Anthony Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Facts can "change" depending upon who is
> perceiving them.


Is gravity a fact? Moving on ...


> The Egyptians had no idea what a degree was, so
> they wouldn't know 26* from 27*... nor did they
> probably care. The average builder in the Old
> Kingdom likely would have lumped them both into a
> simple 2:1 rise over run, or seqed 3 1/2.


This is a very good of example of both non-sequitor and strawman. There is no required knowledge of any measuring system to be able to point at something. It is irrelevant what they did to achieve the result, just that they did it. It is not required/proven that they employed a seked system. Every possible angle can be related to a ratio of rise/run. Wether we describe it in terms of degree, seked, or blugfritter units does not matter. The overall direction of the shaft points to a height up from the horizon that happens to be equal with the meridian transit of Al Nitak at the time of construction. That's a physical fact, and it won't change depending on who is perceiving it.


> And, once again, the degree of coincidence does
> not change the nature of a coincidence.


This statement would be true knowing a priori that it is a coincedence. When a number of different circumstances all explain the hypothesis, it becomes non-coincidental, ie the more the situation has a context explaining it the less chance of it being coincidental.



Best,
Avry