Hi lobo-hotei

> C Wayne Taylor Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Hi Hermione,
> >
> > >However, can I remind you that the onus
> of
> > providing cultural evidence to support your
> theory
> > still lies with you.
> >
> > Again, I respectfully disagree. The
> > "quarter-base" method has been presented.
> Anyone
> > who
> > wants to dispute it is free to present their
> > argument.
>
> Actually Hermione is correct. You have shown you
> have made a pattern/design that seems to fit the
> pyramid layout(like the many posted over last
> month) now you need to put forth the evidence of
> the AE using this pattern/design to lay out the
> pyramids.

I respectfully disagree.

> Showing that this quarter-base hits certain
> points does not show that the AE created such a
> surveying technique only that you have found a
> close pattern to connect certain points.

The "quarter-base" method reveals relationships, not necessarily the process used by the builders.

> As far as the disputing this newest design method,
> Don has already posted what came to my mind
> immediately. The 2000RC "line of symmetry" was
> accurate 1-2 cubits(0.10%) during all the diagrams
> posted and yet having a miss of 2-4RC over
> 410-440RC side length of G1 and G2 is now
> acceptable in this latest attempt.

see my reply to Don

> These "geometric" epiphanies all use a limited
> number of points on almost exclusively the "Giza
> Three" and satellite/queen pyramids without the
> Sphinx, MT & VT, and causeways included with
> these structures as a whole complex(three of
> them).

1. You need to provide a valid argument that these other features must be included.

2. Actually, in the first few posts of the "quarter-base" method I showed how the method explained the G3 MT and the G2 boundary walls.

3. I'm not done yet.


> I have yet to see a single piece of evidence to
> dictate that the "outer square" that encompasses
> the "unifying plan" has to follow the north and
> east sides of G1 and the south and west sides of
> G3. This is almost always the way it is layed out.

The "quarter-base" method does not use an "outer square".

> Heck the "line of symmetry" wasn't the angle
> someone wanted so they adjust everything to make
> it a perfect 45 degree and then claim it fits. As
> soon as the line was set to 45 degrees the "plan"
> rotated out of square with the cardinal directions
> depending on what point from which it was
> rotated(mid point of line @1000RC, Northern most
> point, southern most point,etc.)

The "quarter-base" method does not use a unifying 45 degree line.

C. Wayne Taylor
Richmond, Virginia USA