mstower Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A plank of Scott Creighton’s method in pushing the
> “Vyse forgery” allegation is misrepresenting those
> he quotes. In this case the lucky winner is
> Robert Schoch.
>
> In HOAX, Creighton performs this conjuring trick
> (p. 18 in the print edition):
>
>

Quote

. . . Further on in this passage, Schoch
> goes on to say of this mineral crystallization
> that it is “. . . a process that takes centuries
> or millennia” If the crystallization observed on
> these marks can, in Schoch’s words, take
> just “centuries” to form,
> then they could just as easily have formed in the
> near two centuries since Vyse first opened these
> chambers (and thereby forever changing the
> atmospheric conditions within them). . . .

>
> https://www.google.co.uk/search?tbm=bks&q=
> . . .
>
> In his chapter summary, he adds this (p. 20):
>
>

Quote

Schoch believes that quarry marks on the
> blocks are authentic ancient marks based on
> crystallization on the surface of some marks. He
> states also that this crystallization process can
> take millennia or just
> centuries to occur.

>
> The word “just” is not Schoch’s. Creighton has
> added it. Why has he done so? To invert
> the sense of what Schoch wrote. If Schoch’s
> intended sense were “just centuries” (or “as few
> centuries as two”), he would have written
> that—wouldn’t he, Mr Creighton? He would not (I
> suggest) have added the word “millennia”. And
> unless I’m missing something, it’s Schoch (and not
> you) is the geologist.
>
> I find no sign in Void of his even mentioning
> Schoch. He returned to his misuse of Schoch’s
> words in this recent post:
>
> https://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1289285/pg5#pid25966659
>
> To the reader’s surprise, I challenged this
> shameless distortion as long ago as 2014, when
> Creighton first came out with it:
>
> https://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread998893/pg7#pid17623893
>
> I drew attention to Schoch’s words (in their
> proper sense) in 2005:
>
> https://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?1,183159,183171#msg-183171
>
> In fairness to Creighton, I note that in HOAX (p.
> 18) he continues with this assertion:
>
>

Quote

. . . Indeed, photographs of some modern
> graffiti to the left of the Khufu cartouche shows
> this graffiti entirely clear of any
> crystallization but is almost entirely covered
> with crystals in more recent
> images—crystallization that has taken, at most,
> just a few decades to form.

>
> If Creighton has anywhere reproduced these
> photographs, or specified which ones exactly they
> are, I have not seen it.
>
> In HOAX (p. 109 in the print edition), we find
> this remarkable statement:
>
>

Quote

Photographic images of the various
> relieving chambers are very few and far between,
> with the vast bulk of images in the public domain
> having come from Campbell’s Chamber, which bears
> the famous Khufu cartouche. . . .

>
> All the more reason (one might have thought) to be
> clear about the photographs referenced. Creighton
> purports to have seen photographs showing these
> details with sufficient clarity to support the
> judgement he bases upon them. Where are they?
>
> M.
>
> Edited 2021-07-18 to fix formatting.

Have you informed Schoch that his words are being misrepresented in print?