Archaeology is fairly set on the way it views the pyramids of Egypt. “The pyramids of Giza were tombs. We don’t know how they were built, but we do know they were built by Egyptians.”

These are statements built from a load of assumptions which are inviolate. It is the very essence of dogma and orthodoxy. Being one who has little respect for unquestions dogma, I suggest we take a closer look.

First of all, even archaeologists can agree that with the tools available to the Egyptians at the time, quarrying, transporting, dressing, and placing the huge blocks of these structures would have been problematic at best. They’re just sure the Egyptians did it, but now how. In addition, parts of these structures was granite. Working with sandstone or limestone is one thing. Granite is quite another.

Second, if you could build such structures out of much smaller blocks, perhaps human-carryable, why would you instead opt for blocks weighing as much as your whole village of people? It doesn’t make sense.

Third, if you undertook a job like this, of this magnitude, wouldn’t you write down how you did it? The Egyptians wrote on everything, and so far as I know, nowhere is there even the suggestion of a glyph explaining the process used to get all this work done. It doesn’t make sense.

Fourth, if you built structures like this, wouldn’t you write down somewhere that you actually had done it? Wouldn’t you take credit for one of the wonders of the ancient world? And yet, there does not appear to be such a set of glyphs anywhere. It doesn’t make sense.

Fifth, if you built structures like these, involving all this work and engineering, wouldn’t you want people know why you built them? “We built this as a tomb for King Jehosephat, year X”. And yet such a statement is nowhere to the found. Archaeologists make this assumption, but no actual Egyptians carved this into a column or wall anywhere. It doesn’t make sense.

Sixth, to my knowledge, there are no glyphs anywhere, at least not on the inner surfaces of the pyramids, and perhaps not even on the outside. As noted before, the Egyptians wrote on everything. So why wouldn’t they load up the inside and outside of these structures at least with something about the cost, the reason, even the weather? It doesn’t make sense.

So here we have a lot of very significant hanging questions. Without solid answers to these questions, the assumptions of the archaeologists just don’t make sense, particularly in light of what we know about the Egyptians. Here’s what makes a lot more sense.

The pyramids were not built by the Egyptians. They were built by a much older group of people, a group we know little or nothing about. This group was much more advanced technologically than the Egyptians. At some point before the Egyptians, they left the area, with some projects dotting Egypt still in progress. This explains why there are no glyphs in and around the pyramids, and none anywhere which explain the building process, how and why they were built.

Naturally, this hypothesis leaves us with a lot of its own questions. But it actually makes more sense than sticking the Egyptians with all this.

It will be said that I’m not qualified to speculate because I don’t have a bunch of initials after my name. That’s a load of horseradish. Anyone is free to speculate in any way they like about anything they see. And I’d say that my speculations make a lot more sense than archaeologists. The difference is that I’m not constrained by dogma or orthodoxy. I don’t have to apply for research grants nor worry about my reputation among my academic colleagues. I have no stake in this game, other than a search for the truth. Further, I didn’t go to school for this stuff, and thus I didn’t have dogma pounded into my head. I’m free to think outside of the archaeological box, so to speak.

It’s also worth considering that in most other places containing megalithic structures, this same logic applies. Anyone who tells you these structures, wherever they are, were built as tombs or temples by the indiginous (and ancient) people with technologies seemingly unknown to us is lying and making assumptions (as above) which simply don’t make sense.

It will also be pointed out that there is no evidence of older civilizations. That’s actually not true. There is some evidence here and there across the globe, that someone was here before our history and left before our history began to be written. But if you need proof that someone was here before us, look no further than the megalithic structures that exist across the globe. If nothing else, they speak of societies with technology superior to our own. Earth has been here a long time, and there’s no reason to assume we were the first to occupy it. Look how much has been buried, covered over and fossilized or simply lost completely in the mists of times past.