<HTML>Krupp's <a href="[
www.ianlawton.com]; are clearly to do with the internal-consistency of the arguments.
"I am not as interested in establishing what the Egyptians did or didn't do as I am in understanding and evaluating accurately the Orion mapping assertion Bauval and Gilbert originally developed in "The Orion Mystery" and that Hancock and Bauval extended in "The Message of the Sphinx". Because the record of the past is always incomplete, I try to be judicious about the difference between proposal and assertion. Guided by that instinct, I evaluated the Orion's Belt mapping in the context of Bauval's and Gilbert's handling of it."
and:
"Had Bauval and Gilbert ignored the shaft alignments and simply said three pyramids in a line equal three stars in a row, their argument would have been unfalsifiable and logically uninteresting. I would have left it alone."
followed by:
"Instead, however, Bauval and Gilbert first anchored the Giza pyramids with clearly designated directional attachments to the sky. The north shaft, they agreed, was targeted on the upper culmination (meridian occupation, cardinal north) of Thuban, near the north celestial pole. 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."
What he's saying - albeit not explicitly - is that if Giza "represents" Orion then the "shafts" aren't "star shafts", or vice versa. You can have one or the other - but not both.
Does this make it clear ?
It's the internal consistency of the arguments NOT the intentions of the AEs.
John</HTML>
