They Finally Figured Out How The Pyramids Were Built. Are They Skyscrapers?

2.3 million blocks with an average weight of two and a half tons each, the ceiling blocks of the king's chamber each weighing up to approximately 60 tons. Completed in a construction period of approximately 20 years. Do the math and you get one block placed every three to five minutes around the clock for 20 years straight. The widely accepted explanation has always been some version of the same thing. Thousands of workers dragging blocks up external ramps. Herodotus wrote about slaves but modern Egyptologists corrected that. The builders were skilled workers and treated with respect. But the basic mechanism stayed the same. Ramps and manpower. There's always been a problem with that though. To build a ramp that's long enough and gentle enough in slope to move 60 ton blocks to the upper levels of a 481 foot structure which is said to be the original height of the pyramid, the ramp would need to contain more material than the pyramid itself. The math never worked cleanly. Archaeologists have debated ramp designs for decades and none of them fully solved the logistics without creating new problems. Then in late 2025, a scientist named Simon Andreas Schuring from Whale Cornell Medicine published a paper in NPJ Heritage Science which is a nature journal proposing a different explanation entirely. He said the pyramid was built from the inside out using its own internal architecture as the construction equipment. What Schuring noticed is something that's been inside the pyramid for thousands of years. The grand gallery and the ascending passage form a continuous straight line with the same width and the same precise slope. He said the slope is approximately 26.5 degrees, exactly the same in both passages. Continuous and unbroken. Schuring argues that that's not coincidence, that's engineering. The slope of 26.5 degrees is optimized to generate approximately half the gravitational force of a descending counterweight while providing twice the sliding ramp length needed to lift blocks to their target height. The math works out to a force amplification of two and that's exactly what you would design if you were building a pulley system. The way it worked was wooden sleds loaded with granite counterweights were released down the grand gallery in the ascending passage. As they slid down they generated pulling force and that force ran through ropes looped around wooden logs in the antechamber, which is a small granite line space just before the king's chamber, and pulled stone blocks upward through a vertical shaft on the other side. And the system could operate in different gears. Loop the ropes over more logs and you multiply the force, allowing even the heaviest ceiling blocks to be lifted, only at the cost of needing to pull more rope. With this system the placement rate works out to one block every one to three minutes, which actually fits the timeline that the external ramp idea never did. The antechamber has been described as a portcula system for as long as anyone has been studying the building. A security feature, three granite slabs that can be lowered to block access to the tomb after burial. But Schuring said that that's not a security feature at all, it's the pulley station. He said, rope guidance grooves and the antechamber south wall extend nearly a meter above the positions where wooden logs would have held the ropes. Consistent with a working mechanical lifting system rather than a blocking device. The unusual geometry, the specific groove patterns, the way the stones fit together in ways that have puzzled researchers for years. All of it makes more sense as components of a working mechanism than as an anti-theft device. For 200 years we've been looking at the heart of a machine and calling it a security feature. And the physical evidence supports this. The ascending passage floor is notably hard and polished, consistent with heavy loads sliding repeatedly through that same path. The grand gallery floor shows scrape marks that directionally make sense if heavy sleds were used, but inconsistent with foot traffic or ceremonial use. The wear patterns are there and they've always been there, but no one stopped to look at them and say what made those. With that being said, this is a serious paper by a credentialed scientist published on a respected journal, but it hasn't been independently verified yet and some researchers have raised methodological questions. Churin's idea is physically coherent and archaeologically grounded, but it requires further study before anyone calls it settled. But what it does do is explain the physical features of the pyramid more logically than the ramp theory has ever been able to do. The polished floors, the scrape marks, the antechamber groove patterns, those features are there and they need explaining. The counterweight idea explains them in a way that a security feature just doesn't. And the paper still doesn't account for everything. The pyramid is aligned to true north within 0.05 degrees, not magnetic north, geographic north. The casing stones were fitted with joints so precise that a piece of paper can't be inserted between them. The mortar formula has been chemically analyzed and can't be fully replicated. The base is leveled to within 15 millimeters across the entire 13 acre footprint. Churin just explains how the blocks were lifted, the cutting precision, the alignment, the mortar, none of that has been explained yet. Now I want to be upfront with you all about what I'm doing in this next part. I'm connecting two documented findings in a way that neither paper does, so this connection is mine. I just don't want people to think that my ape-like ideas are from these credentialed researchers. Churin's counterweight system works because of physics. A counterweight descends generating force. That force lifts the block on the other side. Those mathematics don't change based on how tall the structure is. A taller building using the same internal counterweight mechanism would work the same way with deeper shafts. With longer ropes and proportionally heavier counterweights, the system scales with height. There's no theoretical ceiling. There's a separate finding from the Khafre pyramid, the middle one, that changes the whole perspective of this when you take into account Churin's paper. In March 2025, a team, Corrado Malanga from the University of Pisa and Filippo Biondi from the focused specifically on the Khafre pyramid. The middle one, not the Great Pyramid, but the one next to it. SAR, which is Synthetic Aperture Radar, is the same technology that Biondi published in the journal Remote Sensing in 2022. The scans detected eight vertical cylindrical shafts descending more than 2100 feet below the surface, aligned in parallel rows. Spiral pathways surround each shaft. Two cubic chambers approximately 260 feet per side at the base of the cylindrical structures. And the entire structure extends beneath all three pyramids. The Khafre pyramid above them is 446 feet tall. The shafts beneath it descend 2100 feet. The underground structures are nearly five times the height of what sits above the ground. When I look at that, I see something that I've been waiting for someone else to bring up so I didn't have to be the one to do it and sound like an idiot. But here it is. There's eight parallel vertical cylindrical cylinders with spiral pathways wrapping around them. Now look at what the structural columns of a modern skyscraper look like during construction. Load-bearing columns with helical reinforcement arranged in parallel rows to distribute vertical load across the foundation. The visual parallel is almost exact. The SAR findings, however, are contested and haven't been independently verified. Malanga's background includes alien abduction research, which mainstream archaeologists cite when they dismiss the findings, of course. But Biondi's credentials in radar technology is solid. The methodology is real. Whether it's producing accurate subsurface images at that depth is what's being debated. But the physical logic of what Schuring found in the Great Pyramid and what Biondi's team claims to have found under Khafre on the same plateau connected to the same limestone bedrock is at least worth considering. If the construction system inside Khufu's pyramid scales with height and the shafts under Khafre are real, then the Giza Plateau may be two parts of something larger than either pyramid suggests on its own. And the obvious objection to all this is the water table. If structures extend 2,100 feet below the plateau, why aren't they flooded? Cairo's water table sits approximately 49 feet below the surface. Anything deeper should be underwater. And the answer to that is the geophysics research. Published research documents two separate aquifer systems beneath the Giza Plateau. The quaternary alluvial aquifer from the Nile and a deeper fissured carbonate aquifer, separated by a geological fault. The rising water level has been documented as a severe modern hazard threatening these existing monuments, and that rise has concentrated in the last several decades. Before the Aswan Dam was completed in 1970, the Nile flooded annually, rising and falling with the seasons, controlling regional groundwater levels through a cycle that had been running for thousands of years. Before Cairo became a major city, there was no urban infrastructure pumping water continuously into the ground. No leaking water mains, no sewage systems, no irrigation networks. 5,000 years ago, the water table at Giza was dramatically lower than it is today. What's wet now was dry when this site was active. The carbonate aquifer beneath the plateau is fissured limestone bedrock, not loose sediment. Structures built into solid limestone at depth, compressed by the weight of the plateau above them, survive groundwater changes in ways that surface structures just can't. The shafts the SAR team detected aren't sitting in sand, they're sitting in bedrock beneath one of the most geologically stable plateaus in the region. Progressive groundwater rise over thousands of years, driven by the same urban and agricultural development that now threatens the Sphinx, would leave exactly what the scan shows. It would show deep foundation columns intact in limestone. We've been standing on top of this plateau for thousands of years, assuming we understood what was here. Every generation looked at the same stones and came up with the same answer. Tombs, ramps, manpower, mystery solved. But Sherling's paper cracks that wide open. The Grand Gallery wasn't a passageway, it was a machine component. The antechamber wasn't a security feature, it was a pulley station. The wear patterns in the stone had been telling us this the whole time, but nobody stopped to ask what made them. If the machines scaled, if the same internal system that placed blocks at a rate of one every three minutes could theoretically go as high as the shafts below Khafre go deep, then what we've been calling the Giza Pyramids for 4,000 years might be the surviving fragment of something we don't have a category for just yet. The shafts are 2,100 feet deep. Khafre's pyramid above them is 446 feet tall. The Great Pyramid next to it is 455 feet tall. Nothing about those numbers makes sense if what we're looking at is a pair of tombs with some interesting internal passages. So, if that construction method can scale and those scans are real, what do you think was there before all the sand covered it? Was this our first ancient skyscraper? Again, I'm taking two independent studies and putting them together to try to connect some dots, but theoretically this could be possible. One of the reasons I do these kind of videos is just to prove the fact that we have absolutely no clue what the hell is going on out there. And who knows, this could be the ancient Washington D.C. where the gods descended on this place and sat in their offices in these big skyscrapers and decided on the fate of our species. Seems like what's going on today, just in a different form. As always, I would love to hear your comments on this one. Thank you so much for watching. I really do appreciate your time. If you haven't done so already, please subscribe, like, drop that comment. I'm looking forward to hearing the comments section on this one. I think there's going to be some interesting stuff in there. Until next time, I'll talk to you later.