<HTML>John,
I greatly appreciate your apology, John, and I know that it would have took longer to fix the sarcasm than to rush off the apology and hit the post button.... :>)
Your argument is based on an assumption that all pyramids in Egypt were plundered. The assumption is that each pyramid being grandeous and enticing were primary targets for tomb robbers. However, I should remind you that a lack of evidence is not evidence, and if your arguments were presented in court, there would be contradictory evidence introduced to cause judge and jury to sit back and wonder whether they were being persuaded by rhetorical arguments rather than facts.
<quote>"From jar sealing found in the substructure, Ghoneim determined the name of the pharaoh as Sekhemket, who was evidently Zoser's successor and may be identical with a king called Zoser-teti to whom the Abydos hieroglyphic king-list allots a reign of six years. There was no sign of a portcullis block which was meant to be lowered into the tunnel by a vertical shaft but Ghoneim found the tunnel blocked with ancient masonry which appeared undisturbed. When this was removed, the roughly worked tomb chamber was found to contain a sarcophagus of unusual design. It consists of a single hollow block of alabaster, which instead of a lid has an opening at one end. This aperture was closed with a sliding door, also of alabaster, and sealed with cement that was unbroken. The excitement was great when in May 1954 this trap door was raised, only to give way to disappointment, since the sarcophagus turned out to be completely empty."
(Mendelssohn, <i>The Riddle of the Pyramids,</I> 42) </quote>
A sealed chamber and empty sealed box. Habeas Corpus.
Chris</HTML>
