<HTML>I have responded to this argument by Krupp on his brother's Website long ago.
Krupp writes:
"The south shaft, they agreed, was targeted on the transit (meridian occupation, cardinal south) of the Belt of Orion. If you accept the stellar alignment of the shafts, and Bauval/Gilbert/Hancock do, it means the Old Kingdom Egyptians deliberately associated cardinal north on the ground at Giza with north in the sky and cardinal south on the ground at Giza with south in the sky. Of course, you can invert the directionality of the plan on the ground with respect to the sky's distinctive directionality, but doing so contradicts the original premise. Bauval et al, however, embraced that premise."
Even re-reading now, I honestly cannot see what he's getting at. The south shaft was aimed south at Orion's belt because it was there, not because 'the Egyptians deliberately associated cardinal north etc. etc..'.
Chief Pyramid builder EDKROOPANKH: "O high-priest, where is Orion?"
High-priest: "There..." (pointing south)
Chief Pyramid builder EDKROOPANKH: "Good. Where is the Celetial Nile?"
High-priest: "There, to the left of Orion..."
Chief Pyramid Builder EDKROOPANKH: "Twice good. How shall I lay out the three Pyramids?"
High-priest: "The way you see them, dummy!"
Chief Pyramid Builder EDKROOPANKH: "OK. But aren't you worried that someone may say that because we plan to have a south shaft targeted on the transit, that is at meridian occupation, cardinal south, of the Belt of Orion, then if you accept the stellar alignment of the shafts it means we deliberately associate cardinal north on the ground at Giza with north in the sky and cardinal south on the ground at Giza with south in the sky. Of course, you can invert the directionality of the plan on the ground with respect to the sky's distinctive directionality, but doing so contradicts the original premise. Do you want to embrace that premise, O high-priest?"
High-priest: "What the Underworld (hell) are you on about, man! Do you want the pharoah to stand on his head to actually see the correlation?!!! Or perhaps you think that I've got eyes at the back of my head?!!... Look, another silly remark like that and I'll have you licence revoked!..."</HTML>
