blob

Ecco perché non mi fido dell’archeologia classica, non dà risposte sensate, non ammette la propria impotenza, ma si focalizza su particolari, sicuramente interessanti, ma con la pretesa di essere l’unica verità. Tutti conoscono le Piramidi egiziane, ma pochi conoscono le rovine di Baalbek in Libano. Perchè non ce l'hanno mai fatto studiare? Che cos'ha di particolare questo luogo? che c'è un tempio che...

Costruito con accuratezza sopra un altro piedistallo, che si eleva di ben tredici metri rispetto al terreno, il lato occidentale è stato eretto con lastroni squadrati di nove metri e mezzo, alti quattro e spessi tre e mezzo; ognuno del peso di 500 tonnellate.
Le tre pietre più grandi sono conosciute come "Triliton", o " La Meraviglia delle Tre Pietre"; le loro dimensioni esagerate, di diciotto o venti metri, e il loro peso di mille tonnellate, non hanno ostacolato il loro posizionamento millimetrico. Sono state estratte tutte da una cava vicina, dove ne possiamo ammirare ancora una, conosciuta come la "pietra del Sud", tuttora attaccata alla vena madre. Misura ventuno metri di lunghezza, dieci di altezza con uno spessore di quattro metri e mezzo; raggiunge il ragguardevole peso di 1200 tonnellate! Come possono essere state mosse le pietre del Triliton e le altre dalla miniera, anche se la distanza era di soli due chilometri, resta un mistero. Anche se è stato stimato che 40.000 uomini possono muoverle, gli ingegneri non hanno accertato, non solo in che modo siano state mosse, ma sollevate, trasportate e poste in loco con grande precisione.
La pietra del sud equivale a ben tre Boeing 747. Molti ingegneri si chiedono perché sono stati usati grandi blocchi di pietra, dal momento che era più facile portare a termine la costruzione usando blocchi più piccoli, considerando anche che nelle grandi pietre vi può essere un difetto trasversale, causa di un successivo problema strutturale.
Avevano una smisurata fiducia nel materiale usato, o disponevano di una tecnologia a noi sconosciuta che permetteva loro di attuare velocemente una costruzione senza che il numero ed il peso delle pietre rappresentasse un ostacolo?

Why these stones are such an enigma to contemporary scientists, both engineers and archaeologists alike, is that their method of quarrying, transportation and precision placement is beyond the technological ability of any known ancient or modern builders. Various ‘scholars’, uncomfortable with the notion that ancient cultures might have developed knowledge superior to modern science, have decided that the massive Baalbek stones were laboriously dragged from the nearby quarries to the temple site. While carved images in the temples of Egypt and Mesopotamia do indeed give evidence of this method of block transportation - using ropes, wooden rollers and thousands of laborers - the dragged blocks are known to have been only 1/10th the size and weight of the Baalbek stones and to have been moved along flat surfaces with wide movement paths. The route to the site of Baalbek, however, is up hill, over rough and winding terrain, and there is no evidence whatsoever of a flat hauling surface having been created in ancient times.

Next there is the problem of how the mammoth blocks, once they were brought to the site, were lifted and precisely placed in position. It has been theorized that the stones were raised using a complex array of scaffolding, ramps and pulleys which was powered by large numbers of humans and animals working in unison. An historical example of this method has been suggested as the solution for the Baalbek enigma. The Renaissance architect Domenico Fontana, when erecting a 327-ton Egyptian obelisk in front of St Peter's Basilica in Rome, used 40 huge pulleys, which necessitated a combined force of 800 men and 140 horses. The area where this obelisk was erected, however, was a great open space that could easily accommodate all the lifting apparatus and the men and horses pulling on the ropes. No such space is available in the spatial context of how the Baalbek stones were placed. Hills slope away from where lifting apparatus would need to have been placed and no evidence has been found of a flat and structurally firm surface having been constructed (and then mysteriously removed after the lifting was done). Furthermore, not just one obelisk was erected but rather a series of giant stones were precisely put in place side-by-side. Due to the positioning of these stones, there is simply no conceivable place where a huge pulley apparatus could have been stationed.

Archaeologists, unable to resolve the mysteries of the transportation and lifting of the great blocks, rarely have the intellectual honesty to admit their ignorance of the matter and therefore focus their attention solely on redundant measurements and discussions regarding the verifiable Roman-era temples at the site. Architects and construction engineers, however, not having any preconceived ideas of ancient history to uphold, will frankly state that there are no known lifting technologies even in current times that could raise and position the Baalbek stones given the amount of working space. The massive stones of the Grand Terrace of Baalbek are simply beyond the engineering abilities of any recognized ancient or contemporary builders.

There are several other matters about the Baalbek stones that further confound archaeologists and conventional theories of prehistoric civilization. There are no legends or folk tales from Roman times that link the Romans with the mammoth stones. There are absolutely no records in any Roman or other literary sources concerning the construction methods or the dates and names of the benefactors, designers, architects, engineers and builders of the Grand Terrace. The megalithic stones of the Trilithon bear no structural or ornamental resemblance to any of the Roman-era constructions above them, such as the previously described Temples of Jupiter, Bacchus or Venus. The limestone rocks of the Trilithon show extensive evidence of wind and sand erosion that is absent from the Roman temples, indicating that the megalithic construction dates from a far earlier age. Finally, the great stones of Baalbek show stylistic similarities to other cyclopean stone walls at verifiably pre-Roman sites such as the Acropolis foundation in Athens, the foundations of Myceneae, Tiryns, Delphi and even megalithic constructions in the ‘new world’ such as Ollyantaytambo in Peru and Tiahuanaco in Bolivia.