<HTML>Please excuse, English is not my mother language.
To the climate: It is well known that for example the pyramids were erected in a savanna like landscape (I have to look for the basic source, but see for example Brunner-Traut; Alltag unter Pharaonen). Pollen analyses of flight sand found in the pyramids and in mortar suggest it, and pictures of the hunting grounds of the pharaos show the same, too. The desertification began after this.
And, IIRC, the "climate catastrophy" at the end of the OK was announced here with a link only a few days ago. For the paleo-climate.
The preparations for drainage in OK pyramid and temple complexes shows the necesity, too - todayit would not be necessary.
>>>Now I don ot the funtion of Erosion against Rainfall, but clearly it is not a linear function. It maybe even can be squared to the amount of rainfall, but what is sure is that it is impossible to project the erosion of the dryer climate half back into the wetter past.
>Sorry, I don't follow this - who is projecting the erosion of the dryer half back into the wetter past?
OK, there I try to make this clearer. Schoch writes "Since this since and front weathering is 50 percent to 100 percent deeper, it is reasonable to estimate that the excavation at those points is 50 to 100 percent older than the now 4,500-year-old work tat the Sphinx’s rump."
So he divides the time into two halves: From 4500 BP to the present, and from 4500 BP to the "real building date". He says: "It is 100% more eroded (what IS 100% more eroded???) so it's 100% older".
Therefore he projects the erosion of the last 4500 years back from 4500 BP to the past, although there was a climate cut in the time (Schoch himself depends on a wetter climate in the past, thats the base for his whole theory). And that is simply unscientific. He KNOWS that there was another climate, therefore it is impossible to argue this way.
The only way to decide this would be to develop a model with erosion against rainfall on local lime stone (in form of experiments) and projecting THESE results back with the assumed amounts of rainfall. Unfortunately, most fluid dynamic functions are squared with the speed of the flow (eg. resistance/friction forces), therefore the effects of double the rainfall in the sme time could be 4 times as effective, linear interpolations are not describing reality.
>Schoch says in Voices:
"As I listened to West outline his notion of the Sphinx's age, I was skeptical..."
Well, that's what everyone says. According to this it all were scepticals constructing tghe most funny things. Blumrich and hin "Ezekiel-Shuttle", Beyer and his "space station temple", Schoch with his "Sphinx age", and uncounteable other self proposed "sceptics".
I try to find the source where I read it about Schoch, but he was found to be annoying that he came, run 2 weeks around the Sphinx, listening to nobody, not even to the Geologists working for 5 years then on the Sphinx, seeing "water erosion" in every crack - where he wanted to see it - and ignoring advices to look at similar structures at Djoser, in Lischt and other parts of Giza. I think it was in an article by Gauri.
FD</HTML>
