"It's so easy being a pseudohistorian! All the evidence has to do is APPEAR to support a claim, and it's done!

Anthony"
-- That's a little bit of a blanket statement. On this theory... it is very hard to get a permit to dig in Giza, and rightfully so... so it would be very hard to prove this theory. Additionally, this guy has been at it for 10 years. The website talks about an upcoming book (in 1998), I don't know if this book has been released.

IF the above is true... I would think it's not so easy to be ridiculed as a pseudo-historian, and to maintain a controversial theory for a decade for no monetary reasons(so far). Who would go out on a limb like this?
**********
1. I have not endorsed this theory.
2. I agree that the press release is not convincing
3. For 10 years of research, it would seem that the scholarship in this theory is quite lacking.
4. I do not like the location.
5. Radar technology has improved to the point that you could test this theory without digging.

Here is more info on this guy's theory:
Link 1: [www.geocities.com]

Quote

"The ancient Egyptian artist always depicted his scenes, drew his characters on papyri ,painted the walls of the tombs and temples and erected his obelisks and statues in a harmonical and symmetrical manner"

Link 2: [www.geocities.com]

Quote

"At the top register we found Tutmosis IV is depicted twice offering to two Sphinxes. This is not one scene repeated in a mirror reflecting impression like other various scenery. The reasons why I believe that Pharaoh here is offering to two sphinxes are:

He is wearing different crowns one is the "Kheprish" blue crown of war and courage, in the other scene he is wearing the "Nemes" royal headdress. So, he is in two different social status assured by 2 different royal regalia.
He is offering two different sets of libations and homage in each scene. Tutmosis IV is treating each Sphinx separately and not in the same manner."

Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 09/05/2007 11:29PM by rich.