Similarities Between Wilson And Davidovits

There are a considerable number of theories that attempt to explain the construction of the Great Pyramid, yet only few are contemplated. The arguments put forth by von Daniken to explain the development of the Great Pyramid, are not as credible in comparison to the arguments expressed by Wilson and Davidovits. This is demonstrated through the use of factual, supported evidence.

Both Wilson and Davidovits support their theories regarding the Great Pyramids construction with factual evidence hence are more convincing. Wilson argues that wooden rollers are undoubtedly applied to assist in transporting the enormous stone blocks to the construction site, “he refers to Professor J. Pritchard’s text, that describes the importation of coniferous timber from Phoenicia at the time of Senefru.” (Building the

Davidovits utilizes his knowledge of simple chemistry to explain how the stone blocks fit precisely together and produced moulds for the latter blocks. Common clay and natron, when combine and solidified form a stone. The Egyptians would have laid them in the sun, using the remains as a mould for the next block.(Pouring a Pyramid) Davidovits provides a scientifically- sound explanation. It is highly likely that the Egyptians used this tactic since natron was so readily available (due to the practice of mummification). Further laboratory experiments, comparing such artificial stone to the stone casing of the pyramids, validate his theories. On the contrary, Daniken reverts to conspiracy theories based on supreme beings intervening. He mentions the sun god, Ra’s involvement and the impossibility of the “classical” dimensions and location of the Pyramid. (Chariots of the Gods). Daniken's conspiracies have no substance; they are empty attempts to deny the facts and possibilities that the other theories present. Hence, Daniken’s conspiracies do not validate his