building materials were mined and later civilizations (Romans and Arabs).

Here's what they write about the South Stone before the excavation revealed a clear cut under it:

And yet their feeling after the excavations was confirmed!

The fact that the lower megaliths are not located at the level of this dividing line, but, about a meter below, speaks against the version of the natural line of the boundary between the layers of the rock:

Another version of the origin of the cut under the South Stone is a high-tech one.

Andrey Sklyarov on his last expedition to Baalbek in March 2014 saw among the numerous stone steps an amazing internal cut of zero thickness. Moreover, not through, not through the whole block!!!

It might have been made with an unknown high-tech beam cutter. Such a beam could well have made an undercut under this megalith.

Or it is concrete technology. First, one part of the step, on which the man sits, was cast and hardened, and then new concrete was poured into it, and a gap of zero thickness remained at the junction. Or they poured everything with rhinestone, but for some reason a thin plate was stuck in this place, and when the concrete froze only partially, the plate was taken out, and, freezing, the concrete blurred slightly, leaving such a gap.

I have another option. The steps are made of two stone blocks that fit tightly together, but some concrete was poured onto the lower step, for example, to trim a pothole. And now it looks like a cut through. And, in fact, if you beat off the concrete coating in this place, then there will be a continuation of the gap under it.

These are just my assumptions, I myself was not there, and those who were and looked at this gap believe that this is exactly a gap of zero thickness in a stone block. I quote:

I emphasize that they wrote this before new excavations, when it was not yet known that the southern stone was cut from below.

Initially, I learned all this on the LAI (kR) forum (Laboratory of Alternative History (except for Russia))

It is worth noting that huge boulders are scattered all over the world in wild places, either cracked along a straight line, or sawn to pieces by someone

If the South stone in Baalbek was sawed off with one straight line, then the Thunder Stone under the Bronze Horseman in St. Petersburg is either cut into 3 parts by an arbitrary complex line, or consists of 3 parts, but science is silent about this. What does it have different chats of different colors:

And this hvakt is ignored by officials. Moreover, almost none of the residents of St. Petersburg notices this. I'm not talking about tourists. More details here

I had a conflict with Sklyarov about the sawn-off file. Its subjective feeling is more accurate than the result of measuring with a ruler. The southern stone at Baalbek is a truncated prism, not a parallelepiped. How awful!