Mr. Adam Young: The Inexplicably Precise Predynastic Stone Vessels of Egypt

[@fargarden]

Really extraordinary presentation with the absolute minimum of hyperbole, ego. Thank you for your work

[@misfit94-]

I’m a mechanical engineer and I take this 100% seriously. Working in aerospace, measuring leading edges of turbine blades, I know tolerances. This subject is captivating and worth researching. Love to examine them under ATOS blue light!

[@cosmicsummit]

ya

[@MrTL3wis]

Ditto here. I work on race cars, which uses a lot of aerospace-type equipment. People just don't understand the precision and manufacturing capacity that was necessary to create these vases. It's completely out of place. It literally can't exist with the present explanations.

[@adamnyc7935]

Atos is what I used for the first scan. Since then we have used other structured light equipment, CT, and photogrammetry

[@alexbuilds706]

About my 3rd time watching this presentation. Very solid work. Thx again. The mysteries continue!

[@adamnyc7935]

Thank you!!!

[@danontherun5685]

An entire career machining all types of materials even to .0001 tolerance I can't figure how anyone would make even one of those close tolerance thin wall stone vases but it had to be easy for such frivolous one off items, what were the difficult works they achieved? My bosses didn't even like me machining wood. One of those vases is more problematic than the largest pyramid or the polyginal stones. Finding who and how is more important than space and marine exploration.

[@adamnyc7935]

Perhaps the same tools / processes / skillset was used?

[@danontherun5685]

@@adamnyc7935 If you're suggesting the same machining processes we use today that doesn't cover a lot of artifacts we can not make now. The tall wall small internal radii blind corner boxes in Saqqara as example. Casting would be the first consideration except those boxes are proven not cast, let alone transport to position through barely larger halls. We do not have the ability to move thousand ton stones across dirt and mountains. And where are the magnitudes larger support facilities and energy sources that would have been required even for such seemingly frivolous works? It had to be easy which brings the question of what did they accomplish that was difficult for them? There is an entire huge advanced civilization missing.

[@craigf2696]

Decades of close tolerance milling experience here too. I completely agree with every point you make in both your original comment and reply. To assume that mechanical force milling could yield such artifacts is ridiculous if not ludicrous. EDM? Plasmatic process? Ultra sonic? Dunno. I think the shape and finish is accomplished by a single process. Same for the Barabar excavations. Also, seems to me that the intended content of the vessels is the artifact itself, a very durable record of highly sophisticated technology, mathematics and universal knowledge. We've played the record to a limited extent. Now we need to interpret the song.

[@danontherun5685]

@@craigf2696 We're using evidence of tech that seems magic to us for entertainment while wasting national fortunes on space and marine explorations that aren't providing much bang for the buck. Enough of the fireworks and whale songs, I want a Jetson car.

[@craigf2696]

@@danontherun5685 lmao! Me too. How freakin cool would that be? If you haven't heard, Ben from Uncharted is posting his take on the electron microscopy exam today at 3: pm pacific.

[@Joekonda22]

Really great. Witnessing the work of these people without any help of academia, other then negative criticism, is one of the most interesting thing currently happening. Thank you.

[@CoffeeFiend1]

Their shame should be immortalized. As far as we know we're the only thing in literally.... Fucking existence that can combine reason and scientific methodology in unison to be better than what we are and they choose to revel in blissful dogmatism. Shame them.

[@adamnyc7935]

Thank you

[@Kitties-of-Doom]

totally. because eventually academia and the goons will have to face so much evidence regarding their precision that they'll crash.

[@MarvinMonroe]

Than*

[@CoffeeFiend1]

@@MarvinMonroe That is indeed an excellent counter. I hereby retract my like. Professor Monroe, are you here all week?

[@ImEnemy608]

Been waiting for thse Cosmic Summit talks to release here on YT. Looks like I've got hours of content to watch. Thanks Adam and George

[@Alarix246]

I was thinking the same. Seems they postponed the release by some 3 months. 🤣 The thing is that not many people can afford to fly in and spend a week. Of course it must be incredible bonding with the entire community, but for us who follow this all closely it makes no sense to waste our $. Because most of the info we already know anyway and if mankind slept for few 000 years not knowing this all, we can wait just a few months more.

[@cosmicsummit]

Thank you! We will be making the entire 44 hours of content public this week.

[@ImEnemy608]

@@cosmicsummit heck yea!! can't wait for the Russ and Praveen talks!

[@jacko_jaxon]

I really hope that Mr Adam Young is back for CS-25!!! What an incredible presentation! I've always been in awe of the stuff learned from these brilliant people individually - bringing them together like this for CS is amazing - thanks for all the incredibly hard work from everyone involved, truly outstanding! We don't know the majority of our own history, the mainstream just isn't holding up anymore, they need to start looking and investing a lot more to find some of the answers, if we come together we have more of a chance in doing so! But the sheer ignorance of the mainstream just baffles me! We won't get to learn the majority of our history on this planet, but don't try to tell us that these alternative theories are a load of rubbish when they make much more sense to me and a growing number of people that these guys theory hold much more merit than the rubbish coming from a lot of the mainstream! THANK YOU COSMIC SUMMIT - BRILLIANT EVERY YEAR SO HERE'S TO MANY MORE!!!

[@adamnyc7935]

Thank you!

[@2550205]

18:23 The conical containers are heaters/coolers and we're shaped that way to be inserted into sand which absorbed and then slowly dissipated the heat/cool depending on the season. Same idea as the American cenote

[@gill7045]

To understand the levels of precision and geometry, there must first be a standard to measure these tollerances against. This implies the use of highly sophisticated mathematics, machining, and measuring methods. E.g. 500 years ago, there were no means to determine the levels of precision as found recently. Conclusion: No one knows how this was done more than 5000 years ago!

[@LuluJessNZ]

Or a lathe.

[@mathieutalbo]

Polishing stone like a maniac for years is probably part of the equation

[@johnmqueripel2367]

We know it wasn't done by hand. It was advanced maybe 5 axis cnc type machines, there is no other known method currently.

[@LuluJessNZ]

@@johnmqueripel2367 How do you know it wasn't made by hand??

[@charliemihai5471]

@@LuluJessNZ it sure that you know nothing about. otherwise you wouldn't ask such a stupid question

[@vonniebristow]

Nice job, Adam Young! I appreciate your candor when it comes to the archeological standard by which all finds are classified. I agree these need to be revisited. This can’t be the first presentation you’ve done…

[@adamnyc7935]

Thank you

[@andrewwoollard2255]

When I was in Egypt years ago I visited the museum several times. I could only last a couple of hours as astounding craftsmanship and precision used to do my head in. I would get a thumping headache as I found it very difficult to reason how such precision was possible all those years ago The last day I visited I came upon a stone vase as depicted here. It was so thin and perfectly carved with a scollaped edge. Made of stone yet translucent. I blew my mind. Out of all the museum it was this vase that still to this day, I can't comprehend how it was done.

[@francischambless5919]

Visited the Houston Museum for the first time last year having moved here over a year ago. Found the Egyptian wing and was looking about when across the way I spotted a stone vase in a glass case. Instantly and without doubt I knew it didn't belong there because it was perfect and I had said, 4th Dynasty, walked over and looked at the plaque and sure enough, 4th Dynasty or earlier. It's perfection, thin to translucent, and handle (more like one you'd find on a jug) are mind-boggling. It was the oldest thing in that museum and insanely well made beyond anything else in there. There was no information on the thing either which was frustrating. Who found it? Where precisely was it found? How was it made? Not even a means to investigate these questions on that plaque.... Frustrating.

[@francischambless5919]

@@Chew.YOUR.C4KE to get that level of precision to have uniformity between the walls as you cut so as to not breach a side requires quite a lot. It can't be done by hand, and even simple mechanical engineering wouldn't suffice or else you'd see this creation reproduced today. If you look at granite work today, mostly it's done with Urns, but the interior wall is just drilled out and not formed or shaped in any complex way.

[@jimrich4192]

It's hard to say who/what benefits or profits by hiding certain things away FROM the rest of us! I suspect it has something to do with POWER! 😮

[@Alarix246]

@@francischambless5919 I wonder if casting molten granite into a form could come closer.

[@francischambless5919]

@@Alarix246 As unlikely as I think that was the case for reasons I can list if you really want me to, my guess is that the tools and methods are as lost as the certainty of when and who did them. There is a lot of uncovered ground still. With some luck and the will to find more evidence, it's possible those answers can still be found.

[@timothyappleseed2986]

35:40 One idea I've had about these vessels, is that they are spinning singing bowls. The way you would use these is to wind a string around the neck, pull the string off with your right hand while holding the vessel in place with your left hand causing them to spin. These vessels were also found with plates, which would provide a surface for them to spin on and might also assist with the resonance and with keeping them in place. To get them to sing perhaps you would pour water in it, dip your finger in the water a then rub along the lip of the vessel as it's spinning, causing it to resonate. The concave shape of the lip would help to keep the lip wet. I don't have any of these vessels or plates so I'm not able to experiment with them. So what I'm suggesting here is something that someone else would need to experiment with.

[@Alarix246]

@@timothyappleseed2986 interesting - but there would be no need for such insane precision!

[@timothyappleseed2986]

@@Alarix246 Yeah, unless it was easy for them to achieve. And then again, just because we don't know why doesn't mean there wasn't a good reason for it.

[@MrMarvell]

Wow he breaks the vases down really well here, top presentation

[@omenquentama6453]

Please don't break the vases so they remain to future generations to study.

[@MsmithSmith]

These vessel's are instruments. Lab instruments, test pots, magentic self spinning testing beakers, etc etc. There's a reason to make something so precise and specific. It's to serve a precise and specific function. No doubt these things are instruments In the service of large scale industrial processes. They just look different and have a bit more precision and alot more of a unique style than what we have have today.

[@AhmedAdly2]

The video is very informative, I loved it, and it was useful to look into the whole time line and the history of the excavations

[@cosmicsummit]

I agree entirely. I still havent follwoed up on his key citations but will get to it. Excellent presentation.

[@finley.h]

That's why I always say that when you exclude everything that is impossible, the last thing that remains is the truth, no matter how improbable it may seem. However these days I'm baffled by the number of people who stubbornly insist that the impossible was not impossible.. smh. Watson, let's go for a walk! From Sherlock Holmes.

[@johannjohann6523]

I think this goes over most peoples heads. To work with granite and make so many at such good quality is truly a feat where machinery had to be used to manufacture them. It's almost like someone is showing off. I bet you can't make a granite vase. A good one.

[@KD32301]

SUPERB Presentation!!!

[@glennswart1487]

FASCINATING! I Know the tools we use today and this is utterly inexplicable for so long ago.

[@andymccracken4046]

Thanks for presenting this important work.

[@davidlennon7196]

Loved how he gave more evidence of how hard it is to make them now rather than just saying they ‘would be hard’ like others are. And I’m waiting for someone to guess why such precision was wanted? Did it have a purpose or was it just a case of the technology being so good it just achieved it easily and by default? What does or could such precision give? Military and space parts like it but a vase??!! They had presumably in a house? Just to hold something?! There must be a reason. Sound? Energy storage or creation?

[@adamnyc7935]

Thank you I used the Mohs scale examples to show relative hardness but as people have pointed out, that is not a very valuable scale.

[@scouterstu5856]

It is a mystery to be sure. They ancient Eygotions take granite and seem to have shapedit like clsy on a potter's wheel. Amazing! As a 18 old student (60 years ago) I visted a Mosque in Instanbul where I was shown a perfectly smooth, highly polished, block of granite (5'x5' approx) and when asked how it was cut so perfectly I was told it had been cut with a rotating diamond' encrusted rope, pulleys and a jig. I wish I had also asked them how and when it had polished and when. The variety of pattern in the granite was beautiful. Of course how a smooth cut block of granite is cut , does nothing to answer how to shape stone into a vase with such precision a master clay potter would be envious of such kill even with clay, let along rock! Harder than granite is Burmese Jade (6.7 Wo's scale) Canadian Jade (6.6) which today we need serious diamond cutting tools to cut and shape yet somehow they shaped jade as easily and precisely as they granute and less hard materials, This channels video on how these ancient artists, by multiplying the mechanical advantage of their pulleys seemed likly to yo be part of the answer to how these huge weights could be moved with relstive ease. How they moved them from quary, down river to the site another big question. The mystery will eventual be solved by Engineers rather Egyptionologist, Archelogist or Alien enthusiasts 🖖

[@faragraf9380]

this famous man wasn’t Djoser, it was his brother Imhotep. Djoser as Pharao had no time do all this things, he had to rule and save the land. But his brother could. Therefore there is the Imhotep museum, its not called Djoser museum.

[@adamnyc7935]

Yes, it was Imhotep that 'did' most of the 'doing' it seems. However he had the support of Djoser, and Djoser must have had very strong beliefs of his own. They both deserve some credit and must have been very interesting at parties.

[@Alarix246]

@@faragraf9380 no point in separating them for the purposes of this video. Their work is intertwined to a highest degree, and none of them had their hands dirty - they had other workers doing the job, so we could argue endlessly about what we perceive only from our logical point of view.

[@kirkwoodyoung6035]

@@Alarix246 I encourage you all to take the red pill( everythinginsideme) this world is filled with lies, since Jesus left to prepare a place for the disciples.(because the Church is already IN Christ) We have been fed fake history. If you notice 1. the talking point of the democrat new media, they all use a buzz word to stick in our head(programing) and how or why is it that Universal studios and other movies use the Globe to introduce their product. Yo constantly remind us that the world is a globe and not flat. And that their movie is Universally accepted.

[@Kitties-of-Doom]

The CNC remake that had a runout 20 - 50 times worse than the OG vase seals the deal. There is nothing left to say or do. The og vases were super engineered. Scientific papers will be published on this and the academic sector will cry and crash.

[@MrBrachiatingApe]

But mainstream fetishists will say things like "lol" and "conspiracy theorist" and "where's the evidence" and even make baseless assertions without a shred of proof. They may even spam laughing while crying emojis, accuse you of worshipping Graham Hancock, or reference how some random or nameless KZbinr "debunked" these vessels as fakes! How will you handle such a brilliantly crafted, witheringly rigorous, and scientifically sound counter-stroke?

[@annascott3542]

Ya but I mean, it was made in China. Haha JK

[@jacko_jaxon]

Excellent presentation, thank you

[@annascott3542]

The proof is in the pudding, as they say. Pretty hard to refute, I’d love to see them try. Teeter doesn’t think they even used a lathe on these. Utterly ridiculous. Well done!!

[@marshalbass7098]

Phenomenonal presentation.

[@adamnyc7935]

Thank you for the kind words!

[@luclaflamme4712]

Everything in your presentation points to some sort of "still unknown " molding+geopolymer technology. I really believe that further investigations should be focused on that. I'm inclined to think that the lost ancient technology we are looking for is chemical/composit material in nature, rather than mechanical/Cnc type tooling.... Anyway nice presentation, these vases are still a fascinating mystery...

[@annascott3542]

I agree, for me that’s the most parsimonious explanation.

[@wizwhat8186]

It seems like, that wouldn't really change anything because you'd still need to make the mould.

[@luclaflamme4712]

@@wizwhat8186 One could make the mould out of many different workable materials ...

[@wizwhat8186]

@@luclaflamme4712 It seems like, that might well make a difference but it's odd that nobody in these videos addresses the question of whether softer materials are easier or more difficult to get high tolerances in - some people talk as if they take it for granted that it would be easier, saying that something is difficult to do in metal so it must be much more difficult in stone, but it strikes me that it could go either way, presumably a machinist who's worked with both would know.

[@luclaflamme4712]

​@@wizwhat8186 Your right, precision in and of itself is somewhat taken for granted here. But the fact that they did not have any tools that could carve hard rock like granite or basalt, let alone do it at that level of precision, seems to be the real mystery...hence the mould+geopolymer hypothesis...

[@wouterdc3290]

WoW- amazing!!

[@craigf2696]

A method of discovery would be to determine if there are distinct ranges of measurement tolerance. We have examples of vessels in the + - .003" range. Are there comparable vessels that fall into a tolerance range of + - .015" or even + - .030" ? Seems to me, that would be very telling. Regarding the reproduction attempt. I'm quite certain that the reason the piece was not finished internally is because the required tool pressure would shatter the work piece. Not to mention the extreme difficulty of fixing the work to the machine, again without shattering.

[@eriksvensson86]

I😅Hej

[@eriksvensson86]

Oooi 16:06 😅u😅q😅😊d 16:29 16:34 så k

[@wizwhat8186]

Apparently, Denys Stocks did make a stone vase with the inside shaped ​- his was limestone, but he also did some experiments with granite and reported that it wasn't substantially different although slower, and he wasn't using any crazily high pressure, only a hand drill as in the Egyptian drill hieroglyph, so I'm not sure it couldn't be done, but fixing it to the machine might be more of a difficulty, Stocks only used a rotating tool for the inside and did the outside freehand so he didn't have to reckon with how to fix it twice.

[@kristjiannne]

It looks like a tray for nine-layer dip to me!

[@carmenmagnetra]

Adam Young started this very excellent line of questioning regarding these pre-dynastic vessels. This area of research is proving that how this was done so precisely and without modern tools, should make us pay attention to all the enigmatic details in Egypt as how this was done was how everything was done. Using sound and advanced technologies we no longer have.

[@falkms1795]

Using sound? What makes you speculate on that one?

[@benwinter2420]

The old amphora egg shape is old tech to create convection currents inside to keep contents fresh & not stagnate

[@iainmcfadyen9197]

What 3 words do archeologists not have in their vocabulary ? I don't know.😮

[@Crannogman4686]

You must've never listened to an archeologist before to make such a baseless accusation

[@markluxton3402]

I think the machines used to make these, operated by default using advanced math, like the golden ratio. You just told your machine to make a nice looking vase/jar about yea big, for this purpose, and the machine automatically employs advanced math. It would be pre programmed to use the golden ratio, because that would look nice :-)

[@ricka1799]

Excellent presentation on these alien artifacts left in plain view for millennia. It's about time the 'experts' figured it out, it's not some lost human civilization that's just stupidity compounded.

[@adamnyc7935]

Thank you and I agree!

[@johnhughes8563]

Great informative video thank you so much.

[@adamnyc7935]

Thank you!

[@chriscallaway4027]

20,000 plus or minus years ago the polar shift destroyed EVERYTHING, few escaped. These stone vases did.....

[@SCEPSIS-zw9wv]

And because a great many of them ended up in some pharao's grave, it is likely that they were found in that region which means that this previuos highly developed civilization existed there also, which is backed up by many different stories on the origin of mankind.

[@adamnyc7935]

Its crazy to think about huh?

[@calzskilz]

W presentation.

[@adamnyc7935]

Thank you!

[@Leeside999]

Can you provide a source for the "55k year old fabrication facility" found near Dendera? Can't find anything about such a place.

[@adamnyc7935]

The site is called Taramsa. The Belgian University of Leuvenin discovered it and dated the site to approximately 55,000 BCE.

[@Leeside999]

@@adamnyc7935 Thank you.

[@GroberWeisenstein]

Theres a whole industry dedicated to turned architectural stone products. This funery industry also is big in turned granite vases and urns. Water fall spheres and curling stones round out the list.

[@adamnyc7935]

Absolutely true. The difference is in precision manufacturing. No reproductions have come close… yet

[@GroberWeisenstein]

@adamnyc7935 who has tried to replicate this vase specifically ? In general accuracy and quality for vases and urns produced today exceeds this.

[@adamnyc7935]

@@GroberWeisenstein that is definitely not true. We have never seen circularity tolerance down to 0.001" in any modern stone piece, made by anyone, anywhere. Just not true, sorry.

[@GroberWeisenstein]

@adamnyc7935 I have 40 years in quality control of manufactured stone products. Surface Tolerance pushing .000025 inch , yes, (4)-0's.

[@darinhsu]

@adamnyc7935 Give us a break. A random granite Chinese vase on Night Scarab's channel is down to 0.001", in several spots. And it's a mass market product sold in the thousands.

[@2550205]

29:36 You just explained how Djoser and Imhotep designed and orchestrated the largest construction projects in the history of humans.building sand castles that are still standing 5000 yeaar later. Buildings used to hydrofracture water using water into hydrogen and ammonia to produce fertilizer which you find all along the river and you call them primative...

[@RealKlausSchwab]

I'm a machinist for over 20 years.... These are NOT handmade. They aren't even able to be entirely made on lathes! IMO, these were made on a multi-axis mill/turn machine.

[@thomasxxxxxx2345]

Funny how no one even questions the provenance of the vases that were measured or when they were made. For all we know they were made last week in China and express shipped

[@adamnyc7935]

@@thomasxxxxxx2345 no they were not, but valid criticism

[@MrTL3wis]

I'm a mechanical engineer. Those vases would be mass-produceable in Aluminum. You'd generally use tolerances about 0.020" (1/2mm) or so on a nice bowl/bottle. There wouldn't be any reason to hold the tolerances down to 0.001". You'd have to pay extra for that precision and they'd be expensive pieces, even in AL. I have no idea how you'd make them out of granite.

[@duaneelliott5194]

The big question is why were they made. A great point you bring up.

[@GroberWeisenstein]

Granite provides utility since it's impervious to many chemicals that other stone types are not.

[@adamnyc7935]

Great points and I agree. Its the most fascinating thing in the world… aside from all the rest of Egypt!

[@MrTL3wis]

@@duaneelliott5194 They needed the vases. There was a lot of granite hand. And, this is the big one, it was *easy* to do. If these were as difficult for them to make as it would be for us, then they would not have made so many.

[@NicoleTedesco]

Rediscovering how they did it may help us reduce the costs of various kinds of modern high precision work. Or not. We may find that the technologies and various techniques only work for stones. There might be something about their crystalline structures that certain techniques took advantage of, knowledge lost to time. If you watch expert stone workers work, sculptors, jewelers, or bricklayers, you find unbelievable cuts are made not because of the precision of the tools, but because the artisan was able to take advantage of the molecular structure of the stone itself in some way.

[@patharris9866]

It’s normal in desert regions to avoid flat bottoms on containers. It’s more stable to have pointy bottoms. You can stick them into the sand and they don’t wobble. Could that be relevant to these shapes?

[@adamnyc7935]

Excellent point.

[@seedhound]

Just WOW!

[@nozrep]

youtube algorithm had the “misleading nonsense” comment as the top comment on my app even though it had less likes than other comments. So i wonder whose side youtube is on?😂lolz

[@craigf2696]

Oh you contheoryspirist!!! I'm fairly confident that the intended content of these vessels is the artifact itself. An extremely durable record of highly sophisticated technology, mathematics, and geometry.

[@100HzJimmi]

Paranoia in effect.

[@finley.h]

😂

[@2550205]

The AI is watching itself think

[@smalltownblackouts]

It's misleading to think they could have produced granite vessels at all, let alone that were so symmetrical. So is this nonsense or is your brain just fukin bad? 😂

[@carladamcarter]

None of the historic pictures of burials and ruins actually show stone vessels.

[@adamnyc7935]

That is not true, although sometimes it is easy to confuse stone with pottery.

[@paultogneri9783]

Love this vid.....!!!!!!!

[@adamnyc7935]

Thank you!

[@djhome7718]

I watched you on uncharted so gald this is now being talked about more and you who let them (check them out ) 🤣😂

[@katiekane5247]

I've got the same question about current tunnels; where is the excavated material?

[@skel8tor]

Would it be more or less or equally accurate if ( assume; premise: Granite can be mixed and poured like concrete ) the vase was made using geopolymer and a mould instead of a cutting method? It can't, but if it could, would it be possible to be that accurate?

[@al2207]

your assume is wrong , granite is not a kind of concrete it is igneous rock with lot of crystalline in it

[@GroberWeisenstein]

Geopolymers can't replicate granite

[@skel8tor]

@al2207 assume the premise is true then addrsss the question Easier or more difficult to attain accuracy using a mould or by carving

[@skel8tor]

@GroberWeisenstein thank you I know. Assume the premise is true then addrsss the question Easier or more difficult to attain accuracy using a mould or by carving?

[@GroberWeisenstein]

@skel8tor depends on aggregates used and level of finish required

[@MooseKnuckle1]

Well Mr. Young just give the word if you would like to get to the bottom of your mystery. I will let you know how they were produced.

[@adamnyc7935]

Please do tell!

[@davidlanham99]

Are there “mistakes” that have the same accuracy but were mis-manufactured somehow or were they all perfectly completed?

[@adamnyc7935]

No, not all are perfect. Only a minority of stone vessels we have examined are highly accurate. Many have extensive damage. Those that are finished to high levels of accuracy (that we have examined) appear to be “perfectly completed”, though without knowing their true purpose it is difficult to conclude anything.

[@davidlanham99]

@@adamnyc7935 I'm just trying to eliminate the possibility that they are hoaxed somehow with modern techniques and made to appear older. But if there are mistakes in the otherwise perfect ones, it would suggest that there is a manufacturing process that no one understands that would nonetheless produce some errors. I guess.

[@adamnyc7935]

@@davidlanham99there are many thousands of these - perhaps hundreds of thousands. They are not all hoaxes. Furthermore there have been no successful attempts to create these using modern tools, at least that I am aware of.

[@davidlanham99]

@@adamnyc7935 I guess I was originally wondering if the mistakes would shed light on the manufacturing process. If there are zero mistakes, that would imply aliens who had a bizarre need to give humans perfect pottery. If there are mistakes, that would imply humans who did not have access to some alien technology but who nonetheless were able to create these things and yet not figure out metallurgy nor leave metal objects behind. Neither one makes any sense to me. I don't really believe in aliens, btw, because where is the evidence besides amazing feats with rocks? None of this makes sense really. Also, how does one figure out advanced math without something to write on?? Where are any written calculations?

[@adamnyc7935]

@@davidlanham99 I expect that over time and with a larger data set we will begin to see more evidence of tool marks. So far we don't see much runout, which would indicate stopping and starting of manual tools. Eventually, we will need to examine the surfaces in much greater detail via electron microscopy. That should come soon. For now, I prefer to stick to what we can conclusively show and not speculate on how these were made.

[@lukewaack]

What about Optically stimulated luminescence dating of quartz and feldspar grains?

[@shadetreemechanicracing22]

I have a grade B surface plate made from granite.

[@timhanna4700]

Great presentation. Genesis 6.

[@adamnyc7935]

Thank you!

[@JaguarWisdom-9]

I personally think they used acids a lot more that we know about.

[@nozrep]

man a lot of the mainstream egyptology line towers made it out here to this one in the comments to disparage and denigrate and not even consider a possibly possible new and weird theory about a thing in the world. Lolz. welp, too bad for them.

[@annascott3542]

These people are bent on coming up with any explanation no matter how illogical or nonsensical in order to maintain the status quo, and above all, to avoid challenging their damn worldview they’re so attached to. It’s threatening.

[@peterciurea7771]

Pi=3.14 not 3.16. Simple mistake, but it bugged me for every slide after. Throws off every statement after

[@adamnyc7935]

Yes, there were a few glitches in some of the slides. Mistakes happen, especially in powerpoint.

[@Tekwyzard]

​@@adamnyc7935 That's not just a glitch in a slide or two, it's someone blatantly not understanding Pi, how it works, and how to do decimal rounding, in this case to two decimal places. In this context, 3.16 is massively different than the correct 3.14, and that would completely invalidate any geometry calculations involving radii, diameters, tangents, sine, cosine, etc. Much like @peterciurea7771 said, it massively annoyed me, and highlighted to me that these people can, and probably do, just make up whatever 'sacred geometry' they need to suit their agendas. Beyond this error though, the presentation was fascinating and deffo very thought provoking.

[@adamnyc7935]

@@Tekwyzard​​⁠ it’s an error on the slide and unrelated to calculations.

[@PaulBjorke]

Clearly all the stone objects being discussed are antediluvian. They are the proof of a previous advanced civilization. They are the last vestiges that have not oxidized and disappeared or have been reclaimed by our follow up culture.

[@gbennett58]

There don't seem to be any other high tech artifacts within the last 12,000 years or so. So perhaps it comes from a high tech civilization during one of the previous interglacial periods. The last interglacial was about 125,000 years ago.

[@dodgygoose3054]

Incredible, blows the bible apart ... blows everything apart .... incredible, incredible...... And the establishments are deliberately running away from this .... because of man made religions.

[@sinistersteel1042]

I think you're wrong about nakata I think they were trading somebody else for them if they didn't have the tools to make them so they had something that was valued by somebody who was making the pottery and they would trade for them

[@adamnyc7935]

Interesting idea… seems logical.

[@Alarix246]

41:49 I already commented elsewhere (perhaps on UnchartedX video) that there is something else you'all seem overlooking (or simply resolving and thus it had no point in mentioning): dirt, or merely layers of human fingerprint residue. Did you resolve it by thoroughly washing the vessels before measuring? Because we are dealing with such small dimensions that 1) even the "unintended" scratches and divots (as you correctly just mentioned) make these incredible numbers worse that they otherwise would have, but also 2) the thin oil layer from people just touching or holding the vessel would distort the results just as well!

[@JohnDelong-qm9iv]

Soft rock was popular worldwide, after the global flood

[@ckjamn]

Fancy centerpieces.

[@darbycrash55]

these things are primordial

[@ericjley]

These were obviously made with pounding stones and copper chisels. 😂

[@casualviewing1096]

Nice straw man. A bit like someone claiming you lot think they were made by aliens with lasers.

[@ericjley]

@@casualviewing1096 I’m pretty sure they were or possibly molded from highly vitreous camel shit and fired in a charcoal kiln.

[@danfeutz6911]

Great job and presentation. Too bad your fighting religious zealot and archeology leaders saying they are only a few thousand years old.

[@itsnot_stupid_ifitworks]

All of the ancient Egyptian quarries locations are known with studies of each type of stone documented. Each statue or vase can be identified where the original stone came from. This has been done for the vast majority of all of the ancient Egyptian Stone vessel museum pieces. Can you point me to the the time stamp in this presentation showing the study that proves the Uncharted X tested vases are from known ancient Egyptian quarries.

[@adamnyc7935]

The vessels we have analyzed - and the ones that Uncharted X showed, are seldom identified by Egyptologists by the location of the original stone quarries. There are dozens of known stone quarries in Egypt and some are still in existence today. There is almost no dispute concerning the origination of stone for such artifacts. Most of the dispute centers around how these were created, by whom, and when.

[@itsnot_stupid_ifitworks]

@adamnyc7935 In fact there was a detailed study( i believe the University of Toronto) completed on nearly all the vases in the world's museums. This study details the chemical make up and can pin point the exact quarry each came from. Many replicas were made in the 1800s of egytian and Roman vases/urns with stone quarried in Europe. You would think someone collecting these vases would be at least curious and it would at least give some evidence of there authenticity. It's interesting that Matt Bahl claims to have never heard of this testing as well. It's the first thing I would ask the antiquities dealer to provide me .

[@adamnyc7935]

@@itsnot_stupid_ifitworks Most artifacts are not attributed to a particular quarry by archaeologists. A very small number have been - as you mentioned - but again, the locations of the stone quarries are not in dispute.

[@itsnot_stupid_ifitworks]

@adamnyc7935 you really seem to be struggling with what I'm trying to say. Your stone vases have not being tested. Meaning they could be modern day copies from a European Quarry.

[@evanmorris1178]

@@itsnot_stupid_ifitworksYou’re not listening either. There is no current tooling available today, and certainly not in the 18-19th century capable of turning the hard stone vases. It’s not that we couldn’t do it. If one of the top machining companies, like MAZAK for instance wanted to build a CNC lathe for making vases, they could probably do it. But there isn’t a market for such things at the prices that would result. We know they are authentic, because we CAN’T replicate them. The Alabaster and Siltstone could be turned on a good woodlathe. Although not to those levels of accuracy. The cheap or even relatively expensive modern copies you refer to are generally Alabaster.

[@rosifervincent9481]

What would be impressive would be if you ever found two or more of these vessels that were identical to the same tolerances. And, who made the granite vases that are imperfect?

[@GroberWeisenstein]

Yes, and since that's how you measure and determine precision.

[@Starfishtroopers]

we don't have Atlantean artifacts .... well.....

[@manbearpig710]

I’m sayin🤘

[@pilotnamealreadytaken6035]

I wonder how old they could be in thier oldest?

[@adamnyc7935]

We may never know, but even mainstream archaeology dates these to well before dynastic Egypt

[@stiphbreis5513]

Due to the lack of evidence for machining technology in ancient Egypt, I have proposed a new theory. I propose these vessels were remnants of trade with proto indus valley peoples. Here is the video of proof of ancient machining tech in India. kzbin.info/www/bejne/aoGUaXlsgdd8jNEsi=VvV3em-yhD2CBp8N

[@adamnyc7935]

This could be possible. However some of the vessels’ stone can be traced back to local quarries in Egypt and other areas in Africa. Mt Kilimanjaro for instance.

[@sinistersteel1042]

I'd say every one of these vessels must have had a lid and I bet you it was made out of gold that's why they're all gone

[@adamnyc7935]

Great point. I have seen partial lids on some - removable necks actually. But no lids…

[@nozrep]

gotta send this vid over to David Miano of the World of Antiquity Channel and Miniminuteman even though they don’y really matter in Academia. It’d be hilarous because they are always bashing people like Hancock and Carlson for offering theories and not evem claiming that their theories are fact.

[@Leeside999]

There's nothing new in this video that hasn't been covered already.

[@landyshserebristyy2493]

@@Leeside999 Judging by your remarks, you haven't even watched it.

[@simongordon8182]

@@landyshserebristyy2493he’s totally right, this is the same old same old misrepresentation and misuse of science to sound credible whilst being totally wrong

[@AustinKoleCarlisle]

@@simongordon8182 prove it

[@simongordon8182]

@@AustinKoleCarlisleprove what. The video hasn’t proven anything. It’s proven that they misuse mohs scale

[@swintondavid]

So, how do you propose they were manufactured? What kinda tech are we looking at? How were the machines powered?

[@francischambless5919]

Not all machines run on electricity. Perhaps the point of this is that those answers haven't been adequately addressed yet and require further investigation instead of speculation and dismissal from those that dissent.

[@swintondavid]

@@francischambless5919 who said anything about electricity? If these questions haven’t been answered, what is this person’s response?

[@francischambless5919]

@@swintondavid why is it you people always have to be so damn childish. "Who said anything about electricity?" GOOD GRIEF. I'd get through more talking to a tree than you dense punks. I'm done here. Enjoy your limited intelligence.

[@kenpumford754]

They were turned on a lathe or the equivalent and likely finished with a precisely controlled grinder or polisher. Look up the recent videos with Matt Beall, who has accumulated over 60 of these type of objects and had a dozen or so CT scanned. There are witness marks from the cutting tool on the inside, and the outside dimensions show banding that is evidence of turning.

[@swintondavid]

@@kenpumford754 so, why would you say these are not able to be made produced by Egyptian people? I don’t see an issue..

[@Arminius420]

All this cool stuff and yet they couldn't build decent boats that sail across the oceans.

[@MarvinMonroe]

3:35 "would have GONE into"**

[@timothyappleseed2986]

I think the stone vessels could be spinning singing bowls and the plates are what they would spin on. They turned the corners up to help keep the bowls centered on the plate and to help with the resonance. To get them to spin you simply wind a string around the neck and pull it.

[@28704joe]

Answer: A Lathe You're welcome

[@adamnyc7935]

That is unlikely with friction tools.

[@annascott3542]

Egyptologists claim that these perfectly symmetrical stone vases were made without the use of the lathe, which they claim had not been invented yet.

[@28704joe]

@@annascott3542 Then why are the Egyptians SHOWN using lathes on the wall murals they left behind?

[@annascott3542]

Those depictions are from a later period; New Kingdom, than the stone vessels.

[@annascott3542]

@@28704joe *New and Middle Kingdom but nevertheless, a later period.

[@robymarz]

Why a bussiness man is talking about archaeology without being qualified? Ancient craftsmen were really good and it has been demostrated by experimental archaeology how they were produced (with high level of precision) ...yes they can be made by anciet tools ....it has been demostrated! this presentation is nonsense

[@adamnyc7935]

No, these cannot be made by primitive hand tools. That has not been demonstrated. That is why a business man is talking about archaeology.

[@evanmorris1178]

He’s qualified to talk about his personal experience. Something you clearly don’t have much of…. The laudable attempts by some experimental archaeologists to replicate such vases have not demonstrated the ability to achieve accuracy, or an interior volume shaped like the exterior, ie a consistent thin wall. That is the whole point of these. The exquisite accuracy and delicacy.

[@itsnot_stupid_ifitworks]

@evanmorris1178 The purpose of the "Laudable" experiments was to prove that stone could be carved with extremely primitive tools. Many including uncharted x years ago claimed it wasn't possible. If your referring to the Russian woman she used NO metals taking her experiment before the bronze age. Now the goal posts have been moved to impeccable precision must be achieved...despite the fact that 99 percent of the pre dynastic vases, including the ones on display in museums have visible imperfections. No attempt has been made to copy a predynastic vase with all the tools the Egyptians had available to them. It's also incredibly amazing that the antiquities dealers keep finding perfect vases for the two business men to purchase.

[@evanmorris1178]

@@robymarz I have been following these items since long before UnchartedX existed. I’ve watched his shows and am happy that he’s bringing more attention to them. Ben has made some statements that are incorrect. Most people do sometimes, especially when discussing things that are unusual. All in all, many misstatements about ancient core drills have been made. But, and this is a really big but: Just because nearly anyone with a piece of copper pipe and some abrasive sand can cut a short hole in a few days, does not mean that they can carve the shapes of these vases. Especially with any precision. Further, I’ve travelled to a great many countries, been in hundreds of museums and seen more recent granite and porphyry turnings. Few of them are hollowed at all. Most are architectural details and only shaped on the outside. The ones that are hollowed do not follow the outer contour. And they were done using machine tools, or if by hand, they are very large and allow for conventional chisel and grinding techniques. Of course I haven’t measured them, but I doubt the accuracy is as good. Generally you don’t even get to see any tool marks, so it’s hard to say. My point, is that no one in the modern world has reproduced a vase like these with ancient tools. It would take at the least, a roughly large table sized stand with very strong movable, but clampable workholding and excellent bearings. That will suffice for the exterior, and that is how your modern ones were done. Lathes like this go back to the 17th C.. Interior work is more problematic. Once you’ve drilled straight down, you can angle off as far as the shape of the lip allows and drill more holes. But the accuracy goes down rapidly as your copper tube looses support on all sides after the first few cuts. In fact, I doubt a copper tube would survive this. Modern carbide core drills often snap at this stage. The delicate vases would not survive the attempt.

[@mushroomtea01]

What evidence has been found to set anatomically modern humans back to 2 or 3 million yrs ?

[@timothyappleseed2986]

I don't think the vases were collected. I think they were confiscated. They were gathered up from all around the area. Otherwise, w would find them everywhere. Where else have we found these?

[@JohnDelong-qm9iv]

Fired floodmud

[@williamolivadoti3867]

2:31 s a gold pan for panning gokd

[@dennisbanks8606]

Everything but pottery and stone decays to dust overtime. We are amazed at their vases but they most likely had super duper advanced metal machines , tech, and better way better games than PS6 so yuh kids they had better tech and that means better games!! 😅 Now who finds history interesting 😅😅

[@swirvinbirds1971]

Look at the crystal work done by hand in the 1800's. The skill and difficulty of that makes this stuff look like childs play.

[@GroberWeisenstein]

Fatimid ewers. Faberge Eggs.

[@mikhailasanovic]

Yeah, but you're missing the point. There is no way that these jars could be made by hand, vis-a-vis, they must have been made with machines. This means ancient man had machines

[@swirvinbirds1971]

@@mikhailasanovic yes, if you are talking about primitive 'machines' like a lathe. Machines also mass produce, not make 1 offs. Other than that pure nonsense they couldn't do this by hand.

[@GroberWeisenstein]

@mikhailasanovic you can't link.thst vase to antiquity, so your whole theory falls apart..

[@GroberWeisenstein]

@@mikhailasanovic you are unfamiliar with manual techniques in stoneworking.

[@MrWeanie]

Apparently he is wrong about the Toshka Site 8905, in that in the oldest graves dating back to 14000-12000 BC had not stone vessels in them only flint. The photo's he showed are for some of the middle Kingdom graves.

[@adamnyc7935]

Incorrect. The photos are correctly identified. Not every photo shows stone vessels.

[@MrWeanie]

@@adamnyc7935 I made this statement because I found something on X where they said that these old graves did not contain any stone vessels. So do you have a reference that supports the fact that some of these stone vases date back to 14000BC

[@adamnyc7935]

@@MrWeanie yes - if you check documented records of dig sites all across Egypt and northern Sudan, you will see accounts of stone vessels. However, the dating of these sites is not accurate, and not agreed upon. Only a handful of sites have been carbon dated (based on human remains or other organic materials found there). The dates are therefore uncertain and speculative - by both traditional Archaeologists and skeptics. It is also unclear which sites had the most and/or highest quality stone vessels. Regardless, I do not think we will ever be able to rely on this information for exact dating. Today, both sides agree that these are pre-dynastic. Maybe one day we can agree that these are much older than even that.

[@MrWeanie]

@@adamnyc7935 Thank you very much for the excellent explanation on these dig sites. Much appreciated

[@adamnyc7935]

@@MrWeaniethank you as well for the commentary and critique

[@andreitone]

'until 5000 years ago' - yes, because that's when God made the perfect man Adam (compared with whom we are faaaaar more imperfect now), and these vessels are proofs that in the beginning God gave Adam power over nature forces, animals, plants and minerals (stones), and these were modeled by his will-power. And this is more plausible than your ancient advanced civilization that is nowhere to be found. (and don't say anything about Gobekli because that was waaaay un-advanced civilisation obviously)

[@pilotnamealreadytaken6035]

😂😢

[@iemandanders353]

They kick-started h. erectus biologically to get h. sapiens. They kick-started civilization with some fancy stone bowls. They kick-started modern man with gifts of flying craft in working order such as the "sport model" of Lazar. They're flying the skies of Earth with impunity, and in a couple of years there will be an event that will silence all skeptics- think Phoenix Lights in broad daylight. Hang on, earthlings!

[@AustinKoleCarlisle]

Bring it on, we're ready!

[@benwinter2420]

Hancock is suspect

[@8bitevolushroom312]

Is this guys stole the work of UnchartedX?

[@adamnyc7935]

Nope but thanks for looking out for Ben.

[@JaguarWisdom-9]

I think they use something called 'email'

[@LuluJessNZ]

Would a lathe not be the reasoning behind the precision

[@annascott3542]

I think it’s obvious and just common sense that a lathe must’ve been used, the evidence of which is the perfectly symmetrical vases themselves. But mainstream Egyptology rejects the idea that a lathe was used because it had not been invented yet. It was done purely by hand and eyeballing it, which, of course, is total rubbish.

[@simongordon8182]

One vase takes two years to make ? Nonsense numbers, anyone can throw random numbers around, and you think the salary or an American craftsman is he same as an African or chinese or Indian person ? Again meaningless numbers.

[@knutblume907]

I saw videos on KZbin of Chinese people making 100 cups a day out of natural stone with a drill. They were also round and had handles. I can't see his special precision anywhere. All you need is a drill that spins quickly and running water. Then polish and you're done. Here is the process: kzbin.infoMYZtpRmwEh4

[@simongordon8182]

@@knutblume907 incompletely agree,m completely. When you have a goal in mind it’s easy to stack the decks in math and when multiplying errors on the upside amplify. It’s also clear from other examples this is nonsense for instance the Roman’s have hundreds if not thousands of granite columns and statues. Now if they showed me archeological evidence of computer controlled milling machines we could talk… Meanwhile, use a copper pipe and you can drill out a cylinder. Then shape it and hollow it.

[@knutblume907]

@@simongordon8182 With modern means I would have made something large in ancient times and not flower vases. Like Mount Rushmore or the even larger head of the Sphinx. Quality and quantity are intertwined. There were an awful lot of Egyptians. And some of them wanted their work to be good and beautiful. It was also an opium culture - in love with the white lotus.

[@simongordon8182]

@@knutblume907 of course there is large and small there are large granite statues and I don’t think they were turned on giant lathes ! The fact remains 1) the people making claims of precision have measures very few (one that I know) vases 2) most are eyeballed 3) selective quoting of measurements is deceptive !

[@knutblume907]

@@simongordon8182 People always think that a stonemason makes a statue alone, but it is a collaboration of many specialists. A team breaks the stone out of the rock. Someone with a lot of muscles makes the brute out of it. The next person then does the details. Then the next person polishes the statue and someone else makes the inscriptions. The harder the stone, the longer the process takes. The big things in Egypt with more detail than an obelisk are all sandstone or greywacke. Statues in rose granite were also difficult for the Egyptians. I only saw a small bust of a pharaoh and the execution was not very good. You can see from the same design of things that there was a strict set of rules to achieve this "perfect" results. The rules were gathered over generations of practical doing.

[@itsnot_stupid_ifitworks]

Interesting things inter mixed with wild misinformation and biased speculation

[@AustinKoleCarlisle]

name it, then

[@itsnot_stupid_ifitworks]

@@AustinKoleCarlisleya...I don't work for you. Plenty has been explained to you before and you made it obvious in the past that you just enjoy the fantasy.

[@AustinKoleCarlisle]

@@itsnot_stupid_ifitworks yawn...get back to me when you feel like having a real discussion.

[@adamnyc7935]

Everyone is biased to an extent but I try very hard to objectively use all data in an unbiased way. If these were made by simple people with simple tools, the data should show that, however that is not the case.

[@itsnot_stupid_ifitworks]

@adamnyc7935 I'm curious. Set the "precision" aside for a moment..How do you think Romans, for example, carved and polished the hardest stone sarcophagi, columns and vases? Many immediately reply "romans didnt" which is false fantastic examples in the Vatican museum or they say "romans had iron" which I will refer you to your presentations mohs scale image.

[@knutblume907]

All you need is a fast spinning stick: kzbin.infoMYZtpRmwEh4

[@evanmorris1178]

That fast spinning stick, is high speed steel, and the cutter is diamond. You just proved his point. Those are two of the ingredients he’s arguing we’re needed to produce these. The bowl in the picture looks nice, but will not have 1/10,000 the accuracy recorded on these vases, due to being free handed. Very impressive feat though!

[@knutblume907]

@@evanmorris1178 The principle has remained the same. The tools were worse and everything took longer. But the result is wonderful, wouldn't you agree?

[@evanmorris1178]

Principles don’t get you there. Not even with lots of time. You literally NEED something as strong as the steel and as hard ( or nearly as hard ) as the diamond used in the video to do this kind of work. A wooden stick, even Ironwood would not get the job done. Putting that much thrust into weird angles through a narrow neck to cut away undercut shoulders in those Egyptian vases is the hardest part. The modern person with the circular diamond saw could cut a slightly less than hemispherical bowl with it. But in order to go inside and do a reduced neck with shoulders, he would need diamond burrs of various sizes and shapes. This complicates things immensely when you are trying to claim the ancients could do this with known tech. If you are saying they had Diamond or even Corundum burrs, I’m afraid you’ve proved his point, not yours. But I do agree they are exquisite. I wish I had bought one I saw up at auction a few years ago. They are still out there.

[@knutblume907]

@@evanmorris1178 Diamond, Corundum... I think you don´t understand stone masonary. I can scretch every stone with every other stone. It´s a question of time and how often I scretch the surface. The softer material gets lost but only after a "long" time. For this interval it is a legit tool. How do you think diamond gets in it´s final shape? It´s all about the abrasive. And for the rough work you just need some pointy tool (stone, copper, iron, steel chisel), a hammering tool and a ton of muscles. It doesn't matter how hard a stone is on the Moers scale. Stone breaks due to shock. This is not metal. The guy who makes the finish has had a good eye but even we have human cameras around without special selection. I think Eidetics would be the first choice for the fine details. The people were professionals. They have worked with stone continuously for their entire lives for generations and millennia. From morning to evening. Give them some credit. Yes, at the end of the stone age mankind was pretty good in working stone. Just because you can't do something doesn't mean other trained, stronger and smarter people can't do it either.

[@evanmorris1178]

@@knutblume907 I have a rather long history with drilling and cutting both metal and stone. Read my comment again. I never brought up mohs scale. MY point is the tool holding and the frame of the tool require precision and great strength. Which you mention in your last point. So you understand this. No one cares that a modern diamond tool, with great bearings and a high speed motor can do the work. If anything you prove the point that technology is very helpful in achieving the goal. But you are being disingenuous. You won’t scratch granite with copper, but you can split it with a copper chisel. The chisel just won’t look very good after 3-4 hits. So what? We are talking precision here. Not brute force. Straw men! Especially with very smooth finishes on porphyry. The harder inclusions will tend to stand proud if the frame and the bearings aren’t very accurate and strong. This implies modern levels of tooling. Btw, evidence for something like a modern circular saw is in the Cairo Museum. It’s been discussed a lot. Please explain the “sticks and string” tool, which could do this. The rotary tool marks are visible.

[@onixotto]

Aliens. They took the technology with them.

[@francischambless5919]

nothing is in the realm of impossible, but I find this highly unlikely.

[@susannea4196]

😂

[@williamolivadoti3867]

They probably used lasers to cut the granite, not metal cutting tools. Testament of Solomon says he had a green crystal ring/ and a belt buckle green crystal that he had a Genie use to cut a hole in the foundation block of the Temple..you can cut anything with a green laser beam . Romans said both were on display in Jerusalem until 300 AD.