>>I think Don's logic is correct. How can he discuss the meaning until the intentional geometry is accepted. <<

Don has to prove that the AEs intended it to be that way, as do you. So where's the proof? Just because you can draw patterns over a plan of Giza proves nothing, period. Never has, never will. In a previous incarnation of this, we had Don trying to show that Poussin included the dimensions of Giza in his paintings. That got shot down in flames when it was made clear to Don that accurate maps of Giza never existed in Poussins time, so there was no way that Poussin could do what Don was claiming he did. So, tell me why we should just accept a crack-pot theory without any proof?

And, yes if DOES matter if the same layout designs cannot be found elsewhere because knowledge of pyramid architecture and building was passed down father to son. Explain, then, how they managed to pass down the knowledge of how to design and build a pyramid from the 4th to 5th dyansties and beyond but somehow forgot how to lay them out according to some grand cosmic plan. If the layout was SO important, as Patternistas claim, you'd think the originators of it would let their kids in on the scheme while they were teaching them to build the next generation of Pyramids, wouldn't you? If you want to claim the pattern at Giza only mattered to Giza and nowhere else, then you have to explain WHY, otherwise it's nonsense.

-Joe.










Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/2007 04:08PM by Joe_S.