<HTML>PART 4: The Famine Stele; More On Solving the Riddles; The Klemms Again (Scientific Literature)
The Famine Stele
Frank Doernenburg reminds me, “You still dindn't [sic] answer my question about where on the Famina-stela [sic] I can find something about building a pyramid or processing stone.”
Margaret Morris replies: I preface my response by pointing out that Frank Doernenburg poses many hasty, ill-conceived objections and then attempts to put demands on my time for an immediate response. His poorly conceived writings can hardly take but a moment of his time, while correcting his misinformation point-by-point requires a very time-consuming reply like this one that I must fit into my schedule, which involves much more important and pressing work than responding to someone who does not bother to read or understand the literature that is the basis for a debate in the first place.
Be that as it may, Frank Doernenburg should refer to page 152 of the book I co-authored with Dr. Joseph Davidovits in 1988, The Pyramids: An Enigma Solved. Column 12 shows a hieroglyph shaped like a step pyramid. Columns 11 and 12 refer to the mineral ores for building the pyramid and temples of the king.
More On Solving the Riddles
Frank Doernenburg declares, “unfortunately, [sic] your idea is nothing more than yet another "new-age-nonsense" because it cannot answer any questions. You could not even answer my simple questions about the thosands [sic] of quarries…”
Margaret Morris: Here Frank Doernenburg impatiently expects me to put my work aside to answer his incoherent question. If he gets no immediate reply, he waves his question like a victory flag. Meanwhile, he ignores the challenges I have posed to him.
Thousands of quarries? At Giza? Where are these thousands of quarries? There are only a small number of main quarries at Giza.
Notwithstanding Frank Doernenburg’s incoherence, I do explain more (see below) about the dearth of holes and trenches at Giza, as observed by Petrie and others. However, Frank Doernenburg, proclaiming knowledge of ancient Egyptian studies, should already be familiar with this basic information.
As for “new age nonsense,” even if the geopolymer theory could be proved wrong, it would not be “new age nonsense.” The theory poses a logical scientific question studied by highly qualified scientists, including independent geochemists and geophysicists with extensive training in the micropaleontology and petrology of carbonate rocks. Frank Doernenburg’s remark exposes blatant, unwarranted hostility and arrogance. He provides us with no information suggesting he has any professional level training in the hard sciences. Nonetheless, he pretends to be qualified to ridicule the work of geologists (each with over 40 years of experience) working on behalf of the geopolymer theory. and Joseph Davidovits, an award-winning materials scientist and the founder of a new branch of chemistry he named geopolymerization.
The Klemms Again
Frank Doernenburg continues, “…the identification of the pyramid quarries by Klemm & Klemm…”
Margaret Morris replies: As I explained above, the Klemms identified the quarries from which the aggregates came. There is no conflict with geopolymerization.
Please continue to the next segment..
Margaret Morris
August 7, 2000
Copyright © 2001</HTML>
