<HTML>Hi Claire,
> >>But if there's not any archaeological evidence we are no
> longer discussing archaeology are we?
>
> He was discussing geology I think.
You know what I mean though. I'm not discounting Schoch's geological opinion I'm just saying that if he is right that we still know nothing about the culture that did carve the Sphinx. That is breakfast, lunch and dinner for your alternative authors but not a comfortable position if you're an archaeologist with a serious interest in understanding the past.
> >>Is that an acceptable excuse?
>
> Less an excuse, more a fact I would have thought?
Okay but you could say the same for any archaeological site. We can only learn about cultures from the evidence that is left to us. If you start speculating on missing evidence you leave reality and start on fantasy. Perhaps this evidence is hidden somewhere under layers of Nile mud or it was destroyed during the pixie - goblin wars or eaten by unicorns and dragons. The fact is we don't have it and so we cannot study it so how can we claim Schoch is right if the conclusive supporting evidence remains eternally hidden from us?
> I still can't find the book (not in the bathroom) but from
> what I recall the Nile mud business is established and used
> as the excuse for the scant pre-dynastic evidence for the
> region......Not a Schoch thing exclusively, more an
> archaeological problem from what I remember. And your line
> of argument is of the - you don't like Blair, so you must
> like Hitler then! ilk don't you think ~LOL~
That ole straw man gets his run out again!
> >>Okay then we can accept whatever Schoch says because the
> archaeological record is incomplete.
>
> Not what I was saying - you can accept Schoch on the
> geological evidence I suppose, and not rule him out because
> of the incomplete archaeological record I guess.
Or you can accept the archaeological evidence and suppose that Schoch might possibly be right but that there is no way he can prove it yet. I know I'm basically saying the same thing but the burden of proof rests with Schoch - unless evidence of his vanished culture turns up then as far as archaeology is concerned it didn't exist.
Duncan</HTML>
