Hi Dar


> He was asking for information on classic OCT.


The classic OCT? Where in his posting does Thadd specify that he wants info about the "classic" (read: the first version) OCT? I thought that he wanted the most recent version in the light of the other discussions from which his interest to OCT and what it actually includes comes from. ???



The
> horizon programme covers GH and RB's work and most
> of the original OCT until Hancock's publication of
> "Underworld"....


Which was when, exactly?



In any case, i posted the
> documentary so that people here could also
> identify how OCT has been updated since the
> programme was made...If the original ideas and the
> comments i posted about the 45 degree has been
> changed, you're welcome to point that out...


As I read Thadd's posting, he was more wondering about the 10.000 BC than anything else. Bauval has more on this in The Egypt Code. But as far as I can see nobody offered any new info....




>
> I'm not aware of any updated information here on
> maat. All maat articles are critiques of the work
> from the 90s and Hancock and Bauval have not
> posted on this site.


Hmmm, and the only source to information is Maat? Did you know that Bauval published a book last year? For the sake of discussion on a board titled "Weighing the evidence of alternative history", I'd honestly think that to weigh we'd need all the most recent versions.... unless the basic meaning of the discussion was/is to repercutate the same old same old.



Also, i don't know how the
> original work relates to or endorses the recent
> stuff posted by Don and creigs1707 (Scott?) or
> vice versa, and, quite franky, i've never really
> understood the position taken by posters on this
> board.....


I think the basis of using the OCT is tied to the 10000 BC part i.e. some fantastic Lost Civilisation and their superknowledge, which gives a frame to mathematical and astronomical fantasies of many sorts.
As to the position taken by posters, well this is about "weighing the evidence" and hence we should get opinions/suggestios/ideas that need to be weighed. While I don't agree with Bauval, nor with any theories including the date 10000 or more, I still think people should be entitled to honest discussons. Yes, at times the discussions are boring (after all this time no wonder), but in that case I'd personally rather keep out of them than hand a decade old information to make a point, any point.








Ritva