UJRefugees.net

Wut wrote: ↑Tue Jun 11, 2019 11:38 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Tue Jun 11, 2019 11:24 pm

Wut wrote: ↑Tue Jun 11, 2019 11:19 pm Maybe they used trained dinosaurs

Satan buried dinosaur bones to mislead you my son

My theory is supported by the historical documents.dinocrane_1728734a.gif

Yaba daba doooooo

Wut wrote: ↑Tue Jun 11, 2019 11:38 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Tue Jun 11, 2019 11:24 pm

Wut wrote: ↑Tue Jun 11, 2019 11:19 pm Maybe they used trained dinosaurs

Satan buried dinosaur bones to mislead you my son

My theory is supported by the historical documents.dinocrane_1728734a.gif

Fred doesn't look Egyptian.

Bump because this thread is more interesting by far than anything above it. Bumpity Bump.

It's most important to consider that the "theory" of ancient Egyptian history isn't confined simply to the construction methods of the Great Pyramid. This topic has fascinated me for years but can be summed up in the question of "linear human progression of technological development." Humans have this way of believing that we are, at this very moment, at the pinnacle of human development and ability. We also have a pretty frequent habit of being wrong yet we continue on claiming to know shit and saying it's a fact only to realize at some later date that it wasn't. This cycle goes on and on..

What is interesting to me and completely plausible is that perhaps we aren't currently at the pinnacle of human knowledge or understanding and that throughout the past there may have been many ages in which humans advanced far beyond our current state. There is no way to carbon date rocks, so the estimations of the ages of these megalithic structures is problematic. Egyptologists have had their heads in the sand for years simply repeating the jargon and most folks just believe them. There's as good a chance that the Pyramids are 10,000 years old as they are 2500 or 3500 or whatever. These estimations have been made using OUR timeline of human history and that's assuming that we're right. Which it's likely that we aren't. A few years ago a megalithic ruin was uncovered in Eastern Turkey and is currently being excavated by a team of German archaeologists who not only have dated the structure at approximately 8000-10000 years old (based on the organic fill around it) but have also proved that it was intentionally buried. These structures contain massive stones carved in relief in a style so incredibly complex that we couldn't even fathom the ability to replicate it and the stones are so perfectly cut as to defy modern tech. It goes on and on but when do we sit back and say "the reason we can't figure out how this shit was made is because it was made with technology and understanding we simply don't possess."

We all like to say shit like, "gee isn't it incredible that these stupid people a few thousand years ago were able to do this shit." But clearly in saying so we're the stupid ones by assuming this was some fluke and we're just a bunch of egotistical morons. I think we tend to look at advancement through a heavily distorted lens.. Like, the only indication of advancement is if they were able to do the shit we've done..

Well here's the problem with that basic idea. First off, what we've done is nothing but a manifestation of our priorities.. For example, we've gone to the moon and put forth huge time, money and resources to accomplish this goal. Another culture in another age may say, "well that's all great for you but what was the point?" Or we have dedicated trillions to building weapons to kill each other, or giant pick up trucks for guys with small penis's or endless garbage to buy at walmart or amazon but is any of it really beneficial or an indication that we're making the kinds of advancements worthy of a determination as the most advanced culture on earth? How can we compare ourselves to a culture that existed 10,000 years ago? It's like being the only one to show up to a race, prancing around the track like a faggot and then declaring yourself the fastest guy in the history of planet earth. It's incredibly short-sighted and narrow-minded...Which isn't exactly shocking since that's a pretty fucking rock solid description of mankind.

Interesting observations, JRS

Kind of along your train of thought on the matter, consider Chaco Canyon in New Mexico. "Discovered " in the 1800's, occupied from something like 1000 AD to the 15th century. Experts awed at this massive structure with several religious kivas in the middle of nowhere (deforested which led to it's collapse). Awe turned to outright astonishment when some starting studying the site back in the 70's forward using computers. This huge complex and many outlying buildings miles away is an astronomical religious center. Brought people here to be awed. The buildings are not only aligned to the Summer and Winter Solstice, but many are aligned to the 19 year cycles of the Moon- extremely complex. Experts in shock that "savages" from an inferior culture could have achieved it. BS. Over many generations, people noticed the Sun moved north until it stopped and went back (Summer Solstice) and did the same 6 months later south (Winter). Not a giant leap mentally that once they figured that out, decided to plant sticks in the ground and measure the angles and after a few years build along those angles. Granted the 19 year cycle of the Moon took a lot longer, but same principal just using moonlight.

WestTexasCrude wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:41 pm Interesting observations, JRS

interesting, but not all that pertinent. When the civilizations were separated around the globe and were advancing irrespective of each other, then it is fascinating to study how one civilization coped with all of the things it took to create a society (language, religion, farming, irrigation, tools, construction techniques, etc). The Aztecs had no idea there were people in egypt doing similar things that they were doing or how they were doing it.

There is no doubt that since man first evolved we have been advancing. sure there are setbacks along the way. maybe thousand year setbacks when one civilization is either destroyed or dies off. i've been in the construction business all my life and, although much of what we all do is similar, everyone finds different ways to do the same thing. I couldn't count the number of times i have seen someone do something that I have seen done a thousand times and they have a better way of doing it. I guess its the ingenuity of solving how you build something that intrigues me. Not so much whatever it is that is being built.

Blah blah blah. Google heroes basically copy/pasting as their own thoughts.

Flumper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:27 pm

WestTexasCrude wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:41 pm Interesting observations, JRS

interesting, but not all that pertinent. When the civilizations were separated around the globe and were advancing irrespective of each other, then it is fascinating to study how one civilization coped with all of the things it took to create a society (language, religion, farming, irrigation, tools, construction techniques, etc). The Aztecs had no idea there were people in egypt doing similar things that they were doing or how they were doing it.

There is no doubt that since man first evolved we have been advancing. sure there are setbacks along the way. maybe thousand year setbacks when one civilization is either destroyed or dies off. i've been in the construction business all my life and, although much of what we all do is similar, everyone finds different ways to do the same thing. I couldn't count the number of times i have seen someone do something that I have seen done a thousand times and they have a better way of doing it. I guess its the ingenuity of solving how you build something that intrigues me. Not so much whatever it is that is being built.

The issue is that you're neglecting to consider the scale of time. Our history isn't measure in hundreds but thousands and thousands of years. We went from pulling wagons with horses to flying around the earth in space ships in less than 100 years. How many other such brief periods have happened over the thousands and thousands that came before? Do you think we're special? Of course you do. Fact is, the probability suggests there's a better chance that we did, than we didn't.

JackRabbit_Slim wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:02 pm
The issue is that you're neglecting to consider the scale of time. Our history isn't measure in hundreds but thousands and thousands of years. We went from pulling wagons with horses to flying around the earth in space ships in less than 100 years. How many other such brief periods have happened over the thousands and thousands that came before? Do you think we're special? Of course you do. Fact is, the probability suggests there's a better chance that we did, than we didn't.

well, the only reason that i would think that is because no one has come up with anything that suggests otherwise. Or maybe I'm not understanding what the hell you are suggesting. Are you saying that thousands and thousands of years ago, long lost to any memories or archeology, there (probability speaking) existed a civilization that made advancements faster than we do today?

Flumper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:10 pm

JackRabbit_Slim wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:02 pm
The issue is that you're neglecting to consider the scale of time. Our history isn't measure in hundreds but thousands and thousands of years. We went from pulling wagons with horses to flying around the earth in space ships in less than 100 years. How many other such brief periods have happened over the thousands and thousands that came before? Do you think we're special? Of course you do. Fact is, the probability suggests there's a better chance that we did, than we didn't.

well, the only reason that i would think that is because no one has come up with anything that suggests otherwise. Or maybe I'm not understanding what the hell you are suggesting. Are you saying that thousands and thousands of years ago, long lost to any memories or archeology, there (probability speaking) existed a civilization that made advancements faster than we do today?

yes and no. I'm suggesting that there is the possibility and great likelihood that civilizations existed previously who advanced in their own directions far beyond the technology that we're currently capable of. The issue is that you're incapable of looking at the idea of "advancement" through any lens but our own. Just because they didn't do what we do doesn't mean they couldn't. It means they didn't value it. And if you look around this great high-tech, super duper advanced society of morbidly obese, violent, depressed, self-obsessed, social media crazed, fast food eating, reality tv watching, ass fucking, over-populated, bullshit world we currently have created, it shouldn't be too hard to see why.

JackRabbit_Slim wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:27 pm

Flumper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:10 pm

JackRabbit_Slim wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:02 pm
The issue is that you're neglecting to consider the scale of time. Our history isn't measure in hundreds but thousands and thousands of years. We went from pulling wagons with horses to flying around the earth in space ships in less than 100 years. How many other such brief periods have happened over the thousands and thousands that came before? Do you think we're special? Of course you do. Fact is, the probability suggests there's a better chance that we did, than we didn't.

well, the only reason that i would think that is because no one has come up with anything that suggests otherwise. Or maybe I'm not understanding what the hell you are suggesting. Are you saying that thousands and thousands of years ago, long lost to any memories or archeology, there (probability speaking) existed a civilization that made advancements faster than we do today?

yes and no. I'm suggesting that there is the possibility and great likelihood that civilizations existed previously who advanced in their own directions far beyond the technology that we're currently capable of. The issue is that you're incapable of looking at the idea of "advancement" through any lens but our own. Just because they didn't do what we do doesn't mean they couldn't. It means they didn't value it. And if you look around this great high-tech, super duper advanced society of morbidly obese, violent, depressed, self-obsessed, social media crazed, fast food eating, reality tv watching, ass fucking, over-populated, bullshit world we currently have created, it shouldn't be too hard to see why.

They must have been pretty advanced to make everything so completely biodegradable that no traces of them remain. Super advanced ancient hippies. Makes sense. Except for the dying out part, but maybe they just took off on biodegradable spaceships.

JackRabbit_Slim wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:27 pm
yes and no. I'm suggesting that there is the possibility and great likelihood that civilizations existed previously who advanced in their own directions far beyond the technology that we're currently capable of. The issue is that you're incapable of looking at the idea of "advancement" through any lens but our own. Just because they didn't do what we do doesn't mean they couldn't. It means they didn't value it. And if you look around this great high-tech, super duper advanced society of morbidly obese, violent, depressed, self-obsessed, social media crazed, fast food eating, reality tv watching, ass fucking, over-populated, bullshit world we currently have created, it shouldn't be too hard to see why.

My point is that you basically accused me of being too arrogant to think that the stupid people a few thousand years could measure up to anything that WE can do now. And that my wondering how these knuckle draggers could figure out how to dig rocks and make a pyramid was the fascination. If you actually read my commments, i was more fascinated at how brilliant the methods described in this particular theory were, no matter what time period you put it in. I can guarantee you, that if you pulled up 10,000 20 to 30 year old people today, and gave them nothing more than the tools available at the time, they would never figure out how to do it.

I have studied roman, greek, egyptian, you name it, architecture. It is all fascinating to me. An architect or an engineer can design almost anything, make some plans and some 3d models and then hire a contractor to build it. They show you everything except one thing. How to build it. You can design an arch to span a river, do the engineering and prove that it will work. But then some dumbass contractor with a high school degree has to figure out how to put an arch together that only works when its finished. Often times that's where the brilliance lies.

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:43 pm

JackRabbit_Slim wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:27 pm

Flumper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:10 pm

JackRabbit_Slim wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:02 pm
The issue is that you're neglecting to consider the scale of time. Our history isn't measure in hundreds but thousands and thousands of years. We went from pulling wagons with horses to flying around the earth in space ships in less than 100 years. How many other such brief periods have happened over the thousands and thousands that came before? Do you think we're special? Of course you do. Fact is, the probability suggests there's a better chance that we did, than we didn't.

well, the only reason that i would think that is because no one has come up with anything that suggests otherwise. Or maybe I'm not understanding what the hell you are suggesting. Are you saying that thousands and thousands of years ago, long lost to any memories or archeology, there (probability speaking) existed a civilization that made advancements faster than we do today?

yes and no. I'm suggesting that there is the possibility and great likelihood that civilizations existed previously who advanced in their own directions far beyond the technology that we're currently capable of. The issue is that you're incapable of looking at the idea of "advancement" through any lens but our own. Just because they didn't do what we do doesn't mean they couldn't. It means they didn't value it. And if you look around this great high-tech, super duper advanced society of morbidly obese, violent, depressed, self-obsessed, social media crazed, fast food eating, reality tv watching, ass fucking, over-populated, bullshit world we currently have created, it shouldn't be too hard to see why.

They must have been pretty advanced to make everything so completely biodegradable that no traces of them remain. Super advanced ancient hippies. Makes sense. Except for the dying out part, but maybe they just took off on biodegradable spaceships.

You're being simple and just proving my point. You and Flumper are both arguing that since they didn't build the shit we build and leave the trash we leave, they weren't advanced. That's not a very advanced perspective. It's completely narrow-minded. I expect more from you Mr. Anal

JackRabbit_Slim wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:46 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:43 pm

JackRabbit_Slim wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:27 pm

Flumper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:10 pm

JackRabbit_Slim wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:02 pm
The issue is that you're neglecting to consider the scale of time. Our history isn't measure in hundreds but thousands and thousands of years. We went from pulling wagons with horses to flying around the earth in space ships in less than 100 years. How many other such brief periods have happened over the thousands and thousands that came before? Do you think we're special? Of course you do. Fact is, the probability suggests there's a better chance that we did, than we didn't.

well, the only reason that i would think that is because no one has come up with anything that suggests otherwise. Or maybe I'm not understanding what the hell you are suggesting. Are you saying that thousands and thousands of years ago, long lost to any memories or archeology, there (probability speaking) existed a civilization that made advancements faster than we do today?

yes and no. I'm suggesting that there is the possibility and great likelihood that civilizations existed previously who advanced in their own directions far beyond the technology that we're currently capable of. The issue is that you're incapable of looking at the idea of "advancement" through any lens but our own. Just because they didn't do what we do doesn't mean they couldn't. It means they didn't value it. And if you look around this great high-tech, super duper advanced society of morbidly obese, violent, depressed, self-obsessed, social media crazed, fast food eating, reality tv watching, ass fucking, over-populated, bullshit world we currently have created, it shouldn't be too hard to see why.

They must have been pretty advanced to make everything so completely biodegradable that no traces of them remain. Super advanced ancient hippies. Makes sense. Except for the dying out part, but maybe they just took off on biodegradable spaceships.

You're being simple and just proving my point. You and Flumper are both arguing that since they didn't build the shit we build and leave the trash we leave, they weren't advanced. That's not a very advanced perspective. It's completely narrow-minded. I expect more from you Mr. Anal

Your point is unclear, but appears to be that you have your own special definition of 'advanced' and can't quite articulate it. They couldn't build the shit we build, whilst we could, if so inclined, build giant pyramids.

Flumper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:27 pm

WestTexasCrude wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:41 pm Interesting observations, JRS

interesting, but not all that pertinent. When the civilizations were separated around the globe and were advancing irrespective of each other, then it is fascinating to study how one civilization coped with all of the things it took to create a society (language, religion, farming, irrigation, tools, construction techniques, etc). The Aztecs had no idea there were people in egypt doing similar things that they were doing or how they were doing it.

There is no doubt that since man first evolved we have been advancing. sure there are setbacks along the way. maybe thousand year setbacks when one civilization is either destroyed or dies off. i've been in the construction business all my life and, although much of what we all do is similar, everyone finds different ways to do the same thing. I couldn't count the number of times i have seen someone do something that I have seen done a thousand times and they have a better way of doing it. I guess its the ingenuity of solving how you build something that intrigues me. Not so much whatever it is that is being built.

Still he had some interesting thoughts. One things I'm not buying is his contention that the pyramids could be 10,000 years old because rocks can't be carbon dated. The ancient Egyptians were like the Alpha bureaucrats. Everything was written down in triplicate a lot in stone. Nobody could read it until a Frenchman in the 1800's, broke the alphabet from the Rosetta Stone discovered by the French in Napoleon's invasion of Egypt around 1800. 150 years later after a million man hours of study, they pretty much have the accurate dates on the pharaoh's reigns, when the pyramids were built, etc.

VisionaryEric wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:49 pm Blah blah blah. Google heroes basically copy/pasting as their own thoughts.

Actually decades of reading and studying subjects. But thanks

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:50 pm Your point is unclear, but appears to be that you have your own special definition of 'advanced' and can't quite articulate it. They couldn't build the shit we build, whilst we could, if so inclined, build giant pyramids.

If I am understanding what he is saying, he says that they "could" have built diamond bladed rock saws to cut granite in minutes and large cranes to lift several stones at a time, but they didn't want to.

WestTexasCrude wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:57 pm

VisionaryEric wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:49 pm Blah blah blah. Google heroes basically copy/pasting as their own thoughts.

Actually decades of reading and studying subjects. But thanks

Yeah. Sounds just like that Thanks.

Flumper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:57 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:50 pm Your point is unclear, but appears to be that you have your own special definition of 'advanced' and can't quite articulate it. They couldn't build the shit we build, whilst we could, if so inclined, build giant pyramids.

If I am understanding what he is saying, he says that they "could" have built diamond bladed rock saws to cut granite in minutes and large cranes to lift several stones at a time, but they didn't want to.

Because they foresaw the rise of facebook, yea and lamented thereof.

We have lost the wisdom of the ancients..

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:50 pm

JackRabbit_Slim wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:46 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:43 pm

JackRabbit_Slim wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:27 pm

Flumper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:10 pm

JackRabbit_Slim wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:02 pm
The issue is that you're neglecting to consider the scale of time. Our history isn't measure in hundreds but thousands and thousands of years. We went from pulling wagons with horses to flying around the earth in space ships in less than 100 years. How many other such brief periods have happened over the thousands and thousands that came before? Do you think we're special? Of course you do. Fact is, the probability suggests there's a better chance that we did, than we didn't.

well, the only reason that i would think that is because no one has come up with anything that suggests otherwise. Or maybe I'm not understanding what the hell you are suggesting. Are you saying that thousands and thousands of years ago, long lost to any memories or archeology, there (probability speaking) existed a civilization that made advancements faster than we do today?

yes and no. I'm suggesting that there is the possibility and great likelihood that civilizations existed previously who advanced in their own directions far beyond the technology that we're currently capable of. The issue is that you're incapable of looking at the idea of "advancement" through any lens but our own. Just because they didn't do what we do doesn't mean they couldn't. It means they didn't value it. And if you look around this great high-tech, super duper advanced society of morbidly obese, violent, depressed, self-obsessed, social media crazed, fast food eating, reality tv watching, ass fucking, over-populated, bullshit world we currently have created, it shouldn't be too hard to see why.

They must have been pretty advanced to make everything so completely biodegradable that no traces of them remain. Super advanced ancient hippies. Makes sense. Except for the dying out part, but maybe they just took off on biodegradable spaceships.

You're being simple and just proving my point. You and Flumper are both arguing that since they didn't build the shit we build and leave the trash we leave, they weren't advanced. That's not a very advanced perspective. It's completely narrow-minded. I expect more from you Mr. Anal

Your point is unclear, but appears to be that you have your own special definition of 'advanced' and can't quite articulate it. They couldn't build the shit we build, whilst we could, if so inclined, build giant pyramids.

Lmao.. you make this too easy as your point is so flawed. You can't possibly say, "They couldn't build the shit we build." To say that suggests they tried or even cared to. Just because they didn't do it doesn't mean they couldn't.. THAT'S a big gap to bridge and you can't possibly do it without making completely impossible claims. And that's my whole point that for some reason neither of you can grasp.

They focused their energies towards the pursuits that they valued. Assuming ours are the only ones worth pursuing is kinda mind bogglingly dumb. They didn't try to go to the moon so you can't say they failed at it. Claiming they couldn't do things that they likely never cared to attempt is a rather pointless statement and just follows the narrow-minded historical narrative.

My point is that "advanced" can't have a single definition. The idea that it could is absurd. Step back from that and maybe you'll understand. To say that we "could build a giant pyramid" is also a pointless statement as it's not relevant. Though we could build a giant pyramid using our modern equipment and materials, we couldn't replicate the great pyramid nor do we have modern machinery big enough to move the largest megalithic stones on earth today.

WestTexasCrude wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:55 pm

Flumper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:27 pm

WestTexasCrude wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:41 pm Interesting observations, JRS

interesting, but not all that pertinent. When the civilizations were separated around the globe and were advancing irrespective of each other, then it is fascinating to study how one civilization coped with all of the things it took to create a society (language, religion, farming, irrigation, tools, construction techniques, etc). The Aztecs had no idea there were people in egypt doing similar things that they were doing or how they were doing it.

There is no doubt that since man first evolved we have been advancing. sure there are setbacks along the way. maybe thousand year setbacks when one civilization is either destroyed or dies off. i've been in the construction business all my life and, although much of what we all do is similar, everyone finds different ways to do the same thing. I couldn't count the number of times i have seen someone do something that I have seen done a thousand times and they have a better way of doing it. I guess its the ingenuity of solving how you build something that intrigues me. Not so much whatever it is that is being built.

Still he had some interesting thoughts. One things I'm not buying is his contention that the pyramids could be 10,000 years old because rocks can't be carbon dated. The ancient Egyptians were like the Alpha bureaucrats. Everything was written down in triplicate a lot in stone. Nobody could read it until a Frenchman in the 1800's, broke the alphabet from the Rosetta Stone discovered by the French in Napoleon's invasion of Egypt around 1800. 150 years later after a million man hours of study, they pretty much have the accurate dates on the pharaoh's reigns, when the pyramids were built, etc.

The pyramids are 4500 years old. Not 10,000.

This sounds like great fodder for a 2 am pot smoking session with a bunch of guys listening to old Led Zeppelin albums.

Flumper wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 11:05 pm This sounds like great fodder for a 2 am pot smoking session with a bunch of guys listening to old Led Zeppelin albums.

More like Pink Floyd.

JackRabbit_Slim wrote: ↑Thu Jun 13, 2019 11:02 pm Lmao.. you make this too easy as your point is so flawed. You can't possibly say, "They couldn't build the shit we build." To say that suggests they tried or even cared to. Just because they didn't do it doesn't mean they couldn't.. THAT'S a big gap to bridge and you can't possibly do it without making completely impossible claims. And that's my whole point that for some reason neither of you can grasp.

They focused their energies towards the pursuits that they valued. Assuming ours are the only ones worth pursuing is kinda mind bogglingly dumb. They didn't try to go to the moon so you can't say they failed at it. Claiming they couldn't do things that they likely never cared to attempt is a rather pointless statement and just follows the narrow-minded historical narrative.

My point is that "advanced" can't have a single definition. The idea that it could is absurd. Step back from that and maybe you'll understand. To say that we "could build a giant pyramid" is also a pointless statement as it's not relevant. Though we could build a giant pyramid using our modern equipment and materials, we couldn't replicate the great pyramid nor do we have modern machinery big enough to move the largest megalithic stones on earth today.

Advanced can in fact have a definition, it's in something called a dictionary. Words mean what they mean, trying to argue by changing what words mean is a non starter. I can say that they couldn't build the things we build, because they did not. If we get wiped out tomorrow the next civilisation will be finding a bunch of our shit. You don't seem to grasp development, some little spear chucker in the amazon can't wake up tomorrow and decide he wants to build a skyscraper or a supercomputer, because he has no concept of those things, which are built on a thousands of incremental improvements interspersed with the occasional major breakthrough. A major breakthrough for him would be figuring out how to melt rocks and fashion the results into a new point for his spear, and if he gets that far he leaves archaeological evidence of the before and the after. You don't choose not to build a giant crane powered from the nearest nuclear plant while paddling your barge to the local pyramid, you simply have no conception of those things. You can't reach the point where you can conceive of those things without building an advanced civilisation already, one that would leave significant amounts of evidence.

What we actually find is they build silly shit out of stone, which they worked with basic tools, and generally made to appease their imaginary gods. Why do you think we couldn't replicate the great pyramid? I suspect that's at the heart of your misunderstanding here, you saw some documentary saying it was so super advanced the latest machinery couldn't do it or something? Before the bit about the aliens? Yeah, you got duped. We can make an even bigger pyramid with sandstone, and one to put that in using our more advanced techniques and materials, it's just that it's a pretty silly thing to build when you don't think getting mummified and put in it with a bunch of slaves to serve you in the next life is the very best idea.