<HTML>In his <a href=""></a>
<a href="[
www.grahamhancock.com] rebuttal </a><>
to E.C. Krupp's article, <b>Pyramid Marketing Schemes</b> (<i>Sky and Telescope</i> vol 93 No 2, Feb 1997, pp 64/5), , Bauval states:
"<i>Before I tackle this criticism let me point out that, as amazing as this may seem, in this very article Dr. Krupp himself shows his readers a star-map of Orion not in the way the constellation of Orion is normally seen in the southern sky but FLIPPED AROUND with Taurus at the left of Orion and Gemini at its right. I presume that the printers put the photograph the wrong way.</i>"
Bauval yet again demonstrates his ignorance of the topics on which he presumes to pronounce. The map in question is credited as being 'after Johann Bayer's <i>Uranometria</i>'. It follows the convention of the time in that it maps the heavens as they would appear on a physical model of the celestial sphere. It is not 'the wrong way' -- if it was, the text on it would also be 'the wrong way' -- it isn't. Is it too much to ask that Bauval notices things like this, or should we speculate that he has made Maier's Law a philosophy of life?
One might have assumed that the text of the article might have given anyone with rudimentary reading and comprehension skills a clue:
"...one might adopt a completely different perspective and imagine the way Orion would look from a point outside the celestial sphere." No such luck.
Yet another case where Hanlon's Razor needs to be whetted?</HTML>