Hello Anthony,

I wrote, 'Hmmm. Opinion: A personal belief or judgment that is not founded on proof or certainty.
So, in effect you are saying that your logical conclusion is as good as proof or certainty?
I beg to differ.'

You reply, ' I did not say that, ergo, your interpretation of my words is not the same thing as my words, and I deny your interpretation's validity.'

So, what did you mean?


I wrote, 'Yet you haven't read Smyth or J & M Edgar!'

You reply, 'I don't really care about people's opinions.'

But we are not talking about Smyth's and J & M Edgar's opinions, Anthony.
It's about actual dimensions and detailed descriptions of the Pyramid's interior meticulously recorded at different times.
Information that helps us gain a better view of what it is we are dealing with.


I wrote, 'I fail to see how you can arrive at a sensible conclusion when you have yet to examine all the evidence available.'

You reply, 'What evidence do you know I have not examined?'

Well, Smyth's and the Edgar brothers work at the Pyramid for a start


I wrote, 'You would benefit from reading of, for example, Edgar's exploits in the Well Shaft.'

You reply, 'I have'

I presume you are not confusing Edgar's exploits with Caviglia's.
What do you make of what Edgar discovered about the Well Shaft?


You write, 'I concur with their logical argument, not their opinions.'

An opinion is an opinion regardless of what it is based on.
IMO, this 'logical argument' business is little more than a means of avoiding properly addressing important questions and points raised.


I wrote, 'And as you don't 'think' there was more than three blocks stored in the Gallery, I presume you are still open to the hypothesis that there were more.'

You reply, 'Of course not. It's illogical. Read M&R and you'll see why.'

Better still, Anthony, instead of using this "It's illogical" ploy, why not say here and now why you agree with M & R.

MJ