<HTML>I have been trying to follow the debate over the age of the Sphinx . Inevitability this debate has at times focussed on a crude but important consideration – do the geological interpretations trump the archaeological interpretations?
What is JAW’s view? On page 187 of Serpent in the Sky JAW discusses ‘How ‘hard’ is geology?’ This is what he writes;
<i>“In geology, as in so many scientific and scholarly disciplines, popular works intended for the general reader convey an impression of serene scholarly unanimity; it is as though all fundamental issues were long since settled and agreed upon, and current work involved no more than sorting out and fitting into place minor pieces of the puzzle. But deeper research into specialised works discloses area of conflict over details and broader issues. At the level of articles in geological journals, unanimity all but disappears, while persistent groups of dissident challenge basic assumptions taken for granted by the majority. Few chemists will today support Cavendish’s phlogiston theory, but there are a number of geologists, members of the American Creation Research Society armed with impeccable qualifications who support a literal interpretation of the Biblical deluge, and even its chronology.
The state of controversy bears upon the geological inquiry into he Sphinx.”</i>
Later on page 234 he states
<i>“So it is that the most common and loudly trumpeted objection to the Sphinx theory – now supported by geology and geophysics (sciences as hard-nosed as any in the world) – is that it has ‘no scientific basis’ </i>[Dr Zahi Hawass ] <i>or that it is ‘pseudoscience.’</i>[Dr Mark Lehner]”.
Help me out someone! Is geology ‘hard’ in JAW’s view? I would read the first quote as implying that he recognises that it isn't (Martin Stower posted to this effect I think - if I didn't misunderstand him), but the second quote implies that he recognises that it is 'hard' - and lies in a section where he has been discussing why Egyptology isn't a science at all - <i>"by its very nature Egyptology cannot be a science, in the sense that physics or biology or geology are."</i>(page 235)
Comments?
Claire</HTML>
