cladking Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hermione Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> Quote: It also needs to be pointed out that
> > nowhere is in evidence a single quarry worker
> or
> > even one dragger of stones.
> >
> > How is it possible to reconcile the
> statement
> > "nowhere is in evidence a single quarry
> worker"
> > with the statement "I have no doubt that
> quarrymen
> > existed in the great pyramid building age"?
> >
> > How?
>
> There were quarry workers and a quarry. They
> didn't call them "quarry workers" or "quarries"
> except when using the vulgar forms of the words.
> Titles on tombs were in the scientific form of
> words and these were "sculptors" and "tayet". Any
> time a word was the subject of a sentence they'd
> use the scientific term.
>
> There are no quarry workers in evidence because
> they didn't use this word. There are no quarries
> because they didn't use this word either at Giza.
> It simply never came up (as the object of a
> sentence).
>
> > What on earth are you talking about?
>
> I believe they made perfect sense all the time and
> we misunderstand their language. It looks like
> incantation to us just as our technology would
> look like magic to a primitive. The language was
> a natural metaphysical language where every word
> had a fixed concrete meaning and every thing had
> three words. Their language was digital rather
> than analog and formatted differently than ours.
> It has been misunderstood and misinterpreted for
> 4000 years because we automatically parse
> sentences for meaning. We do this on a real time
> basis without even thinking about it. Ancient
> Language loses its meaning if you do this.
>
> It's impossible to understand Ancient Language if
> you believe that the authors were superstitious or
> that they had beliefs in magic and religion.
> This is why we don't know the origin of even the
> simplest concepts in their language.
>
> The reality is that all people have always made
> perfect sense in terms of their premises but what
> sets the Egyptians apart was that their premises
> were simple axioms like effect follows cause and
> reality exists. Their premises weren't based in
> beliefs as ours are but in theory derived from
> 40,000 years of observation and the applied logic
> of natural language which reflected the wiring of
> the brain and possessed the same natural logic as
> mathematics.
>
> There were no quarry workers because sculptors
> removed horuses leaving tayet. We're looking for
> what isn't there so we don't notice the evidence
> that is there. The evidence is quite clear that
> stones were pulled straight up the sides of five
> step pyramids and this is the only theory that
> fits the cultural context. This is the only
> theory that fits the physical evidence and the
> known facts.
>
> The theory flies in the face of countless modern
> beliefs but is consistent with known theory. It
> is logical even though its logic is difficult to
> see. We aren't accustomed to thinking of animals
> as being conscious much less as being scientists
> and we aren't accustomed to seeing human knowledge
> as being a product of complex language rather than
> intelligence but these are logical and make for
> far simpler explanations of reality than the
> complex ideas currently in vogue. We aren't
> accustomed to the idea that "intelligence" has
> nothing to do with human success or our inability
> to communicate with animals. We aren't accustomed
> to occupying any niche other than the crown of
> creation.
>
> We're going to need to get accustomed to a lot of
> new ideas and it can start as soon as anyone finds
> the courage to investigate the thermal anomaly.
> But make no mistake, it is most probably coming no
> matter what because ideas don't just go away.


WELL Hermione: You did ask.......